Pay More For Child Free Quiet Zones?

annoying-kids-on-airplaneWould you be willing to pay more to sit in an area of a plane that was free of anyone under 12?

Scoot Airlines, a Singapore based budget carrier, thinks you are. For as little as $14.50 you could sit in  rows 21 through 25, 41 seats in all, that were free from kids.

But that’s not the only benefit. You also get more legroom and four extra inches of pitch.  (it’s worth the extra money just for the extra room.)

I checked the seat map and the airline only flies Boeing 777’s.   The child-free section is separated from other seats so there is no worry of a screaming baby sitting in the row in front or back of you.

And they’re not the only airline to do this. Air Asia X banned under 12’s from the first seven rows of its economy cabin and Malaysia Airlines has banned them from the first class cabins on their A380’s and 747’s.

It’s interesting that only Asian based carriers have done this.

Now, how about a recline free zone where the person in front of you can’t recline his or her seat?

What do you think? Good idea or bad? Would you be willing to pay for sitting in a quiet area?


This entry was posted in Uncategorized and tagged , , . Bookmark the permalink.

7 Responses to Pay More For Child Free Quiet Zones?

  1. notmensa says:

    “Would you be willing to pay for sitting in a quiet area?”

    Yes I am willing – and yes I have flying Air Asia. The flights from the Australian east coast to Malaysia or Singapore are around 8 hours, and I needed to work for most of it. The ‘quiet zone’ was definitely worth the extra few dollars for me.

  2. Lomo says:

    I have 5 children, and even I don’t want to fly with them! Seriously, more leg room, less chance of seat kicking or folks getting up and down all through the flight–probably worth a few extra dollars in my opinion. Now what about a no drunks section going to Vegas?

  3. Maggie says:

    I’ve read the outrage from parents in the US when a restaurant bans kids so I don’t think child-free zones on flights will make it there any time soon.

    As I do sometimes fly from Singapore to Australia (starting from Hong Kong), I might just give Scoot some consideration!

    • Frank@OBOW says:

      The big difference is that the airlines aren’t banning children from flights, just from one section of the aircraft.

      On multi-sectional aircraft, this isn’t too difficult. The only problem would be if more families wanted to fly than there were seats in other sections. I can’t see airlines turning away passengers when there are empty seats on the plane.

  4. Ralph says:

    At the end of the day, this is simply paying for a premium seat, which is an established acceptable to passengers. The only if is the price sweet spot, since there is no relationship to the premium seat and revenue or more importantly cost, unlike a change in cabin class, which is a change in operating cost.
    Its like buying insurance because what are the odds of sitting close to small children in the first place?
    The MAS situation in very different though, on those long haul flights in F.

  5. Chris says:

    Now if only they could do something about the people who play their music/movies at ridiculous levels (yes, even loud with their headphones)!

  6. Neil says:

    How about a kicking free zone? I wear shooting earplugs (molded to my ear canal-best $80 I ever spent), so no sound is getting through them, but they can’t stop junior from constantly kicking my seat; no matter how many times I plead with the parents.