<br>
<br>
<p>Boarding back to front does intuitively seem like it should be the most efficient way to load an airliner, but actual tests have shown that’s it’s actually one of the lousier ways.</p>
<p>I recall that about 6 -8 years ago Northwest Airlines (now part of Delta) abandoned its usual back-to-front practice in favor of letting everyone (within their own ticket grade) board at random. Their tests had showed that random boarding was actually significantly faster.</p>
<p>Now more formal research has been done comparing several boarding algorithms:</p>
<p><a href=“http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-14717695[/url]”>http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-14717695</a></p>
<p>Excerpt:</p>
<p>"The pair tested five different scenarios: “block” boarding in groups of rows from back to front, one by one from back to front, the “Wilma method”, the Steffen method, and completely random boarding.</p>
<p>In all cases, parent-child pairs were permitted to board first - reflecting the fact that regardless of the efficiency of any boarding method, families will likely want to stay together.</p>
<p>The block approach fared worst, with the strict back-to-front approach not much better.</p>
<p>Interestingly, a completely random boarding - as practised by several low-cost airlines that have unallocated seating - fared much better, presumably because it randomly avoids space conflicts."</p>