#humane design

A Design Manifesto of Humans-First

Give the surface of the planet back to humans, and design transportation technologies that respect human weakness and personal freedom.

In this small Greek city, pedestrians, speeding mopeds, and delivery vehicles fight for the same street space. This is primarily due to the number of pedestrians and the lack of sidewalks. The result is a stressful environment where you have to constantly look over your shoulder, making sure you’re not about to be mowed down. Something is very wrong when it is unpleasant or dangerous to simply go for a walk.

Our transportation systems have evolved with the technologies available. First it was horses, then it was carriages, then it was cars, and soon it might be VTOL aircraft. Every step had negative impact on pedestrians, from horse manure, to getting run over, to road noise and pollution. Humans do not necessarily need to be adversely impacted every time a new technology comes out - those are called design flaws. Transportation technologies are extremely useful and liberating, and they can be designed in a way that permits people to move around safely on their own power. For this to occur, we need a different design perspective where secondary users (e.g. pedestrians) are privileged above the primary user (e.g. driver). The mindset of both city planners and technology designers needs to change. If we envisaged either a car or a city, where people were given primary status above cars, cities would look a lot different. 

There are many ways of accomplishing this goal, but one idea is that the surface (let’s call it Level-0) belongs to people. Cars can go underground via tunnels or hyperloops (Level -1) and aircraft or drones can go in Level +1 (the sky, well above buildings.) Trains could either be in -1 or +1, but never on 0. Level 0 would support walking, running, sitting, and low-speed personal transport devices such as bikes, e-bikes, one-wheels, electric-unicycles and the like. Level 0 is special because there is only one surface. In contrast to this, there are many levels of underground, and many levels of higher in the air. Thus the unique surface layer should be reserved for the public, just like beaches are in many countries. Getting run over by a car would be a logical impossibility because they simply wouldn’t be on the surface. Trains would no longer hit pedestrians or cars because the latter would never cross tracks. This design solution would result in much more safe and beautiful cities. With no traffic to dodge, the cityscape would become tranquil. Busy or loud aspects would be hidden underground or high above. This is a more humane vision for our future cities - one where people are safe, and where ubiquitous technology gets out of our way, and puts our physical and psychological needs first.

So after playing The Caribbean and having been frustrated over how few save spots there were, I was reminded of this amazing Extra Credits video they did where it talked about exit points.

KH in general has always been very cutscene heavy and I feel like their cutscenes sometimes aren’t calculated into their overall play session time, mainly because it turns possibly a 15 minute commitment into a 45 minute one when you chain cutscenes and combat with no place to save and put the game down.

There are two major forms of mass-transport in the world and they could not be more different in terms of design considerations and resulting user experience. Planes have been designed with minimizing space-per-customer, weight-per-customer, and allowable-movement-per-customer as primary goals. Engineering and profit goals for the airplane owner have supremely trumped the goals and even the basic human comfort of airplane passengers. In contrast to this, trains and ferries, while having similar profit motives, have prioritized comfort for passengers, increased public space, and made exercise a reasonable option. They have also designed efficient entry and exit methods. So why have airlines been designed to be so non-user-centered? Because we have collectively chosen to. A user-centered airplane would look very different.

PLANES

Design Summary:

Planes are designed to be one line after another. You wait in line to have baggage processed. Another line to get through security. Another line to wait to get on the plane. You sit in a line of other tightly cramped seats. You wait in line to get off the plane. Planes are optimized around cramming as many people in the smallest amount of space possible, to increase cost-effectiveness for the owner of the plane who is paying for the fuel. This results in insufficient baggage space, insufficient leg room, and long flights that violate any doctor’s advice on how often you should get up and stretch your legs. It's surprising that airlines haven’t been sued for unhealthy travel environments, because that is certainly what they are providing. While factors such as customer safety and ergonomics have certainly been considered by Boeing human factors experts, customer happiness, comfort, and emotional well-being are certainly not be weighed heavily in the design process, as evidenced by the resulting designs.

Photo caption: Passengers stand and attempt to walk in the aisle on a long flight, which is inconvenient for seated passengers and doesn’t offer a great exercise experience.

What would a better plane look like?:

Air travel does not have to be a horrible experience. Yes, new technologies and government guidelines would be needed, but the main challenge would be to convince plane manufacturers and airlines that there is a market for a more enjoyable flight experience. It is quite possible that a slower transport option (think along the lines of a floating cruise ship dirigible) might be preferred by many travelers. Even if we stay with the basic plane/petrol concept, automated security checks that happen rapidly enough to not create lines would help. Creating planes with no center aisle, where passengers enter their seat directly through the side of the plane could help. Creating a circular aisle where passengers could walk in a circle to stretch their legs would make flights more healthy. Creating one reserved storage compartment per-person would help avoid the fight for available storage. Simply creating planes that hold less passengers in a given space would help provide the equivalent room of a first-class seat for all passengers. Planes in Australia load through both the forward and rear doors simultaneously resulting in 1/2 the necessary loading and exit time. Planes should also learn from the successes of trains and ferries, namely that they should have a bar and lounge area where people can relax, walk around, and socialize. Some planes have this, but it is deemed a “first class experience” and only provided to part of the plane at premium prices, instead of democratized and made available to the entire plane as would occur on a train or ferry. When a transportation design can only offer a humane experience to a small subset of wealthy passengers, it is a bad design. *

Photo caption: Passengers walking off a plane via the rear door in Seattle. Planes can load and disembark, through both front and rear doors simultaneously with passengers choosing the door nearest to their seat.

TRAINS

Design Summary:

Trains can either be a slow or fast form of travel depending on where you are, however all of them share quite a few positive traits. Trains usually have assigned seats and have more than enough storage space for what you carry on. Sometimes they have some security concerns, as baggage can be stored in a separate area from the owner. Train seats almost always recline and have some kind of foot rest option. Train seats use up far more space per-person than airline seats and they correspondingly offer greater comfort and relaxation. Most trains permit walking between cars and many of them have a sleeping car, lounge car, dining car, and snack bar. While train travelers have been known to complain, it is typically complaints of boredom, or not being able to afford the sleeping car. This stands in opposition to airline complaints which tend to cover sore legs, claustrophobia, lack of exercise, poor air, and general unhappiness.

What would a better train look like?:

Generally trains offer a fairly good user experience. Removing the ticket line and having electronic payment and verification would make it easier to get on the train. Notifying passengers in advance about which train car to enter helps to distribute the initial boarding line along the track at the station. Some trains could use better security for possessions. One option would be a storage trunk per person in the bottom of the car, with a RFID bracelet given to each rider to unlock the trunk. Possessions would be stored when you boarded. The main aisle on a train could be made wider which would allow passengers to pass each other easily. Every car could come with an upper observation deck to allow for more open space and relaxation. I don’t cover ferries in detail on this post, but they are in many ways better than trains and planes in that they have far more room for people to freely move and baggage is often locked in cars on a lower level.

ALTERNATIVES

There are a number of innovative transport options being discussed which would offer more humane designs.

Hyperloop: The Hyperloop offers a unique transport option which would safely speed passengers between LA and San Francisco in just over a half hour. Given the speed and short duration of the journey it might make more sense to have isolated pods which offer high personal security and comfort, while supporting rapid entry and exit to avoid loading and unloading delays that hold up the train from departing. Notice the wide doors and simultaneous access to all seats on one side, unlike an airplane.

Photo caption: A concept drawing of the Hyperloop capsule.

Tesla Self-Driving Electric Bus: Busses are not analyzed here because they offer most of the design deficiencies of an airplane plus numerous other downsides. However, An automated, electric, bus which was designed to support rapid entry and exit, with more isolated personal space might offer significant advantages. It has been discussed that the Model-X falcon wing doors could be used in sequence down the outside of a stretch limo Model-X. This would allow for separate compartments inside, the removal of the center aisle, and opening individual pod doors for specific passengers.

Photo caption: Tesla falcon wing doors allow rapid entry directly into an individual compartment without the need to “board the vehicle” as is required in a bus.

Straddling Bus: China has invented a bus which glides over the top of existing traffic, solving the issue of public transit being delayed by rush-hour traffic. It also has an interior more reminiscent of a ferry and would allow passengers to walk around while being transported as well as having a few out over the top of traffic. **

Photo caption: The straddling bus has a large open area inside similar to ferry where passengers can walk around, socialize, and enjoy the views.

GENERAL TRANSPORTATION DESIGN GUIDELINES

Every form of transport should be designed to support the following guidelines for humane human transport:

Support exercise and free movement - Passengers should be either to get up and move around easily if the trip is more than a half-hour. An alternative (e.g. for automobiles) is to have frequent rest stops available for pausing transport.

Support socialization - Passengers should have a place to congregate and chat if they wish.

Support entertainment - Passengers should either have something changing to look at (either natural or digital)

Support lying down - For longer trips, fully reclining seats or beds are a necessity

Minimize lines - Lines are not needed when ordering processes are digital and boarding processes are properly designed

Support individualized and secure baggage storage - Baggage can be expensive and no one wants unknown items placed in their baggage. If you can reserve a seat, then you can reserve storage.

Support digital reservations - No one likes to run for the best seat. Require people to choose seats in advance.

* Feasibility and cost are not considered in this article. However, examples such as Tesla prove that things that were considered infeasible, too expensive, and without a clear product-market fit, can become a reality if there is a vision to produce a better experience for the customer. (Aug 25, 2016)

Humane Design - Games Must Be Good to Their Players - Extra Credits