1) Business and 1st class make a lot of money for airlines. Not letting them board first (although personally I've always wondered why this is desirable) would devalue their tickets and make less profit for the airline.

2) Airplanes have to undergo certain maintenance checks or procedures whenever they land. Those take some fixed amount of time. There is no incentive to speed up the boarding/deplaning process past that fixed amount of time, since it won't be the limiting factor.

As someone who customarily boards early (due to fare class or airline status), I can tell you one solid reason, overhead bin space. If flight attendants would ensure folks put their bags on their row and the gate attendants ensured bags weren’t too large, this would be less an issue, but I routinely see folks fairly early in the boarding process putting their bags in rows in front of theirs, even though their row’s bin is empty or at least not full.

The worst example of this was my flight a few weeks ago. I was the first to board that flight, followed by another customer in first class and her family. The woman proceeded to put all her kid’s and husband’s luggage in the first class overhead despite her being the only one in that cabin (her seat was via an upgrade, not that it matters). The rest of the passengers in first class (besides me, thankfully) had to put their luggage in the first rows of economy due to her actions which had a ripple effect down the plane. Probably extended boarding and deboarding time by at least five minutes, all because of what I’d call selfish behavior.

As long as egoistic behavior is the optimal strategy we will not see a significant change in behavior.

It can only be changed by changing the surrounding rules and conditions.

If everyone can't do it (bringing more luggage than will fit above you) then doing that seem like you're doing it because you're better than everyone else, which is offensive to most people for good reason. If her whole family had flown first class, that'd be a different story. (They'd probably still be annoyed at the family for basically cancelling out some of the perks of paying extra for flights, though.)

Maybe the airlines I fly are just the worst examples, but I frequently fly business/first both domestic and international and the overheads are always full, usually due in part to passengers not in that cabin.

When I was fat, I paid extra for first class tickets so that I wouldn't be the slob jerk who overflowed into my neighbor's coach class seat. Because of that, I had a lot of coach-mindset first-class seats.

Boarding first in first class gives you an opportunity to get some work done, to relax a bit before the plane takes off, and almost always you get to have a drink and a snack before the plane leaves the ground. It gives you a chance to put your head on straight for the next leg of the journey, or catch up on stuff before the ascent.

If you're a busy person (as I was back then), boarding first really makes a difference.

I have done some business travel and some premium economy travel, and I have seen airlines take 40-60 minutes from "formal" boarding time to takeoff. When they require 60 minutes, it usually is a big plane and the difference between business and economy could be 20 minutes easily (assuming the seating was reversed).

I have wondered many a times if boarding last would not be better? But there is a joy to leaving the lounge and directly walking into the plane if you time it right. Otherwise you end up waiting for others to board first. Also, I could afford to be late and still get in, not so if my boarding group was the last.

These are minor luxuries, but each has some value. In the bigger scheme of things, and given that it is hard to afford business travel all the time on personal dime, I would say it does not matter much :)

Most people finding waiting to board unpleasant and want it over ASAP. For me personally, it is often less comfortable in the terminal for a number of reasons. The climate and noise is worse, I must keep an eye on luggage, and I have a mild anxiety about inexplicably losing my documentation or becoming too engrossed in whatever activity I am doing while I wait.

Alternatively, I could be sitting, stretching, taking off my shoes, ordering a drink, and focusing my full attention work/entertainment/sleep for that 20 minutes.

Part of the annoyance of boarding isn't just the total time it takes from when they open the gate door until when it's done. It's the amount of standing up, holding your luggage, shuffling forward a bit, and wondering when the person in front of you will move.

Use driving as an analogy. Suppose you get out of a doctor's appointment at 3pm and are meeting someone to see a movie at 6pm. During those 3 hours, the only two activities you can do are kill time on your phone (either lingering in the doctor's office lobby or sitting in the movie theater lobby) and drive. Do you leave at 3pm and avoid rush hour, or do you wait until the last minute and get in traffic? Either way, you're going to wait 3 hours, so you're not saving time, but one is less stressful.

Even though I'm not really a frequent flyer, I generally buy business class when they are on sale. E.g. Beijing to Bali on Hong Kong Express for $900 roundtrip (vs. $500 for economy), or Beijing to LA on ANA for $2000 last minute one way (vs. $1500 for economy, and since I was moving, it was tax deductible at the time). You can find some good deals, especially in Asia, and the experience can be worth it.

Seems like you can model this as equivalent to boarding two airplanes. Boarding first class is like boarding one airplane, and when you're done with that you start the clock ticking on boarding coach, which is like the second airplane.

In which case, you have two airplane-boarding sub-problems, and the number you care about is the sum of the times. You can apply whatever strategy to both subproblems, then you can reduce both numbers that you're adding, and you still get a smaller sum.

Maybe it's not as much of an efficiency gain as doing away with the first class and coach separation, but it should still be an efficiency gain.

Others have noted other reasons, but I think the biggest reason is that 1st/business class seats are more comfortable than the crappy crowded boarding area. Economy seats, it's the other way around. And as an added bonus, on something like a 787 where the boarding doors are behind business class, boarding first means you're lounging around in the front of the plane being served drinks and addressed by name while behind you the rabble are are being herded like cattle into their tiny seats at the back.

For 3x the price, 1st/business class want luxury, and sitting elbow to elbow with the riffraff in beat up terminal seating isn't that.

The risk of having to reschedule a $5K flight is to great to justify the reward. If I'm not going to be in the lounge, I'm back to minimizing the time at the gate.

Also, most lounges really aren't very good. AmEx centurion lounge is nice. But like, the United lounge in your average airport is really a few steps down from your typical airport bar.

(BA: ~£200 Economy for LHR-JFK, £2300 to £7300 depending on day 1st Class)

Maybe peace of mind? One you're on the plane you know you're good to go. When you're in the terminal you have to keep diverting your attention to announcements, changes, distractions, etc.

I'm in the "board first, get it over with, get settled in" camp. My wife wants the boarding door to brush her backside as they close it. When we travel together, we don't always board together.

The hustle and bustle at the gate stresses me out. (There's no good reason why and it shouldn't, but it does.) Once I'm sitting in my window seat, I close my eyes and relax.

In some airports it also reduces total queueing time, though in others it just moves you from queuing at the boarding desk to queueing at a bus stop/stairwell/skybridge.

Business class seats are nice and you get a swanky drink/treat to enjoy after boarding. When in economy, I always hang back during boarding unless I'm worried about overhead, but in biz it is really different. And they often board through their own door anyways (if international).

Carry-on space. I have yet to see a truly full flight where at least some carry ons aren't gate-checked.

That's also the main reason why I try to board as fast as possible - to ensure that there's still space for my luggage.

The problem with his analyses is that they're frequently wrong because he look at problems in a very academic way and severely oversimplifies them.

For example, his video about cars going through intersections makes perfect sense in a simulated world on a computer. But it falls down instantly in real life because it presumes that every car is identical, with the same mechanical characteristics, the same acceleration capability, the same connectivity (for the magic fictional traffic control signal), the same latency, they never break down, there are never any external factors at an intersection, and on and on and on.

Similarly, his plane boarding simulation falls down as soon as someone shows up late, or in a wheelchair, or with a bum leg, drunk, a baby, luggage that the wheel has fallen off of, etc...

He seems to live in a world where there is no difference between theory and reality. I still watch his videos, but I consume them as entertainment, not as documentaries.

This doesn't invalidate your core criticism, but there's no need to accuse him of trying to impose authority.

I've watched a lot of CGP grey and I just learned now, from you, that he's a college professor. I may have missed or forgotten it being mentioned a couple times, but I'm sure it's not front and center as you imply.

Being on YouTube is, tautologically, obvious from being on YouTube, but it's also necessarily obvious from being on YouTube, and a similar accusation of appeal to authority could be constructed for any other medium, e.g."it's best because I say so and I have a blog".

All of these things occur in non-ideal boarding scenarios as well. I don't see how they affect his solution more so than what we currently have.

It's like when a Toyota and a Freightliner crash into the same wall. They both crashed at the same speed, why is one damaged more than the other?

Maybe there is an algorithm that boards a plane faster when there are 2 handicapped people, 3 drunks, and 1 person being late. But how typical is that? And is it realistic to design the whole algorithm around that? I would argue it isn't.

If your data is truly random, you should pick the algorithm with the best average time complexity. Is your data random? Almost certainly not. It might be 'random enough', or it might not be. A real world data set may fall completely within the best case of algorithm A and the worst case of algorithm B, even if the average case of B is better than the average case of A.

In this case, the data points that are most likely to negatively affect an algorithm are specifically being excluded from the model. Far from comparing even the average case, we're comparing best cases. We aren't using a 'real world' data set. So it's an interesting simulation, but it isn't enough to reach any conclusions at all.