Winston Aldworth: Toilet? You should've gone before we left

'An unscientific survey from Expedia found that some passengers would back themselves to cross their legs on short-haul, low-cost flights.' Photo / Thinkstock

Would you give up the right to spend a penny inflight in return for saving a few bucks on your airline ticket?

An unscientific survey from Expedia found that some passengers would back themselves to cross their legs on short-haul, low-cost flights. The online booking firm polled 1500 travellers from France, Germany, Ireland, Spain and the UK on issues around low-cost airlines.

Gamely, 14 per cent of respondents said they would give up the use of a toilet on the plane in return for cheaper ticket prices. A couple of things to bear in mind: Firstly, the survey was focused on low-cost carriers in Europe, so the people responding are probably pretty comfortable with the idea of crossing their legs for an hour or so between Stansted and Barcelona; secondly, it's a self-selecting survey, so don't read too much into the results.

However, it raises an interesting idea. No airline would be bonkers enough to fly without toilets at all. But what about chucking out one of the johns in a shorthaul A320 and installing a couple more seats, then charging passengers for the use of the one remaining toilet?

It puts an incentive on passengers to go to the loo before boarding, therefore (hopefully) fewer people would need to use the toilet. Crucially it would produce cheaper ticket prices all round.

A long break

As my wonderfully industrious colleagues who make the Travel section arrive in your paper each week will tell you, I'm a bit hopeless with technology.

When I flew out to Vancouver last week, I thought it would be helpful to put one of those Out-Of-Office thingies on my email. When people send me an email, it immediately bounces back with a message alerting them to my absence.

It was meant to say: "I am out of the office until early October and will have infrequent access to email." (Keep it vague, that's my policy)

Instead, I managed to say: "I am out of the office until the end of July and will have infrequent access to email."

A 10-month stint away from the office! Chance would be a fine thing. For the record, I'm at my desk today, but away again next week. Apologies to anyone who got the confusing message.