Tomo Posted January 12, 2012 Posted January 12, 2012 Interesting news isn't it. Wonder how it's gonna work if it come's in... $2 a kg, or everyone over 77kg pay extra!
dazza 38 Posted January 12, 2012 Posted January 12, 2012 Dont know Tomo.But if you have children that weigh less just say eg- 40 Kg.Do you get a refund per Kg up to the 77 KG mark ?. I doubt it.
Guest Howard Hughes Posted January 12, 2012 Posted January 12, 2012 It will happen, I reckon within 5 years. The sensible way would be to give a total allowance for passenger, baggage and hand luggage (say 110kg), that way the passenger can decide how he/she wants to use the allowance! You know 80 kg man, 10kg hand luggage and 20 kg bag, or 55 kg woman + 55 kg of shoes!
Guest Andys@coffs Posted January 12, 2012 Posted January 12, 2012 Or a 130kg man and 20kg of helium Iggy, Approx 160g of helium lifts 1kg of weight (ignoring all the other variables in the various gas laws) so 20kg of Helium is good for 122kg. so your 130kg man is almost airborne on his own without the aircraft ..... Andy P.S I didnt know this myself, had to google it...http://newton.dep.anl.gov/askasci/phy99/phy99471.htm P.P.S I completely ignored the volume required for 20kg of helium, I suspect it would be significant and pronlematic....ignore the oxygen mask briefing, there was no oxygen when the helium was released.... P.P.P.S I think in reality the 20kg of helium just means that the total weight is actually 150kg, not the 110 that you infer.
Guest Howard Hughes Posted January 12, 2012 Posted January 12, 2012 Or a 130kg man and 20kg of helium There will probably be a charge for that! Tick here if you wish to offset your body weight helium...
youngster Posted January 12, 2012 Posted January 12, 2012 The problem as I see it is not weight. If you are 6'10", you are going to weigh 110kg naturally, so it seems unfair to charge extra. The problem is people who encroach into your paid-for seat. I sat next to a woman last year on a Qantas flight who could not even lower the tray table she was so fat. Needless to say, I spent the whole flight squished against the window and I certainly didn't get the whole seat I paid for.
dazza 38 Posted January 12, 2012 Posted January 12, 2012 The thing is, in the past, they have never weight people.They have always looked at children, to make up for Fat people.Im not fat, but I do have a little gut.Im six foot and weigh about 96 Kg, Im a fraction under 6 foot. Fuel is the biggest factor in running a airline.Its just their way of trying to charge more.I have seen some realy Fat people who would nearly take up 2 seats. Maybe they should pay for 2 seats.I dont know.lol
eightyknots Posted January 13, 2012 Posted January 13, 2012 Andys@coffs' date=' post: 197926, member: 94[/email']]P.P.S I completely ignored the volume required for 20kg of helium, I suspect it would be significant and pronlematic..... Don't speak too loudly Andy otherwise airlines will be charging for volume as well as weight "within five years"
Kyle Communications Posted January 13, 2012 Posted January 13, 2012 Crap....I am 123kg and 187cm looks like I am getting charged then
Guest davidh10 Posted January 13, 2012 Posted January 13, 2012 It sounds to me like one of those schemes that will cost more to implement than is recouped by simply averaging it out, as they do today. It won't do anything for weight and balance unless they also register the actual weight in each seat. Even then I suspect that unless somehow, all the overweight people sit down the back, it isn't going to make a difference worth anything. Let's take an example... say six people walk down to the back of the aircraft to go to the toilet. If we say an average is 77kg per person, that is 462kg extra, placed close to the end of the weight / balance lever (assuming they all came from about the CG location. Worse if they were all in front of it to begin with). Ok, now if we consider a person at 110kg, that is 33kg over the average. Now to have such people seated at the back to make up the equivalent of the six average people waiting at the toilet would need 14 people. When you take into account fuel load, aircraft weight and cargo, I just don't think it is that significant. Bottom line, they still have to charge a market rate for the ticket to get passengers, and that has nothing to do with the weight of the passengers or how much luggage they carry. On the other hand paying for two seats if you occupy two is fair. I seem to recall there was a court case in the US over just that issue. I don't remember the outcome.
Guernsey Posted January 13, 2012 Posted January 13, 2012 The thing is, in the past, they have never weight people.They have always looked at children, to make up for Fat people.Im not fat, but I do have a little gut.Im six foot and weigh about 96 Kg, Im a fraction under 6 foot. Fuel is the biggest factor in running a airline.Its just their way of trying to charge more.I have seen some realy Fat people who would nearly take up 2 seats. Maybe they should pay for 2 seats.I dont know.lol I know exactly what you are getting at when you state that they never weighed people before, but just as a matter of interest ( not trying to be clever here ) I have been weighed many times in the past. Back in the Channel Islands and the UK several airlines operated De Havilland Rapide aircraft which usually carried eight passengers. We were weighed and then allocated seating with the heaviest in the front. Some carriers restricted their load to six or seven passengers depending on the fuel requirements. With some of todays overweight people there would definitely be problems, not to mention the pilot's possible inability to walk down the very narrow aisle between the passengers. Being young and skinny I always sat in the back which gave the best view being behind the wing. Come to think of it, I would probably still be in the back seat today as I am 5'8" and weight 70 kilos. Slim and trim Alan.
dazza 38 Posted January 13, 2012 Posted January 13, 2012 HI Alan, In small aircraft.The scales come out alot to weigh people.Actually I have heard from time to time where people (normally the female variety), get very annoyed when ask to jump on the scales.In modern airliners they havent in the past worried to much about it.I think that the 77Kg weight used , is a bit light these days due to males in the western world on average being heavier than that . PS- I was slim and trim when I was 20 odd.My weight was 54 KG (well under weight for my height). I think the millon gallons of beer I have drunk since then has got me up to 96 Kg.LOL
Ultralights Posted January 13, 2012 Posted January 13, 2012 So how much do you pay when you purchase your ticket 6 months ahead?
dazza 38 Posted January 13, 2012 Posted January 13, 2012 Good Point UL.How will they get around that?
Guest Howard Hughes Posted January 13, 2012 Posted January 13, 2012 So how much do you pay when you purchase your ticket 6 months ahead? Everyone pays the same price when they book assuming they are 'standard', you pay the difference when you rock up to the counter, much like you would if your bag was overweight. Earlier this year I caught a flight from Cairns to Sydney, walked up to the desk 45 mins before the flight, ticket $160, excess bags $180 (9kg) I had just come off an International flight so had more than the standard 20kg and couldn't be bothered repacking into my hand luggage (which they actively encourage), go figure... I am only 168cm and weigh 90kg (should probably be about 80kg) and people tell me I don't look overweight, I guess I'll be paying extra!
Tomo Posted January 13, 2012 Author Posted January 13, 2012 I reckon they shouldn't charge extra for weight as such, but rather wideloads... Smaller aircraft "Do" need to adhere to weight restrictions though.
Guernsey Posted January 13, 2012 Posted January 13, 2012 I reckon they shouldn't charge extra for weight as such, but rather wideloads...Smaller aircraft "Do" need to adhere to weight restrictions though. ' Wide Loads ' I like that. They should have a narrow entrance of certain dimensions that you have to walk through, sort of like you have now for checking that your hand baggage is within the size limits. You would have a ' Size Marshall ' standing alongside so that if you were too large he would say "I'm sorry sir but you are oversized so you will have to travel in the hold". You will now be charged excess baggage however, you will get a refund on your normal ticket plus a $100 gift voucher for 'Weight Watchers'. First Class passengers would travel up the front of the cargo hold but would be given an oversize seat to sit on and of course a Porta Potty would be provided. "What was that you said sir........no, I'm afraid there are no window seats. NOTE!! No smilies at the end of this one as it is a serious proposal. Skinny Alan.
Guest ozzie Posted January 13, 2012 Posted January 13, 2012 Rapides had a aft CG problem. Qantas and Holyman airways lost one each and they were easy to over load. Maybe they should charge lot extra for the use of a seat belt extention.
winsor68 Posted January 13, 2012 Posted January 13, 2012 I think the big factor involved here should be safety... the majority of large people request an aisle seat... this leaves the poor people sitting next to them unable to get to the aisle on the aircraft... basically you are dead if it comes to an emergency... I know a way the airline could make a massive kick out of baggage... currently the maximum weight for an individual bag is 32kgs. I reckon if they dropped the max to 20kgs per single bag but kept the allowance at 23kgs or there abouts all the women folk would buy a second bag in order to get there extra 3kgs of baggage... and of course they Would by nature put more than 3kgs in the second bag attracting a nice Big kick in excess fees... with the added benefit of improving WH&S. Make sense?
Gnarly Gnu Posted January 13, 2012 Posted January 13, 2012 I was 20 odd.My weight was 54 KG (well under weight for my height). I like the Herman cartoon where he says to his wife mid argument "You were only 110 pounds on our wedding day so I'm not even married to half of you" I'm tired of Virgass and all their restrictions, try travelling with a bunch of tools these days....
winsor68 Posted January 13, 2012 Posted January 13, 2012 I'm tired of Virgass and all their restrictions, try travelling with a bunch of tools these days.... Jeez Gnarly... I reckon your ears would have been ringing after having spent the afternoon and evening loading and unloading said tools on my knees with what I reckon about heavy baggage. Lol. But the worst are golf bags@!!!@#@!!! I would like to see these hackers carry some of these bags to a taxi let alone around 9 holes. 1
kgwilson Posted January 13, 2012 Posted January 13, 2012 The 77 KG standard pax weight does need to be revised. Humans are increasing in height and weight (excluding obesity and the sedentary lifestyle) due to the nutrition we now have available compared to 100 or even 50 years ago. This is just evolution sped up. I'm 167cm & 71kg including all the beer so I still fit the standard which is in theory an average value, so half of passengers should be under 77kg, & half over 77kg. Seat pitch is the other issue with the average persons height increasing this will reduce the number of seats available if the pitch has to be increased. So increase the standard and work out how to charge for extremes. Super fatties should be charged for 2 seats or they can go business or first class which would have the same effect. There could be a person sizer like the ones they have for carry on luggage. If you can't fit in it .. well ching ching. Personal hygiene is a bugbear with me in cattle class. There should be a pongometer at the checkin & those who fail are directed off to a shower. I'm not sure how I would deal with those who have consumed copious amounts of beans or other sulphur dioxide creating foods. Perhaps a special nappy or a vacuum to remove the offending odours would work. 1
Gnarly Gnu Posted January 14, 2012 Posted January 14, 2012 Well I guess statistically half the population is overweight so that would be a nice seller if compulsory. Winsor I am a travelling brick salesman. The strength training will save you in gym fees and improve your health. 1
planedriver Posted January 15, 2012 Posted January 15, 2012 Hopefully, when the the Rump-Capacity frames are introduced, like those checking the size of carry-on baggage, the mother-in law can be tagged and travel in the baggage hold so I dont have to try and eat as if my both my elbows were cable-tied together.
Guernsey Posted January 15, 2012 Posted January 15, 2012 I suppose we could measure the fat person's intrusion into our space and then sub let that space to them. Just a thought. Skinny Alan. 1
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now