General Aviation > Civil Aviation News

Airline Asks Passengers to Empty Bladders Before Boarding Flights

<< < (2/3) > >>

F-111 C/C:
Well, I think AVIATOR has a good point. There are WAY more people over the 80kg average than under it so I think the airlines need to rethink the allowances.

In fact I was referring to design weights and not boarding weights.
When they design an aircraft they must have altered the criteria over the years. People are now huge compared to the sixties when the 747 was designed and first flew.
 It is also obvious that gross operating weights must have a huge margin of safety otherwise they'd have scales for people at the airport before you board.
Could anyone imagine the legal ramifications of someone being told at check in that they are too fat and can't go?


Design weights, sure, but perhaps in other departments than you think. New planes generally have higher operating weights than their predecessor, thanks to improvements in engine, but I don't think that's driven by the weight carried, fuel is still the biggest weight factor. Fuel is range. I think what the additional weight just means is that we're seeing bigger planes on shorter routes? Plus these luggage restrictions.

Not talking about the line-flights, they are half empty half the time anyway.

The seats became a lot lighter. Although I think that was just a way to have more seats+passengers.

Sure the satefy margin is probably huge. Actually, the FAA thought about forcing regional airlines to not only weigh luggage, but also passengers. Less people on board, smaller planes, I suppose the margins are smaller on lighter aircraft by law too. I'm not sure what the final decision was, probably still pending?

Well about the legal ramifications, you are right there, but it doesn't need to be a fat person that's kicked off. They can overbook based on seats now, surely they can get away with overbooking based on weight. So imagine, the Rugby team onboard and you and your kid get rescheduled. How nice...

Isn't it a safety risk for the fat person as well as the other passengers. Surely they'd be able to show that it isn't safe to have overweight persons on the aircraft in case of an emergency with some simulation. Okay, talking really overweight here, not just a bit fat.

--- Quote ---Do they count the luggage of each person as part of the person or is it completely separate?

--- End quote ---

Well seperate for the weight calculations on each flight, but probably together when they design an aircraft to carry X persons.

--- Quote ---What happens if there's like an anorexic chick or someone really light, do they still count as 85kg?

--- End quote ---

Yeah, that's why they can still use averages, instead of weighing you. So maybe every fat person need to buy them a drink after each flight. Not onboard, because then you'll have this weight-in-bladder issue again. LOL

shawn a:
First of all, That's Japan for you. Secondly, I think everyone should step on a scale along with their ridiculously large, hideously overweight, "roll aboards", so the plane's takeoff weight can be estimated accurately. Weighing luggage at check-in counters does not take into account anything bought once in the security area, including, of course, meals eaten and beverages consumed.
Seeing the ridiculous steps taken and laws enacted here in America to prevent "even one child dying", the simple step of accurately assessing the weight of a passenger aircraft seems to be the next logical step.
After that, we can expect our air travel tickets to be based on overall estimated weight, with additional charges for passengers who check in above their ticketed weight.
Orwell's "1984" is just taking longer than he expected.
Travel light.

F-111 C/C:
The future of discount airlines????


[0] Message Index

[#] Next page

[*] Previous page

Go to full version