Airlines to charge by passenger`s weight

kat1 (Moderator) says on Jun 4, 2008, 08:24:

i read sometime similar about weight and planes, here it is

"Larger Americans Increases Airline Safety Concerns" After the US Airways Express Flight 5481 crash in January 2002 that killed all 21 people aboard, investigators have been looking at an airplane mechanical problem as well as airplane weight issues as possible contributors to the aviation crash. The FAA had ordered 15 airlines to check passenger weight following the airplane crash and found that passenger and baggage weight surpassed estimates currently in place.

The airplane crash weight estimation was believed to be within 100 pounds of the maximum takeoff weight. Due to the average American weight increasing every year, many believe airplane weight estimates that exist since its’ 1995 creation is far too low. Especially in smaller airplanes, weight requirements can be crucial to the safety of the airplane passengers.

In response to the FAA airplane crash survey regarding weight, some airlines have changed weight estimates to reflect more current size standards. The FAA has proposed different weight requirements for airplane passengers, which has been opposed by regional airlines because weight estimate increases can result in seat eliminations that can hurt sales.

0 funny, 0 helpful.

kat1 (Moderator) says on Jun 4, 2008, 08:25:

i will be devastated if they tell me i am too fat to flight huh!

0 funny, 0 helpful.

webmanco says on Jun 4, 2008, 08:27:

http://poorbuthappy.com/yourthing/post/time-to-slim-down/

...A yo, déjenme queto y no me jodan má! ...

0 funny, 0 helpful.

bickerss says on Jun 4, 2008, 08:29:

jaja this arguments been going on in Australia with the number of fatbodies flying, taking up extra space that belongs to the next seat!!!

0 funny, 0 helpful.

jorgegdiaz says on Jun 4, 2008, 08:29:

hahaha ... Would you imagine the complains from large women when an airline employee tells them, "excuse me madame, your weight exceeds in 25 lbs from what you told us to quote your ticket "...

"To err is human - and to blame it on a computer is even more so."Robert Orben

0 funny, 0 helpful.

Cerealkiller says on Jun 4, 2008, 08:30:

wow, can you imagine? most people in the developing world paying for cheapass travel while the fat arses in the west cant afford to fly? hahahahahaha

Conservatives are not necessarily stupid, but most stupid people are conservatives -John Stuart Mill

0 funny, 0 helpful.

ColombianoGringo says on Jun 4, 2008, 08:31:

I read about this in some US papers yesterday and it seemed to be mere speculation on the part of some ATA spokesman. None of the airlines have publicly proposed the idea.

I do think it might be a good idea if the formula is developed fairly. I weigh about 190lbs which is normal for my height (6'2"). If they charged strictly by weight, I would end up paying more than some overweight woman. I think a better approach would be to set some "normal" weight range for men and women and charge a stepped premium for those that go over that weight range. I certainly shouldn't have to pay the same fare as some 400lb mastodon.

0 funny, 0 helpful.

EVERETT says on Jun 4, 2008, 08:40:

graeat news my family is small in size and weight, i'll be able to store them in the overhead compartment !!!

The Stars at Night are Big and Bright

0 funny, 0 helpful.

Mononoke28 says on Jun 4, 2008, 08:50:

Sweet!!!!! =D

Diana

0 funny, 0 helpful.

Tinto (Moderator) says on Jun 4, 2008, 09:23:

Color me skeptical that this will ever be implemented. Some lawyer will sue using the Americans with Disabilities Act, claiming his client's morbid obesity is due to vague "gland problems" or mental health problems and he'll win.

0 funny, 0 helpful.

Cerealkiller says on Jun 4, 2008, 10:03:

But the thing is the policy wouldn't be implemented to encourage people to lose weight and cannot be considered a "fattist" policy -although both things are collateral effects-. It is a fact that more weight requires more energy, so regardless of how tall or fat or the degree of mental or glandular problems one has, weight is weight, the scale doesn't lie (most of the times, if you're not holding water anyway). Now if the seats were designed for thin people or the fatsos were all sat down together on the back of the plane, then that would be discrimination, but based exclusively on the weight/energy argument, there really is not much to debate on the issue.

Conservatives are not necessarily stupid, but most stupid people are conservatives -John Stuart Mill

0 funny, 0 helpful.

ColombianoGringo says on Jun 4, 2008, 10:10:

Southwest has been charging a second seat for people that can't fit into a single seat. I think this is a great policy. I'm not sure if they've been sued over this yet.

There is nothing worse than being stuck next to some fat bastard who is literally overflowing into your space. When in this situation, I normally just start jabbing them with my elbow until they either move or at least reign in the flab a bit. Of course, I am a bit of an asshole, but I shouldn't have to be uncomfortable for hours because the guy next to me can't quit shoving big macs in his pie hole.

0 funny, 0 helpful.

kat1 (Moderator) says on Jun 4, 2008, 11:10:

we can't seat all the fat people behind that will un-balance the weight of the plane, they have to spreed them out evenly, really no joke didn't in America a small airplane crashed because weight imbalance? most of the weight was on the back of the plane

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/US_Airways_Express_Flight_5481

0 funny, 0 helpful.

ColombianoGringo says on Jun 4, 2008, 11:15:

Kat,

This was a while back, but I used to take a lot of small planes from Denver to various ski resorts in Colorado and they would sometimes ask you how much you weighed before you boarded. I think the idea was to make sure that the plane was not overloaded and that the weight was evenly distributed. Some of these little airports were in some pretty treacherous places. Sandy airport in Aspen is literally in a field between two mountains. That was not a fun landing.

0 funny, 0 helpful.

kat1 (Moderator) says on Jun 4, 2008, 11:22:

The problem was that the weight was
1)not the correct one
2) spreed unevenly so according to investigation when the pilot lifted the landing gear, this put more weight in an already existing overweight on the back of the plane, so the plane stalked.

CG now they are checking the passenger weight for that small airplanes, i flew in one from Lexington to Cincinnati

0 funny, 0 helpful.

ColombianoGringo says on Jun 4, 2008, 11:26:

Yep. I would not trust passengers to be truthful about their weight. I suspect that most people would be more concerned about avoiding embarrassment than ensuring flight safety.

0 funny, 0 helpful.

jorgegdiaz says on Jun 4, 2008, 11:32:

So I, at 6´2" and 170 lbs, am a safe travel companion? ... lol
Gosh, I ought to start asking for refunds !!!!

"To err is human - and to blame it on a computer is even more so."Robert Orben

0 funny, 0 helpful.

ColombianoGringo says on Jun 4, 2008, 11:38:

You can sit next to me anytime.

There aren't too many Colombians as tall as us. I always joke that I can see from one end of Unicentro to another when it's crowded. Is your whole family tall? Except for my brother and I, the guys in our family from our generation are a normal 5'8" or so.

You must be pretty thin to only weigh 170. I am also 6'2" and not even the tiniest bit fat and weigh 190. When I was young and muscular, I got up to around 205. Of course, I ate something like 3,500 calories a day back then.

0 funny, 0 helpful.

jorgegdiaz says on Jun 4, 2008, 11:48:

Yep, I`m lean...
I`m also any women`s envy when they see me eating...

"To err is human - and to blame it on a computer is even more so."Robert Orben

0 funny, 0 helpful.

miamimike says on Jun 4, 2008, 12:38:

This is the ONLY fair way, now all passengers, NO matter how large or small, will pay their fair share based on actual weight. For years the single, average weight single passenger has been subsidizing other extra passengers who payed nothing or a pittance that really didn't cover true expenses.

Kat,,,,Hmmm How many Kilos do you weigh? I will make the Call Ji JI

"Wait a minute. What did you just say? You're predicting $4-a-gallon gas? That's interesting. I hadn't heard that." -- Feb. 28, 2008 --George W. Bush, Washington, D.C.

0 funny, 0 helpful.

Mononoke28 says on Jun 4, 2008, 13:01:

So how would that work to know exactly what your weight is, they weigh your bags first and then you stand on the large scale? That's a bit much, no?

Diana

0 funny, 0 helpful.

kat1 (Moderator) says on Jun 4, 2008, 13:52:

uhmm no way miamimike after month of bullying me for my beautiful hat , i don't trust you anymore huh! :P

0 funny, 0 helpful.

jorgegdiaz says on Jun 4, 2008, 14:54:

.. would you trust me instead KAT?

"To err is human - and to blame it on a computer is even more so."Robert Orben

0 funny, 0 helpful.

Mr. Hollywood says on Jun 4, 2008, 15:18:

This will NEVER happen.

It's a class-action lawsuit waiting to happen, and the lawyers at airlines will stop it.

Not to mention that there is no "fixed-price" for most airline tickets. The last thing airlines want is consistent pricing throughout the plane. They want variable pricing so they can constantly shift prices by demand and other factors. A "per pound" fare would kill that. Besides, what are they going to do, ask you to enter your weight when you book the ticket and then line everyone up to be weighed as a "truth check" before boarding?

0 funny, 0 helpful.

ColombianoGringo says on Jun 4, 2008, 15:24:

They currently charge excess baggage charges upon check in. While per pound fares would be difficult, they could do as I suggested and charge excess weight fees for passengers that go over a certain weight limit.

As I said, Southwest has been charging for a second seat for a few years now. Surely some poor "victim of obesity" has raised hell about Southwest's practices. I don't know if anyone has sued them, but they have not stopped this practice.

0 funny, 0 helpful.

Mr. Hollywood says on Jun 4, 2008, 15:27:

I'm sure someone has complained about the SW policy, too, but I bet it's very rarely enforced and it's based on not fitting inside the dimensions of your seat, not weight.

0 funny, 0 helpful.

ColombianoGringo says on Jun 4, 2008, 15:28:

I don't see how charging by weight is any more discriminatory than charging by volume. I hope this does become standard practice. I have no patience or sympathy for people who become a public nuisance due to their gorging habits.

0 funny, 0 helpful.

Mr. Hollywood says on Jun 4, 2008, 15:40:

I was curious, too, so looked up the SW policy. http://www.southwest.com/travel_center/cos_qa.html

They judge not by weight but, rather, by whether you can fit in the seat with armrests down without encroaching on the seat next to you. And they only charge the extra fee when a flight is sold out.

0 funny, 0 helpful.

ColombianoGringo says on Jun 4, 2008, 15:46:

Thanks for the link. Still, it effectively comes down to charging by volume under certain conditions.

I did notice some other interesting sections in their FAQ that could possibly apply to charging a premium for excessively obese passengers. Again, I am not advocating charging marginally overweight people. This should only apply to those that exceed a reasonable weight limit.

Judging from the second item, it would seem that they have been sued over their current policy.

-----------------------------------------

Doesn't your policy violate the Americans with Disabilities Act or the Air Carrier Access Act?

-Interstate airline travel is specifically excluded from Title II of the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) by Section 12141(2). Airline travel is instead covered by the Air Carrier Access Act, 49 U.S.C. 1374(c) and the regulations implementing the Act issued by the Department of Transportation as 14 CFR Part 382, et seq. The Air Carrier Access Act (ACAA) preceded the ADA, and Congress excluded air carriers and other air transportation services from the scope of ADA. As regulated under 14 CFR §382.38 Seating accommodations (i) "Carriers are not required to furnish more than one seat per ticket or to provide a seat in a class of service other than the one the passenger has purchased."


Isn't this policy discriminatory toward large Customers?

Southwest Airlines does not condone discrimination in any form. We have Employees and Customers of all races, ethnicity, religions, shapes, and sizes. Our Mission and our responsibility per our Contract of Carriage is to provide safe and comfortable air transportation for each and every Customer. This policy has been upheld in court and is supported by the Department of Transportation’s stance that the purchase of a single ticket offers the use of a single seat.

0 funny, 0 helpful.

Mr. Hollywood says on Jun 4, 2008, 16:21:

Yep.

I stand by my previous statement, though, that the practicalities of a "Pay by weight" system would be a nightmare far outweighing any benefits.

0 funny, 0 helpful.

Papi de Alejo says on Jun 4, 2008, 17:52:

I once had to sit next to a rather large, yet surprisingly pleasant woman on a flight from San Juan Puerto Rico to JFK. It was two seats and she sat by the window. If she wasn't a nice conversationalist, I would have been very upset with the airline. Now, there is no one with their faculties intact that would ever call me thin, but I was practically hanging in the aisle. Every person that passed by bumped me because I was sticking out in the aisle and the carts had their share of bumping me.

Since this flight, I have made it my practice of choosing my seat by a window if possible or inside of the five seats across in the center of the airliner.

Interesting possibilities with this policy.

PdA

0 funny, 0 helpful.

adrimm says on Jun 4, 2008, 18:01:

I think it is a good thing.

0 funny, 0 helpful.

Buongone says on Jun 4, 2008, 20:53:

I was on a China Air flight from LA to Tapei. 15 hrs. I get put next to this giant Sumu wrestler. Last row of the plane. Next to the window. Only thing the window was about a foot out of reach. Could not even rest against the window. Sold out plane. Talk about being Pissed Off !!

0 funny, 0 helpful.

Papi de Alejo says on Jun 4, 2008, 20:56:

OK Buongone, you got me beat. 15 hours! Wow!

PdA

0 funny, 0 helpful.

miamimike says on Jun 5, 2008, 00:24:

kat1 (Moderator) says on Jun 4, 2008, 13:52: flag

uhmm no way miamimike after month of bullying me for my beautiful hat , i don't trust you anymore huh! :P

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

LOL. Kat I was going to guess you weigh in at 48-52 Kilos. Do I get a prize? Ji ji

===========================================================

Bet you don't see so many Kiddies in the future once this law kicks in! The Flights will be more peaceful.

"Wait a minute. What did you just say? You're predicting $4-a-gallon gas? That's interesting. I hadn't heard that." -- Feb. 28, 2008 --George W. Bush, Washington, D.C.

0 funny, 0 helpful.

lpdiver says on Jun 5, 2008, 04:30:

So my daughter who weighs 35 pounds should fly for practically nothing? I don't feel for the airlines. They aren't losing money.

I would prefer to be sandwiched between two fat people than two stinky ones!!!

t

"cook some rice!"

0 funny, 0 helpful.

Mr. Hollywood says on Jun 5, 2008, 14:59:

I was thinking the same thing about kids. I'd love to have them flying for their per pound price.

0 funny, 0 helpful.