benjjk
Posts: 345
Joined: Fri Aug 08, 2014 4:29 am

Re: Weighting passenger

Wed Sep 11, 2019 5:37 am

h1fl1er wrote:
buddy, how much do overweight bags actually add to the trip cost? How about just one overweight bag? Yet they're still charged.

Overweight baggage fees are so high largely to act as a deterrent in a volume-limited space, because you just know someone will try moving their whole house one day. And whenever manual handling is involved there’s worker health and safety considerations (i.e costs) that a heavier person doesn’t cause.

h1fl1er wrote:
Cargo? It's charged by the oz. Or the g or whatever measure you want to specify. Why not people? If you don't want to weigh everyone then just put a weight surcharge on overweight passengers.

Airlines don’t want to charge people by the kg. If they did, they would have to give a whole seat to a 4 year old who pays just 20% of the fare that her father in the next seat pays. That is a massive drop in yield that will be – wait for it – subsidized by you.

h1fl1er wrote:
Flying 200ppl all of whom are 20kgs overweight...this is 4t extra and this cost should be shared by the people who impose it. Thin, healthy people are subsidizing fat slobs the world over...it should stop is all I'm saying and this is a good place for the airlines to fairly price tickets.

Such an extreme example would require at least a mid-sized jet, let’s go with an A330. Even combined, these 200 people are only adding in the region of 1.6-1.7% to the aircraft's weight above-standard, or 0.0085% per person. Per Wikipedia, a rule of thumb is that for a 1% change in weight, fuel consumption will also change by 0.75%. I think you can see where I’m going with this, the extra cost of flying someone who weighs 20kg more than the standard weight is a ridiculously small percentage that would be commensurate with the increased fare you may be able to charge them (and in line with the discount you hope to receive by being slightly under).

To illustrate my point to the extreme - I’ve never vomited on a jet yet my ticket subsidizes those who do as it pays for their sick bags. If you’re that desperate to only pay for the costs you personally incur then maybe give a certain Irish airline a call.

h1fl1er wrote:
subsidizing fat slobs the world over

Is your motivation here really to save money or is it just to punish fat people?
 
Sokes
Posts: 222
Joined: Sat Mar 09, 2019 4:48 pm

Re: Weighting passenger

Wed Sep 11, 2019 7:35 am

benjjk wrote:
Sokes wrote:

Getting upset about discrimination doesn't seem logical to me. Who doesn't discriminate while choosing a partner?


Personal choice isn’t relevant here, I mean I can personally refuse to date someone of a specific religion, but as a business it would be illegal to refuse service, or charge more, based on that preference.


How does the religion of a passenger affect the profitability of the flight?
But yes, you are right. Political correctness probably helps mankind to get along more peaceful.

benjjk wrote:


h1fl1er wrote:
Flying 200ppl all of whom are 20kgs overweight...this is 4t extra and this cost should be shared by the people who impose it. Thin, healthy people are subsidizing fat slobs the world over...it should stop is all I'm saying and this is a good place for the airlines to fairly price tickets.


Such an extreme example would require at least a mid-sized jet, let’s go with an A330. Even combined, these 200 people are only adding in the region of 1.6-1.7% to the aircraft's weight above-standard, or 0.0085% per person. Per Wikipedia, a rule of thumb is that for a 1% change in weight, fuel consumption will also change by 0.75%. I think you can see where I’m going with this, the extra cost of flying someone who weighs 20kg more than the standard weight is a ridiculously small percentage that would be commensurate with the increased fare you may be able to charge them (and in line with the discount you hope to receive by being slightly under).


I had to google what is a slob:
"a person who is lazy and has low standards of cleanliness.
"he's a slob and expects others to clean up after him"
synonyms: layabout, good-for-nothing, sluggard, slug, laggard "

I believe body fat helps to cope with stress. I have seen people loosing a lot of weight. They would get much faster angry afterwards. The lower classes have more financial problems. They may on average also be less good in coping with personal problems. Which I believe is the reason that lower classes ON AVERAGE are more overweight.
I'm not speaking of extreme examples with thyroid or similar troubles.

Then there are people like myself:
Nobody in my family is fat. I like to drink lots of tea with sugar and munch at irregular times.
It seems there are no "one size fits all" explanations for overweight.

If the plane starts below MTOW, you are absolutely right.
If the plane is at MTOW, h1fl1er is absolutely right about missed cargo revenue.
Why can't the world be a little bit more autistic?
 
h1fl1er
Posts: 121
Joined: Thu Jun 06, 2019 5:58 pm

Re: Weighting passenger

Wed Sep 11, 2019 3:59 pm

benjjk wrote:
h1fl1er wrote:
Cargo? It's charged by the oz. Or the g or whatever measure you want to specify. Why not people? If you don't want to weigh everyone then just put a weight surcharge on overweight passengers.

Airlines don’t want to charge people by the kg. If they did, they would have to give a whole seat to a 4 year old who pays just 20% of the fare that her father in the next seat pays. That is a massive drop in yield that will be – wait for it – subsidized by you.


it won't be SUBSIDIZED by anyone! The airline will charge a per-kg weight that gives them desired yield and profit for the flight. Dude, there are cargo airlines doing exactly this, including the US3 and EK and a few others with big cargo business, every single day!

Such an extreme example would require at least a mid-sized jet, let’s go with an A330. Even combined, these 200 people are only adding in the region of 1.6-1.7% to the aircraft's weight above-standard, or 0.0085% per person. Per Wikipedia, a rule of thumb is that for a 1% change in weight, fuel consumption will also change by 0.75%. I think you can see where I’m going with this, the extra cost of flying someone who weighs 20kg more than the standard weight is a ridiculously small percentage that would be commensurate with the increased fare you may be able to charge them (and in line with the discount you hope to receive by being slightly under).


1% is a big deal. Fat people should be paying this extra amount.

To illustrate my point to the extreme - I’ve never vomited on a jet yet my ticket subsidizes those who do as it pays for their sick bags. If you’re that desperate to only pay for the costs you personally incur then maybe give a certain Irish airline a call.


They will be the first to weigh passengers as EVERY airline already does bags and assess a surcharge. Which is just.
 
User avatar
Starlionblue
Posts: 19343
Joined: Fri Feb 27, 2004 9:54 pm

Re: Weighting passenger

Thu Sep 12, 2019 12:16 am

h1fl1er wrote:
benjjk wrote:
h1fl1er wrote:
Cargo? It's charged by the oz. Or the g or whatever measure you want to specify. Why not people? If you don't want to weigh everyone then just put a weight surcharge on overweight passengers.

Airlines don’t want to charge people by the kg. If they did, they would have to give a whole seat to a 4 year old who pays just 20% of the fare that her father in the next seat pays. That is a massive drop in yield that will be – wait for it – subsidized by you.


it won't be SUBSIDIZED by anyone! The airline will charge a per-kg weight that gives them desired yield and profit for the flight. Dude, there are cargo airlines doing exactly this, including the US3 and EK and a few others with big cargo business, every single day!

Such an extreme example would require at least a mid-sized jet, let’s go with an A330. Even combined, these 200 people are only adding in the region of 1.6-1.7% to the aircraft's weight above-standard, or 0.0085% per person. Per Wikipedia, a rule of thumb is that for a 1% change in weight, fuel consumption will also change by 0.75%. I think you can see where I’m going with this, the extra cost of flying someone who weighs 20kg more than the standard weight is a ridiculously small percentage that would be commensurate with the increased fare you may be able to charge them (and in line with the discount you hope to receive by being slightly under).


1% is a big deal. Fat people should be paying this extra amount.

To illustrate my point to the extreme - I’ve never vomited on a jet yet my ticket subsidizes those who do as it pays for their sick bags. If you’re that desperate to only pay for the costs you personally incur then maybe give a certain Irish airline a call.


They will be the first to weigh passengers as EVERY airline already does bags and assess a surcharge. Which is just.


The problem with your argument about "fat people" is that bodyweight doesn't only depend on diet and exercise. Genetics play a major part in determining bodyweight, and there's nothing a person can do about it. Assuming both have a Body Mass Index in the healthy range, a 200cm man will weigh more than a 150cm woman.

That's the key big difference between cargo/luggage and human beings. Weight of cargo/luggage can be adjusted by the shipper/passenger. However, a 200cm man cannot (in a healthy way) keep his bodyweight equal to a 150cm woman's bodyweight.
"There are no stupid questions, but there are a lot of inquisitive idiots." - John Ringo
 
Passedv1
Posts: 643
Joined: Sun Oct 07, 2012 3:40 am

Re: Weighting passenger

Fri Sep 13, 2019 7:52 pm

The easiest fix that doesn't seem too hard to implement (in new designs anyway) is to have the airplanes weigh themselves right before takeoff. There has got to be a way to put sensors in gear struts and get a pretty accurate weight of the aircraft.

I was in a pilot meeting/training and we had a performance engineer there and during a break I told him a joke..."how do you know a performance engineer has a sense of humor...He calculates required take-off distance to the nearest foot".. hah... I thought it was funny. He didn't.

This problem comes to a head when engineers and accounts collaborate and take these calculations as precise measurements when in actuality, even under the best of circumstances, are only pretty good approximations.

If you tell me a 737-800 is going to take 6,387' to take off, and then you load it up to the absolute limit of that, using a weight that you calculated as 158,462 lbs then you are going to run into problems.

Flight ops at every airline is in a constant fight with "accountants" trying to remove our buffers that are put in in recognition of the fact that these are only approximations. The accountants tell us...f it only take 6,487 feet to take-off then you shouldn't use an increased power setting that shrinks the required take-off runway to 5,500 feet. If it only takes 38,756 pounds of fuel to fly from SEA-ORD then we shouldn't put on 40,000.

If you are going to treat these numbers as measurements, then we should actually measure.
 
User avatar
Starlionblue
Posts: 19343
Joined: Fri Feb 27, 2004 9:54 pm

Re: Weighting passenger

Sat Sep 14, 2019 12:27 am

Passedv1 wrote:
The easiest fix that doesn't seem too hard to implement (in new designs anyway) is to have the airplanes weigh themselves right before takeoff. There has got to be a way to put sensors in gear struts and get a pretty accurate weight of the aircraft. .


It isn't that simple. The slightest wind will move the aircraft about enough to throw those calculations off. Which is why aircraft are weighed in a closed hangar.
"There are no stupid questions, but there are a lot of inquisitive idiots." - John Ringo
 
planecane
Posts: 1073
Joined: Thu Feb 09, 2017 4:58 pm

Re: Weighting passenger

Sat Sep 14, 2019 1:32 am

I'm sure that with a scale built into a zone of the jet bridge and cameras both feeding data/video to a computer an algorithm could be developed that could give the total weight of passengers and carry ons to a very high degree of accuracy.
 
frmrCapCadet
Posts: 3067
Joined: Thu May 29, 2008 8:24 pm

Re: Weighting passenger

Sat Sep 14, 2019 4:22 pm

Supposing an extreme case of 3 pro football teams and 3 gymnast teams on a 318? I suppose they would not put all the football players on one end of the plane.
Buffet: the airline business...has eaten up capital...like..no other (business)

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 21 guests

Popular Searches On Airliners.net

Top Photos of Last:   24 Hours  •  48 Hours  •  7 Days  •  30 Days  •  180 Days  •  365 Days  •  All Time

Military Aircraft Every type from fighters to helicopters from air forces around the globe

Classic Airliners Props and jets from the good old days

Flight Decks Views from inside the cockpit

Aircraft Cabins Passenger cabin shots showing seat arrangements as well as cargo aircraft interior

Cargo Aircraft Pictures of great freighter aircraft

Government Aircraft Aircraft flying government officials

Helicopters Our large helicopter section. Both military and civil versions

Blimps / Airships Everything from the Goodyear blimp to the Zeppelin

Night Photos Beautiful shots taken while the sun is below the horizon

Accidents Accident, incident and crash related photos

Air to Air Photos taken by airborne photographers of airborne aircraft

Special Paint Schemes Aircraft painted in beautiful and original liveries

Airport Overviews Airport overviews from the air or ground

Tails and Winglets Tail and Winglet closeups with beautiful airline logos