Airline Begins Weighing Passengers For 'Safety' 373
New submitter Lopsemily writes to note that passengers on Uzbekistan Airways may face a new pre-flight check: In a recent statement, the country's flag carrier announced it will weigh passengers and their carry-on luggage prior to flights to determine how much weight they'll be adding to the plane. 'According to the rules of International Air Transport Association, airlines are obliged to carry out the regular procedures of preflight control passengers weighing with hand baggage to observe requirements for ensuring flight safety,' says the airline's statement.
Just starting now? (Score:5, Insightful)
When was the last time that a plane had to make an emergency landing or a flight delayed because the plane simply weighed too much due to obese travelers?
This looks more like a precursor for charging extra fees for tickets based on a person's weight... kind of like charging extra for bandwidth usage or bottled air.
Re:Just starting now? (Score:5, Interesting)
Part of the problem is that airlines are cramming more seats into each plane. However the real limiting capacity for carrying people/cargo is not # of seats, its weight. Too heavy, then the plane needs extra runway to reach a higher speed just to get off the ground. Even if it does get off the ground, it may not stay that way for long if weight limits are exceeded.
Then there's the fact that we have more obese travelers. So yeah, not surprised its becoming more of a problem. And technically, weight and balance calculations are required before each flight.
Re:Just starting now? (Score:5, Interesting)
And technically, weight and balance calculations are required before each flight.
Absolutely. Aircraft weight and balance is very important. These calculations also determine how much fuel to carry. Sometimes while in flight pilots will report unexpected fuel burn, difficulty climbing, that the plane is nose or tail heavy, and request an audit of what was loaded onto the plane (baggage/cargo). Also, if you've ever been on a plane that's relatively empty, you may notice flight attendants spreading out the passengers so that they all aren't in the front, or wherever.
Re:Just starting now? (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: Just starting now? (Score:5, Informative)
The system consists of strain-sensing transducers in each main wheel and nose wheel axle, a weight and balance computer, and indicators that show the gross weight, the CG location in percent of MAC, and an indicator of the ground attitude of the aircraft.
The strain sensors measure the amount each axle deflects and sends this data into the computer, where signals from all of the transducers and the ground attitude sensor are integrated. The results are displayed on the indicators for the flight crew as a "weight on wheels" value.
Re: (Score:2)
I don't think so. The balance they're working towards is the balance of a plane in the airstream not on the ground. If they could somehow rig a suite of weight sensors for the wheel trucks, they 'd get something, but whether simply duplicating those readings would indicate a properly loaded aircraft, I can't say with certainty. You'd probably need to have many sets of readings to deal with the various configs each aircraft would possibly have: Number of seats, exact fuel distribution (there are multiple tan
Re: (Score:2)
It's not just weight, it's also balance - where the center of gravity of the plane is. Without that, you can be within the limits with regards to weight, but off-balance. This video [youtube.com] is an example of what happens in that scenario (cargo was not properly tied down).
Re: (Score:2)
If you had sensors on each landing gear, you'd be able to make a CG calculation based on the pattern of weight distribution across the gear
Why not start now..and take if further? (Score:4, Insightful)
I'd be all for that.
Re: (Score:2)
Although most instances of obesity is inability to control one's shoveling food into one's mouth (like my fatty of an ex) there are instances where obesity is caused by hormonal or glandular (thyroid, pituitary, adrenal) problems, so that isn't fair. What IS fair is charging someone for two seats if they're oozing into the next seat.
Re:Why not start now..and take if further? (Score:5, Insightful)
Since much of the weight gain in hypothyroidism is accumulation in salt and water, when the hypothyroidism is treated one can expect a small (usually less than 10% of body weight) weight loss
There are also medical treatments available for most of these issues, which a person should seek as carrying around excessive amounts of weight it hard on the body and is strongly correlated with diabetes and other medical conditions. Eventually those problems will result in a far more expensive medical bill that could be reduced or prevented by treating the initial issues.
People who have no hormonal or glandular problems will still insist that they do, because it obviously can't be them, it must be something else's fault. Just weigh everyone and charge based on total weight of person traveling and their luggage. It's far more simple that way and even if someone does have a legitimate medical condition or has been taking medication that is responsible for their extra weight, it still doesn't change the laws of physics or the need for additional fuel.
Re:Why not start now..and take if further? (Score:5, Interesting)
I believe it is STILL FAIR to those with glandular conditions (I have to think this category is by far a small one and an exception to the rule)...in that this is based solely on how much it costs the airline in fuel, etc to carry that person. We're talking weight here, nothing else. For whatever reason the weight disparity...a smaller, lightweight person is cheaper to carry than a heavy one, just like a box of Kleenex is cheaper to transport than a gun safe.
Pure economics.
Re:Why not start now..and take if further? (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Actually....why NOT start basis fares on weight?
Because you have to get significantly out of the norm before you have a significant effect? Because two people who eat the same thing will experience different effects, even if they get the same amount of activity? Because you wouldn't want to be treated like a sack of ham if something happened to you and you got fat?
Re: (Score:3)
Fine reasoning, if it held exactly true. but humans being what they are, it does not. Many people do eat too much and they are fat. period. I''m not judging, just pointing out that being all touchy-feely and caring counts for nothing is the plane pitches over crashes.
This isn't fat shaming. "Norms" in your use relate to human structure and don't mean mean diddly in an engineering problem. There is no norm human, but there is room for X seats. That's what they want to fill. Flight is cut and dried engineerin
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Why not start now..and take if further? (Score:5, Insightful)
Have you ever noticed that when people propose something purely to make someone else's life worse, they then immediately start to make excuses ("so, it isn't discriminating" = "I'm not a racist, but") thus indicating they're fully aware of the malicious bullshit nature of their own message, and knew it would be obvious to everyone else too, but chose to post it anyway?
Re:Why not start now..and take if further? (Score:5, Insightful)
It would be an administrative/legal nightmare.
For example, do you include clothing weight? If so, expect passengers to start stripping when they are on the borderline of a cheaper weight bracket. Like boxers do.
What about disabled passengers? Most countries require airlines to carry their equipment, like wheelchairs and crutches, for free. Some people are overweight due to health problems which can be classed as disabilities in a legal sense. You can bet a lot of them will argue that angle, genuinely or otherwise.
How would you take payment? The passenger buys a ticket online, but isn't weighed until they arrive at the airport. You could ask for an estimate online, but would still need to check when they arrive and start demanding hefty chunks of cash if they are over the limit. Estimates will never be very good because even if people don't lie domestic scales are often not very accurate.
Even charging for two seats for people who won't fit into a single one can fall foul of these issues. It's less contentious than weight but not by much.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
And technically, weight and balance calculations are required before each flight.
Absolutely. Aircraft weight and balance is very important. These calculations also determine how much fuel to carry. Sometimes while in flight pilots will report unexpected fuel burn, difficulty climbing, that the plane is nose or tail heavy, and request an audit of what was loaded onto the plane (baggage/cargo). Also, if you've ever been on a plane that's relatively empty, you may notice flight attendants spreading out the passengers so that they all aren't in the front, or wherever.
Thats why they don't let all the fatties sit on one side of the plane and instead balance them out on either side.
Re: (Score:2)
I call bullshit, because if they are cramming so many people onto a single plane that the weight of the passengers matters to safety, then the problem is 100% the airline cramming too many people on the plane. The weight of the passengers shouldn't matter by a very wide safety margin.
Re: (Score:2)
Could be worse... it could be that they're weighing everyone in order to determine whether or not to fully fuel a plane up before it leaves.
Re: (Score:2)
The weight of the passengers shouldn't matter by a very wide safety margin.
And you base your claim on your extensive knowledge of the engineering of aircraft or flight experience?
Seems that you would be wrong [theguardian.com]. Dead wrong [adn.com].
Re: (Score:2)
technically, weight and balance calculations are required before each flight.
Correct, however any airline operating so far in to the safety margin that they need to weigh passengers is, well, really unsafe.
Re:Just starting now? (Score:5, Informative)
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Just starting now? (Score:4, Informative)
And for what it's worth, underestimating weight can also be hazardous [theguardian.com].
Re: (Score:2)
"It was determined that neither problem alone would have caused the loss of control, which explains why it departed Huntington, West Virginia safely."
Further down....
As a result of the weight issues discovered, the FAA planned to investigate and potentially revise estimated weight values, something that had not been done since 1936. Air Midwest used an average weight of 200 pounds (90.7 kg) per passenger after the accident, but the NTSB suggests that airlines use actual weights instead of average. 70% of small air carriers still use average.
Weight issues affect control surface authority. In this case, it was a contributing factor and relevant enough for the FAA to change it's guidance.
FYI, Private Pilot, ASEL. And in the aircraft I am certificated for, weight is quite relevant. Ditto for the small carriers.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Seriously, has this ever been a problem?
The only time I ever experienced any issue was when I was travelling with a lot of needed equipment. This would be on a relatively small plane. I travelled heavy, and they needed the weight info so they could balance the load. Around 200 to 300 pounds. I paid extra since it was the equivalent of taking another person. On the larger planes, it wasn't as important, but still kinda heavy.
note: on one flight out of our local airport, I was travelling heavy. A very heavy fellow got on the plane, and the stew
Re: (Score:2)
note: on one flight out of our local airport, I was travelling heavy. A very heavy fellow got on the plane, and the stewardesses very discretely changed his seat to help balance the load.
Well, I should think so. He would have had to have been very heavy for a non-discrete seat change to have had any measurable effect.
Re: (Score:3)
Re:Just starting now? (Score:4, Informative)
Yes, obese passengers have caused air crashes before. The most infamous one I can think of was a Cessna Caravan 208 that crashed in Pelee, Ontario. The findings of the report [bst-tsb.gc.ca] showed that the average passenger weight was 240lbs in that flight, whereas the airline was using an average weight for men of 188lbs at the time, which contributed to the aircraft being over 500lbs than estimated. This is a bigger issue with small aircraft, where your weight margin is much tighter.
Also note that passenger weight doesn't only include his body weight - it also includes all his carry-on belongings and clothings. Which is another reason a party of hunters with heavy winter clothing and hunting gear can weigh significantly above average as in the above crash
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Even if it weren't a danger to the flight, it's still an imposition that other passengers end up paying in their fares for the cost of the (wasted) fuel.
Think of it as a subsidy for fat 'Murcans
Re:Just starting now? (Score:5, Interesting)
Seriously, has this ever been a problem?
There have been a half-a-dozen incidents of planes overrunning runways on takeoff or otherwise crashing because of the difference between the expected average weight of passengers and their actual (obese) weight, most notably Obese passengers could have caused plane crash, May 2003 [dailymail.co.uk], aka Air Midwest 5481 [wikipedia.org].
Further reading: The true costs of heavier passengers: Part one [aircraftin...tional.com]
Re:Just starting now? (Score:5, Informative)
Seriously, has this ever been a problem?
YES!
This is a common issue in commercial AND private aviation. Weight and balance is *critical* to flying safely and as load factors increase and aircraft sizes decrease it becomes very necessary to be more and more accurate. Let me explain why this is.
First is total weight. Aircraft are designed to handle a maximum takeoff and landing weight safely. The calculated performance numbers for the aircraft are based on it's weight. Now for a 777 another 100 lbs might be unnoticeable, but for a C150 I can assure you it is. Being over weight affects take off performance, necessary runway lengths, maximum rate of climb, and stopping distances on aborted takeoffs. It affects landing configurations, cross wind tolerances, and breaking distances. If you are in a position where you are depending on the performance of the aircraft, safety demands that you not be overweight.
Balance is next. Balance has to do with where the center of gravity is on the aircraft. The CG must fall within a very narrow range for both efficiency and safety's sake. If the CG is to far forward, it makes the nose heavier and you must apply downward force on the tail using the elevators to keep the nose up. This extra force creates drag and adds to the amount of lift the wings must create to stay in the air. All this creates drag and lowers efficiency. The problem though is you cannot just move the CG way to the aft or you make the aircraft unstable. If the CG is too far aft and you stall the aircraft cannot be brought out of the stall and will crash so for safety, you need the CG forward. The area between these two points is usually pretty small compared to the length of the aircraft and actually gets smaller as you approach the maximum operating weight.
So why does how much people weigh matter? Quite simply because you cannot exceed the maximum weight of the aircraft, and with today's tendency for people to be a bit porky makes it very easy to get overloaded. Plus, if you have an uneven distribution of porky people between front to back. Moving 100lbs of weight forward might be the difference between living or dying in a stall.
So yes, passenger weight matters, especially at high load factors where we are operating at or near the maximum ratings of the aircraft. And, now that people are weighing more and more, it matters more and more.
Re: (Score:2)
on several recent Southwest flights they the plane was "weight capped" so they had to waitlist people even though there were empty seats. sux. I would say charge the large passengers more, but then I would be charged more...
Re: (Score:2)
When was the last time that a plane had to make an emergency landing or a flight delayed because the plane simply weighed too much due to obese travelers?
There's probably some other unknown reason why they are doing this.
One reason I would imagine is due to passengers shifting weight from checked-in baggage to their carry on or themselves. Combine that with trying to reduce fuel costs and you find yourself with airlines wanting to eliminate as many of the unknowns as possible. Carrying extra fuel just in case also adds to the fuel cost, since that weight must be accounted for in extra burn.
The risk with too much over-optimisation is that the risk of failure increases if any one of the values is slightly off. The truth is, i
Re: (Score:2)
Shite (Score:3)
Honey! We'll be driving to Disneyworld this year.
Re: (Score:2)
I hope this isn't going the way of overweight baggage fees.
Honey! We'll be driving to Disneyworld this year.
In late 2002, I took my last commercial plane flight. Before I was due to take any more, the airline customer as the enemy policy really kicked in.
So despite my love of flying - I'm one of those nerds who insists on a windows seat - I gave it up, as it was becoming really unpleasant, and started driving everywhere.
Know what? North America is really beautiful. And I can get my flying jones taken care of on private flights. The commercial airlines just aren't worth it for what they do to you.
Re: (Score:2)
Agreed. You may technically travel faster in an airplane, but in a surprising number of situations, when you factor in how early you should arrive, time to get to the airport, getting through security, delays, getting out of the airport on the other side (including dealing with customs), and then the ride from the airport to your true destination, a car can beat an airplane.
Oce upon a time, where I worked, we'd take the puddle jumpers to D.C. Then after a while, we figured out that getting to the airport at least an hour before the flight, then something over an hour for the flight, then an hour for getting the luggage and rental car, then driving to the meeting location, then figuring out how to drop the car off and get another flight back, and the expense of those puddle jumper flights - you could save a lot of time and money by just hopping in a car, driving the three hous
Re: (Score:2)
Maybe they will figure people wedged in like cordwood leads to overloaded flights. Maybe we will get legroom back.
Detail? (Score:3)
There's no detail in the article - they may be doing this only for very small aircraft (the cited Samoan airline for example, is flying small 4 seat single engine aircraft where weight and balance is absolutely critical, and an unexpected fat passenger will mean necessarily having to leave someone or luggage or fuel behind).
For larger aircraft, standard passenger weights are used. However this can sometimes be wrong. A friend is a senior FO flying the MD-11, and his airline takes military contracts from time to time. One time leaving Hawaii they discovered they were carrying a full plane load of Marines armed to the teeth, although they didn't know that until they started coming through the door. He said the aircraft didn't climb as well as usual, and when he estimated their true takeoff weight, he reckoned they took off some 12,000 lbs overweight.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
All aircraft have a maximum take-off weight, and it varies with weather. A plane full of "average" people, including both Samoan wrestlers/Linebackers, and petite women generally is not a problem, unless it is particularly hot, or there is a lot of cargo. But a plane loaded fully with Samoan wrestlers/Linebackers could potentially put it over take-off weight. Also there's balance to take into account. It's bad for the weight to be concentrated in either the front or the back.
Umm, yeah. And they've been weighing and balancing people/luggage for the small planes for as long as I've been flying. Since I always flew heavy, with a lot of equipment, it was weighed and I paid extra for it, and sometimes a bigger passenger was discretely re-seated on the other side of the plane. Big planes, not so much of a problem.
That was from the mid 80s, the first time I flew with heavy luggage, to the last time.
Aerodynamics hasn't changed a lot since then.
Why is safety in scare quotes? (Score:4, Insightful)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... [wikipedia.org]
http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/u... [mirror.co.uk]
Of course the quotes are in the original article.
Sounds good to me, why should people who don't have as much weight in their luggage or their stomachs have to subsidize those that do?
Re: (Score:2)
Why should people that don't drive as much subsidize those that do through road taxes?
Why should people without children at the age to attend school subsidize those that do through school taxes?
Why should anyone pay for anything that does not directly benefit them?
Oh wait. Because that's how society works.
Re:Why is safety in scare quotes? (Score:5, Insightful)
If airlines charge $50 extra because your suitcase is 100 grams too heavy then they should weigh the passengers as well.
One or the other.... you can't have both.
Re: (Score:2)
That one's easy: to improve economic mobility.
Re: (Score:2)
They don't. This is what taxes on gasoline are for. It is a usage based tax, though not the most accurate when you take into account the variation in vehicle fuel economy. Every now and then you do hear someone suggest that we tax based on actual miles driven (which I'm a fan of), but never seems to get too much traction. We all pay a flat "access" fee, though.
Re:Why is safety in scare quotes? (Score:4, Informative)
They don't. This is what taxes on gasoline are for.
Actually, in the United States the largest share - roughly half - of the cost of roads comes from general revenues, not from user-specific taxes and fees. For example, in 2010 [taxfoundation.org], state and local governments spent $153 billion on roads. They collected $41 billion in fuel taxes and $13 billion in tolls and other transportation-related non-fuel taxes and charges related to usage. Another $23 billion was paid in vehicle licensing charges (your flat "access" fee). The remaining $76 billion comes from general revenues. (And then there's an infrastructure deficit - deferred maintenance, repair, and replacements - that isn't being paid for right now but is accumulating nevertheless. Right now we're something like $300 billion in the hole just for bridges which need to be replaced.)
So yeah, non-drivers are very much subsidizing the driving population. One can certainly make an argument that the overall economic benefit of having a functional road system is good for society as a whole, but don't for one minute try to suggest that drivers are actually paying their own way.
Re: (Score:2)
Yes, I am European. Your point?
Re: (Score:2)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... [wikipedia.org] http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/u... [mirror.co.uk]
Of course the quotes are in the original article.
Sounds good to me, why should people who don't have as much weight in their luggage or their stomachs have to subsidize those that do?
Sorry, you have to pay more under the smug asshole provision.
Re: (Score:2)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... [wikipedia.org]
http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/u... [mirror.co.uk]
Of course the quotes are in the original article.
Sounds good to me, why should people who don't have as much weight in their luggage or their stomachs have to subsidize those that do?
Because this is the English speaking world where everyone should be very rightly scared all of the time!
Because terrorists, pedophiles, drugs, climate change etc etc.
Why not set a limit to total weight? (Score:3)
I've never really understood the stupid luggage limits, I'm a fairly light guy so why do I have to pay more for a few kilos of extra luggage while the person next to me weighs 30 kilos more? It's never really been about the weight but just about adding costs... and this should have happened a long time ago ;)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I've never really understood the stupid luggage limits, I'm a fairly light guy so why do I have to pay more for a few kilos of extra luggage while the person next to me weighs 30 kilos more? It's never really been about the weight but just about adding costs... and this should have happened a long time ago ;)
Because you are looking at it with assblinders on. If you want to be charged only for your weight, have them build a box, plop your ass in it, and you can travel as freight. DIfferent people need to travel with different weights of stuff.
You are so worried about poundage, I want obnoxious people, people with bad breath, obnoxious children or people with babies to pay more. A very obese person already has no choice but to fly first class
People aren't freight. People are different sizes and weights. Some
Re: (Score:2)
I've never really understood the stupid luggage limits,
You do understand that aircraft have design limits for weight and balance right? Seems pretty obvious to me that there is a safety issue with how much stuff you throw onto or allow to walk onto an aircraft weighs..
Re: (Score:2)
Not a bad idea. Each passenger gets a free 200lb total encumberance allotment, whether that's human weight or luggage weight..
Except that this would open up a can of worms like sexism, etc.. Why should an average guy pay more for a plane flight with the same weight of luggage as an average woman? Like it or not, men tend to be heavier, even if they are at their ideal weight.
Of course, they could go with some sort of standard for height, weigh, sex, etc. and you only pay for the amount that you are over your ideal weight. But this, again, gets into privacy concerns because it would be recorded somewhere.
In other words, implement
Re:Why not set a limit to total weight? (Score:4, Insightful)
If men actually weigh more, and it costs more fuel to move heavier objects by airplane, then men should pay more. That's not sexism, it's logic.
The line between bigotry and applied statistics is thin and very blurry. For example here in Norway I've heard a lot of broad generalizations of why there's so many Swedes in the restaurant/bar/nightclub business and why there's so many Poles in the construction industry, claiming they have higher work morale, less sick leave and whatnot. But if you say anything remotely like that about why you wouldn't hire immigrants from certain countries, you'll have demonstrations and boycotts and be reported to the police for racial discrimination.
We're all individuals but we're all through statistics part of various groups with positive and negative connotations. For example, by being male I'm more likely than the average person to be a rapist, simply because there's so few females. Not that they don't exist, but statistics. So all other things being equal, would you like me or a woman to drive your wasted daughter home? It doesn't matter what I would do, it's what the "statistical male that you don't know" would do. It's hardly fair to me as I know myself but anyone else would have to go with the superficial.
Fill the plane to the absolute brim? (Score:2)
If you plan to cram even more seats into the plane, and then fill it up with passengers and luggage to its maximum take-off weight, then this is a good idea.
Most airlines have done some statistics, and make sure that in 99.9999% of the cases (*), the weight of all the passengers does not exceed the maximum take off weight. But that means they are typically not completely full.
If this airline wants to cram more people into its plane, they must accept that they will sometimes exceed the maximum weight. So, yo
Re: (Score:2)
If you plan to cram even more seats into the plane, and then fill it up with passengers and luggage to its maximum take-off weight, then this is a good idea.
So are they actually getting anywhere near doing this? Last I checked, the answer was no.
Can't they just weigh the plane? (Score:2)
Just saying.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Weighing the passengers before they ever get close to the apron means it's one less thing you have to do once the plane is available. Remember that a lot of stuff , like check-ins, happen on purpose before the plane you're flying on arrives at the airport. Usually when the plane hits the ground the airline's #1 priority is getting the plane re-filled (in all senses) and back in the air... weighing would add significant time to that, and you can bet travellers would complain about the extra wait (pun intende
Re: (Score:2)
Actually, it gets worse once you realise that you _are_ overweight and now have to taxi back, attach the walkway again, open the plane again, remove some people... find their baggage, remove that.... then taxi back to the scales....
I'll bet by that point even you would say: "Why don't they just weigh the passengers?!"
Re: (Score:2)
Weight is about performance... How fast can you stop, climb etc which might affect safety... BALANCE though is all about safety. Have an AFT CG and approach a aerodynamic stall and it's going to be a very bad bad day for everybody.
Variable costs (Score:2)
Technically possible but logistically complicated and unnecessary since they know the dry weight of the plane already with pretty fair accuracy. The only variable is the contents (you, luggage, fuel, food, etc) and to allocate costs truly fairly it makes sense to charge by weight. A lot of people will be offended but weight directly affects fuel consumption so if you bring more weight on the plane you probably should be paying for a bigger percentage of the fuel costs. Not really fair to me to pay to hau
Re: (Score:2)
Just saying.
Shut up! This is Slashdot, and people have to make things way more complicated than need be. Flying's been around over a hundred years, and like - that pissed off nerd in Mom's basement knows weight and balance have never been addressed before. It's a wonder these slashdotters aren't all wealthy - they're so smart.
Re: (Score:2)
Actually I was hoping to be modded Funny, but people posted serious answers. The AC who said that, even if you know the weight, you can still have problems with balance, was interesting, so I learned something anyway :)
Re: (Score:2)
Actually I was hoping to be modded Funny, but people posted serious answers. The AC who said that, even if you know the weight, you can still have problems with balance, was interesting, so I learned something anyway :)
If I had mod points at the moment, I'd have modded you insightful.
Especially since slashdotters are often long on knowing exactly how things work, and short on actual insight on how things actually work.
Every day, on every commercial flight, weight and balance are calculated and/or actually weighed. My shipping containers were weighed, and the load adjusted. People were shifted around once or twice to help balance. On teh larger planes, not as much of an issue, but the same rules apply.
And here in 2
Re: (Score:2)
Just saying.
They do exactly this, but it's expensive... After any major overhaul, they actually put the aircraft on scales and weigh it to verify that their weight and balance calculations are what they expect. You have to jack up the aircraft to get the scales under it. It takes time and labor to do this.
It's easier, faster and cheaper to just weigh stuff as you load the aircraft and then calculate the affect this has on weight and balance.
Market failure (Score:2)
Several Chinese Airlines Already Do This (Score:2)
For at least a decade a number of Chinese Airlines have been doing this for their coach class customers. In particular on domestic segments where the planes are configured to be really tight. There are industry standard weight and balance calculations and they had to be updated in the late 90s because North Americans and Western Europeans all weigh more than they used to.
Passenger Weight Limits (Score:4, Insightful)
I've read through the early comments here, and I see a lot of vitriol for "obese" people, and statements that people should only be allowed a weight limit of 100kg, or worse, 200lb, beyond which there should be extra charges.
Go to hell, each and every one of you that supports that idea. I'm 6'3", and my body fat percentage hovers around 15%. I _sink_ in fresh water. And I weigh 240lbs, before any luggage is included. I am healthy and fit. I already suffer with airline seats that are far too small for my frame, with my knees in the back of the seat in front of me, and the headrest sitting firmly between my shoulder blades. And now you have the temerity to think that I should pay _more_ for the privilege of flying, because you think people that weigh more than 140 pounds are fat and unhealthy, and it's their own fault?
Get real.
Often happens with small planes (Score:2)
As stated elsewhere, weight and balance are important in a plane, and accidents have happened as a result. I've taken a number of small plane commuter flights in the US and they regularly asked how much I weighed, and they definitely weighed my baggage. The smaller the plane is, the more it matters.
Safety is one aspect, efficiency is another- knowing how much you weigh also tells the airline how much fuel they must put on board, and even how much cargo they can safely take- much cargo flies on a space (weig
Re: (Score:2)
This is actually a good idea, if used for safety (Score:2)
While averages work reasonably well for larger planes, having accurate weight data does increase the safety margin even there. For small planes it is critical to have good numbers and there have been crashes where one thing went wrong and accurate weight numbers might have prevented them.
Of course, what the bean-counters will do is somehow make heavier people pay more (and without making things cheaper for lighter ones). This is however a political problem.
Uzbekistan? (Score:3)
The Nepal Airlines once sacrificed a goat [bbc.co.uk] to appease a Hindu God. But like this story, it says more about Nepal than it does about Airlines.
Other airlines will no doubt ignore Uzbekistan, just as we ignore Nepal Airlines.
All for Kevin Smith? (Score:2)
Maybe this is an over-the-top way of screening for Kevin Smith when he flies.
Sign of the times (Score:2)
In 1960 the average American male was 165 lbs and the average female was 140 lbs. Today those weights are 195 for men and 165 for women. At the same time airlines are continuously trying to add more seats. At some point it will pay off for the airline to use the actual weights of passengers instead of some assumed average to do their weight and balance calculations.
Comment removed (Score:3)
Offensive to the gravitationally-enhanced (Score:2)
Seriously, all CG calculations aside (which happen automatically in large aircraft), have you noticed that treating overweight people like sh*t is now the only remaining universally tolerated form of social abuse?
World culture of being clueless about what you eat (Score:2)
The US is pretty bad, but it's not exactly awesome elsewhere. People are just not educated about nutrition. They know nothing about protein, carbohydrates, fats, sugars, vitamins, minerals, food sensitivies/allergies, intestinal flora, pollutants and contaminants, or any of those things. People just eat whatever the hell they want, which is primarily junk food, they get fat, slow down their brains, and get even dumber. The biggest offenders are actually the MDs who have all knowledge of nutrition ripped
Re: (Score:2)
Having recently flown on an airline named after a greek letter, and having sampled the output of their catering services, I am reminded that I am somewhat repulsed by the fact that you mention "nutrition" and "airlines" in the same post.
However, mentioning "airlines" and "flak" in the same sentence somewhat atones for that.
It *is* a safety issue. (Score:4, Interesting)
I remember a crash of a small twin engined turbo-prop, around 2006. The plane took off and crashed within seconds of take off, it just pitched up and up and up, stalled, rolled in and crashed into a hanger. The cause was the use of average weight for passengers to estimate the take off weight to set the elevator tabs. Compounded by unusual number of heavy bags. The plane was tail heavy, the center of gravity was beyond the allowable limits and the elevators could not generate enough aerodynamic force to pitch the plane down.
The captain of the plane, the leader of NTSB investigation team, the air traffic controller, the emergency crew leader that went into the wreckage looking for survivors, and the baggage handler who provided the clue that cracked the case were all women.
Nothing new (Score:2)
This used to be normal in the early days of commercial aviation. I've seen a picture of people being 'weighed in' prior to boarding a plane from one of the aerodromes around London in the 20s or 30s.
Price based on weight (Score:2)
One big issue I see with charging by the kilo is actually booking the flights. Most of us book online with at least one layover. Do you trust people to accurately / honestly report their weight at the time of purchase? Weight of luggage is only accurately known at the time of travel. What happens at the airport if some under reported or over reported their weight? Could a couple use their average weight (one is overweight and the other under), or do they pay normal fare for the lighter person (no discount)
Ever sat in the middle seat ? (Score:3)
I recently flew from Phoenix wedged between to women who both weighed close to 300 lbs. if they weighed a pound. I couldn't get my elbows un-wedged from my ribs for 2 days following the flight. I can see being embarrassed if you weigh that much and still can't see over the top of the seat, but why should I be forced to suffer the invasion of the seat I pay for because of someone else's' health/size issues ?
Re:Anonymity (Score:5, Funny)
I hope data is accumulated and presented summarised to the crew. Otherwise, some people may find it a privacy violation.
"Hello, this is your Captain speaking from the cockpit! As soon as we reach cruising altitude, we'll be serving drinks and dinner. Except for the passengers in rows 7, 16 and 25. You guys are a bunch of fat fucks, and will just get water!"
Re: (Score:3)
The funniest part about your comment is believing that airlines serve any sort of food without purchase required.
Meals and alcohol are still 'free' on most international flights... Pro-tip - Always request the Indian or Hindu meal when making your reservation (if offered). It's usually the best tasting airline food you can get, and goes well with the cheap beer/wine that's offered :)
Mostly fuel costs but there are other factors (Score:3)
I bet this is all about fuel costs and nothing to do with safety.
It's mostly about fuel costs though there is a safety component to it. You have to know the weight of the plane with reasonable accuracy to put in the right amount of fuel. There also are issues on smaller planes regarding proper distribution of weight. If you've flown in puddle jumpers you very likely have been asked to move seats to even out the weight distribution. I've had to do it a number of times and it is entirely about safety.
If they can more accurately weigh the plane, they can put just enough fuel in to reach the destination, and save millions in jet fuel over the course of a year.
Quite true but there is also the issue that travelers currently aren'
Re: (Score:2)
If you carry more fuel than you need you are carrying extra weight for no good reason. That extra weight costs you in total fuel consumption for the trip. Now do you understand?
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
eating any terrorist food.
Aloha Snackbar!
Re: (Score:2)
a colon check will also be offered free of charge on your next flight
Will this include a prostate massage?
Re: (Score:2)
Too expensive and would need to be nearly 100% reliable.
Weight and Balance are both critical for safe flying. It's just way to easy and cheaper to weigh stuff before you load it, then calculate the weight and balance of the loaded aircraft.