Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Airlines lose lifevests to fit fat flyers
Guardian ^

Posted on 08/13/2005 3:29:44 PM PDT by traumer

Americans have put on so much weight that airlines have removed phones, magazines and even lifevests from aircraft to compensate.

This week, the federal aviation administration revised guidelines used by airlines to calculate how much weight they have on board to take account of the fact that Americans are getting fatter.

The FAA has added 8% to a male and 18% to a female traveller in an attempt to ensure that the centre of gravity, takeoff speed and fuel needs for planes can be more accurately estimated.

Assumptions about weight were last made 10 years ago and obesity among adults has increased by 60% over the course of the 90s.

According to the National centre for Health statistics, 30% of American adults over 20 are obese. Two years ago the low-cost carrier Southwest airlines started forcing large passengers to pay for two seats.

"Maybe instead of just using those [boxes] at the gates to limit carry-on bags to certain sizes, the airlines need to have a people-sizer with a sign asking, 'Do you fit into this?'" Dave Grotto, of the American Dietetic Association, told the Chicago Tribune.

Excessive weight was believed to be a key reason why a jet crashed in North Carolina in 2003, killing all 21 people on board. Shortly afterwards the FAA ordered that passengers on small planes should be weighed. Travellers were asked their weight or told to step on a set of scales.

Given people's propensity to lie about their weight, airlines were told to add 4.5kg (10lb) to the figure they were told. "They usually lie in the single digits," said Peggy Gilligan, the FAA's director of flight standards.


TOPICS: News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: faa; obesity

1 posted on 08/13/2005 3:29:44 PM PDT by traumer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: traumer
I can just see the comments on this one

I resemble this remark
2 posted on 08/13/2005 3:32:49 PM PDT by HangnJudge
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: traumer
The FAA has added 8% to a male and 18% to a female traveller

Oh boy now they've done it. They haven't seen a terrorist till they tell a woman she's put on more weight than her hubby............ ;-)
3 posted on 08/13/2005 3:34:15 PM PDT by festus (The constitution may be flawed but its a whole lot better than what we have now.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: traumer

"'Americans have put on so much weight that airlines have removed phones, magazines and even lifevests from aircraft to compensate.""

nonesense....phones have not been removed, magazines have been removed but not because people are fat.

This is just an example of how anti-americanism has infected each and ever aspect of the foreign press's perspectives about the USA.


4 posted on 08/13/2005 3:36:03 PM PDT by atlanta67
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: traumer

Well...fat floats.


5 posted on 08/13/2005 3:39:17 PM PDT by ryan71 (Speak softly and carry a BIG STICK)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ryan71

Well, there goes McDonald's stock value....


6 posted on 08/13/2005 3:40:23 PM PDT by EagleUSA
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: traumer

I was unaware that Teddy Kennedy flew commercial.


7 posted on 08/13/2005 3:40:54 PM PDT by Dr.Syn
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: traumer

Well I've just lost 30 lbs. I want a discount on my nextflight!


8 posted on 08/13/2005 3:43:48 PM PDT by afraidfortherepublic
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: traumer
The FAA should just order the removal of X rows of seats from each plane/configuration and stop allowing the airlines to pack planes so tight that weight is an issue, regardless of passenger size.

Getting rid of pillows and magazines to squeeze one more passenger in is cutting it way too close.

The airlines scream about profitability, but if the FAA ordered it across the board, the playing field would be level, and prices could be adjusted to match.

Garvins Blog (link below) has some interesting insight into the profitability of airlines. Synopsis: They rolled the dice and lost. They gambled on fuel costs and were supprised - Now they blame the fat american for their need to fill absolutely every seat.

http://finance.baylor.edu/weblogs/garven/archives/000051.html

9 posted on 08/13/2005 3:43:50 PM PDT by konaice
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: traumer
Two years ago the low-cost carrier Southwest airlines started forcing large passengers to pay for two seats.

No, two years ago the policy got some major publicity. Southwest and all other major airlines have been doing this for many years: if you don't fit in one seat, you need to buy two.

Excessive weight was believed to be a key reason why a jet crashed in North Carolina in 2003, killing all 21 people on board.

It was NOT a jet. It was a Beechcraft 1900D - a 19-passenger turboprop. Not that it makes any difference, but words mean things.

Given people's propensity to lie about their weight, airlines were told to add 4.5kg (10lb) to the figure they were told.

Actually the ten pounds is primarily to account for hand-carried items, clothing, shoes, etc.

Interesting story, but *really* lazy journalism.

10 posted on 08/13/2005 3:45:00 PM PDT by xjcsa (The Kyoto Protocol is about as futile as sending seven maids with seven mops to rid a beach of sand)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: konaice

Well you have some really terrible ideas. To begin with, it's not the government's job to tell airlines how to configure the seats on their planes. In addition, there are things other than passengers that go on a plane and add to the weight, such as fuel, bags, freight, and catering items. Airlines always have and always will load a plane to its max weight when it produces revenue. I do it every day myself. And you know what? It's safe.

The North Carolina incident was a freak accident. It was on a very small plane, which is more sensitive to weight and balance issues. And it wasn't even the gross weight that was the problem! It was a combination of center of gravity and a mechanical problem. The passenger weights were fine, but the cargo hold in the back had lots of weight; probably more than the "standard weights" used by the crew indicated. But it would have probably been OK except for a mechanical problem with the controls for the elevator.

How many other weight-related accidents have there been in the last, oh, 20 years or so? I know of none.

Finally, yes, airlines have been getting rid of pillows, blankets, and magazines. This has not been primarily for weight reasons: these items are not free, and they are cutting costs. They have a side benefit of cutting weight on an aircraft, but that was not the primary reason for doing it.


11 posted on 08/13/2005 3:54:13 PM PDT by xjcsa (The Kyoto Protocol is about as futile as sending seven maids with seven mops to rid a beach of sand)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: traumer
I always thought that the fares ought to be scaled to a "standard" for one's height. Exceed that at $2 a pound.

Just like baggage.
Weight is weight.

I weigh 10 pounds over my standard height? Extra $20 please.
Works for me.

12 posted on 08/13/2005 3:54:15 PM PDT by Publius6961 (Liberal level playing field: If the Islamics win we are their slaves..if we win they are our equals.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: traumer

We had a similar problem with the passenger-only ferry boats here in Washington state a few years ago. The boats are limited by the number of people that can be seated. The seats are three-person wide bench seats. Nobody could figure out why so many people were either standing or sitting in the aisles even though the passenger count was correct. So, the Coast Guard watched for awhile.

The problem was that people had gotten so fat that the average butt width had increased to the point where three people could no longer fit on the bench seat. So, the Coast Guard reduced the number of people that could be carried by the ferry boats, by reducing the classification of the seats from three-person to two-person.

This caused an uproar among ferry passengers. It meant that some would have to wait for another boat. They protested with signs like "Don't discriminate against the Boat People". All it took was one editorial in a local paper calling them "Butt People" instead of "Boat People" (which everybody took up, by the way), and their cause was lost.


13 posted on 08/13/2005 3:58:35 PM PDT by wyattearp (The best weapon to have in a gunfight is a shotgun - preferably from ambush.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: xjcsa
To begin with, it's not the government's job to tell airlines how to configure the seats on their planes.

BZZZZZZT ... Wrong, but thanks for Playing.

The mission of the FAA is SPECIFICALLY and FOREMOST to make flying safe.

Overloading airplanes is inherantly UNSAFE.

Packing people in so tight you can't move is Unsafe.

Carrying freight on passenger liners is just asking for a terrorist attack. (And I say this living in an area where it is common practice to have passengers bumped so more freight can be loaded.) Moving the freight off would allow greater weight of people.

Your premis is fundamentally wrong, it is well within the perview if the FAA to limit the NUMBER as well as the Total Weight of passengers.

14 posted on 08/13/2005 4:02:12 PM PDT by konaice
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: Publius6961
Weight is weight.

Then what is the rationale for indexing it to one's height, if "weight is weight"? Baggage weight is not indexed to a bag's length...

15 posted on 08/13/2005 4:03:18 PM PDT by xjcsa (The Kyoto Protocol is about as futile as sending seven maids with seven mops to rid a beach of sand)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: Publius6961
I always thought that the fares ought to be scaled to a "standard" for one's height.

I'm assuming that you meant "weight" not "height". Here's a question: if somebody is below the standard weight, would they get a discount on their ticket using your system?

I like your idea, by the way. Charge everybody by the pound, luggage included. If it costs X number of dollars to move a pound from Seattle to Atlanta, then charge that amount. If somebody is too big to fit in one seat, charge them for two seats but give them the weight allowance for two seats. It makes sense.

16 posted on 08/13/2005 4:04:47 PM PDT by wyattearp (The best weapon to have in a gunfight is a shotgun - preferably from ambush.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: konaice
Overloading airplanes is inherantly UNSAFE.

Yep. And loading them to their capacity is inherently SAFE. Nowhere did I suggest overloading planes was a good idea; in fact we take great pains not to do so. As far as your argument about freight, you have a point (to the degree that you have any idea what's actually going on), but you might want to look up the definition of "red herring". As for the rest, you should probably step aside and let the grown-ups handle it. If you want more legroom, you can spring for a first class ticket.

p.s. Capitalizing random Words in the middle of sentences is Odd.

17 posted on 08/13/2005 4:08:37 PM PDT by xjcsa (The Kyoto Protocol is about as futile as sending seven maids with seven mops to rid a beach of sand)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: xjcsa

Most travellers are clueless dolts.


18 posted on 08/13/2005 4:10:04 PM PDT by Cobra64
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: wyattearp

The problem is the small props and jets. Just after the crash mentioned, I was on one from San Diego to LAX.
They had three of us mega sized guys in the back row.
When the stew walked aft the plane damn near tilted reward.
I told the Stew to tell the pilot he had a CG problem and we needed to move some people and loose some weight.
Took a bit to convince her that she was at risk, but finally they did move us and take off bags in the rear.
That was my last flight on one of these little babies.
That and lost bags left behind due to overweight.


19 posted on 08/13/2005 4:11:34 PM PDT by Oldexpat
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: wyattearp
I like your idea, by the way. Charge everybody by the pound, luggage included. If it costs X number of dollars to move a pound from Seattle to Atlanta, then charge that amount. If somebody is too big to fit in one seat, charge them for two seats but give them the weight allowance for two seats. It makes sense.

An elegant solution, and so simple to implement! I'm sure the people who squeal about the indignities of airport security would have no problem with stepping on a scale when they arrive.

20 posted on 08/13/2005 4:12:26 PM PDT by xjcsa (The Kyoto Protocol is about as futile as sending seven maids with seven mops to rid a beach of sand)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: ryan71
Well...fat floats.

Only if the lardass can get out of the seat and out of the emergency exit before drowning. The average passenger hasn't been trained in underwater egress techniques. Many will panic and die...fat or not.

21 posted on 08/13/2005 4:17:53 PM PDT by Myrddin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Oldexpat
The problem is the small props and jets.

I work 34 seat props and 44-50 seat jets. You're right that they're by nature more sensitive to weight and balance issues than larger planes. 1000 pounds on a 34-seat Saab is about 3% of max weight, while 1000 pounds on a 190-seat 757 is around 0.5%. But because we know they're more sensitive, we have rather elaborate procedures in place to make sure things are safe - and they are.

When the stew walked aft the plane damn near tilted reward.

This is pretty common. When bags are being loaded, or passengers are boarding, the plane will shift constantly - the landing gear have shock absorbers built in, and the pressure is shifting. It happens on larger planes, too, but it's not as visible.

I told the Stew to tell the pilot he had a CG problem and we needed to move some people and lose some weight.

There may or may not have been a real problem, but it can't hurt to make sure.

That was my last flight on one of these little babies.

Whatever you need to do. I'm not sure what kind of plane you were on, but the (34-pax) Saab 340 is about the safest plane in the sky; personally, it's the plane I feel safest on.

22 posted on 08/13/2005 4:20:09 PM PDT by xjcsa (The Kyoto Protocol is about as futile as sending seven maids with seven mops to rid a beach of sand)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: Publius6961
I weigh 10 pounds over my standard height? Extra $20 please.

If they do that, and I use the lavatory in the plane, then I'll demand a refund of some of what I left on the plane!

Mark

23 posted on 08/13/2005 4:23:17 PM PDT by MarkL (It was a shocking cock-up. The mice were furious!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: traumer

It costs more to ship a 1 pound package than a 50 pound package... maybe the airlines should use a destination/weight ratio pricing structure.


24 posted on 08/13/2005 4:24:53 PM PDT by operation clinton cleanup
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: xjcsa
I'm sure the people who squeal about the indignities of airport security would have no problem with stepping on a scale when they arrive.

Put the scale right in front of the counter. Folks shouldn't have to go out of their way to step on the scale. Just step up and get your ticket. And, for God's sake, don't make the readout visible to everybody in the line. Print it on the ticket or something.

The problem would be if you bought your ticket ahead of time. You would be responsible for weighing yourself and all of your stuff in order to calculate the price. If you were a bit off, you'd have to either make up the difference or get a partial refund (depending on if you were over or under in your weighing).

I think that it could work.

25 posted on 08/13/2005 4:28:13 PM PDT by wyattearp (The best weapon to have in a gunfight is a shotgun - preferably from ambush.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: Publius6961

For fares, space is far more precious than weight. A seat is a seat for most passengers (Bertha excluded). If you were going to charge varying rates, it would make no sense to charge an overweight 10 year old more than a skinny 200 lb. man. If you had to do it your way, then the only fair way would be to charge by the pound of the person and all of their luggage.


26 posted on 08/13/2005 4:50:59 PM PDT by SampleMan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: Publius6961

Hey, since I'm considered underweight, do ya think I could finagle a discount then?

LOL!


27 posted on 08/13/2005 4:59:47 PM PDT by exnavychick (Whom the gods would destroy they first make chads.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: wyattearp

I really need to learn to scroll down before posting...you already asked my question! GMTA, I guess. :)


28 posted on 08/13/2005 5:01:11 PM PDT by exnavychick (Whom the gods would destroy they first make chads.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: Dr.Syn

Yeah, Teddy flies military since he needs a C-5. They can't carry any tanks when they have him onboard.


29 posted on 08/13/2005 5:24:01 PM PDT by Right Wing Assault ("..this administration is planning a 'Right Wing Assault' on values and ideals.." - John Kerry)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: traumer

I just read somewhere today that about a dozen european countries have people who weigh more than average Americans. While Americans certainly are overweight on average, it is a myth that Americans are the most overweight.


30 posted on 08/13/2005 5:24:09 PM PDT by Kirkwood
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: traumer

Oh, but adding extra seats so passengers are smushed in like sardines doesn't add extra weight?


31 posted on 08/13/2005 5:26:24 PM PDT by mtbopfuyn (Legality does not dictate morality... Lavin)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: traumer

Back in the late 70's we were asked our weight before boarding. The whole time I was terrified that someone lied and we'd all fall from the sky. It wasn't until the pilot slammed on the breaks leaving skid marks in mid-air that it was because of the too short runway.


32 posted on 08/13/2005 5:32:39 PM PDT by mtbopfuyn (Legality does not dictate morality... Lavin)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Kirkwood
I just read somewhere today that about a dozen european countries have people who weigh more than average Americans.

No way. Among OECD nations (according to their data), the US is the fattest by a significant margin, although the UK is catching up fast.

33 posted on 08/13/2005 5:35:43 PM PDT by untenured (http://futureuncertain.blogspot.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: untenured

I will have to figure out where I read that... it may have been in one of my medical journals. I recall it listed Germany, Finland, Greece, and Slovakia as being more overweight than Americans, along with some others.


34 posted on 08/13/2005 6:51:09 PM PDT by Kirkwood
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: untenured

I couldn't recall the journal, but I did a web search and here you go.

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2005/03/15/health/main680243.shtml

Original report is here in PDF form in the upper right corner.

http://www.iotf.org/


35 posted on 08/13/2005 6:57:59 PM PDT by Kirkwood
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: traumer

I wondered when this would get the FAA's attention.


36 posted on 08/13/2005 10:21:42 PM PDT by Kevin OMalley (No, not Freeper#95235, Freeper #1165: Charter member, What Was My Login Club.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Oldexpat

Your post reminds me of the nastiest flight I ever paid for. It was on a turboprop flown by the "airline" that a few years later killed John Tower. I said at the time "If I live through this, never again!"


37 posted on 08/13/2005 10:35:21 PM PDT by 185JHP ( "The thing thou purposest shall come to pass: And over all thy ways the light shall shine.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: traumer

It's been years since I've flown. How big is the average airliner seat? Is it much smaller than your typical movie theater seat?


38 posted on 08/13/2005 10:36:20 PM PDT by birbear (Admit it. you clicked on the "I have already previewed" button without actually previewing the post.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Kirkwood
Thanks for that report, which is interesting. These data differ from those reported by the OECD. If you go there and serach for "obesity" the first document that comes up is an Excel spreadsheet. It includes the following numbers (out of 29 countries) for the percentage of the population that was obese in 2002:

1. U.S. 30.6
2. Mexico 24.2
3. Slovakia 22.4
4. U.K. 22.0
5. Greece 21.9
6. Australia 21.7

This is obesity, and your report refers in part to obese or "overweight," which is not as heavy. It's hard to say how much of this is different definitions, reporting error, etc., but I would be very surprised if people in most of Europe are as heavy as they are in much of the U.S., especially the Midwest and South.

39 posted on 08/15/2005 7:35:51 AM PDT by untenured (http://futureuncertain.blogspot.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: untenured

It surprised me too, which is why I remembered seeing it somewhere. There is a difference when you compare percentage of people who are considered overweight by any amount as opposed to the avg amount of pounds people are overweight.


40 posted on 08/15/2005 2:58:00 PM PDT by Kirkwood
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson