Airlines to weigh passengers before boarding

[B3ck89]

www.thesun.co.uk/travel/8895844/airlines-weigh-passengers-save-fuel/?utm_campaign=sunmainfacebook040919&utm_medium=Social&utm_source=Facebook#Echobox=1567623178

Spotted this in the sun.

Many allow 88kg (13.8 stone) for men, 70kg (11 stone) for women and 35kg (5.5 stone) for children

This bit confused me a little bit, is that their estimate they use for calculating fuel consumption? My partner and children weigh more than that estimate

I wonder what their weight limit will be? 🤔
And I can see shit will hit the fan when/if this does come into force, and passengers are excluded from the flight

Airlines work on very tight margins and a lot of business profits are based on 'marginal gains' ie lots of small efficiency savings, that add up to a significant reduction in costs.

Having now read the article, it says that based on the figures in use, they're actually carrying 1% too much fuel, and between a third and a half of that extra fuel is burnt by simply carrying that fuel, so it's just wasted and they want to stop doing that, not judge people based on whether or not they've lost their baby weight or had a good time at the AI buffet.

As a 6ft tall woman the ideal weight range of 10 stone to 12 stone 6lbs actually translates for me as emaciated, sickly looking and with amenorrhea.

Maybe some of the short tiny people in this thread could give up some of their unnecessary leg room for those of us with 38in inside leg measurements?

@Ginfordinner I think the defensive posts are in line with the other posts who took delight in telling us all what tiny healthy delicate little flowers they are despite that also having no relevance to air line safety.

I've always wondered why as a 50kg person I have to have the same luggage allowance as someone twice my weight

You should be able to offset your weight and your bag weight

The usual awful, smug, self-righteous fat shaming from some posters, who clearly have no idea about the science behind weight gain and obesity and just want to feel superior because they are normal weight, it is tedious.

The policy on the other hand would seem to me to be sensible, as somebody said, nobody need be any the wiser about anybody's weight and a cumulative number could be delivered to the plane crew, in fact, if we wanted to be very sensitive it could be made non visible even to the check in people to assuage any anxiety.

My worry, like a PP mentioned, would be that airlines armed with that knowledge would cut it too fine.

I don't see a problem with weighing people for safety reasons.

Currently, airlines estimate using an inexact science based on the gender ratio of the passengers on board.

Many allow 88kg (13.8 stone) for men, 70kg (11 stone) for women and 35kg (5.5 stone) for children.

So they expect the average woman will be 11 stone, some will be over and some under. That's how I read it.

I agree with it as far as I'd much prefer things to be as accurate and safe on a plane as possible. However. I think I would not be flying again due to the public humiliation of having my weight analyzed every time I fly....flying is anxiety inducing enough on its own. Throw in having to be publicly weighed.....lol. too much for me I think

It needn't be public though Hailey, especially if luggage was weighed with the passenger.

However. I think I would not be flying again due to the public humiliation of having my weight analyzed every time I fly

That is utterly bonkers. No-one's weight is going to be announced and even if the check in desk person sees your weight, if you are noticeably under or overweight, they can tell that by looking at you, so I really don't understand what difference them knowing that you weigh 6, 8, 16 or 18 stone or whatever makes in the slightest, especially when they see hundreds of people a day and will probably never see any of them again.

Josepheen It's not an allowance, it's an assumption based on statistics used to calculate the weight of goods (passengers, luggage, fuel and other items) carried on the plane.

There is a statistically significant difference in the average male and female weights, so by noting that they have X men and Y women, each multiplied by an average weight, they have a rough indication of the weight of people on the plane.

What a lot of people seem to be forgetting is that we're talking about an average, which by definition means that some people are below and some people are above and for these purposes there are no medals to be gained for being above or below that number.

@NotTonightJosepheen they don't have a weight allowance - read the article.

It is an average estimate airlines use to allow them to calculate fuel needed.

It doesn't affect the passengers one bit.

Wait...if a woman and a child pay as much as a man for a seat, why is their weight allowance less?

Sheesh, read the article. Weight vs luggage allowance does not come into it.

Am currently on a plane, taller than most blokes on board, yet they are allowed to weigh more? Why? For the privilege of being a man?

It isn't about being "allowed" to weigh more. No-one is proposing a weight limit currently. It is, however, a fact that, on average, women weigh less than men of the same height.

My worry, like a PP mentioned, would be that airlines armed with that knowledge would cut it too fine

An airliner carries a lot more fuel than the bare minimum required to get to the destination. There are multiple safety margins built in to the calculation. The pilot must declare an emergency if they will have less than 30 minutes fuel left after landing. Depending on the conditions, they may declare an emergency earlier.

This thread is a MN dream come true! Let's all crow about how much under the weight allowance we are and how those awful fatties should have to pay more so we can bring more shoes!

So, you think people with Prader Willy syndrome are ok to be overweight. What about people who have had steroids for condition and have put on a lot of weight as a result? Or medication for cancer that leaves the patient bloated? Who is going to judge the reason why someone is larger than average, whether it is caused by overeating or a medical problem - The check in staff?

As for those justifying the extra charges, I always travel first class, so if I carry extra weight it would not affect anyone in an adjacent seat.
Thinly veiled fat-bashing thread heh?
Always brings out the vipers.

This thread is a MN dream come true! Let's all crow about how much under the weight allowance we are and how those awful fatties should have to pay more so we can bring more shoes!

Because they cannot be arsed to read the facts in the article before spouting the holier than thou crap.

Again, too many people are missing the point of the thread

Fat bashers - shame on you!
People being defensive - this isn't about you.

This is about airline safety.

God, hopefully there is never a plane full of MN'ers.... with you all being so svelte, it will take off like a Harrier jet and end up through the Stratosphere

Well I’m pregnant and normally easily within that range, but edging ever closer to the cut off

I'm 11 stone, but very slim and tall. So I'll get slapped with an overweight baggage sticker. My self esteem loves that I mean it's already pretty uncomfortable to fly as a tall person.

So a man who is 5ft.6 and 13st 8lb (would be deemed morbidly obese and can fly ok. But I'm 5.8 and 11st 11lb and will have to pay penalties... Yes that works! hmm

Don’t think that is morbidly obese.

I think you mean obese and not morbidly obese. ahardknocklife

ahardknock 10 BMI points is certainly not a bit.