| |
 |
|
|
Travel Groups Forum Index » Air » CNN: Airline policies juggle larger passengers
Page 1 of 2 Goto page 1, 2 Next
|
| Author |
Message |
| Vic |
 Posted: Sat Jun 27, 2009 7:06 am |
|
|
|
Guest
|
http://www.cnn.com/2009/TRAVEL/06/26/obese.passengers.airlines/index.html
Airline policies juggle larger passengers
Story Highlights
* Obesity rates have grown in the last 25 years but plane seat sizes remain
the same
* A growing number of airlines are creating polices to deal with heavier
passengers
* Heavier passengers cost more fuel and space, say some passengers
* National Association of Fat Acceptance says it's unsafe to cram
passengers
By Stephanie Chen
CNN
(CNN) -- You pay for checking your baggage, for snacks and for extra
legroom. Word is one airline has even toyed with charging you to use the
toilet. So it makes perfect sense to some fliers that heavier passengers
should pay for spilling over into the next seat.
Frequent flier Ross Murphy, 54, has been sandwiched between larger fliers
in coach, and he believes they should have to shell out for a second seat.
"They have a right to sit in the seat next to me," said Murphy, who travels
cross-country at least 15 times a year to watch his sons' sporting matches.
"But they don't have a right to sit in my lap."
A growing number of airlines are forcing bigger passengers to pay more as
they cope with the costly and uncomfortable quandary that arises when obese
passengers cannot squeeze into a single coach seat.
With airlines trimming flight schedules -- meaning fuller passenger loads
this summer -- the issue is bound to spur some awkward encounters. Chart:
Compare some of the common airline fees
"It's a growing problem, no pun intended," said George Hobica, president of
AirfareWatchdog.com, a site that is part of Smarter Travel Media LLC, which
provides airfare deals and advice. "Everyone suffers. The obese people
suffer and the people who are skinny and get spilled over on suffer as
well."
U.S. obesity rates have mushroomed during the last 25 years, but the width
of a coach airplane seat has changed little, remaining between 17 and 18
inches in most commercial planes. More than one-third of Americans fall
into the obese category, according to the Centers for Disease Control and
Prevention. This makes traveling in tight spaces vexing for airlines trying
to bolster profits by selling the maximum number of seats.
The Federal Aviation Administration does not regulate seat width, but it
does require passengers be able to sit belted and with both arm rests down
to comply with safety standards.
In April, UAL Corp.'s United Airlines formalized a policy that says
passengers who are unable to safely fit into one seat must pay full price
for a second seat. They may receive it free if the plane has vacant seats.
Flight attendants on the airlines are responsible for making sure
passengers are fitting in their seats and may ask a heavier passengers
requiring two seats to pay extra.
Robin Urbanski, a spokeswoman for United, said the company received 700
complaints in 2008 from passengers who were upset because a larger
passenger encroached on his or her seat.
"This new policy was created for the comfort and well-being of all our
guests on board," Urbanski said.
A survey conducted this year by Europe's low-fare airline Ryanair found a
third of the 100,000 passengers polled believed a "fat tax" should be
instituted, requiring heavier passengers to pay more.
Most U.S. airlines have a policy or plan for dealing with heavier
passengers, though some are not formalized like United's. Officials worry
heavier passengers squished into one seat may pose a safety hazard when a
plane must be evacuated during an emergency.
Southwest Airlines has had a "customer of size policy" for more than 20
years, requiring passengers to buy a second seat on a full plane if their
body crosses the armrest boundary.
The company will issue refunds if unoccupied seats are available, which
they say is the case 97 percent of the time.
Airlines with open seating policies such as Southwest find it easier to
relocate passengers in need of an extra seat. On all airlines, passengers
can buy first-class or business-class seats, which are wider. But those
tickets cost more than a coach seat.
Experts at Boeing Company, an aircraft manufacturer, say 17-inch seats can
accommodate 95 percent of the traveling public. They say studies have found
most seat space invasions happen because of wider shoulders and not
derrieres.
Still, some larger passengers who need more than one seat believe being
charged extra is discriminatory and the airlines are not accommodating the
growing American waistline.
"The airlines need to be making bigger seats," said Peggy Howell, a
spokeswoman for the National Association to Advance Fat Acceptance, a group
based in San Francisco, California. "It's not safe to be cramming us into
two seats."
Lawsuits have been filed by heavier passengers and by those who complain
about large passengers encroaching on their space. The courts have ruled
the airline policies are within their rights.In the United States, there
aren't any discrimination laws to protect obese people, attorneys say. (In
some employment discrimination cases, attorneys have been able to win by
proving obesity was a genetic disease beyond the person's control.)
In 2003, the issue of passenger weight surfaced when a commuter plane
crashed on takeoff from Charlotte, North Carolina, because of excess weight
and a maintenance error. The accident prompted the FAA to increase the
estimated weight per passenger by 10 pounds, including 20 pounds of
carry-on luggage. For example, the average weight for a passenger traveling
in the summer (including carry-on luggage) went from 180 pounds in 1995 to
190 pounds in 2003.
"We realized after that accident that the weights we were using probably
didn't reflect the current state of the American traveling public," said
Les Dorr, a spokesman with aviation safety at the FAA.
In 2004, a CDC scientist studied the effects of obesity on the airline
industry. The scientist calculated his findings based on data revealing the
average weight of an American had increased by 10 pounds in the 1990s. He
estimated the extra weight cost airlines $275 million extra for fuel in
2000. The figures are likely higher today, with fuel costs rising.
Scott Cluthe, 57, who works in the radio industry in Houston, Texas, a city
known for its obesity epidemic, said average-sized passengers should not
have to incur the higher fuel cost caused by the airline's heavier
customers.
"A small child needs to pay for a flight, so why wouldn't an obese person?"
said Cluthe, who flies several times a year, mostly in coach, for personal
trips. "I'm not a discriminatory person, but we have to look at the reality
of the situation. It's getting a little crowded in here."
Some larger passengers don't mind paying for the second seat. Other heavier
fliers argue while tall passengers pay a fee for legroom, the fees are only
a fraction of the price of a entire seat. Air France offers obese
passengers booking a second seat up to 33 percent off the ticket price,
depending on the type of seat and availability.
Mike Vasey of Cheyenne, Wyoming says even some normal-sized people can't
fly comfortably when they are packed in the cabin like sardines. Vasey, 45,
who considers himself a large guy at 400 pounds and over six feet tall,
usually pays for two seats.
"I'd rather be comfortable first ," he said, "and worry about
discrimination later." |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| pbj |
| Posted: Mon Jun 29, 2009 6:08 am |
|
|
|
Guest
|
On Sat, 27 Jun 2009 03:06:47 +0000, Vic wrote:
Quote: Scott Cluthe, 57, who works in the radio industry in Houston, Texas, a
city known for its obesity epidemic, said average-sized passengers
should not have to incur the higher fuel cost caused by the airline's
heavier customers.
Then it follows that smaller-than-average passengers should pay less than
average-sized passengers because they use less fuel.  |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| Jochen Kriegerowski |
| Posted: Mon Jun 29, 2009 8:47 am |
|
|
|
Guest
|
"pbj" <postittothenewsgroup@nospam.com> schrieb
Quote: Then it follows that smaller-than-average passengers should pay less
than average-sized passengers because they use less fuel.
Sure. You do it with the checked bagage, so why not with the
people? Put the passangers on a scale, together with their suit-
cases, and make them pay.
It's not fair that I pay more than the obese person next to me
just because I happen to have a heavier suitcase (but still
weigh half of him - baggage included)
Jochen |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| TheNewsGuy(Mike) |
| Posted: Mon Jun 29, 2009 3:15 pm |
|
|
|
Guest
|
Jochen Kriegerowski wrote:
Quote: "pbj" <postittothenewsgroup@nospam.com> schrieb
Then it follows that smaller-than-average passengers should pay less
than average-sized passengers because they use less fuel. :-)
Sure. You do it with the checked bagage,
You do? I've never been charged by weight for checked bags. Airlines
charge for "number" of checked bags not their weight. Over 50 lbs is, I
believe, a "safety rule" for the baggage handlers and that incurs added
fees, but still no charge "per pound" for checked baggage.
http://tinyurl.com/5uj7x9
--
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Sawyer Nicknames - http://sawyer.xtreemhost.com/
Seinfeld Lists - http://seinfeld.xtreemhost.com/
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| Jochen Kriegerowski |
| Posted: Mon Jun 29, 2009 6:02 pm |
|
|
|
Guest
|
"TheNewsGuy(Mike)" <tnguymNoSpamm@yaho.com> schrieb
Quote: You do? I've never been charged by weight for checked bags. Airlines
charge for "number" of checked bags not their weight.
Quote from the "Lufthansa" web pages:
"The Lufthansa zone system is an especially concise rule to calculate the
excess baggage rate. The amount is not linked to the ticket price, but
based on the destination. So for a flight within Germany, for example,
the fee for one kilo of excess baggage is €5; on a flight from Germany
to Spain it is €10, and to Africa or Asia €30. In all cases where bags
are overweight, a minimum fee of 30 euros will be charged if the kilo
rate payable is below this amount."
Ryanair:
"Passengers traveling with more than 15kg of checked baggage
allowance per passenger will be charged a per kilo fee"
.... many others have similar rules. Or they charge for numbers of
bags, as you said. But charging weight ist not uncommon.
Jochen |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| MTV |
| Posted: Tue Jun 30, 2009 12:37 am |
|
|
|
Guest
|
TheNewsGuy(Mike) wrote:
Quote: Jochen Kriegerowski wrote:
"pbj" <postittothenewsgroup@nospam.com> schrieb
Then it follows that smaller-than-average passengers should pay less
than average-sized passengers because they use less fuel. :-)
Sure. You do it with the checked bagage,
You do? I've never been charged by weight for checked bags. Airlines
charge for "number" of checked bags not their weight. Over 50 lbs is, I
believe, a "safety rule" for the baggage handlers and that incurs added
fees, but still no charge "per pound" for checked baggage.
http://tinyurl.com/5uj7x9
It's common practice on international flights. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| John Mayson |
| Posted: Thu Jul 02, 2009 2:26 am |
|
|
|
Guest
|
On Sun, 28 Jun 2009, pbj wrote:
Quote: On Sat, 27 Jun 2009 03:06:47 +0000, Vic wrote:
Scott Cluthe, 57, who works in the radio industry in Houston, Texas, a
city known for its obesity epidemic, said average-sized passengers
should not have to incur the higher fuel cost caused by the airline's
heavier customers.
Then it follows that smaller-than-average passengers should pay less than
average-sized passengers because they use less fuel.
What about people like me who are rail thin, but weigh over 200 pounds
because I'm six-and-a-half feet tall? Fat people can help being fat, I
can't prevent myself from being tall.
John
--
John Mayson <john@mayson.us>
Austin, Texas, USA |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| krw |
| Posted: Thu Jul 02, 2009 4:33 am |
|
|
|
Guest
|
On Wed, 1 Jul 2009 17:26:33 -0500, John Mayson <john@mayson.us> wrote:
Quote: On Sun, 28 Jun 2009, pbj wrote:
On Sat, 27 Jun 2009 03:06:47 +0000, Vic wrote:
Scott Cluthe, 57, who works in the radio industry in Houston, Texas, a
city known for its obesity epidemic, said average-sized passengers
should not have to incur the higher fuel cost caused by the airline's
heavier customers.
Then it follows that smaller-than-average passengers should pay less than
average-sized passengers because they use less fuel. :-)
What about people like me who are rail thin, but weigh over 200 pounds
because I'm six-and-a-half feet tall? Fat people can help being fat, I
can't prevent myself from being tall.
If the issue is really fuel, then buck it up and pay. If the issue is
control (it is) then make your excuses to the control freaks. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| Robin King |
| Posted: Thu Jul 02, 2009 5:35 am |
|
|
|
Guest
|
"John Mayson" <john@mayson.us> wrote in message
news:alpine.OSX.2.00.0907011725360.1380@Calculus.local...
Quote: On Sun, 28 Jun 2009, pbj wrote:
On Sat, 27 Jun 2009 03:06:47 +0000, Vic wrote:
Scott Cluthe, 57, who works in the radio industry in Houston,
Texas, a
city known for its obesity epidemic, said average-sized
passengers
should not have to incur the higher fuel cost caused by the
airline's
heavier customers.
Then it follows that smaller-than-average passengers should pay
less than
average-sized passengers because they use less fuel. :-)
What about people like me who are rail thin, but weigh over 200
pounds
because I'm six-and-a-half feet tall? Fat people can help being
fat, I
can't prevent myself from being tall.
John
Does it matter? You're still a heavier customer whether you
can help it or not.
Given all the weight that an airplane carries, what %
difference in fuel cost does a large passenger incur?
Robin |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| pbj |
| Posted: Thu Jul 02, 2009 5:55 am |
|
|
|
Guest
|
On Wed, 01 Jul 2009 19:33:16 -0500, krw wrote:
Quote: On Wed, 1 Jul 2009 17:26:33 -0500, John Mayson <john@mayson.us> wrote:
On Sun, 28 Jun 2009, pbj wrote:
On Sat, 27 Jun 2009 03:06:47 +0000, Vic wrote:
Scott Cluthe, 57, who works in the radio industry in Houston, Texas,
a city known for its obesity epidemic, said average-sized passengers
should not have to incur the higher fuel cost caused by the airline's
heavier customers.
Then it follows that smaller-than-average passengers should pay less
than average-sized passengers because they use less fuel. :-)
What about people like me who are rail thin, but weigh over 200 pounds
because I'm six-and-a-half feet tall? Fat people can help being fat, I
can't prevent myself from being tall.
Sure you can help it. Humans are taller today because of our modern
diet. If you'd eaten like our ancestors did instead of being a pig,
you'd be shorter and weigh less. Stop trying to make others pay for your
choices.
Quote: If the issue is really fuel, then buck it up and pay. If the issue is
control (it is) then make your excuses to the control freaks.
The way I look at this is that yes it's inconvenient to occasionally get
stuck next to a "wide-body" passenger. However, their size is why seats
are still as wide as they are. Take them out of the equation and seats
can be made narrower. Then we can all be just as miserable with someone
of average width sitting next to us as we are now sitting next to a
350-pounder. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| krw |
| Posted: Thu Jul 02, 2009 6:46 am |
|
|
|
Guest
|
On Wed, 01 Jul 2009 20:55:26 -0500, pbj
<postittothenewsgroup@nospam.com> wrote:
Quote: On Wed, 01 Jul 2009 19:33:16 -0500, krw wrote:
On Wed, 1 Jul 2009 17:26:33 -0500, John Mayson <john@mayson.us> wrote:
On Sun, 28 Jun 2009, pbj wrote:
On Sat, 27 Jun 2009 03:06:47 +0000, Vic wrote:
Scott Cluthe, 57, who works in the radio industry in Houston, Texas,
a city known for its obesity epidemic, said average-sized passengers
should not have to incur the higher fuel cost caused by the airline's
heavier customers.
Then it follows that smaller-than-average passengers should pay less
than average-sized passengers because they use less fuel. :-)
What about people like me who are rail thin, but weigh over 200 pounds
because I'm six-and-a-half feet tall? Fat people can help being fat, I
can't prevent myself from being tall.
Sure you can help it. Humans are taller today because of our modern
diet. If you'd eaten like our ancestors did instead of being a pig,
you'd be shorter and weigh less. Stop trying to make others pay for your
choices.
If the issue is really fuel, then buck it up and pay. If the issue is
control (it is) then make your excuses to the control freaks.
The way I look at this is that yes it's inconvenient to occasionally get
stuck next to a "wide-body" passenger. However, their size is why seats
are still as wide as they are. Take them out of the equation and seats
can be made narrower. Then we can all be just as miserable with someone
of average width sitting next to us as we are now sitting next to a
350-pounder.
Then what about "tall"? |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| pbj |
| Posted: Thu Jul 02, 2009 7:08 am |
|
|
|
Guest
|
On Wed, 01 Jul 2009 21:46:42 -0500, krw wrote:
Quote: On Wed, 01 Jul 2009 20:55:26 -0500, pbj
postittothenewsgroup@nospam.com> wrote:
On Wed, 01 Jul 2009 19:33:16 -0500, krw wrote:
On Wed, 1 Jul 2009 17:26:33 -0500, John Mayson <john@mayson.us> wrote:
On Sun, 28 Jun 2009, pbj wrote:
On Sat, 27 Jun 2009 03:06:47 +0000, Vic wrote:
Scott Cluthe, 57, who works in the radio industry in Houston,
Texas, a city known for its obesity epidemic, said average-sized
passengers should not have to incur the higher fuel cost caused by
the airline's heavier customers.
Then it follows that smaller-than-average passengers should pay less
than average-sized passengers because they use less fuel. :-)
What about people like me who are rail thin, but weigh over 200 pounds
because I'm six-and-a-half feet tall? Fat people can help being fat,
I can't prevent myself from being tall.
Sure you can help it. Humans are taller today because of our modern
diet. If you'd eaten like our ancestors did instead of being a pig,
you'd be shorter and weigh less. Stop trying to make others pay for your
choices.
If the issue is really fuel, then buck it up and pay. If the issue is
control (it is) then make your excuses to the control freaks.
The way I look at this is that yes it's inconvenient to occasionally get
stuck next to a "wide-body" passenger. However, their size is why seats
are still as wide as they are. Take them out of the equation and seats
can be made narrower. Then we can all be just as miserable with someone
of average width sitting next to us as we are now sitting next to a
350-pounder.
Then what about "tall"?
It's because of all those tall people that airplane cabins have to be so
high. If not for them the cabin could be lower and the plane would
weigh less and use less fuel. Why should those of us of normal height
have to subsidize tall people? |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| krw |
| Posted: Thu Jul 02, 2009 7:24 am |
|
|
|
Guest
|
On Wed, 01 Jul 2009 22:08:54 -0500, pbj
<postittothenewsgroup@nospam.com> wrote:
Quote: On Wed, 01 Jul 2009 21:46:42 -0500, krw wrote:
On Wed, 01 Jul 2009 20:55:26 -0500, pbj
postittothenewsgroup@nospam.com> wrote:
On Wed, 01 Jul 2009 19:33:16 -0500, krw wrote:
On Wed, 1 Jul 2009 17:26:33 -0500, John Mayson <john@mayson.us> wrote:
On Sun, 28 Jun 2009, pbj wrote:
On Sat, 27 Jun 2009 03:06:47 +0000, Vic wrote:
Scott Cluthe, 57, who works in the radio industry in Houston,
Texas, a city known for its obesity epidemic, said average-sized
passengers should not have to incur the higher fuel cost caused by
the airline's heavier customers.
Then it follows that smaller-than-average passengers should pay less
than average-sized passengers because they use less fuel. :-)
What about people like me who are rail thin, but weigh over 200 pounds
because I'm six-and-a-half feet tall? Fat people can help being fat,
I can't prevent myself from being tall.
Sure you can help it. Humans are taller today because of our modern
diet. If you'd eaten like our ancestors did instead of being a pig,
you'd be shorter and weigh less. Stop trying to make others pay for your
choices.
If the issue is really fuel, then buck it up and pay. If the issue is
control (it is) then make your excuses to the control freaks.
The way I look at this is that yes it's inconvenient to occasionally get
stuck next to a "wide-body" passenger. However, their size is why seats
are still as wide as they are. Take them out of the equation and seats
can be made narrower. Then we can all be just as miserable with someone
of average width sitting next to us as we are now sitting next to a
350-pounder.
Then what about "tall"?
It's because of all those tall people that airplane cabins have to be so
high. If not for them the cabin could be lower and the plane would
weigh less and use less fuel. Why should those of us of normal height
have to subsidize tall people?
Tall = more leg room => legs in "your space". I know it's hard for
you, but think. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| John Mayson |
| Posted: Thu Jul 02, 2009 8:23 am |
|
|
|
Guest
|
On Wed, 1 Jul 2009, pbj wrote:
Quote: It's because of all those tall people that airplane cabins have to be so
high. If not for them the cabin could be lower and the plane would
weigh less and use less fuel. Why should those of us of normal height
have to subsidize tall people?
What about public places that put water fountains one foot off the ground
for people in wheelchairs meaning tall people throw their backs out
getting a drink?
--
John Mayson <john@mayson.us>
Austin, Texas, USA |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| John Mayson |
| Posted: Thu Jul 02, 2009 8:24 am |
|
|
|
Guest
|
On Thu, 2 Jul 2009, Robin King wrote:
Quote: Does it matter? You're still a heavier customer whether you
can help it or not.
Given all the weight that an airplane carries, what %
difference in fuel cost does a large passenger incur?
A previous poster hit the nail on the head. Is it about weight?
Passenger comfort (no one wants to sit next to a space hogging obese
person)? Or is it about control?
John
--
John Mayson <john@mayson.us>
Austin, Texas, USA |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| Gordon Burditt |
| Posted: Thu Jul 02, 2009 9:11 am |
|
|
|
Guest
|
Quote: Does it matter? You're still a heavier customer whether you
can help it or not.
Given all the weight that an airplane carries, what %
difference in fuel cost does a large passenger incur?
A previous poster hit the nail on the head. Is it about weight?
Passenger comfort (no one wants to sit next to a space hogging obese
person)? Or is it about control?
It strikes me that the airlines could accomodate larger passengers
much better than charging them double. Install some blocks of 4
seats that replace 5 seats. Charge 25% more for these. Most (I
didn't say all - some of them may really need 2 or 3 seats) of the
fatties can do fine with about 5 extra inches, and they might be
surprised to find that some passengers that fit in a regular-sized
seat may be willing to pay extra for more seat room (mothers carrying
babies come to mind). |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| miguel |
| Posted: Thu Jul 02, 2009 9:13 am |
|
|
|
Guest
|
On Thu, 02 Jul 2009 00:11:48 -0500, gordon@hammy.burditt.org (Gordon
Burditt) wrote:
Quote: Does it matter? You're still a heavier customer whether you
can help it or not.
Given all the weight that an airplane carries, what %
difference in fuel cost does a large passenger incur?
A previous poster hit the nail on the head. Is it about weight?
Passenger comfort (no one wants to sit next to a space hogging obese
person)? Or is it about control?
It strikes me that the airlines could accomodate larger passengers
much better than charging them double. Install some blocks of 4
seats that replace 5 seats. Charge 25% more for these. Most (I
didn't say all - some of them may really need 2 or 3 seats) of the
fatties can do fine with about 5 extra inches, and they might be
surprised to find that some passengers that fit in a regular-sized
seat may be willing to pay extra for more seat room (mothers carrying
babies come to mind).
These seats already exist in first class. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| Gordon Burditt |
| Posted: Thu Jul 02, 2009 9:19 am |
|
|
|
Guest
|
Quote: Does it matter? You're still a heavier customer whether you
can help it or not.
Given all the weight that an airplane carries, what %
difference in fuel cost does a large passenger incur?
A previous poster hit the nail on the head. Is it about weight?
Passenger comfort (no one wants to sit next to a space hogging obese
person)? Or is it about control?
It strikes me that the airlines could accomodate larger passengers
much better than charging them double. Install some blocks of 4
seats that replace 5 seats. Charge 25% more for these. Most (I
didn't say all - some of them may really need 2 or 3 seats) of the
fatties can do fine with about 5 extra inches, and they might be
surprised to find that some passengers that fit in a regular-sized
seat may be willing to pay extra for more seat room (mothers carrying
babies come to mind).
These seats already exist in first class.
How wide are the seats in first class? In various discussions on this
topic, people seem to think they're all the same width. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| The Real Bev |
| Posted: Thu Jul 02, 2009 9:32 am |
|
|
|
Guest
|
miguel wrote:
Quote: On Thu, 02 Jul 2009 00:11:48 -0500, gordon@hammy.burditt.org (Gordon
Burditt) wrote:
Does it matter? You're still a heavier customer whether you
can help it or not.
Given all the weight that an airplane carries, what %
difference in fuel cost does a large passenger incur?
A previous poster hit the nail on the head. Is it about weight?
Passenger comfort (no one wants to sit next to a space hogging obese
person)? Or is it about control?
It strikes me that the airlines could accomodate larger passengers
much better than charging them double. Install some blocks of 4
seats that replace 5 seats. Charge 25% more for these. Most (I
didn't say all - some of them may really need 2 or 3 seats) of the
fatties can do fine with about 5 extra inches, and they might be
surprised to find that some passengers that fit in a regular-sized
seat may be willing to pay extra for more seat room (mothers carrying
babies come to mind).
These seats already exist in first class.
At what, double the price?
--
Cheers, Bev
$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$
"If you put the government in charge of the desert, there would
be a sand shortage within ten years." -- M. Friedman (?) |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| miguel |
| Posted: Thu Jul 02, 2009 9:40 am |
|
|
|
Guest
|
On Wed, 01 Jul 2009 22:32:21 -0700, The Real Bev
<bashley101+et@gmail.com> wrote:
Quote: miguel wrote:
On Thu, 02 Jul 2009 00:11:48 -0500, gordon@hammy.burditt.org (Gordon
Burditt) wrote:
Does it matter? You're still a heavier customer whether you
can help it or not.
Given all the weight that an airplane carries, what %
difference in fuel cost does a large passenger incur?
A previous poster hit the nail on the head. Is it about weight?
Passenger comfort (no one wants to sit next to a space hogging obese
person)? Or is it about control?
It strikes me that the airlines could accomodate larger passengers
much better than charging them double. Install some blocks of 4
seats that replace 5 seats. Charge 25% more for these. Most (I
didn't say all - some of them may really need 2 or 3 seats) of the
fatties can do fine with about 5 extra inches, and they might be
surprised to find that some passengers that fit in a regular-sized
seat may be willing to pay extra for more seat room (mothers carrying
babies come to mind).
These seats already exist in first class.
At what, double the price?
About triple. But the food is free. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| |
Page 1 of 2 Goto page 1, 2 Next
All times are GMT
The time now is Fri May 18, 2012 6:56 am
|
|
|