Should the overweight pay more for airfare?

[Verzin]

it seems to me that asking someone who requires two seats to buy both of them is quite reasonable. Simply saying that because someone is obese they should get a seat for free is, in my opinion, ridiculous.

EDIT: this is from a standpoint where the obese person is not otherwise physically disabled in any way other than his/her extreme size and body weight. assuming there is a valid medical reason why they are so overweight, the extra seat should certainly be free.
In my opinion, there are differences between most disabilities and obesity. The biggest and most obvious of them is that obesity is often a choice and should not be treated as a true disability, though there are certain rare medical conditions that can result in obesity and in those cases, should be treated as a disability

 

[Thyunda]

The airplane has seats. If you can fit into a seat, that seat has been made for you, regardless of your weight.

The luggage compartment does not have seats. It has a certain amount of space. And to prevent people from saying "oh I've got just the one bag, it's this grand piano right here", it's measured in weight.

So long answer: don't be stupid
Short answer: no

Take it you don't know much about planes then? Or how they organise the passengers to equalise weight?

I think it's a good idea. First off, it's rational. Maybe a little invasive, though. But...I suppose if you only weigh people who are obviously outside the optimal range, it should be okay. Fat people aren't exactly ignorant of their own weight, and they'd be prepared for it.

At the very least, it'll make an unhealthy lifestyle expensive, which would encourage a healthier population.

In theory.

If a plane is filled with fat people, will it go down? Cause if not, you need to read what I said again, as your response has nothing to do with what I've said.

Yes. Actually. There was a Seconds From Disaster episode about a small commercial plane that went down immediately after taking off because it couldn't handle the weight of its overweight passengers.

Funny. I was weighed when I got on a small plane... (capacity of 15 passengers). Aviation safety authorities also tend to state that the smaller the plane, the heavier you have to assume each passenger is.
(The figures I saw suggested a large commercial jet goes with an average of 78 kg, while smaller ones use 82.)

Running a flight sim I also noticed that a small plane designed for 7 passengers, cannot actually fly with even 7 passengers of average weight without reducing the fuel load (and thus the range) to about 40% of maximum.

In any event, this is all kind of arbitrary. If a large aircraft is 90% empty. (Something I've experienced surprisingly often - in fact on one of these flights they let me on with about about 50% more than the luggage allowance without charging me), then the weight of the plane itself is going to mean a lot more than the weight of the passengers.

Take for instance the A380 - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Airbus_A380

It's seating capacity is about 644 passengers for a typical configuration.

Typical Operating empty weight is listed as 276,800 kg (That's the plane + crew & everything needed to operate it except fuel)

Using typical figures for a plane that size (78 kg/ passenger + 20 kg luggage), 644 passengers weigh (50232 + 12880 kg) = 63112

The plane also has to shift the weight of it's fuel, so actual costs are surprisingly complex.

But it should be clear that the payload of a fully loaded A380 is just 22% of the overall weight of the aircraft.

That means, that (very) roughly speaking (remember, the way fuel is loaded and burnt makes the calculation non-linear), the cost of flying the aircraft from point A to point B when empty is around 80% of the cost of when it is full.

Therefore, so long as you don't actually overload the plane entirely, doubling or even tripling the weight of an individual passenger would not triple the operating cost, but increase it by a factor of (0.2*3)+0.8 = 1.4

Given that 80% of the cost is moving the aircraft itself around, the cost per passenger as defined by weight has to vary A LOT for it to mean anything.

if you increase a passenger's weight to 10 times normal, (Remember, that's 780 kg. Even people considered morbidly obese are rarely that much over 200. 780 would be world record candidate material), the increase in cost to move this passenger is still only:
0.8 + 2 = 2.8 times that of a more typical passenger.

And that assumes the plane is full.

If it is only 10% loaded, the passengers only represent 2% of the weight. Now this means the cost for one ordinary passenger is 1, the cost for our record-holding obese person is 0.97 + (10 * 0.03) = 1.27

For someone who is perhaps obese rather than a freak of nature, they'd be maybe 0.97 + (1.5 * 0.03) = 1.015

Can you honestly say that these figures are significant enough to bother with the kind of measures that would be required to figure out who is heavy enough to pay extra?

At least someone occupying more than one seat actually does legitimately cost twice as much to move around. (although this too is meaningless unless the plane is heavily loaded.)

The idea isn't worth the hassle really.

To be honest, I'm in favour of it because it'll make the unhealthier lifestyles more difficult to sustain. It'll persuade people against our easy-living culture that leads to this kind of obesity. Encourage taking care of yourself. It's not just about the weight of the plane, it's about trying to encourage healthier life. If it costs more money to eat fast food and sit around, then people are less likely to do it.

 

[hazabaza1]

Yes, because I think it would be funny and it doesn't affect me in any way.

I vote for users on The Escapist that have manic and depressive in their name to be punched in the face everyday, because I think it would be funny and it doesn't affect me in any way

yes cause fat people deserve it.

And I nominate people who have Tanksie in their name, cause they probably deserve it

I vote for people who post in pink to get attention to get punched in the face everyday because I think it would be funny and it doesn't affect me in any way.
OT: Nah. Planes are already pretty expensive. Plus, people'd probably end up asking for fat people to get charged more for bus fees or such as well.
EDIT: Unless, of course, they do end up taking two seats. In which case they should pay. Though that seems kinda rare to be honest.

 

[Hoplon]

This may be an...interesting discussion, but here goes:

I stumbled across this article over at MSN, [a href=http://now.msn.com/living/0313-overweight-airline-passengers.aspx] the short version being that if you're charged more for heavy baggage, you should be charged more for being heavier[/a], after all the plane doesn't care where the extra weight is coming from, and fuel costs need to be made up somehow.

The [a href=http://www.project-syndicate.org/commentary/singer84/English]idea[/a] comes from Peter Singer, who I don't always agree with on his other views, but that's an entirely different can of ethical worms. He argues in this case that people over a certain weight, roughly 220lbs, should pay a surcharge, and people weighing 110lbs or under should be given a discount.

Another option, he argues, would be "to set a standard weight for passengers and luggage, and then ask people to get on the scales with their luggage. That would have the advantage of avoiding embarrassment for those who do not wish to reveal their weight."

He also adds, "Friends with whom I discuss this proposal often say that many obese people cannot help being overweight--they just have a different metabolism from the rest of us. But the point of a surcharge for extra weight is not to punish a sin, whether it is levied on baggage or on bodies. It is a way of recouping from you the true cost of flying you to your destination, rather than imposing it on your fellow passengers. Flying is different from, say, health care. It is not a human right."

While I think that implementing the policies for such a rule would be nightmarish-especially when it comes down to that line of what precisely is and isn't overweight-I can't say that I fully disagree with the idea or the reasoning. But again, I think utilizing and enforcing such a policy would be incredibly challenging, and most likely would need to pack riot gear and flame shields to even get approved.

Thoughts?

What's missing is that the idea is backwards, if you don't need to be charged extra for being 140kg (me) why they hell do they need to charge for a 30 kg bag.

 

[Bazaalmon]

Furthermore sitting next to fat people on a plane is disgusting, the constant eating, the spilling food down their front (Why do so many fat people seem to be messy eaters?), the noises they make (What is it with fat people and those weird grunting noises), and while I was born without a sense of smell my partner informs me that they smell gross (I assume it's mostly sweat?). Sitting next to them on an 8 hour flight is horrible, so I get very angry when I've had to pay for than them.

Wow. So skinny people are never slobs who spill food, or smell horrible, or make weird grunting noises? People who go over a certain weight don't suddenly start exuding foulness. I agree that SOME fat people are like that, but saying that ALL fat people are like that and skinny people are excluded from this group is horrendous. In fact, the foulest passenger I've ever sat next to on a plane was skinny, but I think he should have had an entire plane to himself. He smelled like he rolled in manure right before hopping on the plane. To sum up: The way you talk about fat people sounds like the way a racist white person would talk about anybody non-white. Not everybody foul is fat, and not everybody fat is foul.

OT: If someone takes more than one seat, they should pay for the extra seat, because either they're crushing another passenger or the airline can't fill that extra seat. However, the fee shouldn't be based on weight, it should be based on whether or not they need a second seat because of the space they take up. If we let the airlines charge based on weight, I'm sure the point where you need to pay extra will be somewhere around 150lbs. Because the airlines are greedy, horribly mismanaged, and can get away with it. That's why we bailed them out and they're STILL absolute shit.

 

[Lionsfan]

Yes, because I think it would be funny and it doesn't affect me in any way.

I vote for users on The Escapist that have manic and depressive in their name to be punched in the face everyday, because I think it would be funny and it doesn't affect me in any way

yes cause fat people deserve it.

And I nominate people who have Tanksie in their name, cause they probably deserve it

I vote for people who post in pink to get attention to get punched in the face everyday because I think it would be funny and it doesn't affect me in any way.
OT: Nah. Planes are already pretty expensive. Plus, people'd probably end up asking for fat people to get charged more for bus fees or such as well.
EDIT: Unless, of course, they do end up taking two seats. In which case they should pay. Though that seems kinda rare to be honest.

For the record, I posted in pink because as far as I remember, that was the best way to show sarcasm for posts on The Escapist

 

[Neonit]

if there is anyway to make two seats into one, why the hell not?
they should however make more space anyway, because i for one am not fat, i fit perfectly into one seat but im tall and i have to sit in very strange manner which mean i take "leg space" of other people. and i know im not the only one, seeing as im not super-tall or anything. also i walk funny afterwards.

you can lose weight, but the only way to become less tall is either getting old (im working on it) or chopping your legs off, and i wont do that.

also, i demand some of my money back for luggage space i dont use. small people should also pay less. if you want it to work, it has to work both ways.

and lets not pretend its about customer satisfactions, its about squeezing more money. thing is, how you set limits. "ohh, but im only 500 gram above the limit!"

as to people who say that there is no way to make sure the plane wont fall regardless of weight - bs. you make a plane with say 100 seats. you estimate that average person will weight 90kg, so you make sure your plane can hold 100 seats full of 150 kg worth of people. you get a fat person on board? he takes two seats. 300 kg? if somebody weight more, theyll probably wont fit into door anyway.

ps im pretty sure that planes are heavy as hell. i dont think a few people with a few extra kg will make THAT much a difference.

 

[artanis_neravar]

They should, and unlike the OP and the original article I am qualified to talk about this subject.

While training to be a commercial airline pilot we discussed this in detail, with everything boiling down to this.

1) Airlines charge extra for overweight luggage because it costs them more (fuel burnt and space taken up) to carry the extra weight.

2) The one ticket price for all became standard practice in the early years (50s early 60s) when the variation between passenger weights was low and to simplify the process.

3) Today both the average weight and the variation have increased to such an extant that Airlines are getting worried about their plane being literally being "overloaded by fat people" (I'll try to find the article, but I think it was in a flight mag I no longer have access to.)

4) Weighing passengers is already standard practice in light aircraft so their weight tolerances are not exceeded.

5) Given half a chance the Airlines WOULD weigh everyone if only to collect new data to calculate airfares.

So in all its a good idea to at least weigh your passengers if only for safety purposes. admittedly the possibility of a modern turbo-fan falling out of the sky is minimal, but good aviation is all about minimizing the the potential risk.

I'm curious, as a pilot how do you pronounce Turbine (as in the jet engine)?

 

[KingsGambit_v1legacy]

That would be a great idea. I'm naturally slim, so could pack a whole extra case and still be lighter altogether than many larger passengers.

 

[TehCookie]

While it may be unethical if I get to save money then I'd be for it. If anything I'm defiantly for fatasses having to pay for two seats. I'm a small person so they think they can sit next to me and take up the space in my seat I'm not using. I'm not a people person so I like that buffer space and don't want to be sat on instead.

 

[Natasha_LB]

Furthermore sitting next to fat people on a plane is disgusting, the constant eating, the spilling food down their front (Why do so many fat people seem to be messy eaters?), the noises they make (What is it with fat people and those weird grunting noises), and while I was born without a sense of smell my partner informs me that they smell gross (I assume it's mostly sweat?). Sitting next to them on an 8 hour flight is horrible, so I get very angry when I've had to pay for than them.

Wow. So skinny people are never slobs who spill food, or smell horrible, or make weird grunting noises? People who go over a certain weight don't suddenly start exuding foulness. I agree that SOME fat people are like that, but saying that ALL fat people are like that and skinny people are excluded from this group is horrendous. In fact, the foulest passenger I've ever sat next to on a plane was skinny, but I think he should have had an entire plane to himself. He smelled like he rolled in manure right before hopping on the plane. To sum up: The way you talk about fat people sounds like the way a racist white person would talk about anybody non-white. Not everybody foul is fat, and not everybody fat is foul.

OT: If someone takes more than one seat, they should pay for the extra seat, because either they're crushing another passenger or the airline can't fill that extra seat. However, the fee shouldn't be based on weight, it should be based on whether or not they need a second seat because of the space they take up. If we let the airlines charge based on weight, I'm sure the point where you need to pay extra will be somewhere around 150lbs. Because the airlines are greedy, horribly mismanaged, and can get away with it. That's why we bailed them out and they're STILL absolute shit.

I'm not suggesting that all fat people are like this, although after a reread of my post I will admit that I could have perhaps worded my post a little more carefully. However that has been my experience of sitting next to obese people on planes, I used to fly around 8 times a year, and that was always my experience whenever I sat next to someone who was over weight. I have never had an enjoyable flight whilst sat next to a fat person. The evidence may only be anecdotal, but it's happened to me enough times that in lieu of any statistics on this, I my own experiences are all I have.

Anyhow my opinions on overweight people are completely irrelevant here, the fact remains that why should I have to pay extra money for being a few Kg's over, when a fat person 2 or 3 times my weight (Possibly even up to 4x in these cases of people taking up 2 seats) pays no extra? It's not fair. A combined weight limit of both luggage and passenger should be set, then it's fair for everyone.

Finally your comparison to racism does not hold up here in my opinion. Race is not a choice and cannot be changed, further more your race does not negatively influence others in any fashion. Being fat does have negative implications for those around you (Hence the whole 2 seats thing - which sadly does not happen as often as it should) and it can be changed: In most cases it's a life style choice. If overweight people don't like being over weight then Brian Griffin has the solution [http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xge3fzPKV6I]. For those whose weight issues are caused by a medical condition, it's a different matter of course, and I would not expect them to pay an extra charge as they cannot help it (Like how I would not expect a disabled person to pay for the weight of their wheelchair), but those who can help it, I have no sympathy for.

Also I feel you took my comments slightly out of context, as I had already made it perfect clear that my experiences were based on being a frequent flier and that I had no issue with people who were medically obese.

 

[Kelthurin]

Yes, because I think it would be funny and it doesn't affect me in any way.

I vote for users on The Escapist that have manic and depressive in their name to be punched in the face everyday, because I think it would be funny and it doesn't affect me in any way

yes cause fat people deserve it.

And I nominate people who have Tanksie in their name, cause they probably deserve it

What he said.

 

[Petromir]

Crap. The weight of the passengers is minimal when compared to the weight of the luggage and the plane itself. I mean, a passanger 747 takes 200,000 tons of fuel to get to altitude and back. That's half the fuel tank. A few hundred extra pounds will make such a small difference to that usage of fuel that any "surcharge" is just a crap excuse to charge more money without raising your ticket price.

200,000 TONS!!! Bloody hell thats what twice the displacement of a fully loaded Nimitz Class super carrier. You may want to check your maths a second there.......

Max takeoff weight of a 757 depending on Variants between about 330 tons and 450 tons....

 

[The Unworthy Gentleman]

No simply because that's not the business plan for planes.

Passengers buy a ticket for the plane. That means that the airline will give them a seat, the luggage weight and all those other things like meals and shit. You don't buy a weight in which you must fit your entire being on.

Charging extra for a belt extension or for spilling over into the aisle or someone else's seat is fine. Charging extra for being heavier isn't cool and, to be frank, stupid.

Oh, thanks Solve Media. Great to see that your shitty version of CAPTCHA doesn't even show up the fucking thing I'm meant to type. Fuck, I hate this thing. Just get CAPTCHA back for fuck sake.

 

[teebeeohh]

what always impresses me when this forum talks about fat people is that there is a huge range of what people consider fat. this ranges from not being super thin too being morbidly obese
hey mods, could we get a standard definition of what fat mean when mentioned here and everyone who uses the word wrong gets banned?