New Zealand airline asking passengers to weigh in before their flights

A great idea. Especially if they charge the obese ones extra.

If it helps them bring the price down, I'm all for it.

(Also good to know I'm the "authority's designated weight for people 13 and over". Shame I'm so damn short).

I was going to weigh in on this article, but . . .

I recall there was an airline in the South Pacific that actually use to charge passengers by their weight plus the weight of their luggage. It makes total sense.

Air NZ hitting above their weight once again.

Lol

I'm a rather slim guy at about 155 pounds (71 kilograms, or 12 stone), yet I get charged for excess baggage while a co-flyer twice my weight but with less baggage is not. (That's not to mention overflowing the seat and hogging the armrest.)

Airfare should be charged on total weight brought aboard.

Currently, the authority's designated weight for people 13 and over is 86 kilograms, which includes carry-on luggage. The authority last changed the average passenger weight in 2004, increasing it from 77 kilograms.

According to The New York Times, the average weight assigned to each passenger by the FAA is 91 kgs for men, 81 kgs for women.

So if an over 90kg person like the lady that was sat next to me once and was partially in my seat I couldn't even put the armrest down ( long story I was eventually moved her husband also refused to sit next to her for 14 hours).

She must have weighed well over 150 kg if not more.

She gets to take up my space, 2 check-in bag an carry-on no extra charge.

I was 60kg at the time and was going to be charged ¥10,000 extra because one on my bags was 1 kg over the limit ( I move the stuff to my carry-on)

So I was 60+ 23+23+10= 116kg

This woman alone weighed more than my total but still got to check in 2 bags up to 23kg each and a carry-on up to 10kg and pay the same price as I do.

With obesity at over 30% in the USA UK and 25% Canada and Australia and in general over 50% in western countries being overweight perhaps all airlines need to start weighing passengers for safety.

And start charging by total weight.

150kg is a good number your weight plus baggage over that you pay more.

So if you are 125kg then one bag 25kg or carry-on 10kg plus one checked at 15kg.

If you can afford the food it takes to get that big then if you want to fly like those of us that care about our bodies we'll pay more.

Now before we hear the claims about obesity being medical issues.

Less than 5% of the population has a medical/generic/, chronic issue that would cause obesity.

Remember 30% are obese now in many countries.

A great idea. Especially if they charge the obese ones extra.

Oh, come on, stop it, Fatty Arbuckle could well become a leveraged measure to pay additional charges for mobile human baggage.

Step here, Sir/Madam, you have clearly exceeded the free waist line allowance, the buckle up big boy back stop personal allowance restriction, our ate all the pies excess baggage, charges will apply, enjoy your flight.

Weight and balance is a serous safety issue with aircraft. There are limits to the distance the balance point is from the CG of the plane. If you have all the fat people with fat carry on bags in the back, you may exceed elevator and trim control to keep an angle of attack within a safe range. The nose rises, the aircraft slows and stalls, because you can’t push the nose over to maintain speed.

Just being weighed is not a big deal. Some people freak at every little thing. Some at big things.

Like the fat lady in the next seat.

Seriously, I weight 49kg, calculating aircraft weight and balance passenger wise has never been a danger to or contributed to a plane crash.

Do you really think that your waist line or weight is going to automatically make you eligible for upgrade or discount?

Or guarantee you don't have a passenger excess waist line intruding on your ability to consume your in flight meal?

This could be a cynical means to humiliate, so increase capital.

A great idea. Especially if they charge the obese ones extra.

Indeed Mr. Kipling

calculating aircraft weight and balance passenger wise has never been a danger to or contributed to a plane crash.

Not true. There have been accidents that resulted from poor weight and balance calculations especially on smaller aircraft.

Even on a very large aircraft, the proper weight and balance is critical and the margin of error on calculating the proper balance point is smaller than one would think.

This is becoming an issue in America as um...."Fliers of size" are increasingly prevalent on planes. I was on a flight last year that was delayed because the plane didn't have enough seat belt extenders on board.

Now if you have seen how big these belts can get, you know that they can be loosened quite a ways. And it still wasn't enough for several passengers who needed an extender.

I am with several of the previous posters: Oversized flyers should pay extra.

Great! Get those fatties to pay more...and eat a salad too for in-flight meals. Win-win.

sunfunbun

Today 06:30 pm JST

Just being weighed is not a big deal. Some people freak at every little thing. Some at big things.

> Like the fat lady in the next seat.

Not in the next seat!

In the next seat and 1/3 in my seat!

14 hour flight with the prospect of my having only 2/3 of what are already small seat and I having paid for a seat, not 2/3 of a seat not 1/3 for the large oversized body of someone I don't know!

If the person fits 100% in their seat that is how it should be, if the person's body flops over into the neighbouring seats and the armrest cannot be lowered then that is not next to you that is on you!

My father is over 195cm wide shoulders and not a skinny guy, even he doesn't come close to 100kg he is just around 90kg and he fits in a economy seat armrest down (yeah legs not so much).

So if an over 90kg person like the lady that was sat next to me once and was partially in my seat...

Matte, you are treading a very thin (excuse the pun) line here. You're about to be cancelled.

I see NZ was clever enough (woke?) to not have different average weights for men and for women.

if only those gender terms meant anything anymore or could be described somehow it might help.

Do you really think that your waist line or weight is going to automatically make you eligible for upgrade or discount?

Well yes!

It is already happening, every obese person that does not fit in a regular seat in Canada on domestic flights cost all the other passengers money!

Under Canadian regulations obese people are to be provided a "FREE" second seat, who do you think pays for that?

Everyone else with their tickets eventually going up to cover the list seat revenue.

And as the false "body positive" narrative gets pushed by more giant size celebrities, we gave a high chance of this spreading and with a possible 30% of passengers qualifying for a free second seat ticket prices will go up

EFD

Ok one flight, just one that crashed through a failed weight distribution.

Even the fundaments, of 21st century, the gyroscope sensor, a device that is used to measure, maintain the orientation and angular velocity of an object, in this case an aircraft, vertically, its weight, gravity, essential on every aircraft that utilizes autopilot suddenly cannot establish it weight on ground distribution??

Think about it.

Park your brutal shaming, ok they are big, but to discriminate through false health and safety nonsense is a failure to appreciate that the air travel industry will stop at nothing to salvage any revenue from covid

tora

Today 07:13 pm JST

So if an over 90kg person like the lady that was sat next to me once and was partially in my seat...

> Matte, you are treading a very thin (excuse the pun) line here. You're about to be cancelled

It that a threat?

Staying fact is now on offence because people don't like facts.

not average weight by gender*

It that a threat?

No. It was a joke.

Sure thing.

Not like you would have an average expected weight of 86kg and then see a manifest of 100 people (90 men and 10 women.

wouldn’t you then expect in advance you might have an issue and decide to leave a few seats empty?

nah. Who plans anything anymore based on data, right? It’s all feeeeelings and wokiness.

itsonlyrocknroll

Today 07:51 pm JST

Antiquesaving, my friend, you are being taken for a long ride off a short pier.

Actually I think it is you with the above problem.

You are so convinced the airlines are out to get you, you refuse to see facts.

If the Canadian government has to legislate giving obese people a second free seat that says people are way too big, it doesn't say airlines are trying to trick you.

The airline was not sitting 1/3 in my seat!

An overweight woman and when it was discovered her husband was sitting in the seat infront of me, even he refused to sit next to her, BTW he and I had aisle seats so he would have still had a similar seat just only 2/3 as his wife would has 1/3 of his seat.

Please don't act like this isn't a problem, there are thousands of videos were people are complaining about not being able to sit in their seat because the person next to them is occupying part of it.

This is all about money, not safety.

wouldn’t you then expect in advance you might have an issue and decide to leave a few seats empty?

Why would anyone expect there to be a 90-10 split between male and female? That doesn't make any sense.

It just makes more sense to get the average weight of passengers, and not average by sex.

But yes, let's just assume Air New Zealand is risking passenger safety in the name of "wokeness," whatever that means. lol

This is all about money, not safety.

I'd say there are compelling safety considerations to make as well.

Every see a plane take off when the weight is unbalanced or shifts? Not pretty.

Antiquesaving,

Can we agree to separate the need to establish the necessity to debate, formal reasoning legislate giving obese people a second free seat that says people are way too big, it doesn't say airlines are trying to trick you.

We both could be accused of over reaction.

My huff puff is the ridiculous notion, assumption that heavyweights sudden movement will create the scenario the aircraft will inadvertently drop out of the sky.

has it now really?

so a plane full of 100 men would not be expected to weigh more than a plane of 100 women?

and if the capacity is 100 "people" at 86kg, you wouldnt have to consider bumping 5-10 men from the flight?whereas women all 100 would be fine?

Park your brutal shaming, ok they are big, but to discriminate through false health and safety nonsense is a failure to appreciate that the air travel industry will stop at nothing to salvage any revenue from covid

The seat sizes haven't changed, the size of passenger bellies has. It costs more to fly them it costs more to seat them and in interferes with other passenger's comfort.

God help them if they have to evacuate in an emergency.

So it is not an issue of greedy capitalists squeezing money out of the portly. It's an economic and a safety issue.

Why would anyone expect there to be a 90-10 split between male and female?

because of a time when you looked at a manifest and saw it.

Would it be any different it if were 80-20 or 70-30? same concept.

so a plane full of 100 men would not be expected to weigh more than a plane of 100 women?

I've never, ever taken a flight with all men. This is just silly. So now the rightists now more about operating an airline than the people actually paid to run the airline. lol

and if the capacity is 100 "people" at 86kg, you wouldnt have to consider bumping 5-10 men from the flight?whereas women all 100 would be fine?

lol No.

and here is your Canadian who started this whole "Im fat, I demand an extra seat for free" thing that some of you claim doesnt happen.

https://www.newsweek.com/fat-obese-travel-two-seats-free-plus-size-airline-1795006

Im quite sure most of the liberals are thinking how lovely she is and how great it is that the is positive about her own body, etc etc.

Until she is in the seat next to you. Then you want her off the plane or paying double, that much is clear by your comments.

I've never, ever taken a flight with all men. 

oh and because you never have, its never happened in the history of aviation.

and I didnt say ALL men, I said 90% or 80% or even 70%

but if it hasnt happened to you personally then it has undeniable never, ever happened- I see.

oh and because you never have, its never happened in the history of aviation.

I've ridden on dozens of flights and it's never happened. I'd be willing to bet that's never happened to you or any other commenter, because it's a bizarre assumption.

Now that aside; How often are there commercial flights where all of the passengers are men? Oh, fine, even 90% men. How many?

but if it hasnt happened to you personally then it has undeniable never, ever happened- I see.

Do you have any proof it happens? It doesn't seem like the airline, the company that actually operates the planes, are worried about it.

“All plus-size passengers should be provided with an extra free seat, or even two or three seats depending on their size, to accommodate their needs and ensure their comfort during the flight”

how wonderful, huh?

 the company that actually operates the planes, are worried about it.

the FAA who regulates the flight are worried about it, as they have averages for both men and women.

enjoy your flight!

When one turns a discussion on the increased weight of all passengers on civil airliners into a rant about gender identity, it is time for one's bed time meds.

Double-up on the Cofeve perhaps....

EFD, to be frank my accusation of brutal shaming is misplaced.

I am not sure the speed/danger, to the person in front of a plus sized passenger in the event of a emergency is relevant, if the Captain, flight crew has decided to land, so to deploy the chute

My beef is New Zealand airline asking passengers to weigh in before their flights, and the reasoning for doing so.

I suggest there is a financial ulterior motive.

the FAA who regulates the flight are worried about it, as they have averages for both men and women.

lol Nope.

https://www.faa.gov/documentLibrary/media/Advisory_Circular/AC_120-27F.pdf

The operator will use the third column labeled “Standard Average Weight” in Table 3-1 to enter in their standard average weight per passenger based on seasonal clothing variance. The standard average weight is calculated by adding the CDC/NHANES weights in the first column and the clothing weights located the middle column. The clothing weights are 5 pounds for summer clothing, and 10 pounds for winter clothing. Where no gender is given, the standard average passenger weights are based on the assumption that 50 percent of passengers are male and 50 percent of passengers are female.

The standard average weight is calculated by adding the CDC/NHANES weights in the first column and the clothing weights located the middle column.

oh you mean both of those EMPTY columns?

the columns that require you to access a link/PDF with male/female weights by age groups to get the numbers to fill in?

those 2 entirely empty columns allow you to calculate......what?

I think people don't really understand, weight is a major factor, distribution of weight is minor in a large commercial passenger jet, it is a factor but minor.

But because of safety and cost especially domestic flights, a correct calculation of weight is needed for many reasons.

Example is fuel, jets are not usually fuelled up to the top.

More often than not a calculation based on the cargo weight and the number of passengers, distance etc...and just a bit more than needed is filled, this way the plane is lighter and less fuel is needed, it also lowers fire risk if the landing goes wrong.

Sure if saved the airline money but think about this, a wind burst happens the plane crashes but not to severely but is carrying both wings near full of fuel.

That not severe crash is now a flaming inferno!

This is why only the necessary amount to get from point A to point B and a bit is out in the plane.

This is why the weight and number of passengers can be very important.

Planes are designed to land below certain weights. A heavier plane is more likely to hit the ground hard and get damaged. It's got 5,000 gallons of fuel, which is about three elephants weighing it down. So, landing with a full tank is pretty risky.

This is also why if emergency landing the pilot will dump the fuel.

You may think everything is about money but sometimes safety is the issue.

The weight limits and rules are not set by the airlines but by the government and The International Civil Aviation Organization.

There have been several accidents and emergency landings over the years because of miss calculation and plane literally running out of fuel.

Blacklabel

Today 08:38 pm JST

Her fiance is as big as her, the airline at one point together on a flight offered to move them to a 3 seat section and they could share the empty middle seat.

They refused saying 3 "tiny seats" was not enough space for the two of them.

Weight and balance is a very serious safety of flight issue. Physics doesn't bend to trendy political trends.

If people would take the time to search Weight, balance fuel calculation and air craches.

Do multiple different combinations of these words, you may be surprised by the results.

Quite a number of crashes from large passengers jets to mid side commuter jets.

Improper fuel calculation, overweight, improper balance, etc...