B3TA fixes the world
Moon Monkey says: Turn into Jeremy Clarkson for a moment, and tell us about the things that are so obviously wrong with the world, and how they should be fixed. Extra points for ludicrous over-simplification, blatant mis-representation, and humourous knob-gags.
( , Thu 22 Sep 2011, 12:53)
Moon Monkey says: Turn into Jeremy Clarkson for a moment, and tell us about the things that are so obviously wrong with the world, and how they should be fixed. Extra points for ludicrous over-simplification, blatant mis-representation, and humourous knob-gags.
( , Thu 22 Sep 2011, 12:53)
« Go Back | See The Full Thread
The actual weight of passengers and their luggage is something like 15% of the overall weight of the plane so fat people don't cause much of a problem to the airline.
Baggage weight on the other hand usually varies with baggage size and due to limited hold size and loading capacity they need some way of restricting how much baggage each person takes. The added bonus is that they can charge eye watering figures for over-weight baggage.
The reason airlines rarely weigh your carry-on baggage is because it's restricted by size anyway and they don't have to pay anyone to carry it to the plane for you. The weight is not an issue.
( , Sat 24 Sep 2011, 12:02, 1 reply)
so by that analogy, my flights could be around 7.5% cheaper for fuel (going on a 50/50 ratio)
if the plane was full of thinner people? which passed on to the customer (yeah right) would in theory make the flight cheaper.
( , Sat 24 Sep 2011, 12:10, closed)
if the plane was full of thinner people? which passed on to the customer (yeah right) would in theory make the flight cheaper.
( , Sat 24 Sep 2011, 12:10, closed)
I haven't done the maths
How did you come up with that figure? The heavier the plane the more fuel it burns, for sure, but even if the plane and contents weighed 0kg you would still burn a lot of fuel to overcome the significant wind resistance at 500mph, power the air conditioning, hydraulics, entertainment system, and so on.
But yeah you're right, if the plane was full of skinny people instead of heifers it would use less fuel. You're also right that the savings would be redistributed into a bonus scheme for senior management before it got anywhere near your pocket.
( , Sat 24 Sep 2011, 12:19, closed)
How did you come up with that figure? The heavier the plane the more fuel it burns, for sure, but even if the plane and contents weighed 0kg you would still burn a lot of fuel to overcome the significant wind resistance at 500mph, power the air conditioning, hydraulics, entertainment system, and so on.
But yeah you're right, if the plane was full of skinny people instead of heifers it would use less fuel. You're also right that the savings would be redistributed into a bonus scheme for senior management before it got anywhere near your pocket.
( , Sat 24 Sep 2011, 12:19, closed)
« Go Back | See The Full Thread