Never been on a plane

joescrivens said:
an innocent piece of advice to ignore the new york post :shrug:
Click to expand...

its an easy mistake to make - the washington post and the new york times are credible heavy weight papers

the washington times and the newyork post on the otherhand are, well, less so :lol:
 
It took me ages to get into travelling, but once I did, I couldn't get enough. Doing so without getting on a plane would be challenging to say the least! I don't even notice anymore.
 
MWHCVT said:
What's wrong with that in the airline industry it called a POS Passenger Of Size and speaking as someone who is very fat, I have no issues what so ever with paying for a second seat, and being offloaded if a second seat is not available, why should I take up some of the seat that someone else has paid for not only that it cost extra in fuel to carry someone of my size over a skinny person why shouldn't I foot that bill?
Click to expand...

also with regard to this don't you think your luggage allocation should changed based on your size?

Some people are like 7 stone and others 14 stone - why should the 14 stone person get the same amount of luggage allocation as the 7 stoner? I think it should be a combined weight - the less you weigh the more you can carry
 
joescrivens said:
also with regard to this don't you think your luggage allocation should changed based on your size?

Some people are like 7 stone and others 14 stone - why should the 14 stone person get the same amount of luggage allocation as the 7 stoner? I think it should be a combined weight - the less you weigh the more you can carry
Click to expand...

Indeed :) though take in to consideration all the clothes and make up some skinny little women take and your looking at a C5 Galaxy just for luggage :naughty:
 
The luggage allowence thing will never be fair. The trouble with an "overall weight allowence", is that on average, men are taller and heavier than women.....it would have to be sexist to work, so there's no fair way to do it.

I definitely agree that fatties like myself and Matthew should pay more though.....I weigh twice what some people do, and wouldn't be offended at all if I was asked to pay more as I'm definitely over what anyone would consider normal.

Again though, I a man, and men on average will weigh more than the average woman, and I don't see why I should pay more because I happened to be born with a Y chromosome.
 
They could do weight brackets I guess such as 0-8 stone, 8-14 stone etc? (in KG of course)

EDIT: What's the odds of getting a woman to step on some scales in a public airport?
 
Last edited:
Slimbert said:
I definitely agree that fatties like myself and Matthew should pay more though.....I weigh twice what some people do, and wouldn't be offended at all if I was asked to pay more as I'm definitely over what anyone would consider normal.
Click to expand...

If your your body mass can't be confined to one seat and your taking up more than your own seat room then yes I agree with your thinking. But should it be done on weight though? I'm 5'8" and weigh 14.5 stone, yet I'm not fat (31.5" waist) and wouldn't take up more than just one seat.
 
nilagin said:
If your your body mass can't be confined to one seat and your taking up more than your own seat room then yes I agree with your thinking. But should it be done on weight though? I'm 5'8" and weigh 14.5 stone, yet I'm not fat (31.5" waist) and wouldn't take up more than just one seat.
Click to expand...

I'm thinking more about how much extra fuel is used due to the extra weight of a person (the airlines seem very keen on this with extra baggage charges etc) rather than cubic space taken up inside the plane......there's no way to do it fairly, so the unfair way the airlines choose do it is to charge everyone equally regardless of whether they weigh 30 stone, or 3 stone. I know there are many variations to pricing etc but generally speaking they charge people per seat and baggage by the kilo.

I think it would be way too much hassle for the airlines to do it any other way!! :shrug:
 
neil_g said:
I hate flying but realise its the fastest way to get to nice places.
Click to expand...
You need to visit more places in the Uk,i have done my far share of flying but really believe we live in one of the most beautiful countries in the world.
 
gman said:
They could do weight brackets I guess such as 0-8 stone, 8-14 stone etc? (in KG of course)

EDIT: What's the odds of getting a woman to step on some scales in a public airport?
Click to expand...

If they started asking your weight before you boarded, even generally people would take offence and not book holidays

It's why they've dropped that nude scanner at Manchester airport IMO, people felt it was an invasion of privacy

20kg is more than enough baggage allowance, if you need to take more than that you should pay for it
 
wack61 said:
20kg is more than enough baggage allowance, if you need to take more than that you should pay for it
Click to expand...

Beg to differ.......

I have size 13 feet, my shoes weigh a lot :lol:........ The hotel we spent our honeymoon at insisted on men wearing trousers at the evening meal so I needed to pack and additional pair of shoes.

For a 14 night stay, even with "recycling" clothes I struggled to keep under 25KG (paid for an extra 5KG when I booked).

I'm pretty sure 10 odd years ago the "standard" baggage allowance was 25KG but now they've dropped the allowance to 15KG in some cases (pardon the pun) and charge you for extra under the guise of being "green"........
 
Love flying, dont do so much with kids being young (other stuff to do with cash!), but when they start getting older to appreciate things, we'll pick it up again.

Flew to every continent, lots of times. Had some scares...Varig, landing in Rio on a md11 - great plane ;) and wheels not going down that sort of thing (nothing to worry about really, sounds worse than it is, but a few were screaming). Air Canada pilot saying he's never seen anything so bad as the plane took a battering over st johns (cheers for the confidence boost!) and stewardess sitting behind us in tears saying she cant do this.... - really.

Back in 2001, we were on a BA 747 to Hong Kong and just had dinner thought what can we do (as you do on a plane) suggested to the missus we ask to see the cockpit, no probs, stewardess sorted it and off we went....sat there for 1.5 hours over Russia, great times :) couldn't do it now so being cheeky paid off ;) i was a bit of a spotter and they asked me back for the landing:) what a life chance.

Want to show my girls what a lovely world we live in, although sometimes looking at the news you wouldnt think so :(
Wish i had he cash to see the world by boat though!
 
KIPAX said:
and not likely to either... surely i cant be the only one? am over half way though my life (diplomatic) so its not a case of not had time yet..

anyone else a big wuss!
Click to expand...

I used to work for Airbus making and repairing/modifying them so know just how well made they are....still have connections with Airbus and their apprenticeship scheme and believe me I've much more confidence flying on an aircraft than I have driving around our roads!!!

Simon
 
I was flying in to Tenerife on a lads holiday a couple of years ago. The airport there is right on the coast and must be subject to some pretty severe winds. On this particular occasion our pilot must have misjudged the wind or been caught out by a gust because moments from the point you expect the wheels to touch down the pilot dropped the left wing of the plane to correct our course. I was sat at the window seat just behind the left wing and was able to see just how close to the ground it go. We're talking a matter of inches. The sudden movement caused a fair few to scream and I got a little surge of adrenaline when I saw the wing drop so near to the ground. Once we stepped off the plane the howling winds coming from the side of the runway were enough to take people off balance. Aside from that (which was fairly minor really) and feeling plenty of turbulence I've never had a problem with flying.

I quite like the whole process too. It always feels like the start of the adventure when you get in to the airport. I suppose if you're one of those who hates waiting and queuing it would drive you spare but I don't mind either so it's fun :)
 
I suppose they could have a large pressure plate at the check in desk where you would be standing anyway with luggage and the weight wouldn't even need to be shown, just any excess weight and it could be only shown the computer. There's always discreet ways I guess.
 
Spuff said:
An oft quoted statistic, perpetuated by the airline industry, is that it's safer to travel by flying than by car. To back this up the statistics use "fatalities per passenger miles". So if a plane travels 1000 miles with 200 passengers, that's 200K passenger miles. Why should the number of passengers on a plane affect safety? Using time or number of events (take-off and landings) as the measurement and the figures look very different and driving's safer. I'll stick to the car or train for Europe and if I have to go further afield perhaps look into booking passage on a container ship :D

Also, the disdain and Ratner-like way which certain airlines treat their customers (Mr O'Leary et al), the undignified manner in which you are corralled and shepherded at airports, the semi-toxic, carcinogen and pathogen laden fug you are forced to breathe whilst enduring cramped seating conditions and personal space that would be illegal if you were livestock being transported across the UK etc etc....I'll take the car.
Click to expand...

Not sure where you get your data from but for example between 1990 & 1999 not one single person was killed taking a flight on a Uk airline, in the Uk last year 1900 people were killed on the road....I'll take the plane any chance I get;)
 
As another Aircraft engineer, who worked on most civil aircraft over last 20 years, flew probably 150 times a year for almost 10 years and still fly a couple of dozen times a year now, my #### still twitches every time I get on a plane.
 
Only 21 but haven't - haven't been outside mainland UK actually. And don't have a passport. Or the money for a holiday.

I think though I'd like to see more of the UK before I go outside of it - I've seen a fair bit of wales, a tiny bit of scotland, herefordshire/some of gloucester area, and pretty much all of cornwall and devon. That's a lot I haven't seen!


If/when I do go abroad I have no interest in going like a lot seem to (I'd guess less here for various reasons actually) and go to basically a british hotel in a foreign country and never actually see any of the country for the sake of a posh swimming pool and cheap booze. There are places I'd love to see, lots of them. Just not the fully touristy areas.
 
After watching BBC4 last night, I would like to fly on Ed Force One.
 
I would rather fly than travel by boat, I can fall 5 miles but can't swim it!

Sit at the back, planes never reverse into mountains!

It's 3 hours of peace and quiet, I tell my wife my ears have popped and can't hear a word she is saying!

Drove on nearly every major road in mainland UK, boring!
 
A pic I took of Whitby Abbey a few weeks ago :)


_DSC0031-2 by Mikeynose86, on Flickr

I love flying. Currently training for my P.P.L, But get me on an airliner and things change.

The lack of control you have as a passenger is what makes me uneasy.

Get me behind the contols and Im happy as larry :)
 
nilagin said:
If your your body mass can't be confined to one seat and your taking up more than your own seat room then yes I agree with your thinking. But should it be done on weight though? I'm 5'8" and weigh 14.5 stone, yet I'm not fat (31.5" waist) and wouldn't take up more than just one seat.
Click to expand...

that's not fair. I too am 5ft 8 and 15 1/2 stone but a 36" waist... (6 months ago I was a lot heavier!!)
 
I will be 65 at Christmas and like Tony have never been on a plane and probably never will.

Never been abroad either, furthest I have been is the Isle Of Wight.

John:)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top