Japan Airlines lays on extra plane after sumo wrestlers make too heavy to fly
theguardian.com
theguardian.com
People get hinky, but I think I'd rather get on an aircraft which understood it's risk exposure to overweight than not.
Whats utterly crap is the way large people are hounded into expensive seats on specious "it's your lifestyle" reasons: If aircraft seating dimensions cannot accommodate people then just like the ambulance services, they need to adapt to the weight profile of the community they serve.
Remember: Flying is a fully regulated market. It's not actually just their business what the seat pitch is.
Price is already sufficiently mutable that if they have to take a profit hit for larger pax, thats ok with me (I am not btw, a larger passenger)
I have flown in craft where they asked us to move seats for takeoff because the loading map wasn't working out how they expected (code share can do that if too many people get specific seat allocations outside the craft operators control) and also been asked (once) to deplane with 40 or so others, so the 747 could taxi to the far slot on LAX, and then wait to have the tires cool, before we were bussed out to board on the runway. That was an experience: midnight flight out, screaming jets, those stairs and the lights vanishing off into the distance. There is something very "metal" about boarding a large aircraft on the tarmac close to launch, rather than at a gate or on the apron.
I disagree. Airplane tickets are expensive and the seats are already extremely cramped. If you don’t adequately fit in your seat, why should the person at your side have to suffer?
At the very least I'd say it's likely a not-small portion of American adults are larger than common airline seats want them to be.
The fact is there are many non healthy adults and the question is what do we do about them. Is flying a fundamental right? Should people with over the top obesity have to pay more to use 2 seats? Should large people have to pay extra or business class tickets to get a decent leg length?
The laws of physics don't care about people's feelings.
Exactly 1 seat.
One seat on a plane is exactly one seat on the plane. This is not some abstract thing that is being talked about here.
Why? We are buying a seat, not inches. But since you insist, here: https://seatguru.com/charts/generalcharts.php
How does this information move the conversation forward?
Yes, but you aren't buying inches but a seat on a plane so it is irrelevant. The original poster said that when he buys a seat he bought a whole seat, not 0.7 nor 0.9 of that seat. How does defining that seat in inches invalidates his point?
> So yes you do need to know the inches to know how many seats to buy under your plan. In principle even an average sized person could be undersized on some theoretical airline with smaller seats -- the dimensions are key.
Yes, when you want to fly it is good to know what size a seat you are buying but notice that you saying that in no way moves the conversation forward. And nobody claimed that knowing the size of seat in inches isn't important.
Airlines, like other companies, serve their owners, not the community. If the community wants to compel the company to do something, they can do it via legislature.
https://www.reuters.com/legal/us-court-hears-challenge-lack-...
I've never seen "lay on" used this way before, but from context I take it to mean they added another plane.
According to Mirriam-Webster "lay on" is used by the British to mean "hire" (as in the opposite of "lay off") and I suppose this is a similar use.
-- U.S. English speaker.
"To provide for the supply of (water, gas, etc.) through pipes from a reservoir; to provide (a telephone line). Hence, to make arrangements for, to provide (refreshments, entertainment, transport, etc.)"
and which M-W defines more briefly as "provide, arrange".
Northern England native.
I wonder if Owen Farrell knows he's now a unit of measurement.
In that case, it was because the passengers included a much higher than typical proportion of adult men and, as it was a flight from London to Geneva in winter, there was a lot of heavy winter sports equipment in the checked baggage.
An ATR42 on a commercial flight had to interrupt it take off above V1=VR, after the plane failed to rotate.
Pilot suspected bad weather.
BEA concluded to rugby team on board.
They then made recommendations about how to sit these guests. It's only in French, unfortunately https://bea.aero/les-enquetes/evenements-notifies/detail/acc...
I came across this a few years ago and just loved everything about it: the website design, the writing, the interweaving of Japanese literature and history.
The only way I can see this being true is if a stitch in this context defined as a singular piece of thread used for attaching fabrics. Is this a common definition? In the common parlance I'm most familiar with, a stitch is one "in-and-out" of the thread. e.g., "I got 17 stitches across my forehead". In that context, I can't see how he large and small articles would take the same number.
These are the things that take up manufacturing time - and time and build complexity is a greater cost than mere thread or material, therefore the cost of a specific jacket (say) is dominated more by the design complexity rather than the area of material and length of thread between a small Vs a large.
Sheeeesh, an average of 70kg sounds low. But then again the average reported weight in the USA is 181 pounds, or 82kg, which ALSO seems low.