168

Weighing Passengers To Become Standard For Bangkok Airways (www.buriramtimes.com)

submitted 11 months ago by BuddyTheBeefalo@lemmy.ml to c/world@lemmy.world

64 comments fedilink hide all child comments

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[-] Ubermeisters@lemmy.zip 19 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago)

From an engineering point of view it makes really good sense because the better you can estimate a plane's weight the better you can maximize efficiency blah blah blah. But these are humans not numbers, and it's a bit rude..

[-] Transcendant@lemmy.world 39 points 11 months ago

Personally I think it's a bit rude when someone is hanging over into my seat, pressed up against me and forcing me out into the aisle. I'd like to sit in 100% of my seat please.

I put some weight on over the pandemic and I do sympathise that losing weight is quite hard. But fuck if it got to the point I needed 1.5 seats, I'd either do something drastic about it (like the time I had 500 calories a day for a few months and dropped from 15 to 12.5 stone, sorry for the caveman units), or book two seats.

[-] cantstopthesignal@sh.itjust.works 15 points 11 months ago

Dude that's a pretty insane diet. Seems pretty dangerous or you were way underestimating your calorie intake.

[-] Transcendant@lemmy.world 12 points 11 months ago

I will readily acknowledge that it was unsafe (I don't think it's a coincidence that's when my heriditary hair loss kicked in). I was taking a vitamin supplement and using myFitnessPal to track calories, some days I only had 300 calories but most days I had 500-600.

For me, gradual weight loss seemed unattainable. I kept trying and failing. So I just said fuck it I'm going to do something drastic to lose the weight. Of course, having willpower and losing the weight gradually is the best way to do it.

[-] ClumZy@sh.itjust.works 6 points 11 months ago

Nothing more to add. They can buy two seats.

[-] Transcendant@lemmy.world 8 points 11 months ago

I had a woman the other day doing this. She was determined to type on her laptop despite not just her body but her elbows / arms breaching my side. After about an hour of this I got fed up, seized the moment as she got something from her bag to actually sit back in my seat for the first time. She did not like this and proceeded to stubbornly type like a t-rex with her elbow either in my guts or smashed into the crook of my arm.

Not sure what's difficult to understand for someone like that; if what they want to do involves spreading out into someone elses seat, then they have to pause the task.

[-] Fal@yiffit.net 18 points 11 months ago

Planes have a maximum weight, and it really matters where exactly in the plan that weight is. Even if it was rude, which it isn't, it can be an important safety concern

[-] angrymouse@lemmy.world 2 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago)

It can't be safety concern, comercial airplanes already fly with an lenormous margin of fuel, it is probably to allow the company to reduce this margin since they know the exact value and it is not an approximation that would always consider the worst case.

This will probably mean that airplanes would take off with less fuel average that can reduce the safety of the fly by almost nothing and reduce a little the cost for the company.

It should not increase the safety of the fly because it is already too high related to fuel.

[-] Fal@yiffit.net 8 points 11 months ago

If you don't understand planes, the location of the weight matters at least as much, if not more, than the amount of weight. Having a bunch of really heavy people at the back of the plan can absolutely be a safety issue. It doesn't matter if the plan isn't anywhere near the max takeoff weight.

[-] angrymouse@lemmy.world 5 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago)

But this is an already fixed issues, no airplane crash happened recently because a chubby guy on the first seat, the average is already being used without any risk to passengers.

Again, commercial airplanes are already too safe to any of your suggestions make an actual difference, and if it could actually make a difference Europe agencies and FAA would have already emmited alerts related to this (not an imperialist issue but they are financially attached to boeing and airbus so they usually push the standards further), and a random ass company would not be the leader of this safety standard.

[-] Jimmycakes@lemmy.world 10 points 11 months ago

If it's rude they can buy 2 tickets for their fat ass and skip the requirements to be weighed

[-] BuddyTheBeefalo@lemmy.ml 2 points 11 months ago

Humans not able to battle climate change, because they can't admit their weight.

this post was submitted on 18 Sep 2023

168 points (97.2% liked)

World News

38147 readers

2341 users here now

A community for discussing events around the World

Rules:

Rule 1: posts have the following requirements:
- Post news articles only
- Video links are NOT articles and will be removed.
- Title must match the article headline
- Not United States Internal News
- Recent (Past 30 Days)
- Screenshots/links to other social media sites (Twitter/X/Facebook/Youtube/reddit, etc.) are explicitly forbidden, as are link shorteners.
Rule 2: Do not copy the entire article into your post. The key points in 1-2 paragraphs is allowed (even encouraged!), but large segments of articles posted in the body will result in the post being removed. If you have to stop and think "Is this fair use?", it probably isn't. Archive links, especially the ones created on link submission, are absolutely allowed but those that avoid paywalls are not.
Rule 3: Opinions articles, or Articles based on misinformation/propaganda may be removed. Sources that have a Low or Very Low factual reporting rating or MBFC Credibility Rating may be removed.
Rule 4: Posts or comments that are homophobic, transphobic, racist, sexist, anti-religious, or ableist will be removed. “Ironic” prejudice is just prejudiced.
Posts and comments must abide by the lemmy.world terms of service UPDATED AS OF 10/19
Rule 5: Keep it civil. It's OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It's NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
Rule 6: Memes, spam, other low effort posting, reposts, misinformation, advocating violence, off-topic, trolling, offensive, regarding the moderators or meta in content may be removed at any time.
Rule 7: We didn't USED to need a rule about how many posts one could make in a day, then someone posted NINETEEN articles in a single day. Not comments, FULL ARTICLES. If you're posting more than say, 10 or so, consider going outside and touching grass. We reserve the right to limit over-posting so a single user does not dominate the front page.

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.