this post was submitted on 18 Sep 2023
158 points (98.2% liked)

World News

38956 readers
3492 users here now

A community for discussing events around the World

Rules:

Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.

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.


Lemmy World Partners

News !news@lemmy.world

Politics !politics@lemmy.world

World Politics !globalpolitics@lemmy.world


Recommendations

For Firefox users, there is media bias / propaganda / fact check plugin.

https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/media-bias-fact-check/

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] DavidDoesLemmy@aussie.zone 65 points 1 year ago (2 children)

They weigh my carry on and complain when it's 1kg over, yet some people weighing twice as much as me get on the plane. Makes no sense.

[–] Jimmycakes@lemmy.world 62 points 1 year ago (2 children)

That weight limit is how much an employee can lift by themselves in America(50 pounds). If it's over they have to team lift.

[–] DavidDoesLemmy@aussie.zone 7 points 1 year ago (2 children)

Sure, for checked luggage. But why does carry on luggage have to be 7kg?

[–] otter@lemmy.ca 26 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Sometimes the passenger can't lift it for whatever reason, in which case the flight attendants would have to do it.

[–] electrogamerman@lemmy.world 4 points 1 year ago

Then they should put a barbell with weights and you are allowed to bring as many kgs as you can lift with the barbell.

[–] Jimmycakes@lemmy.world 21 points 1 year ago

So it's doesn't fall out and crush you in the head during turbulence. It's held up there by a shitty little latch.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] FiskFisk33@startrek.website 21 points 1 year ago (7 children)

Your fellow passenger will be in a seat, not the overhead baggage compartment.

[–] Leperhero@lemmy.ml 24 points 1 year ago

The fellow passenger will be spread across two seats.

load more comments (6 replies)
[–] antlion@lemmy.dbzer0.com 39 points 1 year ago (6 children)

Just weigh and charge people with their baggage. Privacy and embarrassment about mass can be blamed on the bag.

[–] mayonaise_met@feddit.nl 12 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

"I guess I shouldn't have brought my 50kg tote."

[–] electrogamerman@lemmy.world 6 points 1 year ago
  • Laura, size 5xl
[–] echodot@feddit.uk 8 points 1 year ago

I'm not overweight, I just have really heavy clothes.

load more comments (4 replies)
[–] jet@hackertalks.com 27 points 1 year ago

This will add a new terror to air travel

[–] Ubermeisters@lemmy.zip 18 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (4 children)

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 37 points 1 year ago (2 children)

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 14 points 1 year ago (1 children)

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

[–] Transcendant@lemmy.world 12 points 1 year 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 1 year ago

Nothing more to add. They can buy two seats.

[–] Fal@yiffit.net 16 points 1 year ago (1 children)

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 3 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

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 7 points 1 year ago (1 children)

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 4 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year 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 1 year 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 1 year ago

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

[–] kn33@lemmy.world 18 points 1 year ago (2 children)

I'm comfortable in my weight. However, my girlfriend is not. We won't be flying any airline that weighs us. That would be a small crisis for her.

[–] PsychedSy@sh.itjust.works 14 points 1 year ago (1 children)

That would be a small crisis for her.

Hah!

[–] kn33@lemmy.world 5 points 1 year ago

Shit - that wasn't meant to be a pun

[–] Kekzkrieger@feddit.de 13 points 1 year ago (1 children)

You have your whole luaggage scanned, body scans, fingerprints, passport and even custom officers asking you where you stay and god knows what background checks are going on, but weight is gonna be an issue ?

[–] kn33@lemmy.world 8 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Where she is right now mentally, it's best for her to not have a number put to what she weighs.

[–] Kekzkrieger@feddit.de 6 points 1 year ago

Fair, it doesnt change the reality tho, its just a number whatever that number may look like.

I dont agree with that proposed practice either, in fact i would be more happy if we wouldnt have to go through most of the "safety" procedures they put in place, but its not going to change my choice of airlines because i book whatever is convinient and affordable.

[–] Pisodeuorrior@kbin.social 17 points 1 year ago (3 children)

It's a slippery slope. Soon they'll have two separate queues, and one of them will be called "fatties".

[–] theKalash@feddit.ch 16 points 1 year ago (1 children)

It's a slope I'm willing to slide down.

[–] Mr_Blott@feddit.uk 8 points 1 year ago

Until you get stuck on the sides, yeah

[–] BruceTwarzen@kbin.social 14 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Make them walk through a narrow gate to see how many seats they need to buy.

[–] blackn1ght@feddit.uk 9 points 1 year ago

And this is how humans evolved to have whiskers.

[–] XMRFrbgNBwQC6Hkd@lemmy.world 2 points 1 year ago

The "GLP-1 queue" & the "Non-GLP-1 queue".

[–] p000l@lemmy.sdf.org 17 points 1 year ago (3 children)

I welcome it. I'm harassed for the 1kg excess in my bag. If you're not charging others more, I'd like not to be treated like that. Give me a discount then for every kilogram I weigh less by.

[–] Frozengyro@lemmy.world 21 points 1 year ago

Do you seriously think it would work that way? They wouldn't charge you a single cent less. Probably charge others more though.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] otter@lemmy.ca 14 points 1 year ago (2 children)

On September 16, it became evident that airlines were becoming more interested in passengers’ weight. Prominent carriers like Korean Air and Air New Zealand introduced a rather unconventional rule, requiring passengers to step on scales before boarding their flights. [...] This novel approach in the aviation industry has gained momentum, with the objective of maintaining optimal aircraft weight and thereby reducing fuel consumption. The primary goal of this unconventional procedure is to precisely determine the standard weight of passengers and averages. This, in turn, aids in accurately calculating the distribution of weight on the aircraft, resulting in fuel savings. [...] The ultimate objective is to ensure that each flight adheres to strict parameters set by the maximum take-off weight of the aircraft, thereby enhancing safety. However, for many, this emphasis on safety might feel like an intrusion into their privacy.

I didn't know that this was a factor that they needed to consider. The privacy aspect is real, and we need regulations on storage and deletion of this data after each flight. I can already see this info being sold to advertisers.

On the discomfort side, couldn't they have the collection and recording happen in the background? If no other passengers or staff can see the numbers, there's less of a chance of someone feeling uncomfortable with the process.

This is all assuming that this is actually necessary or helpful.

[–] ParkingPsychology@kbin.social 5 points 1 year ago (1 children)

On the discomfort side, couldn’t they have the collection and recording happen in the background? If no other passengers or staff can see the numbers, there’s less of a chance of someone feeling uncomfortable with the process.

The weighing process involves humans, so that wouldn't be possible.

Their average intelligence being what it is, when instructed to have one person on the scale, sometimes it's one, sometimes two, sometimes two and a stroller. Sometimes somehow a horse ends up on the scale and no one really understands how, including that horse.

Unless you check the weight, you don't know what exactly was weighed.

[–] Womble@lemmy.world 2 points 1 year ago

i mean, if theres a plate on the floor and soneone checks theres only one person on it before a button is pressed that solves that and theres no reason to display the number. Flash up an error to retry if its more than 3 sigma away from the expected mean.

[–] JoBo@feddit.uk 4 points 1 year ago

They're not weighing every passenger forever. They just want to get reliable stats on the average per passenger.

The article states that the information will be kept private.

[–] 50MYT@aussie.zone 6 points 1 year ago

This isn't new in the airline world.

I believe there is a Tongan airline that has been doing it for a few years already

[–] Honytawk@lemmy.zip 5 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

That is so racist against Americans, lol

[–] Squids@sopuli.xyz 5 points 1 year ago

This doesn't sound like they're charging extra if you're over a certain weight, which is what a lot of people here seem to be assuming. Its data collection for future designs.

People are aware that you get charged for overweight baggage for health and safety reasons, right? Anything over about 20 kilos is too heavy for a single person to safely handle so they have to get two people to do it, which costs more time and money. I would be very genuinely surprised if a few dozen more kilos from overweight baggage and people would be enough to seriously impact a plane's flight unless you're on a small town hopper

[–] girl4life2023@kbin.social 5 points 1 year ago (2 children)

I'm not ok with it but I think airlines should make bigger seats available. make it an option to book these chairs , no weighting needed, but I rather pay for a bigger seat than book 2 seats and the 2 seats not honoured when boarding the plane.

[–] BuddyTheBeefalo@lemmy.ml 6 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

The reason for the weight check is to balance out the plane to save kerosene.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments
view more: next ›