Page 1 of 1

Cheer Up. The answer but what was the question?

PostPosted: 04 Dec 2009, 11:59
by HWVlover
When booking my holiday I discovered that VH and VS are singing from different hymn sheets on the subject of luggage allowance or more precisely the exact booking date which determines which allowance you get. Whatever, chaos is likely to reign at LGW.

I understand the point of the reduction in allowances. Taking weight off and/or reducing bags means quite a lot of weight reduction on a full jumbo and a commensurate reduction in fuel use etc.

But that begs the question...why not go further with this weight restriction stuff if it really is so important?

My proposal, which is, quite frankly, simply brilliant, is that each fare level should have a weight allowance associated with it. However that weight allowance would be not just for the luggage but also include the weight of the passenger. There would be SIGNIFICANT penalty charges for exceeding the allowance.

If you are fit, slim and handsome (albeit slightly balding) like me then the allowance would give you the opportunity to carry extra, sadly increasingly necessary, beauty products for chaps. On the other hand, if overweight then the options would be pay a lot more in penalty charges, travel without luggage or DIET.

The advantages are clear and many.

The plane would be a more agreeable place to be...it is a well known fact (I think) that large people break wind more often and in greater quantity than their slimmer counterparts. And that is before we consider the beneficial impact on global warming of the resultant reduction in those frightful greenhouse gases!!!

It would also put an end to that bane of air travel, seat creep, where the buttocks and sometimes other bodily parts of the large person next to you overwhelm not just the armrest but also half your seat too.

The health consequences would be significant as large numbers of large people would diet, improving their cardiovascular function and thereby reducing the drain on NHS resources long term.

And finally and most importantly, there would be economic advantages too. Because VS would be in such a better state through greater income and/or cost savings the airline would be able to reintroduce all those wonderful things that the UC passengers (poor dears) are so valiantly doing without (well, those who havent decamped to the dark side).

So it is a WIN WIN situation and I commend my brilliant idea to you all.

Now where did I put SRBs address?

[}:)]

PostPosted: 04 Dec 2009, 12:18
by HighFlyer
LOL

I do think there is a point about passenger weight, but it will never happen (well, possibly on RyanAir but not the scheduled airlines) the court of human rights would never allow the weigh in at check-in.

I also find it interesting that we are restricted on what we can bring in a case in terms of weight (checked and hand luggage) but once past security and deposited in the shopping arena we can buy whatever we want and take it onboard.

Have to disagree with large people breaking wind more often, that is largely down to what you eat and your digestive system. Your average obese person is probably not snacking on high fiberous foods. [:)]

Thanks,
Sarah

PostPosted: 04 Dec 2009, 13:31
by tontybear
I recall on the BBC documentary 'Secret Life of the Airport' that in the early days both pax and their luggage were weighed and there was film of this being done!

PostPosted: 04 Dec 2009, 13:44
by northernhenry
Again reminds me of my 3ft-nothing Scottish mother-in-law, having been told to pay up for excess bagagge on a LCC, turned round and pointing to a particularly 'larger gentleman' in the queue and in a rather easily heard voice:

'Unless my combined weight with luggage weighs more than him, I'm not paying a thing'

[:0]

Unsurprisingly no charges were made....

PostPosted: 04 Dec 2009, 14:09
by HWVlover
quote:Originally posted by HighFlyer
LOL

Have to disagree with large people breaking wind more often, that is largely down to what you eat and your digestive system. Your average obese person is probably not snacking on high fiberous foods. [:)]

Thanks,
Sarah


Sorry about that Sarah. I was basing my view on the 'who can produce the most bubbles in the communal bath' competition which occured after matches at my rugby club. It was invariably won by one of the large lumps from the scrum. Plus there was my mother too.....!!

TEE HEE.
[}:)]