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?
[}:)]
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?
[}:)]