On Fri, 02 Nov 2007 19:25:02 GMT, jimp@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote in
<2t9sv4-g06.ln1@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>:
>In rec.aviation.piloting Larry Dighera <LDighera@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>> On 02 Nov 2007 17:57:55 GMT, Fujikawa Yamamoto <amm-j@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
>> wrote in <Xns99DC6F8BA4FB5789FAED@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>:
>
>> >As Americans have grown heftier, 1960s-era assumptions regarding
>> >passenger weight have become a concern to the aviation industry. In
>> >2004, a turboprop of a Canadian commuter airline crashed into Lake
Erie,
>> >killing all 10 aboard. According to the standard air passenger weight
>> >tables used in the United States and Canada, the average weight of the
>> >10 people aboard was 183 pounds -- the tables assume an average adult
>> >male weight of 189 pounds and average adult female weight of 141
pounds.
>> >Investigation showed the average actual weight of the people on the
>> >plane was 240 pounds. That's 570 pounds unaccounted for in a plane
with
>> >a max takeoff weight of 8,000 pounds, and 7 percent missing from the
>> >pilot's load and wind calculations are enough to upset a light
aircraft.
>> >The smaller the aircraft, the higher the passengers' and bags' weight
as
>> >a percentage of aircraft mass. For the cute little Eclipse 500, whose
>> >max takeoff weight is 5,995 pounds, the passengers, pilots and baggage
>> >easily could be 20 percent of aircraft weight, which is why the FAA
>> >mandated use of passengers' actual weights.
>
>> Weight and balance of aircraft is essential. It is often achieved by
>> flying with empty seats or offloading fuel.
>
>> It would only seem prudent for the air carrier to surcharge passengers
>> for the ****tion their total load that exceeds the FAA specification.
>
>> If passengers are sensitive about revealing their weight to flight
>> personnel, they should either purchase enough additional seats so that
>> there is no question of overloading, or suggest an reasonable
>> alternative means of assuring their flight is conducted within the
>> aircraft's performance envelope.
>
>Simple; each passenger get issued a bar coded boarding pass, stands
>on an electronic scale with no display holding all the carry on stuff,
>and the W&B gets totaled by a computer.
>
>All the stuff to do it is off the shelf and the code is trivial.
>
That sounds like a reasonable solution to me. If the passenger has a
problem revealing his weight to an inanimate machine, perhaps he
requires a little closer psychological appraisal before being
permitted to board...
>The non-trivial part is what to do when someone puts things out
>of limits.
If there the extra weight can be carried within operating limits, the
there should be a per-pound fee *****sed for the overage. If it is
not possible to carry the extra weight, something will have to be left
behind for forwarding at a reasonable fee.
|
