"Larry Dighera" <LDighera@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message
news:544ni3pltg8phqcppp08e1brgpob34to2l@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> 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.
>
That last has the potential for a very humorous video--possibly even
better
that my initial vision of several Disney employees asisting a large person
to squeeze through a turnstyle.
Peter
(Easily amused)
|
