united airlines, you must buy two seats if you don't fit into one

[dk62]

davester wrote:
Some airlines sell "premium coach" seats that are in the main cabin, wider and with more legroom but not costing too much more than a coach seat. However, I think you'll always find there are a few unreasonable people who are too big to sit in a coach seat, refuse to pay for "premium coach" and insist on stealing part of their neighbor's seat. Enforcing rules disallowing such poaching against insistent people is likely to be a PR nightmare. I can't wait until they come out with the forcefield that keeps them off of my seat.
.

It seems that most people here do not travel much.

"Premium economy" in the US is more legroom, no difference whatsoever in seat width. I do not know if any airline apart from United has this.

First Class domestic is the only choice for wider seats. Price usually from double to 5 times coach.

"Premium economy" in Virgin and BA are wider and more comfortable seats, similar to First Class seats on US domestic flights. I do not know of any other international airline to offer them. But on these two airlines, they are indeed a reasonable choice, as long as you are travelling from US to London.

"Business class," as far as US is concerned, applies to overseas flights only, and is out of reach of most people on this forum, unless an upgrade is bought for any available seats when departing on some US carriers. Otherwise, you can get up to 10 coach seats for the price of one business ($5-$10K to Europe). First Class international is great (almost real bed), but even more expensive.

"Business class" within Europe is a joke, but would also be OK for obese people, as it guarantees that there will be no one sitting in the middles seat (the seats are otherwise regular coach seats).

[OWC Jamie]

actually dimensional weight is charging for volume

[Carnos Jax]

Right, in other words, it accounts for the oversize nature of an item, instead of basing the fare strictly on weight.

[guitarist]

Blankity Blank wrote:
Here's a wacky idea. How about the airlines cutting out the pit one against the other BS and stop trying to pack people onto flights like fraking sardines to maximize profits? You know seats that are actually comfortable even if you can't pay some wildly jacked up fare just to get a decent seat and a complimentary warm damp towel?

I know. Crazy talk. :booty:

Crazy! Probably won't work because consumers are too cheap-ass, and value bargains over quality or comfort.

(which unites a lot of macresource forum members, as a way of life)

In its earlier incarnation, air travel was sort of considered luxurious and special. And primarily affluent jet-setters could do it regularly. The sardine era came with competition and the race to the bottom cost cutting, as you observed. Not an easy business to compete in, the airline industry.

Re: charging realistic fares based on how much space a fat person's ass takes up, long overdue.

I assumed truly obese travelers had been buying a pair of seats for quite some time now. I imagine many voluntarily do (and i mean morbidly obese individuals who wouldn't reasonably fit in one seat in the first place) it's those 'close calls' i wonder about, travelers who are close to the line, could go either way.

We have a LOT of obesity. Even a (pre-obese America) average-sized person can't fit comfortably in what airlines consider a normal-sized seat in coach. Jumbo-sized folks do need two seats.

But the idea of really fat people expecting price parity while invading the space of normal-weight passengers seated beside them is unrealistic and unwelcome. Being obese has consequences, this is a trivial one.

[Article Accelerator]

davester wrote:
The "pay by weight" idea is simply not doable and doesn't address the problem. After all, the weight of a human's excess body mass is nothing compared to the weight of the airplane.

http://www.cbc.ca/canada/story/2006/04/1...60411.html

The problem is with people who occupy more than one seat, making it impossible for the airlines to sell that seat without torturing its occupant. It's really a "pay by seat" issue.

I think it's a fairness issue. I don't think a person weighing 125 lbs and bringing 75 lbs of luggage should pay the same as one weighing 275 lbs with 75 lbs of luggage.

[Article Accelerator]

billb wrote:
A fat ass gauge isn't too hard to make.

I agree.

[guitarist]

Article Accelerator wrote:
[quote=davester]
The "pay by weight" idea is simply not doable and doesn't address the problem. After all, the weight of a human's excess body mass is nothing compared to the weight of the airplane.

http://www.cbc.ca/canada/story/2006/04/1...60411.html

The problem is with people who occupy more than one seat, making it impossible for the airlines to sell that seat without torturing its occupant. It's really a "pay by seat" issue.

I think it's a fairness issue. I don't think a person weighing 125 lbs and bringing 75 lbs of luggage should pay the same as one weighing 275 lbs with 75 lbs of luggage.
With regards to fellow passengers, this distinction is meaningless. We don't try to share an armrest with someone's luggage. But a passenger's fat ass it taking up all of their seat, and half of mine, they should be required to buy two seats. Screw their luggage. You assume really fat people can bargain their way in by saying their luggage weighs less? Or skinny people can bring on extra bags? This is nonsense.

[Article Accelerator]

No, I'm not referring to that at all. I'm talking about charging per unit of weight--body, luggage, it should all be treated the same.

Seating is another issue.

[guitarist]

I thought the issue was " you must buy two seats if you don't fit into one.