chickentikka Posted December 9, 2007 Report Share Posted December 9, 2007 Should we carry on with the current rules and have a fixed additional baggage allowance or have a total travelling weight per passenger. Last time I travelled I was sat next to a very overweight passenger who had to pull up the seat bar to get comfortable. I was forced to spend the flight in half a seat pushed up by the fat gut of my fellow traveller. I asked the hostess to be moved as I actually didn't even have the seat I had paid for but the flight was full I was basically told to suffer as the person next to me was really nasty and a 'fat rights type' and I was expected to be squashed as their bulk took up at least one and a half seats, she was mouthy enough about her rights but didn't care about mine. Surely she should have paid for 2 seats if that's what was comfortable. Planes are all about space and weight so why not book the space and weight you need and pay accordingly. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alison Posted December 9, 2007 Report Share Posted December 9, 2007 Should we ....... have a total travelling weight per passenger. Wish I had a quid for every time I've written to the airlines asking for this very thing. It's just plain common sense, isn't it? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
akitas Posted December 9, 2007 Report Share Posted December 9, 2007 (edited) So when I am traveling with kids under the ago of 2 I don't need to pay at all, as they don't get a seat???? Would be lovely. Just too bad I always had to pay and had them on my lap. What about people with long legs, pushing their leg underneath the seat in front and taking away that space for the person in front of them.... I think in general airlines should allow more space per passnger, so we can all sit comfortably, but then it would be more expensive Edited December 9, 2007 by akitas Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chickentikka Posted December 9, 2007 Author Report Share Posted December 9, 2007 Wish I had a quid for every time I've written to the airlines asking for this very thing. It's just plain common sense, isn't it? Nope according to my travelling neighbour, if you are rather large you 'deserve a seat and a half' (sod the poor b*gger sat next to you). Taking account all baggage allowances my travel was at least 10 stone less than my neighbour but she was adamant that it was her right to flob all over my seat. I think that is what wound me up most - she kept banging on about her rights and as soon as I mentioned me being squished, I was shrilly told to shut up as she needed the room D.I.E.T Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alison Posted December 9, 2007 Report Share Posted December 9, 2007 So when I am traveling with kids under the ago of 2 I don't need to pay at all, as they don't get a seat???? Would be lovely.Just too bad I always had to pay and had them on my lap. No, your kids would pay and get a seat (well you'd pay for them, obviously ) Little 2 year old bods don't weigh much so their baggage allowance would be huge. You'd then naturally pack anything over your own baggage allowance in their cases. Not sure if I've put this particularly well, sorry. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
akitas Posted December 10, 2007 Report Share Posted December 10, 2007 But the point is, I have to pay for a seat I am never getting with my under 2 year old. And to be honest, it is not particular safe in case anything happens. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jemimap Posted December 10, 2007 Report Share Posted December 10, 2007 I completely agree Murtle Akitas, do you ahve to pay the same amount as for yourself? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cycas Posted December 10, 2007 Report Share Posted December 10, 2007 Only thing about that is with fat passengers, it's not so much weight as volume. Muscly people can be absurdly heavy but not get in anyone's way, whereas fat isn't so heavy but fills up a lot of space... Then there's luggage that's strange shapes. Big controversy down here just now because BA have banned people from having surfboards in their luggage. Surfboards aren't heavy, but they are large and fairly easily damaged. But if you ban them that kind of removes the reason that many people wanted to fly to Cornwall anyway... I think I agree with the 'more space for everyone' idea. I know that airlines try to cut things down and down to bring the prices ever lower, but surely there comes a point when it's basically a flying cattle-truck? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ranirottie Posted December 10, 2007 Report Share Posted December 10, 2007 When Jazz and I flew to Scotland recently to stay with Fiona we both had to take wheelchairs but we weren't charged for them,and we had special roomy seats right at the front so we had no call for complaint at all, but I do disagree with having to pay for children who do not have a seat. I think a token fare would be more acceptable if the child is on a parent's lap.As for fat people,if they need more than one seat then they should pay for two for their own comfort.If planes are full and someone has to have the seat next to them then it can't be comfortable for either one. x Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blackmagic Posted December 10, 2007 Report Share Posted December 10, 2007 what would happen if two fat people were sitting next to each other? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
boosboss Posted December 10, 2007 Report Share Posted December 10, 2007 what would happen if two fat people were sitting next to each other? Perhaps they could buy a seat and a half each Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alison Posted December 10, 2007 Report Share Posted December 10, 2007 Perhaps they could buy a seat and a half each It sounds like a crazy idea but given some thought as to how it could be implemented, this might just work. Some food for thought here, particularly amongst the readers' comments. Overweight Man Sues Air France. Regarding Ursula's comments about children sitting on parents laps, I completely agree: if a seat is reserved for a child and paid for then the child should be entitled to occupy it. I haven't got kids but when I travel by air, everyone is allocated a seat (either in advance or at check-in with their boarding pass) so I don't understand how children are getting on the plane without having a seat The only time I've ever seen a child without their own seat was the other week when a lady had a tiny baby on her lap. As I say, I haven't got kids of my own so I'm probably ignorant of the facts. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
murtle Posted December 10, 2007 Report Share Posted December 10, 2007 I completely agree Murtle Akitas, do you ahve to pay the same amount as for yourself? Are we using telepathy or am I loosing my mind Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jemimap Posted December 11, 2007 Report Share Posted December 11, 2007 Are we using telepathy or am I loosing my mind Ooops I meant Chickentikka, sorry Murtle Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cycas Posted December 12, 2007 Report Share Posted December 12, 2007 (edited) I am looking after an airline booking system just now, and it has sparked these thoughts: - booking systems aren't always clever enough to make sure that people sit together. So if you had a seat reserved for a baby, you might end up with it in a different row to the mum: clearly that's not going to work. I appreciate that the booking system should be that clever. But depending on the airline, it might not be. Actually, I was on a plane this year where a young family who were supposed to be all booked to sit in a group (with small children who did have seats of their own) had been split up by the software. They got round it by getting people to volunteer to move, which delayed the takeoff a bit. Not too bad with one family, but what if there had been several families with the same problem? That would have started to delay other flights, and it would all have got a bit messy. - if you don't force people quite clearly to book children in in their own right, I'd have thought there was a risk that people would just turn up with babies and expect to be able to travel with them (because if you don't pay for them, and they don't get a seat, why would you need to book?) . Which is fine if it's only one or 2, but if by some freak you had 20 show for the same plane, it would be a bit of a health and safety nightmare if anything untoward happened. This is why many airlines are having to sort out special booking for wheelchair passengers, for example. It's the whole 'what if we have to evacuate them and by some coincidence half the plane is full of people who can't walk?' thing. - the fare and booking doesn't just pay for the seat. It pays for making sure everyone gets on and off and looking after them in between, and making sure that everything is planned as far as possible for emergencies. Babies may not need seats, but carrying extra people, even if they are sitting on a lap, isn't something that can be done at no cost, particularly if it's a low-cost airline where everything that can be is cut to the bone to keep the prices competitive. Re the fat people thing, again you have the problem of booking seats that are in indivisible pairs. I can just see a fat person (already indignant from having had to check the 'I am a Fat Person' box on the online checkin) coming on board and finding that his 2 seats have accidentally been redistributed to opposite ends of the plane... Edited December 12, 2007 by cycas Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts