Re: Flying while fat
- From: Rita <rtkngkd@xxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Sun, 21 Feb 2010 08:31:09 -0800
On Sat, 20 Feb 2010 10:06:29 -0800 (PST), Nantz <thenantz@xxxxxxxxx>
wrote:
When Kevin Smith was kicked off a Southwest flight for being "too
wide" a lot of ideas came out as to handling the situation. After
hearing all of them I favor the one which goes with poundage. I don't
know what it cost in fuel per pound but I'll bet if every passenger
had 150 lbs of bricks in their luggage the airline might come out
behind in fuel cost. Just a guess.
The avg seat width is 17 to 18 inches. I doubt that a 300 pounder
would fit comfortably in that space. Frankly, I'm small enough to
easily fit between the arms but even I wish the seats were wider. (and
softer)
I've been lucky in that I never had to sit next to a wide seat invader
or a screaming brat but I did sit directly behind a guy who smelled
like he drank 2 liters of whiskey the night before. Had he been behind
me or next to me I would have asked to be reseated.
Why are the thin passengers being forced to pay the extra fuel cost
for the fat ones? That hardly seems fair to me. Cost per pound is cost
per pound whether it's luggage or girth.
With so many people being obese now maybe it's time to widen the coach
seats.
Nantz
I make an effort to always book an aisle seat -- at least there is no
one pressing on me from one direction. I was very glad I did that and
paid just a bit more to get one on Jet Blue last June because I ended
up with a very large woman on one side. But not on both sides of me
on a cross-country flight.
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: Flying while fat
- From: Nantz
- Re: Flying while fat
- References:
- Flying while fat
- From: Nantz
- Flying while fat
- Prev by Date: Re: Deep Sea Oddities from the Census of Marine Life - Slide 1 of 29
- Next by Date: Re: Flying while fat
- Previous by thread: Re: Flying while fat
- Next by thread: Re: Flying while fat
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|