| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
crazylemongirl
Joined: 23 Mar 2003
Location: almost there...
|
 Posted: Wed Feb 09, 2005 2:30 am Post subject: |
 |
|
I got a $200NZ overcharge after being overweight on Air New Zealand from auckland to incheon. They only allow 20 and I had 30. The airline policy was that they start charging from 25. So at 40 bucks a kilo I learnt an expensive lesson. Post is cheaper, at just 10kg. If you think you are going to be overweight have a bag of 'postable stuff.' So that you can have some said it snail mail.
Also in the past I've explained my situation to the airline before hand (thai, singapore) that I'm going to a place I can't buy clothes, shoes etc. And they've bumped up my luggage allowance. Air New Zealand doesn't do this.
Finally if you have a frequent flyer card some of them give you a higher luggage allowance. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
teachingld2004
Joined: 29 Mar 2004
|
| Posted: Wed Feb 09, 2005 6:40 am Post subject: how many pounds |
|
|
| Make sure you take 2 suitcases. Not sure of the pounds, but I do know that if one bag is overweight and one bag is underweight, make them equal, cause you will get charged extra if the bag is over weight. Also you are allowed a carry on, so put the heavest stuff in that. ANd I am almost sure you can have a back pack too. Your best bet is to call the airline. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
panthermodern
Joined: 08 Feb 2003
Location: Taxronto
|
| Posted: Wed Feb 09, 2005 10:12 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: |
| Years of packing have taught me a few things. Go get some garbage bags and elastic bands. Pack your heavy sweaters and stuff into the garbage bags then use a vacuum cleaner to suck the air out and close the bag with the elastic band. It will compress stuff and save you a ton of space. |
You are an evil genius ...
| Quote: |
| What about weighing the passanger AND the luggage with a maximum combined weight? Anyone agree/disagree? |
Yes, I do. disagree
If weight were passenger + luggage = X
Then everyone would have a combined ( passanger + luggage) weight of X.
The static weight of a plane makes the passenger / luggage weight question moot.
The restrictions on luggage weight is a baggage handling problem and concern rather then flight physics and costs.
747-400 - Standard operating empty with PW-4056s 180,985kg
747-400 - Flightcrew of two. Typical three class seating for 416 (23 first, 78 business and 315 economy class pax). Cargo hold 170.5m3 (6025cuft) or 151m3 (5332cuft).
747-400 Domestic - Two class seating for 568 (24 first and 544 economy).
747-400 Combi - Typical arrangement for six or seven pallets and 266 three class passengers.
747-400ER - Same as -400, but cargo hold 158.6m3 (5599cuft) or 137m3 (4837cuft).
747-400F - 30 pallets on the main deck and 32 LD1 containers in the lower hold.
The plane with has weight of 180 985 kg
416 people with a combined total of 500 Kg of weight / luggage
Equals 1.15 % of the mass of the plane.
416 x 500 = 208000
208000 / 180 985 = 1.14926651
If they have a combined total of 400 kg
416x400 = .919413211
If total of 100 kg.
416x100 / 180 985 = .2298853303
People are hardly (give or take) 1% of the weight of the plane if they each weigh 400 kg (with luggage).
The people weight nothing compared to the hull.
The fuel cost is more effected by weather.
The cost is in the moving the bags.
Fat people carring less luggage are cheaper to move for A to B then skinny people with tonnes of bags. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
diver
Joined: 16 Jun 2003
|
| Posted: Fri Feb 11, 2005 5:45 am Post subject: |
|
|
| panthermodern wrote: |
What about weighing the passanger AND the luggage with a maximum combined weight? Anyone agree/disagree
Yes, I do. disagree |
I tend to disagree with that kind of policy myself, but it is an issue that has come up. The weight of luggage and passengers is an issue of flight safety and, despite your math, a fuel efficiency issue.
Growing waistlines in the US are causing the airlines extra in terms of fuel bills. The argument that slim people make is that they pay the same amount for a ticket, but use less fuel. They should be allowed to make up the difference in luggae.
Person A @ 70kg + luggage @ 30kg = 100kg
Person B @ 110kg + luggaeg @ 30kg = 140kg
Person A feels that since he/she is paying the same amount as person B, they should be allowed to use up the same amount of resources (fuel) as Person B.
Weight does affect fuel. Weight does affect safety (obviously). Passenger weight is a concern to the FAA.
| US DOT wrote: |
Last week, the Department of Transportation estimated that the increasing weight of Americans increased airlines' fuel cost $275
million in a single year and released 3.8 million extra tons of carbon dioxide into the air burning it. |
See:
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/831275/posts
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2003/05/02/health/main552008.shtml
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/6409403/
http://www.fedsmith.com/articles/articles.showarticle.db.php?intArticleID=89
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,137636,00.html
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/BBWNorthwest/message/22738
http://www.swaviator.com/html/issueMJ03/Hangar5603.html |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
phaedrus
Joined: 13 Nov 2003
Location: I'm comin' to get ya.
|
| Posted: Fri Feb 11, 2005 6:01 am Post subject: |
|
|
| panthermodern wrote: |
The plane with has weight of 180 985 kg
416 people with a combined total of 500 Kg of weight / luggage
Equals 1.15 % of the mass of the plane.
416 x 500 = 208000
208000 / 180 985 = 1.14926651
If they have a combined total of 400 kg
416x400 = .919413211
If total of 100 kg.
416x100 / 180 985 = .2298853303
People are hardly (give or take) 1% of the weight of the plane if they each weigh 400 kg (with luggage).
|
I believe it would be 115%, 91% and 22%. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
kangnamdragon
Joined: 17 Jan 2003
Location: Kangnam, Seoul, Korea
|
| Posted: Fri Feb 11, 2005 7:19 am Post subject: |
|
|
Years of living here have taught me:
1. Call the airline to check the weight limit on bags. The rules often change.
2. Don't bring cheap, bulky stuff which you can buy here. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
diver
Joined: 16 Jun 2003
|
| Posted: Fri Feb 11, 2005 8:00 pm Post subject: |
|
|
A good rule of thumb is not to bring this much...
 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
panthermodern
Joined: 08 Feb 2003
Location: Taxronto
|
| Posted: Tue Feb 15, 2005 9:56 am Post subject: |
|
|
babies should count as carry on luggage or banned.
purse + diaper bag + carry on + baby = a lot of stuff I don't get to bring on board PLUS my "carry on" dose not cry and poop everywhere ...
My plan.
Reduce ticket prices by a preportional amount.
No luggage, no carry on.
Pay for all luggage (including carry on) by the kg.
Maybe 1 kg = $5.00
BEST PLAN:
Distance x Weight x Mystery Number.
Mystery Number x Cost x 2
Pre pay your weight and luggage ...
and
No shitty meals ...
No Babies ... OR Babies count as luggage
No fat assed people who can't sit in a regular chair ...
My S.O. and I have gotten into the habit of hitting subways at the airport ... or packing a pick nick lunch ... |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
anomi
Joined: 16 Oct 2003
|
| Posted: Tue Feb 15, 2005 6:00 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| crazylemongirl wrote: |
I got a $200NZ overcharge after being overweight on Air New Zealand from auckland to incheon. They only allow 20 and I had 30. The airline policy was that they start charging from 25. So at 40 bucks a kilo I learnt an expensive lesson. Post is cheaper, at just 10kg. If you think you are going to be overweight have a bag of 'postable stuff.' So that you can have some said it snail mail.
Also in the past I've explained my situation to the airline before hand (thai, singapore) that I'm going to a place I can't buy clothes, shoes etc. And they've bumped up my luggage allowance. Air New Zealand doesn't do this. |
AirNZ are total bastards about luggage. I always say "Look at that guy over there, he must weigh twice as much as me" and they're never impressed enough to let my measly 27kg through without charging me $80. My mate just went away and put on all his shirts, pants and jackets, re-presented himself and they let him through ....... they are total bastards. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
tzechuk
Joined: 20 Dec 2004
|
| Posted: Tue Feb 15, 2005 7:07 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| panthermodern wrote: |
babies should count as carry on luggage or banned.
purse + diaper bag + carry on + baby = a lot of stuff I don't get to bring on board PLUS my "carry on" dose not cry and poop everywhere ...
No Luggage, no carry on.
Pay for all luggage (including carry on) by the kg.
Maybe 1 kg = $5.00
BEST PLAN:
Distance x Weight x Mystery Number.
Mystery Number x Cost x 2
Pre pay your weight and luggage ...
and
No *beep* meals ...
No Babies ... OR Babies count as luggage
No fat assed people who can't sit in a regular chair ...
My S.O. and I have gotten into the habit of hitting subways at the airport ... or packing a pick nick lunch ... |
All babies are now charged 10% by all airlines. This is not 10% of the discounted price either, this is 10% of the published, original price.
My baby, aged 3 months, will have to pay 200,000 won to fly to Hong Kong whilst I pay 400,000.
No babies? They make money out of babies! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
peppergirl
Joined: 07 Dec 2003
|
| Posted: Tue Feb 15, 2005 9:06 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| panthermodern wrote: |
Reduce ticket prices by a preportional amount.
No luggage, no carry on.
Pay for all luggage (including carry on) by the kg.
Maybe 1 kg = $5.00
BEST PLAN:
Distance x Weight x Mystery Number.
Mystery Number x Cost x 2
Pre pay your weight and luggage ...
and
No *beep* meals ...
No Babies ... OR Babies count as luggage
No fat assed people who can't sit in a regular chair ...
My S.O. and I have gotten into the habit of hitting subways at the airport ... or packing a pick nick lunch ... |
Well, the cheap airlines in Europe (Ryanair etc) are doing almost exactly what you're suggesting (not the baby thing though, and tzechuk is right, you do have to pay 10% for infants up to 2 yrs old these days, and 75% for 2-12 year olds).
Those cheap airlines only let you bring a small amount of luggage, I think 10 kg or so, no meals on board (but you can buy drinks/sandwiches), no meal coupons or hotel stays if the flight gets cancelled etc.
Those flights are really successful (and really cheap!).
About the fat people: I thought some airlines make people who can't fit into 1 seat pay for 2.. not too sure if this is true or just a rumour, but sounds like a very good idea to me! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
anomi
Joined: 16 Oct 2003
|
| Posted: Wed Feb 16, 2005 12:29 am Post subject: |
|
|
You know what else makes Air NZ bastards? Rhetorical question. Recently a wheelchair-bound tourist holidayed in NZ. He had motor neurone disease and still managed to have a great trip with whale watching etc, and people on the tours helped him on and off the boats, buses, trains etc. Anyway he fronts up to his flight back home and the AirNZ staff won't help him on the plane. They aren't allowed to lift passengers on and off because of occupational health and safety issues. So the guy has to get his nurse to fly from England to lift him onto the plane and then fly her home again, at his insurance company's expense at least.
totally off the topic of course but.......don't you think that's WRONG???
http://www.nzherald.co.nz/index.cfm?ObjectID=10010761 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
peemil
Joined: 09 Feb 2003
Location: Koowoompa
|
| Posted: Wed Feb 16, 2005 2:51 am Post subject: |
|
|
Apparently if your Canadian you can bring the kitchen sink and no one will complain...
If you head to Australia it's got to be 20kg or less otherwise the Unions kick up a stink. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
