[ rss / options / help ]
post ]
[ b / iq / g / zoo ] [ e / news / lab ] [ v / nom / pol / eco / emo / 101 / shed ]
[ art / A / beat / boo / com / fat / job / lit / map / mph / poof / £$€¥ / spo / uhu / uni / x / y ] [ * | sfw | o ]
logo
BADASSES

Return ]

Posting mode: Reply
Reply ]
Subject   (reply to 63191)
Message
File  []
close
13139846-6996559-Passengers_scrambled_to_evacuate_.jpg
631916319163191
>> No. 63191 Are Moaty
6th May 2019
Monday 2:05 pm
63191 spacer
>Overweight survivor of Russian plane inferno 'blocked others from escaping' as hero stewardess pushed people out of jet which bounced down runway before bursting into flames, killing 41 people

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-6996559/Heroic-stewardess-pushed-passengers-safety-reveals-terror-Russian-plane-crash.html

Imagine being unable to escape from a burning plane all because you're trapped behind some fatty blocking the aisle.
Expand all images.
>> No. 63193 Anonymous
6th May 2019
Monday 6:39 pm
63193 spacer
Airlines have all been looking for an excuse to weigh passengers like they do baggage for decades, as they can get a much more optimal trim, meaning the plane has better fuel economy, if they have that data and/or can load the heavier ones in specific areas of the plane.

You may have noticed on flight that isn't full, everyone is seated in a certain section, often in the middle nearer the centre of gravity, or near the back on a front-heavy plane, etc. Most airlines use a notional weight for men, women, and children (88/75/35 kg respectively, usually) and will trim with that average data, but obviously that's very rough estimates - with accurate passenger weight data, they could do this sort of optimisation on any flight, but even just knowing you have a 400 pounder in the front row could be a meaningful trim adjustment and potentially save a couple of tonnes of fuel over the course of a flight.

It's entirely possible this incident could be used as a roundabout excuse to start making you stand on the scales when you check in for a flight. It's for safety!
>> No. 63194 Moralfag
6th May 2019
Monday 7:05 pm
63194 spacer
>>63193
>It's for safety!
I don't feel safe if my hands haven't touched someone's face, so for everyone's safety I'm going to punch the fucking gate steward's face in if they try and charge me £70 to put an international standard cabin size bag in the fucking hold again.
>> No. 63195 Anonymous
6th May 2019
Monday 7:25 pm
63195 spacer
>>63194

Ryanair?
>> No. 63196 Auntiefucker
6th May 2019
Monday 9:43 pm
63196 spacer

0_12444414-6937399-image-m-4_1555606838587.jpg
631966319663196
>>63193
Reminded me of this:
https://www.stokesentinel.co.uk/news/stoke-on-trent-news/hilarious-photo-shows-eddie-hall-2784098
>> No. 63197 YubYub
6th May 2019
Monday 9:48 pm
63197 spacer
>>63196
If everyone on this website is from Stoke or Ossett why do you go to the pub in London? I'm so confused.
>> No. 63198 Billbob
6th May 2019
Monday 9:50 pm
63198 spacer
>>63193

>meaning the plane has better fuel economy

OR IN OTHER WORDS, BETTER FOR THE ENVIRONMENT, RIGHT? IT'S A CLIMATE EMERGENCY. YOU HEARD ARE GRETA. WE'VE GOT TO DO SOMETHING NOW, AND I THINK PART OF THAT HAS TO BE BANNING FATTIES FROM PLANES.

IN FACT LET'S GO A STEP FURTHER AND BAN THEM FROM ALL PUBLIC TRANSPORT. BEING FAT MEANS YOU HAVE A HIGHER CARBON FOOTPRINT IN THE FIRST PLACE. THEY NEED THE EXERCISE.
>> No. 63199 Searchfag
6th May 2019
Monday 10:11 pm
63199 spacer
>>63198

>OR IN OTHER WORDS, BETTER FOR THE ENVIRONMENT, RIGHT?

Basically, yes, it's less fuel burned.

>AND I THINK PART OF THAT HAS TO BE BANNING FATTIES FROM PLANES.

Unfortunately, it doesn't really work like that - the plane will only really burn more fuel carrying the fatty if the fatty is not properly accounted for in the setting of the aircraft - even the world's fattest man is negligible when it comes to extra weight for the plane to physically move, but his position on the plane will have drastic aerodynamic effects if the plane is not properly configured for him. A row full of tiny, super light ballerinas on the back row would have a similar but opposite effect on the flight characteristics - if not dialled in, their lack of weight would still cause extra fuel burn.

The only true solution is to weigh each passenger like cattle. I'm sure that would still cause plenty of people to lose weight.

all this has got me thinking though - I wonder if when a passenger needs the seatbelt extender, the crew then tell the captain where they're sat so they can actually add extra weight to their calculations? I'll have to ask.
>> No. 63200 Crabkiller
6th May 2019
Monday 11:54 pm
63200 spacer
Airlines started charging more for flights to Polynesia on the grounds that 90% of them are obese and therefore seriously messed with their cost to profit ratio. I think that's fair.

I feel like airlines should go on 'total weight' so as a lighter passenger I should be allowed to carry more. And possibly sell some of my weight credits to more 'big boned' people, after all at the moment my same price ticket is paying for them to fly for every kg they are over 88 and I'm under.
>> No. 63201 Anonymous
7th May 2019
Tuesday 12:34 am
63201 spacer
>>63200
>after all at the moment my same price ticket is paying for them to fly for every kg they are over 88 and I'm under.
This. Also they should charge brown people more because they smell of curry and inconvenience us normal people.
>> No. 63202 Moralfag
7th May 2019
Tuesday 12:35 am
63202 spacer
>>63199

Lardarse passengers do chip away at the MTOW, especially on smaller aircraft. It's not unheard of for passengers or cargo to get bumped because the aircraft is overweight.
>> No. 63203 Anonymous
7th May 2019
Tuesday 12:41 am
63203 spacer
>>63202
>because the aircraft is overweight
Maybe it should get off its arse and do some work instead of just sitting on the tarmac like a lazy fucker.
>> No. 63204 R4GE
7th May 2019
Tuesday 12:44 am
63204 spacer

29n8kjlgh2.jpg
632046320463204
>>63203

STOP FUSELAGE SHAMING ME. I AM A BIG BEAUTIFUL AIRCRAFT.
>> No. 63205 YubYub
7th May 2019
Tuesday 7:29 am
63205 spacer
>>63204
What surprises me is that you can do that to a plane and still fly it OK, but stick slightly different engines on a 737 and ram it repeatedly into the ground with some crappy assistance software.
>> No. 63206 Moralfag
7th May 2019
Tuesday 7:36 am
63206 spacer
>>63202

I suppose you're right, I'm only really well versed in larger jets with underloads in excess of a few ton. You could probably tip a dash 8 on its arse if you had enough Americans in the back.
>> No. 63207 Ambulancelad
7th May 2019
Tuesday 7:39 am
63207 spacer
>>63206
You can do a loop in a Dash 8, so it'll probably be fine.
>> No. 63208 Samefag
7th May 2019
Tuesday 7:41 am
63208 spacer
>>63204
Don't got there, lad. BBA porn is a thing.
>> No. 63209 Paedofag
7th May 2019
Tuesday 7:47 am
63209 spacer
>>63207

Fair, but they aren't as stable on the ground. Don't they have a pin you have to lock on to the aft when it's parked because they're so prone to tipping? Or is that the AT7? I can't remember, I don't see many of either.
>> No. 63210 YubYub
7th May 2019
Tuesday 8:37 am
63210 spacer
>>63205

It's like one is a competent aircraft manufacturer who took time and effort, and the other one did rush job to try keep up that was purposely built to try take advantage of a technicality and should have never seen the air apart from corruption and bland favoritism because they are an American company.

America has a long proud history of choosing its aircraft based on corruption, tragic as it is, it is good it came back to bite them in the arse. If they could justify banning Airbuses from their sky they would.
>> No. 63211 Auntiefucker
7th May 2019
Tuesday 10:46 am
63211 spacer
>>63210
The lack of Airbus in the US is basically peak NIH.
>> No. 63212 Ambulancelad
7th May 2019
Tuesday 12:12 pm
63212 spacer

Boeing_747-400LCF_Dreamlifter.jpg
632126321263212
>>63208

BEAUTY AT ANY SIZE.
>> No. 63213 Auntiefucker
7th May 2019
Tuesday 12:22 pm
63213 spacer
>>63212
You won't be saying that when you're 35 and your landing gears are giving way.

>>63211
What's NIH?
>> No. 63214 Are Moaty
7th May 2019
Tuesday 12:30 pm
63214 spacer
>>63213

Not Invented Here.
>> No. 63215 Auntiefucker
7th May 2019
Tuesday 1:08 pm
63215 spacer

Dash_8_gear.jpg
632156321563215
>>63209

The landing gear is notoriously shit.
>> No. 63216 Anonymous
7th May 2019
Tuesday 1:11 pm
63216 spacer

Aircraft_spotters_at_Danish_Airshow_2014-06-22_cro.jpg
632166321663216
Why doesn't it surprise me that this place is full of plane spotters?
>> No. 63217 YubYub
7th May 2019
Tuesday 1:45 pm
63217 spacer
>>63216

I don't like planes, I just have to work with them now.

Dreamliners are quite nice, mind.
>> No. 63218 Crabkiller
7th May 2019
Tuesday 3:36 pm
63218 spacer
>>63217
Replace planes with blacks and that'd make you a racist.
>> No. 63219 Samefag
7th May 2019
Tuesday 6:30 pm
63219 spacer
>>63216

My interest is far more based on a fascination with the economics then anything, the fact that the kind of planes you are most familiar with costs 9 figures each never mind the fuel and maintenance, and yet they can supply flights that the average person can afford is staggering to me.
>> No. 63220 YubYub
7th May 2019
Tuesday 6:51 pm
63220 spacer
>>63219

That's very true, I'd never actually thought about it like that.

On top of the 200 odd million quid jets I wander on and off of, I must see a few million quid's worth of jet fuel every day even in my very small airport - yet also see passengers who paid fifty quid for a seat. It's incredible, really. I suspect my grandkids, if I ever have them, will not believe for a second the amount of money we chuck about right now.
>> No. 63221 Auntiefucker
7th May 2019
Tuesday 7:30 pm
63221 spacer
>>63219
You are Sam from Wendover and I claim my £5. Or a free year of whatever you're selling this month.
>> No. 63222 R4GE
7th May 2019
Tuesday 8:46 pm
63222 spacer
>>63221
HE'S FROM OSSETT, BECAUSE EVERYONE IS FROM OSSETT.
>> No. 63223 Moralfag
7th May 2019
Tuesday 8:52 pm
63223 spacer
>>63222
I genuinely know of someone moving from Ossett to Flockton because there's too many non-white faces in Ossett. That's 98% white British Ossett.
>> No. 63224 Anonymous
7th May 2019
Tuesday 10:21 pm
63224 spacer
>>63221

Afraid not. Tell me about this Sam though. Sounds like a character.
>> No. 63225 Are Moaty
8th May 2019
Wednesday 1:24 pm
63225 spacer
>>63223

you'd have thought he wants to get further away from huddersfield/dewsbury if it's the browns he hates. is he dense?

tell him he wants to move to wakey. we don't have many of them here at all, but all the shops sell tyskie.

Return ]
whiteline

Delete Post []
Password