Bandit12 Posted September 4, 2014 Share Posted September 4, 2014 By the way that's only one of two things I've learned during the past 50 years of married life !Bob Dare we ask what the second thing is? Hoping to shortcut my learning and maybe progress to three things before I reach 50 years of wedded bliss! 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rankamateur Posted September 5, 2014 Share Posted September 5, 2014 I learned something important just before I got married. Begin as you intend to continue. Sounds simple enough but it takes some will power at times. So don't remember your anniversaries when you first get married, forget them right from the beginning, that way it comes as no surprise down the track, everyone knows what to expect. 1 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
biggles Posted September 5, 2014 Share Posted September 5, 2014 Dare we ask what the second thing is? Hoping to shortcut my learning and maybe progress to three things before I reach 50 years of wedded bliss! Who said anything about " wedded bliss " . Anyway, I'm not about to divulge something that took me 49 years to learn, so unless I have a change of heart you'll just have to do it cold turkey ...... unless of course you have something to trade ! Bob Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
biggles Posted September 5, 2014 Share Posted September 5, 2014 I learned something important just before I got married. Begin as you intend to continue. Sounds simple enough but it takes some will power at times. So don't remember your anniversaries when you first get married, forget them right from the beginning, that way it comes as no surprise down the track, everyone knows what to expect. Yeah that's right Steve .... Do it right from the start or you're rxxted . Other things include birthdays , forgetting to do the shopping is also a good one . I haven't been asked to shop for 49 years now . I've basically gotten away with murder, but as hard as it is , it's really for her benefit, sort of helps her self esteem . Mum always said " Bob sometimes you've gotta be cruel to be kind " . I've never forgotten that. Bob Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guernsey Posted September 5, 2014 Share Posted September 5, 2014 I think that I have a problem not remembering what I have forgotten. Alan. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guernsey Posted September 5, 2014 Share Posted September 5, 2014 Okey ewes blokes! I have corrected my cruddy post so it makes sense. It made very good sense, a sense of humour. Alan. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bruce Tuncks Posted September 5, 2014 Share Posted September 5, 2014 I reckon Ozzie has right on his side. You should stand on the scales with your luggage, and pay the excess if the total goes over. That is how aeroplanes operate, and yet we have been influenced by politically correct committees of greenie vegetarian fat lady sociologists so that we ignore common sense and we charge a light person excess baggage and subsidise obese people. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dazza 38 Posted September 5, 2014 Share Posted September 5, 2014 Yup, Air Canada are really anal. We were ok in Toronto back in May when we were on a holiday. My weight is 97 kg (0n a good day) and the missus weight 55 kg dripping wet. We knew how anal they were and my bag was 19 kg and old loves was 21 kg. So we were both under the 23 kg baggage limit. But ahead of us, two light peeps had to remove baggage. They were just over in baggage but well under the nominal 87 kg body weight. Stupid. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest ozzie Posted September 5, 2014 Share Posted September 5, 2014 Next time i go to Melbourne I'm going by overnight train. Less drama. By the time i get out of the Valley to the airport and go through the security crap get on the plane get to the other end then get to the CBD I'm too worn out. By train I have a good meal, a couple of drinks a good nights sleep and arrive pretty fresh in the CBD. No baggage problems. Air travel is so over rated. The fares are on par to when you add up cab fares or airport parking. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Marty_d Posted September 5, 2014 Share Posted September 5, 2014 Who said anything about " wedded bliss " . Anyway, I'm not about to divulge something that took me 49 years to learn, so unless I have a change of heart you'll just have to do it cold turkey ...... unless of course you have something to trade !Bob "Happy wife, happy life." That's it. All you need to know. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Old Koreelah Posted September 5, 2014 Author Share Posted September 5, 2014 ...politically correct committees of greenie vegetarian fat lady sociologists so that we ignore common sense and we charge a light person excess baggage and subsidise obese people. Hold your horses there Bruce! As a male anorexic greenie vegetarian working hard to promote common sense I resemble that remark. I would love to pay by weight, especially having twice been sandwiched beside enormous humans who nonchalantly requested a seat belt extension; I didn't know there was such a thing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Marty_d Posted September 5, 2014 Share Posted September 5, 2014 Nobody wants to be shoehorned in next to an obese person, but then again I'd rather be pushed up against Jabba the Hutt than beside a 50kg person who gets airsick, or a family with screaming baby (having just inflicted our kids on fellow travellers for 30 hours straight, I can only offer them our sincerest apologies). Despite the common perception of obese people being lazy eaters whose weight is all their own fault, in a lot of cases it's not, and they should be allowed to travel too. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rankamateur Posted September 5, 2014 Share Posted September 5, 2014 Nobody wants to be shoehorned in next to an obese person, but then again I'd rather be pushed up against Jabba the Hutt than beside a 50kg person who gets airsick, or a family with screaming baby (having just inflicted our kids on fellow travellers for 30 hours straight, I can only offer them our sincerest apologies).Despite the common perception of obese people being lazy eaters whose weight is all their own fault, in a lot of cases it's not, and they should be allowed to travel too. And just think if the unthinkable were to happen, it would be a bit like having your own airbag. 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dazza 38 Posted September 6, 2014 Share Posted September 6, 2014 You know how they have those metal frames at the check in, that carry on baggage has to fit inside, a kind of go, no go gauge. Well maybe they need a similar set up for people. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Old Koreelah Posted September 6, 2014 Author Share Posted September 6, 2014 You know how they have those metal frames at the check in, that carry on baggage has to fit inside, a kind of go, no go gauge. Well maybe they need a similar set up for people. ...do you mean people actually use those frames to check bag size? Never seen it. Have seen plenty of oversize bags being jammed into overhead lockers. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest ozzie Posted September 6, 2014 Share Posted September 6, 2014 On the way to my last Airventure adventure i caught an overweight bag in the face when a locker bin opened on a rather spanky landing at Salt Lake City. Lost a tooth and had a cut above the eye. Spent the afternoon in town and ended up having most of the trip paid for. Seems in the US if it fits the dimensions and you can lift it into the overhead bin, it goes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guernsey Posted September 6, 2014 Share Posted September 6, 2014 You know how they have those metal frames at the check in, that carry on baggage has to fit inside, a kind of go, no go gauge. Well maybe they need a similar set up for people. Sounds a good idea to me, so if you didn't fit the measurements for carry on passenger requirements, you would have to travel in the hold. Hang on a minute, your ' baggage' weight could cost you more than your airfare.. Alan. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dazza 38 Posted September 6, 2014 Share Posted September 6, 2014 ...do you mean people actually use those frames to check bag size? Never seen it. Have seen plenty of oversize bags being jammed into overhead lockers. I have seen it occasionally used. More so overseas than here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
turboplanner Posted September 6, 2014 Share Posted September 6, 2014 Heavy RPT aircraft seem to have a huge envelope, but I'm surprised that the attitudes have become so casual. Reg Ansett used to weigh all his passengers and baggage. Even farmer selling lambs for the supermarkets may weigh 5000 lambs each week to check their progress. So it's surprising there aren't load cells at airports for passengers and their carry ons; they are already there for baggage and the technology is there for coding the passenger ticket, seat, carry ons, baggage, fuel etc and doing the load calculation automatically, which would quickly flag a warning like the QANTAS situation. A heavy jet went down in Afghanistan recently, in my opinion due to the simple error by Defence Departments not to check, or possibly even specify truck/equipment lashing shackle capacities, a few decades ago a Singapore Airlines 747 out of Tullamarine used up all the runway, some of the grass, and only just cleared the boundary fence flattening it and bales of hay in a farmers paddock next door and I'm sure there have been many other near misses. Calculating all loads is just as critical in RA aircraft. We had a post here a year or so ago from a pilot who changed the position of his 15 kg tool kit before takeoff and almost lost control of the aircraft in flight. The principles of W&B are as simple as the computer's IO basis - just variations on an equation with three inputs, based on the simple see saw. Page 1 on the attachment shows the see saw, and how there is a mathematical relationship between mass and distance from a pivot. WX012.doc WX012.doc WX012.doc 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Old Koreelah Posted September 6, 2014 Author Share Posted September 6, 2014 I've toyed with inventing a built-in weight and balance monitoring system based on pressure in the aircraft's landing gear hydraulics. The total could tell the pilot how close to MTOW he was getting, the third wheel could be calibrated to display actual CoG. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
turboplanner Posted September 7, 2014 Share Posted September 7, 2014 That's what a lot of people tried in the transport industry, some with variable model trucks sitting on kitchen scales, some with load cells on semis, some with calibrated airbags, but all have their disadvantages with things like vibration, corrosion etc. You also have the issue that an aircraft sitting on its undercarriage will not be in the same plane as when it's flying - for example, all the load thrusts when sitting on the ground will be at quite a different angle in the air. Much more accurate to calculate it with a spreadsheet - less than 30 seconds usually. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
M61A1 Posted September 7, 2014 Share Posted September 7, 2014 Hold your horses there Bruce! As a male anorexic greenie vegetarian working hard to promote common sense I resemble that remark.I would love to pay by weight, especially having twice been sandwiched beside enormous humans who nonchalantly requested a seat belt extension; I didn't know there was such a thing. I cannot remember which airline, my extremely large sister was Sent by airline by her employer, the short story is that they ended up having to purchase an extra seat to cover her weight. She was offended by it, but I doubt that she really understands just how important weight is on a aircraft. Maybe airlines would do well to forget "standard passenger" and just charge per kg being transported, as long it doesn't exceed the actual seat limitations. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bruce Tuncks Posted September 7, 2014 Share Posted September 7, 2014 This is how crazy it is: You could transfer weight from your baggage to stuff it down your front till you became "legal". And I'm sorry Old Koreelah, but you don't sufficiently resemble the sort of person who made up those rules to be offended. AND...I'm not talking about stopping fat people from flying, I just want them to pay their way. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
facthunter Posted September 7, 2014 Share Posted September 7, 2014 What sounds reasonable enough with overweight?? people would probably be interpreted as discrimination, if you tried to bring it in. Using standard weights should not be done when it would result in a dangerous situation. ie a plane full of Sumo Wrestlers. Actual weights would be required. It is the PIC's role to ensure compliance, although that may be difficult in practice. Most potential for error involve hold cargo, with CofG error, as passenger zones are calculated separately and an error becomes obvious and can be rectified by relocating PAX.. Nev Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
turboplanner Posted September 7, 2014 Share Posted September 7, 2014 Well not in post #1 FH, that's what started the discussion. How's the Indian going? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now