But what if they didn’t? What if a person’s bulk was centered more in front of them, instead of side-to-side? So that they were not spilling out into the neighbor’s seat, but they still needed an extender? I think they should have one, no extra charge. Unless you think pregnant women should pay for two seats as well. After all, her condition is completely voluntary, it isn’t a “disability”. Make her pay for two seats!
Hey, it wasn’t my idea, but one they put forth when the suggestion of double tickets came out. The pregnant woman is just an example of someone who would have a disproportionate amount of mass out front. The assumption that people who needed extenders needed more seats was the airlines idea.
And I can’t help but think that assuming they aren’t your 5 year old child, it’s none of your fucking business what someone chooses to eat.
I’m sorry - did you have a point here?
Again I call bullshit. By your reasoning, it would be reasonable for me to expect tall people to share the expense of the clutch pedal extender I had to install on my car (which was designed for your average Aryan behemoth) - and which I did, BTW, sans whining. And no, I do not expect Volkswagen to redesign all their cars.
Coach class is a DISCOUNT. They can charge less for it because there are MORE SEATS. If they make all the seats real roomy & comfortable, THEY WON’T BE CHEAP ANYMORE. You can’t have your cake and eat it too.
Oh, so you want those magic seats that molecularly transform to change the position of the headrest when you sit in them.
There was a thread about Southwest’s policy awhile back, and I am fairly certain that they in fact had TWO criteria, only one of which was the seatbelt extender. The other was whether the passenger in question needed to have the armrest up. It stands to reason that if you cannot sit in the seat with the armrest down, then you are spilling over into the next seat. For the record, I don’t think Southwest handled the issue very well; however, it’s a strawman argument that the seatbelt extender was the only criteria.
may have been more than one criteria. I remebered the seat belt one. I never said it was the sole criteria.
Hey, way to take it out of context and do a drive by. Now piss off.
lurker: Pregnant women don’t necessarily need extra-large seat belts. They aren’t supposed to put the seat belt over their bellies. In case of an accident, the pressure of the seat belt can damage the fetus. Pregnant women should put the seat belt over their hips, tucking it under the big bulgy belly as necessary. So, I’m afraid pregnant women aren’t actually a good example.
But, speaking as someone who is overweight, but not over-wide, I think that accounting for differences in body shape are important. (I never have any trouble fitting into any seat, fortunately.)
Oh yeah, there’s a lot of context in your statement that “someone who needs two seats should only have one meal”. Please, point out all this wonderful context that turns it from another “I think I should comment on how if people would just eat less they’d be thinner” into something deep and meaningful.
I refer you to the rest of my post AND the smilie (which indicated that I wasn’t being serious, just in case the “Joking aside” part wasn’t clear to you). Maybe then you’ll see that my statement was “These people should get 2 . . . peanuts/meals/drinks.”
This is essentially correct. Southwest’s policy on charging for two seats was based on both the need for an extender and the ability to fit between the armrests. This was not a new policy BTW; it had existed for quite a few years but had never really been enforced. The controversy arose when a company memo reminding gate agents of the policy was publicized and trumpeted by the media as if it were a new policy.
I was (and am) a loyal Southwest customer because of their handicapped policy (as I’ve mentioned in the past) and had never had any trouble with them because of my size. At 5’6" and 260 pounds I just about fit between the armrests and do not need an extender; when I travel with my wife I always lift the armrest between us, as she usually doesn’t object to having me that much closer to her. 
Southwest’s “open seating” policy doesn’t affect me much when I’m with my wife as we’re in the pre-board group and thus get first choice of the available seats. When my friend and I make our annual pilgrimage to Las Vegas we always get to the airport ridiculously early anyway, so we’re usually in the first boarding group. He’s larger than I am, does need an extender and doesn’t really fit between the armrests. We head for the back and take the window and aisle seats in one row and hope that the flight isn’t full enough that someone’s going to try to squeeze in between us (it usually isn’t, as we tend to fly at odd times). No one has ever said anything to him about having to pay for a second seat, even though he obviously fits the criteria of Southwest’s announced policy. He was made sufficiently paranoid by the media coverage that when we booked tickets for this year he insisted on flying another airline, so we’re flying ATA. We’re booked in aisle seats across from each other. I have no idea if we’re as likely to run into trouble with ATA.
I have mixed feelings on this issue. Paying for two seats because you’re just a little too wide for one doesn’t really seem fair to the customer, especially if you have no way of knowing until you get on the plane that you don’t fit. On the other hand, the airlines (or the plane designers) are to some extent responsible for the problem, as they’re the ones who decide the width of the seats. As has been amply illustrated by various posters, weight is not the only factor in determining seat comfort. I happen to have most of my excess weight (which BTW I’m trying to lose) in my hips and thighs, so seat width is definitely a problem, but I’ve also got knee problems and sitting with my feet down for extended periods causes my knee to lock up. During a long flight I can’t keep shifting my legs or walk around without disturbing the person next to me, so I live with it.
The whole concept of “subsidizing” anyone else’s flight is only legit if everyone on a flight paid the same fare. That never happens. Business people who don’t have the luxury of two week advance purchases can pay thousands for the same flight for which the tourist is paying a couple of hundred on an e-saver, and even those who do book in advance don’t always get the same fare, depending on how far in advance they bought and whether they did it in person, by phone or online. And those pesky companion pass riders are paying 10% of the same day ticket price, and airline employees and their immediate families are there for pennies on the dollar.
So on every flight, someone is subsidizing someone else’s flight to some extent, business travelers (who are losing more and more of the perks afforded them by the amount of money they spend) more than anyone. If you want to bitch about subsidizing extra room for the disabled or the otherwise able-bodied obese, first bitch about the fact that there is absolutly no parity in airline ticket pricing to begin with. When everyone on board has paid the exact same amount for their tickets and the playing field is level then we can talk about the relative fairness of a different pricing structure for those who need more room.
Rather than hijack this thread further, I’ve opened another thread to discuss another issue that’s somewhat tied into this. Consider This: Maybe Our Increasing “Fatness” Isn’t Entirely Bad
Flying alone between Australia and the US as I am wont to do I seem to always get an empty seat next to me which is wonderful but I know it will not always happen. I am large yet can fit between the armrests (though cannot plug headphones in if the jack is there without impaling my leg). I do tend to lift them for stretching out purposes or for lying down when I have 3 seats to myself as sometimes happens.
One flight where I had 3 seats I tried to lie down only to find that instead of disappearing up in between the seats the armrests had a large semicircular doohickey protruding a few inches out between the seats. Lying comfortably was even more impossible than usual and buying 2 seats would not have allowed my ample backside to creep over to the next seat anyway. I only came across it once and it just struck me as the weirdest piece of design I had encountered. I presume the airlines that are doing this do not have any planes with that fucked up design?
That was a United plane by the way.
Blame the airline for the interiors - and the external paint.
I don’t know if the mfg installs the interior to customer spec (I’d guess yes) or if the plane is ferried to another business for that purpose, but it is the customer who spec’s such things (as well as such things as cabin windows - freighters don’t have them, pass. models do)
Must be the same people who design beds - the Average male height (where I live, not sure about elsewhere) is 6 foot. I am just 1 inch above that, yet every bed I ever get into is WAY too short for me, same goes for the quilt.
I think that if a person can prove that their size is a disease or disability then they should be entitled to free seat or upgrade. If they can’t and are in fact someone who eats too god-damn much then they are not entitled to any free seat or upgrade.
You have it backwards. It is the people who can’t fit into the coach-class seats who are doing the bitching.
Here it is, in plain English: Just because YOU are 5’5" tall does not mean that your head will hit the head rest at the same point that mine does. Your ass may be 3 inches lower than mine.
I think it’s amusing that you think I don’t have a right to bitch that my seat is uncomfortable, especially given the fact that I pretty damn close to the average sized American woman. I am not asking for magic, I am asking for a seat that isn’t UNcomfortable. I am asking the the airline industry to respond to the fact that their “average” sized customer has changed significantly since 1970.
It is asking them to be proactive instead of reactive. Why is that such a radical notion to you?
I don’t want to seem insensitive, but I’m looking at this from a design angle.
-
Is there actually a reference to all airline seats being designed for a specific size or shape of person?
-
Is there data which suggests that the seats in use now in Coach are currently comfortable for any general size or shape of person?
-
Since I fly a great deal, I have to say that we cannot lump Coach and First-Class, or Business Class seats into one basket. The honest truth is - I’ve been in Coach seats that were as comfy as First Class, and First seats that really sucked. And one of the prime selling points between airlines serving the transoceanic routes are the differences between their various Business class seats (they all seem the same to me, but that’s just me. My legs always hurt, although my back is OK.)
We’ve had short and tall, average and large people posting in here that they were uncomfortable. And people of those same forms which say they are not. It’s a complicated problem, that simply may not have a good solution.
/hijack
Anthracite you’re not a tall person, right?
Have you tried putting your feet on something during flight? E.g. briefcase? I find that if I don’t have my feet on the floor, my legs can start to hurt.
/end hijack