So, have people become significantly taller then, thus affecting safety issues by increased weight?
Irrelevant, my ass. Not to bash anyone for their weight, but it’s pretty clear why the safety issues outlined in the OP occur. And it’s not because we’re all 7 feet tall all of a sudden.
I did and you will see your first post was quoting me (in the OP) and saying how this is a safety issue (an issue I did not dispute in the OP) and not an obesity issue (an issue I did not entertain).
Well, you only quote me so how could you be targetting others? And what part of the OP says anything about it not being a safety issue or it being an obesity issue? As for others, I believe you are talking about tlw’s, ** Collounsbury’s**, Gary Kumquat’s, and stypticus’s posts (4 out of 32 posts prior to your post). Not a “trend” if you ask me.
Let’s examine the 11 times (prior to my post listing the 11 times) obese/obesity was used - in order:
So, obesity isn’t relevant and would have been mentioned 4 times (in two posts) if you hadn’t added to the count. Note: I’m not saying you should be posting or anything like that just that I don’t think it is proper to say “Look how many times the words have been used” when you used the words more times than anybody.
Larger size is relevant and larger size does not equate to obesity.
All good, valid points and I can’t agrue with the truth in the statements.
Maybe my question should be "Question: In 1995, Average Adult Person X weighed 160 pounds. In 2003, Average Adult Person X weighs 181 pounds. Is Average Adult Person X fatter? " Yes, there will be the bodybuilders (muscle weighs more than fat) or the pregnant woman but, on average, I believe people are heavier due to fat. I know I am.
And I don’t think you are mad, just reading the statements with a bias (which, of course, everybody does since we are all biased about some things).
Sigh.
Again, the amount of weight in the original article was 21 pounds, and again, the article said this would not affect large commercial aircraft, but was targeting small aircraft.
The impetus for the proposed weight restrictions was (according to the article) the crash of a small aircraft due to an incorrectly calculated weight on board.
I did NOT say that there weren’t fat people. In fact I specifically state in all three of my posts that “yes, of course there are people who are fat or obese”.
That’s not my point. My point is that scale weight does not necessarily denote obesity or fatness. Especially with a number as small as 21 pounds.
A pound of fat is about the size of a football, a pound of muscle about the size of a softball. The fat pounds are big gooshy and jiggly, the muscle pounds are small, hard and sleek.
A person of 180 pounds can be MUCH smaller in size and much more fit that a person 20 pounds “Lighter” on the scale. Yes, more Americans are obese than ever before, but we also have better nutrition even WITH the junk food and our bones are denser and we have better muscle tone (naturally, NOT of course after years of being couch potatoes), than we did many decades ago.
THAT is what I meant by irrelevent. The article and the airlines are interested in SCALE weight, NOT whether a person is obese, or unfit or not.
Whether Americans are too fat, and whether the airlines that have smaller aircraft and need to impose new weight restrictions for safety are two SEPARATE issues.
Not to nitpick (well, to nitpick) “it is possible that at high-altitude airports and in hot, humid weather, when aerodynamic lift is less, even larger airliners might have to leave some cargo behind.”
Well, I think that it is cause-effect. Americans weigh more hence safety restrictions are needed. Why do Americans weigh more? I will agree with your statements that the reasons are:
Well, I was just relating what the article said, but not living in a hot climate I’ll take your word for it.
I did however, work as an aircraft refueler for large aircraft (727s on up to 747s and even the concorde, though it’s pretty small), and I don’t recall weight ever being an issue insofar as the commercial airlines having to leave behind luggage.
Flying Tigers and JAL Cargo (among others) ships cattle, sheep, and even race horses, pretty heavy cargo, and all we ever did was adjust the fuel depending upon density.
My quote was from the article (regarding large airplane issues).
I knew that fuel adjustments were made but the article (biased itself, I’m sure) led me to believe that it nearing the point where weights are a problem. Don’t know enough (well, anything) about big planes to know when (or even if) it will be a problem.
One thing I noticed while teaching college was that there’s a lot more girls who can look me right in the eye than there used to be. So I wouldn’t be at all surprised if the average height of Americans is still increasing over time.
Mind you, I know the average girth of Americans is increasing too, so I’m not trying to lay all or even most of the weight increase off on height.
That, or you’re shrinking.
Yeah, RTF, but since 1995? I’d say over an 8 year period, an average weight increase of 21 pounds is a LOT more likely to be attributable to weight rather than height.
Not arguing your point that people these days get taller and taller in Western countries: it’s true. But 8 years seems a really short time span to explain a 21 pound weight gain by length alone, ceteris paribus.
I don’t really understand CanvasShoes’ stance here. He/She seems somehow offended that people are using terms as “obesity” when discussing this matter, saying obesity is not relevant to this debate. Of course it is. If the average passenger is 21 pounds heavier than 8 years ago, and we have no reason to believe they’re significantly taller, more muscled, or more pregnant, the reason that they’re 21 pounds heavier is weight gain. If people on average gain weight while all the other factors remain the same, a larger percentage of people will be considered obese, and more people are moving towards that definition. It’s a simple observation, and not offensive at all.
The fact that this affects small aircraft and not large jets has a lot to do with weight vs. power ratios, probably. A 747 can deal with 400 times 21 pounds a lot easier than a Dash-8 can with 50 times 21 pounds: excess power is the key here.
1.) I’m a girl.
2.) I’m not offended at all, and if you’ll read my posts you’ll see that. I don’t want to repeat what I’ve already said, I was pretty clear in the posts I’ve already made.
My point was not “oh how offensive they’re saying these people are fatter” but merely a matter of fact “there are two separate issues here”.
Again, my point is merely one of SCALE weight doesn’t necessarily equate to obesity, but that based on the overall tone of this post people seem to think it does.
The article itself didn’t focus at ALL on the “fact” that Americans were more obese, it focused on the 21 pound average heavier weight (again, scale weight) that the average person has as opposed to when the standards were first created (which was? I either missed it, or it wasn’t in the article).
The article focused on safety issues and possible solutions regarding how the weight aboard a small plane effects safety etc.
This Thread on the other hand seemed to have immediately taken on the flavor of “Oh yeah, Obesity rears it’s ugly head again”.
I wasn’t defending obesity, merely pointing out that what was covered in the article didn’t really support the “Americans are out of control obese” stance.
I guess I’m coming from a position of not thinking that restrictions or taxes are all that unusual or “obesity based” due to the vast amount of travel by small to tiny aircraft here in AK.
That’s all 
I agree with the girth and height increase too. Have you seen the size of the 18 year olds that may leave high school and enter the NBA? I’ve seen 14 year olds on TV that are bigger than me and I’m 5’10" 190lbs.