There may be a similar system still employed, but with electronic check-ins, flyers may never come into contact with airline personnel before boarding.
Huh. They weigh our bags. Why not weigh us? I don’t mind. If it’s just about doing a fuel calc., what do I care?
I’m slightly unclear on how this situation is even possible. It seems like someone dropped the engineering ball big time.
Are the runways at that particular airport especially short? Why aren’t planes designed so that the number of seats multiplied by the weight allowance of a passenger (baggage plus person) can be lifted on all the runways it’s expected to fly on in no wind?
Or are there actually flyable wind conditions that are worse than having no wind? What happens if there’s enough wind to take off with a certain load and there’s not enough wind at the destination to land?
Weigh the passengers plus their bags at check in and take them off in order of total weight to maximize the number of people able to get there. I may be a big bruiser, but if some little old lady is toting 200 lbs of baggage, then she’s as much a burden to the plane as I am. Or just take the pigs that hog the overhead bins.
This was my thinking at the time. You’re in the goddamned Windy City. Known, in no small part for rapidly changing weather. And you scheduled a takeoff load that depended on consistent weather conditions?
This is my understanding. You can go to Google Maps and compare Midway to O’Hare via satellite photos. It’s pretty drastic.
I did not know this, and it makes perfect sense. I suppose it is a much more interesting ethical problem if you assume that the airline has an Airplane Scale that it weighs the plane on prior to takeoff rather than some namby-pamby formula. Oh well.
Indeed, this is a much better solution to the problem. However, the airline ended up not doing this, and instead simply booked us all hotels at our destination since they’d caused us all to miss our connecting flights. It did not cut any ice with the very irritated passengers.
I don’t see that ethics come into this.
For practical reasons they need to reduce weight.
For commercial reasons they need to minimize customer dissatisfaction.
Asking for volunteers and offering compensation is about the only solution
- I’ve only seen a planeload of really angry people once, I and and my colleague were blocking the stairs to the top deck of a Malaysia Airlines 747 with the crew huddled behind us.
- finally they sent on uniformed security
This is a serious question and one asked by someone (me) who, some years ago, actually addressed a flight attendant as “waitress.” (Yes, my mom scolded me for that.) What do you think a flight attendant’s job entails?
Not joking: Psychiatric Nurse
I used to be involved with airlines (writing onboard duty free sales terminal software) so I had both the need and opportunity to analyze them.
They need to be very robust, flying is tiring especially 9 hours on the trot (eg: UK to Canaries and back) they need to be physically strong (overhead lockers, wrestling with bar carts in the galley etc) they need to be patient with idiots, also to have ‘natural authority’ telling people what to do.
They need to be reasonably numerate on short haul airlines that sell duty free.
Also they have to be good at talking to people, even if they don’t want to.
They need to absorb a lot of rules and regulations, safety stuff, on which they are tested.
They cannot be squeamish (just thinking about toilet problems …)
I would say that any lass who has survived three seasons on a UK charter (Summer, Winter, Summer) is a pretty impressive bit of work.
This did in fact happen in 2005 at Midway, and killed a boy in a car on the street outside the airport. Other planes were landing at the airport that day, but from what I can tell from the landing, the thrust reversers were deployed late. The first linked article says that the NTSB wanted landings to be calculated without taking thrust reversers into account, to determine if landings could be done safely in icy weather without them.
I guarantee you that the image of the 737 broken through the fence and resting in an intersection was in the minds of those pilots when they were considering if they could get off the ground in the space they had to work with. (I’ll also note that even with their limitations, to the best of my understanding Midway still has a better ontime departure rate than O’Hare.)
Didn’t they used to warn overweight passengers that they might be asked to leave if the plane was too heavy, decades ago? 
I am thinking that when I was a kid this was said (or on the paperwork) when my family was going on a plane trip…
Whoever asks for a seatbelt extended?
As a person who pays attention to air crashes I’d be with MGibson in getting off any plane they say is overloaded, no matter how little I weighed. As a big, fat motherfucker who knows it and who has built model airplanes, I was not offended by the crew of a bizjet when they asked me to pick a seat on the plane’s center of gravity. I have found the secret to avoiding paying an extra fare, though it would be really nice to spread out on a plane for a change: I park one of my kids in the next seat. She’ll only complain to me about being crowded, not to the flight attendant.
I note your location as New Jersey.
Here is the crash of a jet in New Jersey were overloading was found to be a significant factor: http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2005/02/02/national/main671071.shtml All seats were filled and thus the passenger weight + luggage = too much weight scenario applies.
Pretty close. The FAA number is 170 lbs/passenger.
If I recall correctly, there is also an additional 10 lbs tacked on for winter weight clothing, and a figure for children but I can’t recall the latter at all.
Maybe you don’t care… but a lot of other people do, whether they should or not.
Yes.
The required runway is not only affected by the intensity of the wind, but also its direction. Surface conditions - wet vs. dry vs. icy - also has a significant effect, as does temperature and to a lesser degree humidity. Given that Chicago experiences wind speeds of 0 to 60 over the course of a normal year, and temperatures can range from -30 to 105+ F between winter and summer there are significant factors and challenges here. Combine that with runways that are exceedingly short for the 737’s flying out of there and the need to coordinate traffic with O’Hare (the two airspaces butt up against each other) and things get quite complicated.
And if you take off and find you can’t land at your destination - for whatever reason? Prior to take off all commercial flights have designated alternate airports that they will go to in the event they need to do so.
Yes, decades ago when airplanes were smaller and less capable this was not an uncommon practice. When passenger services started in the 1930’s and 1940’s it was, in fact, routine. Not any more, though.
I have, on occassion, threatened to put a passenger on a scale - but then I fly very small airplanes where the weight and balance issues are even more critical than for the big jets.
Huh, I don’t see why they don’t put a simple sensor on the landing gear. Should be pretty darn easy to determine aircraft weight from a simple measurement of the compression of the shock absorbers. Then you can use the formula to determine how many people you book on the flight, but know in real time if you are on-weight. Not only that, but you will be able to constantly check your formula to see how close it comes to matching reality.
Oh, and an extra benefit is that by comparing the relative compressions you can determine your CG. I have no idea why they don’t do this.
That seems like a really good freaking idea. Possibly costly to implement on a whole fleet of planes, but is there any engineering reason that this couldn’t be done?
Maybe nobody thought of it before. At first glance it’s an excellent idea. There are others here more technical than I who can give it a second glance and tell you how it’s the dumbest idea they ever heard and why it won’t work. Then others will have ideas how it could work that get shot down and things go back and forth with namecalling and thrown pencils and eventually a design is laid out.
Ah, the Engineering Process in action! 
I was waiting for someone to tell me I was talking out of my ass about the way things were in 1970, and that with today’s technology, they do that.
I would prefer it if they asked for volunteers, because as soon as they mentioned “overloaded” or “too heavy to take off” I would be off that plane in an instant. Once the crew have told me “we boneheads have fucked up loading this plane but trust us we can accurately recalculate the correct weight to take off,” I will be watching from the lounge with a drink in hand. Good luck to those who stay aboard.
I agree that getting TF off the plane is a good plan. I’d advise displaying some righteous indignation all the same. A cash incentive is a cash incentive, even if you don’t need it. 