Saved wieght and lower fares

[oldpax]

Does anyone know the total wieght that could be saved if all the "entertainment"stuff was removed(just like year ago!)and all the kitchen equipment except tea making facilities taken out,this could result in smaller crews as well!!!How much fuel would be saved if it was all taken out and passengers could buy packed meals at the gate?Would it result in lower fares?Passengers could be offered a bonus if thier luggage was below a certain weight(especially take on stuff which seems to get bigger every year!!).

[RevMan2]

Lower costs? Yes.
Lower fares? No

The only relationship between price and cost is the amount of profit (or loss) the difference generates

[PAXboy]

An interesting question but - no chance!

I only use a small part of the IFE but am always glad that the children on the flight have got it's myriad capabilities.

[Hartington]

I suspect the saved weight would either go as a contibution to reducing operating cost or to carry more cargo and make more money. Then again, I wonder how much weight it all adds up to?

[PAXboy]

In the past, carriers have stated that one of the reasons not to have water misting systems (in the event of fire) is the weight they would carry for a 1 in x time it's needed. Then just think of the inflight magazines and other junk they carry. Heigh Ho.

[ZFT]

If you REALLY want to reduce weight, stop carrying duty free crap. But of course, it's a nice little earner.

[The SSK]

Air France announced a while ago that new lightweight seats for their A319/320/321 fleet, saving 5.4kg per seat or an average of 750kg per aircraft, would reduce annual fuel burn by 1700 tonnes.

Now, let me find an envelope that I can scribble on the back of. All I need to know is the average sector distance for those three types in AF service, how many sectors a year they fly, and what is the estimated fuel consumption for each of them for those sector lengths. Shouldn’t be difficult …

[scribble, scribble]

OK. Here we are. I reckon that a 750kg weight reduction would result in a fuel consumption reduction of 0.13% for those fleets. Or, to look at it another way, any costs saved would be wiped out by an increase in the price of jet fuel from, say, $130 a barrel to $130.17.

Don’t think that my decimal points are in the wrong place, but you never know. Either way, I wouldn’t bank on any price reductions just yet.

[smith]

How about asking everyone to take a leak before boarding, average urine volume is approx 500ml=0.5kg saving approx 100kg per flight. Multiply this acroos the whole fleet and all rotations would be a big annual saving although not enough to see price reductions.

[PAXboy]

Some LCCs already take the pi$$... :}

[smith]

Also, the reduction in usage of the lavs would mean less maintenance of them and pax may buy more drink as they wouldn't need to queue for the toilet as much :-O

[Hotel Tango]

smith, can you say that again - in English this time please?

[oldpax]

why have all that booze on board anyway!Causes trouble on some flights!How much weight saved on that?Also people are allowed to take on far to much hand luggage .I sem to remember on my RAF trooping flights hand luggae was 4.5 kg and if over you unloaded till it was right!!
So are we saying that an aircraft without the in flight entertainment hot meals and booze would not be any cheaper to run?I would plump for a weight limit on hand luggage ,seems that some airlines let people on with anything and its downright dangerous overloading overhead lockers but the stewardess,s dont seem to notice!?

[PAXboy]

Thread drift
Hi oldpax, the thorny subject of hand baggage has been discussed here many times and you will find several threads that go through the reasons why it happens.

The key one being: If one carrier rigidly enforced the baggage size and weight rules - and did so for a year - they would lose customers. Many, many pax consider it their right to take on more weight than is 'permitted' and will change carrier if prevented. The carriers know this of course, and weight and balance the a/c for the 'hidden' extra weight.

If you can get ALL carriers to respect the rules and get ALL airports to manage the size and weight rules correctly ... you will be the official ruler of the universe. :) :)

[L'aviateur]

For various reasons, LCC options on longhaul seem to be very unsucessful. Even Air Asia X are pulling out of LGW.

[farci]

How about asking everyone to take a leak before boarding, average urine volume is approx 500ml=0.5kg saving approx 100kg per flight.Ssshhh! You're giving Michael O'Leary ideas :eek:

[ExXB]

It's been done: All Nippon (http://www.nbcmiami.com/news/business/Japans-All-Nippon-Airways-Bladder-Flights-63703352.html)

[oldpax]

What powers do Health and Safety have in the aviation industry?I know they get a bad press but could they not put a stop to the practice of excess hand luggage which is after all a danger to all?

[ZFT]

DON'T - Health & Safety has never added value, only cost.

If you live in Thailand then you must understand that!

[easyflyer83]

Hand baggage can be a problem on full flights but I don't believe it poses a safety risk. For those of you who are unaware, Airbus' own literature for the new style A32X interiors clearly diagramed how many pieces of hang luggage can be fitted in their lockers and as such they have been designed for that kind of capacity.

Weight wise, Easyjet offers unlimited weight within set dimensions but lets face it most peoples hand luggage will be of reasonable weight unless they decide to pack dumbells.

Crew, from my experience at Easyjet, do a great job at dealing with this. Oversized bags that are deemed a risk or simply too big which have been missed at the gate are tagged and sent downstairs (hold). Again from experience on the routes are operate this is relatively rare. Most hand baggage is within limits which means pax adhere or it is being dealt with at the gate. Furthermore handling agents at EZY have a matrix which, depending on pax load, sees X amount of permitted sized bags tagged free of charge and placed in the hold.

So the amount of hand baggage can cause problems and EZY have looked at several ways to alleviate this (including reducing bag size) but have so far deemed that such measures would impact on sales/revenue. However, at no point is hand baggage a safety risk IMO.

I sem to remember on my RAF trooping flights hand luggae was 4.5 kg and if over you unloaded till it was right!!

Pax on flights to Guantanemo Bay had 0.0kg hang baggage allowance. It's comparing apples with pears slightly.

[L'aviateur]

Continuing OT:

Those of us who know how to pack hand carry to perfection and the max, would be very dissapointed should the system change. The idea of checking baggage in makes me shudder.

[Peter47]

I've read somewhere that Emirates plan to do away with literature in their seat pockets (except I presume the safety card) and to get people to rely on the IFE quoting a weight saving in excess of 100kg on an A380.

Don't ask me what happens if the IFE crashes.

[oldpax]

Maybe I should have put this in a tech thread!It would be nice to know what the equipment actually weighs!An A380 must have a considerable amount!How much does all the booze weigh ,the kitchen equipment!Does anyone think that in the near(/)future as oil prices rise there will be a time when weight reduction of any kind will come into being?

[Rwy in Sight]

Given that a lot of people are sensitive about their weight, I don't think it is going to work any time soon.


Rwy in Sight

[WestofEMA]

Why stop at the weight of the baggage? Surely there will be a time when each passenger is charged by their weight. together with their checked and hand luggage. Charge by £ or $ per pound/kilo:)

[ExXB]

Being 60kg and rarely travelling with a checked suitcase I would love paying by weight.

But lets face it, it isn't going to happen. Too complicated to price in advance, recalculate if you gain/lose weight and/or pack more/less than expected, etc.

At best we might see a price based on a maximum total weight (say 100kg) with surcharges being applied at the airport if you exceed this. Even this would be complex - Your 40kg kid could take three 20kg suitcases. (Remembering that volume is just as important as weight in the hold)

Nice idea but ...