Weight Restriction

[tony]

Hello. I have a question for anyone who travels on or works for US Air.

Have you ever heard the term "weight restriction" used to describe a scenario where they need to take volunteers to give up their seat?

I was on a connecting flight through Pittsburg, OH, and the announced that they needed volunteers because of a weight restriction, or they would have to start bumping people.

Given that it was a Canadair regional jet, it seemed to make sense that it wouldn't be too difficult to overload one of those planes.

Four people gave up their seats, and no one was bumped fortunately. The offer of a free round-trip ticket anywhere they fly was a pretty good incentive.

However, while I was on the flight, I looked around and noticed something strange. Every seat was full. It was a small jet, so it was easy to see if all the seats were taken.

Did 4 thinner people get on board? Did someone dump some luggage? It seemed to me the more likely explanation is that they oversold the flight, and didn't want to admit it, so they called it something else. Essentially, it seems as if US Air deliberately lied. Compounding that, it wasn't difficult to catch that lie, which is rather insulting to the intelligence of USAir's customers.

Is this assement incorrect? Is weight restriction something else? Perhaps "wait restriction"?

 

[barbeetantrums]

Pittsburg, Ohio? Never heard of it.

 

[flyin2low]

The 'weight restrictions" are calculated with the planned checked baggage count and adult passenger weights. If there are children onboard or if some of the checked bags mis-connect, then more passengers can be boarded. As you saw, the voluteers are just for planning purposes and not a sure thing. Pittsburgh,OH(?) is a bags positive station where bags bump passengers. Other stations are not that way.

 

[Weight&Balance]

You passenger weights regardless you are 100 lbs 300 lbs the average during winter is 195 lbs per person and 30 lbs per checked baggage.The words Weight Restriction may have not applied to the scenario that you telling.This one clearly sounds like one of oversale and volunteers were need. You have to remember on small or large aircraft to travel from point A to B requires given amount of fuel and if point C and D (alternate landing fields) are added due field conditions are arriving station or enroute weather this would drive the fuel load required up and you available payload (meaning bags and people) down. You either operate at Max.structure Takeoff weight (MTOW) or MTOW(landing limit)The second would be the worse scenario because this is maximum landing climb weight + fuel burn. If you are tankering or carrying fuel for alternates or contingency this can hurt

 

[john john]

You passenger weights regardless you are 100 lbs 300 lbs the average during winter is 195 lbs per person and 30 lbs per checked baggage.

This formula depends on what outsource contract carrier or wholly own carrier you are on we have 9 I think.

 

[tony]

You passenger weights regardless you are 100 lbs 300 lbs the average during winter is 195 lbs per person and 30 lbs per checked baggage.The words Weight Restriction may have not applied to the scenario that you telling.This one clearly sounds like one of oversale and volunteers were need. You have to remember on small or large aircraft to travel from point A to B requires given amount of fuel and if point C and D (alternate landing fields) are added due field conditions are arriving station or enroute weather this would drive the fuel load required up and you available payload (meaning bags and people) down. You either operate at Max.structure Takeoff weight (MTOW) or MTOW(landing limit)The second would be the worse scenario because this is maximum landing climb weight + fuel burn. If you are tankering or carrying fuel for alternates or contingency this can hurt

It definately sounded like it was an oversold situation, yet they called it a "Weight Restriction". Dirty pool, in my opinion. The operating airline was: US AIRWAYS EXPRESS CHAUTAUQUA AIRLINES

And yes, it was Pittsburgh OH (PIT).

 

[BoeingBoy]

I can only think of 1 case where the plane could have departed with a full passenger load but a weight restriction would have involved asking for volunteers - child weights. For example, if 4 adults volunteered to get off and they were replaced by a family of 4 with 2 children then using child weights could have allowed the flight to squeak under a weight restriction that couldn't be met with the 4 adults on board.

And PIT is definitely in PA, not OH. Unless the airport has moved since I've been there.....

Jim

 

[john john]

I can only think of 1 case where the plane could have departed with a full passenger load but a weight restriction would have involved asking for volunteers - child weights. For example, if 4 adults volunteered to get off and they were replaced by a family of 4 with 2 children then using child weights could have allowed the flight to squeak under a weight restriction that couldn't be met with the 4 adults on board.

And PIT is definitely in PA, not OH. Unless the airport has moved since I've been there.....

Jim

I have seen a lot of crazy things in my days when it comes to W/B I will leave it at that

 

[barbeetantrums]

It definately sounded like it was an oversold situation, yet they called it a "Weight Restriction". Dirty pool, in my opinion. The operating airline was: US AIRWAYS EXPRESS CHAUTAUQUA AIRLINES

And yes, it was Pittsburgh OH (PIT).

I don't know how to break this to you but Pittsburgh has been relocated to the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania. That happened not too long ago, say, before the French and Indian War. :huh:

 

[delldude]

I don't know how to break this to you but Pittsburgh has been relocated to the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania. That happened not too long ago, say, before the French and Indian War. :huh:

try routes 20 north and 82 west....its in ohio but nowhere near an airport.
scheduled crop dusting flights outa goober finchley international daily.

 

[barbeetantrums]

try routes 20 north and 82 west....its in ohio but nowhere near an airport.
scheduled crop dusting flights outa goober finchley international daily.

Oh, I guess there IS a Pittsburg, OH. Looks like "Tony" was having a little fun at our expense.

 

[ringmaruf]

Pittsburgh,OH(?) is a bags positive station where bags bump passengers. Other stations are not that way.

Yes, we've all heard the horror stories of how the bags never make the flights at our Philadelphia, Alabama hub.

 

[tony]

Yes, we've all heard the horror stories of how the bags never make the flights at our Philadelphia, Alabama hub.

Oh man, I have no idea why I thought that Pittsburgh was in Ohio. I think because my last few flights through the midwest were in Cleveland, so I associated layovers with Ohio.

No, I wasn't having fun. I was just having a brain fart.

Regardless, pretty tactless of USAir.

 

[aerosmith]

Also there is a Pittsburg (no H) New Hampshire located on the Canadian border. Usless information, I know.

 

[SSRinPHX]

Oh man, I have no idea why I thought that Pittsburgh was in Ohio. I think because my last few flights through the midwest were in Cleveland, so I associated layovers with Ohio.

No, I wasn't having fun. I was just having a brain fart.

Regardless, pretty tactless of USAir.

It could have also been as simple as...someone added child counts and got more weight ok'd for passenegrs or there weren't as many bags checked or the capt's math added up better and they were able to take EVERYONE. 90% of the time I have a weight restriction we get it pretty much lifted by counting children in the area...sometimes there aren't as many bags at the end as they though...how can you say it's tactless unless you know the whole story? Pretty tactless to acuse without knowing all the facts involed...