TG sets waistline limit for passengers on 787-9 Dreamliners
Mar 16, 2018, 9:58 pm
#1
Original Poster
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: BKK
Programs: TG ROP Platinum, M&M Senator, IHG Platinum, Accor Platinum
Posts: 8,324
TG sets waistline limit for passengers on 787-9 Dreamliners
Attention obese fellow board members!
from Thai PBS:
Thai Airways International has banned passengers with over 56-inch waistline and passengers with kids on their laps from Business Class seating on its Boeing 787-9 Dreamliner.
The new regulation on oversized passengers was announced by THAI’s Corporate Image and Social Responsibility Division this week.
Flight Lieutenant Pratana Patanasiri, THAI Vice President, Aviation Safety, Security & Standards Department, clarified in the announcement today (March 16) that THAI has taken delivery of two Boeing 787-9 Dreamliner aircrafts to its service fleet since September last year.
He said that the aircraft manufacturer has fixed airbag in seat belt on Business Class seats. With this latest version of seatbelt, passengers with over 56 inches waist could not fasten the belt safely.
Therefore it is necessary for the company to abide by the safety standard rule strictly by not allowing passengers with waistline of over 56 inches and passengers travelling with infants on their laps to book the business class seats of the Boeing 787-9 Dreamliner aircrafts, he said.
THAI insisted that the seat belt meets aviation safety standard required by the US Federal Aviation Administration.
THAI sets waistline limit for passengers on 787-9 Dreamliners - Thai PBS English News
from Thai PBS:
Thai Airways International has banned passengers with over 56-inch waistline and passengers with kids on their laps from Business Class seating on its Boeing 787-9 Dreamliner.
The new regulation on oversized passengers was announced by THAI’s Corporate Image and Social Responsibility Division this week.
Flight Lieutenant Pratana Patanasiri, THAI Vice President, Aviation Safety, Security & Standards Department, clarified in the announcement today (March 16) that THAI has taken delivery of two Boeing 787-9 Dreamliner aircrafts to its service fleet since September last year.
He said that the aircraft manufacturer has fixed airbag in seat belt on Business Class seats. With this latest version of seatbelt, passengers with over 56 inches waist could not fasten the belt safely.
Therefore it is necessary for the company to abide by the safety standard rule strictly by not allowing passengers with waistline of over 56 inches and passengers travelling with infants on their laps to book the business class seats of the Boeing 787-9 Dreamliner aircrafts, he said.
THAI insisted that the seat belt meets aviation safety standard required by the US Federal Aviation Administration.
THAI sets waistline limit for passengers on 787-9 Dreamliners - Thai PBS English News
Mar 16, 2018, 10:59 pm
#2
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: WLG/BKK
Programs: TG*G, NZ*GE, QF G, Accor Gold
Posts: 10,193
I wonder how on earth someone buying a business class ticket will be advised of this requirement?!
What would happen if a large waisted pax in passenger in J on another type gets a swap to a 789?
What would happen if a large waisted pax in passenger in J on another type gets a swap to a 789?
Mar 16, 2018, 11:06 pm
#3
Original Poster
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: BKK
Programs: TG ROP Platinum, M&M Senator, IHG Platinum, Accor Platinum
Posts: 8,324
i guess they will not advise anybody on this and neither measure his/her waiste at check in, but if he/she does not fit into the seatbelt, the passenger will be downgraded to cattle class... aren't 56 inch a lot and quite exceptional?
Mar 16, 2018, 11:12 pm
#4
A FlyerTalk Posting Legend
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Minneapolis: DL DM charter 2.3MM
Programs: A3*Gold, SPG Plat, HyattDiamond, MarriottPP, LHW exAccess, ICI, Raffles Amb, NW PE MM, TWA Gold MM
Posts: 100,399
My guess is that the business class seats on this aircraft type have airbags, which are danagerous for lap kids, and cannot accommodate seat belt extenders.
Mar 17, 2018, 1:01 am
#5
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Denmark
Programs: TK Elite
Posts: 11,829
Maybe downgraded during take-off and landing but the unfortunate pax should be able to return to the C seat midflight where seatbelts are not required, right?
Mar 17, 2018, 2:12 am
#6
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Tokyo
Programs: JAL Metal Card (OWE), SAS Eurobonus Gold (*G), Marriott Titanium (LTP), Tokyu Hotels Platinum
Posts: 21,153
While 56" is a considerable waist size, I don't think that it is that unusual in the western hemisphere. I'd be curious to know what other airlines with airbag fitted does in terms of people needing extension belts....
Mar 17, 2018, 6:57 am
#7
Join Date: Jan 2016
Posts: 905
56" is pretty enormous ( if I'm 33" then it close to double my size...wow!). But this is unfair IMO. People of size are often required to pay extra for J because they won't fit in Y seats.
Do we really need airbags in the seat belt? The lap-sash is enough ,I think. In any case the admistration/application of this policy/requirement is fraught.
Do we really need airbags in the seat belt? The lap-sash is enough ,I think. In any case the admistration/application of this policy/requirement is fraught.
Mar 17, 2018, 10:35 am
#8
Join Date: Oct 2009
Programs: UA 1K, Hilton ♦ , Hyatt Carbonado, Wyndham ♦, Marriott PE, "Stinking Bum" elsewhere.
Posts: 4,993
56" is pretty enormous ( if I'm 33" then it close to double my size...wow!). But this is unfair IMO. People of size are often required to pay extra for J because they won't fit in Y seats.
Do we really need airbags in the seat belt? The lap-sash is enough ,I think. In any case the admistration/application of this policy/requirement is fraught.
Do we really need airbags in the seat belt? The lap-sash is enough ,I think. In any case the admistration/application of this policy/requirement is fraught.
As someone who was in a serious vehicle crash where the airbags malfunctioned (one exploded), but the seatbelt worked as designed, this seems like a ridiculous safety measure on an aircraft where crash speeds are likely to be more than twice the fastest highway auto crashes. I just can't see an airbag improving survivability significantly, unless they also place one under your butt to minimize the vertical decleration on your body.
Last edited by zombietooth; Mar 17, 2018 at 10:40 am
Mar 17, 2018, 2:04 pm
#9
Join Date: Mar 2015
Location: NYC (Primarily EWR)
Programs: UA 1K / *G, Marriott Bonvoy Gold; Avis PC
Posts: 9,005
56" is pretty enormous ( if I'm 33" then it close to double my size...wow!). But this is unfair IMO. People of size are often required to pay extra for J because they won't fit in Y seats.
Do we really need airbags in the seat belt? The lap-sash is enough ,I think. In any case the admistration/application of this policy/requirement is fraught.
Do we really need airbags in the seat belt? The lap-sash is enough ,I think. In any case the admistration/application of this policy/requirement is fraught.
Mar 17, 2018, 2:07 pm
#10
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Eurozone
Programs: LH SEN, HH Gold
Posts: 3,002
I don't see this having a --pardon the pun-- huge effect on TG's daily ops. There's a difference between measurement at the waistline versus across the bellybutton. While 56" at the waist isn't impossible to reach, it's a bridge afar. Anyone offended by not being accommodated in business class at that size has been accommodated all along and could use a wake-up call. Maybe this will be a positive life-changer for a few flyers in the long run.
Mar 17, 2018, 8:32 pm
#11
Original Poster
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: BKK
Programs: TG ROP Platinum, M&M Senator, IHG Platinum, Accor Platinum
Posts: 8,324
I don't see this having a --pardon the pun-- huge effect on TG's daily ops. There's a difference between measurement at the waistline versus across the bellybutton. While 56" at the waist isn't impossible to reach, it's a bridge afar. Anyone offended by not being accommodated in business class at that size has been accommodated all along and could use a wake-up call. Maybe this will be a positive life-changer for a few flyers in the long run.
for many at that size it is disease related or they are completely hopeless at any diet
Mar 18, 2018, 8:50 am
#12
Join Date: Jan 2012
Programs: Emirates Gold
Posts: 225
Personally, I do not think this is an issue, after-all how many people are we really talking about ? The chances of someone being over 56" waist, flying with Thai and on that particular plane configuration must be relatively small surely. As for the comments on the airbags, one assumes that many safety tests have been run and that there is clear evidence that the bags will help in a crash...
Mar 18, 2018, 4:21 pm
#14
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Tokyo
Programs: JAL Metal Card (OWE), SAS Eurobonus Gold (*G), Marriott Titanium (LTP), Tokyu Hotels Platinum
Posts: 21,153
Mar 18, 2018, 8:27 pm
#15
Original Poster
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: BKK
Programs: TG ROP Platinum, M&M Senator, IHG Platinum, Accor Platinum
Posts: 8,324