Airlines Showing More Thigh

30,000 feet above the fruited plain is not the place to catch the raciest new fare from Hollywood…unless you own your own plane, of course. Then you can watch and/or do whatever you want. But for the most part, airlines from American to Xanadu have shown movies onboard that can be viewed by everyone, keeping things mainly within what might be considered family fare. This is not absolute, of course. JetBlue’s 21 gazillion channels of DirectTV provide the opportunity to poke that annoying little armrest button long enough to find, say The Terminator gunning people down while you fly. But for the most part when it comes to the movies being shown aboard movies that were actually selected by the airline, they have been tame.

According to sister-site Cinematical, that may not be the case any longer. Some airlines, they say, are beginning to show more racy, mainstream fare like Brokeback Mountain and Transamerica with the idea that this will provide more choice, variety, and current releases to passengers. I for one think i’s a good if not great idea, so long as they don’t begging showing Debbie Does Dallas or something. The fact is, given the lousy crop of films out these days, the more variety the better so as to tolerate those six or so long hours in the air.

Girth Surcharge: Should Overweight People Pay More to Fly?

While boarding a Southwest flight on Sunday, I found myself in the back of the airplane looking at the two remaining seats–both of which were middle seats. One, however, was next to a particularly overweight woman whose girth spilled over into the free seat. Can you guess which seat I ended up choosing? That’s a no-brainer.

Fellow passengers who infringe on another person’s sitting area tend to be particularly despised. And yet, there is only one American carrier who has done anything about it; Southwest.

A fascinating article in Sunday’s New York Times tackles the issue of overweight passengers taking up too much space on planes. Southwest, Charles Passy writes, solves the problem by simply forcing obese passengers to buy a second seat onto which their fat may spill.

And what constitutes obese? A person who cannot lower the armrest while sitting down.

Naturally, the airline was sued for discrimination. Southwest, however, surprisingly won. Perhaps this was due to another lawsuit in which a passenger on Delta successfully sued the airline after sitting next to a 450 pound man who encroached well into the plaintiff’s seat. The plaintiff sued under the pretext that he had paid for a full seat and did not receive one.

So, what to do? From a purely selfish standpoint, I agree with Southwest; an overweight person should purchase a second seat so as not to squish their fellow passengers. On the other hand, I understand the discrimination at play here.

I suppose things could be worse for the grossly obese: they could be charged for their weight. On most airlines they pay the same cost as I do, but are allowed to board with a few hundred pounds of excess baggage. And yet, if my personal luggage weighs more than 50 pounds, I have to pay $50 in excess fees. Does this mean that I’m subsidizing someone else’s chocolate milk shake that went straight to their hips?

Holiday Fares Starting to Soar

San Francisco Chronicle has a very good reminder for those of us wanting to travel this holiday season: buy your tickets NOW! They not only dish this common travel knowledge our way, but make clear which dates are going to cost you a pretty penny and which may save you a buck or three. For instance the following dates (Friday, Nov. 17 thru Monday, Nov. 27 ) around Thanksgiving are going to mean more damage on the pocket book. No one wants to travel while the turkey is being passed around the table, but that kind of flexibility will allow you to see your loved ones without paying a mini fortune.

Other dates worth looking into are those between Thanksgiving and Christmas – the period of Nov. 28 to Dec. 16. In addition to helping you select which dates are right to go, they also spill which destinations will cost more on the inbound and return flights. You almost couldn’t ask for a better summary! Check it out.

Madrid’s Airport Wins Plaudits

I’m a big fan of airports. Not just because when I am in one of them it means I am traveling somewhere (which I love). I enjoy them for their look and feel. For their vibrant mood suggesting a humanity on the move, of cultures intermixing. This is especially the case when an airport is well-designed. Think of the United Airlines terminal in Chicago’s O’Hare airport. The gaping spaces above, the jazzled (new word) multicolored lights overhead as you cruise through the people mover, the broad terminal halls. It’s a lovely airport that fills you with zeal and appreciation and gladness to be alive in the 21st century. Or at least, that’s how I feel about it

Well, apparently a new airport terminal in Madrid’s Barajas International Airport, has got a lot of people talking. It, too has dazzling lofty light filled halls where passengers come and go. And it’s look is so new and appealing that it recently won a major award. Saturday m the terminal was honored with the Royal Institute of British Architects Stirling Prize, Britain’s most prestigious architecture award. The building was designed by Richard Rogers and cost $7.2 billion. It is said to double the size of the Spanish capital’s main airport when it opened in February. I have not seen it yet, but as I perused some photos of the new terminal, I decided that the next time I’m in Spain, I’m going to make a special trip to check it out.

Flying Green

It’s been on my mind lately. How much harm are we doing to the environment, flying around in fuel-guzzling jumbo jets? Being a large city dweller, I haven’t owned a car for years. However, I’ll jet around any chance I get.

On a per-passenger basis, flying is still less damaging than driving. (Here’s a nifty carbon calculator to see how much CO2 your next flight will generate.) However, airplanes do burn a lot of fuel and generally push pollutants up higher in the atmosphere than cars (the effects of which are being debated).

Fortunately, there is some hope for the guilty-minded. Some companies are offering the ability to pay for carbon-sequestering, sometimes by paying to have trees planted to offset carbon emissions, including Myclimate.org and TerraPass. Information about these programs is available on the web, including recent articles in the NY Times and Wired, and MyClimate’s site carbonoffsets.org.

Expedia, apparently, now offers to sell you offsets directly, charging $5.99 per 1,000 pounds of CO2, or about the amount from a 2,200 mile flight.