Air fares should reflect the combined weight of the passenger and their luggage

As a result of international sanctions, certain commodities are in very short supply in Iran and last month my friend "Insane" Hussein Avhadmedinnerdad, who is a stallholder in Tehran's Grand Bazaar, asked me to send him a consignment of cornflakes over as they cannot be officially imported into Iran. So I went to my local cash-and-carry, bought a 1m² wholesale box of this decadent Western breakfast cereal and sent it to him by air freight, for which the airline charged me $50.Then, this month, Hussein got in touch again and asked me if I could send him something else that he couldn't get in Iran - highly enriched uranium - which he said is much in demand at the moment. For some reason, however, the cash-and-carry doesn't stock uranium so I went to see my friend "Bonkers" Boris Pantzov, a Ukrainian arms dealer who drinks in my local pub, and who can get his hands on anything for a price, and he kindly sold me a 1m² crate full of weapons-grade uranium billets. To my great indignation, though, the freight forwarder wanted to Jew me out of whopping $50,000 to send the container even though it was exactly the same size of the one I sent before for just $50!The reason for this extra cost was, of course, that the price was determined more by the weight than the physical dimensions of the packages and uranium weighs 19,050.00kg/m² (1), whereas cornflakes only weigh 8.25kg/m² (2), and the weight of my crate of uranium equated to over a third of the maximum payload of a Boeing 767-300 Freighter cargo plane. (3)In the case of passenger planes, the cost of fuel normally accounts for around 30% of airlines' revenues (4) and is their most significant single expense. On medium-haul flights every extra kilogram of weight uses an extra litre of fuel, and even more on long-haul flights. (5) So why, then, does a little old lady travelling only with hand luggage pay the same air fare as some huge obese woman travelling with a big heavy suitcase plus hand luggage when we know the the little old lady costs the airline so much less in fuel to transport? Presumably, the answer has something to do with airlines not wanting to be accused of discriminating against overweight people, but this means that normal people are, in effect, subsidising the air travel of fat people, which is plainly unjust.That's why I propose that air fares should reflect the combined weight of passengers and their luggage. This is a simplified version of how the fares could be calculated in the future:Current fare for all passengers including 1 piece hold baggage allowance - $500Future fare for below average weight passenger with no hold baggage - $400Future fare for below average weight passenger with 1 piece hold baggage - $450Future fare for below average weight passenger with 2 piece hold baggage - $500Future fare for average weight passenger with no hold baggage - $450Future fare for average weight passenger with 1 piece hold baggage - $500Future fare for average weight passenger with 2 pieces hold baggage - $550Future fare for overweight passenger with no hold baggage - $500Future fare for overweight passenger with 1 piece hold baggage - $550Future fare for overweight passenger with 2 pieces hold baggage - $600Using this pricing method all passengers will make the appropriate contribution to the cost of fuelling the plane for the flight and the air fares will reflect the true cost of the tickets.Thank you.(1) http://www.rsc.org...(2) A 750g box of Kellogg's cornflakes has volume of 0.080626499m² allowing 11 boxes to be packed into a square metre container, thus cornflakes have a mass of 8.250kg/m², meaning that billets of uranium are 2,309 times heavier than boxes of cornflakes(3) http://www.boeing.com...(4) http://www.airlinefinancials.com...(5) http://www.airliners.net...