Survey on standard weights of passengers and
baggage
Final report
drs. Z. Berdowski
drs. F.N. van den Broek-Serlé
J.T. Jetten
ir. Y. Kawabata
ir. J.T. Schoemaker
ir. R. Versteegh
This report has been financed by EASA.
Reference EASA 2008.C.06/30800/R20090095/30800000/FBR/RLO
Zoetermeer, May 2009
Quoting of numbers and/or text is permitted only when the source is clearly mentioned.
Survey on standard weights of passengers and
baggage
Final report
Survey on standard weights of passengers and luggage
R20090095.doc 5
May 2009
Contents
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 13
1 INTRODUCTION 15
1.1 Project Aim 15
1.2 Background 15
1.2.1 Trend analysis on weight development 15
1.2.2 Causes of weight developments 17
1.2.3 Forecast (future trends) 18
1.2.4 Impact of weight on air transport operations 19
1.2.5 Diffusion and flexibility in application of definitions in the air
travel market 21
1.3 Report structure 22
2 METHODOLOGY OF THE SURVEY 23
2.1 Introduction 23
2.2 Principles and approach of the survey 23
2.2.1 General set-up of the survey 23
2.2.2 Regional division and selection of airports 24
2.2.3 Field work process 29
2.2.4 Required sample size 30
2.2.5 Data surveyed and recorded 32
2.3 Data cleaning 37
2.3.1 Cleaning Summer data 38
2.3.2 Comparison of Summer/Winter data corrections 39
2.3.3 Data correction algorithm 40
2.4 Adding data on luggage and baggage allowance policies 41
2.5 Description of analyses/statistical principles applied in the
survey 42
3 RESPONSE 47
3.1 Introduction 47
3.2 Description of the field work per airport 47
3.3 Experiences and problems encountered and counter measures 49
3.4 Results of data cleaning 51
3.4.1 Collected and corrected data per season 51
3.5 Frequency tables 54
3.5.1 Meta information 54
3.5.2 Records on passengers and baggage 58
4 RESULTS 61
4.1 Introduction 61
4.2 Mean masses – step 1 61
4.2.1 Children masses 61
4.2.2 Passenger masses 62
4.2.3 Carry-on luggage 66
4.2.4 Checked baggage 70
4.3 Analysis by explanatory variables - step 2 71
Survey on standard weights of passengers and luggage
6 R20090095.doc
May 2009
4.3.1 Correlation between factors and mass values 71
4.3.2 Appropriateness of the factors 74
4.4 Regression analysis – step 3 81
4.4.1 Passenger masses including carry-on luggage 81
4.4.2 Checked baggage 83
4.5 Comparison with EU safety regulations 84
4.5.1 Current EU safety regulations 84
4.5.2 Measured passenger masses applied to safety regulation 86
4.5.3 Measured checked baggage masses applied to safety
regulation 88
4.5.4 Recommended standard masses for updating EU safety
regulations 88
5 CONCLUSIONS AND
RECOMMENDATIONS 91
5.1 Conclusions 91
5.1.1 Conclusions on the survey set-up and the field work 91
5.1.2 Conclusions on the survey results 92
5.1.3 Conclusions on comparison of survey results with EUOPS 93
5.2 Recommendations on revisions of standard mass regulations 93
ANNEX A Weighing team instructions 95
ANNEX B Survey schedule 105
ANNEX C Tables passengers excluding carry-on
luggage 107
ANNEX D Tables passengers including carry-on
luggage 129
ANNEX E Tables check-in baggage 151
ANNEX F Tables relation between factors and weight 173
ANNEX G IATA airport code (3-letter) 196
ANNEX H IATA airline code (2-letter) 207
ANNEX I Overview of variable names 211
ANNEX J List of charter airlines 251
ANNEX K List of low-cost airlines 255
ANNEX L List of website links consulted for
baggage allowance restriction 259
Survey on standard weights of passengers and luggage
R20090095.doc 7
May 2009
TABLES
0.1
Net number of observations 13
0.2 Recommended standard masses for updating EU safety
regulations* 14
2-1 Regions and selected airports representing the regions 25
2-2 Region 1: UK, Ireland 25
2-3 Region 2: Benelux and France 26
2-4 Region 3: Spain, Portugal and Italy 27
2-5 Region 4: Scandinavia 27
2-6 Region 5: Germany, Switzerland and Austria 28
2-7 Region 6: Baltic states, Poland, Czech Republic, Slovakia,
Hungary and Slovenia 28
2-8 Region 7: Greece, Cyprus and Malta 29
2-9 Region 8: Romania and Bulgaria 29
2-10 Required sample size following the outcomes of the pilot
survey at ATH 31
2-11 Required sample size according to four random samples of
the ATH pilot data 31
2-12 Regions of departure/region of arrival 35
2-13 Data correction algorithm, performed fixes (from least to
most severe) 41
2-14 Number of baggage records within the survey and used in
specific correlation analysis 42
3-1 Summer passenger data collected and corrected 52
3-2 Summer checked baggage data collected and corrected 52
3-3 Winter passenger data collected and corrected 53
3-4 Winter checked baggage data collected and corrected 53
3-5 Frequency table: passenger records by gender 54
3-6 Frequency table: passengers records by season 54
3-7 Frequency table: passengers records by airport, total
survey 55
3-8 Frequency table: passengers records on Non-European,
European or Domestic flights 55
3-9 Frequency table: purpose of trip, related to number of
passengers 55
3-10 Frequency table: class of travel, related to number of
passengers 56
3-11 Frequency table: checked baggage records related by
gender 56
3-12 Frequency table: checked baggage by season 56
3-13 Frequency table: pieces of checked baggage by airport,
total survey 57
3-14 Frequency table: Non-European, European or Domestic
flight 57
3-15 Frequency table: purpose 58
3-16 Frequency table: class of travel 58
3-17 Net numbers of passengers and checked baggage weighed
by season and gender 59
3-18 Passenger masses excluding carry-on luggage by season
and gender (the figures for adult passengers include
passengers carrying an infant) 60
4.1 Passenger masses by age; children 2-12 years 62
Survey on standard weights of passengers and luggage
8 R20090095.doc
May 2009
4.2 Age distribution by gender 63
4.3 Purpose of trip 64
4.4 Flight type related to gender distribution 66
4.5 Airline type related to gender distribution 66
4.6 Mean masses of carry-on luggage for all passengers 67
4.7 Passenger masses including carry-on luggage by season
and gender (the figures for adult passengers include
passengers carrying an infant) 68
4.8 Maximum allowed* and measured values of carry-on
luggage masses by airline and destination 69
4.9 Checked baggage masses by season and gender 70
4.10 Criteria to judge the appropriateness of factors in new
regulations 75
4.11 Linear regression analysis with dependent variable passenger
masses incl. carry-on luggage (best fit model); all
passengers > 12 years 81
4.12 Different ratios 83
4.13 Linear regression analysis with dependant variable checked
baggage masses (best fit model) 84
4.14 Standard masses of male and female passengers on an
aeroplane with 20 and 30 or more seats 85
4.15 Average standard masses in aeroplanes with nineteen or less
seats 85
4.16 Standard masses of checked baggage on an aeroplane with
20 or more seats 86
4.17 Standard masses of male and female passengers on an
aeroplane with 20 and 30 or more seats (EU-OPS), and
measured masses* 87
4.18 Checked baggage masses 88
4.19 Recommended standard masses for updating EU safety
regulations* 88
B-1 Pilot and Summer survey 2008 schedule 105
B-2 Winter survey 2009 schedule 105
C-1 Passenger weights by season and gender 109
C-2 Passenger weights by season and age; children 2-12 years 110
C-3 Passenger weights by season, purpose and gender 111
C-4 Passenger weights by season, class and gender (children
2-12 years excluded; male/female with infants < 2 years
included) 112
C-5 Passenger weights by season, route type and gender
(male/female with infants <2 years included) 113
C-6 Passenger weights by season, route type and gender
(male/female with infants <2 years included) (Part II) 114
C- 7 Passenger weights by season, flight type and gender
(male/female with infants < 2 years included) 115
C-8 Passenger weights by season, airline type and gender
(male/female with infants < 2 years included) 116
C-9 Passenger weights by season, airline type and gender
(male/female with infants < 2 years included) (Part II) 117
C-10 Passenger weights by gender and region of departure
(male/female with infants < 2 years included) 118
Survey on standard weights of passengers and luggage
R20090095.doc 9
May 2009
C-11 Passenger weights by gender and region of departure
(male/female with infants < 2 years included) (Part II) 119
C-12 Passenger weights by gender and region of destination
(male/female with infants <2 years included) 120
C-13 Passenger weights by gender and region of destination
(male/female with infants <2 years included) (Part II) 121
C-14 Passenger weights by gender and airport; Summer 122
C-15 Passenger weights by gender and airport; Summer (Part II) 123
C-16 Passenger weights by gender and airport; Winter 124
C-17 Passenger weights by gender and airport; Winter (Part II) 125
C-18 Passenger weights by gender and airport; totals 126
C-19 Passenger weights by gender and airport; totals (Part II) 127
D-1 Maximum kilos of permitted carry-on luggage 131
D-2 Percentage of passengers carrying more or less than
permitted kilos of carry-on luggage 132
D-3 Passenger weights by season and gender; incl. carry-on
luggage 133
D-4 Passenger weights by season, purpose and gender; incl.
carry-on luggage 134
D-5 Passenger weights by season, gender and class ; incl.
carry-on luggage 135
D-6 Passenger weights by season, gender and route type; incl.
carry-on luggage 136
D-7 Passenger weights by season, gender and route type; incl.
carry-on luggage (Part II) 137
D-8 Passenger weights by season, flight type and gender; incl.
carry-on luggage 138
D-9 Passenger weights by season, airline type and gender;
incl. carry-on luggage 139
D-10 Passenger weights by season, airline type and gender;
incl. carry-on luggage (Part II) 140
D-11 Passenger weights by gender and region of departure incl.
carry-on luggage 141
D-12 Passenger weights by gender and region of departure incl.
carry-on luggage (Part II) 142
D-13 Passenger weights by gender and region of arrival; incl.
carry-on luggage 143
D-14 Passenger weights by gender and region of arrival; incl.
carry-on luggage (Part II) 144
D-15 Passenger weights by gender and airport; incl. carry-on
luggage; Summer 145
D-16 Passenger weights by gender and airport; incl. carry-on
luggage; Summer (Part II) 146
D-17 Passenger weights by gender and airport; incl. carry-on
luggage; Winter 147
D-18 Passenger weights by gender and airport; incl. carry-on
luggage; Winter (Part II) 148
D-19 Passenger weights by gender and airport; totals. incl.
carry-on luggage 149
D-20 Passenger weights by gender and airport; totals. incl.
carry-on luggage (Part II) 150
E-1 Checked baggage weights by season and gender 153
Survey on standard weights of passengers and luggage
10 R20090095.doc
May 2009
E-2 Checked baggage weights by season, purpose and gender 154
E-3 Checked baggage weights by season, gender and class 155
E-4 Checked baggage weights by season, route type and
gender 156
E-5 Checked baggage weights by season, route type and
gender (Part II) 157
E-6 Checked baggage weights by season, flight type and
gender 158
E-7 Checked baggage weights by season, airline type and
gender 159
E-8 Checked baggage weights by season, airline type and
gender (Part II) 160
E-9 Checked baggage weights by gender and region of
departure 161
E-10 Checked baggage weights by gender and region of
departure (Part II) 162
E-11 Checked baggage weights by gender and region of arrival 163
E-12 Checked baggage weights by gender and region of arrival
(Part II) 164
E-13 Checked baggage weights by gender and region; Summer 165
E-14 Checked baggage weights by gender and region; Winter 166
E-15 Checked baggage weights by gender and region; totals 167
E-16 Checked baggage weights by season, gender and haul
label 168
E-17 Checked baggage weights by season, gender and haul
label (Part II) 169
E-18 Checked baggage weights by season, gender and number
of persons concerned 170
E-19 Checked baggage weights by gender and permitted weight
(max.kg) 171
F-1 Correlations between different factors and mass weights on
passengers and carry-on luggage; male (Pearson
correlations) 175
F-2 Correlations between different factors and mass weights on
passengers and carry-on luggage; female (Pearson
correlations) 176
F-3 Correlations between different factors and mass weights on
passengers and carry-on luggage; ; total (ex children) 177
F-4 T-test for equality of mean weights by gender, season and
flight type scheduled and non-scheduled (children
excluded) 178
F-5 Mean weights by gender, season and flight type (children
excluded) 179
F-6 Passenger weights by age groups and gender (excl. carry-
on luggage and excl. children) 180
F-7 T-test for equality of mean weights by gender and season:
differences between route types (children excluded) 181
F-8 Mean weights by gender, season and route type (children
excluded) 182
F-9 Mean weights by gender, season and route type (children
excluded) (Part II) 183
Survey on standard weights of passengers and luggage
R20090095.doc 11
May 2009
F-10 T-test for equality of mean weights by gender and season:
differences between haul labels (children excluded) 184
F-11 Percentage female passengers by region in which flight
started or ended 185
F-12 Analysis of variances in differences in weights between
regions of start and finish flight by region and gender 186
F-13 Linear regression analysis with dependent variable
passenger weights incl. carry-on luggage (best fit model);
all passengers >12 years 187
F-14 Linear regression analysis with dependent variable
passenger weights incl. carry-on luggage (best fit model);
male passengers 189
F-15 Linear regression analysis with dependent variable
passenger weights excl. carry-on luggage (best fit model);
male passengers 190
F-16 Linear regression analysis with dependent variable carry-
on luggage weights (best fit model); male passengers 191
F -17 Linear regression analysis with dependent variable
passenger weights incl. carry-on luggage (best fit model);
female passengers 192
F -18 Linear regression analysis with dependent variable
passenger weights excl. carry-on luggage (best fit model);
female passengers 193
F-19 Linear regression analysis with dependent variable carry-
on luggage weights (best fit model); female passengers 194
F-20 Linear regression analysis with dependant variable
checked baggage masses (best fit model) 195
I-1 Variable names of Passenger and Carry-on luggage data 213
I-2 Variable names of Passenger and Carry-on luggage data
(Part II) 214
I-3 Variable information: Passenger and carry-on luggage
data 215
I-4 Frequency table: airport of weighing session 216
I-5 Frequency table: season 217
I-6 Frequency table: gender 218
I-7 Frequency table: Passenger with a baby (< 2 years): yes /
no 219
I -8 Frequency table: purpose 220
I -9 Frequency table: Outbound flight or Inbound flight 221
I -10 Frequency table: class of travel 222
I -11 Frequency table: Passenger has check in luggage: yes / no 223
I-12 Frequency table: Non-European, European or Domestic
flight 224
I -13 Frequency table: Scheduled or non-scheduled flight 225
I-14 Frequency table: Type of carrier 226
I-15 Frequency table: Region of airport of departure 227
I-16 Frequency table: Region of airport of arrival 228
I-17 Frequency table: Short/medium/long haul flight 229
I-18 Frequency table: Maximum weight value determined from
simplified airline regulations 230
I-19 Variable names of Checked baggage data 231
I -20 Variable names of Checked baggage data 232
Survey on standard weights of passengers and luggage
12 R20090095.doc
May 2009
I -21 Variable information: Checked baggage data 233
I -22 Frequency table: airport of weighing session 234
I -23 Frequency table: season 235
I-24 Frequency table: gender 236
I-25 Frequency table: Passenger with a baby (< 2 years): yes /
no 237
I-26 Frequency table: purpose 238
I -27 Frequency table: Outbound flight or Inbound flight 239
I-28 Frequency table: class of travel 240
I -29 Frequency table: Checked baggage for one or more
passengers 241
I-30 Frequency table: Non-European, European or Domestic
flight 242
I-31 Frequency table: Scheduled or non-scheduled flight 243
I-32 Frequency table: Type of carrier 244
I-33 Frequency table: Region of airport of departure 245
I-34 Frequency table: Region of airport of arrival 246
I-35 Frequency table: Short/medium/long haul flight 247
I-36 Frequency table: USA related flight 248
I-37 Frequency table: Maximum weight value determined from
simplified airline regulations 249
J-1 List of charter airlines 253
K-1
List of low-cost airlines 257
K-2
List of low-cost airlines (Part II) 258
Survey on standard weights of passengers and luggage
R20090095.doc 13
May 2009
Executive summary
Introduction
March 2008 European Aviation Safety Agency (EASA) granted NEA the service
contract for the Performance of a Survey on Standard Weights of Passengers and
Baggage. The aim of the survey was to conduct a Pan-European survey of the
current weights of passengers, carry-on luggage and checked baggage.
The 2008-2009 EASA Survey on Standard Weights of Passengers and Baggage
has been carried out according to requirements laid down in the contract. The
total number of observations for passengers is 22,901 and 22,353 for checked
baggage (see Table 0.1).
Table 0.1 Net number of observations
Total net number of
observations in survey
All Passengers 22,901
Checked baggage 22,353
Source: NEA
Conclusions
The 2008 – 2009 EASA survey on Standard Weights of Passengers and Baggage
gives mass values of passengers, carry-on luggage and checked baggage.
The survey set-up proved to be an effective way to build a data-set on
passenger, carry-on luggage and checked baggage mass values on European
flights that enabled statistically sound analyses of factors influencing these mass
values and comparison with the current EU safety regulations in place.
The results of the analyses can be used for revisions of the currently applicable
regulations on standard masses. Comparisons show that the masses derived
from the survey are higher than currently incorporated in EU safety regulations
on standard masses for male passengers, female passengers, all adults, carry-on
luggage and checked baggage.
The correlations with the following factors have been analysed:
Passenger characteristics: age, gender;
Passenger behavioural characteristics: carrying an infant, carrying carry-on
luggage, travelling by purpose (business or leisure);
Place and time of the measurements: airport (eight airports were selected)
season (Summer or Winter);
Trip characteristics: direction (outbound or inbound), route type (domestic,
European and non-European), region of departure or arrival (fourteen regions
have been distinguished), and class of travel (economy, business or first);
Flight characteristics: flight type (scheduled or not-scheduled), airline type
(regular scheduled, charter or low cost) and airline policies concerning
maximum of baggage mass.
Survey on standard weights of passengers and luggage
14 R20090095.doc
May 2009
The analyses show that passenger characteristics (gender, age, purpose of trip)
have the most influence on passenger mass. The factor ‘gender’ shows the
strongest correlation with passenger mass.
Recommended standard masses for updating EU safety regulations and
further research
The recommended standard mass values for male, female, adult passengers and
checked baggage are presented in Table 0.2. Separate standard masses for male
and female adults are recommended. The recommended male/female ratio is
70/30. For carry-on luggage masses it is recommended to include this mass in a
value for passenger + carry-on luggage. The recommended standard mass for
checked baggage is 17 kg.
Table 0.2 Recommended standard masses for updating EU safety
regulations*
Passenger seats: 20 and more 30 and more
Passengers Male Female M/F ratio All adult
All flights 94 kg 75 kg 70/30 88 kg
Checked baggage
All flights 17 kg 17 kg n.a. 17 kg
Source: NEA
* The standard masses include hand baggage and the mass of any infant below two years
of age carried by an adult on one passenger seat.
Determination of a standard mass for children is a remaining issue because the
required accuracy was not reached. This is due to the fact that the weight of
humans typically increases strongly between 2 and 12 years. In order to
determine a new statistical standard mass for children, it is recommended to
perform an additional survey with special focus on children.
Based on the outcomes of the survey, it is recommended to perform a full new
survey in 10 years time in order to update the dataset. It is not recommended to
apply general weight development data on the exisiting dataset to update
standard mass values because of differences in the survey purposes and designs
(sampling frames, age of population surveyed etc.).
Survey on standard weights of passengers and luggage
R20090095.doc 15
May 2009
1 Introduction
1.1 Project Aim
In March, 2008 the Euopean Aviation Safety Agency (EASA) granted NEA the
service contract for the Performance of a Survey on Standard Weights of
Passengers and Baggage. The aim of the survey was to conduct a Pan-European
survey of the current weights of passengers, carry-on luggage and checked
baggage. As initially defined by the JAA SWWG
1
the objective was to ascertain a
set of weights of passengers, hand and checked baggage for use of aircraft mass
and balance upon statistical principles and to investigate, identify and advise on
the circumstances in which weights may be inapplicable and require a separate
analysis.
The results of this project will be considered for an update of the standard mass
tables used by European airlines.
A further aim was to identify and assess the various factors that have influenced
the change of passengers and baggage weights and their impact on the standard
mass values. The project will also contribute to identifying statistical principles to
further review standard mass values on a regular basis.
1.2 Background
The JAA SWWG report dated the 31
st
of October, 2006 states that a number of
factors have changed since the standard mass values were determined. One of
the optional recommendations of the report was to use health survey data to
update the passenger standard masses and a weight survey for bags. “Health
data presents the advantage of being available from various European countries.
… Health survey data also has the advantage that it is available every year so
that it would be possible to conduct a review of standard weights at regular
intervals so that they never become invalid.”
In this paragraph an overview is given of desk research on the weight
development of people and the effect this might have on the weight and balance
of an airplane.
1.2.1 Trend analysis on weight development
Global trends
Globally, there are more than 1 billion overweight adults. According to the US
Federal Centres for Disease Control and Prevention, a solid majority of 65% of
Americans were overweight in 2006. The average American man grew from
75,30 kg (166 pounds) in 1960 to 86,64 kg (191 pounds) in 2002, while the
1
JAA SWWG: Standard Weights Working Group of the Joint Aviation Authorities
Survey on standard weights of passengers and luggage
16 R20090095.doc
May 2009
average women’s weight rose from 63.5 kg (160 pounds) to over 74 kg (164
pounds).
2
The new federal guidelines, which came into effect in the US on August 11
th
,
2005, mean that female passengers with carry-on baggage will be counted as
weighing 81 kg (179 pounds) in the Summer months, which is an increase of
almost 16 kg (35 pounds), and almost 83.5 kg (184 pounds) in the Winter, which
is a gain of more than 15 kg (34 pounds), with the average weight for male
passengers with carry-on bags rising to almost 91 kg (200 pounds) in the
Summer and 93 kg (205 pounds) in the Winter. Both increases are of almost 7
kg (15 pounds). In addition, youngsters aged between 2 and 13 years old will be
calculated at 37 kg (82 pounds) in the Summer and almost 39.5 kg (87 pounds)
in the Winter. The increase in weight takes into account the fact that recent
research in the US has revealed that passenger’s body weight has increased and
clothing is generally heavier in the Winter months.
3
About 17.6 million children under five years of age worldwide are estimated to
be overweight. According to the US Surgeon General, in the US the number of
overweight children has doubled and the number of overweight adolescents has
trebled since 1980.
4
Increased consumption of more energy-dense, nutrient-poor foods with high
levels of sugar and saturated fats, combined with reduced physical activity, have
led to overweight and obesity rates that have risen three-fold or more since
1980 in some areas of North America, the United Kingdom, Eastern Europe, the
Middle East, the Pacific Islands, Australia and China. Overweight is commonly
assessed by using body mass index (BMI). The BMI for overweight is over 25.
This development is not restricted to industrialised societies; this increase is
often faster in developing countries than in the developed world. In addition to
this, both adults and children from lower socio-economic groups are found to be
less physically active than those of a higher socio-economic status.
5
European trends
Data on weight development in Europe usually are taken from national health
surveys. Because of differences in the survey designs (sampling frames, age of
population surveyed etc.) the results are difficult to compare. Truly comparable
data are available from the results of single Pan-European studies; the most
recent study that includes the prevalence of overweight and obesity is the WHO
MONICA project. The latest results of this project showed that in the mid-1990’s
between 8% (Moscow, Russia) and 24% (Kuopio Province, Finland and rural
Augsburg, Germany) of men aged between 35 to 64 were obese. For women
aged between 35 to 64, between 10% (Toulouse in France, Gothenburg in
2
Lehigh University; http://www3.lehigh.edu/News/V2news_story.asp?iNewsID=1765
3
New regulations result in increased average weight of passengers and luggage on US
airlines, Airline Industry Information- (C)1997-2005 M2 Communications Limited,
2005
4
World Health Organization, Global Strategy on Diet, Physical Activity and Health,
Factsheet 2003
5
World Health Organization, Global Strategy on Diet, Physical Activity and Health,
Factsheet 2003
Survey on standard weights of passengers and luggage
R20090095.doc 17
May 2009
Sweden, and Vaud/Fribourg in Switzerland) and 36% (Tanobrzeg Vovoidship,
Poland) were obese.
6
Recent WHO estimates (based on national survey data) suggest that the
prevalence of obesity in men aged 15 and above ranges from 5% in Uzbekistan
to 26% in Greece, and the prevalence in women ranges from 6% in Norway to
30% in Turkey. There does not appear to be any clear geographical pattern to
the variation in the prevalence of obesity in either men or women.
Overweight affects 30-80% of adults in the countries of the WHO European
Region. And about 20% of children and adolescents are overweight.
7
Although the numbers of those overweight are rising everywhere, The world
health report 2002 revealed that Europe now has one of the highest average BMI
of all WHO regions - nearly 26.5. According to the most recent data on nationally
representative samples from different countries in the European Region, the
prevalence of obesity (BMI over 30) ranges from 5% to 20% in men and up to
30% in women. Research also shows a rapid closing of the gap in prevalence
between the Western and Eastern parts of the Region. Currently almost 400
million adults in the Region are estimated to be overweight and about 130
million are estimated to be obese.
8
The increase of weight is very profound amongst children. In France, for
example, the prevalence of childhood overweight and obesity increased from 3%
in 1960 to 16% in 2000. In Poland the prevalence increased from 8% to 18%
between 1994 and 2000, while Hungary reports 20% of children aged 11-14
years are obese.
9
Amongst primary school-aged children (both sexes), the
highest prevalence rates of overweight were in Portugal (7-9 years, 32%), Spain
(2-9 years, 31%) and Italy (6-11 years, 27%); the lowest rates were in Germany
(5-6 years, 13%), Cyprus (2-6 years, 14% and Serbia and Montenegro (6-10
years, 15%).
10
1.2.2 Causes of weight developments
As incomes rise and populations become more urban, diets high in complex
carbohydrates give way to more varied diets with a higher proportion of fats,
saturated fats and sugars. At the same time, large shifts towards less physically
demanding work have been observed worldwide. A more sedentary lifestyle due
to the rise in welfare is one obvious cause for the increase of weight. Most of our
daily living environments, including transport, housing, employment, school and
some leisure settings, have become less conductive to physical activity.
6
http://www.heartstats.org/datapage.asp?id=4745; Prevalence of and trends in
overweight and obesity in Europe, British Heart Foundation Statistics Website,
August 4, 2008
7
World Health Organization, The challenge of obesity in the WHO European Region
and the strategies for response. Summary, 2007
8
World Health Organization Europe, Fact sheet EURO13/05, Copenhagen, Bucharest,
12 September 2005
9
World Health Organization Europe, Fact sheet EURO13/05, Copenhagen, Bucharest,
12 September 2005
10
World Health Organization, The challenge of obesity in the WHO European Region
and the strategies for response. Summary, 2007
Survey on standard weights of passengers and luggage
18 R20090095.doc
May 2009
Consequently, the overall trend is towards considerably lower levels of total
physical activity.
11
Combine this with the (regular) consumption of (too much)
fast food and the increase of weight is obvious.
Physical inactivity also seems to be a growing problem during childhood due to
the societal changes described below:
1 Transport sector: In most Western European countries, the steeply growing
demand for mobility over several decades has been satisfied mainly through
the increased use of private cars. Similar patterns have been observed in
recent years in the Eastern part of the Region. In addition, barriers such as a
real or perceived level of safety associated with physically active forms of
transport such as walking or cycling have prevented people from integrating
these forms of activity into their lifestyle
2 Urban planning and the housing environment: The distances travelled
have increased over the last decades because of the geographical separation
of living, working, shopping and leisure activities. Technical developments
such as elevators and devices that make household chores less physically
demanding have also influenced opportunities for physical activity in the local
environment
3 Occupational settings: A large proportion of employees now spend most of
their working time sitting with little or no physical activity. This is partly
because the service sector has expanded continuously in most countries, at
the expense of the agricultural and industrial sectors
4 School settings: Children spend more time in institutions than ever before
5 Leisure time and sport: The way people spend leisure time is subject to
changing trends. Especially children and adolescents are very much attracted
by screen-based activities (i.e. computer games)
1.2.3 Forecast (future trends)
The past and future trend developments strike out the profound changes in
society and in behavioural patterns of communities over recent decades. Societal
changes and worldwide nutrition transitions are driving the increase of weight
development. Economic growth, modernisation, urbanisation and globalisation of
food markets are just some of the forces thought to underlie the future weight
development. The number of overweight people (both adults and children) will
only rise and the total number of overweight people is expected to increase
rapidly.
The prevalence of obesity has risen three-fold or more in many European
countries since the 1980’s. If prevalence continues to increase at the same rate
as in the 1990’s, it is estimated that about 150 million adults in the Region will
be obese by 2010. This means that over a period of five years there will be 20
million more obese people and that is four million more per year. The figures
show a clear upward trend, even in countries with traditionally low rates of
overweight and obesity, such as France, the Netherlands and Norway.
Furthermore, while the prevalence in the European Region is expected to rise by
11
World Health Organization, Steps to health. A European Framework to promote
Physical Activity for Health, 2007
Survey on standard weights of passengers and luggage
R20090095.doc 19
May 2009
an average of 2.4% in women and 2.2% in men, some countries might show a
faster increase, such as Finland, Germany, Greece, Sweden and the United
Kingdom for men and Georgia, the Republic of Moldova, Slovakia, an Tajikistan
for women.
The increase of overweight amongst children and adolescents has accelerated in
recent years: according to the International Obesity Task Force, the annual
increase in prevalence of around 0.2% during the 1970’s rose to 0.6% during the
1980’s and to 0.8% in the early 1990’s. In some cases it reached as high as
2.0% by the turn of the millenium.
12
The International Obesity Task Force
predicts that about 38% of school-aged children in the WHO European Region
will be overweight by 2010, and that more than a quarter of these children will
be obese.
13
1.2.4 Impact of weight on air transport operations
In 1994 an average weight was set in Europe of 83 kg (185 pounds) for each
passenger and their carry-on luggage. SAS undertook a study that revealed that
the average passenger weight was actually 3 kg (6.6 pounds) heavier. This
discovery by SAS is higher than the industry standard weight that was set about
thirteen years ago.
14
In the US, most airlines have assumed a weight of 81.65 kg (80 pounds) for
each adult passenger in the Summer months and 83.91 kg (185 pounds) in the
Winter months; checked baggage are assumed to weigh 11.34 kg (25 pounds)
each, since 1994 up to 2003. Whereas 1994 was up until then the most recent
year in which statistics from the US Federal Centres for Disease Control had been
available.
Following the crash of commuter US Airways Express Flight 5481 (type Beech
1900D) on January 8, 2003, at Charlotte-Douglas Airport in North Carolina, the
US Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) and the National Transport Safety
Board (NTSB) conducted surveys. In some surveys it was found that passengers
– once clothing and personal items were factored in – weighed an average of
9.36 kg (20.63 pounds) more than assumed; carry-on baggage weighed 2.59 kg
extra (5.72 pounds); and checked baggage, 1.73 kg (3.81 pounds), a total of
13.68 kg (30.16 pounds) more than the assumed average.
EU-OPS Subpart J establishes requirements for mass and balance of aircraft,
including standard mass values to be used for crew, passengers and baggage. On
this issue, the Standard Weights Working Group of the Joint Aviation Authorities
(JAA SWWG) has submitted a report on October 31
st
, 2006, which has been
communicated to EASA following the agreement signed between the Agency and
the JAA. This report states that a number of factors have changed since the
standard mass values were determined and includes recommendations for a Pan-
European survey to be conducted.
12
World Health Organization Europe, Fact sheet EURO13/05, Copenhagen, Bucharest,
12 September 2005
13
World Health Organization, The challenge of obesity in the WHO European Region
and the strategies for response. Summary, 2007
14
A Weighty Issue, Access Intelligence, LLC, 2006
Survey on standard weights of passengers and luggage
20 R20090095.doc
May 2009
According to the JAA SWWG report, health statistics data and airline survey data
from a number of countries have shown that body masses have grown steadily.
The JAA report gives the example of the UK Office of National Statistics
http://www.statistcs.gov.uk/
. In addition, the report also states there is a strong
anecdotal evidence that passengers are carrying heavier bags into the cabin.
Furthermore, the luggage charging policies applied in scheduled or charter flights
may have an influence in the baggage repartition between cargo hold and cabin.
The effect of weight changes on the weight and balance of an airplane varies.
Especially small planes are more weight-sensitive. Adjusted weight requirements
could have an impact on the profitability of flights. Mostly on smaller planes,
cargo might have to be left behind or some seats unsold, which will hurt sales.
According to a Canadian study, passengers account for only 9% of the total
weight of a Boeing 747, but 22% of a ten-passenger commuter plane.
15
The weight of checked baggage is a separate issue on small (commuter) planes,
where the cargo hold is often behind the passengers, not below them, and thus
not only affects the total weight of the plane, but also the centre of gravity. If
the centre of gravity is too far back, the pilots may be unable to control the
plane’s pitch.
However, an increase in passenger weights would also impact the larger aircraft
as a result of record load factors. A 4.5 kg increase in passenger weights would
mean that a 160-seater, such as a A320, would be forced to fly with eight
passengers less on range-limited flights. Long-haul flights using wide bodies
have greater margins, but at the extreme of range, higher passenger weights
with high load factors may have an appreciable impact on performance and
therefore also on potential profitability.
A comparison of various aircraft types indicates that the ratio of passenger
weight to overall aircraft weight is inversely proportional to the size of the
aircraft. For example, in a Boeing 747, the passenger weight represents
approximately 9% of the aircraft's weight (450 passengers at 85.28 kg (188
pounds), aircraft of 396,893 kg (875,000 pounds)) whereas the passenger
weight in a Caravan can represent approximately 22% (ten passengers at 85.28
kg, aircraft of 3,878 kg (8,550 pounds)). For aircraft under 5,670 kg (12,500
pounds), there can be significant deviations from the published standard
passenger weights due to the small sample size (nine passengers or fewer). This
deviation error is further amplified in small aircraft due to the higher percentage
of total aircraft weight that the passengers represent. If a small aircraft is being
loaded to maximum gross weight, this discrepancy in passenger weight could
result in an overweight condition that adversely affects the safety of flight. For
example, stall speeds increase with increased aircraft weight; if the pilot is
unaware of this change to aircraft performance, the reference speeds used for
critical phases of flight will be incorrect.
16
15
Lehigh University; http://www3.lehigh.edu/News/V2news_story.asp?iNewsID=1765
16
Lehigh University; http://www3.lehigh.edu/News/V2news_story.asp?iNewsID=1765
Survey on standard weights of passengers and luggage
R20090095.doc 21
May 2009
According to an expert article
17
, some carriers (commonly referred to as low cost
carriers) have baggage policies that differ from the policies of ‘traditional flag
carriers’ and charge a fee for checked baggage. This might lead to the situation
that passengers carry more carry-on luggage and less checked baggage. As a
result, the weight and balance of the airplane will be different than assumed in
current EU safety regulations.
Conclusions of desk research on weight development
Recent worldwide research has revealed that passenger’s body mass has
increased and clothing is generally heavier in the Winter months. Research
shows a clear upward trend, even in countries with traditionally lower rates
of overweight and obesity.
The increase of overweight amongst children and adolescents has accelerated
in recent years. In the US the number of overweight children has doubled
and the number of overweight adolescents has trebled since 1980. According
to the most recent data on nationally representative samples from different
countries in the European Region, the prevalence of obesity (BMI over 30)
ranges from 5% to 20% in men and up to 30% in women.
Causes for the increase of weight are increased consumption of more energy-
dense, nutrient-poor foods with higher levels of sugar and saturated fats,
combined with reduced physical activity (more sedentary lifestyle due to the
rise in welfare), have led to overweight and obesity rates that have risen
three-fold or more all over the world since 1980. Mean masses of adult
passengers will probably be higher than currently taken into account in EU
safety regulations.
The effect of weight changes on the weight and balance of an airplane varies.
Especially small planes are more weight-sensitive, but an increase in
passenger weight would also impact the larger aircraft as a result of record
load factors.
1.2.5 Diffusion and flexibility in application of definitions in
the air travel market
The air travel market has changed significantly in the past decades and is now
characterized by diffusion and flexibility in the application of definitions. In the
current European (EU) safety regulations, holiday charter means a charter flight
solely intended as an element of a holiday travel package. In recent years
charter carriers have started to sell seat-only tickets on charter flights. In one
charter flight, a combination can be found of passengers with a ticket as part of
a holiday package and seat-only ticket. New operators that use different travel
policies, allowances and conditions compared to the traditional flag carriers have
entered the market. These operators are commonly referred to as ‘low-cost
carriers’, but lack a formal definition. In addition, some of these operators
provide both scheduled flights and charter flights. Some of these operators
charge a fee for each piece of checked baggage and do not impose a weight
restriction on carry-on luggage. These differences are relevant because they
influence passenger behaviour. Also, these flights have become eligible for
17
A Weighty Issue, Access Intelligence, LLC, 2006
Survey on standard weights of passengers and luggage
22 R20090095.doc
May 2009
business trips. This means that an assumption that only ‘holiday’ passengers can
be found on low-cost carriers does not hold true. Furthermore, the traditionally
so-called ‘charter airlines’ or ‘holiday flights’, also operate regular scheduled
flights (e.g. Transavia.com).
1.3 Report structure
Chapter 2 explains the methodology of the survey.
Chapter 3 elaborates on the response of the survey.
Chapter 4 gives an overview of the results of the survey.
Chapter 5 presents the conclusions and recommendations of the survey and
identifies the remaining issues.
The Annexes
Survey on standard weights of passengers and luggage
R20090095.doc 23
May 2009
2 Methodology of the survey
2.1 Introduction
This chapter describes the principles and approach of the survey and gives a
description of analyses and statistical principles applied in the survey.
The principles and approach of the survey are based on requirements stated in
the EU OPS regarding weight surveys. These requirements refer to:
The sample size, based on a relative confidence rate (accuracy) and
determined by previous surveys and a pilot survey. The required sample size
is presented in paragraph 2.2.4.
Division of Europe in eight different regions, in accordance with the JAA
SWWG. The division is presented in paragraph 2.2.2.
2.2 Principles and approach of the survey
2.2.1 General set-up of the survey
The aim of the survey was to conduct a Pan-European survey of the current
weights of passengers, carry-on luggage and checked baggage. The general set-
up was to carry out a survey at different airports in Europe, representing
different regions during the Summer and the Winter. The regional division and
selection process of airports is presented in the next paragraph. In each period
(Summer and Winter) surveys have been performed at each selected airport. All
individual airport measurements lasted one working week (Monday until Friday),
except for the pilot/Summer survey at Athens International Airport, which was
spread over two periods during the Summer of 2008.
All preparations and practical arrangements were agreed upon with the airport
authorities in preparatory meetings and were supported by them during
execution. During these preparatory meetings the possible weighing locations
were evaluated and the best were selected based on passenger flow volumes and
characteristics and available physical space to set up the equipment. The
locations on the air side had to be situated after the (main) shopping areas to
maximize the probability that the passenger is weighed with all the items
purchased in the tax free shops.
Each survey was carried out by a team consisting of two NEA consultants and a
flexible number of local staff recruited through staffing agencies that provide
temporary staff for work at the airport on a regular basis. The temporary staff
members were not employed by the airport.
Depending on the physical characteristics of the airport, passenger flow volumes
and characteristics and security policies, the survey teams worked together as
either one team or two separate teams.
Survey on standard weights of passengers and luggage
24 R20090095.doc
May 2009
Depending on the type of location the following weights were measured:
Land side inbound: checked baggage, and if possible, passenger and carry-on
luggage
Land side outbound: only checked baggage
Air side (inbound and outbound): only passenger and carry-on luggage
2.2.2 Regional division and selection of airports
Regional division
Europe has been divided into eight regions, in accordance with the JAA SWWG,
see Figure 2.1. The regions were composed by their communality of population
weight and length and only include ‘EASA countries’. Data collected in each
region is representative for the whole region.
Figure 2.1 Regional division of Europe
FR
NL
DE
IT
UK
IE
DK
GR
PT
ES
IS
NO
SE
FI
CH
AT
PL
CZ
SK
HU
RO
BG
AL
UA
BY
EE
LV
LT
MK
BA
SI
HR
FY
MD
MT
CY
TR
GA
RU
BE
LU
Map of European regions
SWAP
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
Source: NEA
Airport selection
For each region one airport was selected where the weighing took place. This
selection was made according to the following criteria:
The passenger throughput should be large enough to enable the fieldworkers
to weigh a sufficient amount of passengers and baggage.
There should be variability in the factors that possibly influence passenger
and baggage weight. This means the airport should serve both European and
Survey on standard weights of passengers and luggage
R20090095.doc 25
May 2009
non-European arrivals and have both scheduled and non-scheduled flights.
Preferably there should also be a low-cost airline operating at the airport.
The airport itself should be cooperative and a safe working environment.
The selected airports per region are presented in Table 2-1.
Table 2-1 Regions and selected airports representing the regions
Region Airport
1
UK and Ireland London Gatwick Airport (LGW)
2
Benelux and France Amsterdam Schiphol Airport (AMS)
3
Spain, Portugal and Italy Madrid Barajas Airport (MAD)
4
Scandinavia, Finland and Iceland Copenhagen Airport Kastrup (CPH)
5
Germany, Switzerland and Austria Frankfurt Airport (FRA)
6
Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, Czech Republic,
Slovakia, Poland, Slovenia, Hungary
Warsaw Frederic Chopin Airport (WAW)
7
Greece, Cyprus and Malta Athens International Airport (ATH)
8
Romania and Bulgaria Sofia Airport (SOF)
Source: NEA
The selection process per region is described below. The 2006 Eurostat air
passenger traffic data was used, unless noted otherwise. IATA airport codes are
used in the tables.
Region 1: UK and Ireland
Candidate airports are: London Heathrow (LHR), London Gatwick (LGW), London
Stansted (STN), Manchester (MAN), Dublin (DUB). Please see Table 2-2 for
details.
Table 2-2 Region 1: UK, Ireland
Airport Pass. (mln) Intra-EU
Extra-EU
Domestic
Non-scheduled
LHR 67.72 36%
55%
9%
0%
LGW 34.25 52%
35%
12%
27%
STN 23.69 82%
6%
11%
4%
MAN 22.75 55%
28%
17%
38%
DUB 21.27 86%
9%
6%
9%
Source: NEA
Survey on standard weights of passengers and luggage
26 R20090095.doc
May 2009
Disregarded are:
LHR (lack of non-scheduled flights)
STN (lack of non-scheduled flights)
DUB (lack of extra-EU passengers).
The final choice was between LGW and MAN. LGW was selected as it is the larger
airport of the two, and because low-cost airline EasyJet operates from there.
LGW responded positively to our request to participate.
Region 2: Benelux and France
Airports studied were: Brussels (BRU), Paris Charles de Gaulle (CDG), Paris Orly
(ORY), Schiphol (AMS). Please see Table 2-3 for details.
Table 2-3 Region 2: Benelux and France
Airport Pass. (mln) Intra-EU
Extra-EU
Domestic Non-scheduled
BRU 16.74 70%
30%
0% 18%
CDG 56.45 42%
49%
9% 5%
ORY 25.60 19%
20%
61% 4%
AMS 46.13 57%
43%
0% 9%
Source: NEA
Disregarded are:
CDG (different airport for budget airlines)
ORY (different airport for budget airlines).
Paris has a separate airport for budget airlines, it is physically rather difficult and
time-consuming to switch from one airport to the other in a limited period of
time available to perform the survey. That left two options: BRU and AMS. The
latter is the larger of the two and has an excellent variety of passengers. Also,
the low-cost carrier Transavia.com operates from AMS. As NEA is located in the
Netherlands, we could perform the AMS survey ‘out of home’.
Region 3: Spain, Portugal and Italy
Airports studied were: Madrid (MAD), Milan (MXP), Rome (FCO), Barcelona
(BCN). Please refer to Table 2-4 for details.
Survey on standard weights of passengers and luggage
R20090095.doc 27
May 2009
Table 2-4 Region 3: Spain, Portugal and Italy
Airport Pass. (mln) Intra-EU
Extra-EU
Domestic
Non-scheduled
MAD 44.93 32%
22%
46%
3%
MXP 21.90 46%
37%
17%
9%
FCO 30.33 37%
22%
42%
4%
BCN 29.69 42%
9%
49%
4%
Source: NEA
Disregarded are:
MXP (different airport for budget airlines)
FCO (different airport for budget airlines)
BCN (lack of extra-EU passengers).
Because Milan and Rome have different airports for budget airlines, they are less
attractive for the survey. Even though MAD has a relatively high number of
domestic passengers, the airport is large enough to be able to find a sufficient
variety of passengers. It is also a hub for the low-cost airline EasyJet. Because of
this, MAD was our primary choice for this region. MAD reacted positively and was
willing to cooperate.
Region 4: Scandinavia
Airports studied were: Stockholm (ARN), Helsinki (HEL), Copenhagen (CPH), Oslo
(OSL). Please refer to Table 2-5 for details.
Table 2-5 Region 4: Scandinavia
Airport Pass. (mln) Intra-EU
Extra-EU
Domestic
Non-scheduled
ARN 17.80 51%
19%
30%
0%
HEL 12.01 59%
17%
24%
9%
CPH 20.85 64%
28%
8%
7%
OSL ~17 n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
Source: NEA
Disregarded is ARN (lack of non-scheduled flights)
HEL, CPH and OSL were all considered to be appropriate weighing sites. Eurostat
has no detailed data on OSL, but it handles about 17 million passengers a year
and is used by various airlines (domestic, international, scheduled and non-
scheduled).
As the low-cost airline Sterling Airlines uses CPH as its hub and due to the fact
that CPH is the largest airport of the three, we requested CPH to participate. CPH
agreed to cooperate.
Survey on standard weights of passengers and luggage
28 R20090095.doc
May 2009
Region 5: Germany, Switzerland and Austria
Airports studied were: Berlin (TXL), Cologne (CGN), Düsseldorf (DUS), Frankfurt
(FRA), Hamburg (HAM), Hannover (HAJ), Munich (MUC) and Stuttgart (STR).
Please see Table 2-6 for details.
Table 2-6 Region 5: Germany, Switzerland and Austria
Airport Pass. (mln) Intra-EU
Extra-EU
Domestic Non-scheduled
TXL
11.84 39%
13%
48% 3%
CGN
9.98 49%
15%
36% 6%
DUS 16.62 50%
27%
23% 7%
FRA 53.13 37%
50%
13% 1%
HAM
12.01 42%
16%
42% 4%
HAJ
5.73 52%
26%
22% 11%
MUC 30.80 43%
26%
31% 2%
STR
10.16 49%
19%
31% 9%
Source: NEA
None of the German airports were immediately disregarded, but we preferred to
conduct the survey at one of the two largest airports in Germany, MUC or FRA.
Following advice from the EASA, MUC was approached. Unfortunately, they
refused to cooperate without separate permission and/or request on behalf of the
airlines operating at Munich Airport. FRA reacted positively to our request and
participated in the survey.
Region 6: Baltic states, Poland, Czech Republic, Slovakia, Hungary and
Slovenia
Airports studied were: Warsaw (WAW), Prague (PRG), Ljubljana (LJU) and
Budapest (BUD). Please refer to Table 2-7 for details.
Table 2-7 Region 6: Baltic states, Poland, Czech Republic, Slovakia,
Hungary and Slovenia
Airport Pass. (mln) Intra-EU
Extra-EU
Domestic Non-scheduled
WAW 8.12 66%
23%
12% 7%
PRG 11.54 72%
27%
1% 15%
LJU 1.55 66%
34%
0% 86%
BUD 8.25 73%
27%
0% 7%
Source: NEA
Disregarded is LJU (lack of scheduled flights)
Survey on standard weights of passengers and luggage
R20090095.doc 29
May 2009
Region 7: Greece, Cyprus, Malta
Airports studied: Athens (ATH). See Table 2-8 for details.
Table 2-8 Region 7: Greece, Cyprus and Malta
Airport Pass. (mln) Intra-EU
Extra-EU
Domestic Non-scheduled
ATH 15.07 46%
17%
36% 3%
Source: NEA
ATH was selected because it is the only large international airport in the region.
ATH also participated as pilot airport for the survey.
Region 8: Romania and Bulgaria
Airports studied were: Bucharest (OTP) and Sofia (SOF). Please refer toTable 2-9
for details.
Table 2-9 Region 8: Romania and Bulgaria
Airport Pass. (mln) Intra-EU
Extra-EU
Domestic
Non-scheduled
OTP 3.51 n/a
n/a
9%
5%
SOF* 2.75 n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
* Data for SOF has been taken from the website of Sofia Airport and concerns the year 2007.
Source: NEA
Sofia was selected based on the positive response in the survey preparations.
2.2.3 Field work process
The weighing team at each airport consisted of two NEA consultants and locally
hired temporary staff members.
Instructions for performing the survey
The required sample size is 1,000 passengers plus carry-on luggage AND
1,000 pieces of checked baggage. Allowing for mistakes and data entry
errors, the aim is to oversample both figures by at least 10%.
The sampling should take place randomly. It is important to be at a busy
location with a steady flow of preferably highly diversified
travellers/destinations.
Participation is strictly voluntary.
The survey is anonymous: no personal data will be collected. The aim is to
collect statistics.
The inbound passengers (arriving passengers) and their checked baggage
were weighed at the (exit of the) baggage reclaim area.
The outbound passengers (departing passengers) were weighed as close to
the gates as possible, just before entering the airplane. This was done to
Survey on standard weights of passengers and luggage
30 R20090095.doc
May 2009
ensure that tax-free items purchased at the airport, were included in the
recorded mass.
The checked baggage of outbound passengers was weighed near the check-in
counters.
A transfer passenger is recorded as ‘outbound passenger’ in case the
passenger and carry-on luggage were being weighed close to the gates.
Checked baggage of a transfer passenger is marked as ‘outbound’ in case it
was being weighed near the check-in counters (if the passenger had to check
it in again). A transfer passenger is treated as ‘inbound passenger’ when he
participated in the survey at the baggage reclaim area.
A full overview of the weighing process can be found in Annex A.
2.2.4 Required sample size
A way to determine the required sample size is stipulated in Appendix 1 to JAR-
OPS 1.620(g) Paragraph (a)(2)(ii)(A). It stipulates that a minimum of 2,000
passengers of each gender must be weighed in order to establish separate
notional weights for males and females. The minimum number of passengers is
not necessary for every route sampled. Routes showing similar characteristics
may be combined and the investigation of differing factors affecting passenger
masses may allow a similar combination of routes. Similarly, a minimum of 2,000
pieces of hand/carry-on baggage and 2,000 pieces of hold/checked baggage in
each of the route categories (e.g. domestic/short-haul, European/medium haul
and intercontinental/long haul).
The required sample size for a survey can be determined by using data from an
existing survey report or on the basis of a pilot survey. For this survey used both
ways were used to determine the required sample size. The required sample size
is based on a relative confidence rate (accuracy) of 1% for all adult passengers
and 2% for all sub-categories of the survey (examples of these sub-categories
are male passengers, female passengers, children, scheduled flights etc.).
Calculation of the required sample size = sumsquare*(1,96 * stdev * 100)/
sumsquare*(1 * mean). The total sample size is independent of the size of the
population.
NEA initially based the required sample size on the 2003 survey of passenger
weights, the market research report performed by NFO New Zealand for CAA
New Zealand
18
. The required sample size has also been determined based on the
pilot survey NEA performed at ATH. This gives the outcomes as shown in Table
2-10. This required sample size based on the pilot survey relates to the total
sample size for the Summer and the Winter survey combined.
The survey requirements
in JAR-OPS relate to adult passengers. The results from
the pilot survey in Athens indicate that the required sample size per airport is
2,226 if all passenger types are included (male, female and children in the age
between 2 and 12 years old). The required sample size is 1,821 in case only
adult passengers (over 12 years old) are taken into account. This relates to the
18
Reference ‘Survey of Passenger Weights Market Research Report’
Survey on standard weights of passengers and luggage
R20090095.doc 31
May 2009
Summer and the Winter survey combined. Children in the ages between 2 and 12
years old obviously show a large spread in weights (please refer to the last
column of Table 2-10). If we allow for 5% incorrect or incomplete observations,
the total required sample size per airport would be 1.05 * 1,821 is 1,912. For
the Summer survey this leads to a sample size per airport of 956 observations.
Table 2-10 Required sample size following the outcomes of the pilot
survey at ATH
Pilot ATH
All passengers
Pilot ATH
Excl. children
Male Female Child
n = 798
769
415 354 29
Mean passenger mass 81
83
92 72 42
Std.dev. 20
18
16 14 18
Total required sample size > 2,226
1,821
1,204 1,366 6,996
Source: NEA
The standard deviation for children is substantial which means you would need
an enormous sample size, which is outside the pre-conditions of this survey
Special focus on such an amount of children during the survey needs to be
avoided in order not to jeopardize the randomness of the survey.
Random sampling from the population within the dataset is a tool to determine
the probability to find a certain mass and to make sure the outcomes do not bias
the result. For further justification of the sample size, the required sample size
was determined based on four random samples of the Athens pilot data
automatically generated by SPSS, see Table 2-11. According to these tables the
number of passengers to be weighed should be in the range of 1,930 – 2,121.
Table 2-11 Required sample size according to four random samples of
the ATH pilot data
Pilot ATH
Sample 1
Sample 2
Sample 3 Sample 4
n = 100
110
101 103
Mean passenger mass 83
79
82 86
Std.dev. 19
18
18 20
Required sample size > 2,119
1,931
1,930 2,121
Source: NEA
Random sampling is also done by taking 100 samples of 30 passengers each, in
order to determine to what extend the dataset is valid for mean masses for
individual flights. The highest mass value of these 100 samples gives a
recommended value to be used.
Survey on standard weights of passengers and luggage
32 R20090095.doc
May 2009
The purpose of the survey is to get an accurate view of the weight of men and
women. Therefore, the sample size of men and women should be of a substantial
size in order to get reliable results. This leads to the conclusion that the sample
size should equal the minimum number of around 1,000, both for female and
male, is sufficient.
The three different ways to categorise our data (route type, flight type and
direction) do not have separate minimum sample sizes. These criteria are used in
the field work to select weighing locations. The purpose of this is to prevent a
bias caused by differences in population on different flight types and/or route
types.
Based on the analysis above, it can be concluded that the required sample size
of 1,000 observations per airport/season is legitimate. For this survey the target
for each location was set at 1,000 useable records for passenger mass (including
and excluding carry-on luggage) and 1,000 useable records for checked baggage
mass per season. Experience shows that in these kinds of data collection
processes it has to be anticipated that a selection of the data collection will be
incomplete, incorrect or unusable. The teams performing the field work were
therefore instructed to ‘over-sample’ the required numbers.
2.2.5 Data surveyed and recorded
In this section the collected field work data and the data that was added
afterwards from other sources will be described.
The following mass values were measured:
Passenger mass including carry-on luggage
Passenger mass excluding carry-on luggage
Checked baggage mass.
The following independent factors were measured:
Passenger characteristics: age, gender;
Passenger behavioural characteristics: carrying an infant, carrying carry-on
luggage, travelling by purpose (business or leisure);
Place and time of the measurements: airport (eight airports were selected)
season (Summer or Winter);
Trip characteristics: direction (outbound or inbound), route type (domestic,
European and non-European), region of departure or arrival (fourteen regions
have been distinguished), flight length categories (short haul, medium haul
and long haul) and class of travel (economy, business or first);
Flight characteristics: airline and flight number, flight type (scheduled or
non-scheduled), airline type (regular scheduled, charter or low cost) and
airline policies concerning maximum of baggage mass.
In the following paragraph an operational definition of all measured variables is
stated.
Survey on standard weights of passengers and luggage
R20090095.doc 33
May 2009
Operational definition of dependent variables
Mass
Values in kilograms measured by the Disomat scales, calibrated by Kalibra.
Mass of passenger
The value in kilograms of a single passenger including clothing carried by a
passenger (jacket, sweater, scarf) and carry-on luggage, measured by use of the
Disomat scales, calibrated by Kalibra. In case the passenger is travelling with an
infant younger than two years the mass of the infant is included in the passenger
mass.
Mass of passenger without carry-on luggage
The value in kilograms of a single passenger including clothing carried by a
passenger (jacket, sweater, scarf) and without carry-on luggage, measured by
use of the Disomat scales, calibrated by Kalibra.
Mass of carry-on luggage
The value in kilograms of all belongings carried by a single passenger to be
taken into the aircraft, e.g. purse, tax-free bags, photo equipment, excluding
clothing carried by a passenger (jacket, sweater, scarf). This is calculated as the
difference between the mass of a passenger without carry-on luggage from the
mass of the same passenger with carry-on luggage.
Mass of checked baggage
The value in kilograms per piece of baggage that the passenger was going to
check-in before boarding or that the passenger had checked-in on the arriving
flight.
Operational definition of independent factors
Age
The age of the passenger in years as stated.
Gender
The term gender is used to define five passenger categories based on age and
gender. The following categories are distinguished: (1) male, (2) female, (3)
child (2-12 years), (4) male with infant between 0-2 years and (5) female with
infant between 0-2 years.
Place of measurement
The airport where the survey took place. Eight airports were selected: AMS, ATH,
CPH, FRA, LGW, MAD, SOF, WAW.
Time
The season in which the survey took place: in Summer or Winter.
Purpose
The motive for travelling as stated by the passenger. Two categories are used:
business and leisure.
Survey on standard weights of passengers and luggage
34 R20090095.doc
May 2009
Direction
Direction defines whether the passenger is arriving or departing from the place
of measurement. Two categories are used: inbound and outbound.
Airport of departure
The airport where the arriving passenger boarded the airplane that has arrived at
the place of measurement.
Airport of arrival
The airport where the departing passenger will land after boarding at the place of
measurement.
Class of travel
The service level of the flight, as stated by the passenger or mentioned on the
airline ticket or boarding pass. Three categories are used: economy, business
and first class.
Airline code
Identification code for the airline the passenger was travelling with registered as
a 2-character format.
Flight number
The 2-, 3- or 4-digit code as used by the carriers. The airline code and flight
number combined define a unique flight.
Route type
Route type defines the geographical scope of the flight route in three categories:
(1) European, (2) non-European and (3) domestic. A flight is categorised as
European if both the airport of departure and the airport of arrival are located in
the following countries on European territory: Andorra, Austria, Belgium,
Bulgaria, Croatia, Cyprus, Czech Republic, Denmark, Estonia, Finland, France,
Germany, Greece, Hungary, Iceland, Ireland, Italy, Latvia, Lithuania,
Luxembourg, Macedonia, Malta, Moldova, Monaco, Montenegro, Netherlands,
Norway, Poland, Portugal, Romania, San Marino, Republic of Serbia, Slovakia,
Slovenia, Slowenia, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland, Ukraine, United Kingdom. A
non-European flight only has the airport of origin or destination in one of the
European countries defined. A domestic flight starts and ends in the same
country.
Flight type
Flight type defines whether a flight is scheduled or non-scheduled. A flight is
scheduled when that flight is published in the Official Airline Guide (further
noticed as OAG data). All other flights are non-scheduled.
Airline type
Classification of airlines used in this survey to analyse passenger behaviour
according to different service levels and travel conditions offered by the airlines.
Three categories are used: (1) regular scheduled, (2) charter and (3) low-cost.
This is not an official classification. See ANNEX J and ANNEX K for the used list of
charter and low-cost carriers.
Survey on standard weights of passengers and luggage
R20090095.doc 35
May 2009
Region of departure
The geographical region where the airport of departure is located. Fourteen
categories are identified as specified. in Table 2-12.
Region of arrival
The geographical region where the airport of arrival is located. Fourteen
categories are identified as specified inTable 2-12 .
Table 2-12 Regions of departure/region of arrival19
Code European regions Code Non-European regions
1
UK and Ireland
11
Africa and the Middle East
2
Benelux and France
12
Asia
3
Spain, Portugal and Italy
13
North America
4
Scandinavia and Iceland
14
South America
5
Germany, Switzerland and Austria
15
Other
6
Northeast Europe
7
Greece, Cyprus, Malta and Turkey
8
Romania and Bulgaria
9
Other European countries (incl. Russia)
Source: NEA
Non-European locations are divided into five regions. The actual airports of
arrival and departure that were encountered in the survey, were taken into
account to determine the regionalization. The following regions are set: North
America (including Mexico) and South America. The Asian region captures Middle
and Eastern Asian destinations like India, China and Japan. The Middle Eastern
countries are grouped together with Africa. The last catchall region includes
Australia and various island destinations.
Distance
The value in kilometres between the airport of departure and the airport of
arrival according to geographical coordinates in The Global Airport Database
http://www.partow.net/miscellaneous/ airportdatabase/index.html
).
Flight length
Categorization of distance in three categories: (1) short haul, (2) medium haul
and (3) long haul.
19
European regions are defined by a single-digit code and non-European regions by a
two-digit code.
Survey on standard weights of passengers and luggage
36 R20090095.doc
May 2009
Baggage allowance restriction
Airline carry-on luggage and checked baggage allowance policies and guidelines
according to their websites. See ANNEX L for the website list.
Working definitions in detail
During the process of data collection and data handling the definitions, as
mentioned above were implemented in the following way:
Passenger characteristics
When a passenger was carrying an infant, i.e. child younger than 2 years of age,
the weight of the infant is included in the weight of its accompanier.
For ‘purpose’ there is only a distinction made in business trip and leisure trip. All
holiday trips were marked as leisure and all other purposes (e.g. family visit,
recital, funeral) as well.
Trip characteristics
A trip is defined as going from one airport to the next connecting airport (or vice
versa). A trip could be part of a whole journey of a passenger, if a journey
contains one or more transfer airports. The next connecting airport is not
necessarily the final destination of the journey.
Flight/airline type
An airline can be designated as a low-cost or charter airline, or both. However,
this does not mean that all of the operated flights of such an airline are low-cost
and/or charter flights. On top of that, airlines that typically operate scheduled
flights can also operate charter flights, especially in the holiday season. For that
reason a distinction had to be made between the flight type and the airline type.
The airline type is manually determined by using information found on the
websites of the carriers. The flight type is automatically determined by using the
OAG data which includes only the scheduled flights. All flights not registered in
the OAG data are marked as non-scheduled flights.
Region of departure/region of arrival
For each trip, the region a passenger is travelling from or to, is determined
based on the country of departure and the country of arrival. The region codes
used, are chosen in accordance with the JAA SWWG.
This in contrast to the regional division used for the selected airports
representing the European regions of the EASA survey as presented in Table
2-12.
Distance and flight length
Distance between two airports is determined to categorize the flights into short-,
medium- and long-haul. This distance is calculated by using longitude/latitude
information for each airport in our dataset. For flight length the next categories
are chosen:
Short-haul is a distance shorter than 500 km
Medium haul is a distance between 500 and 5,000 km
Long haul is a distance longer than 5,000 km.
Survey on standard weights of passengers and luggage
R20090095.doc 37
May 2009
Baggage allowance restriction
In most cases the information about baggage allowance restriction can be found
on the websites of the carriers. However, this was not a straightforward job,
because of the many special cases and exceptions found within each carrier’s
luggage policy. The number of carriers found in the survey is very large and it
was recognized that finding the required information for all observations was not
realistic. The approach therefore has been as follows:
In the database it was possible to calculate the number of observations per
carrier. Using that information, a set of carriers with the highest number of
observations was selected. For these carriers, information was sought on their
websites. This was firstly done after the Summer survey, and again after the
Winter survey for any important carriers still missing. For some carriers there
are no carry-on luggage weight limits (e.g. EasyJet) and so observations in the
dataset for these carriers could not be connected to a maximum luggage weight.
It was also found that luggage policies could change in the months between the
two survey periods (e.g. British Airways changed their carry-on luggage
allowance from 23 kg (Summer 2008) to a limit based only on luggage
dimensions) but it has been decided to use the allowances independent of the
season, and always use the maximum weight that was found first.
Carriers can apply distinguishing luggage policies depending on the destination
and flight length (e.g. on long haul flights the checked baggage allowance can be
higher than on short or medium haul). Finally, carriers usually have different
luggage policies for the different flight classes that are available.
During the Summer, the baggage allowance policies for European and North
American flights were examined. The policies for African and Asian flights were
gathered for a selected number of carriers after the Winter survey.
To summarize, the following information was gathered for a selected number of
carriers:
Carry-on luggage restriction :
o Maximum weight economy class
o Maximum weight business class
o Maximum weight first class
Checked baggage restriction:
o Per distance and flight length (European, North American, African,
Asian):
Maximum weight per piece, economy class
Maximum weight per piece, business class
Maximum weight per piece, first class.
2.3 Data cleaning
This paragraph describes the process of improving the quality of the data
gathered during both the Summer and Winter surveys. As indicated in paragraph
2.2.4, the actual target for weight observations at all locations was set higher
than the minimum required sample size mentioned previously in the proposal. It
was expected that this would provide the opportunity to delete obviously
Survey on standard weights of passengers and luggage
38 R20090095.doc
May 2009
incorrect or incomplete data. Still, it is important to fix as many errors and
salvage as much of the data as possible, so that the statistical analysis can be
done in the best possible way.
First the cleaning process of the Summer data is described. Next the manner in
which data cleaning for the Winter survey took place is compared to the
approach for the Summer survey. Then it is explained why it was useful to apply
the Winter approach to the already corrected Summer data. Afterwards the
results of the cleaning process for both Summer and Winter data are
summarized.
2.3.1 Cleaning Summer data
This paragraph describes the cleaning of the Summer dataset. In the data the
airports and airlines are represented by IATA codes. Some of the data were
incorrect due to coding errors that were, in general, easily traceable.
Additionally, there were errors related to the passenger, like their age, gender or
weight which had clearly been entered incorrectly. Others were related to the
actual flight, the person or the luggage. Below all identified issues are described
and categorised: (1) Missing data in records, (2) Data entry errors - Inconsistent
values and (3) Data entry errors - Impossible values. In addition, the corrections
are described.
Adding missing data in records
Airline codes and flight numbers:
o Airline codes
are either in the 3-letter ICAO format or the 2-letter IATA
format. Although the 2-letter format is most commonly used and
therefore incorporated in our software, some carriers were only identified
with the 3-letter format on the ticket or boarding pass. At Madrid Airport
only the 3-letter format was used throughout the airport. The survey
team used a conversion table during the survey to identify the codes
used in the software. In some cases it was decided to leave the field
‘airline code’ blank during data entry and make notes of these events. All
necessary additions and corrections were carried out during the post-
processing.
o In some cases the flight number
was missing, but the departing airport,
arriving airport and airline code were available. In such a case the flight
number was added based on the flight schedules (this was possible
because the data files contain information about the survey date and
time).
Fields on passenger weight left blank: In some cases only the passenger
weight was entered, but not the passenger weight including carry-on
luggage. Field workers were instructed to do so when no carry on luggage
was available. In these cases the weight including carry-on luggage was set
equal to the weight excluding carry-on luggage.
Survey on standard weights of passengers and luggage
R20090095.doc 39
May 2009
Data entry errors - Inconsistent values
Gender/child: the data form included an option to categorise a passenger as
a child as opposed to a male or female over 12 years. However, in some
cases the value entered for the ‘age’ was not consistent with this category.
The cases where the entered passenger age was under 13 years were re-
categorised as a child. Entries where the passenger was categorised as child,
but the entered age was over 12 years were deleted because the gender
information was not available.
Relation between flight direction (inbound/outbound) inconsistent with
airports of departure/arrival: despite automatically generated suggestions by
the software for airport of departure/arrival based on flight direction,
inconsistent data were sometimes entered. In all records the most reliable
data fields were preserved and contradictory data were changed to match the
reliable data. This means that the flight number, the flight direction or
airport of departure or arrival was changed.
Flight number inconsistent with departure/arrival and/or airline: in these
cases the flight number was the correct item; all other inconsistent data were
corrected.
Data entry errors - Impossible values
Weight excluding carry-on luggage exceeds weight including carry-on
luggage: Obvious data entry error. In these cases the values were switched.
High passenger weight values: in case the entered passenger weight
exceeded 150 kg, the survey team leader was consulted to double check the
entered weight values. If not, the record was deleted.
Excessively low passenger weight values: in case the entered passenger
weight was less than 25 kg and the entered age 13 or above, this was
treated as an obvious data entry error. In these cases the record was
deleted.
Entered values on the combination of airline code, flight number, departure
and arrival completely impossible and untraceable: in such a case the record
was deleted.
All corrections are automatically carried out with SPSS syntax files that contain
the commands for data corrections. In this way all corrections are transparent,
traceable and reproducible.
2.3.2 Comparison of Summer/Winter data corrections
Some of the errors during the Summer survey could be prevented by improving
the data entry software. By forcing the user to fill in all of the fields, and setting
limits to a person’s age, their weight, and the weight of their hand and checked
luggage, it became a lot harder to inadvertently pollute the survey data with
Survey on standard weights of passengers and luggage
40 R20090095.doc
May 2009
incomplete or wrongly typed records. Additionally, the ‘child’ category for gender
was removed, because whether a person is a child can be derived from their age.
The ‘direction’ flag (inbound/outbound) also could no longer contradict the
entered airports for departure and arrival.
Because of this, the only fields that still needed to be checked for errors were
the departure and arrival airport, airline and flight number. For the Summer data
corrections this was mostly done manually. For the Winter corrections, we used
digital flight schedules and newly designed algorithms to automatically fix the
records where possible.
This improved methodology was then also applied to the Summer dataset. It was
necessary to double-check all of the flight numbers, because they needed to be
correct to be able to determine whether the flights were scheduled or non-
scheduled, which is an important variable in the statistical analysis. Aside from
that, since the Summer corrections were done manually, some errors were
overlooked. Using the algorithm was an easy way to weed out most of the
remaining errors. Please refer to Table 3-1 and Table 3-2.
2.3.3 Data correction algorithm
The flight information in the dataset was compared to the flight information in
the digital flight schedules. If the airport of departure, the airport of arrival,
airline and flight number of a record matched perfectly, then the record was
assumed to be correct. The records that could not be matched were classified as
erroneous. These erroneous records were then further categorised as records
that could be fixed automatically and records that required a manual check, to
see if they should be kept or deleted.
Using regular expressions, the algorithm altered the erroneous records to try and
find a match with one or more real flights from the digital flight schedules. Small
errors, such as typos in the departing or arrival airport codes, or one digit
changes in the flight numbers, were fixed automatically. The more drastic fixes
were reviewed manually afterwards, to see if they made sense. If not, the
records were deleted. The Table 2-13 ranks the corrections from least to most
severe.
Survey on standard weights of passengers and luggage
R20090095.doc 41
May 2009
Table 2-13 Data correction algorithm, performed fixes (from least to
most severe)
Fix # Description Type
1 Different airline Automatic
2 Switch departure airport and arrival airport Automatic
3 Change one digit in the flight number Automatic
4 Change the departure airport or the arrival airport Automatic
5 Any combination of fixes #1-#3 Manual
6 Change two digits in the flight number Manual
7 Completely different flight number Manual
8 Different airline and change two digits in the flight number Manual
9+ Different combinations of the above fixes Manual
Source: NEA
2.4 Adding data on luggage and baggage allowance policies
To analyse the impact of carry-on luggage allowance policies on the actual carry-
on luggage masses an additional factor has been added to the database. The
maximum values for carry-on luggage mass as stated by the airlines were added
to the passenger carry-on luggage and checked baggage records. The baggage
allowance policies’ details have been gathered based on the frequencies of
passengers traveling with the airlines. In the first step, the main carriers based
on their frequency within the whole survey were identified. In the next step, a
selection was made for each airport of the most frequent carriers.
From almost 80% of the carry-on luggage records and the checked baggage
records, the relevant policy details have been identified and added, which
provides sufficient data to obtain significant results.
Survey on standard weights of passengers and luggage
42 R20090095.doc
May 2009
Table 2-14 Number of baggage records within the survey and used in
specific correlation analysis
Total in survey
Airline policies on baggage
allowance added
Carry-on luggage 22,901 17,463 (76%)*
Checked baggage 22,353 17,643 (79%)*
* These figures are only used for the analysis of the carry-on luggage and checked baggage to
evaluate the correlation between passenger behaviour and baggage allowance policies
Source: NEA
2.5 Description of analyses/statistical principles applied in the
survey
First step
The first step of the analysis is focused on revealing the mean mass weights of
several samples of objects (persons or luggage), measured in the survey. The
following variables are used as sampling criterion:
Passenger characteristics: age, gender;
Passenger behavioural characteristics: carrying an infant, carrying carry-on
luggage, travelling by purpose (business or leisure);
Place and time of the measurements: airport (eight airports were selected)
season (Summer or Winter);
Trip characteristics: direction (outbound or inbound), route type (domestic,
European and non-European), region of departure or arrival (fourteen regions
have been distinguished, see Table 2-12), and class of travel (economy,
business or first);
Flight characteristics: flight type (scheduled or not-scheduled), airline type
(regular scheduled, charter or low cost) and airline policies concerning
maximum of baggage mass.
The outcomes of the first step of the analysis are presented in the tables in
ANNEX C, ANNEX D. and ANNEX E. The following measurements are included:
mean, n, standard deviation, accuracy and confidence range.
Mean ( ) is the arithmetical mean of mass values, calculated as shown in the
following formula:
n
x
x
n
j
j
=
=
1
Where: n = the number of objects (passengers or pieces of luggage)
Σ = the sum of measured mass value of object x
1
up to object x
n
X
Survey on standard weights of passengers and luggage
R20090095.doc 43
May 2009
The standard deviation (s) is calculated as follows:
1
)(
1
2
=
=
n
xx
s
n
j
j
Where: x
j
= the deviation between the mass value of object x
j
from the sample
mean
x .
The accuracy of the sample mean is calculated according to the next formula:
xn
s
e
r
=
10096.1
The accuracy refers to the confidence range of the sample means. When the
outcome of the formula does not exceed 1%, the confidence range is considered
highly sufficient. An outcome of 2% is considered sufficient enough. When the
outcome is 5% or more, the accuracy is considered to be insufficient.
The confidence range is calculated at the significance level of 95% with the
formula:
n
s
x
+
96.1
The outcome of this formula estimates the interval (sample mean plus or minus
outcome of the formula) of the mass value of the population.
Second step
The second step of the analysis is focused on the relation between the dependent
variable mass value of objects (persons or luggage) and factors which were
thought to influence mass values. The factors, taken into account are the
variables, which were used as sample criteria in the first step of analysis. In
order to determine whether the selected variables are correlated to mass values,
Pearson’s product-moment correlation coefficient (r) is calculated with the
following formula:
YX
n
i
ii
ss
yyxx
n
r
=
=1
))((
1
1
Where: x refers to the values of the dependent variable and y refers to the
values of the factor taken in account. The value of the outcome r is a value
between -1 and +1. When the value is 0, there is no linear correlation between
the factor and the mass values. A positive or negative correlation is indicated
when the value of r is higher of lower than 0. In the tables presenting r-values,
only correlations at the significance level of 95% are mentioned.
Survey on standard weights of passengers and luggage
44 R20090095.doc
May 2009
Third step
The third step of the analysis is focused on determining the linear regression
analysis. Regression analysis is a method from statistics to determine the
relation between a dependent variable and one or more explanatory variables.
In the analysis below the dependent variable is the mass (weight) of a
passenger. The mass varies between passengers: one passenger will have a
higher mass than another passenger. A regression analysis explains this
variation in mass from passenger to passenger, from the age of the person, the
trip purpose the type of flight, etc.. The results of the analysis helps answering
questions such as:
Do long haul flights on average carry passengers with higher masses (after
correcting for age, trip purpose, etc.)?
What is the influence of the age of a passenger on its mass (after correcting
for gender, trip purpose, etc.)?
To carry out the regression analysis, first a certain relation between the
dependent variable and the explanatory variables has to be specified, in this case
a linear relationship (all explanatory variables affect the mass in a linear way,
not for instance through a logarithmic or exponential function of age):
Mass = constant + β
1
.age + β
2
.longhaul + …..
This is called a linear regression model. The constant is the value of the mass
that we get (in kg, since mass is in kg) when all explanatory variables would be
equal to 0.
β
1
, β
2
, etc. are the coefficients of the model (often called: the ‘betas’).
Statistical estimation of the model means finding the appropriate values for
these coefficients.
A statistical technique called Ordinary Least Squares (OLS), is used to estimate
the coefficients. This technique determines the coefficients in such a way that it
minimises the squared difference between the observed mass of a passenger and
the mass that the model would predict based on the explanatory variables (and
the constant), summed over all passengers in the dataset.
In order to explore the difference of mass values between two samples (i.e.
female and male passengers or Winter and Summer measurements) the T-test is
applied. When more samples are the object of analysis, the differences between
the samples are measured with analysis of variance.
Given two paired sets X
1
and X
2
of n measured values, the paired t-test
determines whether they differ from each other in a significant way under the
assumptions that the paired differences are independent and identically normally
distributed.
The t-value to test whether the means are different is calculated in different
ways according to an assumption about the variance between the two sets. If the
assumption is that the two sets have the same variance, the t-value is calculated
as follows:
Survey on standard weights of passengers and luggage
R20090095.doc 45
May 2009
21
21
11
21
nn
S
XX
t
XX
+
=
Where
2
)1()1(
21
2
2
2
1
21
21
+
+
=
nn
SnSn
S
XX
XX
i
X is the mean value of set X
i
i
X
S is the estimator of the standard deviation of set X
i
n
i
is the size of set X
i
.
If the assumption is that the two sets have unequal variance, the equation is as
follows:
21
21
XX
s
XX
t
=
Where
2
2
2
1
2
1
21
n
s
n
s
s
XX
+=
s
i
is the standard deviation of set X
i
n
i
is the size of set X
i
.
In this last step of the analysis multiple factors are taken into account. When two
or more samples are the object of analysis, multivariate analysis of variance is
applied. Analysis of variance (ANOVA) is a statistical test for heterogenity of
means by analysis of group variances. To apply the test, assume random
sampling of a variate Y with equal variances, independent errors, and a normal
distribution. Let n be the number of replicates (sets of identical observations)
within each of K factor levels (treatment groups), and y
ij
be the j
th
observation
within factor level i. Multiple analysis of variance (MANOVA) is a procedure for
testing the equality of mean vectors of more than two populations. The sets are
compared on multiple response variables simultaneously.
Survey on standard weights of passengers and luggage
R20090095.doc 47
May 2009
3 Response
3.1 Introduction
This chapter gives a brief description of the weighing locations, the performed
field work at the eight airports and experiences and problems encountered. A
more detailed description has been laid down in the Summer and the Winter
survey reports. A detailed survey plan is presented in ANNEX A and the schedule
for the Summer and the Winter surveys is presented in ANNEX B.
Furthermore, this chapter describes the process of controlling and cleaning the
databases, in which the results of the measurements are recorded.
3.2 Description of the field work per airport
A detailed description of the field work per airport has been given in the Summer
and the Winter survey reports.
A very thorough and in-depth study of the airport timetable and selection of
locations in advance, are of the highest importance for the survey in order to be
secured of a constant and diversified flow of passengers. Location selection was
based on the following criteria: number of passengers, suitability of the location,
available space and, to some extent, availability of electricity. In the following
paragraph the weighing locations are identified and differences between the
Summer and the Winter are discussed. Sometimes different and/or additional
locations were used, for instance because the locations used in the Summer were
no longer available anymore in the Winter (e.g. due to redesign of the airport or
new security measures). Still, only locations were used that fit within the survey
requirements.
London Gatwick Airport (LGW)
LGW Airport has two terminals: North and South. These two Terminals are linked
by an automatic transit train (the trip takes about two minutes). The survey was
performed in the South Terminal, where we had the best mixture of arrivals and
airline types. The weighing locations in the departure area were defined behind
the security check and tax free shopping area (Pier 2) close to the exits to the
gates where European, intercontinental and also some local flights take off. The
originally designated weighing locations at the baggage reclaim and check-in
areas was changed, due to the fact that these locations turned out to be
unpractical from a survey point of view (passengers were too far away to be
interested for the survey). During the Winter survey the same locations were
used.
Survey on standard weights of passengers and luggage
48 R20090095.doc
May 2009
Amsterdam Schiphol Airport (AMS)
AMS airport uses three different areas for departures and four for arrivals. The
weighing locations for passengers and carry-on luggage were at the roots of the
different Piers and after the tax free shops (in order to catch the best mixture of
arrivals (European and intercontinental) and airline types (scheduled/non-
scheduled and flag carriers/charters/low cost carriers)). Weighing of checked
baggage could be done at two different locations in the Departure halls and
inbound checked baggage was weighed at two different locations in the reclaim
halls. During the Winter survey the same locations were used as in the Summer
survey, but in addition, Gate B was used because of low passenger flows at Gate
D (especially top level).
Madrid Barajas Airport (MAD)
MAD Airport uses three terminals: T1 and T2 for a wide range of carriers, and T4
mainly for Iberia flights. Weighing took place at different locations in the three
terminals to reach the preferred number of passenger and luggage weighing for
the defined categories. In the Winter survey one additional location in the
secured areas was used because of small passenger flows.
Copenhagen Airport Kastrup (CPH)
CPH Airport uses three terminals: T1 mainly for domestic flights, and T2 and T3
for European and intercontinental flights. Weighing took place at different
locations in the three terminals to reach the preferred number of passenger and
luggage weighing for the defined categories. In the Winter survey the same
locations were used.
Frankfurt Airport (FRA)
FRA Airport uses two terminals T1 and T2. Weighing took place at different
locations in Terminal 1 to reach the preferred number of passenger and luggage
weighing for the defined categories. All target groups are represented and the
flow is continuously high at terminal 1. In the Winter survey the same locations
were used.
Warsaw Frederic Chopin Airport (WAW)
WAW Airport uses three terminals: T1 and T2 for European, Domestic and
intercontinental flights and Terminal 3 (Etudia) for low-cost carriers. Weighing
took place at different (secured) locations in Terminals 1 and 2. In the Winter
survey the same locations were used.
Athens International Airport (ATH)
ATH Airport uses a Main Terminal and a Satellite Terminal. Weighing took place
at different locations within the Main Terminal. The Summer survey dataset
Survey on standard weights of passengers and luggage
R20090095.doc 49
May 2009
consists of the data collected during the pilot (dataset validated by EASA)
completed with additional data collected at ATH Airport in July/August 2008. The
locations were the surveys were performed: Gate B (Schengen and domestic
flights) and Gate A (extra Schengen), check-in counters at the Departure Hall
and the Reclaim Hall. In the Winter survey the same locations were used.
Sofia Airport (SOF)
SOF Airport uses two Terminals (distance by car: five minutes; not within
walking distance). Terminal 2 is used for the (inter)continental flights. Terminal
1 is much smaller and only the low-cost carriers and domestic flights fly to and
from this terminal. In the Summer, one survey day was used for the weighing at
Terminal 1. The other days of the week the survey took place at Terminal 2.
Although the initial plan was to perform surveys for one day at Terminal 1 it was
decided to carry out all surveys at Terminal 2. The decision was made based on
the expected number of passengers at Terminal 1 in our survey week, supplied
by our airport contacts and due to the large amount of time involved in
transferring the scales from one terminal to the other and through customs.
More passengers were expected at terminal 2 than at terminal 1.
3.3 Experiences and problems encountered and counter
measures
After the performance of the pre-pilot at the Panteia office and the pilot at ATH,
some minor adjustments were made to the data entry forms and software. Some
further adjustments were made to the data entry program before the start of the
Winter survey, in order to make the software more user-friendly. The
adjustments do not affect the comparability of the data of the Summer and the
Winter surveys.
Some of the improvements compared to the Summer version are:
One executable instead of three different ones
Search option for airports and airlines (press CTRL+F)
Previous flight information can be captured easily (press F5)
Input validation; erroneous data can no longer be submitted
Both comma’s and periods are accepted as decimal separator; whatever is
preferred can be used.
The software was tested by all members of the weighing teams before it was
officially put to use.
Security proceedings varied at the different airports. At some locations it was not
allowed for NEA staff to access secured areas (airside) without the company of
an airport representative, or security passes could only be handed out for two
consecutive days. In those cases we were either escorted by an airport
representative or by one of the temporary team members with the necessary
security clearance. Knowing that the security procedures had been tightened at
several airports, we requested the security passes for both consultants and local
staff members well in advance for the Winter survey. Especially at AMS, FRA and
CPH stricter rules made it more difficult to obtain the necessary passes.
Survey on standard weights of passengers and luggage
50 R20090095.doc
May 2009
Changing weighing locations (dismantling, transport and set-up at new location)
can take a significant amount of time, due to the long distances and the fact that
all equipment (weighing scales, laptops) need to pass the security checkpoints
where they are thoroughly inspected. Therefore, it is important to be at locations
with constant and varied passenger flows.
Reliance on electrical outlets at the survey airports meant that we were often
confined to specific locations within the terminal during the Summer survey.
During the Summer survey these locations were sufficient to be able to collect a
sizeable sample, but the lack of mobility might pose a problem during the Winter
survey with significant smaller passenger flows. To improve the mobility of the
weighing teams, battery packs were purchased and tested in order to supply
power to the weighing scales during the Winter survey. Tests within the NEA
office showed that using the battery packs had no effect on the accuracy of the
scales. The capacity of the battery packs was enough to keep two scales up and
running for half a day. Because of the weight of the battery packs and their
limited capacity, it was decided to not use them extensively. Two battery packs
were purchased and at each airport the team had one battery pack available.
It is crucial to have a multi-lingual weighing team in order to be able to invite as
many people to participate in the survey as possible. Furthermore, it is important
to have people in the team that speak the local language, especially during the
Winter survey, when there are less tourists travelling. Temporary staff was
recruited from the same sources as used for the Summer survey. Allowing us to
work with (partly) experienced staff. Overall support from our airport contacts
during preparation (flight schedules, adjusted or additional survey locations) and
performance (on site support, storage of equipment) of the survey has been very
good.
The passenger flows can vary significantly during the days of the week. Except
for Frankfurt and Amsterdam, we decided by mutual agreement with EASA to
leave on Sunday for the survey locations. With this, anticipating that the number
of travellers in the Winter season is lower than during the Summer season and
allowing the survey teams to use the survey week to its full extent. The surveys
were performed from Monday up to and including Friday.
A poster had been prepared to use at all airports, explaining the purpose of the
survey. Due to safety regulations, it was unfortunately not allowed to use the
poster at all airports. Also weighing team members were approached on a
regular basis by passengers to obtain general airport and/or travel information,
which is was not always efficient for the survey.
Early Monday morning the weighing equipment was delivered by the transport
company and Friday afternoon picked-up again. Transport from one airport to
the other was arranged over the weekend.
At all airports the weighing of inbound intercontinental passengers, carry-on
luggage and checked baggage is a bit difficult (as anticipated). Reasons for this
are mainly: catching a connecting flight, being tired after a long trip and waiting
time and wanting to go home or to scheduled appointments. The closer the
weighing team could get to the reclaim belts, the higher the response rate to the
Survey on standard weights of passengers and luggage
R20090095.doc 51
May 2009
survey. At some airports (e.g. LGW, ATH) it was possible to make arrangements
with baggage management to direct more incoming flights to specific reclaim
belts, close to locations were we could perform our survey. This turned out to be
effective and helpful.
In the Summer survey, NEA had incorporated a question about the membership
of a frequent flyer program in relation to additional luggage allowance. As only a
marginal share of the passengers qualify, make use of the additional allowance
and understand the question. By mutual agreement with EASA it was decided to
leave this question out of the Winter survey. Especially based on the fact that
the participation in such programs does not influence the weight of the
passenger.
3.4 Results of data cleaning
In this paragraph the results of the data cleaning process, as described in
chapter 2, are shown.
3.4.1 Collected and corrected data per season
The Table 3-1 up to and including Table 3-4 show how many records were fixed
and deleted from the gross dataset, for both the Summer and the Winter
surveys. For the Summer data (Table 3-1andTable 3-2), the tables indicate how
many corrections were made after the Summer survey and also how many in the
second correction round after the Winter survey. After the Summer and Winter
data had been brought together in one database, the OAG data was added. The
OAG data contain the information of all Official Airline Flight schedules. The
additionally deleted Summer records could not be matched to an existing flight
from the OAG data or contained missing data, and therefore could not be fixed
and were deleted.
The percentage net data of the Winter session is higher than the percentage of
net data of the Summer session. This is due to the improved data entry
software.
Survey on standard weights of passengers and luggage
52 R20090095.doc
May 2009
Table 3-1 Summer passenger data collected and corrected
Airport
Gross
data
Summer
corrections
Additional
corrections
Deleted
records
Summer
Additional
deleted
records
Net data
AMS 1,714 96
33
5
3 1,706 (99.5%)
ATH 1,879 92
92
49
0 1,830 (97.4%)
CPH 1,514 394
33
34
4 1,476 (97.5%)
FRA 1,332 368
42
48
0 1,284 (96.4%)
LGW 1,136 129
56
1
0 1,135 (99.9%)
MAD 1,446 415
68
87
2 1,357 (93.8%)
SOF 892 297
22
0
0 892 (100%)
WAW 1,903 335
51
88
0 1,815 (95.4%)
Total 11,816 2,126
397
312
9 11,495 (97.3%)
Source: NEA
Table 3-2 Summer checked baggage data collected and corrected
Airport
Gross
data
Summer
corrections
Additional
corrections
Deleted
records
Summer
Additionally
deleted
records Net data
AMS 1,259 62
54
1
7 1,251 (99.4%)
ATH 1,587 96
106
17
3 1,567 (98.7%)
CPH 1,251 336
31
84
1 1,166 (93.2%)
FRA 1,445 223
100
43
3 1,399 (96.8%)
LGW 1,099 78
31
2
0 1,097 (99.8%)
MAD 1,325 315
13
112
7 1,206 (91.0%)
SOF 633 80
2
0
2 631 (99.7%)
WAW 1,444 298
35
65
1 1,378 (95.4%)
Total 10,043 1488
372
324
24 9,695 (96.5%)
Source: NEA
Survey on standard weights of passengers and luggage
R20090095.doc 53
May 2009
Table 3-3 Winter passenger data collected and corrected
Airport Gross data
Corrections
Deleted records
Net data
AMS 1,469
108
0
1,469 (100%)
ATH 1,177
23
1
1,176 (99.9%)
CPH 1,455
385
15
1,440 (99.0%)
FRA 1,421
249
2
1,419 (99.9%)
LGW 1,639
245
0
1,639 (100%)
MAD 1,471
389
18
1,453 (98.8%)
SOF 916
91
0
916 (100%)
WAW 1,895
311
1
1,894 (99.9%)
Total 11,443
1,801
37
11,406 (99.7%)
Source: NEA
Table 3-4 Winter checked baggage data collected and corrected
Airport Gross data Corrections
Deleted records
Net data
AMS 1,587 266
0
1,587 (100%)
ATH 1,437 26
0
1,437 (100%)
CPH 1,420 411
9
1,411 (99.4%)
FRA 1,678 447
2
1,676 (99.9%)
LGW 2,304 357
0
2,304 (100%)
MAD 1,354 414
2
1,352 (99.9%)
SOF 898 50
0
898 (100%)
WAW 1,997 214
1
1,996 (99.9%)
Total 12,675 2,185
14
12,661 (99.9%)
Source: NEA
Survey on standard weights of passengers and luggage
54 R20090095.doc
May 2009
3.5 Frequency tables
3.5.1 Meta information
The survey has resulted in a database of 22,901 passenger records (both
passenger mass and mass of carry-on luggage) and 22,353 records for the mass
of checked baggage. In this paragraph, tables are presented containing meta
information, demonstrating the validity of the recorded and cleaned data. In
Annex I detailed tables on frequencies can be found. Table I.1 up to and
including table I.17 refer to the frequencies of passengers and carry-on luggage.
Table I.18 up to and including table I.35 refer to the frequencies of checked
baggage,
Frequency tables related to the net number of records of
passengers and carry-on luggage
Table 3-5 Frequency table: passenger records by gender
Gender Frequency
Percent
Male
12,588
55.0
Female
8,351
36.5
Child (2-12 years)
1,420
6.2
Male & Infant (<2 years)
298
1.3
Female & Infant (<2 years)
244
1.1
Total
22,901
100.0
Source: NEA
Table 3-6 Frequency table: passengers records by season
Season Frequency
Percent
Summer 11,495
50.2
Winter 11,406
49.8
Total 22,901
100.0
Source: NEA
Survey on standard weights of passengers and luggage
R20090095.doc 55
May 2009
Table 3-7 Frequency table: passengers records by airport, total
survey
Airport Frequency
Percent
AMS 3,175
13.9
ATH 3,006
13.1
CPH 2,916
12.7
FRA 2,703
11.8
LGW 2,774
12.1
MAD 2,810
12.3
SOF 1,808
7.9
WAW 3,709
16.2
Total 22,901
100.0
Source: NEA
Table 3-8 Frequency table: passengers records on Non-European,
European or Domestic flights
Routetype Frequency
Percent
Non-European
7,821
34.2
European
12,790
55.8
Domestic
2,290
10.0
Total
22,901
100.0
Source: NEA
Table 3-9 Frequency table: purpose of trip, related to number of
passengers
Purpose Frequency
Percent
Leisure 15,739
68.7
Business 7,162
31.3
Total 22,901
100.0
Source: NEA
Survey on standard weights of passengers and luggage
56 R20090095.doc
May 2009
Table 3-10 Frequency table: class of travel, related to number of
passengers
Class Frequency
Percent
Economy
20,997
91.7
Business
1,767
7.7
First
137
0.6
Total
22,901
100.0
Source: NEA
Frequency tables related to the net records of checked baggage
In this paragraph the most important frequency tables for checked baggage are
reported.
Table 3-11 Frequency table: checked baggage records related by
gender
Gender Frequency
Percent
Male
12,553
56.2
Female
9,252
41.4
Child (2-12 years)
465
2.1
Male & Infant (<2 years)
30
.1
Female & Infant (<2 years)
53
.2
Total
22,353
100.0
Source: NEA
Table 3-12 Frequency table: checked baggage by season
Season Frequency
Percent
Summer 9,692
43.4
Winter 12,661
56.6
Total 22,353
100.0
Source: NEA
Survey on standard weights of passengers and luggage
R20090095.doc 57
May 2009
Table 3-13 Frequency table: pieces of checked baggage by airport,
total survey
Airport Frequency
Percent
AMS 2,838
12.7
ATH 3,004
13.4
CPH 2,576
11.5
FRA 3,074
13.8
LGW 3,400
15.2
MAD 2,558
11.4
SOF 1,529
6.8
WAW 3,374
15.1
Total 22,353
100.0
Source: NEA
Table 3-14 Frequency table: Non-European, European or Domestic
flight
Routetype Frequency
Percent
Non-European
7,995
35.8
European
11,758
52.6
Domestic
2,600
11.6
Total
22,353
100.0
Source: NEA
Survey on standard weights of passengers and luggage
58 R20090095.doc
May 2009
Table 3-15 Frequency table: purpose
Purpose Frequency
Percent
Leisure 17,679
79.1
Business 4,674
20.9
Total 22,353
100.0
Source: NEA
Table 3-16 Frequency table: class of travel
Class Frequency
Percent
Economy
21,764
97.4
Business
576
2.6
First
13
0.1
Total
22,353
100.0
Source: NEA
3.5.2 Records on passengers and baggage
The survey has resulted in a database of 22,901 passenger records (both
passenger mass and mass of carry-on luggage) and 22,353 records for the mass
of checked baggage. The figures are presented by season and gender in Table
3-17.
Based on the following, it was decided to neglect the categories male/female
carrying an infant as separate ones:
Although it was appreciated to perform an analysis of the number of
passengers travelling with infants (0-2 years), focusing on these passengers
during the survey was avoided in order not to jeopardize the randomness of
the survey.
No significant difference is found between the mean masses of male/female
without an infant in relation to the mean masses of male/female carrying an
infant (please refer to Table C.1).
As the records for passengers (male and female) carrying an infant are
relatively low (in the Summer 513 passengers carrying an infant and in the
Winter 29 passengers) and only represent about 2.4% of the total dataset.
Therefore, the figures for passengers carrying an infant are presented in italic in
Table 3-17. In further analyses the records are integrated in the records by
gender see Table 3-18.
Survey on standard weights of passengers and luggage
R20090095.doc 59
May 2009
Table 3-17 Net numbers of passengers and checked baggage weighed
by season and gender
Season Gender
Number of
passengers
Share (%)
Checked
baggage Share (%)
Male 5,612
48.8%
5,162 53.3%
Female
4,287
37.3%
4,172 43.0%
Child (2-12 years)
1,083
9.4%
327 3.4%
Male & Infant (<2 years)
287
2.5%
13 0.1%
Female & Infant (<2 years)
226
2.0%
18 0.2%
Summer
Total
11,495
100%
9,692 100%
Male
6,976
61.2%
7,391 58.4%
Female
4,064
35.6%
5,080 40.1%
Child (2-12 years)
337
3.0%
138 1.1%
Male & Infant (<2 years)
11
0.1%
17 0.1%
Female & Infant (<2 years)
18
0.2%
35 0.3%
Winter
Total
11,406
100%
12,661 100%
Male
12,588
55.0%
12,553 56.2%
Female
8,351
36.5%
9,252 41.4%
Child (2-12 years)
1,420
6.2%
465 2.1%
Male & Infant (<2 years)
298
1.3%
30 0.1%
Female & Infant (<2 years)
244
1.1%
53 0.2%
Total
Total
22,901
100%
22,353 100%
Source: NEA
Survey on standard weights of passengers and luggage
60 R20090095.doc
May 2009
Table 3-18 Passenger masses excluding carry-on luggage by season
and gender (the figures for adult passengers include
passengers carrying an infant)
Season Gender Mean
n
Std.dev.
Accuracy
(%)
Conf. Range
(95%)
All adults 75.1
10,412
16.4 0.4 0.31
- Male 82.6
5,899
6,987 14.7 0.4
- Female 65.3
4,513
4,082 12.9 0.6
Child (2-12 years) 31.1
1,083
11.6 2.2 0.69
Summer
Measured passengers
20
11,495
All adults 79.5
11,069
16.6 0.4 0.31
- Male 86.3
6,987
14.7 0.4 0.34
- Female 67.9
4,082
12.9 0.6 0.40
Child (2-12 years) 29.7
337
12.3 4.4 1.31
Winter
Measured passengers
11,406
All adults 77.4
21,481
16.6 0.3 0.22
- Male 84.6
12,886
15.0 0.3 0.26
- Female 66.6
8,595
12.7 0.4 0.27
Child (2-12 years) 30.7
1,420
11.7 2.0 0.61
Total
Measured passengers
22,901
Source: NEA
20
The number of measured passengers is included in the table as reference to
paragraph 4.2. Statistical analyses are not stated as these values are irrelevant for
the survey and for revision of standard masses.
Survey on standard weights of passengers and luggage
R20090095.doc 61
May 2009
4 Results
4.1 Introduction
This chapter presents the outcomes of the statistical analyses that were
performed. The chapter starts with a paragraph describing the outcomes of
mean values of the survey, including a separate paragraph on the results of the
sampling for children. The next paragraphs give an overview of different factors
and the correlation between factors and mass values and of the regression
analysis. The chapter ends with a comparison with current EU safety regulations
and conclusions.
4.2 Mean masses – step 1
4.2.1 Children masses
A large standard deviation can be observed in the findings for children. As
stated in the chapter on the methodology of the survey, the required sample
size is based on a relative confidence rate (accuracy) of 1% for all adult
passengers and 2% for all sub-categories of the survey (examples of these sub-
categories are male passengers, female passengers, children, scheduled flights
etc.). Although the accuracy for all measured children is 2%, this is not robust
to determine a standard mass for all children. The required accuracy is 1% in
order to determine a standard mass.
The outcome of the survey shows an average of 31.1 kg in the Summer and
29.7 kg in the Winter (accuracy of 4.4%). The difference between the Summer
and the Winter values for children is highly disturbed by differences in age
between the Winter and the Summer sample. Therefore, an overview of mean
mass by age is given in Table C-2.
When the actual age of children is taken into account, there are still differences
between their Summer and their Winter mass. This is due to the wide age range
(2-12 years) for this category, as the respondents typically experience
significant growth (and therefore weight increase) during this age period. Due
to the large variety on weight distribution caused by the age of children, the
number of measured objects by age is too low to lead to a sufficient accurate
mean mass for children. The average passenger mass for children travelling
therefore, can not be distinguished clearly.
The mean mass for children from 2 to 12 years old used in EU safety regulations
is 35 kg. The survey shows mean child-masses of 30.7 kg. Children’s mass is
highly determined by age (Table 4.1). Different masses for children between
factors such as season, flight characteristics or trip characteristics are caused
by different distribution over age classes.
In order to estimate a standard mass for children under 12 years old, which can
be used in new EU safety regulation, 100 samples of 30 passengers were taken.
The mean masses of the children in those samples varies from 25 kg up to 40
Survey on standard weights of passengers and luggage
62 R20090095.doc
May 2009
kg. Based on the outcomes of the desk research, stating that about 38% of
school-aged children in the WHO European Region will be overweight by 2010,
and that more than a quarter of these children will be obese, the highest value
of 40 kg would be the most safe border for the standard mass of children under
12 years old.
Table 4.1 Passenger masses by age; children 2-12 years
Age mean n St.dev
Accuracy
(%)
Confidence
range (95%)
2 years 14.0 37 1.9 4.4 0.61
3 years 15.9 90 2.8 3.7 0.58
4 years 18.5 113 2.7 2.7 0.50
5 years 21.5 108 3.5 3.1 0.66
6 years 23.5 109 4.2 3.4 0.79
7 years 26.4 174 5.4 3.0 0.80
8 years 30.9 154 6.7 3.4 1.06
9 years 33.9 152 7.0 3.3 1.11
10 years 36.9 160 7.4 3.1 1.14
11 years 42.1 153 9.3 3.5 1.47
12 years 46.3 170 9.2 3.0 1.38
total child (2-12 years) 30.7 1,420 11.7 2.0 0.61
Source: NEA
Conclusion:
Due to the accuracy within the survey, it is not possible to determine a
standard mass for children. It is recommended to perform an additional
survey in order to determine the standard mass for children.
In case it will not be possible to perform such a survey on short time notice,
it is recommended to apply the standard mass of 40 kg.
4.2.2 Passenger masses
The passenger masses as measured in the survey are presented in Table 3-18.
The mean value for all adult passengers is 77.4 kg. All detailed tables are
presented in ANNEX C, ANNEX D, and ANNEX E.
Passenger characteristics
Gender
The total mean mass for male passengers is higher than for female passengers
(84.6 kg and 66.6 kg). The difference is almost 17 kg.
Survey on standard weights of passengers and luggage
R20090095.doc 63
May 2009
Age
Table 4.1 shows that female passengers in the ages between 30 and 50 are
slightly underrepresented. This might influence the average weight of adult
passengers, as the frequency of male passengers is higher (Table 3-5).
Table 4.2 Age distribution by gender
Age category Mean mass
Share of male
Share of female
1 13-15 58.8
0.48
0.52
2 16-20 68.7
0.51
0.49
3 21-25 71.4
0.53
0.47
4 26-30 75.0
0.58
0.42
5 31-35 78.5
0.64
0.36
6 36-40 79.9
0.63
0.37
7 41-45 81.4
0.66
0.34
8 46-50 81.9
0.64
0.36
9 51-55 81.7
0.62
0.38
10 55-60 81.7
0.62
0.38
11 61-65 81.1
0.60
0.40
12 <65 80.0
0.60
0.40
Total 77.4
0.60
0.40
Source: NEA
Purpose of the trip
During the field work passengers were interviewed about the purpose of their
trip. Two answers were possible: business or leisure. Male passengers on
‘business’ trips show higher mean masses than male passengers travelling for
the purpose of ‘leisure’ (86.8 kg and 83.2 kg). Travelling female passengers
show no differences in mass values between ‘business’ or ‘leisure’ purposes, as
shown in Table 4.3. All mean values on trip purpose are presented in Table C-3.
Survey on standard weights of passengers and luggage
64 R20090095.doc
May 2009
Table 4.3 Purpose of trip
Gender Purpose Mean n
Std. dev.
Accuracy
(%)
Confidence range
(95%)
Leisure 83.2 7,899
15.0
0.4
0.33
Business 86.8 4,987
14.6
0.5
0.40
Male
Total 84.6 12,886
15.0
0.3
0.26
Leisure 66.6 6,680
12.7
0.5
0.30
Business 66.3 1,915
12.5
0.8
0.56
Female
Total 66.5 8,595
12.7
0.4
0.27
Source: NEA
Time and place of the measurements
Season
In the Summer survey the mean mass for all adults was 2.3 kg lower (75.1 kg)
and in the Winter 2.1 kg higher (79.5 kg) than the average of the survey (77.4
kg). Refer to Table 3-18.
The difference between the Summer and the Winter can partially be explained
by the sample composition: the Summer survey includes more female
passengers than the Winter survey (43% female adults in the Summer and 37%
female adults in the Winter). Apart from differences in sample compositions,
there still remain differences between masses of passengers in the Summer and
the Winter. Heavier coats, clothes and shoes might be causing those
differences.
The mean male passenger mass is 82.6 kg in Summer and 86.3 kg in the Winter
(a difference of 3.7 kg). The upper boundary for male Winter masses is 87 kg.
Female passengers show mean masses of 65.3 kg in Summer and 67.9 kg in
Winter (a difference of 2.6 kg). The upper boundary for female masses in
Winter is 69 kg.
Airport where the survey was performed
The weighing of passengers took place at eight European airports. In Table C-14
,Table C-15, Table C-16, Table C-17, Table C-18 and Table C-19 passenger
masses by season and airport of weighing are presented. Passengers weighed in
Madrid show lower mean mass values (about 2.3 kg less) than passengers
measured at other airports. These lower values appear on the mean masses of
male passengers as well as female passengers and the lower masses in Madrid
appear in the Summer survey as well as in the Winter survey. At Sofia the mean
mass value is about 2.1 kg heavier.
Survey on standard weights of passengers and luggage
R20090095.doc 65
May 2009
Trip characteristics
Route type
Three route types are distinguished in this survey: domestic, European and non-
European. The mean mass of passengers travelling on a domestic route type is
slightly higher (0.9 kg), than the mean mass of all passengers (Table C-5). No
significant mean mass differences were found in the survey for male and/or
female passengers.
Region of departure and arrival
In the following paragraph attention is being paid to differences in measured
masses between passengers departing to or arriving from several regions. When
the measured mean values are 1 kg more or less then the grand total mean,
regions are mentioned. The paragraph is based upon Table C-10, Table C-11,
Table C-12 and Table C-13.
The mean body mass of male passengers departing from or travelling to South
America, Asia, Spain, Portugal or Italy is lower than the grand total mean of all
male passengers (84.6 kg). Higher weights are measured amongst men,
departing to or arriving from North-Eastern Europe, Romania and Bulgaria. Male
passengers, departing to Greece, Cyprus, Malta and Turkey weigh more then
the average male whereas male passengers arriving from this very same region
show no difference from the grand total mean (84.6 kg).
Female passengers with higher masses than the grand total mean (66.5 kg), are
the ones that:
depart to Scandinavia and Iceland, Africa and the Middle East, UK and
Ireland, Benelux and France and North America, or
arrive from UK and Ireland, Scandinavia and Iceland.
Female passengers with lower weights than the female grand total mean, depart
to Asia, South America, Romania and Bulgaria, Spain, Portugal and Italy. The
very same lower masses are measured for females, arriving from Spain,
Portugal, Italy, Greece, Cyprus, Malta and Turkey.
Overall it can be concluded that the accuracy percentages are rather high.
Flight characteristics
Flight type
The variable flight type implicates two characteristics: ‘scheduled’ or ‘non-
scheduled’. The mean mass of all passengers travelling on a scheduled flight is
75.2 kg, and on non-scheduled flights the mean passenger mass is 69.3 kg
(Table C- 7). This difference in mean masses of passengers is caused by
ratio (male/female distribution), Table 4.4. The percentage female passengers
is lower on scheduled flights than its percentage on non-scheduled flights (39%
and 49%).
Survey on standard weights of passengers and luggage
66 R20090095.doc
May 2009
Table 4.4 Flight type related to gender distribution
Flight type Share of male
Share of female
0 Scheduled 0.61
0.39
1 Non-scheduled 0.51
0.49
Total 0.60
0.40
Source: NEA
Airline type
Three airline types are distinguished
21
: ‘regular scheduled’, ‘charter’ and ‘low-
cost’. The mean mass of passengers on regularly scheduled flights is the highest
(75.3 kg) and the mean mass of passengers in chartered flights (70.2 kg) is the
lowest of the three airline types (Table C-8 and Table C-9). Charter flights show
lower mean masses because they carry more female passengers than regularly
scheduled flights (52% and 38% female). This difference is caused by ratio
(male/female distribution), as shown in Table 4.5.
Table 4.5 Airline type related to gender distribution
Airline type Share of male
Share of female
0 Regular scheduled 0.62
0.38
1 Charter 0.48
0.52
2 Low-cost 0.55
0.45
3 Charter & low-cost 0.59
0.41
Total 0.60
0.40
Source: NEA
Class of travel
Male passengers, travelling first class or business class tend to weigh slightly
more (1.1 kg) than the average male passenger (Table C-4). For female
passengers the opposite is the case. Female passengers travelling first class or
business class tend to weight slightly less (-0.3 kg) than the average female
passenger.
4.2.3 Carry-on luggage
The grand total mean of carry-on luggage mass is 6.1 kg (Table 4.6). In the
Summer survey the total mean is lower (5.3 kg) and in the Winter the total
21
The fourth type (‘charter and low cost’) is not analysed as the measurements of
this passengers is low (4% of the total number of measurements), and mass
differences are therefore not significant
Survey on standard weights of passengers and luggage
R20090095.doc 67
May 2009
mean is higher (6.9 kg). Male passengers carry-on luggage mass is heavier (6.7
kg) than the carry-on luggage of female passengers (5.9 kg).
Table 4.6 Mean masses of carry-on luggage for all passengers
Season gender mean
n
Std. Dev
accuracy
(%)
conf range
(95%)
male 6.0
5,899
4.6
1.9 0.12
female 5.2
4,513
4.1
2.3 0.12
child 2.0
1,083
2.6
7.7 0.15
Summer
total 5.3
11,495
4.4
1.5 0.08
male 7.2
6,987
4.7
1.5 0.11
female 6.7
4,082
4.6
2.1 0.14
child 2.2
337
2.6
12.5 0.28
Winter
total 6.9
11,406
4.7
1.2 0.09
male 6.7
12,886
4.7
1.2 0.08
female 5.9
8,595
4.4
1.6 0.09
child 2.0
1,420
2.6
6.5 0.13
Total
total 6.1
22,901
4.6
1.0 0.06
Source: NEA
Further categorisation of the mean masses of carry-on luggage is not useful,
due to the fact that the outcomes of these categories would not comply with the
required accuracy (2%).
It is recommended for carry-on luggage masses to include this mass in a value
for passenger + carry-on luggage (Table 4.7). In this case it is not necessary to
apply a large safety margin on the carry-on luggage weight. If this method is
applied the survey results show that an average mass of 7 kg can be used for
carry-on luggage of adult passengers (6.5 kg + confidence range of 0.07 kg and
rounded to the upper value).
Survey on standard weights of passengers and luggage
68 R20090095.doc
May 2009
Table 4.7 Passenger masses including carry-on luggage by season
and gender (the figures for adult passengers include passengers
carrying an infant)
Season Gender Mean
n
Std.dev.
Accuracy
(%)
Conf. Range
(95%)
All adults 80.8
10,412
17.5 0.4 0.34
- Male 88.7
5,899
16.3 0.5 0.42
- Female 70.5
4,513
13.3 0.5 0.39
Child (2-12 years) 33.0
1,083
12.4 2.2 0.74
Summer
Measured passengers
22
11,495
All adults 86.6
11,069
17.5 0.4 0.33
- Male 93.5
6,987
15.6 0.4 0.37
- Female 74.6
4,082
13.8 0.6 0.42
Child (2-12 years) 32.0
337
13.5 4.5 1.44
Winter
Measured passengers
11,406
All adults 83.8
21,481
17.7 0.3 0.24
- Male 91.3
12,886
16.1 0.3 0.28
- Female 72.5
8,595
13.7 0.4 0.29
Child (2-12 years) 32.8
1,420
12.7 2.0 0.66
Total
Measured passengers
22,901
Source: NEA
The carry-on luggage mass is partly determined by airline policies concerning
maximum allowed mass of carry-on luggage. Those airline policies vary from 5
kg per person up to 23 kg per person
23
. The most common maxima are 5, 6, 8,
10 and 12 kg per person (Table 4.8). The measured masses of carry-on luggage
vary from 4.2 up to 10.2 kg. Because part of the passengers carry no carry-on
luggage at all, standard deviations are rather high. Due to the large variety on
maximum allowed weights, the number of measured objects per maximum mass
class is too low to lead to sufficient accurate measurements per maximum
weight class. Except for the mass values of carry-on luggage in the maximum
mass class of 8 kg, all measured values exceed the accuracy level of 2%.
Therefore, the next table is only meant to be illustrative.
22
The number of measured passengers is included in the table as reference to
paragraph 4.2. Statistical analyses are not stated as these values are irrelevant for
the survey and for revision of standard masses.
23
Maximum allowed masses are known for 75% of the measured passengers
Survey on standard weights of passengers and luggage
R20090095.doc 69
May 2009
Table 4.8 Maximum allowed* and measured values of carry-on
luggage masses by airline and destination
Maximum allowed Mean n
Std.dev.
Accuracy (%)
Conf. Range (95%)
5 kg 4.2 1,504
3.6
4.3
0.18
6 kg 6.3 2,408
4.5
2.9
0.18
7 kg 6.7 443
4.3
6.0
0.40
8 kg 6.9 5,460
4.7
1.8
0.13
9 kg 6.8 263
4.7
8.3
0.56
10 kg 6.2 2,588
4.3
2.7
0.17
12 kg 7.1 1,876
4.8
3.1
0.22
13 kg 7.7 17
5.0
30.7
2.38
14 kg 7.3 44
5.5
22.5
1.64
15 kg 10.4 9
6.1
38.3
4.00
16 kg 8.2 355
5.5
6.9
0.57
18 kg 6.9 794
4.7
4.7
0.32
20 kg 7.2 138
4.6
10.7
0.77
23 kg 7.4 499
5.0
5.9
0.43
Total 6.5 16,398
4.6
1.1
0.07
* The luggage allowances have been retrieved from the websites from the airlines and can
vary depending on different flight classes and distance and flight length (on long haul
flights the checked baggage allowance can be higher than on short or medium haul).
Please refer to 2.2.5
Source: NEA
Survey on standard weights of passengers and luggage
70 R20090095.doc
May 2009
4.2.4 Checked baggage
The mean mass of checked baggage is 16.7 kg (Table 4.9). There is hardly any
difference between the checked baggage mass of the Winter and the Summer
survey. There is no significant difference between the checked baggage mass of
male and female passengers.
Table 4.9 Checked baggage masses by season and gender
Season Gender Mean
n Std.dev.
Accuracy
(%)
Conf.
Range
(95%)
Male 16.9
5,162
5.8
0.9 0.16
Female 17.0
4,172
5.7
1.0 0.17
Child (2-12 years) 14.2
327
6.0
4.6 0.65
Male & Infant (<2 years) 19.9
13
7.1
19.3 3.83
Female & Infant (<2 years) 17.2
18
7.9
21.3 3.67
Summer
Total 16.9
9,692
5.8
0.7 0.12
Male 16.5
7,391
5.9
0.8 0.13
Female 16.8
5,080
5.7
0.9 0.16
Child (2-12 years) 17.1
138
6.2
6.0 1.03
Male & Infant (<2 years) 19.8
17
6.7
16.1 3.18
Female & Infant (<2 years) 18.8
35
5.4
9.5 1.79
Winter
Total 16.6
12,661
5.8
0.6 0.10
Male 16.7
12,553
5.9
0.6 0.10
Female 16.9
9,252
5.7
0.7 0.12
Child (2-12 years) 15.1
465
6.2
3.7 0.56
Male & Infant (<2 years) 19.8
30
6.7
12.2 2.41
Female & Infant (<2 years) 18.3
53
6.3
9.4 1.71
Total
Total 16.7
22,353
5.8
0.5 0.08
Source: NEA
In the following circumstances, checked baggage mass is higher than the grand
total mean: baggage that is meant for more than one person (Table E-18), non-
European flights (Table E-4 and Table E-5), non-scheduled flights, charter and
low-cost flights (Table E-7) and checked baggage belonging to passengers
travelling to or from Asia, North America and South America (Table E-9, Table
E-10, Table E-11 and Table E-12).
Survey on standard weights of passengers and luggage
R20090095.doc 71
May 2009
4.3 Analysis by explanatory variables - step 2
In this paragraph the relation between the dependent variable mass value of
objects (passengers or baggage) and factors which were thought to influence
mass values are investigated. Paragraph 4.3.1 starts with the presentation of
the correlation between all factors and mass values of passengers and their
carry-on luggage. Paragraph 4.3.2 follows an interpretation of the presented
correlations.
4.3.1 Correlation between factors and mass values
In Table F-1 correlations are presented between measured passenger mass and
factors which were thought to influence mass values. The values of Pearson’s r
are presented for correlation between several factors on the one hand and
masses of passengers with and without carry-on luggage on the other.
Pearson’s r varies from -1 (there is a strong negative correlation) up to +1
(there is a strong positive correlation). A negative value of the correlation
means that a high value of the factor correlates with low values of masses. A
positive value of the correlation means that high values on the measured factor
correlate with high values of masses. When there is no correlation between
factor and mass, the value is 0. When correlations are not significant no values
are presented (the table shows ‘n.s.’).
On the base of the strength of the correlations between the factors and the
masses of passengers and their carry-on luggage, it is possible to rank the
factors from the strongest (lowest number 1) up to the weakest correlations
(highest number).
Ranking correlations between factors and adult passenger
masses
The survey shows the following ranking in importance of factors related to
passenger
masses of adults:
1 gender
: female masses are 17 kg lower than male masses
2 age
(years): passengers from 13 up to 30 years old have less masses (10 kg
less than passengers older than 30 years of age)
3 when the purpose of the flight
is business, masses are higher than when
the purpose is leisure (7 kg higher)
4 season
:in the Winter the masses are higher than in the Summer (7 kg
difference)
5 place of measurement
: passengers weighted in Madrid, Warsaw and
London Gatwick show lower masses:
Madrid 3 kg less than all other regions
Warsaw 1.7 kg. less than all other regions
London Gatwick 1.5 kg less than all other regions
6 difference between flying to and coming from
the following directions:
other European countries (incl. Russia) (4 kg difference)
Spain, Portugal and Italy (2 kg difference)
Survey on standard weights of passengers and luggage
72 R20090095.doc
May 2009
Scandinavia and Iceland ( 2 kg. difference)
North America (2 kg difference)
Benelux and France (2 kg. difference)
Northeast Europe (almost 2 kg. difference)
UK and Ireland (1 kg. difference)
7 airline type
:
in low-cost airlines adult passenger masses are 2.5 kg. less than all
other airline types
difference between airline type charter and all other types is 4.6 kg
8 flight type
: the masses of adult passengers in non-scheduled flights are 5.9
kg lighter than the masses of passengers in scheduled flights
9 check-in baggage
: yes or no (0,4 kg difference)
10 haul
< 500 km and all other hauls further away (2,3 kg. difference)
haul > 5000 km and all other hauls (0,9 kg. difference)
11 direction
inbound or outbound (0,09 kg. difference)
12 route type
European and all other types (1,2 kg. difference)
No significant differences between factors and adult masses were observed for
the following factors:
place of measurement
: Amsterdam, Athens, Copenhagen, Frankfurt, Sofia
route type
domestic or other types
difference between flying to or coming from
the following regions:
Germany, Switzerland and Austria
Greece, Cyprus, Malta and Turkey
Romania and Bulgaria
Africa and the Middle East
Asia
South America
Ranking correlations between factors and carry-on luggage
The survey shows the following ranking in importance of factors related to
masses of carry-on luggage
1 flight type
: the mass of carry-on luggage in non-scheduled flights is 2.5
kg lighter than the mass of carry-on luggage in scheduled flights
2 season
: in the Winter carry-on luggage is 1.3 kg heavier than in the
Summer.
3 purpose
: adults who claim their flight has a business purpose have 1.4 kg
heavier carry-on luggage than adults who claim their trip has a leisure
purpose.
4 difference in masses of carry on luggage between flying to and
from the following regions:
South America is (1.5 kg difference)
Greece, Cyprus, Malta and Turkey (1.2 kg difference)
Africa and the Middle East (0.7 kg difference)
Germany, Switzerland and Austria (0.6 kg difference)
Spain, Portugal and Italys (0.5 kg difference)
Scandinavia and Iceland (0.5 kg difference)
Survey on standard weights of passengers and luggage
R20090095.doc 73
May 2009
5 check in baggage: adults without checked baggage carry 1,5 kg heavier
carry-on luggage than adults with checked baggage.
6 place of measurement
:
measured masses in Frankfurt are 1.6 kg heavier than elsewhere
measured masses in Amsterdam are 0.3 kg heavier than elswhere
measured masses in Sofia are 0.3 kg lighter than elsewhere
measured masses in Warsaw are 0.24 kg lighter than elswhere
measured masses in Madrid are 0.12 kg lighter than elswhere
7 airline type
: passengers in charter flights carry 2.0 kg less carry-on
luggage than passengers of other flights. In low-cost carriers, carry-on
luggage is 1 kg lighter than those of all other flights.
8 maximum kg of handbag
: higher maximun allowed values of carry-on
luggage correlate slightly with higher measured values.
9 gender
: carry-on luggage of female passengers is 0.8 kg lighter than
carry-on luggage of male passengers.
10 age
: passengers from 13 to 20 years carry 1.6 kg less carry-on luggage
than older passengers.
11 haul
:
passengers in long haul > 5,000 km flights carry 0.3 kg more carry-on
luggage than passengers in other flights
passengers in short haul < 500 km flights carry 0.06 kg less carry-on
luggage than passengers in other flights
12 route type
masses of carry-on luggage in domestic flights are 0.3 kg
lighter than masses of all other flights.
13 direction
masses of carry-on luggage of outbound passengers is 0.2 kg
heavier than these masses of inbound passengers
No significant differences were observed for:
Route type
: European
Place of measurement
: Copenhagen, Athens, and London Gatwick
Difference between flying to or coming from
: Romania and Bulgaria,
Benelux and France, Northeast Europe, UK and Ireland, Other European
countries (incl. Russia), Asia and North America
Ranking correlations between factors and checked baggage
The survey shows the following ranking in importance of factors related to
masses of checked baggage
13 distance in kilometers
: the further the distance of the flight the heavier
the masses of checked in luggage.
14 route type
: The checked in luggage mass in non-European flights is 2.3 kg
more than the luggage mass on European flights and 3.4 kg more than the
luggage mass domestic flights.
15 haul
: The checked in luggage mass in long haul (>5,000 km) flights is 2.5 kg
more than the luggage mass in medium haul (500-5,000 km) flights and 3.8
kg more than the luggage mass of short haul (<500 km) flights.
16 label USA
: checked in luggage mass with a USA-label is 2.5 kg more than all
other checked in luggage mass.
Survey on standard weights of passengers and luggage
74 R20090095.doc
May 2009
17 purpose: passengers who claim the purpose of their trip is business have
1.7 kg heavier checked in luggage mass than passengers flying for leisure
reasons.
18 number of persons
: Checked in luggage mass that belongs to more than
one person is 1.8 kg heavier than the luggage that belongs to one person.
19 maximum kilo
: airlines with maximum checked in luggage of 15 kg show
lower masses than airlines with maxima of 18 kf and more (3 kg less)
20 charter
: Checked in luggage mass in charter flights is 1.4 kg heavier than
luggage masses in other flights
21 flight type
: Checked in luggage mass in scheduled flights is 0.7 kg lighter
than luggage masses in non-scheduled flights
22 direction
: Checked in luggage mass in inbound flights is 0.5 kg heavier than
luggage masses in outbound flights
23 low cost:
Checked in luggage mass in low-cost flights is 0.5 kg heavier than
luggage masses in other flights
24 age
: Checked in luggage mass of very old ( >80 years old) passengers and
children (<12 years old) is somewhat lighter (1 kg) than checked in luggage
mass of other passengers.
No significant differences were observed for:
class
: Checked in luggage of first class passengers shows 6.1 kg more mass
than the luggage of economy and business class passengers, but this
difference is not significant.
gender
: there is no significant difference between the checked in luggage
mass of female and male passengers.
season
: In the Winter checked in luggage mass is the same as in the
Summer
4.3.2 Appropriateness of the factors
In the following paragraph an interpretation of the correlations, presented in
paragraph 4.5.1, is given. During this interpretation two questions are leading:
What might cause the correlation between factors and masses?
To what extent would it be appropriate to use the factor in new regulations?
The First question shall be answered by investigating interactions between
different factors, examined in this study. The second question shall be answered
by arguing whether the following four criteria are applicable:
The factor in question is specific, meaning that the nature of the factor can
be defined in a clear, understandable, and unambiguous way.
The factor is measurable, meaning that when two or more different parties
measure the same factor at the same time and place, the same values are
measured.
The factor is acceptable for all or at least most parties involved in aircraft
business. In this study a factor is defined as unacceptable when implication
of the factor in regulations may lead to additional administrative burdens
The factor is realistic, meaning that evidence-based differences of
measured masses are substantial.
Survey on standard weights of passengers and luggage
R20090095.doc 75
May 2009
The abovementioned criteria are summarised in Table 4.10 and will be clarified
in the coming paragraphes. A factor will be called appropriate when all four
required criteria are met.
Table 4.10 Criteria to judge the appropriateness of factors in new
regulations
realistic
Factor specific measurable acceptable passenger carry on check in
passenger characteristics
Gender: female or male yes yes yes yes no no
age yes yes no yes yes no
purpose: business or leisure no no no no yes no
checked baggage: yes or no yes yes no no yes n.a.
Time/place of measurement
Time: Winter or Summer yes yes yes yes yes no
Place: AMS, ATH, CPH, FRA, LG,
MAD, SOF, WAW
yes yes no mad fra no
Trip characteristics
direction inbound or outbound yes yes no no no no
Route type: domestic, Eur etc yes yes yes no no yes
Haul: long, medium, short yes yes yes no no yes
distance flight (km) yes yes no no no yes
Flight characteristics
flight type (non) scheduled no no yes yes yes yes
Airline type: charter, low cost no no yes yes yes yes
maximum kg baggage yes no yes no no yes
Region departure/destination
Thirteen regions* yes yes no no no no
* The 14
th
region covers other various arriving and destinating airports
Survey on standard weights of passengers and luggage
76 R20090095.doc
May 2009
Passenger characteristics
Gender
Gender is an appropriate factor to use in new regulations because the factor
meets all four requirements:
Specific: The factor gender is used to define five passenger categories
based on age and sex. The following categories are distinguished: (1) male,
(2) female, (3) child (2-12 years), (4) male with infant between 0-2 years
and (5) female with infant between 0-2 years. Differences in sexe are clear
and unambiguous. The age categories of infants and children are clear,
understandable and unambiguous, because they are linked to the age of the
person.
Measurable: Because airlines make a distinction between the price of the
flight and the age where children or infants are concerned, it is possible for
airlines to measure the distinct gender categories
Acceptable: Because gender plays a role in the current regulations, gender
should be acceptable for all parties concerned.
Realistic: Five categories of gender types were defined. It did not seem to
be realistic to make a distinction between adult passengers with or without
carrying infants, because the proportion of adults carrying infants was very
small – especially in the Winter months. The second reason why the
distinction between adults with and without carrying infants is not realistic is
the fact that the mean masses of adults with infants are not different from
the mean masses of adults without infants. Because the category ‘child from
2-12 years old ‘ shows very significant differences in mass weight
(compared with the masses of adults) it seems realistic to take this category
into account. The number of measured children was however too low to lead
to the sufficient accuracy level of at least 2%. This is the reason why the
category ‘children from 2-12 years old’ is not taken into account. This leads
to the conclusion that only two categories of the factor gender remain: adult
female passengers (female passengers carrying an infant included) and
adult male passengers (male passengers carrying infants included). These
two categories of the factor ‘gender’ show the strongest correlation with
passenger mass: female passengers weigh less than male passengers. The
most important cause of differences in masses between men and women is
their body length and body structure: men are longer than women and have
more muscles. It is realistic to use the factorgender in new regulations
because it is a very significant factor predicting differences in adult
passenger mass. Gender predicts 28% of the differences in adult passenger
mass.
Age
Age is not an appropriate factor to use in new regulations because the factor
meets only three of the four requirements:
Specific: The passengers age in this survey is measured in a subjective
way: passengers told their own age. Because all passengers are able to give
an adequate answer when asked about their age, this factor is clear,
understandable and unambiguous.
Survey on standard weights of passengers and luggage
R20090095.doc 77
May 2009
Measurable: Because all passengers have to travel with their passports,
and the date of birth is written in the passport, the age of every passenger
is measurable in an objective way.
Acceptable: When age is taken into account in new regulations, airlines will
have to make specific administrative adjustments to be able to follow the
new rule. Furthermore, this might be in violation of the privacy law.
Therefore, this factor is considered unacceptable.
Realistic: There is a significant positive correlation between age and
passenger mass. Younger passengers between 13 and 30 years old show
substantial fewer masses than older passengers. Age predicts 6.1% of the
differences in adult passenger mass. Part of the relation between age and
body mass is caused by different male/female ratio’s in the ages of 35 and
50 years old. After correction for gender differences, age predicts 4,7% of
the differences in adult passenger mass. Due to the positive correlation
between age and passenger mass age is a realistic factor for regulations.
Purpose of the flight
The purpose of the flight is not an appropriate factor to use in new regulations
because the factor meets none of the four requirements:
Specific: The factor purpose is the motive for travelling as stated by the
passenger. Two categories were used: business and leisure. When asked
about the motive of their flight, passengers gave answers in more
categories than the two distinguished categories in this survey. Neither the
category ‘business’ nor the category ‘leisure’ is therefore unambiguous.
Measurable: When two or more differences would have to categorize the
same flight purpose, different answers are possible. Mixing up flying
business class with flying for business purposes is imaginable. This is why
the factor “purpose” is not measurable enough.
Acceptable: Aircraft companies would have to start a separate registration
when the factor purpose is subject to new regulations. Therefore, the factor
is not acceptable.
Realistic: Business purpose predicts 2.5% of the differences in adult
passenger mass. Part of correlation between business purpose and adult
passenger mass is caused by gender and age: especially male passengers
between 30 and 50 years old claim the purpose of their flight is business.
After correction for this influence of gender and age, only 0.4% of the
differences in adult passenger mass are predicted by business purpose. An
influence this small is not considered substantial enough for new
regulations.
Checked baggage: yes or no
The factor checked baggage is not an appropriate factor to use in new
regulations because the factor meets only two of the four requirements:
Specific: A passenger might have checked baggage or not. Checked
baggage is defined in terms of a concrete action and therefore clear,
understandable, and unambiguous.
Measurable: when different people in different places perform the
operations specified in the definition of ‘checked baggage’ the same values
(yes or no) will be measured.
Survey on standard weights of passengers and luggage
78 R20090095.doc
May 2009
Acceptable: relating passenger masses to their checked baggage would
imply extra administrative actions on behalf of the airlines. This is why the
factor “checked baggage” is not considered acceptable.
Realistic: The factor ‘checked baggage’ predicts 0.1% of the differences in
adult passenger mass. An influence this small is not considered substantial
enough for new regulations.
Time and place of measurement
Season
The factor ‘season’ is an appropriate factor to use in new regulations, because
the factor meets all four requirements. After correction for gender differences
however, season predicts only 0.5% of the differences in adult passenger mass:
Specific: The factor ‘season’ contains two categories: Winter and Summer.
Both categories can be defined as clear, understandable, and unambiguous
by specifying the days of the month as a starting and ending point of that
particular season.
Measurable: The factor ‘season’ is measurable because all European
countries use the same time table and calendar.
Acceptable: The factor ‘season’ already plays a role in aircraft business,
because passenger movements vary by season. It should therefore be easy
to incorporate the factor season into new regulations.
Realistic: There is a correlation between season and passenger mass. In
the Winter the masses are higher. Season predicts 2.6% of the differences
in adult passenger mass (carry on luggage included). Part of the higher
masses in the Winter are caused by gender differences: in the Winter the
fraction of female passengers is lower than in the Summer. In the Winter
male passengers are older than male passengers in the Summer and they
have higher masses of carry-on luggage. After correction for these gender
differences, season predicts only 0.5% of the differences in adult passenger
mass. An influence this small is not considered substantial enough for new
regulations.
Place of measurement
The factor ‘place of measurement Madrid’ is not an appropriate factor to use in
new regulations because the factor does not meet all four requirements:
Specific: The factor ‘place of measurement’ contains eight specific airports.
Each airport represents a part of Europe. Such a definition is clear,
understandable, and unambiguous.
Measurable: Because data collection of this survey is described precisely,
any other party could repeat the measurements in the same way. The factor
is therefore measurable.
Acceptable: Based on the accuracy level it can be concluded that follow-up
research is recommendable. Moreover, it should be discussed with
stakeholders whether it is acceptable to create different rules for different
parts of Europe, as this might complicate the performance of the
regulations.
Realistic: Seven of the eight airports show similar passenger masses. Adult
passenger masses in Madrid were lower than passenger masses in all other
airports (5 kg. lower). The factor “place of measurement Madrid” predicts
0.6% of the differences in adult passenger mass. Part of the differences in
Survey on standard weights of passengers and luggage
R20090095.doc 79
May 2009
passenger mass between Madrid en the other airports where measurements
took place is caused by gender and age differences. The data on passengers
coming from and going to Madrid, contain more female passengers (2%
more female passengers than other measured airports) and the average age
of the passengers is lower (the average age of passengers measured in
Madrid is 2 years younger than passengers measured in other airports).
Furthermore, fewer passengers claimed that the purpose of their trip was
business. After correction for these factors passenger masses in Madrid
diminished by 3 kg. lower than passenger masses in all other airports.
Trip characteristics
Direction
Direction is not an appropriate factor to use in new regulations because the
factor meets only two of the four requirements:
Specific: The factor ‘direction’ contains two categories: inbound passengers
(arrivals) and outbound (departing) passengers. This definition is sufficiently
clear and unambiguous.
Measurable: the factor meets the criterion of measurement.
Acceptable: The factor is not acceptable for new regulations, because only
departing passengers are boarding.
Realistic: Arriving passenger mass is lower than departing passenger mass
(1.3 kg). The factor direction predicts 0.1% of the differences in adult
passenger mass. An influence this small is not considered substantial
enough for new regulations.
Route type
Route type is not an appropriate factor to use in new regulations because the
factor meets only two of the four requirements:
Specific: Route type defines the geographical scope of the flight route into
three categories: (1) European, (2) non-European and (3) domestic. A flight
is categorised as European if both the airport of departure and the airport of
arrival are located in European countries. Because some European countries
are smaller and others are larger, the surface area of the category
‘domestic’ has a different meaning in different countries. This is why the
category ‘domestic’ is not specific.
Measurable: The factor is very well measurable.
Acceptable: When route type would contain only two remaining categories
European and non-European, the factor is simple enough to be acceptable.
Realistic: Passenger mass of European flights is a bit higher than
passenger mass in all other flights. Route type predicts 0.1% of the
differences in adult passenger mass. An influence this small is not
considered substantial enough for new regulations.
Flight distance
Flight distance is not an appropriate factor to use in new regulations because
the factor meets only one of the four requirements:
Specific: The factor flight distance is the distance in kilometers between the
airport of departure and the airport of arrival, categorised in three distance
categories: (1) short haul (<500 km), (2) medium haul (500-5,000 km) and
(3) long haul (> 5,000 km).
Survey on standard weights of passengers and luggage
80 R20090095.doc
May 2009
Measurable: The factor is not well measurable, because passengers might
make stops in between. Because of these stops the total distance of the
flight of the passenger does not correspond with the total distance of the
flight of one special airplane.
Acceptable: Introducing the factor flight distance into regulations would
make things very complex for aircraft companies. The factor is therefore not
acceptable.
Realistic: Flight distance predicts 0.02% of the differences in adult
passenger mass. After correction for mass differences, caused by gender,
age and carry-on baggage, flight distance predicts only 0.01% of the
differences in adult passenger mass. An influence this small is not
considered substantial enough for new regulations.
Flight characteristics
Flight type
Flight type is not an appropriate factor to use in new regulations because the
factor meets only two of the four requirements:
Specific: The flight type is determined by OAG data which includes only the
scheduled flights. All flights not registered in the OAG data are marked as
non-scheduled flights. It is not certain whether this definition is
unambiguous.
Measurable: as long as OAG data are registered, the factor flight type is
measurable.
Acceptable: Because current regulations contain flight characteristics as
distinguishable criterion, it should be no problem to introduce new
regulations based on flight characteristics.
Realistic: Scheduled flights predict 0.5% of the differences in adult
passenger mass. Passenger mass in scheduled flights is 5.9 kg more than
passenger mass in other flights. Part of the relation between scheduled
flights and passenger mass is caused by age, season and airline policies
concerning carry-on luggage. The average age of the passengers in
scheduled flights is higher, the fraction of scheduled flights is higher in the
Winter and the mass of carry-on luggage of passengers in scheduled flights
is higher because of differences in airline policies. After correction for these
factors the difference between passenger mass in scheduled flights and all
other flights is 1.2 kg.
Airline type
Airline type is not an appropriate factor to use in new regulations because the
factor does not meet all four requirements:
Specific: The factor airline type is defined in three categories of flights: (1)
regular scheduled, (2) charter and (3) low-cost. These categories are not
clear and unambiguous.
Measurable: The airline company decides which flight is called ‘charter’ or
‘low-cost’. Therefore, the factor is not measurable in an independent way.
Acceptable: Because the factor is part of current regulations, the factor is
acceptable.
Realistic: The category ‘charter’ predicts 0.3% of the differences in adult
passenger mass; this is a 4.6 kg difference. The differences in passenger
mass between charter flights and all other flights is partially due to
Survey on standard weights of passengers and luggage
R20090095.doc 81
May 2009
differences in gender, age, airline regulations regarding carry-on luggage,
season and purpose of the flight. After correction for these factors the
difference between charter flights and all other flights diminishes from 4.6
kg to 1.9 kg. After this correction the category ‘charter’ predicts 0.1% of the
differences in adult passenger mass. This influence is considered not
substantial for new regulations.
4.4 Regression analysis – step 3
4.4.1 Passenger masses including carry-on luggage
In Table F-1 and Table F-2 corr elations between individual factors and
passenger masses were presented. In the previous paragraph it has been
explained that there is interaction between factors. Male and female passengers
choose differently for flight type and airline type. Please refer to ANNEX C and
ANNEX D. This interaction leads to differences in male/female ratio per flight
type, which might influence mean masses of passengers. In order to eliminate
the influence of interaction between factors, we examined all independent
variables in a regression analysis. The results are presented in Table 4.11. The
coefficient values can be found in the column ‘non-standardized coeff beta’. This
results in a formula that predicts the mass of an adult passenger as follows: the
mass of an adult passenger is 71.7 kg, minus 17.1 kg if the passenger is
female, plus 1.2 kg if the person is carrying a handbag (plus nothing, with no
handbag), plus 0.2 kg for every year of age, plus 2.6 kg in the Winter, plus 2.1
kg if the purpose is business, plus 1.7 kg if the flight is a charter.
Table 4.11 Linear regression analysis with dependent variable passenger
masses incl. carry-on luggage (best fit model); all passengers >
12 years
Predictors Non-standardized coeff. B
% of mass variance predicted
(Constant)
71.7
Gender
-17.1
27.0%
Handbag
1.2
10.4%
Age
0.2
4.0%
Season
2.6
0.5%
Purpose
2.1
0.2%
Charter
1.7
0.1%
flight type
1.0
0.0%
Total
n.a.
42.2%
Source: NEA
Aside from the factors shown in the table, no other factors measured in the
survey have influenced passenger masses. All factors in the table predict 42%
Survey on standard weights of passengers and luggage
82 R20090095.doc
May 2009
of the differences in passenger masses of all passengers older than 12 years of
age. This is a very high percentage, taking into account, that the length of
passengers, which normally explains part of passenger mass, is not measured in
this survey. Passenger characteristics (gender, age, purpose of trip) have the
most influence on passenger mass. 27% of the mass variance is predicted by
gender. Flight and trip characteristics only contribute to a limited extent to
mass differences.
Conclusions:
Within the regression analysis it has been showed that gender is the most
important factor. Therefore, separate standard masses for male and female
adults are recommended.
It is recommended to include the carry-on luggage mass in the mass value
for passenger + carry-on luggage. In this case it is not necessary to apply a
large safety margin on the carry-on luggage weight.
The masses of passengers measured in the Winter are leading.
No other distinction in factors is recommended for passengers.
The recommended male/female ratio is 70/30.
Based on the aforementioned, the following standard masses are
recommended:
male passengers: 94 kg
female passengers: 75 kg
all adult passengers: 88 kg
More details can be found in the Annex, Table F-13.
By way of illustration, the effect of the m/f ratio on the mean mass for adult
passengers, is shown for a few factors in Table 4.12.
Survey on standard weights of passengers and luggage
R20090095.doc 83
May 2009
Table 4.12 Different ratios
Factors Ratio male/female
All adults’ mean mass
To compare: current ration
within EU safety regulations
for ‘All flights except holiday
charters’, applied to survey
outcome
80/20
87.7 kg
Purpose = business 72/28
86.2 kg
Class of travel = business 66/34
85.0 kg
Route type = European 61/39
84.1 kg
Flight type = non-scheduled 51/49
82.2 kg
To compare: current ration
within EU safety regulations
for ‘Holiday charters’, applied
to survey outcome
50/50
82.0 kg
Source: NEA
In the Summer survey a relatively high number of female passengers was
weighed although the majority of respondents was still male (57/43
male/female ratio). In the Winter survey the male/female ratio was 63/37. The
survey shows that mass values are strongly influenced by male/female ratio and
by season. According to airport statistics of WAW, AMS and FRA the actual
overall male/female ratio was 58%/42% in the Summer and 64%/36% in the
Winter. This confirms that the random oberservations within the survey reflect
the actual situation at the airports.
4.4.2 Checked baggage
Most measured baggage masses vary between 15 kg and 18 kg. The variables,
taken into account in this survey can hardly determine differences in baggage
mass. Only 6% of the differences in measured baggage mass can be determined
by the variables in the survey. Unknown factors and errors are responsible for
most of the variance in luggage weight (Table 4.13). The conclusion is that the
factors that have been measured in this survey are not explanatory for the
actual carried mass of baggage. Therefore, it is not recommendable to
distinguish in further categories for checked baggage (e.g. for flight types).
Survey on standard weights of passengers and luggage
84 R20090095.doc
May 2009
Table 4.13 Linear regression analysis with dependant variable
checked baggage masses (best fit model)
Non-standardized Coefficients B
% of mass variance predicted
(Constant) 11.1
Intercontinental flight 1.2
3.5%
Purpose: business -1.1
0.9%
Baggage for 2 or more 1.4
0.7%
Domestic flight -0.8
0.4%
Maximum kg 0.2
0.2%
Class: business -2.3
0.2%
Short haul -0.5
0.1%
Long haul 0.7
0.0%
Charter 0.9
0.0%
Low cost 0.2
0.0%
total n.a
6.0%
Source: NEA
Most measured baggage masses vary between 15 kg and 18 kg. Based on the
survey results, it is recommended for checked baggage masses to use the mean
observed mass of 16.7 kg + the confidence range of 0.08 kg and rounded to the
upper value.
Conclusion:
This results in a standard mass of 17 kg for checked baggage.
4.5 Comparison with EU safety regulations
The 2008 - 2009 EASA survey on Standard Weights of Passengers and Baggage
at eight European airports have given best estimates of the mean masses of
passengers, their carry-on luggage and checked baggage for aeroplanes with
more than twenty or thirty seats. This paragraph discusses the way these
masses can be used in practice.
4.5.1 Current EU safety regulations
The current EU safety regulations are formulated in EU-OPS 1, subpart J – Mass
and balance. EU-OPS 1.620 are presented in Table 4.14.
Survey on standard weights of passengers and luggage
R20090095.doc 85
May 2009
Table 4.14 Standard masses of male and female passengers on an aeroplane
with 20 and 30 or more seats
20 and more 30 and more Passenger seats:
Male Female All adult
All flights except holiday charters 88 kg 70 kg 84 kg
Holiday charters 83 kg 69 kg 76 kg
Children 35 kg 35 kg 35 kg
Source: EU-OPS 1.620
The standard masses include hand baggage and the mass of any infant below
two years of age carried by an adult on one passenger seat. When the number
of passenger seats is 30 or more, no separate weights for male and female
passengers are prescribed.
Where the total number of passenger seats available on an aeroplane is
nineteen or less, currently the standard masses as presented in Table 4.15 are
applicable.
Table 4.15 Average standard masses in aeroplanes with nineteen or less
seats
Passenger seats 1 - 5
6 - 9
10 - 19
Male 104 kg
96 kg
92 kg
Female 86 kg
78 kg
74 kg
Children 35 kg
35 kg
35 kg
Source: EU-OPS 1.620
Table 4.14 (20 and more seats) contains the basic information with respect to
the passenger masses. JAA SWWG made a distinction between ‘All flights except
holiday charters’ and ‘Holiday charters’. To calculate the mean mass for ‘adults’,
JAA SWWG used a break down of 80% male and 20% female for theAll flights
except holiday charters’ category and 50% male, 50% female for ‘Holiday
charters’. The masses in the Table 4.15 are derived from Table 4.14 (‘All flights
except holiday charters’) by adding 4 kg for 10 – 19 seats, 8 kg for 6 – 9 seats
and 16 kg for 1 – 5 seats. The rationale for that is given in the Final report of
JAA SWWG. Of relevance here, is to conclude that a higher mass of passengers
in smaller airplanes has nothing to do with the actual mean masses of
passengers in aircrafts with more or less seats, but has to do with safety
margins.
On flights where no carry-on luggage is carried in the cabin, or where carry-on
luggage is accounted for separately, 6 kg may be deducted from the above male
and female masses. Articles such as an overcoat, an umbrella, a small handbag
or purse, reading material or a small camera are not considered as carry-on
baggage.
Survey on standard weights of passengers and luggage
86 R20090095.doc
May 2009
Table 4.16 Standard masses of checked baggage on an aeroplane with 20 or
more seats
Type of flight Baggage standard mass
Domestic 11 kg
Within the European region 13 kg
Intercontinental 15 kg
All other 13 kg
Source: EU-OPS 1.620
Where the total number of passenger seats available on the aeroplane is twenty
or more, the standard mass values given in Table 4.16 are applicable for each
piece of checked baggage. For aeroplanes with nineteen passenger seats or
less, the actual mass of checked baggage, determined by weighing, must be
used.
4.5.2 Measured passenger masses applied to safety
regulation
The 2008 - 2009 EASA survey on Standard Weights of Passengers and Baggage
gives best estimates for the standard masses for the passenger categories
‘male’ and ‘female’. It is been concluded in the survey that gender and ratio are
the most important factors in determining the standard masses of adult
passengers. These findings have been applied in Table 4.17, using the same
methodology as has been used for current EU safety regulations. For children
the value of 40 kg would be the most safe border for the standard mass of
children under 12 years old, as the accuracy of the survey outcomes for children
is too high. In order to determine a new statistical standard mass for children, it
is recommended to perform an additional survey with special focus on children.
Survey on standard weights of passengers and luggage
R20090095.doc 87
May 2009
Table 4.17 Standard masses of male and female passengers on an
aeroplane with 20 and 30 or more seats (EU-OPS),
and measured masses*
20 and more 30 and more Passenger seats:
Male Female M/F ratio All adult
EU-OPS standard masses
All flights except holiday charters 88 kg 70 kg 80/20 84 kg
Holiday charters 83 kg 69 kg 50/50 76 kg
Children 35 kg 35 kg n.a. 35 kg
Measured mean masses from the survey
Scheduled 92kg 73 kg 70/30 86 kg
Non-scheduled 88 kg 71 kg 50/50 80 kg
Children 40 kg 40 kg n.a. 40 kg
Source: EU-OPS 1.620 and NEA
*
The standard masses include hand baggage and the mass of any infant below two
years of age carried by an adult on one passenger seat.
It can be concluded that the standard masses of male and female passengers
have increased, compared to current EU safety regulations. However, the
increase of the standard mass for all adults on scheduled flights, is less than
would have been expected. This is a result of the fact that the male/female ratio
has changed (as a result of this survey).
Conclusion:
Standard adult passenger masses (male, female and all adult) have
increased. Therefore, revision of EU safety regulations is recommended.
Although the standard masses of adult passengers on non-scheduled flights
differs from the standard mass of adult passengers on scheduled flights, it is
recommended to disregard the factor ‘charter’, because it does not comply
with the set criteria for appropriateness (see Flight characteristics – flight
type. Refer to paragraph 4.3.2).
Survey on standard weights of passengers and luggage
88 R20090095.doc
May 2009
4.5.3 Measured checked baggage masses applied to safety
regulation
Table 4.18 Checked baggage masses
EU-OPS 1.620
2008 - 2009 EASA survey % difference
Domestic 11 kg
15 kg +36%
Within the European region 13 kg
16 kg +23%
Intercontinental 15 kg
18 kg +20%
Source: EU-OPS 1.620 and NEA
In Table 4.18 the diffences between the outcomes of the survey and current EU
safety regulations are illustrated.
Most measured baggage masses vary between 15 kg and 18 kg.
Conclusion:
Although the standard masses of checked baggage differs from the standard
mass of the standard masses for route type in current EU safety regulations,
it is recommended to disgard the factor ‘route type’, because it does not
comply with the set criteria for appropriateness (see paragraph 4.3.2.)
Based on the survey results, it is recommended for checked baggage
masses to use the mean observed mass of 16.7 kg + the confidence range
of 0.08 kg and rounded to the upper value
. This results in a recommended
value of 17 kg.
4.5.4 Recommended standard masses for updating EU safety
regulations
In Table 4.19 the following standard masses for male, female, adult passengers
and checked baggage are recommended.
Table 4.19 Recommended standard masses for updating EU safety
regulations*
Passenger seats: 20 and more 30 and more
Passengers Male Female M/F ratio All adult
All flights 94 kg 75 kg 70/30 88 kg
Checked baggage
All flights 17 kg 17 kg n.a. 17 kg
Source: NEA
* The standard masses include hand baggage and the mass of any infant below two
years of age carried by an adult on one passenger seat.
Survey on standard weights of passengers and luggage
R20090095.doc 89
May 2009
The figures in the Table 4.19 are based on the outcomes of the survey (as
stated earlier) :
The masses of passengers measured in the Winter are leading.
No other distinction in factors are given.
Survey on standard weights of passengers and luggage
R20090095.doc 91
May 2009
5 Conclusions and recommendations
5.1 Conclusions
5.1.1 Conclusions on the survey set-up and the field work
The 2008-2009 EASA Survey on Standard Weights of Passengers and Baggage
has been carried out according to requirements laid down in EU-OPS regarding
weight surveys:
the survey has been performed at eight selected airports, each representing
a region of Europe, where a number of different routes could be surveyed on
consecutive days and where random selection of passengers took place;
the survey has been performed in Summer and Winter period;
the survey sample size was within the required accuracy levels to cover all
relevant factors within the required statistical confidence levels, except for
children.
The 2008 – 2009 EASA survey on Standard Weights of Passengers and Baggage
gives mass values of passengers, carry-on luggage and checked baggage. The
correlations between mass values and influencing factors have been analysed.
The results of the analyses can be used for revisions of the currently applicable
regulations on standard masses. Data on weight development in Europe usually
are taken from national health surveys. Because of differences in the survey
designs (sampling frames, age of population surveyed etc.) the results are
difficult to compare. Therefore, it is not recommended to use statistical
extrapolation in order to determine future standard masses for passengers.
The correlations with the following factors have been analysed:
Passenger characteristics: age, gender;
Passenger behavioural characteristics: carrying an infant, carrying carry-on
luggage, travelling by purpose (business or leisure);
Place and time of the measurements: airport (eight airports were selected)
season (Summer or Winter);
Trip characteristics: direction (outbound or inbound), route type (domestic,
European and non-European), region of departure or arrival (fourteen
regions have been distinguished), and class of travel (economy, business or
first);
Flight characteristics: flight type (scheduled or not-scheduled), airline type
(regular scheduled, charter or low cost) and airline policies concerning
maximum of baggage mass.
The survey set-up proved to be an effective way to build a data-set on
passenger, carry-on luggage and checked baggage mass values on European
flights that enabled statistically sound analyses of factors influencing these
mass values and comparison with the regulations currently in place in EU-OPS.
For children, the results derived from the survey are only to a limited extend in
accordance with the set accuracy levels. Special focus on a relatively large
number of children during the survey needs to be avoided in order not to
jeopardize the randomness of the survey.
Survey on standard weights of passengers and luggage
92 R20090095.doc
May 2009
5.1.2 Conclusions on the survey results
The survey resulted in standard masses for the following categories: male,
female, all adult, children, carry-on luggage and checked baggage.
Conclusion on infants:
No significant difference is found between the standard masses of
male/female without an infant in relation to the standard masses of
male/female carrying an infant. Therefore, the masses of male/female
carrying an infant has been included in the mass of male/female
passengers.
Conclusions on children:
Due to the high accuracy outcome of the survey for children, it is not
possible to determine a standard mass for children. It is recommended to
perform an additional survey in order to determine the new standard mass
for children.
In case it will not be possible to perform such a survey on short time notice,
it is recommended to apply the standard mass of 40 kg.
Conclusion on carry-on luggage:
Based on the survey results, it is recommended for carry-on luggage masses to
include this mass in a value for passenger + carry-on luggage.
Table 4.7. In this
case it is not necessary to apply a large safety margin on the carry-on luggage
weight.
Conclusions on adult passengers:
Within the regression analysis it has been showed that gender is the most
important factor. Therefore, separate standard masses for male and female
adults are recommended.
It is recommended to include the carry-on luggage mass in the mass value
for passenger + carry-on luggage. In this case it is not necessary to apply a
large safety margin on the carry-on luggage weight.
The masses of passengers measured in the Winter are leading.
No other distinction in factors is recommended for passengers.
The recommended male/female ratio is 70/30.
Based on the aforementioned, the following standard masses are
recommended:
male passengers: 94 kg
female passengers: 75 kg
all adult passengers: 88 kg
Conclusion on checked baggage:
The recommended standard mass for checked baggage is 17 kg.
A factor is called appropriate when all four required criteria are met (specific,
measurable, acceptable and realistic).The factors meeting all four requirements
are gender and season. After correction for gender differences however, season
predicts only 0.5% of the differences in adult passenger mass and therefore the
factor ‘season’ has been integrated in the recommended adult standard mass.
Survey on standard weights of passengers and luggage
R20090095.doc 93
May 2009
In the adult standard masses, gender has been integrated in the male/female
ratio.
5.1.3 Conclusions on comparison of survey results with
EUOPS
The 2008 - 2009 EASA survey on Standard Weights of Passengers and Baggage
gives best estimates for the standard masses for the passenger categories
‘male’ and ‘female’ and all adults for the periods under consideration. It has
been concluded in the survey that gender and ratio are the most important
factors in determining the standard masses of adult passengers.
It can be concluded that the standard masses of male and female passengers
have increased, compared to current EU safety regulations. However, the
increase of the standard mass for all adults on scheduled flights, is less than
would have been expected. This is a result of the fact that the male/female ratio
is changed (as a result of this survey).
Although the standard masses of checked baggage differs from the standard
mass of the standard masses for route type in current EU safety regulations, it
is recommended to disregard the factor ‘route type’, because it does not comply
with the set criteria for appropriateness.
The following standard masses for updating EU safety regulations are
recommended:
Passenger seats: 20 and more 30 and more
Passengers Male Female M/F ratio All adult
All flights 94 kg 75 kg 70/30 88 kg
Checked baggage
All flights 17 kg 17 kg n.a. 17 kg
5.2 Recommendations on revisions of standard mass
regulations
Revision of the regulations on standard masses for passengers, carry-on
luggage and checked baggage is recommended. This is supported by two
empirical issues:
The outcomes of the survey indeed showed an increase in passenger mass
and checked baggage mass as suggested in JAA SWWG report dated the 31
st
of October, 2006.
The desk research in chapter 1 provides a summary of several studies in
which the increase of body mass is also confirmed.
The findings from these studies are as follows:
Recent worldwide research has revealed that passenger’s body mass has
increased and clothing is generally heavier in the Winter months. Research
Survey on standard weights of passengers and luggage
94 R20090095.doc
May 2009
shows a clear upward trend, even in countries with traditionally lower rates
of overweight and obesity.
The increase of overweight amongst children and adolescents has
accelerated in recent years. According to the most recent data on nationally
representative samples from different countries in the European Region, the
prevalence of obesity ranges from 5% to 20% in men and up to 30% in
women.
The increased consumption of more energy-dense, nutrient-poor foods with
higher levels of sugar and saturated fats, combined with reduced physical
activity (more sedentary lifestyle due to the rise in welfare), have led to
overweight and obesity rates that have risen three-fold or more all over the
world since 1980.
It is expected that the standard mass of the European population in the coming
years will increase further based on the following:
In 10 years time the current younger adult generation will represent the age
class between 40 to 50 years and will show a further increase in body mass,
based on the predictions of desk research.
In case the survey is carried out in one year, the probability of measuring
different standard masses is unlikely because of minor mass changes.
Based on this, a full new survey to update the dataset is recommended in 10
years time.As mentioned before, it is not recommended to use statistical
extrapolation in order to determine future standard masses for passengers.
Due to the high accuracy outcome of the survey for children, it is not possible
to determine a standard mass for children. In order to determine a new
statistical standard mass for children, it is recommended to perform an
additional survey with special focus on children.
Survey on standard weights of passengers and luggage
R20090095.doc 95
May, 2009
ANNEX A Weighing team instructions
General information and preparations
The weighing team consists of two NEA consultants and Temporary Staff. One
NEA employee will be the Team Leader responsible for the correct execution
of the field work. The Team Leader is responsible for all aspects of the survey
and will be the first contact for the airport. In case of any problem, contact
the Team Leader.
Meeting with and training of Temporary Staff on day 1 (Monday):
o Introduction of the project objective and approach;
o Practice set-up and using equipment and the software
o Make agreements on breaks, lunch, sanitary stops, etc.
o Discuss all operational details, daily meeting point and times.
Never leave the equipment and team member belongings unattended.
Instructions for shipment, storage and movement of equipment
Shipment of the scales is carried out by SDV International Logistics and
Roberts Europe and need to be picked-up and delivered at a designated
location.
Each weighing scale is packed in a separate box, a shipment contains four
boxes. As the shipment of equipment makes a round trip, all paper work
necessary for performing the surveys at the airports is included.
The equipment must be stored at a secure location overnight – make sure to
have agreement on access to the equipment with the airport contact.
At the end of the last survey day, outbound shipment of the scales has to be
arranged.
The Team Leader is in charge of the in- and outbound shipment.
Instructions for performing the survey
The required sample size
is 1,000 passengers plus carry-on luggage AND
1,000 pieces of checked baggage. Allowing for mistakes and data entry
errors, the aim is to oversample both figures by at least 10%.
The sampling should take place randomly
, meaning that the best way would
be to instruct your temporary staff to invite every third or fifth passenger to
participate. You should do this at as much different locations at the airport as
possible to cover all types of flights, destinations, passengers etc. As this is
not always possible, it is quite obvious that you try to be at a busy location
with a steady flow of preferably highly diversified travellers/destinations.
Always be polite to passengers; participation is strictly voluntary.
Stress that the survey is anonymous
: no personal data will be collected. We
are collecting statistics
.
Duly note the following issues:
o When a passenger is carrying an infant (child < 2 years of age) the
weight of the infant will be included by the weight of its accompanier.
o In case you meet a transfer passenger please fill out the form as it was
an outbound passenger.
Survey on standard weights of passengers and luggage
96 R20090095.doc
May, 2009
Only in case he has to go to the baggage reclaim and after that he checks
his baggage in again, and you meet him at the check-in counter, he can be
treated as an inbound passenger.
The inbound passengers and their carry-on luggage will be weighed at the gate
when leaving the aircraft or at the baggage reclaim area. Their checked baggage
will be weighed at the baggage reclaim.
The outbound passengers will be weighed as close to the gate as possible before
entering the aircraft, whilst the luggage will be weighed at check-in. Passenger
and carry-on luggage weight measurements of outbound passengers take place
close to the gate to ensure that tax-free items purchased at the airport will be
included. It is not necessary to know the total number of passengers on the
plane nor to link the passengers with their checked baggage.
INSTRUCTIONS FOR LOCAL WEIGHING TEAM
General instructions
In case of any problem, contact the Team Leader.
Never leave the equipment and team member belongings unattended.
Always be polite to passengers; participation is strictly voluntary.
In case of an evacuation or other emergency, listen to the instruction of the
airport authorities and leave everything in place.
Make notes of who works with which equipment for all working times.
Instructions for storage, set-up and movement of equipment
Each day starts with the set-up of equipment and charging the battery pack.
Equipment should be safely stored before changing locations at airport.
o Notify airport contact for any significant change
o Shut down all equipment and secure for transport
o Execute change (be prepared for security check)
At the end of the last survey day, outbound shipment of the scales has to be
arranged. This will require tape and scissors.
Instructions for approaching passengers
Approach the passenger and ask whether they want to participate in an air
safety related survey.
The selection of passengers must be random:
o Approach the passenger (the one nearest to you);
o In case of a group or family the whole group is welcome to cooperate;
o Do not discriminate on appearance or characteristics.
The survey should be presented as a study for the European Aviation Safety
Agency regarding passenger and baggage weights (see Project Description
and poster).
Stress that the survey is anonymous
: no personal data will be collected. We
are collecting statistics
.
Survey on standard weights of passengers and luggage
R20090095.doc 97
May, 2009
Instructions for data collection
After the introduction the passenger will either cooperate or not:
o In case the passenger cooperates, escort him/her to the scale and ask
them to have their boarding pass ready because this will make the data
entry faster.
o In case the passenger rejects to cooperate, fill out the non-response
form as complete as possible.
For the Passenger and Carry-on Luggage Weighing
, go through the following
steps at the weighing location:
o Welcome the passenger;
o Ask the passenger to step on the scale and to stand as still as possible;
o Ask the questions in the data entry form (origin, destination, age, etc.);
o Record the weight of the passenger including hand luggage (see
definitions below);
o Ask the passenger step off the scales and put his/her carry-on luggage
beside the scale.
o Record the weight of the passenger excluding carry-on luggage.
o Thank the passenger for participating in the study and wish him/her a
nice flight. Make sure they take all their carry-on luggage with them!
For the Checked baggage Weighing
, go through the following steps at the
weighing location:
o Welcome the passenger;
o Ask the passenger place the luggage on the scale and to stand as still as
possible – each piece of luggage should be registered as a separate
record;
o Ask the questions in the data entry form;
o Thank the passenger for participating in the study and wish him/her a
nice flight.
Duly note the following issues:
o Children 2-12 years: ask accompanying adult for cooperation as well the
child himself - this will result in two separate records;
o When a passenger is carrying an infant (child < 2 years of age) the
weight of the infant will be included by the weight of its accompanier.
o If the passenger refuses to mention the age, ask for a range or the year
of birth;
o In case you meet a transfer passenger please fill out the form as it was
an outbound passenger. Only in case he has to go to the baggage reclaim
and after that he checks his baggage in again, and you meet him at the
check-in counter, he can be treated as a inbound passenger.
o Do not mention the weight of the passenger or luggage. At request the
passenger weight can be mentioned, but not the luggage weight (as the
weighing team is not in the position to have any opinion about the weight
of the luggage in reference to the airline policy and/or applicable
legislation on weight allowance).
o Data entry staff need to fill in a time sheet which can be found next to
the computers
o At the end of each day NEA will write a report about the experiences of
that day
o In case the data entry is not possible at the computers; paper data entry
forms are available
Survey on standard weights of passengers and luggage
98 R20090095.doc
May, 2009
Definitions
Age: The length of time that one has existed, starting from the year of birth
Checked baggage weight: any piece of luggage that has to be checked-in
for travel.
Carry-on luggage weight: all bags (including tax-free bags), cases
(including photo equipment), purses, a pillow etc. carried by a passenger to
be taken into the aircraft.
Passenger weight: the weight of a passenger including all clothing carried
by that passenger.
Survey on standard weights of passengers and luggage
R20090095.doc 99
May, 2009
Poster Size A0
At this airport a survey is carried out as part of a
pan-European study into the weights of
passengers, carry-on luggage and checked
baggage. The aim of this study is to verify the
average standard weight indicators currently in
force in European legislation.
The study is carried out on behalf of the European
Aviation Safety Agency (EASA) and in cooperation
with Airport Authorities.
Passengers are kindly requested to participate in
the survey. All information will be treated
confidentially and anonymously.
EASA
European Aviation Safety Agency
Survey on standard weights of passengers and luggage
100 R20090095.doc
May, 2009
The following text is available on plastic cards to the weighing team in case
passengers do not completely understand one of the languages the weighing
team speaks.
Dear passenger,
We kindly request your cooperation in a safety survey on behalf of the European
Aviation Safety Agency (EASA).
All aircraft have a maximum weight limit. However, as weighing all airline
passengers and their carry-on luggage for each flight would be too lengthy,
regular surveys are carried out in order to update and improve the average
standard weight. We need to weigh passengers, their carry-on luggage as well as
their checked-in luggage.
We would greatly appreciate if you would participate in our survey by following
the instructions of our survey team. The survey will not take much of your time.
All information will be treated confidentially and anonymously.
Thank you for your cooperation.
Survey on standard weights of passengers and luggage
R20090095.doc 101
Mayl, 2009
WINTER SESSION Passenger and Luggage weighing
PURPOSE L = leisure Date: LOCATION
B = business Time: Before check in B
AM / PM After check in P
CLASS OF TRAVEL E = economy Name: Baggage reclaim P+B
B = business Combined: Inbound-outbound P/B/P+B
F = first class
P1 P2 P3 P4 P5 P6 P7
P
Weight incl. carry-on
luggage
kg
kg
kg
kg
kg
kg
kg
P
Weight excl. carry-on
luggage kg
kg
kg
kg
kg
kg
kg
P Check in luggage (Y/N)
Male/Female (M/F)
Infant < 2 years (Y/N)
Purpose: L/B
Inbound/outbound
Airport of origin/destination
Airline code
Flight Number
Survey on standard weights of passengers and luggage
102 R20090095.doc
May, 2009
Class of travel (E/B/F)
Age
B
Luggage for 1 person/2 or
more persons
B Weight check in luggage kg
kg
kg
kg
kg
kg
kg
B Weight check in luggage kg
kg
kg
kg
kg
kg
kg
B Weight check in luggage kg
kg
kg
kg
kg
kg
kg
Survey on standard weights of passengers and luggage
R20090095.doc 103
May, 2009
Passenger and carry-on luggage weighing (also
available in French and German)
Outbound passengers
Are you flying for business or for leisure?
Where are you flying to? What is your next airport?
Could I see your boarding pass please?
Which airline are you using?
What is your flight number?
Are you travelling in business class or economy class today?
Do you have any checked in luggage?
How old are you? May I ask your age please?
Inbound passengers
Are you flying for business or for leisure?
Where have you flown from? What was your last airport?
Which airline are you using?
What is your flight number?
Have you travelled in business class or economy class today?
Do you have any checked in luggage?
How old are you? May I ask your age please?
Luggage weighing (also available in French and German)
Outbound passengers
Is this luggage for one person? Is this luggage for you only?
Are you flying for business or for leisure?
Where are you flying to? What is your next airport?
Could I see your boarding pass please?
Which airline are you using?
What is your flight number?
Are you travelling in business class or economy class today?
How old are you? May I ask your age please?
Inbound passengers
Is this luggage for one person? Is this luggage for you only?
Are you flying for business or for leisure?
Where have you flown from? What was your last airport?
Which airline are you flying with?
What is your flight number?
Have you travelled in business class or economy class today?
How old are you? May I ask your age please?
Survey on standard weights of passengers and luggage
R20090095.doc 105
May, 2009
ANNEX B Survey schedule
The Pilot and Summer survey schedule is presented in Table B-1.
Table B-1 Pilot and Summer survey 2008 schedule
Wk 26
Wk 27 Wk 28 Wk 29 Wk 30 Wk 31 Wk 32 Wk 33
ATH
pilot
LGW CPH FRA* MAD FRA
SOF AMS WAW ATH
Summer
Source: NEA
* Frankfurt Summer survey was postponed to the back-up week (week 33, 2008)
due to strikes.
** ATH Summer refers to the additional survey executed at Athens International
Airport to complete the dataset.
All survey teams consisted of NEA staff and local temporary staff. The temporary
staff was recruited through, (1) agencies, providing survey staff, (2) students via
local university contacts and (3) freelancers. Recruitment requirements were,
among others, experience, foreign language skills, and security cleared. The
composition of the survey teams was sometimes changed in order to get the
highest output quality, because some of the temporary staff members were not
able to meet our requirements.
The Winter survey 2009 schedule is presented in Table B-2. .
Table B-2 Winter survey 2009 schedule
Wk 2 Wk 3 Wk 4 Wk 5 Wk 6 Wk 7
AMS SOF* ATH FRA SOF
CPH WAW LGW MAD
Source: NEA
* Sofia Winter survey was postponed to the back-up week (week 7, 2009) due to
the political issues between Russia and Ukraine, which effected Sofia as well
Survey on standard weights of passengers and luggage
R20090095.doc 107
May, 2009
ANNEX C Tables passengers excluding
carry-on luggage
TABLES
C-1
Passenger weights by season and gender 109
C-2 Passenger weights by season and age; children 2-12 years 110
C-3 Passenger weights by season, purpose and gender 111
C-4 Passenger weights by season, class and gender (children
2-12 years excluded; male/female with infants < 2 years
included) 112
C-5 Passenger weights by season, route type and gender
(male/female with infants <2 years included) 113
C-6 Passenger weights by season, route type and gender
(male/female with infants <2 years included) (Part II) 114
C- 7 Passenger weights by season, flight type and gender
(male/female with infants < 2 years included) 115
C-8 Passenger weights by season, airline type and gender
(male/female with infants < 2 years included) 116
C-9 Passenger weights by season, airline type and gender
(male/female with infants < 2 years included) (Part II) 117
C-10 Passenger weights by gender and region of departure
(male/female with infants < 2 years included) 118
C-11 Passenger weights by gender and region of departure
(male/female with infants < 2 years included) (Part II) 119
C-12 Passenger weights by gender and region of destination
(male/female with infants <2 years included) 120
C-13 Passenger weights by gender and region of destination
(male/female with infants <2 years included) (Part II) 121
C-14 Passenger weights by gender and airport; Summer 122
C-15 Passenger weights by gender and airport; Summer (Part II) 123
C-16 Passenger weights by gender and airport; Winter 124
C-17 Passenger weights by gender and airport; Winter (Part II) 125
C-18 Passenger weights by gender and airport; totals 126
C-19 Passenger weights by gender and airport; totals (Part II) 127
Survey on standard weights of passengers and luggage
R20090095.doc 109
May, 2009
Table C-1 Passenger weights by season and gender
Season Gender Mean
n
Std.dev.
Accuracy
(%)
Confidence range
(95%)
Male 82.6
5,612
15.1
0.5 0.39
Female 65.3
4,287
12.3
0.6 0.37
Child (2-12 years) 31.1
1,083
11.6
2.2 0.69
Male & Infant (<2 years) 83.1
287
14.6
2.0 1.69
Female & Infant (<2 years)
65.2
226
12.3
2.5 1.61
Summer
Total 71.0
11,495
20.5
0.5 0.37
Male 86.3
6,976
14.7
0.4 0.34
Female 67.9
4,064
12.9
0.6 0.40
Child (2-12 years) 29.7
337
12.3
4.4 1.31
Male & Infant (<2 years) 80.9
11
14.2
10.4 8.40
Female & Infant (<2 years)
72.5
18
11.4
7.2 5.25
Winter
Total 78.0
11,406
18.5
0.4 0.34
Male 84.6
12,588
15.0
0.3 0.26
Female 66.6
8,351
12.7
0.4 0.27
Child (2-12 years) 30.7
1,420
11.7
2.0 0.61
Male & Infant (<2 years) 83.0
298
14.6
2.0 1.65
Female & Infant (<2 years)
65.8
244
12.4
2.4 1.55
Total
Total 74.5
22,901
19.9
0.3 0.26
Survey on standard weights of passengers and luggage
110 R20090095.doc
May, 2009
Table C-2 Passenger weights by season and age; children 2-12 years
Season Age Mean
n
Std.dev.
Accuracy
(%)
Confidence range
(95%)
2 13.7
18
1.7
5.9
0.80
3 15.5
56
2.7
4.5
0.71
4 18.4
83
2.8
3.3
0.61
5 21.1
83
3.1
3.1
0.66
6 23.9
82
4.3
3.9
0.94
7 26.3
136
5.7
3.7
0.96
8 30.4
124
6.3
3.7
1.11
9 33.6
116
6.8
3.7
1.24
10 36.2
124
6.9
3.4
1.22
11 42.0
129
9.1
3.7
1.57
12 46.3
132
9.1
3.3
1.55
Summer
Total child (2-12 years) 31.1
1,083
11.5
2.2
0.69
2 14.4
19
2.0
6.4
0.91
3 16.5
34
3.0
6.0
0.99
4 18.7
30
2.5
4.8
0.89
5 22.8
25
4.4
7.6
1.74
6 22.2
27
3.7
6.2
1.39
7 26.7
38
4.2
5.0
1.33
8 32.9
30
8.1
8.8
2.88
9 34.9
36
7.5
7.0
2.45
10 39.0
36
8.5
7.1
2.78
11 43.0
24
10.4
9.7
4.18
12 46.4
38
9.8
6.7
3.11
Winter
Total child (2-12 years) 29.7
337
12.3
4.4
1.31
2 14.0
37
1.9
4.4
0.61
3 15.9
90
2.8
3.7
0.58
4 18.5
113
2.7
2.7
0.50
5 21.5
108
3.5
3.1
0.66
6 23.5
109
4.2
3.4
0.79
7 26.4
174
5.4
3.0
0.80
8 30.9
154
6.7
3.4
1.06
9 33.9
152
7.0
3.3
1.11
10 36.9
160
7.4
3.1
1.14
11 42.1
153
9.3
3.5
1.47
12 46.3
170
9.2
3.0
1.38
Total
Total child (2-12 years) 30.7
1,420
11.7
2.0
0.61
Survey on standard weights of passengers and luggage
R20090095.doc 111
May, 2009
Table C-3 Passenger weights by season, purpose and gender
Season Gender Purpose Mean
n
Std.dev.
Accuracy
(%)
Confidence range
(95%)
Leisure 81.6
3,872
15.0
0.6
0.47
Business 84.6
2,027
15.0
0.8
0.65
Male
Total 82.6
5,899
15.0
0.5
0.38
Leisure 65.4
3,425
12.4
0.6
0.42
Business 65.1
1,088
12.1
1.1
0.72
Female
Total 65.3
4,513
12.3
0.6
0.36
Leisure 31.5
831
11.5
2.5
0.78
Business 29.4
252
11.4
4.8
1.41
Child (2-12)
Total 31.1
1,083
11.5
2.2
0.69
Leisure 69.6
8,128
20.2
0.6
0.44
Business 74.2
3,367
20.8
0.9
0.70
Summer
Total
Total 71.0
11,495
20.5
0.5
0.37
Leisure 84.7
4,027
14.9
0.5
0.46
Business 88.4
2,960
14.0
0.6
0.51
Male
Total 86.3
6,987
14.7
0.4
0.34
Leisure 67.9
3,255
12.9
0.7
0.44
Business 68.0
827
12.9
1.3
0.88
Female
Total 67.9
4,082
12.9
0.6
0.40
Leisure 29.7
329
12.2
4.4
1.32
Business 30.7
8
15.7
35.4
10.86
Child (2-12)
Total 29.7
337
12.3
4.4
1.31
Leisure 75.2
7,611
18.9
0.6
0.42
Business 83.8
3,795
16.3
0.6
0.52
Winter
Total
Total 78.0
11,406
18.5
0.4
0.34
Leisure 83.2
7,899
15.0
0.4
0.33
Business 86.8
4,987
14.6
0.5
0.40
male
Total 84.6
12,886
15.0
0.3
0.26
Leisure 66.6
6,680
12.7
0.5
0.30
Business 66.3
1,915
12.5
0.8
0.56
female
Total 66.5
8,595
12.7
0.4
0.27
Leisure 31.0
1,160
11.7
2.2
0.68
Business 29.5
260
11.5
4.7
1.40
Child (2-12)
Total 30.7
1,420
11.7
2.0
0.61
Leisure 72.3
15,739
19.8
0.4
0.31
Business 79.3
7,162
19.2
0.6
0.44
Total
Total
Total
74.5
22,901
19.9
0.3
0.26
Survey on standard weights of passengers and luggage
112 R20090095.doc
May, 2009
Table C-4 Passenger weights by season, class and gender (children
2-12 years excluded; male/female with infants < 2 years
included)
Season Gender Class Mean
n
Std.dev.
Accuracy
(%)
Confidence range
(95%)
Economy
82.5
5,044
15.0
0.5 0.42
Business 83.3
788
15.3
1.3 1.07
First 84.8
67
12.3
3.5 2.93
Male
Total 82.6
5,899
15.0
0.5 0.38
Economy
65.3
3,992
12.4
0.6 0.38
Business 65.3
470
12.1
1.7 1.09
First 65.0
51
12.0
5.1 3.30
Female
Total 65.3
4,513
12.3
0.6 0.36
Economy
74.9
9,036
16.3
0.4 0.34
Business 76.6
1,258
16.6
1.2 0.92
First 76.3
118
15.6
3.7 2.82
Summer
Total (ex. Child 2-12 yrs)
Total 75.1
10,412
16.4
0.4 0.31
Economy
86.0
6,697
14.6
0.4 0.35
Business 92.6
285
14.7
1.8 1.71
First 87.1
5
6.8
6.8 5.96
Male
Total 86.3
6,987
14.7
0.4 0.34
Economy
67.8
3,999
12.8
0.6 0.40
Business 71.2
81
15.4
4.7 3.36
First 76.3
2
10.8
19.7 14.99
Female
Total 67.9
4,082
12.9
0.6 0.40
Economy
79.2
10,696
16.5
0.4 0.31
Business 87.9
366
17.3
2.0 1.77
First 84.0
7
8.9
7.8 6.56
Winter
Total (excl. child 2-12 yrs)
Total 79.5
11,069
16.6
0.4 0.31
Economy
84.5
11,741
14.9
0.3 0.27
Business 85.7
1,073
15.7
1.1 0.94
First 85.0
72
11.9
3.2 2.76
Male
Total 84.6
12,886
15.0
0.3 0.26
Economy
66.6
7,991
12.7
0.4 0.28
Business 66.2
551
12.8
1.6 1.07
First 65.4
53
12.1
5.0 3.25
Female
Total 66.5
8,595
12.7
0.4 0.27
Economy
77.2
19,732
16.6
0.3 0.23
Business 79.1
1,624
17.4
1.1 0.85
First 76.7
125
15.4
3.5 2.70
Total
Total (excl. child 2-12 yrs)
Total 77.4
21,481
16.6
0.3 0.22
Survey on standard weights of passengers and luggage
R20090095.doc 113
May, 2009
Table C-5 Passenger weights by season, route type and gender
(male/female with infants <2 years included)
Season Gender Route type Mean
n
Std.dev.
Accuracy
(%)
Confidence range
(95%)
Non-
European
81.7
2,128
15.2
0.8 0.65
European 83.1
3,277
14.9
0.6 0.51
Domestic 83.1
494
15.1
1.6 1.33
Male
Total 82.6
5,899
15.0
0.5 0.38
Non-
European
65.1
1,762
12.6
0.9 0.59
European 65.5
2,399
12.3
0.8 0.49
Domestic 64.3
352
11.1
1.8 1.15
Female
Total 65.3
4,513
12.3
0.6 0.36
Non-
European 31.9
459
11.8
3.4 1.08
European 30.2
548
11.1
3.1 0.93
Domestic 31.9
76
12.2
8.6 2.74
Child (2-12)
Total 31.1
1,083
11.5
2.2 0.69
Non-
European
69.7
4,349
20.6
0.9 0.61
European 71.7
6,224
20.5
0.7 0.51
Domestic 71.7
922
20.1
1.8 1.29
Summer
Total
Total 71.0
11,495
20.5
0.5 0.37
Non-
European
85.9
2,039
14.8
0.7 0.64
European 86.5
4,121
14.9
0.5 0.45
Domestic 85.8
827
13.1
1.0 0.89
Male
Total 86.3
6,987
14.7
0.4 0.34
Non-
European 69.1
1,301
13.5
1.1 0.73
European 67.3
2,267
12.6
0.8 0.52
Domestic 67.7
514
12.3
1.6 1.06
Female
Total 67.9
4,082
12.9
0.6 0.40
Non-
European
28.7
132
12.3
7.3 2.10
European 30.5
178
12.1
5.8 1.77
Domestic 29.9
27
13.8
17.4 5.21
Child (2-12)
Total 29.7
337
12.3
4.4 1.31
Non-
European
77.4
3,472
19.0
0.8 0.63
European 78.4
6,566
18.6
0.6 0.45
Domestic 77.9
1,368
16.9
1.2 0.90
Winter
Total
Total 78.0
11,406
18.5
0.4 0.34
Survey on standard weights of passengers and luggage
114 R20090095.doc
May, 2009
Table C-6 Passenger weights by season, route type and gender
(male/female with infants <2 years included) (Part II)
Season Gender Route type Mean
n
Std.dev.
Accuracy
(%)
Confidence range
(95%)
Non-
European
83.8
4,167
15.2
0.5 0.46
European 85.0
7,398
15.0
0.4 0.34
Domestic 84.8
1,321
13.9
0.9 0.75
Male
Total 84.6
12,886
15.0
0.3 0.26
Non-
European
66.8
3,063
13.1
0.7 0.46
European 66.4
4,666
12.5
0.5 0.36
Domestic 66.3
866
11.9
1.2 0.79
Female
Total 66.5
8,595
12.7
0.4 0.27
Non-
European 31.2
591
12.0
3.1 0.97
European 30.3
726
11.3
2.7 0.82
Domestic 31.4
103
12.6
7.8 2.43
Child (2-12)
Total 30.7
1,420
11.7
2.0 0.61
Non-
European
73.2
7,821
20.2
0.6 0.45
European 75.1
12,790
19.8
0.5 0.34
Domestic 75.4
2,290
18.5
1.0 0.76
Total
Total
Total 74.5
22,901
19.9
0.3 0.26
Survey on standard weights of passengers and luggage
R20090095.doc 115
May, 2009
Table C- 7 Passenger weights by season, flight type and gender
(male/female with infants < 2 years included)
Season Gender Flight type Mean
n
Std.dev.
Accuracy
(%)
Confidence range
(95%)
Scheduled 82.6
5,037
15.2
0.5 0.42
Non-scheduled
82.4
862
14.2
1.2 0.95
Male
Total 82.6
5,899
15.0
0.5 0.38
Scheduled 65.1
3,658
12.1
0.6 0.39
Non-scheduled
66.0
855
13.4
1.4 0.90
Female
Total 65.3
4,513
12.3
0.6 0.36
Scheduled 31.2
803
11.9
2.6 0.82
Non-scheduled
30.8
280
10.4
4.0 1.22
Child (2-12)
Total 31.1
1,083
11.5
2.2 0.69
Scheduled 71.5
9,498
20.2
0.6 0.41
Non-scheduled
68.1
1,997
21.6
1.4 0.95
Summer
Total
Total 71.0
11,495
20.5
0.5 0.37
Scheduled 86.2
6,685
14.5
0.4 0.35
Non-scheduled
86.8
302
17.6
2.3 1.98
Male
Total 86.3
6,987
14.7
0.4 0.34
Scheduled 68.0
3,820
12.9
0.6 0.41
Non-scheduled
66.9
262
12.4
2.3 1.51
Female
Total 67.9
4,082
12.9
0.6 0.40
Scheduled 29.3
273
12.6
5.1 1.49
Non-scheduled
31.6
64
11.0
8.5 2.69
Child (2-12)
Total 29.7
337
12.3
4.4 1.31
Scheduled 78.3
10,778
18.2
0.4 0.34
Non-scheduled
72.9
628
22.5
2.4 1.76
Winter
Total
Total 78.0
11,406
18.5
0.4 0.34
Scheduled 84.7
11,722
14.9
0.3 0.27
Non-scheduled
83.6
1,164
15.3
1.1 0.88
Male
Total 84.6
12,886
15.0
0.3 0.26
Scheduled 66.6
7,478
12.6
0.4 0.29
Non-scheduled
66.2
1,117
13.2
1.2 0.77
Female
Total 66.5
8,595
12.7
0.4 0.27
Scheduled 30.7
1,076
12.1
2.3 0.72
Non-scheduled
30.9
344
10.5
3.6 1.11
Child (2-12)
Total 30.7
1,420
11.7
2.0 0.61
Scheduled 75.2
20,276
19.5
0.4 0.27
Non-scheduled
69.3
2,625
21.9
1.2 0.84
Total
Total
Total 74.5
22,901
19.9
0.3 0.26
Survey on standard weights of passengers and luggage
116 R20090095.doc
May, 2009
Table C-8 Passenger weights by season, airline type and
gender (male/female with infants < 2 years
included)
Season Gender Airline type Mean
n
Std.dev.
Accuracy
(%)
Confidence range
(95%)
Regular scheduled 82.8
4,315
15.2
0.5 0.45
Charter 83.0
415
13.1
1.5 1.26
Low-cost 81.9
993
15.1
1.1 0.94
Charter & low-cost
81.6
176
14.3
2.6 2.11
Male
Total 82.6
5,899
15.0
0.5 0.38
Regular scheduled 64.9
3,071
12.1
0.7 0.43
Charter 66.9
461
13.7
1.9 1.25
Low-cost 65.4
857
12.1
1.2 0.81
Charter & low-cost
68.1
124
12.4
3.2 2.18
Female
Total 65.3
4,513
12.3
0.6 0.36
Regular scheduled 31.2
709
11.7
2.8 0.86
Charter 30.7
133
9.8
5.4 1.66
Low-cost 30.7
196
11.5
5.2 1.61
Charter & low-cost
31.5
45
13.2
12.3 3.87
Summer
Child (2-12)
Total 31.1
1,083
11.5
2.2 0.69
Regular scheduled 86.5
5,822
14.7
0.4 0.38
Charter 87.5
166
15.8
2.7 2.40
Low-cost 84.7
878
14.0
1.1 0.93
Charter & low-cost
84.5
121
15.2
3.2 2.71
Male
Total 86.3
6,987
14.7
0.4 0.34
Regular scheduled 68.1
3,132
13.0
0.7 0.46
Charter 68.9
174
13.3
2.9 1.98
Low-cost 66.9
695
12.4
1.4 0.92
Charter & low-cost
67.5
81
11.4
3.7 2.49
Female
Total 67.9
4,082
12.9
0.6 0.40
Regular scheduled 29.4
251
12.9
5.4 1.59
Charter 31.4
31
10.5
11.8 3.69
Low-cost 30.6
47
10.7
10.0 3.07
Charter & low-cost
27.5
8
8.9
22.5 6.19
Winter
Child (2-12)
Total 29.7
337
12.3
4.4 1.31
Survey on standard weights of passengers and luggage
R20090095.doc 117
May, 2009
Table C-9 Passenger weights by season, airline type and gender
(male/female with infants < 2 years included) (Part II)
Season Gender Airline type Mean
n
Std.dev.
Accuracy
(%)
Confidence range
(95%)
Total Regular scheduled 84.9
10,137
15.0
0.3 0.29
Charter 84.3
581
14.1
1.4 1.14
Low-cost 83.2
1,871
14.7
0.8 0.67
Charter & low-cost
82.8
297
14.7
2.0 1.68
Male
Total 84.6
12,886
15.0
0.3 0.26
Regular scheduled 66.5
6,203
12.7
0.5 0.32
Charter 67.4
635
13.6
1.6 1.06
Low-cost 66.0
1,552
12.2
0.9 0.61
Charter & low-cost
67.8
205
12.0
2.4 1.64
Female
Total 66.5
8,595
12.7
0.4 0.27
Regular scheduled 30.7
960
12.1
2.5 0.76
Charter 30.8
164
9.9
4.9 1.51
Low-cost 30.7
243
11.3
4.6 1.42
Charter & low-cost
30.9
53
12.7
11.1 3.42
Child (2-12)
Total 30.7
1,420
11.7
2.0 0.61
Adult Regular scheduled 77.9
16,340
16.8
0.3 0.26
Charter 75.5
1,216
16.2
1.2 0.91
Low-cost 75.4
3,423
16.1
0.7 0.54
Charter & low-cost
76.7
502
15.5
1.8 1.36
Total 77.4
21,481
16.6
0.3 0.22
Overall Regular scheduled 75.3
17,300
19.8
0.4 0.29
Charter 70.2
1,380
21.2
1.6 1.12
Low-cost 72.5
3,666
19.3
0.9 0.63
Charter & low-cost
72.3
555
20.4
2.3 1.69
Total 74.5
22,901
19.9
0.3 0.26
Survey on standard weights of passengers and luggage
118 R20090095.doc
May, 2009
Table C-10 Passenger weights by gender and region of departure
(male/female with infants < 2 years included)
Gender Region of departure Mean
N
Std.dev.
Accuracy
(%)
Confidence range
(95%)
1 UK and Ireland 85.1
1,244
14.6 1.0 0.81
2 Benelux and France 84.8
1,868
15.3 0.8 0.69
3 Spain. Portugal and Italy 80.8
1,683
13.7 0.8 0.65
4 Scandinavia and Iceland 85.3
1,118
14.6 1.0 0.86
5 Germany. Switzerland and Austria
84.0
1,763
15.1 0.8 0.71
6 Northeast Europe 85.6
1,881
14.8 0.8 0.67
7 Greece. Cyprus. Malta and Turkey
86.2
1,544
14.9 0.9 0.74
8 Romania and Bulgaria 86.5
958
15.8 1.2 1.00
9 Other Eur countries (incl. Russia) 82.7
82
14.5 3.8 3.13
11 Africa and the Middle East 83.7
173
16.1 2.9 2.40
12 Asia 83.6
61
14.5 4.4 3.65
13 North America 85.3
352
15.8 1.9 1.65
14 South America 82.4
144
15.0 3.0 2.45
15 Other 88.3
15
10.6 6.1 5.38
Male
Total 84.6
12,886
15.0 0.3 0.26
1 UK and Ireland 67.9
995
12.8 1.2 0.80
2 Benelux and France 68.2
1,144
12.9 1.1 0.75
3 Spain. Portugal and Italy 64.7
1,201
11.8 1.0 0.67
4 Scandinavia and Iceland 67.6
732
12.1 1.3 0.87
5 Germany. Switzerland and Austria
66.2
882
12.1 1.2 0.80
6 Northeast Europe 66.1
1,396
12.8 1.0 0.67
7 Greece. Cyprus. Malta and Turkey
66.5
1,185
12.9 1.1 0.73
8 Romania and Bulgaria 64.6
454
12.8 1.8 1.18
9 Other Eur countries (incl. Russia) 66.6
57
11.8 4.6 3.06
11 Africa and the Middle East 67.7
88
15.1 4.7 3.16
12 Asia 64.0
48
11.3 5.0 3.19
13 North America 68.7
239
14.3 2.6 1.82
14 South America 64.6
163
12.3 2.9 1.89
15 Other 65.7
11
12.6 11.4 7.47
Female
Total 66.5
8,595
12.7 0.4 0.27
Survey on standard weights of passengers and luggage
R20090095.doc 119
May, 2009
Table C-11 Passenger weights by gender and region of departure
(male/female with infants < 2 years included) (Part II)
Gender Region of departure Mean
n
Std.dev.
Accuracy
(%)
Confidence range
(95%)
1 UK and Ireland 33.2
127
11.6 6.1 2.02
2 Benelux and France 30.9
217
11.4 4.9 1.52
3 Spain. Portugal and Italy 31.5
133
11.3 6.1 1.93
4 Scandinavia and Iceland 31.9
154
11.4 5.6 1.80
5 Germany. Switzerland and Austria
30.5
151
12.9 6.7 2.06
6 Northeast Europe 29.5
315
11.2 4.2 1.24
7 Greece. Cyprus. Malta and Turkey
30.7
166
12.2 6.0 1.86
8 Romania and Bulgaria 28.0
101
10.7 7.4 2.08
9 Other Eur countries (incl. Russia) 32.8
5
11.3 30.2 9.93
11 Africa and the Middle East 29.1
19
10.1 15.7 4.55
12 Asia 21.8
3
7.7 40.0 8.73
13 North America 33.4
21
15.5 19.8 6.62
14 South America 39.2
7
15.7 29.7 11.65
15 Other 44.0
1
Child (2-12)
Total 30.7
1,420
11.7 2.0 0.61
Survey on standard weights of passengers and luggage
120 R20090095.doc
May, 2009
Table C-12 Passenger weights by gender and region of destination
(male/female with infants <2 years included)
Gender Airline type Mean
n
Std.dev.
Accuracy
(%)
Confidence range
(95%)
1 UK and Ireland 85.2
1,837
15.1 0.8 0.69
2 Benelux and France 83.9
947
14.9 1.1 0.95
3 Spain. Portugal and Italy 82.9
1,595
13.9 0.8 0.68
4 Scandinavia and Iceland 85.0
1,353
15.2 1.0 0.81
5 Germany. Switzerland and Austria
86.4
1,579
15.0 0.9 0.74
6 Northeast Europe 85.5
657
14.7 1.3 1.13
7 Greece. Cyprus. Malta and Turkey
84.6
1,241
14.7 1.0 0.82
8 Romania and Bulgaria 85.9
444
15.8 1.7 1.47
9 Other Eur. countries (incl. Russia)
88.1
358
16.6 2.0 1.72
11 Africa and the Middle East 84.0
933
15.2 1.2 0.97
12 Asia 82.2
470
14.6 1.6 1.32
13 North America 84.3
1,011
15.0 1.1 0.93
14 South America 80.6
411
13.7 1.6 1.33
15 Other 87.3
50
13.6 4.3 3.77
Male
Total 84.6
12,886
15.0 0.3 0.26
1 UK and Ireland 68.0
1,220
13.2 1.1 0.74
2 Benelux and France 65.8
584
12.0 1.5 0.97
3 Spain. Portugal and Italy 65.2
1,200
11.8 1.0 0.67
4 Scandinavia and Iceland 68.2
815
12.3 1.2 0.84
5 Germany. Switzerland and Austria
65.6
914
12.9 1.3 0.84
6 Northeast Europe 66.6
366
12.5 1.9 1.28
7 Greece. Cyprus. Malta and Turkey
65.5
954
12.6 1.2 0.80
8 Romania and Bulgaria 65.9
213
11.0 2.2 1.47
9 Other Eur. countries (incl. Russia)
65.9
188
11.9 2.6 1.70
11 Africa and the Middle East 67.3
728
14.3 1.5 1.04
12 Asia 66.3
283
11.8 2.1 1.37
13 North America 66.8
748
12.6 1.4 0.90
14 South America 67.1
335
12.8 2.0 1.37
15 Other 70.7
47
12.4 5.0 3.54
Female
Total 66.5
8,595
12.7 0.4 0.27
Survey on standard weights of passengers and luggage
R20090095.doc 121
May, 2009
Table C-13 Passenger weights by gender and region of destination
(male/female with infants <2 years included) (Part II)
Gender Airline type Mean
N
Std.dev.
Accuracy
(%)
Confidence range
(95%)
1 UK and Ireland 29.6
112
11.8 7.4 2.19
2 Benelux and France 30.4
125
11.5 6.6 2.01
3 Spain. Portugal and Italy 30.0
152
11.3 6.0 1.79
4 Scandinavia and Iceland 31.8
154
11.6 5.8 1.83
5 Germany. Switzerland and Austria
30.3
142
12.3 6.7 2.02
6 Northeast Europe 28.9
44
12.2 12.5 3.60
7 Greece. Cyprus. Malta and Turkey
31.2
173
11.0 5.2 1.63
8 Romania and Bulgaria 31.3
49
11.3 10.1 3.17
9 Other Eur. countries (incl. Russia)
31.8
21
11.6 15.6 4.94
11 Africa and the Middle East 30.4
214
11.5 5.1 1.54
12 Asia 26.1
39
11.0 13.3 3.47
13 North America 34.5
149
12.7 5.9 2.04
14 South America 26.9
45
10.4 11.3 3.05
15 Other 30.0
1
Child (2-12)
Total 30.7
1,420
11.7 2.0 0.61
Survey on standard weights of passengers and luggage
122 R20090095.doc
May, 2009
Table C-14 Passenger weights by gender and airport; Summer
Season Gender
Airport
Mean
n
Std.dev.
Accuracy
(%)
Confidence range
(95%)
AMS
82.8
944
14.4
1.1 0.92
ATH
83.4
866
14.8
1.2 0.99
CPH
83.3
721
15.3
1.3 1.12
FRA
83.1
641
16.9
1.6 1.31
LGW
83.1
516
14.6
1.5 1.26
MAD
78.2
690
14.0
1.3 1.04
SOF
83.4
500
14.9
1.6 1.31
WAW
83.4
734
15.1
1.3 1.09
Male
total
82.6
5,612
15.1
0.5 0.39
AMS
66.1
582
11.7
1.4 0.95
ATH
65.0
760
12.6
1.4 0.89
CPH
66.5
549
11.6
1.5 0.97
FRA
64.2
414
11.3
1.7 1.09
LGW
66.7
414
12.8
1.8 1.23
MAD
63.0
597
11.2
1.4 0.90
SOF
63.7
244
11.7
2.3 1.47
WAW
66.2
727
14.1
1.6 1.03
Female
total
65.3
4,287
12.3
0.6 0.37
AMS
31.7
162
11.6
5.6 1.78
ATH
32.1
145
11.9
6.0 1.93
CPH
30.8
196
10.8
4.9 1.52
FRA
31.8
114
13.5
7.8 2.48
LGW
33.4
95
11.2
6.7 2.24
MAD
32.3
70
11.7
8.5 2.74
SOF
27.8
92
11.0
8.1 2.24
WAW
29.6
209
10.6
4.9 1.44
Child (2-12 years)
total
31.1
1,083
11.5
2.2 0.69
AMS
84.8
5
6.6
6.8 5.80
ATH
87.0
26
14.8
6.5 5.67
CPH
74.0
7
5.3
5.3 3.90
FRA
80.5
77
14.6
4.0 3.26
LGW
83.3
54
11.8
3.8 3.14
MAD
-
-
-
- -
SOF
84.4
31
18.8
7.8 6.62
WAW
84.3
87
15.0
3.7 3.16
Summer
Male & Infant (<2 years)
total
83.1
287
14.6
2.0 1.69
Survey on standard weights of passengers and luggage
R20090095.doc 123
May, 2009
Table C-15 Passenger weights by gender and airport; Summer (Part
II)
Season Gender
Airport
Mean
n
Std.dev.
Accuracy
(%)
Confidence range
(95%)
AMS
86.4
13
14.5
9.1 7.87
ATH
68.6
33
10.4
5.2 3.55
CPH
65.1
3
9.8
17.1 11.14
FRA
64.0
38
12.0
5.9 3.80
LGW
63.7
56
10.7
4.4 2.81
MAD
-
-
-
- -
SOF
62.7
25
10.6
6.7 4.17
WAW
61.9
58
10.6
4.4 2.73
Female & Infant (<2 years)
Total
65.2
226
12.3
2.5 1.61
AMS
72.3
1,706
20.2
1.3 0.96
ATH
71.5
1,830
19.9
1.3 0.91
CPH
70.0
1,476
21.8
1.6 1.11
FRA
71.7
1,284
21.1
1.6 1.16
LGW
72.0
1,135
19.5
1.6 1.13
MAD
69.1
1,357
17.0
1.3 0.90
SOF
71.7
892
22.1
2.0 1.45
WAW
69.7
1,815
21.9
1.4 1.01
Total
Total
71.0
11,495
20.5
0.5 0.37
Clarification: ‘-‘: no observations
Survey on standard weights of passengers and luggage
124 R20090095.doc
May, 2009
Table C-16 Passenger weights by gender and airport; Winter
season gender
airport
Mean
n
Std.dev.
Accuracy
(%)
Confidence range
(95%)
AMS
87.5
874
15.9
1.2 1.05
ATH
88.6
700
13.9
1.2 1.03
CPH
85.8
873
14.4
1.1 0.95
FRA
84.4
971
14.0
1.0 0.88
LGW
86.4
925
14.8
1.1 0.95
MAD
82.7
875
13.1
1.0 0.87
SOF
89.2
630
16.2
1.4 1.27
WAW
87.0
1,128
14.3
1.0 0.84
Male
total
86.3
6,976
14.7
0.4 0.34
AMS
70.3
527
14.0
1.7 1.20
ATH
68.8
441
13.7
1.9 1.28
CPH
68.6
535
12.6
1.6 1.07
FRA
67.5
417
12.1
1.7 1.16
LGW
69.3
695
13.7
1.5 1.02
MAD
65.2
537
11.4
1.5 0.96
SOF
66.1
272
12.9
2.3 1.53
WAW
66.4
640
11.7
1.4 0.90
Female
total
67.9
4,064
12.9
0.6 0.40
AMS
29.5
62
11.5
9.7 2.87
ATH
23.7
25
11.1
18.4 4.36
CPH
36.2
30
12.3
12.1 4.38
FRA
26.1
29
11.4
15.9 4.16
LGW
30.7
19
13.5
19.7 6.06
MAD
31.4
34
12.7
13.6 4.26
SOF
30.3
14
10.3
17.7 5.38
WAW
29.7
124
12.5
7.4 2.19
Child (2-12 years)
total
29.7
337
12.3
4.4 1.31
AMS
69.7
3
19.5
31.7 22.11
ATH
87.8
2
3.9
6.1 5.39
CPH
92.6
1
-
- -
FRA
99.7
1
-
- -
LGW
-
-
-
- -
MAD
75.2
2
14.3
26.3 19.80
SOF
-
-
-
- -
WAW
81.3
2
3.6
6.2 5.00
Winter
Male & Infant (<2 years)
total
80.9
11
14.2
10.4 8.40
Survey on standard weights of passengers and luggage
R20090095.doc 125
May, 2009
Table C-17 Passenger weights by gender and airport; Winter (Part II)
season gender
airport
Mean
n
Std.dev.
Accuracy
(%)
Confidence range
(95%)
AMS
71.3
3
9.7
15.4 10.98
ATH
75.4
8
10.8
9.9 7.47
CPH
86.6
1
-
- -
FRA
63.1
1
-
- -
LGW
-
-
-
- -
MAD
67.5
5
13.3
17.3 11.67
SOF
-
-
-
- -
WAW
-
-
-
- -
Female & Infant (<2 years)
total
72.5
18
11.4
7.2 5.25
AMS
78.8
1,469
20.0
1.3 1.02
ATH
79.7
1,176
18.6
1.3 1.07
CPH
78.4
1,440
17.1
1.1 0.88
FRA
78.2
1,419
17.2
1.1 0.89
LGW
78.5
1,639
17.4
1.1 0.84
MAD
75.0
1,453
16.5
1.1 0.85
SOF
81.4
916
19.6
1.6 1.27
WAW
76.3
1,894
20.5
1.2 0.92
Total
total
78.0
11,406
18.5
0.4 0.34
Clarification: ‘-‘: no observations
Survey on standard weights of passengers and luggage
126 R20090095.doc
May, 2009
Table C-18 Passenger weights by gender and airport; totals
season Gender Airport Mean
n
Std.dev.
Accuracy
(%)
Confidence range
(95%)
AMS 85.1
1,818
15.3
0.8 0.70
ATH 85.7
1,566
14.6
0.8 0.72
CPH 84.7
1,594
14.8
0.9 0.73
FRA 83.9
1,612
15.2
0.9 0.74
LGW 85.2
1,441
14.8
0.9 0.77
MAD 80.7
1,565
13.7
0.8 0.68
SOF 86.6
1,130
15.9
1.1 0.93
WAW 85.6
1,862
14.7
0.8 0.67
Male
Total 84.6
12,588
15.0
0.3 0.26
AMS 68.1
1,109
13.0
1.1 0.77
ATH 66.4
1,201
13.1
1.1 0.74
CPH 67.6
1,084
12.1
1.1 0.72
FRA 65.9
831
11.8
1.2 0.80
LGW 68.4
1,109
13.4
1.2 0.79
MAD 64.1
1,134
11.3
1.0 0.66
SOF 65.0
516
12.4
1.6 1.07
WAW 66.3
1,367
13.0
1.0 0.69
Female
Total 66.6
8,351
12.7
0.4 0.27
AMS 31.1
224
11.6
4.9 1.52
ATH 30.8
170
12.1
5.9 1.82
CPH 31.5
226
11.2
4.6 1.45
FRA 30.7
143
13.3
7.1 2.18
LGW 32.9
114
11.6
6.4 2.12
MAD 32.0
104
12.0
7.2 2.30
SOF 28.1
106
10.9
7.4 2.07
WAW 29.6
333
11.3
4.1 1.22
Child (2-12 years)
Total 30.7
1,420
11.7
2.0 0.61
AMS 79.2
8
14.0
12.2 9.68
ATH 87.1
28
14.2
6.1 5.27
CPH 76.3
8
8.2
7.4 5.67
FRA 80.7
78
14.6
4.0 3.25
LGW 83.3
54
11.8
3.8 3.14
MAD 75.2
2
14.3
26.3 19.80
SOF 84.4
31
18.8
7.8 6.62
WAW 84.2
89
14.9
3.7 3.09
Total
Male & Infant (<2 years)
Total 83.0
298
14.6
2.0 1.65
Survey on standard weights of passengers and luggage
R20090095.doc 127
May, 2009
Table C-19 Passenger weights by gender and airport; totals (Part II)
AMS 83.6
16
14.7
8.6 7.22
ATH 69.9
41
10.7
4.7 3.27
CPH 70.5
4
13.4
18.7 13.17
FRA 64.0
39
11.8
5.8 3.70
LGW 63.7
56
10.7
4.4 2.81
MAD 67.5
5
13.3
17.3 11.67
SOF 62.7
25
10.6
6.7 4.17
WAW 61.9
58
10.6
4.4 2.73
Female & Infant (<2 years)
Total 65.8
244
12.4
2.4 1.55
AMS 75.3
3,175
20.4
0.9 0.71
ATH 74.7
3,006
19.8
0.9 0.71
CPH 74.1
2,916
20.1
1.0 0.73
FRA 75.1
2,703
19.4
1.0 0.73
LGW 75.9
2,774
18.5
0.9 0.69
MAD 72.2
2,810
17.0
0.9 0.63
SOF 76.6
1,808
21.4
1.3 0.99
WAW 73.0
3,709
21.4
0.9 0.69
Total
Total 74.5
22,901
19.9
0.3 0.26
Clarification: ‘-‘: no observations
Survey on standard weights of passengers and luggage
R20090095.doc 129
May, 2009
ANNEX D Tables passengers including carry-
on luggage
TABLES
D-1
Maximum kilos of permitted carry-on luggage 131
D-2 Percentage of passengers carrying more or less than
permitted kilos of carry-on luggage 132
D-3 Passenger weights by season and gender; incl. carry-on
luggage 133
D-4 Passenger weights by season, purpose and gender; incl.
carry-on luggage 134
D-5 Passenger weights by season, gender and class ; incl.
carry-on luggage 135
D-6 Passenger weights by season, gender and route type; incl.
carry-on luggage 136
D-7 Passenger weights by season, gender and route type; incl.
carry-on luggage (Part II) 137
D-8 Passenger weights by season, flight type and gender; incl.
carry-on luggage 138
D-9 Passenger weights by season, airline type and gender;
incl. carry-on luggage 139
D-10 Passenger weights by season, airline type and gender;
incl. carry-on luggage (Part II) 140
D-11 Passenger weights by gender and region of departure incl.
carry-on luggage 141
D-12 Passenger weights by gender and region of departure incl.
carry-on luggage (Part II) 142
D-13 Passenger weights by gender and region of arrival; incl.
carry-on luggage 143
D-14 Passenger weights by gender and region of arrival; incl.
carry-on luggage (Part II) 144
D-15 Passenger weights by gender and airport; incl. carry-on
luggage; Summer 145
D-16 Passenger weights by gender and airport; incl. carry-on
luggage; Summer (Part II) 146
D-17 Passenger weights by gender and airport; incl. carry-on
luggage; Winter 147
D-18 Passenger weights by gender and airport; incl. carry-on
luggage; Winter (Part II) 148
D-19 Passenger weights by gender and airport; totals. incl.
carry-on luggage 149
D-20 Passenger weights by gender and airport; totals. incl.
carry-on luggage (Part II) 150
Survey on standard weights of passengers and luggage
R20090095.doc 131
May, 2009
Table D-1 Maximum kilos of permitted carry-on luggage
Max kg Frequency
Percentage
5 1,696
9.7
6 2,562
14.7
7 471
2.7
8 5,746
32.9
9 269
1.5
10 2,768
15.9
12 1,981
11.3
13 18
0.1
14 46
0.3
15 9
0.1
16 375
2.1
18 851
4.9
20 151
0.9
23 520
3.0
Total 17,463
100
Source: NEA, based on data available on airline websites
Survey on standard weights of passengers and luggage
132 R20090095.doc
May, 2009
Table D-2 Percentage of passengers carrying more or less than
permitted kilos of carry-on luggage
Max kg Percentage maximum or less
Percentage more than maximum n
5-6 kg 63.5
36.5 4,258
7-8 kg 67.4
32.6 6,217
9-10 kg 81.6
18.4 3,037
11 kg and up 92.7
7.3 3,951
Total 74.7
25.3 17,463
Survey on standard weights of passengers and luggage
R20090095.doc 133
May, 2009
Table D-3 Passenger weights by season and gender; incl. carry-on
luggage
Gender Mean
n
Std. dev.
Accuracy
(%)
Confidence range
(95%)
Male 88.6
5,612
16.3
0.5 0.43
Female 70.5
4,287
13.2
0.6 0.40
Child (2-12 years) 33.0
1,083
12.4
2.2 0.74
Male & Infant (<2 years) 90.0
287
15.5
2.0 1.79
Female & Infant (<2 years)
70.5
226
14.2
2.6 1.85
Summer
Total 76.3
11,495
22.1
0.5 0.40
Male 93.5
6,976
15.6
0.4 0.37
Female 74.6
4,064
13.7
0.6 0.42
Child (2-12 years) 32.0
337
13.5
4.5 1.44
Male & Infant (<2 years) 91.0
11
15.8
10.2 9.32
Female & Infant (<2 years)
81.6
18
14.9
8.4 6.88
Winter
Total 84.9
11,406
19.7
0.4 0.36
Male 91.3
12,588
16.1
0.3 0.28
Female 72.5
8,351
13.6
0.4 0.29
Child (2-12 years) 32.8
1,420
12.7
2.0 0.66
Male & Infant (<2 years) 90.1
298
15.5
1.9 1.76
Female & Infant (<2 years)
71.3
244
14.5
2.6 1.82
Total
Total 80.6
22,901
21.4
0.3 0.28
Survey on standard weights of passengers and luggage
134 R20090095.doc
May, 2009
Table D-4 Passenger weights by season, purpose and gender; incl.
carry-on luggage
Season Gender Purpose Mean
n
Std. dev.
Accuracy
(%)
Confidence range
(95%)
Leisure 87.0
3,872
16.0
0.6
0.50
Business 91.8
2,027
16.4
0.8
0.71
Male
Total 88.7
5,899
16.3
0.5
0.42
Leisure 70.5
3,425
13.4
0.6
0.45
Business 70.7
1,088
13.0
1.1
0.77
Female
Total 70.5
4,513
13.3
0.5
0.39
Leisure 33.5
831
12.4
2.5
0.84
Business 31.5
252
12.4
4.8
1.53
Child (2-12)
Total 33.0
1,083
12.4
2.2
0.74
Leisure 74.6
8,128
21.6
0.6
0.47
Business 80.5
3,367
22.7
1.0
0.77
Summer
Total
Total 76.3
11,495
22.1
0.5
0.40
Leisure 91.4
4,027
15.8
0.5
0.49
Business 96.5
2,960
14.8
0.6
0.53
Male
Total 93.5
6,987
15.6
0.4
0.37
Leisure 74.4
3,255
13.8
0.6
0.47
Business 75.5
827
13.6
1.2
0.93
Female
Total 74.6
4,082
13.8
0.6
0.42
Leisure 31.9
329
13.4
4.5
1.45
Business 33.2
8
15.7
32.8
10.90
Child (2-12)
Total 32.0
337
13.5
4.5
1.44
Leisure 81.5
7,611
20.0
0.6
0.45
Business 91.8
3,795
17.1
0.6
0.55
Winter
Total
Total 84.9
11,406
19.7
0.4
0.36
Leisure 89.2
7,899
16.0
0.4
0.35
Business 94.6
4,987
15.6
0.5
0.43
Male
Total 91.3
12,886
16.1
0.3
0.28
Leisure 72.4
6,680
13.7
0.5
0.33
Business 72.8
1,915
13.5
0.8
0.60
Female
Total 72.5
8,595
13.7
0.4
0.29
Leisure 33.0
1,160
12.7
2.2
0.73
Business 31.6
260
12.5
4.8
1.51
Child(2-12)
Total 32.8
1,420
12.7
2.0
0.66
Leisure 77.9
15,739
21.1
0.4
0.33
Business 86.5
7,162
20.7
0.6
0.48
Total
Total
Total
80.6
22,901
21.4
0.3
0.28
Survey on standard weights of passengers and luggage
R20090095.doc 135
May, 2009
Table D-5 Passenger weights by season, gender and class ; incl.
carry-on luggage
Season Gender Class Mean
n
Std. dev.
Accuracy
(%)
Confidence range
(95%)
Economy
88.3
5,044
16.2 0.5 0.45
Business 90.4
788
16.7 1.3 1.17
First 90.8
67
13.1 3.5 3.14
Male
Total 88.7
5,899
16.3 0.5 0.42
Economy
70.5
3,992
13.3 0.6 0.41
Business 70.8
470
13.1 1.7 1.18
First 69.5
51
12.9 5.1 3.53
Female
Total 70.5
4,513
13.3 0.5 0.39
Economy
80.5
9,036
17.4 0.4 0.36
Business 83.1
1,258
18.2 1.2 1.00
First 81.6
118
16.7 3.7 3.02
Summer
Total (ex. Child 2-12 yrs)
Total 80.8
10,412
17.5 0.4 0.34
Economy
93.2
6,697
15.5 0.4 0.37
Business 101.4
285
15.0 1.7 1.74
First 94.9
5
6.9 6.4 6.03
Male
Total 93.5
6,987
15.6 0.4 0.37
Economy
74.5
3,999
13.7 0.6 0.42
Business 79.6
81
16.1 4.4 3.50
First 83.9
2
12.3 20.3 17.05
Female
Total 74.6
4,082
13.8 0.6 0.42
Economy
86.2
10,696
17.4 0.4 0.33
Business 96.6
366
17.7 1.9 1.82
First 91.7
7
9.2 7.5 6.85
Winter
Total (excl. Child 2-12 yrs)
Total 86.5
11,069
17.5 0.4 0.33
Economy
91.1
11,741
16.0 0.3 0.29
Business 93.4
1,073
17.0 1.1 1.02
First 91.1
72
12.8 3.2 2.96
Male
Total 91.3
12,886
16.1 0.3 0.28
Economy
72.5
7,991
13.7 0.4 0.30
Business 72.1
551
13.9 1.6 1.16
First 70.1
53
13.0 5.0 3.51
Female
Total 72.5
8,595
13.7 0.4 0.29
Economy
83.6
19,732
17.6 0.3 0.25
Business 86.1
1,624
18.9 1.1 0.92
First 82.2
125
16.5 3.5 2.90
Total
Total (excl. Child 2-12 yrs)
Total 83.8
21,481
17.7 0.3 0.24
Survey on standard weights of passengers and luggage
136 R20090095.doc
May, 2009
Table D-6 Passenger weights by season, gender and route type; incl.
carry-on luggage
Season Gender Route type Mean
n
Std. dev.
Accuracy
(%)
Confidence range
(95%)
Non-European
87.9
2,128
16.4
0.8 0.70
European 89.1
3,277
16.2
0.6 0.55
Domestic 88.8
494
15.9
1.6 1.40
Male
Total 88.7
5,899
16.3
0.5 0.42
Non-European
70.6
1,762
13.6
0.9 0.64
European 70.7
2,399
13.3
0.8 0.53
Domestic 69.4
352
11.6
1.8 1.22
Female
Total 70.5
4,513
13.3
0.5 0.39
Non-European
33.9
459
13.0
3.5 1.19
European 32.2
548
11.8
3.1 0.99
Domestic 33.9
76
12.9
8.6 2.90
Child(2-12)
Total 33.0
1,083
12.4
2.2 0.74
Non-European
75.2
4,349
22.2
0.9 0.66
European 77.0
6,224
22.1
0.7 0.55
Domestic 76.9
922
21.2
1.8 1.37
Summer
Total
Total 76.3
11,495
22.1
0.5 0.40
Non-European
93.3
2,039
15.6
0.7 0.68
European 93.9
4,121
15.8
0.5 0.48
Domestic 92.4
827
14.0
1.0 0.95
Male
Total 93.5
6,987
15.6
0.4 0.37
Non-European
75.9
1,301
14.5
1.0 0.79
European 74.0
2,267
13.5
0.7 0.55
Domestic 74.1
514
13.0
1.5 1.12
Female
Total 74.6
4,082
13.8
0.6 0.42
Non-European
30.7
132
13.2
7.4 2.26
European 32.9
178
13.3
6.0 1.96
Domestic 32.3
27
15.3
17.8 5.77
Child(2-12)
Total 32.0
337
13.5
4.5 1.44
Non-European
84.4
3,472
20.3
0.8 0.67
European 85.4
6,566
19.7
0.6 0.48
Domestic 84.3
1,368
17.9
1.1 0.95
Winter
Total
Total 84.9
11,406
19.7
0.4 0.36
Non-European
90.5
4,167
16.3
0.5 0.49
European 91.8
7,398
16.2
0.4 0.37
Domestic 91.1
1,321
14.8
0.9 0.80
Male
Total 91.3
12,886
16.1
0.3 0.28
Non-European
72.8
3,063
14.2
0.7 0.50
European 72.3
4,666
13.5
0.5 0.39
Domestic 72.2
866
12.7
1.2 0.84
Total
Female
Total 72.5
8,595
13.7
0.4 0.29
Survey on standard weights of passengers and luggage
R20090095.doc 137
May, 2009
Table D-7 Passenger weights by season, gender and route type; incl.
carry-on luggage (Part II)
Non-European
33.2
591
13.1
3.2 1.06
European 32.3
726
12.2
2.7 0.89
Domestic 33.5
103
13.5
7.8 2.61
Child(2-12)
Total 32.8
1,420
12.7
2.0 0.66
Non-European
79.3
7,821
21.8
0.6 0.48
European 81.3
12,790
21.3
0.5 0.37
Domestic 81.3
2,290
19.6
1.0 0.80
Total
Total 80.6
22,901
21.4
0.3 0.28
Survey on standard weights of passengers and luggage
138 R20090095.doc
May, 2009
Table D-8 Passenger weights by season, flight type and gender; incl.
carry-on luggage
Season Gender Flighttype Mean
n
Std. dev.
Accuracy
(%)
Confidence range
(95%)
Scheduled 89.1
5,037
16.4
0.5 0.45
Non-scheduled
86.3
862
15.1
1.2 1.01
Male
Total 88.7
5,899
16.3
0.5 0.42
Scheduled 70.7
3,658
13.1
0.6 0.42
Non-scheduled
69.8
855
14.1
1.4 0.94
Female
Total 70.5
4,513
13.3
0.5 0.39
Scheduled 33.3
803
12.9
2.7 0.89
Non-scheduled
32.3
280
11.0
4.0 1.29
Child(2-12)
Total 33.0
1,083
12.4
2.2 0.74
Scheduled 77.3
9,498
21.8
0.6 0.44
Non-scheduled
71.7
1,997
22.6
1.4 0.99
Summer
Total
Total 76.3
11,495
22.1
0.5 0.40
Scheduled 93.6
6,685
15.4
0.4 0.37
Non-scheduled
92.2
302
18.4
2.3 2.08
Male
Total 93.5
6,987
15.6
0.4 0.37
Scheduled 74.8
3,820
13.8
0.6 0.44
Non-scheduled
71.7
262
13.2
2.2 1.59
Female
Total 74.6
4,082
13.8
0.6 0.42
Scheduled 31.7
273
13.8
5.2 1.64
Non-scheduled
33.1
64
11.9
8.8 2.91
Child(2-12)
Total 32.0
337
13.5
4.5 1.44
Scheduled 85.4
10,778
19.3
0.4 0.36
Non-scheduled
77.6
628
23.9
2.4 1.87
Winter
Total
Total 84.9
11,406
19.7
0.4 0.36
Scheduled 91.6
11,722
16.0
0.3 0.29
Non-scheduled
87.8
1,164
16.3
1.1 0.93
Male
Total 91.3
12,886
16.1
0.3 0.28
Scheduled 72.8
7,478
13.6
0.4 0.31
Non-scheduled
70.3
1,117
13.9
1.2 0.82
Female
Total 72.5
8,595
13.7
0.4 0.29
Scheduled 32.9
1,076
13.1
2.4 0.78
Non-scheduled
32.4
344
11.2
3.6 1.18
Child(2-12)
Total 32.8
1,420
12.7
2.0 0.66
Scheduled 81.6
20,276
20.9
0.4 0.29
Non-scheduled
73.1
2,625
23.1
1.2 0.88
Total
Total
Total 80.6
22,901
21.4
0.3 0.28
Survey on standard weights of passengers and luggage
R20090095.doc 139
May, 2009
Table D-9 Passenger weights by season, airline type and gender;
incl. carry-on luggage
Season Gender Airline type Mean
n
Std. dev.
Accuracy
(%)
Confidence range
(95%)
Regular scheduled 89.3
4,315
16.5
0.6 0.49
Charter 87.3
415
14.2
1.6 1.37
Low-cost 87.2
993
15.9
1.1 0.99
Charter & low-cost
85.1
176
14.9
2.6 2.21
Male
Total 88.7
5,899
16.3
0.5 0.42
Regular scheduled 70.4
3,071
13.2
0.7 0.47
Charter 71.3
461
14.5
1.9 1.32
Low-cost 70.3
857
13.0
1.2 0.87
Charter & low-cost
72.0
124
13.4
3.3 2.36
Female
Total 70.5
4,513
13.3
0.5 0.39
Regular scheduled 33.3
709
12.8
2.8 0.94
Charter 32.2
133
10.4
5.5 1.77
Low-cost 32.4
196
12.2
5.2 1.70
Charter & low-cost
33.5
45
13.6
11.8 3.96
Summer
Child(2-12)
Total 33.0
1,083
12.4
2.2 0.74
Regular scheduled 94.0
5,822
15.6
0.4 0.40
Charter 92.8
166
16.8
2.7 2.55
Low-cost 91.3
878
14.6
1.1 0.97
Charter & low-cost
90.2
121
15.8
3.1 2.82
Male
Total 93.5
6,987
15.6
0.4 0.37
Regular scheduled 75.0
3,132
13.9
0.6 0.49
Charter 73.3
174
14.4
2.9 2.14
Low-cost 73.3
695
13.0
1.3 0.96
Charter & low-cost
74.8
81
13.1
3.8 2.85
Female
Total 74.6
4,082
13.8
0.6 0.42
Regular scheduled 31.7
251
14.1
5.5 1.74
Charter 32.3
31
11.0
12.0 3.87
Low-cost 33.4
47
12.4
10.6 3.53
Charter & low-cost
29.6
8
8.3
19.3 5.72
Winter
Child(2-12)
Total 32.0
337
13.5
4.5 1.44
Survey on standard weights of passengers and luggage
140 R20090095.doc
May, 2009
Table D-10 Passenger weights by season, airline type and gender;
incl. carry-on luggage (Part II)
Season Gender Airline type Mean
n
Std. dev.
Accuracy
(%)
Confidence range
(95%)
Regular scheduled 92.0
10,137
16.2
0.3 0.32
Charter 88.9
581
15.2
1.4 1.23
Low-cost 89.1
1,871
15.5
0.8 0.70
Charter & low-cost
87.2
297
15.5
2.0 1.76
Male
Total 91.3
12,886
16.1
0.3 0.28
Regular scheduled 72.7
6,203
13.7
0.5 0.34
Charter 71.8
635
14.5
1.6 1.12
Low-cost 71.6
1,552
13.0
0.9 0.65
Charter & low-cost
73.1
205
13.3
2.5 1.82
Female
Total 72.5
8,595
13.7
0.4 0.29
Regular scheduled 32.9
960
13.2
2.5 0.83
Charter 32.2
164
10.5
5.0 1.60
Low-cost 32.6
243
12.2
4.7 1.53
Charter & low-cost
33.0
53
12.9
10.6 3.48
Total
Child(2-12)
Total 32.8
1,420
12.7
2.0 0.66
Survey on standard weights of passengers and luggage
R20090095.doc 141
May, 2009
Table D-11 Passenger weights by gender and region of departure incl.
carry-on luggage
Region of departure Mean
n
Std. dev.
Accuracy
(%)
Confidence range
(95%)
1 UK and Ireland 91.5
1,244
15.3 0.9 0.85
2 Benelux and France 91.7
1,868
16.7 0.8 0.76
3 Spain. Portugal and Italy 87.0
1,683
14.7 0.8 0.70
4 Scandinavia and Iceland 91.9
1,118
15.8 1.0 0.93
5 Germany. Switzerland and Austria
92.0
1,763
16.1 0.8 0.75
6 Northeast Europe 92.3
1,881
16.0 0.8 0.72
7 Greece. Cyprus. Malta and Turkey
92.5
1,544
15.9 0.9 0.80
8 Romania and Bulgaria 92.8
958
17.0 1.2 1.07
9 Other Eur countries (incl. Russia) 89.3
82
15.8 3.8 3.42
11 Africa and the Middle East 89.2
173
17.2 2.9 2.57
12 Asia 90.2
61
15.3 4.2 3.83
13 North America 92.2
352
16.7 1.9 1.74
14 South America 88.0
144
16.0 3.0 2.61
15 Other 92.9
15
13.0 7.1 6.55
Male
Total 91.3
12,886
16.1 0.3 0.28
1 UK and Ireland 73.8
995
13.5 1.1 0.84
2 Benelux and France 74.5
1,144
14.3 1.1 0.83
3 Spain. Portugal and Italy 70.7
1,201
12.7 1.0 0.72
4 Scandinavia and Iceland 73.6
732
12.9 1.3 0.94
5 Germany. Switzerland and Austria
73.2
882
13.4 1.2 0.88
6 Northeast Europe 71.4
1,396
13.7 1.0 0.72
7 Greece. Cyprus. Malta and Turkey
72.1
1,185
13.6 1.1 0.78
8 Romania and Bulgaria 69.7
454
13.8 1.8 1.27
9 Other Eur countries (incl. Russia) 72.4
57
13.5 4.8 3.49
11 Africa and the Middle East 73.0
88
16.7 4.8 3.48
12 Asia 71.2
48
11.6 4.6 3.29
13 North America 75.6
239
15.4 2.6 1.95
14 South America 69.4
163
13.2 2.9 2.03
15 Other 71.1
11
16.1 13.4 9.51
Female
Total 72.5
8,595
13.7 0.4 0.29
Survey on standard weights of passengers and luggage
142 R20090095.doc
May, 2009
Table D-12 Passenger weights by gender and region of departure incl.
carry-on luggage (Part II)
Region of departure Mean
n
Std. dev.
Accuracy
(%)
Confidence range
(95%)
1 UK and Ireland 35.8
127
12.8 6.2 2.22
2 Benelux and France 33.1
217
12.5 5.0 1.67
3 Spain. Portugal and Italy 33.7
133
12.2 6.1 2.07
4 Scandinavia and Iceland 33.9
154
11.6 5.4 1.84
5 Germany. Switzerland and Austria
33.5
151
14.7 7.0 2.34
6 Northeast Europe 31.0
315
12.0 4.3 1.33
7 Greece. Cyprus. Malta and Turkey
32.7
166
13.0 6.1 1.98
8 Romania and Bulgaria 29.4
101
11.3 7.5 2.20
9 Other Eur countries (incl. Russia) 36.2
5
11.0 26.5 9.61
11 Africa and the Middle East 31.0
19
12.0 17.4 5.41
12 Asia 25.0
3
9.0 40.6 10.17
13 North America 36.1
21
16.7 19.7 7.14
14 South America 39.3
7
15.8 29.8 11.70
15 Other 44.0
1
.
Child(2-12)
Total 32.8
1,420
12.7 2.0 0.66
Survey on standard weights of passengers and luggage
R20090095.doc 143
May, 2009
Table D-13 Passenger weights by gender and region of arrival; incl.
carry-on luggage
Region of arrival Mean
n
Std. dev.
Accuracy
(%)
Confidence range
(95%)
1 UK and Ireland 91.7
1,837
16.1 0.8 0.74
2 Benelux and France 90.7
947
16.2 1.1 1.03
3 Spain. Portugal and Italy 89.4
1,595
15.1 0.8 0.74
4 Scandinavia and Iceland 92.0
1,353
16.1 0.9 0.86
5 Germany. Switzerland and Austria 93.7
1,579
16.2 0.9 0.80
6 Northeast Europe 92.1
657
16.0 1.3 1.23
7 Greece. Cyprus. Malta and Turkey 90.0
1,241
15.7 1.0 0.87
8 Romania and Bulgaria 92.3
444
17.1 1.7 1.59
9 Other Eur. Countries (incl. Russia)
95.3
358
18.0 2.0 1.86
11 Africa and the Middle East 91.2
933
16.9 1.2 1.08
12 Asia 89.5
470
15.1 1.5 1.36
13 North America 91.1
1,011
15.8 1.1 0.98
14 South America 86.9
411
14.7 1.6 1.42
15 Other 93.1
50
14.5 4.3 4.03
Male
Total 91.3
12,886
16.1 0.3 0.28
1 UK and Ireland 74.0
1,220
14.2 1.1 0.80
2 Benelux and France 72.0
584
13.2 1.5 1.07
3 Spain. Portugal and Italy 71.2
1,200
12.9 1.0 0.73
4 Scandinavia and Iceland 74.2
815
13.0 1.2 0.89
5 Germany. Switzerland and Austria 71.8
914
13.8 1.2 0.90
6 Northeast Europe 72.3
366
13.6 1.9 1.39
7 Greece. Cyprus. Malta and Turkey 70.3
954
13.4 1.2 0.85
8 Romania and Bulgaria 71.3
213
11.7 2.2 1.57
9 Other Eur. Countries (incl. Russia)
72.4
188
12.5 2.5 1.79
11 Africa and the Middle East 72.6
728
15.4 1.5 1.12
12 Asia 72.7
283
13.4 2.1 1.56
13 North America 73.3
748
13.5 1.3 0.97
14 South America 74.3
335
14.4 2.1 1.54
15 Other 75.3
47
12.3 4.7 3.52
Female
Total 72.5
8,595
13.7 0.4 0.29
Survey on standard weights of passengers and luggage
144 R20090095.doc
May, 2009
Table D-14 Passenger weights by gender and region of arrival; incl.
carry-on luggage (Part II)
Region of arrival Mean
n
Std. dev.
Accuracy
(%)
Confidence range
(95%)
1 UK and Ireland 31.7
112
12.8 7.5 2.37
2 Benelux and France 32.7
125
12.3 6.6 2.16
3 Spain. Portugal and Italy 31.9
152
12.3 6.1 1.95
4 Scandinavia and Iceland 33.9
154
12.5 5.8 1.98
5 Germany. Switzerland and Austria
32.5
142
13.1 6.6 2.15
6 Northeast Europe 30.8
44
13.2 12.7 3.91
7 Greece. Cyprus. Malta and Turkey
32.9
173
12.2 5.5 1.81
8 Romania and Bulgaria 33.1
49
11.8 10.0 3.31
9 Other Eur. countries (incl. Russia)
34.2
21
12.7 15.9 5.44
11 Africa and the Middle East 31.8
214
12.3 5.2 1.64
12 Asia 28.6
39
11.7 12.8 3.67
13 North America 37.3
149
14.1 6.1 2.27
14 South America 29.4
45
11.5 11.4 3.35
15 Other 32.6
1
.
Child(2-12)
Total 32.8
1,420
12.7 2.0 0.66
Survey on standard weights of passengers and luggage
R20090095.doc 145
May, 2009
Table D-15 Passenger weights by gender and airport; incl. carry-on
luggage; Summer
Gender Airport
Mean
n
Std. dev.
Accuracy
(%)
Confidence range
(95%)
AMS 88.7
944
16.1
1.2 1.03
ATH 89.4
866
15.7
1.2 1.04
CPH 89.2
721
16.4
1.3 1.20
FRA 90.5
641
18.2
1.6 1.41
LGW 88.6
516
15.5
1.5 1.33
MAD 83.4
690
14.9
1.3 1.11
SOF 89.5
500
16.3
1.6 1.43
WAW 89.4
734
16.4
1.3 1.18
Male
Total 88.6
5,612
16.3
0.5 0.43
AMS 71.5
582
12.6
1.4 1.02
ATH 70.4
760
13.4
1.4 0.96
CPH 71.7
549
12.3
1.4 1.03
FRA 71.0
414
12.8
1.7 1.23
LGW 72.3
414
13.6
1.8 1.31
MAD 67.6
597
11.9
1.4 0.96
SOF 68.9
244
12.9
2.3 1.61
WAW 70.7
727
14.9
1.5 1.08
Female
Total 70.5
4,287
13.2
0.6 0.40
AMS 33.9
162
12.6
5.7 1.93
ATH 34.0
145
12.8
6.1 2.08
CPH 32.5
196
11.2
4.8 1.57
FRA 35.0
114
15.3
8.1 2.82
LGW 35.6
95
12.1
6.8 2.43
MAD 34.1
70
12.0
8.3 2.82
SOF 29.3
92
11.6
8.1 2.38
WAW 31.3
209
11.6
5.0 1.57
Child (2-12 years)
total 33.0
1,083
12.4
2.2 0.74
AMS 97.4
5
12.3
11.0 10.75
ATH 93.6
26
15.6
6.4 6.00
CPH 80.2
7
5.4
4.9 3.96
FRA 89.2
77
16.0
4.0 3.57
LGW 89.7
54
12.6
3.8 3.37
MAD -
-
-
- -
SOF 89.1
31
19.2
7.6 6.77
WAW 90.6
87
15.7
3.6 3.31
Summer
Male & Infant (<2 years)
total 90.0
287
15.5
2.0 1.79
Survey on standard weights of passengers and luggage
146 R20090095.doc
May, 2009
Table D-16 Passenger weights by gender and airport; incl. carry-on
luggage; Summer (Part II)
Gender Airport
Mean
n
Std. dev.
Accuracy
(%)
Confidence range
(95%)
AMS 97.7
13
22.0
12.3 11.98
ATH 73.5
33
10.9
5.1 3.73
CPH 67.9
3
9.1
15.2 10.31
FRA 71.2
38
13.2
5.9 4.18
LGW 68.0
56
11.3
4.3 2.95
MAD -
-
-
- -
SOF 67.7
25
10.4
6.0 4.08
WAW 65.8
58
11.7
4.6 3.02
Female & Infant (<2 years)
Total 70.5
226
14.2
2.6 1.85
AMS 77.7
1,706
22.0
1.3 1.04
ATH 76.9
1,830
21.2
1.3 0.97
CPH 75.1
1,476
23.4
1.6 1.19
FRA 78.6
1,284
22.9
1.6 1.26
LGW 77.3
1,135
20.6
1.6 1.20
MAD 73.9
1,357
18.1
1.3 0.96
SOF 77.0
892
23.9
2.0 1.57
WAW 74.5
1,815
23.5
1.5 1.08
Total
Total 76.3
11,495
22.1
0.5 0.40
Clarification: ‘-‘: no observations
Survey on standard weights of passengers and luggage
R20090095.doc 147
May, 2009
Table D-17 Passenger weights by gender and airport; incl. carry-on
luggage; Winter
Season Gender Airport
Mean
n
Std. dev.
Accuracy
(%)
Confidence range
(95%)
AMS 95.3
874
16.9
1.2 1.12
ATH 95.5
700
14.9
1.2 1.11
CPH 93.2
873
15.2
1.1 1.01
FRA 92.8
971
14.8
1.0 0.93
LGW 92.5
925
15.5
1.1 1.00
MAD 90.0
875
14.1
1.0 0.93
SOF 96.0
630
17.1
1.4 1.33
WAW 94.0
1,128
15.4
1.0 0.90
Male
Total 93.5
6,976
15.6
0.4 0.37
AMS 77.5
527
15.2
1.7 1.30
ATH 75.2
441
14.2
1.8 1.33
CPH 75.5
535
13.4
1.5 1.14
FRA 75.3
417
13.3
1.7 1.28
LGW 75.2
695
14.3
1.4 1.07
MAD 73.0
537
12.2
1.4 1.03
SOF 71.4
272
13.7
2.3 1.63
WAW 72.6
640
12.6
1.3 0.98
Female
Total 74.6
4,064
13.7
0.6 0.42
AMS 32.0
62
13.1
10.2 3.25
ATH 25.5
25
11.7
17.9 4.58
CPH 39.7
30
13.6
12.3 4.86
FRA 29.0
29
12.9
16.2 4.70
LGW 33.0
19
14.2
19.4 6.41
MAD 34.8
34
14.4
13.9 4.83
SOF 32.4
14
11.4
18.4 5.97
WAW 31.1
124
13.2
7.5 2.32
Child (2-12 years)
Total 32.0
337
13.5
4.5 1.44
AMS 77.2
3
23.9
35.0 27.01
ATH 90.8
2
5.9
9.1 8.23
CPH 98.0
1
-
- -
FRA 113.3
1
-
- -
LGW -
-
-
- -
MAD 97.1
2
9.9
14.1 13.72
SOF -
-
-
- -
WAW 91.4
2
4.2
6.4 5.88
Winter
Male & Infant (<2 years)
Total 91.0
11
15.8
10.2 9.32
Survey on standard weights of passengers and luggage
148 R20090095.doc
May, 2009
Table D-18 Passenger weights by gender and airport; incl. carry-on
luggage; Winter (Part II)
Season Gender Airport
Mean
n
Std. dev.
Accuracy
(%)
Confidence range
(95%)
AMS 78.7
3
21.5
30.9 24.33
ATH 83.2
8
14.0
11.7 9.73
CPH 93.4
1
-
- -
FRA 75.0
1
-
- -
LGW -
-
-
- -
MAD 79.7
5
17.4
19.2 15.28
SOF -
-
-
- -
WAW -
-
-
- -
Female & Infant (<2 years)
Total 81.6
18
14.9
8.4 6.88
AMS 86.2
1,469
21.5
1.3 1.10
ATH 86.3
1,176
19.7
1.3 1.12
CPH 85.5
1,440
18.1
1.1 0.94
FRA 86.3
1,419
18.4
1.1 0.96
LGW 84.5
1,639
18.1
1.0 0.88
MAD 82.4
1,453
17.3
1.1 0.89
SOF 87.7
916
20.7
1.5 1.34
WAW 82.6
1,894
22.2
1.2 1.00
Total
Total 84.9
11,406
19.7
0.4 0.36
Clarification: ‘-‘: no observations
Survey on standard weights of passengers and luggage
R20090095.doc 149
May, 2009
Table D-19 Passenger weights by gender and airport; totals. incl.
carry-on luggage
Season Gender Airport
Mean
n
Std. dev.
Accuracy
(%)
Confidence range
(95%)
AMS 91.9
1,818
16.8
0.8 0.77
ATH 92.1
1,566
15.6
0.8 0.77
CPH 91.4
1,594
15.9
0.9 0.78
FRA 91.9
1,612
16.3
0.9 0.80
LGW 91.1
1,441
15.6
0.9 0.81
MAD 87.1
1,565
14.8
0.8 0.73
SOF 93.1
1,130
17.0
1.1 0.99
WAW 92.2
1,862
16.0
0.8 0.73
Male
Total 91.3
12,588
16.1
0.3 0.28
AMS 74.4
1,109
14.2
1.1 0.83
ATH 72.2
1,201
13.9
1.1 0.79
CPH 73.6
1,084
13.0
1.1 0.77
FRA 73.2
831
13.2
1.2 0.90
LGW 74.1
1,109
14.1
1.1 0.83
MAD 70.2
1,134
12.4
1.0 0.72
SOF 70.2
516
13.4
1.6 1.15
WAW 71.6
1,367
13.9
1.0 0.74
Female
Total 72.5
8,351
13.6
0.4 0.29
AMS 33.4
224
12.7
5.0 1.66
ATH 32.8
170
12.9
5.9 1.95
CPH 33.5
226
11.8
4.6 1.53
FRA 33.8
143
15.0
7.3 2.46
LGW 35.2
114
12.4
6.5 2.28
MAD 34.4
104
12.8
7.2 2.46
SOF 29.7
106
11.6
7.4 2.21
WAW 31.2
333
12.2
4.2 1.31
Child (2-12 years)
Total 32.8
1,420
12.7
2.0 0.66
AMS 89.8
8
18.9
14.6 13.12
ATH 93.4
28
15.1
6.0 5.59
CPH 82.5
8
8.0
6.7 5.55
FRA 89.5
78
16.1
4.0 3.58
LGW 89.7
54
12.6
3.8 3.37
MAD 97.1
2
9.9
14.1 13.72
SOF 89.1
31
19.2
7.6 6.77
WAW 90.6
89
15.6
3.6 3.23
Total
Male & Infant (<2 years)
Total 90.1
298
15.5
1.9 1.76
Survey on standard weights of passengers and luggage
150 R20090095.doc
May, 2009
Table D-20 Passenger weights by gender and airport; totals. incl.
carry-on luggage (Part II)
Season Gender Airport
Mean
n
Std. dev.
Accuracy
(%)
Confidence range
(95%)
AMS 94.2
16
22.6
11.7 11.05
ATH 75.4
41
12.0
4.9 3.69
CPH 74.3
4
14.8
19.5 14.48
FRA 71.3
39
13.0
5.7 4.08
LGW 68.0
56
11.3
4.3 2.95
MAD 79.7
5
17.4
19.2 15.28
SOF 67.7
25
10.4
6.0 4.08
WAW 65.8
58
11.7
4.6 3.02
Female & Infant (<2
years)
Total 71.3
244
14.5
2.6 1.82
AMS 81.6
3,175
22.2
0.9 0.77
ATH 80.6
3,006
21.1
0.9 0.76
CPH 80.2
2,916
21.6
1.0 0.78
FRA 82.7
2,703
21.0
1.0 0.79
LGW 81.5
2,774
19.5
0.9 0.73
MAD 78.3
2,810
18.2
0.9 0.67
SOF 82.4
1,808
23.0
1.3 1.06
WAW 78.7
3,709
23.2
0.9 0.75
Total
Total 80.6
22,901
21.4
0.3 0.28
Clarification: ‘-‘: no observations
Survey on standard weights of passengers and luggage
R20090095.doc 151
May, 2009
ANNEX E Tables check-in baggage
TABLES
E-1
Checked baggage weights by season and gender 153
E-2 Checked baggage weights by season, purpose and gender 154
E-3 Checked baggage weights by season, gender and class 155
E-4 Checked baggage weights by season, route type and
gender 156
E-5 Checked baggage weights by season, route type and
gender (Part II) 157
E-6 Checked baggage weights by season, flight type and
gender 158
E-7 Checked baggage weights by season, airline type and
gender 159
E-8 Checked baggage weights by season, airline type and
gender (Part II) 160
E-9 Checked baggage weights by gender and region of
departure 161
E-10 Checked baggage weights by gender and region of
departure (Part II) 162
E-11 Checked baggage weights by gender and region of arrival 163
E-12 Checked baggage weights by gender and region of arrival
(Part II) 164
E-13 Checked baggage weights by gender and region; Summer 165
E-14 Checked baggage weights by gender and region; Winter 166
E-15 Checked baggage weights by gender and region; totals 167
E-16 Checked baggage weights by season, gender and haul
label 168
E-17 Checked baggage weights by season, gender and haul
label (Part II) 169
E-18 Checked baggage weights by season, gender and number
of persons concerned 170
E-19 Checked baggage weights by gender and permitted weight
(max.kg) 171
Survey on standard weights of passengers and luggage
R20090095.doc 153
May, 2009
Table E-1 Checked baggage weights by season and gender
Season Gender Mean
n
Std.dev
Accuracy
(%)
Confidence range
(95%)
Male 16.9
5,162
5.8
0.9 0.16
Female 17.0
4,172
5.7
1.0 0.17
Child (2-12 years) 14.2
327
6.0
4.6 0.65
Male & Infant (<2 years) 19.9
13
7.1
19.3 3.83
Female & Infant (<2 years) 17.2
18
7.9
21.3 3.67
Summer
Total 16.9
9,692
5.8
0.7 0.12
Male 16.5
7,391
5.9
0.8 0.13
Female 16.8
5,080
5.7
0.9 0.16
Child (2-12 years) 17.1
138
6.2
6.0 1.03
Male & Infant (<2 years) 19.8
17
6.7
16.1 3.18
Female & Infant (<2 years) 18.8
35
5.4
9.5 1.79
Winter
total 16.6
12,661
5.8
0.6 0.10
Male 16.7
12,553
5.9
0.6 0.10
Female 16.9
9,252
5.7
0.7 0.12
Child (2-12 years) 15.1
465
6.2
3.7 0.56
Male & Infant (<2 years) 19.8
30
6.7
12.2 2.41
Female & Infant (<2 years) 18.3
53
6.3
9.4 1.71
Total
total 16.7
22,353
5.8
0.5 0.08
Survey on standard weights of passengers and luggage
154 R20090095.doc
May, 2009
Table E-2 Checked baggage weights by season, purpose and gender
Season Gender Purpose Mean
n
Std.dev
Accuracy
(%)
Confidence range
(95%)
Leisure 17.0
4,448
5.7
1.0
0.17
Business 16.1
727
6.6
3.0
0.48
Male
Total 16.9
5,175
5.9
0.9
0.16
Leisure 17.1
3,925
5.7
1.0
0.18
Business 16.3
265
6.1
4.5
0.73
Female
Total 17.0
4,190
5.7
1.0
0.17
Leisure 14.2
325
6.0
4.6
0.65
Business 17.5
2
2.0
15.7
2.74
Child(2-12)
Total 14.2
327
6.0
4.6
0.65
Leisure 16.9
8,698
5.7
0.7
0.12
Business 16.1
994
6.5
2.5
0.40
Summer
Total
Total 16.9
9,692
5.8
0.7
0.12
Leisure 17.3
4,759
5.7
0.9
0.16
Business 15.2
2,649
6.0
1.5
0.23
Male
Total 16.5
7,408
5.9
0.8
0.13
Leisure 17.2
4,089
5.7
1.0
0.17
Business 15.2
1,026
5.7
2.3
0.35
Female
Total 16.8
5,115
5.7
0.9
0.16
Leisure 17.3
133
6.2
6.1
1.05
Business 13.0
5
4.8
32.2
4.18
Child(2-12)
Total 17.1
138
6.2
6.0
1.03
Leisure 17.2
8,981
5.7
0.7
0.12
Business 15.2
3,680
6.0
1.3
0.19
Winter
Total
Total 16.6
12,661
5.8
0.6
0.10
Leisure 17.2
9,207
5.7
0.7
0.12
Business 15.4
3,376
6.2
1.4
0.21
Male
Total 16.7
12,583
5.9
0.6
0.10
Leisure 17.1
8,014
5.7
0.7
0.12
Business 15.4
1,291
5.8
2.1
0.32
Female
Total 16.9
9,305
5.7
0.7
0.12
Leisure 15.1
458
6.2
3.8
0.57
Business 14.3
7
4.5
23.6
3.37
Child(2-12)
Total 15.1
465
6.2
3.7
0.56
Leisure 17.1
17,679
5.7
0.5
0.08
Business 15.4
4,674
6.1
1.1
0.17
Total
Total
Total
16.7
22,353
5.8
0.5
0.08
Survey on standard weights of passengers and luggage
R20090095.doc 155
May, 2009
Table E-3 Checked baggage weights by season, gender and class
Season Gender Class Mean
n
Std.dev
Accuracy
(%)
Confidence Range
(95%)
Economy
16.9
5,013
5.8
1.0 0.16
Business 16.8
159
6.0
5.6 0.94
First 24.0
3
6.1
29.0 6.94
Male
Total 16.9
5,175
5.9
0.9 0.16
Economy
17.0
4,138
5.7
1.0 0.17
Business 16.8
50
5.5
9.0 1.52
First 15.4
2
5.5
49.6 7.64
Female
Total 17.0
4,190
5.7
1.0 0.17
Economy
17.0
9,151
5.8
0.7 0.12
Business 16.8
209
5.9
4.8 0.80
First 20.5
5
7.0
29.7 6.10
Summer
Total (ex. Child 2-12 yrs)
Total 17.0
9,365
5.8
0.7 0.12
Economy
16.5
7,136
5.9
0.8 0.14
Business 16.4
268
6.4
4.7 0.77
First 27.1
4
3.6
12.9 3.50
Male
Total 16.5
7,408
5.9
0.8 0.13
Economy
16.8
5,015
5.7
0.9 0.16
Business 16.2
96
5.8
7.2 1.17
First 20.6
4
2.2
10.5 2.16
Female
Total 16.8
5,115
5.7
0.9 0.16
Economy
16.6
12,151
5.8
0.6 0.10
Business 16.4
364
6.3
3.9 0.64
First 23.9
8
4.4
12.9 3.07
Winter
Total (excl. Child 2-12 yrs)
Total 16.6
12,523
5.8
0.6 0.10
Economy
16.7
12,149
5.9
0.6 0.10
Business 16.6
427
6.3
3.6 0.60
First 25.8
7
4.7
13.4 3.46
Male
Total 16.7
12,583
5.9
0.6 0.10
Economy
16.9
9,153
5.7
0.7 0.12
Business 16.4
146
5.7
5.6 0.92
First 18.9
6
4.0
17.1 3.22
Female
Total 16.9
9,305
5.7
0.7 0.12
Economy
16.8
21,302
5.8
0.5 0.08
Business 16.5
573
6.1
3.0 0.50
First 22.6
13
5.5
13.3 3.00
Total
Total (excl. Child 2-12 yrs)
Total 16.8
21,888
5.8
0.5 0.08
Survey on standard weights of passengers and luggage
156 R20090095.doc
May, 2009
Table E-4 Checked baggage weights by season, route type and
gender
Season Gender Routetype Mean
n
Std.dev
Accuracy
(%)
Confidence range
(95%)
Non-European
18.3
1,769
5.8
1.5 0.27
European 16.3
2,789
5.7
1.3 0.21
Domestic 15.5
617
5.9
3.0 0.47
Male
Total 16.9
5,175
5.9
0.9 0.16
Non-European
18.3
1,419
5.7
1.6 0.30
European 16.6
2,273
5.5
1.4 0.23
Domestic 15.4
498
5.8
3.3 0.51
Female
Total 17.0
4,190
5.7
1.0 0.17
Non-European
16.4
115
5.8
6.4 1.06
European 12.7
195
5.7
6.3 0.80
Domestic 15.6
17
6.0
18.4 2.86
Child(2-12)
Total 14.2
327
6.0
4.6 0.65
Non-European
18.2
3,303
5.8
1.1 0.20
European 16.3
5,257
5.6
0.9 0.15
Domestic 15.4
1,132
5.9
2.2 0.34
Summer
Total
Total 16.9
9,692
5.8
0.7 0.12
Non-European
18.4
2,689
5.9
1.2 0.22
European 15.7
3,889
5.7
1.1 0.18
Domestic 14.5
830
5.4
2.5 0.37
Male
Total 16.5
7,408
5.9
0.8 0.13
Non-European
18.5
1,936
5.6
1.4 0.25
European 16.0
2,549
5.6
1.4 0.22
Domestic 14.8
630
5.2
2.7 0.40
Female
Total 16.8
5,115
5.7
0.9 0.16
Non-European
18.3
67
6.7
8.7 1.60
European 16.6
63
5.2
7.8 1.29
Domestic 11.4
8
5.4
33.2 3.77
Child(2-12)
Total 17.1
138
6.2
6.0 1.03
Non-European
18.4
4,692
5.8
0.9 0.16
European 15.8
6,501
5.7
0.9 0.14
Domestic 14.6
1,468
5.3
1.9 0.27
Winter
Total
Total 16.6
12,661
5.8
0.6 0.10
Survey on standard weights of passengers and luggage
R20090095.doc 157
May, 2009
Table E-5 Checked baggage weights by season, route type and
gender (Part II)
Season Gender Routetype Mean
n
Std.dev
Accuracy
(%)
Confidence range
(95%)
Non-European
18.3
4,458
5.9
0.9 0.17
European 15.9
6,678
5.7
0.9 0.14
Domestic 14.9
1,447
5.6
1.9 0.29
Male
Total 16.7
12,583
5.9
0.6 0.10
Non-European
18.4
3,355
5.7
1.0 0.19
European 16.3
4,822
5.6
1.0 0.16
Domestic 15.0
1,128
5.5
2.1 0.32
Female
Total 16.9
9,305
5.7
0.7 0.12
Non-European
17.1
182
6.2
5.2 0.90
European 13.7
258
5.8
5.2 0.71
Domestic 14.2
25
6.1
16.7 2.38
Child(2-12)
Total 15.1
465
6.2
3.7 0.56
Non-European
18.3
7,995
5.8
0.7 0.13
European 16.0
11,758
5.7
0.6 0.10
Domestic 15.0
2,600
5.6
1.4 0.21
Total
Total
Total 16.7
22,353
5.8
0.5 0.08
Survey on standard weights of passengers and luggage
158 R20090095.doc
May, 2009
Table E-6 Checked baggage weights by season, flight type and
gender
Season Gender Flight type Mean
n
Std.dev
Accuracy
(%)
Confidence range
(95%)
Scheduled 16.9
4,596
5.9
1.0 0.17
Non-scheduled
17.2
579
5.4
2.6 0.44
Male
Total 16.9
5,175
5.9
0.9 0.16
Scheduled 17.0
3,751
5.8
1.1 0.18
Non-scheduled
17.2
439
5.2
2.8 0.48
Female
Total 17.0
4,190
5.7
1.0 0.17
Scheduled 14.5
285
6.1
4.9 0.70
Non-scheduled
11.9
42
5.1
12.9 1.53
Child(2-12)
Total 14.2
327
6.0
4.6 0.65
Scheduled 16.8
8,632
5.9
0.7 0.12
Non-scheduled
17.0
1,060
5.4
1.9 0.33
Summer
Total
Total 16.9
9,692
5.8
0.7 0.12
Scheduled 16.4
7,048
6.0
0.8 0.14
Non-scheduled
18.3
360
4.6
2.6 0.47
Male
Total 16.5
7,408
5.9
0.8 0.13
Scheduled 16.7
4,794
5.7
1.0 0.16
Non-scheduled
17.8
321
5.4
3.3 0.59
Female
Total 16.8
5,115
5.7
0.9 0.16
Scheduled 17.2
130
6.3
6.3 1.07
Non-scheduled
16.1
8
4.7
20.2 3.25
Child(2-12)
Total 17.1
138
6.2
6.0 1.03
Scheduled 16.5
11,972
5.9
0.6 0.11
Non-scheduled
18.1
689
5.0
2.1 0.37
Winter
Total
Total 16.6
12,661
5.8
0.6 0.10
Scheduled 16.6
11,644
5.9
0.6 0.11
Non-scheduled
17.6
939
5.2
1.9 0.33
Male
Total 16.7
12,583
5.9
0.6 0.10
Scheduled 16.8
8,545
5.8
0.7 0.12
Non-scheduled
17.4
760
5.3
2.1 0.37
Female
Total 16.9
9,305
5.7
0.7 0.12
Scheduled 15.4
415
6.2
3.9 0.60
Non-scheduled
12.6
50
5.2
11.5 1.44
Child(2-12)
Total 15.1
465
6.2
3.7 0.56
Scheduled 16.7
20,604
5.9
0.5 0.08
Non-scheduled
17.4
1,749
5.3
1.4 0.25
Total
Total
Total 16.7
22,353
5.8
0.5 0.08
Survey on standard weights of passengers and luggage
R20090095.doc 159
May, 2009
Table E-7 Checked baggage weights by season, airline type and
gender
Season Gender Airline type Mean
n
Std.dev
Accuracy
(%)
Confidence range
(95%)
Regular scheduled
17.0
3,557
6.1
1.2 0.20
Charter
17.8
250
5.5
3.8 0.68
Low-cost
16.0
1,121
5.3
1.9 0.31
Charter & low-cost
18.5
247
4.9
3.3 0.61
Male
Total
16.9
5,175
5.9
0.9 0.16
Regular scheduled
17.1
2,933
5.9
1.3 0.21
Charter
17.7
197
5.3
4.2 0.74
Low-cost
16.2
858
5.1
2.1 0.34
Charter & low-cost
18.3
202
4.8
3.6 0.66
Female
Total
17.0
4,190
5.7
1.0 0.17
Regular scheduled
14.7
218
6.2
5.7 0.83
Charter
14.2
16
4.6
15.8 2.23
Low-cost
12.6
66
5.3
10.2 1.28
Charter & low-cost
14.2
27
6.0
15.8 2.25
Summer
Child(2-12)
Total
14.2
327
6.0
4.6 0.65
Regular scheduled
17.0
6,708
6.0
0.8 0.14
Charter
17.6
463
5.4
2.8 0.49
Low-cost
16.0
2,045
5.2
1.4 0.23
Charter & low-cost
18.1
476
5.0
2.5 0.45
Male
Total
16.9
9,692
5.8
0.7 0.12
Regular scheduled
16.5
5,479
6.1
1.0 0.16
Charter
18.1
335
4.9
2.9 0.53
Low-cost
15.6
1,337
5.1
1.7 0.27
Charter & low-cost
19.7
257
5.8
3.6 0.71
Female
Total
16.5
7,408
5.9
0.8 0.13
Regular scheduled
16.8
3,585
6.0
1.2 0.20
Charter
18.8
288
5.3
3.3 0.61
Low-cost
15.8
1,049
4.6
1.8 0.28
Charter & low-cost
19.0
193
5.3
3.9 0.75
Winter
Child(2-12)
Total
16.8
5,115
5.7
0.9 0.16
Survey on standard weights of passengers and luggage
160 R20090095.doc
May, 2009
Table E-8 Checked baggage weights by season, airline type and
gender (Part II)
Season Gender Airline type Mean
n
Std.dev
Accuracy
(%)
Confidence range
(95%)
Regular scheduled
17.5
93
6.6
7.7 1.34
Charter
16.3
11
5.6
20.4 3.32
Low-cost
16.9
20
4.8
12.4 2.10
Charter & low-cost
15.7
14
5.4
18.0 2.82
Male
Total
17.1
138
6.2
6.0 1.03
Regular scheduled
16.6
9,157
6.1
0.7 0.12
Charter
18.4
634
5.1
2.2 0.40
Low-cost
15.7
2,406
4.9
1.2 0.19
Charter & low-cost
19.3
464
5.6
2.7 0.51
Female
Total
16.6
12,661
5.8
0.6 0.10
Regular scheduled
16.7
9,036
6.1
0.8 0.13
Charter
18.0
585
5.2
2.3 0.42
Low-cost
15.8
2,458
5.1
1.3 0.20
Charter & low-cost
19.1
504
5.4
2.5 0.47
Total
Child(2-12)
Total
16.7
12,583
5.9
0.6 0.10
Survey on standard weights of passengers and luggage
R20090095.doc 161
May, 2009
Table E-9 Checked baggage weights by gender and region of
departure
Gender Region of departure Mean
n
Std.dev
Accuracy
(%)
Confidence range
(95%)
1 UK and Ireland
16.6
1,709
5.2
1.5 0.25
2 Benelux and France
17.5
1,121
5.6
1.9 0.33
3 Spain, Portugal and Italy
16.4
1,686
5.9
1.7 0.28
4 Scandinavia and Iceland
15.3
915
5.7
2.4 0.37
5 Germany, Switzerland and Austria
17.2
1,522
5.8
1.7 0.29
6 Northeast Europe
16.6
1,648
5.8
1.7 0.28
7 Greece, Cyprus, Malta and Turkey
15.8
1,561
6.4
2.0 0.32
8 Romania and Bulgaria
15.8
974
6.4
2.5 0.40
9 Other Eur countries (incl. Russia)
16.4
110
5.5
6.2 1.02
11 Africa and the Middle East
17.8
270
6.7
4.5 0.80
12 Asia
18.1
113
5.6
5.8 1.04
13 North America
18.8
729
5.3
2.1 0.38
14 South America
19.6
213
5.9
4.0 0.79
15 Other
13.7
12
4.3
17.7 2.42
Male
Total
16.7
12,583
5.9
0.6 0.10
1 UK and Ireland
16.5
1,380
4.9
1.6 0.26
2 Benelux and France
17.9
897
5.4
2.0 0.35
3 Spain, Portugal and Italy
16.5
1,177
5.8
2.0 0.33
4 Scandinavia and Iceland
15.7
738
5.7
2.6 0.41
5 Germany, Switzerland and Austria
17.6
1,106
5.6
1.9 0.33
6 Northeast Europe
17.0
1,253
5.8
1.9 0.32
7 Greece, Cyprus, Malta and Turkey
15.6
1,186
6.1
2.2 0.35
8 Romania and Bulgaria
16.4
527
6.3
3.3 0.53
9 Other Eur countries (incl. Russia)
16.5
60
6.1
9.4 1.55
11 Africa and the Middle East
17.7
177
6.1
5.1 0.90
12 Asia
19.2
79
5.8
6.7 1.28
13 North America
18.9
527
5.6
2.5 0.48
14 South America
19.2
194
4.6
3.4 0.65
15 Other
14.5
4
2.1
14.3 2.07
Female
Total
16.9
9,305
5.7
0.7 0.12
Survey on standard weights of passengers and luggage
162 R20090095.doc
May, 2009
Table E-10 Checked baggage weights by gender and region of
departure (Part II)
Gender Region of departure Mean
n
Std.dev
Accuracy
(%)
Confidence range
(95%)
1 UK and Ireland
14.8
45
5.2
10.3 1.53
2 Benelux and France
13.1
38
5.9
14.4 1.89
3 Spain, Portugal and Italy
14.3
42
6.0
12.7 1.82
4 Scandinavia and Iceland
11.2
47
5.2
13.3 1.49
5 Germany, Switzerland and Austria
17.4
80
6.1
7.7 1.34
6 Northeast Europe
15.2
92
5.8
7.8 1.18
7 Greece, Cyprus, Malta and Turkey
14.9
36
6.7
14.7 2.20
8 Romania and Bulgaria
16.0
38
6.5
13.0 2.08
9 Other Eur countries (incl. Russia)
13.8
5
9.3
58.7 8.12
11 Africa and the Middle East
15.0
11
5.9
23.1 3.47
12 Asia
18.0
3
8.8
55.2 9.94
13 North America
17.1
22
6.4
15.6 2.66
14 South America
17.8
6
5.8
25.9 4.61
15 Other
-
-
-
- -
Child(2-12)
Total
15.1
465
6.2
3.7 0.56
Survey on standard weights of passengers and luggage
R20090095.doc 163
May, 2009
Table E-11 Checked baggage weights by gender and region of arrival
Gender Region of arrival Mean
n
Std.dev
Accuracy
(%)
Confidence range
(95%)
1 UK and Ireland
16.1
1,539
5.1
1.6 0.26
2 Benelux and France
17.0
1,273
5.7
1.9 0.32
3 Spain, Portugal and Italy
16.3
1,890
5.7
1.6 0.26
4 Scandinavia and Iceland
16.1
1,192
5.6
2.0 0.32
5 Germany, Switzerland and Austria
16.3
1,582
6.2
1.9 0.30
6 Northeast Europe
15.6
781
6.0
2.7 0.42
7 Greece, Cyprus, Malta and Turkey
15.6
1,411
6.1
2.0 0.32
8 Romania and Bulgaria
17.3
162
6.8
6.0 1.05
9 Other Eur. countries (incl. Russia)
17.3
268
6.6
4.6 0.79
11 Africa and the Middle East
18.3
503
6.5
3.1 0.57
12 Asia
18.4
419
6.0
3.1 0.58
13 North America
18.6
1,190
5.3
1.6 0.30
14 South America
18.5
260
6.3
4.2 0.77
15 Other
18.7
113
5.1
5.0 0.93
Male
Total
16.7
12,583
5.9
0.6 0.10
1 UK and Ireland
16.5
1,115
5.3
1.9 0.31
2 Benelux and France
17.2
973
5.9
2.2 0.37
3 Spain, Portugal and Italy
16.5
1,490
5.4
1.7 0.28
4 Scandinavia and Iceland
16.6
869
5.8
2.3 0.38
5 Germany, Switzerland and Austria
16.2
999
5.5
2.1 0.34
6 Northeast Europe
16.1
540
5.8
3.1 0.49
7 Greece, Cyprus, Malta and Turkey
15.8
1,069
6.2
2.3 0.37
8 Romania and Bulgaria
17.9
107
6.1
6.5 1.16
9 Other Eur. countries (incl. Russia)
16.1
205
6.0
5.1 0.82
11 Africa and the Middle East
18.0
359
6.1
3.5 0.63
12 Asia
18.8
281
5.5
3.4 0.64
13 North America
18.6
956
5.2
1.8 0.33
14 South America
19.1
217
5.8
4.0 0.77
15 Other
18.5
125
4.5
4.3 0.79
Female
Total
16.9
9,305
5.7
0.7 0.12
Survey on standard weights of passengers and luggage
164 R20090095.doc
May, 2009
Table E-12 Checked baggage weights by gender and region of arrival
(Part II)
Gender Region of arrival Mean
n
Std.dev
Accuracy
(%)
Confidence range
(95%)
1 UK and Ireland
14.6
36
5.3
11.9 1.73
2 Benelux and France
15.3
39
7.4
15.2 2.32
3 Spain, Portugal and Italy
14.2
81
5.5
8.4 1.19
4 Scandinavia and Iceland
12.6
73
5.2
9.5 1.20
5 Germany, Switzerland and Austria
15.1
48
6.2
11.7 1.76
6 Northeast Europe
16.6
17
6.9
19.7 3.26
7 Greece, Cyprus, Malta and Turkey
15.1
50
7.4
13.6 2.06
8 Romania and Bulgaria
17.0
4
5.2
30.0 5.10
9 Other Eur. countries (incl. Russia)
15.7
15
6.3
20.4 3.19
11 Africa and the Middle East
15.6
29
5.7
13.3 2.08
12 Asia
18.2
10
6.0
20.4 3.72
13 North America
17.4
51
5.6
8.8 1.52
14 South America
18.6
11
7.5
23.9 4.44
15 Other
16.2
1
.
Child(2-12)
Total
15.1
465
6.2
3.7 0.56
Survey on standard weights of passengers and luggage
R20090095.doc 165
May, 2009
Table E-13 Checked baggage weights by gender and region; Summer
Season Gender Airport Mean
N
Std.dev
Accuracy
(%)
Confidence range
(95%)
AMS 18.0
678
5.5
2.3 0.41
ATH 16.2
832
6.4
2.7 0.44
CPH 15.2
606
5.3
2.8 0.42
FRA 17.6
725
5.5
2.3 0.40
LGW 16.9
626
5.0
2.3 0.39
MAD 16.8
661
6.3
2.9 0.48
SOF 17.3
364
6.9
4.1 0.71
WAW 17.3
683
5.5
2.4 0.42
Male
Total 16.9
5,175
5.9
0.9 0.16
AMS 18.5
538
5.7
2.6 0.48
ATH 15.8
709
6.0
2.8 0.44
CPH 15.8
495
5.1
2.8 0.45
FRA 17.8
610
5.5
2.5 0.44
LGW 17.1
438
5.1
2.8 0.48
MAD 16.8
525
5.9
3.0 0.51
SOF 17.6
237
6.6
4.8 0.84
WAW 17.2
638
5.5
2.5 0.43
Female
Total 17.0
4,190
5.7
1.0 0.17
AMS 13.5
35
6.5
16.0 2.16
ATH 13.9
26
5.6
15.5 2.14
CPH 10.9
64
5.0
11.4 1.23
FRA 16.1
63
6.1
9.3 1.50
LGW 14.7
32
5.6
13.3 1.94
MAD 14.6
20
5.6
16.8 2.45
SOF 16.3
30
6.5
14.3 2.33
WAW 14.9
57
5.6
9.7 1.44
Child (2-12 years)
Total 14.2
327
6.0
4.6 0.65
AMS 18.1
1,251
20.2
6.2 1.12
ATH 16.0
1,567
19.9
6.2 0.99
CPH 15.2
1,165
21.8
8.2 1.25
FRA 17.6
1,398
21.1
6.3 1.11
LGW 16.9
1,096
19.5
6.8 1.15
MAD 16.8
1,206
17.0
5.7 0.96
SOF 17.4
631
22.1
10.0 1.73
WAW 17.2
1,378
21.9
6.7 1.15
Summer
Total
Total 16.9
9,692
20.5
2.4 0.41
Survey on standard weights of passengers and luggage
166 R20090095.doc
May, 2009
Table E-14 Checked baggage weights by gender and region; Winter
Season Gender Airport Mean
n
Std.dev
Accuracy
(%)
Confidence range
(95%)
AMS 18.2
873
5.6
2.0 0.37
ATH 15.3
858
6.4
2.8 0.43
CPH 16.5
772
6.0
2.6 0.42
FRA 17.5
1,015
6.2
2.2 0.38
LGW 16.9
1,261
5.2
1.7 0.29
MAD 16.1
809
5.7
2.4 0.39
SOF 15.2
608
6.0
3.1 0.48
WAW 16.0
1,212
5.8
2.0 0.33
Male
Total 16.5
7,408
5.9
0.8 0.13
AMS 18.5
686
5.5
2.2 0.41
ATH 15.4
573
6.1
3.2 0.50
CPH 16.5
623
6.3
3.0 0.50
FRA 17.4
631
5.5
2.5 0.43
LGW 16.5
1,031
5.0
1.8 0.30
MAD 16.5
534
5.4
2.8 0.46
SOF 15.8
286
6.0
4.4 0.70
WAW 16.8
751
5.9
2.5 0.42
Female
Total 16.8
5,115
5.7
0.9 0.16
AMS 17.4
28
6.5
13.9 2.41
ATH 15.2
6
10.4
54.6 8.32
CPH 15.9
16
5.5
17.1 2.72
FRA 18.7
30
6.4
12.2 2.28
LGW 15.7
12
4.5
16.2 2.53
MAD 16.1
9
5.5
22.5 3.62
SOF 19.8
4
7.4
36.6 7.27
WAW 16.8
33
5.8
11.7 1.97
Child (2-12 years)
Total 17.1
138
6.2
6.0 1.03
AMS 18.3
1,587
5.5
1.5 0.27
ATH 15.3
1,437
6.3
2.1 0.32
CPH 16.5
1,411
6.1
1.9 0.32
FRA 17.5
1,676
6.0
1.6 0.29
LGW 16.7
2,304
5.1
1.2 0.21
MAD 16.2
1,352
5.6
1.8 0.30
SOF 15.4
898
6.0
2.6 0.39
WAW 16.3
1,996
5.9
1.6 0.26
Winter
Total
Total 16.6
12,661
5.8
0.6 0.10
Survey on standard weights of passengers and luggage
R20090095.doc 167
May, 2009
Table E-15 Checked baggage weights by gender and region; totals
Season Gender Airport Mean
n
Std.dev
Accuracy
(%)
Confidence range
(95%)
AMS 18.1
1,551
5.5
1.5 0.27
ATH 15.7
1,690
6.4
1.9 0.31
CPH 15.9
1,378
5.7
1.9 0.30
FRA 17.5
1,740
5.9
1.6 0.28
LGW 16.9
1,887
5.2
1.4 0.23
MAD 16.4
1,470
6.0
1.9 0.31
SOF 16.0
972
6.4
2.5 0.40
WAW 16.5
1,895
5.7
1.6 0.26
Male
Total 16.7
12,583
5.9
0.6 0.10
AMS 18.5
1,224
5.6
1.7 0.31
ATH 15.6
1,282
6.0
2.1 0.33
CPH 16.2
1,118
5.8
2.1 0.34
FRA 17.6
1,241
5.5
1.7 0.31
LGW 16.7
1,469
5.0
1.5 0.26
MAD 16.6
1,059
5.7
2.1 0.34
SOF 16.6
523
6.4
3.3 0.55
WAW 17.0
1,389
5.7
1.8 0.30
Female
Total 16.9
9,305
5.7
0.7 0.12
AMS 15.2
63
6.7
11.0 1.67
ATH 14.1
32
6.5
16.0 2.27
CPH 11.9
80
5.5
10.1 1.20
FRA 17.0
93
6.3
7.5 1.27
LGW 14.9
44
5.3
10.5 1.56
MAD 15.1
29
5.5
13.4 2.01
SOF 16.7
34
6.6
13.3 2.22
WAW 15.6
90
5.7
7.5 1.17
Child (2-12 years)
Total 15.1
465
6.2
3.7 0.56
AMS 18.2
2,838
5.6
1.1 0.21
ATH 15.7
3,004
6.2
1.4 0.22
CPH 15.9
2,576
5.8
1.4 0.22
FRA 17.5
3,074
5.8
1.2 0.20
LGW 16.8
3,400
5.1
1.0 0.17
MAD 16.5
2,558
5.9
1.4 0.23
SOF 16.2
1,529
6.4
2.0 0.32
WAW 16.7
3,374
5.7
1.2 0.19
Total
Total
Total 16.7
22,353
5.8
0.5 0.08
Survey on standard weights of passengers and luggage
168 R20090095.doc
May, 2009
Table E-16 Checked baggage weights by season, gender and haul
label
Season Gender Haullabel Mean
N
Std.dev
Accuracy
(%)
Confidence range
(95%)
Short Haul: < 500 km
15.1
478
6.1 3.6 0.54
Medium haul: 500 .. 5000 km
16.6
3,560
5.8 1.1 0.19
Long haul: > 5000km
18.7
1,137
5.6 1.7 0.32
Male
Total
16.9
5,175
5.9 0.9 0.16
Short Haul: < 500 km
15.3
415
5.9 3.7 0.57
Medium haul: 500 .. 5000 km
16.7
2,829
5.6 1.2 0.21
Long haul: > 5000km
18.7
946
5.4 1.8 0.34
Female
Total
17.0
4,190
5.7 1.0 0.17
Short Haul: < 500 km
10.5
8
7.1 47.1 4.94
Medium haul: 500 .. 5000 km
13.6
255
5.9 5.3 0.73
Long haul: > 5000km
16.8
64
5.5 8.0 1.34
Child
Total
14.2
327
6.0 4.6 0.65
Short Haul: < 500 km
15.2
901
6.0 2.6 0.39
Medium haul: 500 .. 5000 km
16.5
6,644
5.7 0.8 0.14
Long haul: > 5000km
18.7
2,147
5.5 1.2 0.23
Summer
Total
Total
16.9
9,692
5.8 0.7 0.12
Short Haul: < 500 km
14.8
838
5.5 2.5 0.37
Medium haul: 500 .. 5000 km
15.9
4,662
5.9 1.1 0.17
Long haul: > 5000km
18.7
1,908
5.5 1.3 0.25
Male
Total
16.5
7,408
5.9 0.8 0.13
Short Haul: < 500 km
14.9
593
5.3 2.8 0.42
Medium haul: 500 .. 5000 km
16.1
3,060
5.7 1.3 0.20
Long haul: > 5000km
18.9
1,462
5.3 1.4 0.27
Female
Total
16.8
5,115
5.7 0.9 0.16
Short Haul: < 500 km
14.2
12
6.4 25.5 3.61
Medium haul: 500 .. 5000 km
16.7
80
6.0 7.8 1.31
Long haul: > 5000km
18.7
46
6.2 9.6 1.78
Child
Total
17.1
138
6.2 6.0 1.03
Short Haul: < 500 km
14.9
1,443
5.4 1.9 0.28
Medium haul: 500 .. 5000 km
16.0
7,802
5.8 0.8 0.13
Long haul: > 5000km
18.8
3,416
5.4 1.0 0.18
Winter
Total
Total
16.6
12,661
5.8 0.6 0.10
Survey on standard weights of passengers and luggage
R20090095.doc 169
May, 2009
Table E-17 Checked baggage weights by season, gender and haul
label (Part II)
Season Gender Haullabel Mean
N
Std.dev
Accuracy
(%)
Confidence range
(95%)
Short Haul: < 500 km
14.9
1,316
5.7
2.1 0.31
Medium haul: 500 .. 5000 km
16.2
8,222
5.9
0.8 0.13
Long haul: > 5000km
18.7
3,045
5.5
1.0 0.20
Male
Total
16.7
12,583
5.9
0.6 0.10
Short Haul: < 500 km
15.1
1,008
5.5
2.3 0.34
Medium haul: 500 .. 5000 km
16.4
5,889
5.7
0.9 0.15
Long haul: > 5000km
18.8
2,408
5.3
1.1 0.21
Female
Total
16.9
9,305
5.7
0.7 0.12
Short Haul: < 500 km
12.7
20
6.8
23.3 2.96
Medium haul: 500 .. 5000 km
14.4
335
6.1
4.5 0.65
Long haul: > 5000km
17.6
110
5.8
6.2 1.09
Child
Total
15.1
465
6.2
3.7 0.56
Short Haul: < 500 km
15.0
2,344
5.6
1.5 0.23
Medium haul: 500 .. 5000 km
16.2
14,446
5.8
0.6 0.09
Long haul: > 5000km
18.7
5,563
5.5
0.8 0.14
Total
Total
Total
16.7
22,353
5.8
0.5 0.08
Survey on standard weights of passengers and luggage
170 R20090095.doc
May, 2009
Table E-18 Checked baggage weights by season, gender and number
of persons concerned
Season Gender Baggage for: Mean
n
Std.dev
Accuracy
(%)
Confidence range
(95%)
One person
16.6
4,042
5.7
1.1 0.18
More than one person
18.2
1,133
6.2
2.0 0.36
Male
Total
16.9
5,175
5.9
0.9 0.16
One person
16.7
3,371
5.5
1.1 0.19
More than one person
18.2
819
6.2
2.3 0.42
Female
Total
17.0
4,190
5.7
1.0 0.17
One person
13.7
249
5.8
5.2 0.72
More than one person
15.7
78
6.5
9.2 1.44
Child
Total
14.2
327
6.0
4.6 0.65
One person
16.5
7,662
5.7
0.8 0.13
More than one person
18.1
2,030
6.2
1.5 0.27
Summer
Total
Total
16.9
9,692
5.8
0.7 0.12
One person
16.4
6,834
5.8
0.8 0.14
More than one person
17.9
574
6.5
2.9 0.53
Male
Total
16.5
7,408
5.9
0.8 0.13
One person
16.6
4,755
5.6
1.0 0.16
More than one person
18.9
360
6.8
3.7 0.70
Female
Total
16.8
5,115
5.7
0.9 0.16
One person
16.3
98
5.9
7.1 1.16
More than one person
19.2
40
6.5
10.5 2.01
Child
Total
17.1
138
6.2
6.0 1.03
One person
16.5
11,687
5.8
0.6 0.10
More than one person
18.3
974
6.6
2.3 0.41
Winter
Total
Total
16.6
12,661
5.8
0.6 0.10
One person
16.5
10,876
5.8
0.7 0.11
More than one person
18.1
1,707
6.3
1.6 0.30
Male
Total
16.7
12,583
5.9
0.6 0.10
One person
16.7
8,126
5.6
0.7 0.12
More than one person
18.4
1,179
6.4
2.0 0.36
Female
Total
16.9
9,305
5.7
0.7 0.12
One person
14.4
347
5.9
4.3 0.62
More than one person
16.9
118
6.7
7.1 1.20
Child
Total
15.1
465
6.2
3.7 0.56
One person
16.5
19,349
5.7
0.5 0.08
More than one person
18.2
3,004
6.3
1.2 0.23
Total
Total
Total
16.7
22,353
5.8
0.5 0.08
Survey on standard weights of passengers and luggage
R20090095.doc 171
May, 2009
Table E-19 Checked baggage weights by gender and permitted weight
(max.kg)
Gender
Permitted weight
(maximum kg.) Mean
n
Std.dev
Accuracy
(%)
Confidence range
(95%)
15
14.3
215
4.5
4.2
0.60
18
18.7
7
7.4
29.2
5.47
20
16.0
7,665
5.8
0.8
0.13
23
18.2
1,806
5.5
1.4
0.25
30
15.1
206
6.0
5.5
0.82
32
18.0
89
5.7
6.6
1.19
Male
Total
16.3
9,988
5.8
0.7
0.11
15
14.1
209
4.8
4.6
0.65
18
17.6
10
4.4
15.7
2.76
20
16.2
5,586
5.6
0.9
0.15
23
18.3
1,398
5.7
1.6
0.30
30
15.0
62
5.2
8.6
1.28
32
17.5
28
5.2
10.9
1.91
Female
Total
16.6
7,293
5.6
0.8
0.13
18
5.9
1
-.
-
-
20
14.0
284
5.9
4.9
0.69
23
17.2
73
6.0
8.0
1.38
30
16.1
1
-.
-
-
Child
Total
14.6
359
6.1
4.3
0.63
15
14.2
424
4.7
3.1
0.44
18
17.4
18
6.2
16.4
2.86
20
16.0
13,535
5.7
0.6
0.10
23
18.2
3,277
5.6
1.1
0.19
30
15.1
269
5.8
4.6
0.70
32
17.9
117
5.6
5.6
1.01
Total
Total
16.4
17,640
5.7
0.5
0.08
Survey on standard weights of passengers and luggage
R20090095.doc 173
May, 2009
ANNEX F Tables relation between factors
and weight
TABLES
F-1
Correlations between different factors and mass weights on
passengers and carry-on luggage; male (Pearson
correlations) 175
F-2 Correlations between different factors and mass weights on
passengers and carry-on luggage; female (Pearson
correlations) 176
F-3 Correlations between different factors and mass weights on
passengers and carry-on luggage; ; total (ex children) 177
F-4 T-test for equality of mean weights by gender, season and
flight type scheduled and non-scheduled (children
excluded) 178
F-5 Mean weights by gender, season and flight type (children
excluded) 179
F-6 Passenger weights by age groups and gender (excl. carry-
on luggage and excl. children) 180
F-7 T-test for equality of mean weights by gender and season:
differences between route types (children excluded) 181
F-8 Mean weights by gender, season and route type (children
excluded) 182
F-9 Mean weights by gender, season and route type (children
excluded) (Part II) 183
F-10 T-test for equality of mean weights by gender and season:
differences between haul labels (children excluded) 184
F-11 Percentage female passengers by region in which flight
started or ended 185
F-12 Analysis of variances in differences in weights between
regions of start and finish flight by region and gender 186
F-13 Linear regression analysis with dependent variable
passenger weights incl. carry-on luggage (best fit model);
all passengers >12 years 187
F-14 Linear regression analysis with dependent variable
passenger weights incl. carry-on luggage (best fit model);
male passengers 189
F-15 Linear regression analysis with dependent variable
passenger weights excl. carry-on luggage (best fit model);
male passengers 190
F-16 Linear regression analysis with dependent variable carry-
on luggage weights (best fit model); male passengers 191
F -17 Linear regression analysis with dependent variable
passenger weights incl. carry-on luggage (best fit model);
female passengers 192
F -18 Linear regression analysis with dependent variable
passenger weights excl. carry-on luggage (best fit model);
female passengers 193
Survey on standard weights of passengers and luggage
174 R20090095.doc
May, 2009
F-19 Linear regression analysis with dependent variable carry-
on luggage weights (best fit model); female passengers 194
F-20 Linear regression analysis with dependant variable
checked baggage masses (best fit model) 195
Survey on standard weights of passengers and luggage
R20090095.doc 175
May, 2009
Table F-1 Correlations between different factors and mass weights
on passengers and carry-on luggage; male (Pearson
correlations)
Factor Weightin
Weightex
Handbag n
Gender
-
-
- 12,886
Season
0.15
0.10
0.17 12,886
Business class
n.s.
n.s.
n.s. 12,886
Purpose business
n.s.
n.s.
0.06 12,886
Direction inbound
n.s.
n.s.
n.s. 12,886
Route type domestic
n.s.
n.s.
n.s. 12,886
Airline type charter
n.s.
n.s.
-0.10 12,886
Airline type low cost
-0.03
n.s.
-0.05 12,886
Check bag yes
0.02
n.s.
0.07 12,886
Route type European
n.s.
n.s.
n.s. 12,886
Haul > 5000 km
0.04
n.s.
0.07 12,886
Haul < 500 km
n.s.
n.s.
n.s. 12,886
Distance flight (km)
0.03
n.s.
0.05 12,880
Maximum kg carry-on lugg
0.03
n.s.
0.07 10,051
Carry-on lugg < or > max carry-on lugg
0.28
0.06
0.69 10,051
Age (years)
0.25
0.27
n.s. 12,886
Flight type non scheduled
-0.06
n.s.
-0.16 12,886
Airport
Amsterdam
n.s.
n.s.
n.s. 12,886
Athens
-0.01
0.00
n.s. 12,886
Copenhagen
n.s.
n.s.
0.00 12,886
Frankfurt
0.02
-0.02
n.s. 12,886
London Gatwick
0.04
0.05
n.s. 12,886
Madrid
-0.07
-0.08
0.02 12,886
Sofia
-0.05
n.s.
-0.04 12,886
Warsaw
-0.04
-0.02
-0.07 12,886
Difference in weights between destination/departure
1 UK and Ireland
n.s.
0.01
n.s. 2,873
2 Benelux and France
-0.09
-0.09
n.s. 2,746
3 Spain, Portugal and Italy
n.s.
n.s.
n.s. 2,642
4 Scandinavia and Iceland
0.06
0.06
n.s. 1,958
5 Germany, Switzerland and Austria
-0.05
n.s.
-0.08 3,225
6 Northeast Europe
n.s.
n.s.
n.s. 2,293
7 Greece, Cyprus, Malta and Turkey
-0.08
n.s.
-0.13 2,301
8 Romania and Bulgaria
n.s.
n.s.
n.s. 1,393
9 Other European countries (incl. Russia)
n.s.
n.s.
n.s. 440
11 Africa and the Middle East
n.s.
n.s.
n.s. 1,106
12 Asia
n.s.
n.s.
n.s. 531
13 North America
-0.07
n.s.
n.s. 1,363
14 South America
0.16
0.09
0.22 555
Note: n.s. = correlation is not significant at 95% level of confidence x
Survey on standard weights of passengers and luggage
176 R20090095.doc
May, 2009
Table F-2 Correlations between different factors and mass weights
on passengers and carry-on luggage; female (Pearson
correlations)
Factor Weightin
Weightex Handbag n
Gender
-
- - 8,595
Season
0.15
0.10 0.17 8,595
Business class
n.s.
n.s. n.s. 8,595
Purpose business
n.s.
n.s. 0.06 8,595
Direction inbound
n.s.
n.s. n.s. 8,595
Route type domestic
n.s.
n.s. n.s. 8,595
Airline type charter
n.s.
n.s. -0.10 8,595
Airline type low cost
-0.03
n.s. -0.05 8,595
Check bag yes
0.02
n.s. 0.07 8,595
Route type European
n.s.
n.s. n.s. 8,595
Haul > 5,000 km
0.04
n.s. 0.07 8,595
Haul < 500 km
n.s.
n.s. n.s. 8,595
Distance flight (km)
0.03
n.s. 0.05 8,588
Maximum kg carry-on lugg
0.03
n.s. 0.07 6,347
Carry-on lugg < or > max carry-on lugg
0.28
0.06 0.69 6,347
Age (years)
0.25
0.27 n.s. 8,595
Flight type non scheduled
-0.06
n.s. -0.16 8,595
Airport
Amsterdam
n.s.
n.s. n.s. 8,595
Athens
-0.01
0.00 n.s. 8,595
Copenhagen
n.s.
n.s. 0.00 8,595
Frankfurt
0.02
-0.02 n.s. 8,595
London Gatwick
0.04
0.05 n.s. 8,595
Madrid
-0.07
-0.08 0.02 8,595
Sofia
-0.05
n.s. -0.04 8,595
Warsaw
-0.04
-0.02 -0.07 8,595
Difference in weights between destination/departure
1 UK and Ireland
n.s.
0.01 n.s. 2,046
2 Benelux and France
-0.09
-0.09 n.s. 1,700
3 Spain, Portugal and Italy
n.s.
n.s. n.s. 1,992
4 Scandinavia and Iceland
0.06
0.06 n.s. 1,269
5 Germany, Switzerland and Austria
-0.05
n.s. -0.08 1,737
6 Northeast Europe
n.s.
n.s. n.s. 1,625
7 Greece, Cyprus, Malta and Turkey
-0.08
n.s. -0.13 1,799
8 Romania and Bulgaria
n.s.
n.s. n.s. 664
9 Other European countries (incl. Russia)
n.s.
n.s. n.s. 245
11 Africa and the Middle East
n.s.
n.s. n.s. 816
12 Asia
n.s.
n.s. n.s. 331
13 North America
-0.07
n.s. n.s. 987
14 South America
0.16
0.09 0.22 498
Note: n.s. = correlation is not significant at 95% level of confidence x
Survey on standard weights of passengers and luggage
R20090095.doc 177
May, 2009
Table F-3 Correlations between different factors and mass weights
on passengers and carry-on luggage; ; total (ex children)
Factor Weightin
Weightex
Handbag n
Gender
-0.52
-0.53
-0.08 21,481
Season
0.16
0.13
0.15 21,481
Business class
0.04
0.03
0.04 21,481
Purpose business
0.19
0.16
0.15 21,481
Direction inbound
-0.03
-0.02
-0.02 21,481
Route type domestic
n.s.
n.s.
-0.02 21,481
Airline type charter
-0.05
-0.03
-0.10 21,481
Airline type low cost
-0.07
-0.05
-0.08 21,481
Check bag yes
0.06
0.04
0.12 21,481
Route type European
0.03
0.03
n.s. 21,481
Haul > 5,000 km
-0.02
-0.03
0.03 21,481
Haul < 500 km
0.02
0.02
0.01 21,481
Distance flight (km)
-0.04
-0.05
n.s. 21,468
Maximum kg carry-on lugg
0.05
0.02
0.10 16,398
Carry-on lugg < or > max carry-on lugg
0.26
0.09
0.67 16,398
Age (years)
0.25
0.25
0.05 21,481
Flight type non scheduled
-0.09
-0.05
-0.17 21,481
Airport
Amsterdam
n.s.
n.s.
0.02 21,481
Athens
n.s.
n.s.
n.s. 21,481
Copenhagen
0.01
n.s.
0.00 21,481
Frankfurt
n.s.
n.s.
0.11 21,481
London Gatwick
-0.01
0.01
n.s. 21,481
Madrid
-0.08
-0.08
-0.01 21,481
Sofia
n.s.
n.s.
-0.02 21,481
Warsaw
-0.01
0.00
-0.03 21,481
Difference in weights between destination/departure
1 UK and Ireland
0.04
0.03
n.s. 4,919
2 Benelux and France
-0.04
-0.04
n.s. 4,446
3 Spain, Portugal and Italy
0.07
0.06
0.06 4,634
4 Scandinavia and Iceland
0.07
0.06
0.05 3,227
5 Germany, Switzerland and Austria
n.s.
n.s.
-0.07 4,962
6 Northeast Europe
0.05
0.05
n.s. 3,918
7 Greece, Cyprus, Malta and Turkey
-0.06
n.s.
-0.13 4,100
8 Romania and Bulgaria
n.s.
n.s.
n.s. 2,057
9 Other European countries (incl. Russia)
0.11
0.10
n.s. 685
11 Africa and the Middle East
n.s.
n.s.
0.07 1,922
12 Asia
n.s.
n.s.
n.s. 862
13 North America
-0.05
-0.05
n.s. 2,350
14 South America
0.09
n.s.
0.14 1,053
Note: n.s. = correlation is not significant at 95% level of confidence x
Survey on standard weights of passengers and luggage
178 R20090095.doc
May, 2009
Table F-4 T-test for equality of mean weights by gender, season and
flight type scheduled and non-scheduled (children
excluded)
t
df
Sig
(2-
tailed)
Mean
diff
Std.
Error
diff
95%
Upper
95%
Lower
weight incl.
carry-on lugg 4.6
5,897
0.00
2.75
0.60 1.58 3.93
weight excl.
carry-on lugg 0.4
5,897
n.s
0.21
0.56 -0.87 1.30
Male,
Summer
carry-on
luggage
15.3
5,897
0.00
2.54
0.17 2.21 2.86
weight incl.
carry-on lugg
1.5
6,985
n.s
1.38
0.92 -0.41 3.18
weight excl.
carry-on lugg
-0.6
6,985
n.s
-0.56
0.86 -2.25 1.14
Male
Winter
carry-on
luggage
7.1
6,985
0.00
1.94
0.27 1.40 2.48
weight incl.
carry-on lugg
1.7
4,511
n.s
0.86
0.50 -0.13 1.85
weight excl.
carry-on lugg
-1.8
4,511
n.s
-0.83
0.47 -1.75 0.09
Female
Summer
carry-on
luggage
10.9
4,511
0.00
1.69
0.15 1.39 1.99
weight incl.
carry-on lugg
3.6
4,080
0.00
3.17
0.88 1.45 4.90
weight excl.
carry-on lugg 1.3
4,080
n.s
1.11
0.82 -0.51 2.72
Female
Winter
carry-on
luggage
7.0
4,080
0.00
2.07
0.30 1.49 2.65
Note: 95% = 95% Confidence Interval of Difference
Survey on standard weights of passengers and luggage
R20090095.doc 179
May, 2009
Table F-5 Mean weights by gender, season and flight type (children
excluded)
Season Gender Flighttype
Weightin
Weightex
Handbag n
0 Scheduled Mean 89.1
82.6
6.4 5,037
Std. Dev. 16.4
15.2
4.7
1 Non-scheduled Mean 86.3
82.4
3.9 862
Std. Dev. 15.1
14.2
3.4
Total Mean 88.7
82.6
6.0 5,899
Male
Std. Dev. 16.3
15.0
4.6
0 Scheduled Mean 70.7
65.1
5.6 3,658
Std. Dev. 13.1
12.1
4.2
1 Non-scheduled Mean 69.8
66.0
3.9 855
Std. Dev. 14.1
13.4
3.3
Total Mean 70.5
65.3
5.2 4,513
Summer
Female
Std. Dev. 13.3
12.3
4.1
0 Scheduled Mean 93.6
86.2
7.3 6,685
Std. Dev. 15.4
14.5
4.7
1 Non-scheduled Mean 92.2
86.8
5.4 302
Std. Dev. 18.4
17.6
3.7
Total Mean 93.5
86.3
7.2 6,987
Male
Std. Dev. 15.6
14.7
4.7
0 Scheduled Mean 74.8
68.0
6.8 3,820
Std. Dev. 13.8
12.9
4.7
1 Non-scheduled Mean 71.7
66.9
4.8 262
Std. Dev. 13.2
12.4
3.4
Total Mean 74.6
67.9
6.7 4,082
Winter
Female
Std. Dev. 13.8
12.9
4.6
0 Scheduled Mean 91.6
84.7
6.9 11,722
Std. Dev. 16.0
14.9
4.7
1 Non-scheduled Mean 87.8
83.6
4.3 1,164
Std. Dev. 16.3
15.3
3.5
Total Mean 91.3
84.6
6.7 12,886
Male
Std. Dev. 16.1
15.0
4.7
0 Scheduled Mean 72.8
66.6
6.2 7,478
Std. Dev. 13.6
12.6
4.5
1 Non-scheduled Mean 70.3
66.2
4.1 1,117
Std. Dev. 13.9
13.2
3.4
Total Mean 72.5
66.5
5.9 8,595
Total
Female
Std. Dev. 13.7
12.7
4.4
Survey on standard weights of passengers and luggage
180 R20090095.doc
May, 2009
Table F-6 Passenger weights by age groups and gender (excl. carry-
on luggage and excl. children)
Male Female Total
Age Mean n Std. Dev.
Mean n Std. Dev.
Mean n Std. Dev.
13-15 years 60.9 253 12.4
56.9
272
9.6
58.8 525 11.2
16-20 years 75.7 786 13.6
61.1
741
10.1
68.7 1,527 14.1
21-25 years 78.8 1,317 13.2
63.2
1,181
11.0
71.4 2,498 14.5
26-30 Years 82.5 1,734 13.8
64.7
1,258
11.7
75.0 2,992 15.7
31-35 years 85.4 1,674 14.8
66.4
961
12.8
78.5 2,635 16.8
36-40 years 87.2 1,528 14.2
67.5
895
12.9
79.9 2,423 16.7
41-45 years 88.2 1,445 14.6
68.4
747
12.9
81.4 2,192 16.9
46-50 years 88.8 1,197 14.3
69.4
665
13.2
81.9 1,862 16.7
51-55 years 87.9 980 14.2
71.5
592
12.7
81.7 1,572 15.8
56-60 years 88.0 844 13.8
71.4
519
12.8
81.7 1,363 15.7
61-65 years 87.5 594 13.6
71.6
402
13.1
81.1 996 15.5
66 and older 86.3 534 14.1
70.7
362
11.6
80.0 896 15.2
Total 84.6 12,886 15.0
66.5
8,595
12.7
77.4 21,481 16.6
* the average passenger weights is correlated with age. Up to 30 years the
weights of passengers are lower than the grand total mean weights. The average
weights of persons from 31 years and older are higher than the grand total mean
weights. The correlation between age and weight applies as well to female as to
male passengers.
Survey on standard weights of passengers and luggage
R20090095.doc 181
May, 2009
Table F-7 T-test for equality of mean weights by gender and season:
differences between route types (children excluded)
t df
Sig
(2-
tailed)
Mean
difference
Std. Error
difference
95%
Upper
95%
Lower
Weightin -1.1 2,620
n.s
-0.9
0.8 -2.5 0.7
Weightex -1.8 2,620
n.s
-1.4
0.8 -2.9 0.1
Male,
Summer
Handbag 2.1 2,620
0.04
0.5
0.2 0.0 0.9
Weightin 1.3 2,864
n.s
0.8
0.6 -0.4 2.1
Weightex 0.2 2,864
n.s
0.1
0.6 -1.0 1.3
Male
Winter
Handbag 3.7 2,864
0.00
0.7
0.2 0.3 1.1
Weightin 1.5 2,112
n.s.
1.1
0.8 -0.4 2.7
Weightex 1.2 2,112
n.s.
0.9
0.7 -0.6 2.3
Female
Summer
Handbag 1.2 2,112
n.s.
0.3
0.2 -0.2 0.8
Weightin 2.5 1,813
0.01
1.9
0.7 0.4 3.3
Weightex 2.1 1,813
0.04
1.4
0.7 0.1 2.8
Female
Winter
Handbag 1.7 1,813
n.s.
0.4
0.3 -0.1 0.9
Note: 95% = 95% Confidence Interval of Difference
Survey on standard weights of passengers and luggage
182 R20090095.doc
May, 2009
Table F-8 Mean weights by gender, season and route type (children
excluded)
Season Gender Routetype
Weightin
Weightex
Handbag n
Non-European
Mean
87.9
81.7
6.1 2,128
Std. Dev
16.4
15.2
4.7
European
Mean
89.1
83.1
6.0 3,277
Std. Dev
16.2
14.9
4.5
Domestic
Mean
88.8
83.1
5.7 494
Std. Dev
15.9
15.1
4.5
Total
Mean
88.7
82.6
6.0 5,899
Male
Std. Dev
16.3
15.0
4.6
Non-European
Mean
70.6
65.1
5.4 1,762
Std. Dev
13.6
12.6
4.3
European
Mean
70.7
65.5
5.1 2,399
Std. Dev
13.3
12.3
4.0
Domestic
Mean
69.4
64.3
5.2 352
Std. Dev
11.6
11.1
3.9
Total
Mean
70.5
65.3
5.2 4,513
0 Summer
Female
Std. Dev
13.3
12.3
4.1
Non-European
Mean
93.3
85.9
7.3 2,039
Std. Dev
15.6
14.8
4.8
European
Mean
93.9
86.5
7.3 4,121
Std. Dev
15.8
14.9
4.6
Domestic
Mean
92.4
85.8
6.6 827
Std. Dev
14.0
13.1
4.4
Total
Mean
93.5
86.3
7.2 6,987
Male
Std. Dev
15.6
14.7
4.7
Non-European
Mean
75.9
69.1
6.8 1,301
Std. Dev
14.5
13.5
5.0
European
Mean
74.0
67.3
6.7 2,267
Std. Dev
13.5
12.6
4.5
Domestic
Mean
74.1
67.7
6.4 514
Std. Dev
13.0
12.3
4.5
Total
Mean
74.6
67.9
6.7 4,082
1 Winter
Female
Std. Dev
13.8
12.9
4.6
Survey on standard weights of passengers and luggage
R20090095.doc 183
May, 2009
Table F-9 Mean weights by gender, season and route type (children
excluded) (Part II)
Season Gender Routetype
Weightin
Weightex
Handbag n
Non-European
Mean
90.5
83.8
6.7 4,167
Std. Dev
16.3
15.2
4.7
European
Mean
91.8
85.0
6.8 7,398
Std. Dev
16.2
15.0
4.6
Domestic
Mean
91.1
84.8
6.3 1,321
Std. Dev
14.8
13.9
4.5
Total
Mean
91.3
84.6
6.7 12,886
Male
Std. Dev
16.1
15.0
4.7
Non-European
Mean
72.8
66.8
6.0 3,063
Std. Dev
14.2
13.1
4.7
European
Mean
72.3
66.4
5.9 4,666
Std. Dev
13.5
12.5
4.3
Domestic
Mean
72.2
66.3
5.9 866
Std. Dev
12.7
11.9
4.3
Total
Mean
72.5
66.5
5.9 8,595
Total
Female
Std. Dev
13.7
12.7
4.4
Survey on standard weights of passengers and luggage
184 R20090095.doc
May, 2009
Table F-10 T-test for equality of mean weights by gender and
season: differences between haul labels (children
excluded)
t df
Sig
(2-
tailed)
Mean
difference
Std. Error
difference
95%
Upper
95%
Lower
Weightin 2.2 2,043
0.03
1.7
0.8 0.2 3.1
Weightex 2.8 2,043
0.01
2.0
0.7 0.6 3.4
Male
Summer
Handbag -1.5 2,043
n.s
-0.3
0.2 -0.8 0.1
Weightin 0.9 2,327
n.s
0.6
0.6 -0.7 1.8
Weightex 1.3 2,327
n.s
0.8
0.6 -0.4 1.9
Male
Winter
Handbag -1.2 2,327
n.s
-0.2
0.2 -0.6 0.1
Weightin -1.15 1,534
n.s
-0.8
0.7 -2.3 0.6
Weightex -0.47 1,534
n.s
-0.3
0.7 -1.6 1.0
Female
Summer
Handbag -2.06 1,534
0.04
-0.5
0.3 -1.0 0.0
Weightin -2.22 1,456
0.03
-1.6
0.7 -3.1 -0.2
Weightex -1.42 1,456
n.s
-1.0
0.7 -2.3 0.4
Female
Winter
Handbag -2.60 1,456
0.01
-0.7
0.3 -1.1 -0.2
Note: 95% = 95% Confidence Interval of Difference; n.s. = difference is not significant at 95% level of
confidence x
Survey on standard weights of passengers and luggage
R20090095.doc 185
May, 2009
Table F-11 Percentage female passengers by region in which flight
started or ended
Summer Winter Total
Region Start
End
Start
End Start End
1 UK and Ireland 45%
42%
44%
39% 44% 40%
2 Benelux and France 38%
42%
38%
33% 38% 38%
3 Spain, Portugal and Italy 46%
47%
38%
40% 43% 43%
4 Scandinavia and Iceland 44%
42%
41%
35% 43% 38%
5 Germany, Switzerland and Austria 37%
42%
31%
32% 33% 37%
6 Northeast Europe 51%
37%
37%
34% 43% 36%
7 Greece, Cyprus, Malta and Turkey 47%
47%
40%
37% 44% 43%
8 Romania and Bulgaria 34%
34%
30%
30% 32% 32%
9 Other European countries (incl. Russia) 48%
39%
32%
30% 41% 34%
11 Africa and the Middle East 34%
50%
32%
39% 34% 44%
12 Asia 48%
39%
35%
37% 44% 38%
13 North America 45%
44%
33%
41% 40% 43%
14 South America 56%
44%
49%
46% 53% 45%
Region=region in which flight started or ended
Survey on standard weights of passengers and luggage
186 R20090095.doc
May, 2009
Table F-12 Analysis of variances in differences in weights between
regions of start and finish flight by region and gender
Gender
Region departure / arrival
SS
df
MS F Sig.
Male 1 UK and Ireland 210
1
210 0.8 n.s.
2 Benelux and France 475
1
475 1.7 n.s.
3 Spain, Portugal and Italy 8,396
1
8,396 36.9 0.00
4 Scandinavia and Iceland 1,050
1
1,050 4.1 0.04
5 Germany, Switzerland and Austria 2,618
1
2,618 10.1 0.00
6 Northeast Europe 0
1
0 0.0 n.s.
7 Greece, Cyprus, Malta and Turkey 3,382
1
3,382 13.3 0.00
8 Romania and Bulgaria 52
1
52 0.2 n.s.
9 Other European countries (incl.
Russia) 2,420
1
2,420 7.8 0.01
11 Africa and the Middle East 602
1
602 2.1 n.s.
12 Asia 25
1
25 0.1 n.s.
13 North America 289
1
289 1.1 n.s.
14 South America 124
1
124 0.6 n.s.
Female 1 UK and Ireland 58
1
58 0.3 n.s.
2 Benelux and France 2,500
1
2,500 12.9 0.00
3 Spain, Portugal and Italy 420
1
420 2.6 n.s.
4 Scandinavia and Iceland 800
1
800 4.7 0.03
5 Germany, Switzerland and Austria 785
1
785 4.2 0.04
6 Northeast Europe 395
1
395 2.1 n.s.
7 Greece, Cyprus, Malta and Turkey 2,008
1
2,008 10.9 0.00
8 Romania and Bulgaria 371
1
371 2.1 n.s.
9 Other European countries (incl.
Russia) 0
1
0 0.0 n.s.
11 Africa and the Middle East 13
1
13 0.1 n.s.
12 Asia 99
1
99 0.6 n.s.
13 North America 934
1
934 4.8 0.03
14 South America 2,649
1
2,649 13.5 0.00
Survey on standard weights of passengers and luggage
R20090095.doc 187
May, 2009
Table F-13 Linear regression analysis with dependent variable
passenger weights incl. carry-on luggage (best fit
model); all passengers >12 years
Predictors
Non-
standardized
coeff. B
Std. error
Standardized
coeff. Beta
T
sig. std
error
(Constant)
71.7 0.32 221.38 0.00
Gender
-17.1 0.19 -0.47 -89.19 0.00
Handbag
1.2 0.02 0.30 56.43 0.00
Age
0.2 0.01 0.20 37.58 0.00
Season
2.6 0.19 0.07 13.69 0.00
Purpose
2.1 0.20 0.06 10.30 0.00
Charter
1.7 0.49 0.02 3.45 0.00
flight type
1.0 0.37 0.02 2.77 0.01
Adj. R Square 0.42
Std. Error of the
Estimate
13.48
The column ‘Std error’ gives the standard error of the estimated coefficient. This
is a measure of the variation that exists around the coefficients. The larger it is,
the less sure we are about the coefficient. A more convenient way to look at this
is the t-ratio, which is given in the column ’T’. This is the coefficient divided by
its standard error (e.g. 71.7/0.32=221). If for a positive coefficient the t-ratio
will exceed 1.96, we call the estimated coefficient ‘statistically significant’. This
means that it is statistically different from zero: there is an impact of this
variable on the mass (at the 5% significance level). For negative coefficients,
we have significance if the t-ratio will be below -1.96. All coefficients in this table
therefore are significant at the 5% significance level. They are even significant at
a more demanding significance level (often below 1%), as indicated in the final
column ’sig. std error’, which means that the probability of incorrectly ascribing
a real effect to an explanatory variable is below 1%.
The numbers in the column ‘Standardized coeff. Beta’ give a transformation of
the original estimated coefficients in the first column; they give the relative
importance of the coefficients (excluding the constant) in explaining the mass.
This shows that the presence of the handbag is the most important variable for
explaining the mass, followed by the age, etc..
The t-ratio measures the level of precision of an individual coefficient (one
variable at a time). The quality of the model as a whole can be seen from a
measure of the ‘fit’, such as the R-square. This measures how well the model
explains the dependent variable, the mass. The R-square gives the share of the
variation in the mass that is explained by the equation that was estimated (so by
the variation in the explanatory variables). Here the model explains 42% of the
Survey on standard weights of passengers and luggage
188 R20090095.doc
May, 2009
variation in the mass, which is a common outcome for a model on a large cross
section data set (models on small time series often get larger R-squares). The R-
square is the table was adjusted, that means that we have taken into account
the number of coefficients in the model. Finally the ‘Std. Error of the estimate’
gives the variation that we have in the predicted mass. The mass that our model
equation predicts has a standard error of 13.5 kg. That means that there is a
95% probability that the predicted mass will be between the average mass minus
26 kg (lower bound) and the average mass plus 26 kg (upper bound).
Survey on standard weights of passengers and luggage
R20090095.doc 189
May, 2009
Table F-14 Linear regression analysis with dependent variable
passenger weights incl. carry-on luggage (best fit
model); male passengers
Non-stand.
Coeff.
Standardized Coeff. t Sig.
Predictors B
Std. Error
Beta B Std. Error
(Constant) 72.1
0.48
150.9 0.00
handbag 1.2
0.03
0.34 42.0 0.00
age 0.2
0.01
0.22 27.7 0.00
purpose 2.8
0.27
0.08 10.3 0.00
season 2.8
0.26
0.09 11.0 0.00
flight type 1.9
0.55
0.03 3.5 0.00
long haul 3.4
0.88
0.09 3.9 0.00
domestic -1.1
0.44
-0.02 -2.5 0.01
charter 1.8
0.74
0.02 2.4 0.02
Adj. R Square 0.21
Std. Error of Estimate 14.30
Survey on standard weights of passengers and luggage
190 R20090095.doc
May, 2009
Table F-15 Linear regression analysis with dependent variable
passenger weights excl. carry-on luggage (best fit
model); male passengers
Non-stand.
Coeff.
Standardized Coeff. t Sig.
Predictors B
Std. Error
Beta B Std. Error
(Constant) 73.3
0.47
156.4 0.00
age 0.2
0.01
0.24 28.0 0.00
purpose 2.9
0.27
0.10 10.9 0.00
season 3.0
0.26
0.10 11.4 0.00
flight type 2.3
0.46
0.04 4.9 0.00
long haul 3.3
0.89
0.09 3.8 0.00
domestic -1.3
0.44
-0.03 -2.9 0.00
low-cost -0.8
0.35
-0.02 -2.4 0.02
Adj. R Square 0.09
Std. Error of Estimate 14.31
Survey on standard weights of passengers and luggage
R20090095.doc 191
May, 2009
Table F-16 Linear regression analysis with dependent variable carry-
on luggage weights (best fit model); male passengers
Non-stand.
Coeff.
Standardized Coeff. t Sig.
Predictors B
Std. Error
Beta B Std. Error
(Constant) 5.0
0.21
23.9 0.00
purpose 1.4
0.09
0.14 14.5 0.00
flight type -1.8
0.21
-0.09 -8.7 0.00
season 1.0
0.10
0.10 10.0 0.00
max_kg 0.1
0.01
0.07 6.9 0.00
eu -0.6
0.11
-0.05 -5.2 0.00
age 0.0
0.00
0.05 5.1 0.00
domestic -0.7
0.14
-0.05 -4.6 0.00
low cost -0.6
0.15
-0.04 -4.2 0.00
Adj. R Square 0.07
Std. Error of the Estimate 4.56
Survey on standard weights of passengers and luggage
192 R20090095.doc
May, 2009
Table F -17 Linear regression analysis with dependent variable
passenger weights incl. carry-on luggage (best fit
model); female passengers
Non-stand.
Coeff.
Standardized Coeff. t Sig.
Predictors B
Std. Error
Beta B Std. Error
(Constant) 56.1
0.41
138.7 0.00
handbag 1.1
0.03
0.37 38.2 0.00
age 0.2
0.01
0.25 25.8 0.00
season 2.0
0.27
0.07 7.3 0.00
charter 2.2
0.51
0.04 4.4 0.00
Adj. R Square 0.21
Std. Error of the Estimate 12.12
Survey on standard weights of passengers and luggage
R20090095.doc 193
May, 2009
Table F -18 Linear regression analysis with dependent variable
passenger weights excl. carry-on luggage (best fit
model); female passengers
Non-stand.
Coeff.
Standardized Coeff. t Sig.
Predictors B
Std. Error
Beta B Std. Error
(Constant) 56.9
0.37
154.0 0.00
age
0.2
0.01
0.27 25.7 0.00
season
2.2
0.27
0.09 8.2 0.00
charter
2.0
0.51
0.04 4.0 0.00
Adj. R Square
0.08
Std. Error of the Estimate
12.13
Survey on standard weights of passengers and luggage
194 R20090095.doc
May, 2009
Table F-19 Linear regression analysis with dependent variable carry-
on luggage weights (best fit model); female
passengers
Non-stand.
Coeff.
Standardized Coeff. t Sig.
Predictors B
Std. Error
Beta B Std. Error
(Constant) 5.7
0.24
23.5 0.00
season 1.4
0.11
0.16 12.4 0.00
flighttype -1.7
0.21
-0.11 -8.2 0.00
eu -0.7
0.13
-0.07 -5.8 0.00
purpose 0.6
0.13
0.06 4.9 0.00
max_kg 0.0
0.01
0.04 2.9 0.00
age 0.0
0.00
-0.03 -2.1 0.03
direction 0.3
0.14
0.03 2.1 0.04
Adj. R Square
0.05
Std. Error of the Estimate
4.30
Survey on standard weights of passengers and luggage
R20090095.doc 195
May, 2009
Table F-20 Linear regression analysis with dependant variable
checked baggage masses (best fit model)
Non-standardized
Coefficients
Standardized
Coefficients
t Sig.
B
Std. Error
Beta
B Std. Error
(Constant) 11.1
0.7
16.1 0.00
Intercontinental flight 1.2
0.2
0.08
5.2 0.00
Purpose: business -1.1
0.1
-0.08
-10.3 0.00
Baggage for 2 or more 1.4
0.1
0.08
11.3 0.00
Domestic flight -0.8
0.1
-0.05
-5.6 0.00
Maximum kg 0.2
0.0
0.09
7.4 0.00
Class: business -2.3
0.4
-0.07
-6.2 0.00
Short haul -0.5
0.2
-0.03
-2.9 0.00
Long haul 0.7
0.2
0.05
2.8 0.00
Charter 0.9
0.4
0.02
2.4 0.02
Low cost 0.2
0.1
0.02
2.3 0.02
adj r2 0.06
std error of estimate 5.56
Source: NEA
Survey on standard weights of passengers and luggage
196 R20090095.doc
May, 2009
ANNEX G IATA airport code (3-letter)
Survey on standard weights of passengers and luggage
R20090095.doc 197
May, 2009
Airport
code
name
AAL Aalborg
AAR Aarhus Tirstrup
ABV Abuja
ABZ Aberdeen Dyce
ACC Accra Kotoka
ACE Arrecife Lanzarote
ADA Adana
ADB Izmir Adnan Menderes
AES Alesund Vigra
AGA Agadir Al Massira
AGP Malaga Pablo Ruiz Picasso
AHO Alghero Fertilia
AHU Al Hoceima Cote Du Rif
ALA Almaty Alma Ata
ALC Alicante
ALG Alger Houari Boumediene
AMM Amman Queen Alia International
AMS Amsterdam Schiphol
ANC Anchorage International Airport
ANU
Antigua Saint Johns Vc Bird
International/Coolidge Airport
AOK Karpathos
AQJ Aqaba
ARN Stockholm Arlanda
ASW Aswan
ATH Athinai Eleftherios Venizelos
ATL
Atlanta The William B Hartsfield
Atlanta International Airport
AUA
Aruba Oranjestad Queen Beatrix
International Airport
AUH
Abu Dhabi Nadia International
Airport
AXD Alexandroupolis
AYT Antalya
AZS Samana El Catay
BAH Bahrain Muharraq International
BBU Bucharest Baneasa
BCN
Aeropuerto Transoceanico De
Barcelona
BEG Beograd Aerodrom
BEY Beirut Rafic Hariri International
BFS Belfast International
BGI
Bridgetown Grantley Adams
International Airport
BGO Bergen Flesland
BGY Milano Bergamo Orio Al Serio
BHD Belfast City
BHX Birmingham
BIO Bilbao Sondica
BIQ Biarritz Bayonne Anglet Parme
BJL Banjul Yundum
BJV Milas-Bodrum Airport
BJZ Badajoz Talavera La Real
BKK Bangkok Don Muang International
BLL Billund
Survey on standard weights of passengers and luggage
198 R20090095.doc
May, 2009
Airport
code
name
BLQ
Bologna Giuseppe Marconi Borgo
Panigale
BLR Bangalore International Airport
BOD Bordeaux Merignac
BOG Bogota Eldorado
BOJ Burgas
BOM
Mumbai Chhatrapati Shivaji
International Airport
BON Bonaire Kralendijk Flamingo Airport
BOS
Boston General Edward Lawrence
Logan International Airport
BRE Bremen Neuenland
BRI Bari Palese Macchie
BRS Bristol Lulsgate
BRU
Brussels Bruxelles
National/Zaventem
BSL Basel/Mulhouse Euroairport
BUD Budapest Ferihegyi
BVA Beauvais Tille
BZG Bydgoszcz
CAG Cagliari Elmas
CAI Cairo International Airport
CAN Guangzhou Baiyun
CCC Caya Coco
CCS
Caracas Aeropuerto Internacional
De Maiquetia Simon Bolivar
CCU
Kolkatta Dum Dum International
Airport
CDG Paris Charles De Gaulle
CFE Clermont Ferrand Aulnat
CFU Kerkyra/Corfu
CGN Koln Konrad Adenauer
CHQ Chania
CIA Roma Ciampino
CLJ Cluj Napoca
CLT
Charlotte/Douglas International
Airport
CMB Colombo Katunayake
CMN Casablanca Mohamed V
CPH Kobenhavn Kastrup
CPT Cape Town Df Malan
CRL Charleroi Gosselies
CTA Catania Fontanarossa
CTU Chengdu
CUN Cancun International
CUR
Curacao Willemstad Aeropuerto
Hato
CVG
Cincinnati/Covington
Cincinatti/Northern Kentucky
International Airport
CWL Cardiff Rhoose
DAM Damascus
DAR Dar Es Salaam
DBV Dubrovnik
DEL
Delhi Indira Gandhi International
Airport
DEN Denver International Airport
DFW
Dallas/Fort Worth International
Airport
Survey on standard weights of passengers and luggage
R20090095.doc 199
May, 2009
Airport
code
name
DJE Djerba Djerba/Zarzis
DKR Dakar Yoff
DLM Dalaman
DME Moskva Moscow Domodemovo
DMM Dammam
DOH Doha
DOK Donetsk
DRS Dresden
DSA
Robin Hood Airport Doncaster
Sheffield
DTM Dortmund Wickede
DTW
Detroit Metropolitan Wayne County
Airport
DUB Dublin
DUS Düsseldorf Rhein Ruhr
DXB Dubai International Airport
EAS San Sebastian
EBB Kampala Entebbe
EDI Edinburgh
EFL Kefalonia
EIN Eindhoven
EMA
East Midlands Derby Leicester
Nottingham
ESB Ankara Esenboga
EVN Erevan Yerevan Zapadny
EWR
Newark/New York Newark Liberty
Airport
EXT Exeter
EZE
Buenos Aires Aeropuerto
Internacional Ezeiza/Ministro
Pistarini
FAE Sorvag Faroe Islands Vagar
FAO Faro
FCO Roma Leonardo Da Vinci/Fiumicino
FLR Firenze Peretola
FMO Munster/Osnabruck Greven
FNC Funchal
FRA Frankfurt Rhein Main
FUE Fuerteventura/Puerto Del Rosario
GCI Guernsey
GDN Gdansk Lech Walesa
GIB Gibraltar North Front
GIG
Rio De Janeiro Galeao Antonio
Carlos Jobim International Airport
GLA Glasgow Abbotsichn
GND Grenada Pearls
GOA Genoa Cristoforo Colombo Seatri
GOI Goa Dabolim
GOJ Nizhniy Novgorod Strigino
GOT Goteborg Landvetter
GPA Araxos/Patras
GRO Girona Girona Costa Brava
GRU
Sao Paulo Aeroporto Internacional
Guarulhos
GRX Granada
GRZ Graz Thalerhof
Survey on standard weights of passengers and luggage
200 R20090095.doc
May, 2009
Airport
code
name
GSE Goteborg Save
GUA Guatemala City La Aurora
GUW Atyrau Guryev International
GVA Geneve Cointrin
GYD Baku Heydar Aliyev International
GYE Guayaquil Simon Bolivar
HAJ Hannover Langenhagen
HAM Hamburg Fuhlsbuttel
HAN Hanoi Noi Bai
HAU Haugesund Karmoy
HAV
La Habana Aeropuerto Internacional
Jose Marti
HBE Alexandria Borg El Arab
HEL Helsinki Vantaa
HER Heraklion
HHN Hahn
HKG Hong Kong International Airport
HKT Phuket
HME Hassi Messaoud Oued Irara
HOG Holguin
HOQ Hof/Plauen
HRE Harare
HRG Hurghada
HUY Humberside
HYD
Hyderabad Begumpet/Rajiv Gandhi
International
IAD
Washington Dulles International
Airport
IAH Houston Intercontinental Airport
IBZ Ibiza
ICN Seoul Incheon
IEG Zielona Gora Babimost
IKA
Imam Khomeini International
Airport
INN Innsbruck Kranebitten
INV Inverness
IOA Ioannina
IOM Isle Of Man Ronaldsway Airport
IST
Istanbul Ataturk International
Airport
JED Jeddah King Abdul Aziz Airport
JER Jersey
JFK
New York John F Kennedy
International Airport
JIK Ikaria
JKH Chios
JKL Kalymnos Island National Airport
JMK Mykonos
JNB
Johannesburg Or Tambo
International Airport
JNX Naxos
JSI Skiathos
JTR Santorini
JTY Astypalea Island
KBP Kiev Borispol
KEF Reykjavik Keflavik
Survey on standard weights of passengers and luggage
R20090095.doc 201
May, 2009
Airport
code
name
KGD Kaliningrad
KGS Kos
KIN Kingston Norman Manley
KIV Chisinau
KIX Osaka Kansai Airport
KRK Krakow John Paul Ii
KRP Karup
KRS Kristiansand Kjevik
KRT Khartoum
KSD Karlstad
KTW Katowice
KUF Samara Kurumoch
KUL Kuala Lumpur International Airport
KVA Kavalla
KWI Kuwait
LAD
Luanda Aeroporto 4 De Fevereiro
Belas
LAS
Las Vegas Mccarran International
Airport
LAX Los Angeles International Airport
LBA Leeds/Bradford
LCA Larnaca
LCG La Coruna
LCY London City Airport
LED St Petersburg Leningrad Pulkovo
LEI Almeria
LEJ Leipzig/Halle Schkeuditz
LEN Leon Aeropuero De Bajio
LGW London Gatwick Airport
LHE Lahore Allama Iqbal International
LHR London Heathrow Airport
LIM
Lima Aeropuerto Internacional
Jorge Chavez
LIN Milano Linate
LIS
Lisboa Aeroporto Da Portela De
Sacavem
LJU Ljubljana Brnik
LNZ Linz Horsching
LOS Lagos Murtala Muhammed
LPA Las Palmas/Gran Canaria
LPI Linkoping
LPL Liverpool John Lennon
LRH La Rochelle Laieu
LRS Leros
LTN London Luton Airport
LUX Luxembourg Findel
LWO Lviv
LXR Luxor
LXS Lemnos
LYS Lyon Antoine De Saint Exupery
MAA Chennai Madras Meenambakkam
MAD Madrid Barajas
MAH Mahon Menorca
Survey on standard weights of passengers and luggage
202 R20090095.doc
May, 2009
Airport
code
name
MAN
Manchester Ringway International
Airport
MBA Mombasa Moi International
MBJ Montego Bay Sangster
MCO Orlando International Airport
MEM Memphis International Airport
MEX
Ciudad De Mexico Aeropuerto
Internacional Benito Juarez
MIA Miami International Airport
MIR Monastir Skanes
MJT Mytilene
MJV Murcia San Javier
MLA Malta Luqa
MLE Male
MLN Melilla
MLO Milos
MME Tees Side
MMX Malmo Sturup
MNL
Manila Ninoy Aquino International
Airport
MPL Montpellier Mediteranee/Frejorgues
MPW Mariupol Zhdanov
MRS Marseille Marignane Provence
MRU
Mauritius Sir Seewoosagur
Ramgoolam
MSP
Minneapolis/St Paul Minneapolis St
Paul International Wold
Chamberlain Airport
MSQ Minsk Minsk 2
MUC Munchen Franz Josef Strauss
MXP Milano Malpensa
NAP Napoli Capodichino
NBO Nairobi Jomo Kenyatta
NCE Nice Cote D Azur
NCL Newcastle
NDR Nador
NGO Nagoya Centrair
NKG Nanjing
NOC Knock/Connaught
NRK Norrkoping Kungsangen
NRN Weeze Niederrhein
NRT Tokyo Narita
NTE Nantes Chateau Bougon
NUE Nurnberg
NWI Norwich
ODS Odessa Tsentrainy
OLB Olbia Costa Smeralda
OPO
Porto Francisco Sa Carneiro Pedras
Rubras
ORD
Chicago O Hare International
Airport
ORK Cork
ORY Paris Orly
OSL Oslo Metropolitan Area
OTP
Bucharest Henri Coanda
International Otopeni
OVD Oviedo/Aviles Asturias
Survey on standard weights of passengers and luggage
R20090095.doc 203
May, 2009
Airport
code
name
PAS Paros
PBM
Zandery Paramaribo Johan Adolf
Pengel
PDL Ponta Delgada Sao Miguel Island
PDX Portland International Airport
PEK Beijing Capital
PFO Paphos International
PHL Philadelphia International Airport
PIK Prestwick
PLQ Palanga
PMI La Palma Palma De Mallorca
PMO Palermo Punta Raisi
PMV
Margerita Porlamarar Aeropuerto
Internacional Del Caribe General S
Marino
PNA Pamplona
PNQ Poona
POP Puerto Plata
POZ Poznan Lawica
PRG Praha Ruzyne
PSA Pisa Galilei San Giusto
PTY
Panama City General Omar Torrijos
Herrara
PUJ Punta Cana
PUY Pula
PVG Shanghai Pu Dong
RAI Praia
RAK Marrakech Menara
REC
Recife Guararapes Gilberto Freyre
International
REU Reus
RHO Rhodos Diagoras/Maritsa
RIX Riga Spilve
RNN Ronne Bornholm
RNS Rennes Saint Jacques
ROV Rostov On Don
RTM Rotterdam
RUH Riyadh King Khalid Airport
RZE Rzeszow Jasionka
SAH Sanaa El Rahaba
SAN
San Diego International Airport
Lindbergh Field
SAW Istanbul Sabiha Gokcen
SBZ Sibiu
SCL
Santiago De Chile Aeropuerto
Comodoro Arturo Merino Benitez
SCQ Santiago De Compostela Santiago
SDQ
Santo Domingo Aeropuerto De Las
Americas
SDR Santander
SEA
Seattle Tacoma International
Airport
SFB
Sanford Central Florida Regional
Airport
SFJ
Sondre Stromfjord Kangerlussuaq
Stromfjord Air Base
SFO
San Francisco San Francisco
International Airport
SGD Sonderborg
Survey on standard weights of passengers and luggage
204 R20090095.doc
May, 2009
Airport
code
name
SGN
Ho Chi Minh City Tan Son Nhut
International Airport
SIN
Singapore Changi International
Airport
SJO
San Jose Juan Santamaria
International
SKG Thessaloniki Mikra
SKP Skopje
SMI Samos
SNN Shannon Limerick
SOF Sofia Vrajdebna
SOU Southampton Eastleigh
SPC Santa Cruz De La Palma
SPU Split Kastela
SSA
Salvador Deputado Luis Eduardo
Magalhaes International
SSG Malabo
SSH Sharm El Sheikh Ras Nasrani
STN London Stansted
STR Stuttgart Echterdingen
SVG Stavanger Sola
SVO Moskva Moscow Sheremetyevo
SVQ Sevilla San Pablo
SVX
Yekaterinburg Ekaterinburg
Koltsovo
SXB Strasbourg Entzheim
SXF Berlin Schonefeld
SXM
St Maarten Philipsburg Princes
Juliana
SZG Salzburg
SZZ Szczecin Goleniow
TAB Tobago Scarborough Crown
TAS Tashkent Toshkent Yuzny
TBS Tbilisi Novoalexeyevka
TCP Taba International
TFN Tenerife Los Rodeos
TFS
Santa Cruz De Tenerife Reina Sofia
Tenerife Sur
TGD Pogdorica
TIA
Tirana International Airport Nene
Tereza
TIP Tripoli Idris
TIV Tivat
TKU Turku
TLL Tallinn Yulemiste
TLS Toulouse Blagnac
TLV Tel Aviv Ben Gurion
TMP Tampere Pirkkala
TNG Tanger Boukhalef
TPE
Taipei Taiwan Taoyuan
International
TRD Trondheim Vaernes
TRF Oslo/Sandefjord Torp
TRN Torino Caselle
TRV
Thiruvananathapuram Trivandrum
International Airport
TSE Astana International
TSF Treviso S Angelo
Survey on standard weights of passengers and luggage
R20090095.doc 205
May, 2009
Airport
code
name
TSR Timisoara Giarmata
TUN Tunis Carthage Airport
TXL Berlin Tegel
UAK Narssarssuaq
UIO Quito Mariscal Sucre
UVF St Lucia Vieux Fort Hewanorra
VAR Varna
VCE Venezia Marco Polo Tessera
VGO Vigo
VIE Wien Schwechat
VIT Vitoria
VLC Valencia
VNO Vilnius
VRA Varadero
VRN Verona Villafranca
VVI Santa Cruz Viru Viru International
WAT Waterford
WAW Warszawa Frederic Chopin
WDH
Windhoek Hosea Kutako
International Airport
WRO Wroclaw
XRY Jerez De La Frontera
YEG Edmonton International Airport
YHZ Halifax International Airport
YOW
Ottawa Macdonald Cartier
International Airport
YUL Montreal Trudeau
YVR Vancouver International Airport
YXY Whitehorse Whitehorse Airport
YYC Calgary International Airport
YYZ
Toronto Lester B Pearson
International Airport
ZAG Zagreb Pleso
ZAZ Zaragoza
ZRH Zurich Kloten
ZTH Zakynthos
Survey on standard weights of passengers and luggage
R20090095.doc
207
May, 2009
ANNEX H IATA airline code (2-letter)
Survey on standard weights of passengers and luggage
R20090095.doc 209
May, 2009
Survey on standard weights of passengers and luggage
R20090095.doc 211
May, 2009
ANNEX I Overview of variable names
This annex provides an overview of variable names used in the databases
Passenger and Carry-on luggage data and Checked baggage data. The databases
are described separately. On CD_rom the databases are delivered in two
different formats: SPSS file (.sav) and Ascii file (.txt).
TABLES
I-1
Variable names of Passenger and Carry-on luggage data 213
I-2 Variable names of Passenger and Carry-on luggage data
(Part II) 214
I-3 Variable information: Passenger and carry-on luggage
data 215
I-4 Frequency table: airport of weighing session 216
I-5 Frequency table: season 217
I-6 Frequency table: gender 218
I-7 Frequency table: Passenger with a baby (< 2 years): yes /
no 219
I -8 Frequency table: purpose 220
I -9 Frequency table: Outbound flight or Inbound flight 221
I -10 Frequency table: class of travel 222
I -11 Frequency table: Passenger has check in luggage: yes / no 223
I-12 Frequency table: Non-European, European or Domestic
flight 224
I -13 Frequency table: Scheduled or non-scheduled flight 225
I-14 Frequency table: Type of carrier 226
I-15 Frequency table: Region of airport of departure 227
I-16 Frequency table: Region of airport of arrival 228
I-17 Frequency table: Short/medium/long haul flight 229
I-18 Frequency table: Maximum weight value determined from
simplified airline regulations 230
I-19 Variable names of Checked baggage data 231
I -20 Variable names of Checked baggage data 232
I -21 Variable information: Checked baggage data 233
I -22 Frequency table: airport of weighing session 234
I -23 Frequency table: season 235
I-24 Frequency table: gender 236
I-25 Frequency table: Passenger with a baby (< 2 years): yes /
no 237
I-26 Frequency table: purpose 238
I -27 Frequency table: Outbound flight or Inbound flight 239
I-28 Frequency table: class of travel 240
I -29 Frequency table: Checked baggage for one or more
passengers 241
I-30 Frequency table: Non-European, European or Domestic
flight 242
I-31 Frequency table: Scheduled or non-scheduled flight 243
I-32 Frequency table: Type of carrier 244
Survey on standard weights of passengers and luggage
212
I-33 Frequency table: Region of airport of departure 245
I-34 Frequency table: Region of airport of arrival 246
I-35 Frequency table: Short/medium/long haul flight 247
I-36 Frequency table: USA related flight 248
I-37 Frequency table: Maximum weight value determined from
simplified airline regulations 249
Survey on standard weights of passengers and luggage
R20090095.doc 213
May, 2009
Table I-1 Variable names of Passenger and Carry-on luggage data
List of variable names containing collected data
1 airport Airport of weighing session
(AMS, ATH, CPH, FRA, LGW, MAD, SOF, WAW)
2 season Two seasons are specified:
0 = Summer
1 = Winter
3 age
4 gender 0 = Male
1 = Female
2 = Child (2-12 years)
3 = Male & Infant (<2 years)
4 = Female & Infant (<2 years)
5 = Child (2-12 years) & Infant (<2 years)
5 infant Passenger with a baby (younger than 2 years)
0 = Yes
1 = No
6 purpose
0 = Leisure
1 = Business
7 direction
0 = Outbound flight
1 = Inbound flight
8 departure Airport of departure (3-letter IATA airport code*)
9 arrival Airport of arrival (3-letter IATA airport code*)
10 airline Airline code (2-letter IATA airline designators*)
11 flightnr Flight number
12 class Three classes are specified:
0 = Economy
1 = Business
2 = First
13 checkbag Passenger has checked baggage:
0 = Yes
1 = No
14 weightin Weight of the passenger, including all of his/her carry-
on luggage
15 weightex Weight of the passenger, excluding all of his/her carry-
on luggage
* with exceptions.
Survey on standard weights of passengers and luggage
214
Table I-2 Variable names of Passenger and Carry-on luggage data
(Part II)
List of variables containing additional data
16 airportcode Airport of departure or airport of arrival
(3-letter IATA airport code)
17 airport_name Name of airport converted from the field ‘airportcode’
18 airport_country Country of airport converted from the field ‘airportcode’
19 airline_name Name of airline converted from the field ‘airline’
20 airline_country Country of airline converted from the field ‘airline’
21 ID Record number
22 routetype
0 = Non-European
1 = European
2 = Domestic
23 flighttype 0 = scheduled (flight found in OAG data)
1 = non-scheduled
24 airlinetype 0 = regular scheduled
1 = charter
2 = low cost
3 = charter & low cost
25 RegionDepart Region of airport of departure.
Categorized as:
1 = UK and Ireland
2 = Benelux and France
3 = Spain, Portugal and Italy
4 = Scandinavia and Iceland
5 = Germany, Switzerland and Austria
6 = Northeast Europe
7 = Greece, Cyprus, Malta and Turkey
8 = Romania and Bulgaria
9 = Other European countries (incl. Russia)
11 = Africa and the Middle East
12 = Asia
13 = North America
14 = South America
15 = Other
26 RegionArr Region of airport of arrival. Same code used as
RegionDepart
27 dkms Distance in kilometres between departure and arrival
airport
28 haullabel
0 = Short Haul: distance shorter than 500 km
1 = Medium haul: distance between 500 and 5000 km
2 = Long haul: distance longer than 5000km
29 handbaggage Total weight of all carry-on luggage
30 Max_kg Maximum weight value determined from simplified
airline regulations
Survey on standard weights of passengers and luggage
R20090095.doc 215
May, 2009
Table I-3 Variable information: Passenger and carry-on luggage
data
Position Variable Label
Measurement
Level
Column
Width
1
airport
airport of weighing session
Nominal 3
2
season
<none>
Nominal 8
3
age
<none>
Scale 8
4
gender
<none>
Nominal 8
5
infant
Passenger with a baby
(younger than 2 years): yes / no
Nominal 8
6
purpose
<none>
Nominal 8
7
direction
Outbound flight or Inbound flight
Nominal 8
8
departure
Airport of departure (3-letter)
Nominal 3
9
arrival
Airport of arrival (3-letter)
Nominal 3
10
airline
Airline code (2-letter)
Nominal 9
11
flightnr
Flight number
Scale 8
12
class
Class of travel
Nominal 8
13
checkbag
Passenger has check in luggage:
yes / no
Nominal 8
14
weightin
Weight of the passenger, including all
of his/her carry-on luggage
Scale 8
15
weightex
Weight of the passenger, excluding
all of his/her carry-on luggage
Scale 8
16
airportcode
Airport of departure or
airport of arrival
Nominal 13
17
airport_name
Name of airport converted from
airportcode
Nominal 40
18
airport_country
Country of airport converted from
airportcode
Nominal 20
19
airline_name
Name of airline converted from
airline code
Nominal 20
20
airline_country
Country of airline converted from
airline code
Nominal 20
21
ID
Record number
Scale 10
22
routetype
Non-European, European or
Domestic flight
Scale 11
23
flighttype
Scheduled or non-scheduled flight
Nominal 8
24 airlinetype
Type of carrier:
Regular scheduled / Charter /
Low cost / Charter and Low cost
Scale 13
25
RegionDepart
Region of airport of departure
Nominal 11
26
RegionArr
Region of airport of arrival
Nominal 11
27
dKMs
Distance in kilometres between
departure and arrival airport
Scale 10
28
haullabel
Short/medium/long haul flight
Scale 11
29
handbaggage
Total weight of all carry-on luggage
Scale 13
30
max_kg
Maximum weight value determined
from simplified airline regulations
Nominal 11
Survey on standard weights of passengers and luggage
216
Table I-4 Frequency table: airport of weighing session
Airport Frequency
Percent
AMS 3,175
13.9
ATH 3,006
13.1
CPH 2,916
12.7
FRA 2,703
11.8
LGW 2,774
12.1
MAD 2,810
12.3
SOF 1,808
7.9
WAW 3,709
16.2
Total 22,901
100.0
Survey on standard weights of passengers and luggage
R20090095.doc 217
May, 2009
Table I-5 Frequency table: season
Season Frequency
Percent
Summer 11,495
50.2
Winter 11,406
49.8
Total 22,901
100.0
Survey on standard weights of passengers and luggage
218
Table I-6 Frequency table: gender
Gender Frequency
Percent
Male
12,588
55.0
Female
8,351
36.5
Child (2-12 years)
1,420
6.2
Male & Infant (<2 years)
298
1.3
Female & Infant (<2 years)
244
1.1
Total
22,901
100.0
Survey on standard weights of passengers and luggage
R20090095.doc 219
May, 2009
Table I-7 Frequency table: Passenger with a baby (< 2 years): yes /
no
Infant Frequency
Percent
Yes 542
2.4
No 22,359
97.6
Total 22,901
100.0
Survey on standard weights of passengers and luggage
220
Table I -8 Frequency table: purpose
Purpose Frequency
Percent
Leisure 15,739
68.7
Business 7,162
31.3
Total 22,901
100.0
Survey on standard weights of passengers and luggage
R20090095.doc 221
May, 2009
Table I -9 Frequency table: Outbound flight or Inbound flight
Direction Frequency
Percent
Outbound 18,332
80.0
Inbound 4,569
20.0
Total 22,901
100.0
Survey on standard weights of passengers and luggage
222
Table I -10 Frequency table: class of travel
Class Frequency
Percent
Economy
20,997
91.7
Business
1,767
7.7
First
137
0.6
Total
22,901
100.0
Survey on standard weights of passengers and luggage
R20090095.doc 223
May, 2009
Table I -11 Frequency table: Passenger has check in luggage: yes / no
Checkbag Frequency
Percent
Yes
19,160
83.7
No
3,741
16.3
Total
22,901
100.0
Survey on standard weights of passengers and luggage
224
Table I-12 Frequency table: Non-European, European or Domestic
flight
Routetype Frequency
Percent
Non-European
7,821
34.2
European
12,790
55.8
Domestic
2,290
10.0
Total
22,901
100.0
Survey on standard weights of passengers and luggage
R20090095.doc 225
May, 2009
Table I -13 Frequency table: Scheduled or non-scheduled flight
Checkbag Frequency
Percent
Scheduled
20,276
88.5
Non-scheduled
2,625
11.5
Total
22,901
100.0
Survey on standard weights of passengers and luggage
226
Table I-14 Frequency table: Type of carrier
Routetype Frequency
Percent
Regular scheduled
17,300
75.5
Charter
1,380
6.0
Low-cost
3,666
16.0
Charter & low-cost
555
2.4
Total
22,901
100.0
Survey on standard weights of passengers and luggage
R20090095.doc 227
May, 2009
Table I-15 Frequency table: Region of airport of departure
RegionDepart Frequency
Percent
UK and Ireland
2,366
10.3
Benelux and France
3,229
14.1
Spain, Portugal and Italy
3,017
13.2
Scandinavia and Iceland
2,004
8.8
Germany, Switzerland and
Austria
2,796
12.2
Northeast Europe
3,592
15.7
Greece, Cyprus, Malta and
Turkey
2,895
12.6
Romania and Bulgaria
1,513
6.6
Other European countries
(incl. Russia)
144
0.6
Africa and the Middle East
280
1.2
Asia
112
.5
North America
612
2.7
South America
314
1.4
Other
27
0.1
Total
22,901
100.0
Survey on standard weights of passengers and luggage
228
Table I-16 Frequency table: Region of airport of arrival
RegionArr Frequency
Percent
UK and Ireland
3,169
13.8
Benelux and France
1,656
7.2
Spain, Portugal and Italy
2,947
12.9
Scandinavia and Iceland
2,322
10.1
Germany, Switzerland and
Austria
2,635
11.5
Northeast Europe
1,067
4.7
Greece, Cyprus, Malta and
Turkey
2,368
10.3
Romania and Bulgaria
706
3.1
Other European countries
(incl. Russia)
567
2.5
Africa and the Middle East
1,875
8.2
Asia
792
3.5
North America
1,908
8.3
South America
791
3.5
Other
98
0.4
Total
22,901
100.0
Survey on standard weights of passengers and luggage
R20090095.doc 229
May, 2009
Table I-17 Frequency table: Short/medium/long haul flight
Haullabel Frequency
Percent
Short Haul: < 500 km
2,975
13.0
Medium haul: 500 .. 5000 km
15,141
66.1
Long haul: > 5000km
4,785
20.9
Total
22,901
100.0
Survey on standard weights of passengers and luggage
230
Table I-18 Frequency table: Maximum weight value determined from
simplified airline regulations
Max_kg Frequency
Percent
Valid Percent
Cumulative
Percent
5 1,696
7.4
9.7 9.7
6 2,562
11.2
14.7 24.4
7 471
2.1
2.7 27.1
8 5,746
25.1
32.9 60.0
9 269
1.2
1.5 61.5
10 2,768
12.1
15.9 77.4
12 1,981
8.7
11.3 88.7
13 18
0.1
0.1 88.8
14 46
0.2
0.3 89.1
15 9
0.0
0.1 89.1
16 375
1.6
2.1 91.3
18 851
3.7
4.9 96.2
20 151
0.7
0.9 97.0
23 520
2.3
3.0 100.0
Total 17,463
76.3
100.0
Missing 5,438
23.7
Total 22,901
100.0
Survey on standard weights of passengers and luggage
R20090095.doc 231
May, 2009
Table I-19 Variable names of Checked baggage data
List of variable names containing collected data
1 airport Airport of weighing session
(AMS, ATH, CPH, FRA, LGW, MAD, SOF, WAW)
2 season Two seasons are specified:
0 = Summer
1 = Winter
3 age
4 gender 0 = Male
1 = Female
2 = Child (2-12 years)
3 = Male & Infant (<2 years)
4 = Female & Infant (<2 years)
5 = Child (2-12 years) & Infant (<2 years)
5 infant Passenger with a baby (younger than 2 years)
0 = Yes
1 = No
6 purpose
0 = Leisure
1 = Business
7 direction
0 = Outbound flight
1 = Inbound flight
8 departure Airport of departure (3-letter IATA airport code*)
9 arrival Airport of arrival (3-letter IATA airport code*)
10 airline Airline code (2-letter IATA airline designators*)
11 flightnr Flight number
12 class Three classes are specified:
0 = Economy
1 = Business
2 = First
13 baggfor Passenger’s checked baggage is mentioned for:
0 = one passenger only
1 = more than one passenger
14 weight Weight of one piece of checked baggage
* with exceptions.
Survey on standard weights of passengers and luggage
232
Table I -20 Variable names of Checked baggage data
List of fields containing additional data
15 airportcode Airport of departure or airport of arrival
(3-letter IATA airport code)
16 airport_name Name of airport converted from the field ‘airportcode’
17 airport_country Country of airport converted from the field
‘airportcode’
18 airline_name Name of airline converted from the field ‘airline’
19 airline_country Country of airline converted from the field ‘airline’
20 ID Record number
21 routetype
0 = Non-European
1 = European
2 = Domestic
22 flighttype 0 = scheduled (flight found in OAG data)
1 = non-scheduled
23 airlinetype 0 = regular scheduled
1 = charter
2 = low cost
3 = charter & low cost
24 RegionDepart Region of airport of departure.
Categorized as:
1 = UK and Ireland
2 = Benelux and France
3 = Spain, Portugal and Italy
4 = Scandinavia and Iceland
5 = Germany, Switzerland and Austria
6 = Northeast Europe
7 = Greece, Cyprus, Malta and Turkey
8 = Romania and Bulgaria
9 = Other European countries (incl. Russia)
11 = Africa and the Middle East
12 = Asia
13 = North America
14 = South America
15 = Other
25 RegionArr Region of airport of arrival. Same codes used as
RegionDepart
26 dkms Distance in kilometres between departure and arrival
airport
27 haullabel
0 = Short Haul: distance shorter than 500 km
1 = Medium haul: distance between 500 and 5000 km
2 = Long haul: distance longer than 5000km
28 labelUSA 0 = no USA regulation
1 = USA regulation
29 Max_kg Maximum weight value determined from simplified
airline regulations
Survey on standard weights of passengers and luggage
R20090095.doc 233
May, 2009
Table I -21 Variable information: Checked baggage data
Position Variable Label
Measurement
Level
Column
Width
1 airport airport of weighing session Nominal 3
2 season <none> Nominal 8
3 age <none> Scale 8
4 gender <none> Nominal 8
5 infant
Passenger with a baby
(younger than 2 years): yes / no Nominal 8
6 purpose <none> Nominal 8
7 direction Outbound flight or Inbound flight Nominal 8
8 departure Airport of departure (3-letter) Nominal 3
9 arrival Airport of arrival (3-letter) Nominal 3
10 airline Airline code (2-letter) Nominal 9
11 flightnr Flight number Scale 8
12 class Class of travel Nominal 8
13 baggfor
Checked baggage for: one passenger
/ more than one passenger Nominal 8
14 weight
Weight of one piece of checked
baggage
Scale 8
15 airportcode
Airport of departure or airport of
arrival
Nominal 13
16 airport_name
Name of airport converted from
airportcode
Nominal 40
17 airport_country
Country of airport converted from
airportcode
Nominal 20
18 airline_name
Name of airline converted from
airline code Nominal 20
19 airline_country
Country of airline converted from
airline code Nominal 20
20 ID Record number Scale 10
21 routetype
Non-European, European or
Domestic flight Scale 11
22 flighttype Scheduled or non-scheduled flight Nominal 8
23 airlinetype
Type of carrier:
Regular scheduled / Charter /
Low cost / Charter and Low cost Scale 13
24 RegionDepart Region of airport of departure Nominal 11
25 RegionArr Region of airport of arrival Nominal 11
26 dKMs
Distance in kilometres between
departure and arrival airport
Scale 10
27 haullabel Short / medium / long haul flight Scale 11
28 labelUSA USA related flight Scale 10
29 max_kg
Maximum weight value determined
from simplified airline regulations Nominal 11
Survey on standard weights of passengers and luggage
234
Table I -22 Frequency table: airport of weighing session
Airport Frequency
Percent
AMS 2,838
12.7
ATH 3,004
13.4
CPH 2,576
11.5
FRA 3,074
13.8
LGW 3,400
15.2
MAD 2,558
11.4
SOF 1,529
6.8
WAW 3,374
15.1
Total 22,353
100.0
Survey on standard weights of passengers and luggage
R20090095.doc 235
May, 2009
Table I -23 Frequency table: season
Season Frequency
Percent
Summer 9,692
43.4
Winter 12,661
56.6
Total 22,353
100.0
Survey on standard weights of passengers and luggage
236
Table I-24 Frequency table: gender
Gender Frequency
Percent
Male
12,553
56.2
Female
9,252
41.4
Child (2-12 years)
465
2.1
Male & Infant (<2 years)
30
.1
Female & Infant (<2 years)
53
.2
Total
22,353
100.0
Survey on standard weights of passengers and luggage
R20090095.doc 237
May, 2009
Table I-25 Frequency table: Passenger with a baby (< 2 years): yes /
no
Infant Frequency
Percent
Yes 91
0.4
No 22262
99.6
Total 22,353
100.0
Survey on standard weights of passengers and luggage
238
Table I-26 Frequency table: purpose
Purpose Frequency
Percent
Leisure 17,679
79.1
Business 4,674
20.9
Total 22,353
100.0
Survey on standard weights of passengers and luggage
R20090095.doc 239
May, 2009
Table I -27 Frequency table: Outbound flight or Inbound flight
Direction Frequency
Percent
Outbound 16,432
73.5
Inbound 5,921
26.5
Total 22,353
100.0
Survey on standard weights of passengers and luggage
240
Table I-28 Frequency table: class of travel
Class Frequency
Percent
Economy
21,764
97.4
Business
576
2.6
First
13
0.1
Total
22,353
100.0
Survey on standard weights of passengers and luggage
R20090095.doc 241
May, 2009
Table I -29 Frequency table: Checked baggage for one or more
passengers
Baggfor Frequency
Percent
One passenger
19,349
86.6
More than one
3,004
13.4
Total
22,353
100.0
Survey on standard weights of passengers and luggage
242
Table I-30 Frequency table: Non-European, European or Domestic
flight
Routetype Frequency
Percent
Non-European
7,995
35.8
European
11,758
52.6
Domestic
2,600
11.6
Total
22,353
100.0
Survey on standard weights of passengers and luggage
R20090095.doc 243
May, 2009
Table I-31 Frequency table: Scheduled or non-scheduled flight
Flighttype Frequency
Percent
Scheduled
20,604
92.2
Non-scheduled
1,749
7.8
Total
22,353
100.0
Survey on standard weights of passengers and luggage
244
Table I-32 Frequency table: Type of carrier
Routetype Frequency
Percent
Regular scheduled
15,865
71.0
Charter
1,097
4.9
Low-cost
4,451
19.9
Charter & low-cost
940
4.2
Total
22,353
100.0
Survey on standard weights of passengers and luggage
R20090095.doc 245
May, 2009
Table I-33 Frequency table: Region of airport of departure
RegionDepart Frequency
Percent
UK and Ireland
3,134
14.0
Benelux and France
2,056
9.2
Spain, Portugal and Italy
2,905
13.0
Scandinavia and Iceland
1,700
7.6
Germany, Switzerland and
Austria 2,708
12.1
Northeast Europe
2,993
13.4
Greece, Cyprus, Malta and
Turkey 2,783
12.4
Romania and Bulgaria
1,539
6.9
Other European countries
(incl. Russia) 175
0.8
Africa and the Middle East
458
2.0
Asia
195
0.9
North America
1,278
5.7
South America
413
1.8
Other
16
0.1
Total
22,353
100.0
Survey on standard weights of passengers and luggage
246
Table I-34 Frequency table: Region of airport of arrival
RegionArr Frequency
Percent
UK and Ireland
2,690
12.0
Benelux and France
2,285
10.2
Spain, Portugal and Italy
3,461
15.5
Scandinavia and Iceland
2,134
9.5
Germany, Switzerland and
Austria 2,629
11.8
Northeast Europe
1,338
6.0
Greece, Cyprus, Malta and
Turkey 2,530
11.3
Romania and Bulgaria
273
1.2
Other European countries
(incl. Russia) 488
2.2
Africa and the Middle East
891
4.0
Asia
710
3.2
North America
2,197
9.8
South America
488
2.2
Other
239
1.1
Total
22,353
100.0
Survey on standard weights of passengers and luggage
R20090095.doc 247
May, 2009
Table I-35 Frequency table: Short/medium/long haul flight
Haullabel Frequency
Percent
Short Haul: < 500 km
2,344
10.5
Medium haul: 500 .. 5000 km
14,446
64.6
Long haul: > 5000km
5,563
24.9
Total
22,353
100.0
Survey on standard weights of passengers and luggage
248
Table I-36 Frequency table: USA related flight
labelUSA Frequency
Percent
Valid Percent
Cumulative Percent
No USA regulation 15,037
67.3
85.2
85.2
USA regulation 2,603
11.6
14.8
100.0
Total 17,643
78.9
100.0
Missing 4,713
21.1
Total 22,353
100.0
Survey on standard weights of passengers and luggage
R20090095.doc 249
May, 2009
Table I-37 Frequency table: Maximum weight value determined from
simplified airline regulations
Max_kg Frequency
Percent
Valid Percent
Cumulative
Percent
15 424
1.9
2.4 2.4
18 18
0.1
0.1 2.5
20 13,535
60.6
76.7 79.2
23 3,277
14.7
18.6 97.8
30 269
1.2
1.5 99.3
32 117
0.5
0.7 100.0
Total 17,640
78.9
100.0
Missing 4,713
21.1
Total 22,353
100.0
Survey on standard weights of passengers and luggage
R20090095.doc 251
May, 2009
ANNEX J List of charter airlines
Survey on standard weights of passengers and luggage
R20090095.doc 253
May, 2009
Table J-1 List of charter airlines
Airline code Name
2U Sun d'Or International Airlines
4P Viking Airlines
4Q Air Italy Polska
6B TUIfly Nordic
7H Corendon Airlines
B1 BH Air
BY Thomsonfly
D1 Dubrovnik Airline
DE Condor Flugdienst
DK Thomas Cook Airlines Scandinavia
EB Air Pullmantur
FQ Thomas Cook Airlines
H9 Pegasus Airlines
HV Transavia Holland
JF Jetairfly
JG Jettime
K1 Karthago Airlines
LE Lotus Air
M1 AMC Airlines
MP Martinair
MT Thomas Cook Airlines
OR Arkefly
P1 Privat Air
PV Privilege Style
S1 Sky Airlines
S4 SATA International
SS Corsairfly
T1 Inter Airlines
TS Air Transat
UI Eurocypria Airlines
W1 Windrose Air
X3 TUIfly
XD Free Bird Airlines
Survey on standard weights of passengers and luggage
R20090095.doc 255
May, 2009
ANNEX K List of low-cost airlines
TABLES
K-1
List of low-cost airlines 257
K-2
List of low-cost airlines (Part II) 258
Survey on standard weights of passengers and luggage
R20090095.doc 257
May, 2009
Table K-1 List of low-cost airlines
Airline code Name
2L Helvetic Airways
4U Germanwings
6G Air Wales
8A Atlas Blue
8I Myway Airlines
AB Air Berlin
B4 Flyglobespan
BE Flybe
BT Air Baltic
BY Thomsonfly
C0 Centralwings
D5 Dauair
DC Golden Air
DE Condor Flugdienst
DI dba
DP First Choice Airways
DY Norwegian Air Shuttle
E8 Alpi Eagles
F7 Flybaboo
FR Ryanair
GX Jetx Airlines
HV Transavia Holland
HW Iceland Express
IG Meridiana
IV Wind Jet
JK Spanair
JN Excel Airways
KF Blue1
LF FlyNordic
LK Air Luxor
LS Jet2.com
LT LTU International
NB Sterling Airlines
NE SkyEurope
OF Air Finland
PE Air Europe
QS Travel Service
RE Aer Arann
SE XL Airways France
SH Fly Me Sweden
SM Swedline Express
TF Malmo Aviation
Survey on standard weights of passengers and luggage
258
Table K-2 List of low-cost airlines (Part II)
Airline code Name
TV Virgin Express
U2 easyJet
VA Volare Airlines
VG VLM Airlines
VY Vueling Airlines
VZ MyTravel Airways
W6 Wizz Air
WO Air Southwest
WW bmibaby
XG Clickair
ZB Monarch Airlines
Survey on standard weights of passengers and luggage
R20090095.doc 259
May, 2009
ANNEX L List of website links consulted for
baggage allowance restriction
http://www.aerosvit.ua/eng/infox/faq/freebaggage.html
http://www.airchina.com.cn/PassengerService/GroundService/BaggageLimitation
/default.shtml
http://home.airindia.in/SBCMS/Webpages/Hand-Baggage.aspx?MID=27#
http://home.airindia.in/SBCMS/Webpages/Checked-Baggage.aspx?MID=27#
http://www.evaair.com/html/b2c/english/tips/Airport_service/Baggage/#a3
http://www.egyptair.com/English/Pages/Carryonbaggage.aspx?OrderID=f
http://www.egyptair.com/English/Pages/BaggageAllowance.aspx?OrderID=a
http://www.elal.co.il/ELAL/English/AllAboutYourFlight/BeforeYourFlight/LuggageA
ndBaggage/CarryOnLuggage.htm
http://www.elal.co.il/ELAL/English/AllAboutYourFlight/BeforeYourFlight/LuggageA
ndBaggage/PersonnalAlloeance.htm
http://www.airmalta.com/free-baggage
http://www.malev.com/travelinformation/baggage-information/baggage-general-
information
http://www.brusselsairlines.com/com/my-travel/practical-
information/Default.aspx?item=20302
http://germany.czechairlines.com/en/portal/passengers/baggage/basic_informati
on.htm
http://germany.czechairlines.com/en/portal/passengers/baggage/ex_baggage.ht
m
http://www.airbaltic.com/public/baggage_transportation.html
http://www.icelandair.nl/information/baggage-information/carry-on-baggage/
http://www.icelandair.nl/information/baggage-information/checked-baggage/
http://www.aeroflot.ru/ENG/information.aspx?ob_no=495
http://www.aeroflot.ru/ENG/information.aspx?ob_no=496
http://www.aeroflot.ru/ENG/information.aspx?ob_no=497
Survey on standard weights of passengers and luggage
260
http://www.alitalia.com/NL_EN/your_travel/baggage/checkedbaggage.htm
http://www.alitalia.com/NL_EN/your_travel/baggage/handluggage.htm
http://www.norwegian.no/sw13628.asp#2
http://www.slm.nl/?NL/2/13
http://www.flybe.com/flightInfo/1baggage.htm
http://www.cyprusairways.com/main/default.aspx?tabid=72
http://www.royalairmaroc.com/Marchand/Eng/index.jsp?rub=1812&rubid=1814
http://www.nouvelair.com/Publish/checklisten.pdf
http://www.bulgaria-air.co.uk/bulgaria-air/general-info.php
http://www.aua.com/at/eng/About_Flight/preparation/luggage/handluggage.htm
http://www.aua.com/at/eng/About_Flight/preparation/luggage/freebaggage.htm
http://www.skyeurope.com/en/information-services/travel-
information/baggage.aspx
http://wizzair.com/useful_information/baggage/
http://www.airitalypolska.com/customer-service/luggage.html
http://www.lot.com/Portal/EN/aspx/Content__Luggage.aspx
http://www.sunexpress.com/infos-und-service/baggage/carriage-of-
baggage_100291_100190.html
http://www.tunisair.com/publish/article.asp?id=494
http://www.futura.aero/futura/11/01.php?punto=11
http://www10.condor.com/tcf-eu/gepaeck_handgepaeck.jsp
http://www.thaiairways.co.uk/pages/flying_with_thai/luggage.htm
http://www.aircanada.com/en/travelinfo/airport/baggage/carry-on.html
http://www.aircanada.com/en/travelinfo/airport/baggage/checked.html
http://www.thy.com/en-
INT/services/passenger_services/luggage_information.aspx
http://ww2.flysaa.com/fares/nav/en/en_frameset.html?contents=/fares/faresTDP
DspSearch.jsp?NewSession=true&locale=en_be&loadFrame=false
Survey on standard weights of passengers and luggage
R20090095.doc 261
May, 2009
http://ww2.flysaa.com/fares/nav/en/en_frameset.html?contents=/fares/faresTDP
DspSearch.jsp?NewSession=true&locale=en_be&loadFrame=false
http://www.croatiaairlines.com/nl/klantenondersteuning/bagage/tabid/724/Defau
lt.aspx
http://www.singaporeair.com/saa/en_UK/content/before/plan/cabin_baggage.jsp
?v=-1295830238&
http://www.singaporeair.com/saa/en_UK/content/before/plan/baggage_allowanc
e.jsp?v=-314306864&
http://www.finnair.fi/finnaircom/wps/portal/finnair/kcxml/04_Sj9SPykssy0xPLMn
Mz0vM0Y_QjzKL9473DAHJgFguPvqRqCLOnqgiLvHO3nARX4_83FT9oNS8eDdPfW_9
AP2C3NDQiHJHRQDDZoLX/delta/base64xml/L3dJdyEvd0ZNQUFzQUMvNElVRS82X
0tfM1VT#
http://www.finnair.fi/finnaircom/wps/portal/finnair/kcxml/04_Sj9SPykssy0xPLMn
Mz0vM0Y_QjzKL9473DAHJgFguPvqRqCLOnqgiLvHO3nARX4_83FT9oNS8eDdPfW_9
AP2C3NDQiHJHRQDDZoLX/delta/base64xml/L3dJdyEvd0ZNQUFzQUMvNElVRS82X
0tfM1VS#
http://www.thomascookairlines.dk/dynamic/dynamicTextSingle.aspx?Dynamic_Id
=84614&menuid=2
http://www.thomascookairlines.co.uk/baggage_information.asp
http://www.atlantic.fo/default.aspx?pageid=4426&sectionid=137
http://www.cimber.com/information/baggage.html
http://www.flysas.com/en/nl/Travel_info/Baggage/Cabin_baggage/
http://www.flysas.com/en/nl/Travel_info/Baggage/Checked_baggage/
http://www.spanair.com/web/en-gb/Customer-support/FAQs/Luggage-
Information/Luggage-allowed-at-check-in/
http://www.spanair.com/web/en-gb/Other-information/Special-baggage/
http://www.airtransat.co.uk/en/pop_restrictions_thomas_cook.asp
http://flights.monarch.co.uk/cnt/travelinfo/baggage.asp#other%20faqs
http://www.virgin-
atlantic.com/en/gb/passengerinformation/baggage/handbaggage.jsp
http://www.virgin-
atlantic.com/en/gb/passengerinformation/baggage/baggagebypiece.jsp
Survey on standard weights of passengers and luggage
262
http://www.virgin-
atlantic.com/en/gb/passengerinformation/baggage/baggagebyweight.jsp
http://www.xlairways.fr/fr/infos/Bagages.htm
http://www.ryanair.com/site/NL/faqs.php?sect=bag&quest=cabinbaggageallowan
ce
http://www.ryanair.com/site/NL/faqs.php?sect=bag&quest=checkedbaggageallo
wance
http://www.flytap.com/Nederland/nl/VliegenMetTAP/AlvorensTeVliegen/Bagage/
Handbagage/
http://www.flytap.com/Nederland/nl/VliegenMetTAP/AlvorensTeVliegen/Bagage/
Overbagage/
http://www.flytap.com/Nederland/nl/VliegenMetTAP/AlvorensTeVliegen/Bagage/I
ngecheckteBagage/
http://www.airtransat.co.uk/en/4_6.asp
http://www.airtransat.co.uk/en/4_6_1.asp
http://www.klm.com/travel/nl_nl/travel_information/baggage/baggage_allowanc
e/index.htm
https://www.continental.com/web/en-US/content/travel/baggage/carry-
on.aspx?SID=0E8ACF5405634CDE88B3FA5D8AB17D51
http://www.martinair.com/nl_nl/services/beforedeparture/baggage.aspx
http://www.transavia.com/hv/nl-NL/bagage
http://www.arkefly.nl/arkefly/service.do
http://www.delta.com/traveling_checkin/baggage/baggage_allowance/index.jsp
http://www.bhairlines.com/Content.aspx?pid=3#2
http://www.britishairways.com/travel/bagcabin/public/en_gb
http://www.britishairways.com/travel/bagchk/public/en_gb
http://www.unitedairlines.co.jp/core/english/SI/baggage/checkedbaggage/other_
checked.html
http://www.cathaypacific.com/cpa/en_INTL/helpingyoutravel/baggageinformatio
n
Survey on standard weights of passengers and luggage
R20090095.doc 263
May, 2009
http://www.flybmi.com/bmi/nl-nl/vlucht-and-luchthaveninfo/voor-
vertrek/bagage/bagage.aspx
http://www.aerlingus.com/cgi-
bin/obel01im1/Services/cabin_bag.jsp?BV_SessionID=@@@@2021142952.1239
893254@@@@&BV_EngineID=ccciadegmlkflglcefecfigdffgdfkg.0&P_OID=-
536879754&Category=3#all
http://www.aerlingus.com/cgi-
bin/obel01im1/Services/checked_bag.jsp?BV_SessionID=@@@@2021142952.12
39893254@@@@&BV_EngineID=ccciadegmlkflglcefecfigdffgdfkg.0&P_OID=-
536879754&Category=3#all
http://www.atlas-blue.com/en/informations_bag.php
http://www.nwa.com/travel/luggage/carryon.html
http://www.nwa.com/travel/luggage/checked.html
http://www.swiss.com/web/EN/services/baggage/carryon_baggage/Pages/carryo
n_baggage.aspx
http://www.swiss.com/web/EN/services/baggage/Pages/free_checked_baggage.a
spx
http://www.bmibaby.com/bmibaby/en/index.aspx?p=718
http://www.china-airlines.nl/Info_en_Diensten/Bagage/tabid/73/Default.aspx
http://www.cyprusairways.com/main/default.aspx?tabid=72
http://www.aegeanair.com/Content.aspx?Page=23
http://oainfo.olympicairlines.com/handbag_en.htm
http://oainfo.olympicairlines.com/checkedbag_en.htm
http://www.airfrance.fr/FR/fr/common/guidevoyageur/pratique/bagage_en_cabin
e.htm?BV_SessionID=@@@@0946066624.1239894434@@@@&BV_EngineID=cc
deadegllkmeffcefecekedgfndggh.0
http://www.airfrance.fr/FR/fr/common/guidevoyageur/pratique/bagage_en_sout
e.htm?BV_SessionID=@@@@0946066624.1239894434@@@@&BV_EngineID=cc
deadegllkmeffcefecekedgfndggh.0
http://www.easyjet.com/EN/Planning/baggage.html
http://www.airberlin.com/site/flug_gepaeck_luggage.php
http://www.germanwings.com/nl/Info-
Services/FAQ_bagage_Zijn_er_beperkingen_bij_de_handbagage_wat_grote_gewi
cht_en_aantal_betreft.htm
Survey on standard weights of passengers and luggage
264
http://www.germanwings.com/nl/Info-
Services/FAQ_bagage_Zijn_er_beperkingen_bij_de_bagage_wat_het_aantal_en_
het_gewicht_betreft.htm
http://www.emirates.com/nl/english/plan_book/essential_information/Baggage/B
aggage_Allowances_and_Rules.aspx
http://www.lufthansa.com/online/portal/lh/de/info_and_services/baggage?l=en&
nodeid=1769603&cid=18002
http://www.lufthansa.com/online/portal/lh/de/info_and_services/baggage?l=en&
nodeid=1769620&cid=18002
http://www.usairways.com/awa/content/traveltools/baggage/baggagepolicies.as
px
http://www.iberia.com/OneToOne/v3/obsmenu.do?prgOid=8462&tabId=3&menu
Id=02090300000000&menuRP=1&language=en&country=NL&market=NL&IS_AN
ONYMOUS=true
http://www.iberia.com/OneToOne/v3/program.do?prgOid=9465&tabId=3&menuI
d=02090700000000&language=en&country=NL&market=NL&IS_ANONYMOUS=tr
ue
http://www.aircomet.com/condiciones_de_transporte.php#Equipaje
http://www.aireuropa.com/en/guia_pasajero/equipaj.html
http://www.aireuropa.com/en/guia_pasajero/equipaj_mano.html
http://www.iberworld.com/e-mano.aspx
http://www.iberworld.com/e-permitido.aspx