Bear Down Wildcats

When the concept of what used to be called "flying ticketless" first came about, one guy showed up at the airport naked. If he didn't need a ticket, he didn't see a need for a pocket, either.

lol no.

A wee bit

I'm thinking that isn't the case.

who farted?

I'm going to patent chickens having sex with orangutans.

Oldest flyable Boeing airliner takes last flight

http://www.kiro7.com/news/local/oldest- ... /243994076" target="_blank

Must be nice...

UAEebs86 wrote:Must be nice...

So did they let him sit in first class?

Longhorned wrote:

UAEebs86 wrote:Must be nice...

So did they let him sit in first class?

Did they still make him pay for his second checked bag?

That's strange and rare. Empty flights are a relic of the pre 9/11 world. Airlines do anything to fill up flights now.

ASUHATER! wrote:That's strange and rare. Empty flights are a relic of the pre 9/11 world. Airlines do anything to fill up flights now.

Including canceling the flight and making up some excuse so they don't have to give you a hotel voucher.

Longhorned wrote:

ASUHATER! wrote:That's strange and rare. Empty flights are a relic of the pre 9/11 world. Airlines do anything to fill up flights now.

Including canceling the flight and making up some excuse so they don't have to give you a hotel voucher.

Which has never happened. There's always, 100% of the time, without question, a valid excuse. Which usually is crew and/or passenger safety.

ASUHATER! wrote:

Longhorned wrote:

ASUHATER! wrote:That's strange and rare. Empty flights are a relic of the pre 9/11 world. Airlines do anything to fill up flights now.

Including canceling the flight and making up some excuse so they don't have to give you a hotel voucher.

Which has never happened. There's always, 100% of the time, without question, a valid excuse. Which usually is crew and/or passenger safety.

Valid but fabricated

.

Flight crew issues? So you want tired and overworked crews flying? Weather? So you want to fly in dangerous weather? Maintenance? Do you want to fly on a plane that hasn't been serviced properly?

That's the vast vast vast majority of delays and cancellations there. But please, keep making shit up about them delaying you for no good reason. What exactly do airlines have to gain by passing off customers and not keeping their schedules again? I'll wait for an eternity for an answer to that...

ASUHATER! wrote:Flight crew issues? So you want tired and overworked crews flying? Weather? So you want to fly in dangerous weather? Maintenance? Do you want to fly on a plane that hasn't been serviced properly?

That's the vast vast vast majority of delays and cancellations there. But please, keep making shit up about them delaying you for no good reason. What exactly do airlines have to gain by passing off customers and not keeping their schedules again? I'll wait for an eternity for an answer to that...

I'm just pulling your airline apologist puppet strings. But in answer to your question that you'll wait an eternity for, each flight operates at a cost (gate fees, fuel, cleaning, etc.), which is minimized by having fewer flights with more passengers. This is especially important for regional back-and-forth flights and for airports served by the airline for reasons other than customer travel demands. The news story of the guy who was the only passenger on that flight even cites the reason why that flight took off -- it needed to be in place for the next flight. If the next flight were a turnaround back to New Orleans that also had too few passengers, then what?

The degree to which the airline industry over-scheduled flights that couldn't take off on time was attested by pilots in the late 90s. I'm not saying it happens, but the resentment that passengers can make it seem like it does. Passengers familiar with particular routes often consider it a novice move to book those particular routes.

Individual gate agents have also been known to re-route individual passengers just to dick them over, just as baggage handlers deliberately send a customer's bags to the wrong destination. Airline employees don't particularly enjoy serving customers, and for good reason -- the resentment is cyclical. Passengers even so disrespect pilots nowadays that they've perpetuated the baseless myth of the "autopilot," a supposedly automated system that flies and even lands airplanes at the touch of a button. In turn, flight attendants and gate agents are rude and abusive to the wrong people. It isn't just about some invisible person at the controls who represents the larger interests of the airline industry.

ASUHATER! wrote:That's strange and rare. Empty flights are a relic of the pre 9/11 world. Airlines do anything to fill up flights now.

You seem to be answering the question in the thread title in the negative. Airlines have ALWAYS done anything they could to fill up flights. ALWAYS.

The whole schtick about being compensated for being bumped was because people got jack of them over booking flights all the time and sued for breach of contract. And that was followed by the golden age of flying where passengers would take advantage of the compensation regime and volunteer to be bumped just so they could get the compensation which could be as generous as additional free flights (which could be sold on) in some cases.

Unsold seats get cheaper immediately before take-off too. It is better to have a bum on a seat at half price than an empty seat. That is why they were happy to overbook - it lessened the impact of a no-show and the comp was still cheaper than an empty seat.

And that was all happening LONG before 9/11.

ASUHATER! wrote:Flight crew issues? So you want tired and overworked crews flying? Weather? So you want to fly in dangerous weather? Maintenance? Do you want to fly on a plane that hasn't been serviced properly?

That's the vast vast vast majority of delays and cancellations there. But please, keep making shit up about them delaying you for no good reason. What exactly do airlines have to gain by passing off customers and not keeping their schedules again? I'll wait for an eternity for an answer to that...

You speak with such authority about a topic about which I am confident you know nothing. I might be wrong, but I'm guessing not.

Puerco wrote:

ASUHATER! wrote:Flight crew issues? So you want tired and overworked crews flying? Weather? So you want to fly in dangerous weather? Maintenance? Do you want to fly on a plane that hasn't been serviced properly?

That's the vast vast vast majority of delays and cancellations there. But please, keep making shit up about them delaying you for no good reason. What exactly do airlines have to gain by passing off customers and not keeping their schedules again? I'll wait for an eternity for an answer to that...

You speak with such authority about a topic about which I am confident you know nothing. I might be wrong, but I'm guessing not.

I think mostly it's just that everyone needs to embrace this discussion topic's irony, which dates back to summer 2007. The truth doesn't rest in official policy or media investigations or academic studies to substantiate industry-wide conspiracies. The truth rests in the completely fucked experience and deep psychotic hatred of commercial flying, especially from the perspective of frequent passengers and airline employees.

Longhorned wrote:

Puerco wrote:

ASUHATER! wrote:Flight crew issues? So you want tired and overworked crews flying? Weather? So you want to fly in dangerous weather? Maintenance? Do you want to fly on a plane that hasn't been serviced properly?

That's the vast vast vast majority of delays and cancellations there. But please, keep making shit up about them delaying you for no good reason. What exactly do airlines have to gain by passing off customers and not keeping their schedules again? I'll wait for an eternity for an answer to that...

You speak with such authority about a topic about which I am confident you know nothing. I might be wrong, but I'm guessing not.

I think mostly it's just that everyone needs to embrace this discussion topic's irony, which dates back to summer 2007. The truth doesn't rest in official policy or media investigations or academic studies to substantiate industry-wide conspiracies. The truth rests in the completely fucked experience and deep psychotic hatred of commercial flying, especially from the perspective of frequent passengers and airline employees.

I don't understand it at all. You want to be treated better, pay for first class. You want the cheapest way to get someplace fast (which by the way is cheaper than traveling the same route 30 years ago), you're going to get limited service.

Flying Emirates economy was life changing.

CalStateTempe wrote:Flying Emirates economy was life changing.

10 across in a 777? No thanks.

legallykenny wrote:

Longhorned wrote:

Puerco wrote:

ASUHATER! wrote:Flight crew issues? So you want tired and overworked crews flying? Weather? So you want to fly in dangerous weather? Maintenance? Do you want to fly on a plane that hasn't been serviced properly?

That's the vast vast vast majority of delays and cancellations there. But please, keep making shit up about them delaying you for no good reason. What exactly do airlines have to gain by passing off customers and not keeping their schedules again? I'll wait for an eternity for an answer to that...

You speak with such authority about a topic about which I am confident you know nothing. I might be wrong, but I'm guessing not.

I think mostly it's just that everyone needs to embrace this discussion topic's irony, which dates back to summer 2007. The truth doesn't rest in official policy or media investigations or academic studies to substantiate industry-wide conspiracies. The truth rests in the completely fucked experience and deep psychotic hatred of commercial flying, especially from the perspective of frequent passengers and airline employees.

I don't understand it at all. You want to be treated better, pay for first class. You want the cheapest way to get someplace fast (which by the way is cheaper than traveling the same route 30 years ago), you're going to get limited service.

I can't remember the source, but someone legit who studied the matter debunked the myth of the "Golden Age of Air Travel" by showing that all those things people are nostalgic for from the 1960s are all vastly surpassed by first class travel today (including U.S. domestic flights), which costs less than an economy ticket did back then.

And even if the chances of your flight getting to its destination on time is no better than it is in economy class, you get a special lounge to enjoy and your own, special agents giving you privileged service in rebooking a different flight.

Still, the reality is that close to 100% of travelers can't regularly fly first class, and will continue to get bumped around by tired, impatient airline employees, whom they'll lash out at, and get lashed out at in return. Nobody's going to say, "Hey, if I wanted to be treated civilly, I should fly first class."

legallykenny wrote:

CalStateTempe wrote:Flying Emirates economy was life changing.

10 across in a 777? No thanks.

I was dreading the 14hrs+ from SFO to Dubai, but seriously they try to make the economy experience as painless as possible.

Now business class, which you'd probably be flying was the tits. Got a special request approve to visit my father in law on the upper deck of the a380

I hear you, CST. I've yet to have a qualm flying economy class with any non-U.S. airline other than Air Canada.

What I'll never understand is why anyone would spend their own money on business or first class for an overseas flight, unless you're so freaking famous that people won't leave you alone in transit. Why spend that kind of money on something other than a real experience?

You want to fly first class? Call into work sick, recline in your Lazy Boy with a bottle of whiskey and some online movies, and jerk off. That's flying first class.

When you've got so much money that the difference between $500 and $3000 doesn't register.

Puerco wrote:When you've got so much money that the difference between $500 and $3000 doesn't register.

Also when you factor in the family of four thing.

Oops

Feds will require airline baggage fee refunds when bags are delayed

http://airport.blog.ajc.com/2016/07/27/ ... e-delayed/" target="_blank

A new measure signed into law this month will require airlines to refund baggage fees when bags are delayed.

With the new law, “passengers won’t have to spend a ton of time tracking down a refund when the airline doesn’t deliver,” according to U.S. Sen. John Thune, chairman of the Senate Commerce committee, during remarks on the Senate floor this month.

The measure in a Federal Aviation Administration re-authorization extension bill signed into law this month directs the U.S. Transportation Secretary to issue regulations on the matter within a year.

The new regulations would require an airline to “promptly provide to a passenger an automated refund for any ancillary fees paid by the passenger for checked baggage” if the bag is not delivered within 12 hours of arrival of a domestic flight, or within 15 hours of arrival of an international flight. The passenger would need to notify the airline of the lost or delayed baggage to get the refund.

Great carrots and sticks approach.

So, I've come to the conclusion that all Asian airlines > all European airlines > all American airlines. Why do we put up with it?

Puerco wrote:So, I've come to the conclusion that all Asian airlines > all European airlines > all American airlines. Why do we put up with it?

It's time to make America great again.

Back to regulating the airlines! Ah, those were the days...

azgreg wrote:Feds will require airline baggage fee refunds when bags are delayed

http://airport.blog.ajc.com/2016/07/27/ ... e-delayed/" target="_blank

A new measure signed into law this month will require airlines to refund baggage fees when bags are delayed.

With the new law, “passengers won’t have to spend a ton of time tracking down a refund when the airline doesn’t deliver,” according to U.S. Sen. John Thune, chairman of the Senate Commerce committee, during remarks on the Senate floor this month.

The measure in a Federal Aviation Administration re-authorization extension bill signed into law this month directs the U.S. Transportation Secretary to issue regulations on the matter within a year.

The new regulations would require an airline to “promptly provide to a passenger an automated refund for any ancillary fees paid by the passenger for checked baggage” if the bag is not delivered within 12 hours of arrival of a domestic flight, or within 15 hours of arrival of an international flight. The passenger would need to notify the airline of the lost or delayed baggage to get the refund.

1) Since I know jack shit about the airline industry, can somebody explain to me why there isn't a phone ap that tracks the location of your checked in baggage in real time? Why do I have to go to baggage claim, wait for everybody to get their luggage and walk away happy, and then make my own determination that my bag must be somewhere in an unknown part of the world? Scanners are very sophisticated now, and there should be no problem tracking by bar code in the same way it's done for package deliveries. I should be able to land in Boston, open the ap, discover that my suitcase is on a flight to Honolulu, and then proceed directly to my hotel while getting used to the idea that I'll be giving a lecture at Tufts in my shorts.

2) I wish the feds would require cable companies to refund consumers who have to pay for internet while the internet is out.

Longhorned wrote:
2) I wish the feds would require cable companies to refund consumers who have to pay for internet while the internet is out.

unrelated, why are those AT&T commercials about the internet being down so funny to me?

Not this guy.

don't you still have to demonstrate a specific reason to be there still? like for education or work or diplomatic purposes?

Hells yeah. I'm making that trip within the next 2 years for sure.

Chicago O'Hare airport workers to strike November 29

Janitors, cabin cleaners fight for $15 an hour



http://www.keyt.com/news/national-world ... /178037042" target="_blank

United Airlines losing a PR and social media issue after making a pre-teen change out of leggings prior to boarding a flight since they were deemed inappropriate attire by the gate agent...
Apparently they let one of the girls' dads get on wearing shorts.

Another reason why I purposely go out of my way to avoid flying united.

CalStateTempe wrote:Another reason why I purposely go out of my way to avoid flying united.

You do look dang good in leggings.

Merkin wrote:

As well-played as a timeout with one second on the clock...

From the 4th Ave Street Fair in Tucson, believe this guy used to hang out at the UA too until he was kicked off campus.

So United as just saving her soul.

Chicat wrote:United Airlines losing a PR and social media issue after making a pre-teen change out of leggings prior to boarding a flight since they were deemed inappropriate attire by the gate agent...

Apparently they let one of the girls' dads get on wearing shorts.

I actually agree with their policy but I think a 10 year old is young enough for this to not apply to them