Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
USAToday's Irresponsible Piece On Airlines  
User currently offlineFalcon84 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Posted (6 years 8 months 3 days 22 hours ago) and read 13981 times:

Just got done reading with a mixture of anger and amusement, the lead editorial in the August 20th USAToday, entitled "How airlines mistreat fliers and get Congress to go along." I have rarely read such a piece of irresponsible, negative ranting, with no solutions journalism, in my life.

http://blogs.usatoday.com/oped/2007/08/our-view-on-air.html#more

1. There is no airline number for any airline that is "1669Y". USAToday was obviously given a boarding pass from a disgruntled customer, and didn't ask anyone how to read it. Typical idiocy from newspapers.

2. There's no explaination about WHY the plane was diverted; what conditions caused the diverson; why the plane just can't leave when it must. Nothing. No information.

3. No explaination about the ATC system. None.

4. No explaination as to why the doors on a flight from another nation cannot just be opened, and that that is a GOVERNMENT rule.

Their answer? "There outta be a law". That's it. And a bunch of complaints about lobbyists, which I share in general-but no answers, just negative ranting.

Airlines aren't perfect, God knows, but it's tiring to be treated as a punching bag for irresponsible journalist entities, and by uneducated customers (the latter on some occasions, not all).

I urge all airline employees who feel the same to send an email to USAToday at letters@usatoday.com and tell them to come up with solutions, not just negative ranating. I already did. I'll share my letter with you when I get home tonight.

None of us like delays. It's irritating when someone like USAToday takes pot-shots, and don't even have the balls to give solutions.

117 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlineEatmybologna From France, joined Apr 2005, 412 posts, RR: 0
Reply 1, posted (6 years 8 months 3 days 21 hours ago) and read 13889 times:

Falcon84,

though some of the facts are left out, journalism, quoted from the American Heritage Dictionary, is a "style of writing characteristic of material in newspapers and magazines, consisting of direct presentation of facts or occurrences with little attempt at analysis or interpretation."

This is a piece about a lack of laws set in place to protect consumers' rights. It's not the paper's responsibility to come up with solutions, but rather the duty of legislature and congressional bodies. This composition was printed in order to apply pressure on congress to enact.

[Edited 2007-08-21 00:10:22]


Isn't knowledge more than just the acquisition of information? Shouldn't the acquired information be correct?
User currently offlineCory6188 From United States of America, joined Feb 2004, 2686 posts, RR: 6
Reply 2, posted (6 years 8 months 3 days 21 hours ago) and read 13855 times:

It is a bit ridiculous.....especially given the unique circumstances surrounding international flights that the opinion piece blatantly failed to even research in the slightest. It sure discredits USA Today as a reputable news source, in my opinion, when they can't even be bothered to do basic research before posting such a opinionated article. Flight 1669Y? Come on, as Falcon84 pointed out, what flight has anyone ever been on where there was a letter at the end? Did they not bother to find out that the "Y" simply means that the pax traveled in coach?

Argh...  banghead 


User currently offlineCedarjet From United Kingdom, joined May 1999, 7934 posts, RR: 54
Reply 3, posted (6 years 8 months 3 days 21 hours ago) and read 13805 times:

You guys are hilarious. The boarding card says 1669Y and you seize upon this to discredit the whole piece. Loads of flight numbers do contain a letter, anyway the way US carriers treat their customers is a national disgrace, and while it's easier to shoot the messenger, I suggest you take a minute to look at the real problem, eg, the state of the industry and how it uses "terror" laws against normal passengers, in this case where the pax were treated like criminals merely because they wanted - as I, and you, would have - to get off after sitting without food etc on the BWI tarmac for hours. That it has become a wise move to carry some emergency rations of food on a US flight, as I will from now on, shows how bad things have got. And instead you decide to attack USA Today cos they accidentally added a single letter to the flight number of the flight in question?


fly Saha Air 707s daily from Tehran's downtown Mehrabad to Mashhad, Kish Island and Ahwaz
User currently offlineTravatl From United States of America, joined Mar 2001, 2173 posts, RR: 7
Reply 4, posted (6 years 8 months 3 days 21 hours ago) and read 13733 times:

Quoting Cory6188 (Reply 2):
It sure discredits USA Today as a reputable news source

Uh, duh, it's McPaper........


User currently offlineStyle From United Kingdom, joined Aug 2006, 263 posts, RR: 0
Reply 5, posted (6 years 8 months 3 days 21 hours ago) and read 13695 times:

Quoting Cedarjet (Reply 3):
suggest you take a minute to look at the real problem, eg, the state of the industry and how it uses "terror" laws against normal passengers, in this case where the pax were treated like criminals merely because they wanted - as I, and you, would have - to get off after sitting without food etc on the BWI tarmac for hours.

It's not the industry that uses 'terror' laws to treat passengers this way, why don't you try looking at the government and the failing ATC system. If the article were about how airlines overbook flights and don't get passengers to their vacation spots because of it then I would be in total agreement.

The OP is correct, he pointed out many valid points and not just the '1699Y'. Up until now I have respected USA Today's aviation coverage but this just goes to show how much they are out of touch with the actual problems in aviation today.

Instead of saying that the airline kept them stuck in a plane for hours, why didn't they say that its the government that doesn't allow passengers to disembark the plane?


User currently offlineIaddca From United States of America, joined Jul 2007, 286 posts, RR: 0
Reply 6, posted (6 years 8 months 3 days 21 hours ago) and read 13681 times:

The article reads like it was written by a high school op-ed staffer. The $2 million spent on lobbyists impacts the industry's financials about as much as a .00001 cent increase in the price of Jet A. Still, to keep with USAToday fashion, I would have liked to have seen one of those charts they're famous for.

User currently offlineJetblue32 From United States of America, joined Aug 2007, 78 posts, RR: 0
Reply 7, posted (6 years 8 months 3 days 21 hours ago) and read 13681 times:

As a CSA I can understand your frustration, and I understand how frustrating they delays and long tarmac waits are, but USAToday and the writiers of this article are way out of line in saying the solution is to pass laws and use strong-arm tactics on the airlines. With all the heat I have to take from customers, not to mention the hours I have spent sitting on the tarmac at JFK and other crowded airports when I non-rev, I would wish more than anything that we could have a quick solution to this problem. But the truth is we don't have any choice with the outdated and overcrowded ATC systems we have to work with. Not to mention they have very poor communication; they will tell us an hour or two, then extend it at the last minute, or not have any answers for us when the time comes we were originally told a ground hold would be released. You really think imposing fines on the airlines or forcing them to give greater financial compensation in situations beyond their control is going to fix the problem? Or you could limit the amount of time they are allowed to sit on the tarmac, but that would only force them to return to the gate and cancel your flight all together, when you might otherwise have been able to finally take off in a few minutes. Better late than never, right? For now your best bet is to anticipate these problems and plan accordingly. Take early morning flights that are less likely to be delayed or cancelled (that's what I do when I non-rev). Don't book a flight that only arrives two hours before an important business meeting, or a wedding or funeral, or a cruise ship departure; odds are you won't make it, especially if you take an afternoon or evening flight. And if you do get delayed, getting belligerant to airline personnel or threatening to sue and making other empty threats will get you nowhere. If USAToday (or the people who wrote this article) get their way, the only guarantee that you will have is paying a considerably higher fare, either for fewer available seats/flights, or for the legal costs the airlines will have to pay out as a result of something that really is beyond their control for the moment. As I said before, I hate the situation as much as you or anyone else, but scapegoating or strong-arming the airlines and their employees will only make the sitaution worse, not better.

User currently offlineCharlienorth From United States of America, joined Jun 2006, 1113 posts, RR: 5
Reply 8, posted (6 years 8 months 3 days 21 hours ago) and read 13658 times:

Definitely written by someone who has no clue....at least There was a more realistic column in the Chicago Tribune
http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/o...d0816chapmanaug16,0,7596789.column


User currently offlineRedngold From United States of America, joined Mar 2000, 6907 posts, RR: 45
Reply 9, posted (6 years 8 months 3 days 21 hours ago) and read 13658 times:

IMHO, getting exercised about a USAToday piece is futile. I've heard the president/CEO of the company speak, and it became obvious after listening to him that he's all about selling newspapers and pleasing the public rather than getting involved in quality journalism.

Also, remember that the piece you're upset about is an editorial - an opinion piece, not an article (although I don't expect your average USAToday reader to be as discerning about that difference.)

Edit: spell

[Edited 2007-08-21 00:59:54]


Up, up and away!
User currently offlineCoal From United States of America, joined Aug 2006, 1945 posts, RR: 9
Reply 10, posted (6 years 8 months 3 days 21 hours ago) and read 13658 times:

Quoting Cory6188 (Reply 2):
It sure discredits USA Today as a reputable news source

It really is starting to get to me when people are surprised at the journalistic quality of USA Today, Time, or Fox News. For that matter, you should be getting your news from Us Weekly, which to me is a much more reputable source of information than the picture-clad USA Today.

Let us know when you grow up and start reading the NY Times or the IHT.

Quoting Travatl (Reply 4):
Uh, duh, it's McPaper........

 checkmark 

Cheers
Coal



Nxt Flts: VF SIN-DPS | SQ DPS-SIN-SYD
User currently offlineFlyABR From United States of America, joined Sep 2003, 637 posts, RR: 0
Reply 11, posted (6 years 8 months 3 days 21 hours ago) and read 13622 times:

once the government updates/fixes the air traffic control system...then they can go witch hunting at the airlines. until then...forget about it! course we all know how long it'll be before there is any progress on the ATC system!

User currently offlineRdwelch From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 12, posted (6 years 8 months 3 days 21 hours ago) and read 13570 times:

The funny thing is that USA Today is read by a LARGE number of air travelers. The preeminent free hotel newspaper in the nation. Just take a look around at all the left over copies after every bank of flights and you can get an idea of the influence it has on the traveling public, not just the business traveler. However, like everything else we choose to read what we read and draw our own conclusions from that.

I personally like the sudoku and crossword section, but everything else isn't my cup of tea.

Gus


User currently offlineHalls120 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 13, posted (6 years 8 months 3 days 21 hours ago) and read 13559 times:

Quoting Falcon84 (Thread starter):
I have rarely read such a piece of irresponsible, negative ranting, with no solutions journalism, in my life

You obviously don't read USA Today very often, do you? It's the crappiest newspaper in the country.


User currently offlineDashTrash From United States of America, joined Aug 2006, 1439 posts, RR: 2
Reply 14, posted (6 years 8 months 3 days 19 hours ago) and read 13361 times:

Sorry guys, but when I'm sitting in the cockpit looking at open gates with ops telling me that mine is occupied and I'm going to have to wait, I'm on USA Today's side.

Entirely too many times I've shown up to operate a flight, and find out it's been canceled from the gate agent. No call from my company.

How about the time(s) all 50 passengers busted their connections because ops didn't want to change our gate leading to us waiting over an hour for ours to open up(see opening statement).

What about the time(s) we pushed an hour late because the airline didn't send in the fuel order, or the aircraft didn't get catered, or lav serviced, etc.

The airline industry in the US is absolute shit.

While no mention about ATC was made in the article, does ATC force the airlines to fly 100 flights into an airport that can only handle 90?

Who's fault is it that an airplane diverts, then sits for several hours on the ramp full of passengers while they're staring at open gates?

Who's fault is it that the airline doesn't at very least send a catering truck and lav truck out to an airplane that's been sitting to replenish the galleys and service the shitters. That my friend, CAN be done on the ramp away from a gate.

As far as having a letter in the flight number, airlines will add that when there is more than one airplane with that flight number in the air. US used to fly NAS-CLT-LGA with the same flight number, but with an aircraft swap. When the NAS-CLT segment was late, the "continuation" to LGA would leave on time, with a letter behind the flight number to differentiate between the two.

Air Wisconsin adds a letter to continuing flight segments as a regular practice.

I won't say that the airlines are responsible for all the bullshit, but they are responsible for the majority of it.


User currently offlineSPREE34 From United States of America, joined Jun 2004, 2196 posts, RR: 9
Reply 15, posted (6 years 8 months 3 days 18 hours ago) and read 13211 times:

Quoting Cory6188 (Reply 2):
It sure discredits USA Today as a reputable news source,

ROFLMAO! Like Travatl says, "McPaper", and that's probably an insult to the clown.

Quoting Cedarjet (Reply 3):
I suggest you take a minute to look at the real problem, eg, the state of the industry and how it uses "terror" laws against normal passengers, in this case where the pax were treated like criminals merely because they wanted - as I, and you, would have - to get off after sitting without food etc on the BWI tarmac for hours.

Been there seen that. It should be replaced with Customer Service. Quit hiding behind phrases that start with FAA or TSA. Charge what the seat is worth, then provide the service.

Quoting Style (Reply 5):
failing ATC system

The ATC system? That one is getting old as well. When the carriers schedule 129 flights into a time period where the airport can accept 65, that is not ATC. It is a lack of concrete and gates at the field and ATC has no control over that. All of the neatest ATC hardware in the world will not fix that.

Quoting Jetblue32 (Reply 7):
but USAToday and the writiers of this article are way out of line in saying the solution is to pass laws and use strong-arm tactics on the airlines

Correct. Customer Service is the solution, but hey, we are talking US carriers, who with an exception or two, have forgotten what that is. As long as pax put up with it nothing will change.

Quoting Jetblue32 (Reply 7):
outdated and overcrowded ATC systems

ATC? Huh? Again, how is it ATCs fault when 120+ arrivals are scheduled into a field that can accept 60+? Please, explain this to me.
How is it ATC's fault when there are not enough gates? They don't control gates.
Outdated, or at least behind I'll give you. Overcrowded? Rarely. When weather takes away airspace the planes have to squeeze into less space. When the carriers have over scheduled an airport, airplanes have to hold, thus squeezing more airspace.

Quoting FlyABR (Reply 11):
once the government updates/fixes the air traffic control system...then they can go witch hunting at the airlines. until then...forget about it! course we all know how long it'll be before there is any progress on the ATC system!

Again, the ATC system is a minuscule factor, if any, in most of the delays. ATC is no factor at all in cancellations. ATC cannot cancel a flight. Only the carrier can cancel a flight, and they do it for their convenience and logistics further down line.
I am against more government interference in the industry. More government rules and laws will just further bog down already failing businesses. Passengers need to quit taking the crap quietly. I don't mean mutiny on the airplane, don't crap on the FAs, but once out of the plane start the bitching. Complain right away to the airline reps at the destination. Write the company. And if your are stuck on the tarmac, whip out your mobile phone and start calling the TV stations.



I don't understand everything I don't know about this.
User currently offlineLINATE From United States of America, joined Jun 2007, 77 posts, RR: 0
Reply 16, posted (6 years 8 months 3 days 18 hours ago) and read 13162 times:

Quoting SPREE34 (Reply 15):
I am against more government interference in the industry. More government rules and laws will just further bog down already failing businesses. Passengers need to quit taking the crap quietly. I don't mean mutiny on the airplane, don't crap on the FAs, but once out of the plane start the bitching. Complain right away to the airline reps at the destination. Write the company. And if your are stuck on the tarmac, whip out your mobile phone and start calling the TV stations.



Amen SPREE34. You brought up very god and objective points on your posting. I totally agree with you.
I haven't however found an effective way of complaining. It does not seem to go anywhere with the airline business going the way it is. But maybe if a lot of people start doing it it will get better.

I hope that some of the FA's in this forum at one point realize that reacting defensively towards the pain that the passengers are feeling nowadays is not going to help the airlines at all, and start acting constructively towards a solution or at least a mitigation.

cheers,


User currently offlineLAXdude1023 From India, joined Sep 2006, 7321 posts, RR: 24
Reply 17, posted (6 years 8 months 3 days 18 hours ago) and read 13092 times:

I fail to see how more laws are going to solve anything. Newspaper blogs exist for the sole purpose of bitching and moaning.

What needs to be happen is internal overhaul from the airlines, not more government regulation. The airlines need to kick their own ass, not have the government do it.

Quoting Coal (Reply 10):
It really is starting to get to me when people are surprised at the journalistic quality of USA Today, Time, or Fox News. For that matter, you should be getting your news from Us Weekly, which to me is a much more reputable source of information than the picture-clad USA Today.

Exactly. Ive had many many issues with the media. Not just for stuff like this, but when I used to do non profit work, I had a couple of run ins. Journalistic quality for the most part isnt very good. Ill use the recent China Airlines situation. The first thing the media came out and said was that Since 1994 over 1000 people have died from CI incidents. Not true, only 688 have. Granted that still isnt good, but the media took it upon themselves to distort the facts (it was CNN). In fact 825 people have died in CI incidents in their existance. It just bothers me the way they do this.



Stewed...Lewd...Crude...Irreverent...Belligerent
User currently offlineRampart From United States of America, joined Aug 2005, 3067 posts, RR: 7
Reply 18, posted (6 years 8 months 3 days 18 hours ago) and read 13022 times:

Quoting DashTrash (Reply 14):
Sorry guys, but when I'm sitting in the cockpit looking at open gates with ops telling me that mine is occupied and I'm going to have to wait, I'm on USA Today's side.

 checkmark   checkmark  Those of you complaining about USAToday's journalism ought to read DashTrash's whole post above. Pretty revealing.

As a mere passenger, no connection whatsoever to the travel industry, I'll walk through the OP's original complaints:

Quoting Falcon84 (Thread starter):
1. There is no airline number for any airline that is "1669Y". USAToday was obviously given a boarding pass from a disgruntled customer, and didn't ask anyone how to read it. Typical idiocy from newspapers.

OMG, stop the presses! The author mistakenly inserted an alphanumeral! Must have been written by a 6th grader.  Yeah sure Please! I'm far more concerned about the critique of this article here in this thread than I am about a typo in the paper.

Quoting Falcon84 (Thread starter):
2. There's no explaination about WHY the plane was diverted; what conditions caused the diverson; why the plane just can't leave when it must. Nothing. No information.

First of all, was there space to print that information? This wasn't a long article. Furthermore, does the "why" matter a whole lot? Not to a passenger stuck on a diverted plane. How about explanations of "why?" for the passenger? I'm sure better communications from the crew might relieve some anxiety. Long waits in cramped cabins seem to be more common than ever. It's not healthy. Something *should* be done about that. Airlines, including you employees doing the whining here, need to remember that they are service industries where customers are the priority.

Quoting Falcon84 (Thread starter):
3. No explaination about the ATC system. None.

Was it even relevant here? Maybe, maybe not. That wasn't the focus of this particular (again, short) article, though I have seen good journalism recently on the ATC problems. Not like it's an ignored story.

Quoting Falcon84 (Thread starter):
4. No explaination as to why the doors on a flight from another nation cannot just be opened, and that that is a GOVERNMENT rule.

That's a consideration, sure, but 2nd or 3rd tier in my mind. Again, see my response to #2 above. Foreign travellers require the same attention and comfort that domestic travellers do. Someone needs to figure out how to handle these situations, even for flights arriving from foreign destinations.

Quoting Falcon84 (Thread starter):
I urge all airline employees who feel the same to send an email to USAToday at letters@usatoday.com and tell them to come up with solutions, not just negative ranating. I already did. I'll share my letter with you when I get home tonight.

Journalists should listen to different points of view, true. I would be willing to bet that the airline employee responses would be overwhelmed. But aren't airlines already getting a strong voice via lobbyists? Where do passengers and customers turn? Nowhere but the press. Hence these types of articles.

On threads like this, I wonder if you airline employees realize that sometimes garden variety passengers like me are reading what you write. As a fan and supporter, I sympathize with your positions most of the time. This thread, however, looks like petty whining to me. I assume you aren't showing your true colors, and most of you really do like attending to customers or you wouldn't be in the job. I assume that there's plenty more office talk about the annoying passengers of the day that I wouldn't hear about. Just as there's plenty of around the office and at home discussion of the annoying airline employee of the day. A.net must be one of those rare places where the two can collide.

After all that, I would conclude that the USAToday article is one of many that strikes a chord with travellers like me, grammar and research taken for what it's worth.

-Rampart


User currently offlineHalls120 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 19, posted (6 years 8 months 3 days 18 hours ago) and read 13007 times:

Quoting Rampart (Reply 18):
After all that, I would conclude that the USAToday article is one of many that strikes a chord with travellers like me, grammar and research taken for what it's worth.

USAToday is a sorry excuse for quality journalism. That anyone puts stock in anything they produce is a sad example of what the American public accepts these days.


User currently offlineRampart From United States of America, joined Aug 2005, 3067 posts, RR: 7
Reply 20, posted (6 years 8 months 3 days 17 hours ago) and read 12931 times:

Quoting Halls120 (Reply 19):
USAToday is a sorry excuse for quality journalism. That anyone puts stock in anything they produce is a sad example of what the American public accepts these days.

I never said USAToday was quality journalism. It is, for better or worse, mass journalism, and read by millions. Believe it or not, many of those readers are capable of critical thinking. I do point out that what the article says is similar to what I hear other passengers say, and what other media outlets have said. Instead of insulting my position, which happens to agree with this one of many media reports, how about acknowledging that I have a relevant concern, with which you may or may not agree?

Sadder of what the American public accepts these days is callousness and snobbery. Sound familiar? Probably not.

-Rampart


User currently offlineHalls120 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 21, posted (6 years 8 months 3 days 17 hours ago) and read 12898 times:

Quoting Rampart (Reply 20):
It is, for better or worse, mass journalism, and read by millions. Believe it or not, many of those readers are capable of critical thinking.

Sorry, but I think people who rely on USAToday as their primary news source are as intellectually lazy as they come. Call me a snob if you want, but when there numerous other news sources available that actually produce and print quality, well-researched and documented articles, reading USAToday is like getting your news from the National Enquirer.

Quoting Rampart (Reply 20):
Instead of insulting my position, which happens to agree with this one of many media reports, how about acknowledging that I have a relevant concern, with which you may or may not agree?

I wasn't insulting your position. I was insulting USAToday. And yes, I am insulting anyone who primarily relies on USAToday for their news. Flame me if you want - that is my opinion. Which last time I checked, I'm entitled to have.


User currently offlineRampart From United States of America, joined Aug 2005, 3067 posts, RR: 7
Reply 22, posted (6 years 8 months 3 days 17 hours ago) and read 12824 times:

Quoting Halls120 (Reply 21):
I wasn't insulting your position. I was insulting USAToday. And yes, I am insulting anyone who primarily relies on USAToday for their news. Flame me if you want - that is my opinion. Which last time I checked, I'm entitled to have.

Maybe you didn't realize that you were in effect insulting my position. To quote you directly:

Quoting Halls120 (Reply 19):
That anyone puts stock in anything they produce...

Well, that would be me, because I obviously took stock in the article, evidenced from my first post, because large parts of it rang true for me. But it isn't unusual, as we've seen many similar pieces from NY Times to Newsweek to Wall Street Journal.

I don't disagree with your assessment of the paper's quality. I don't lump it in with the Enquirer or Us, but certainly not a "paper of record". I do recognize it as a very large mass media voice. And still, the particular opinion piece in question is quite common.

Because I happen to read USAToday when someone posts a link on a forum or when it's all I have in a hotel room, I'm not entitled to my opinion as well? Or, more precisely, my opinion isn't as good as yours? To dismiss this opinion, my opinion, and many other travellers', simply based on where we read is the height of arrogance. Please tell me this isn't what you imply.

I hope my clarification makes sense.

-Rampart


User currently offlineStuckInCA From United States of America, joined Oct 2005, 1922 posts, RR: 0
Reply 23, posted (6 years 8 months 3 days 17 hours ago) and read 12824 times:

Quoting Falcon84 (Thread starter):
None of us like delays. It's irritating when someone like USAToday takes pot-shots, and don't even have the balls to give solutions.

Why should a newspaper (albeit a poor one) be solving problems in the aviation industry?

Quoting Eatmybologna (Reply 1):
It's not the paper's responsibility to come up with solutions, but rather the duty of legislature and congressional bodies. This composition was printed in order to apply pressure on congress to enact.

Yep.

Quoting Halls120 (Reply 19):
USAToday is a sorry excuse for quality journalism. That anyone puts stock in anything they produce is a sad example of what the American public accepts these days.

....like what they accept as airline product.


User currently offlineLINATE From United States of America, joined Jun 2007, 77 posts, RR: 0
Reply 24, posted (6 years 8 months 3 days 17 hours ago) and read 12793 times:

Quoting Rampart (Reply 18):
On threads like this, I wonder if you airline employees realize that sometimes garden variety passengers like me are reading what you write. As a fan and supporter, I sympathize with your positions most of the time. This thread, however, looks like petty whining to me. I assume you aren't showing your true colors, and most of you really do like attending to customers or you wouldn't be in the job. I assume that there's plenty more office talk about the annoying passengers of the day that I wouldn't hear about. Just as there's plenty of around the office and at home discussion of the annoying airline employee of the day. A.net must be one of those rare places where the two can collide.

 checkmark   checkmark   checkmark   checkmark 
You could not have said it better! Especially the whining part.


25 Halls120 : Your opinion is every bit as valid as mine. Never meant to imply anything else. Hell, it may be even more valid than mine. Note that I haven't commen
26 Rampart : Thanks for clarifying that. In this case, we all had the same reading material, assuming we all read the linked article. I was commenting on the arti
27 Post contains images Falcon84 : Show me one commercial flight in the US that has a letter in it? Can't find it? Because there are none. The letters indicate a fare classification, n
28 Post contains images Cory6188 : Yeah, you're right - I was surprised by the journalistic quality of USA Today. I rarely read it - we get the New York Times for free at school - so I
29 NWADC9 : I used to buy a USAToday every time I travel for reading material. Not anymore! The only thing in there worthwhile is the crossword puzzle, and even t
30 Rampart : I think you are an airline employee who has lost sight of my primary complaint as a passenger. Re-read what I have. The flight diverted. Why is ultim
31 Galapagapop : Your qualms should again be with the government, they, like explained in several other threads this past week, have rules abound on inbound arrivals
32 Planespotting : Boom. There you have it folks. Thats what I've been telling people for the past year. Shambles even - it's unorganized chaos. That phrase may sound r
33 Post contains images MaverickM11 : Did Maureen Dowd write this ?
34 Rampart : Good points. I appreciate that detailed and well informed reply, Galapagapop. More than some, you took time to understand a position and offer a reto
35 Galapagapop : airlines have mentioned the ATC system and the ridiculous circumstances that they sometimes must operate in, the problem is the FAA and the governmen
36 Coza777 : I disagree with certain posts stating that newspapers need not come up with solutions. The solutions that they suggest are many times clear and unders
37 57AZ : And where's the funding for the infrastructure going to come? Right now AOPA, NBAA and others are fighting the airline lobby in Congress over the user
38 STLGph : it seems the word opinion was missed from the top of the page. opinion and commentary is different from journalistic stance. seems it was missed. by e
39 Post contains links FlyABR : check out this article and see what you think: http://aviationplanning.com/asrc1.htm
40 AAJFKSJUBKLYN : The article is like putting more whip cream on an already decadent dessert. USA Today's quality is in line with ATC/Airlines. They are both junk and f
41 Ade99 : I think the bottom line with the article is CO messed up on this one. There are numerous diversions every day in the US and around the world and airli
42 Elite : Correct. The article exaggerated this incident, but that is what they are getting to. The attack dog and the criminal like treatment is pretty unacce
43 Post contains images Bond007 : Boy, you sound like me on a few other threads This is the #1 problem... way above an 'antiquated ATC system'. It's odd, that whenever you hear folks
44 Commavia : While I won’t even address what I view as some quite serious lapses in basic journalistic quality apparent in the USAToday Op-Ed of August 20, 2007,
45 Post contains images Bond007 : Case in point I don't disagree that the ATC system is desperately in need of modernizing. But, it won't solve many of the current issues discussed he
46 SPREE34 : It is an interesting article you've linked. When the airlines started adding all of these new RJs to service the growing markets, why didn't they inv
47 Bond007 : I don't disagree either. I think separation standards will change, but not enough to make an impact with this problem. Then unfortunately there are l
48 Falcon84 : International flights: the doors cannot be opened unless U.S. Customs is there. Goverment regulation, not airline. The airline can't do anything in t
49 SPREE34 : Frequency is what ATA and some other groups claim the customer wants. I see the problem being that the airlines didn't ensure they had the goods to d
50 CoolGuy : Pathetic article. I spent 4 hours delayed on the tarmac on COA825 and it was one of the best flights I've had. Talking with people, some of whom are i
51 Bond007 : Yes, and they'd be correct to a certain extent, but they didn't ask the right question. "Do you want frequency, at the risk of frequent delays ... or
52 Access-Air : You know, its not ONLY that the ATC system and employees are over worked with way more flights than they can handle, its this frigging prevaling menta
53 SkyyMaster : I read USA Today daily, and I do get frustrated at times with their slant on airlines. However, they do on occasions hit the nail on the head. Having
54 MDW717 : Right, because the gate agent who has to take your abuse is the one who kept you sitting.
55 Post contains images Falcon84 : Oh, I don't know-maybe because even with all that, people still no-show on flights? And they'd all go broke, reconfiguring their fleets to meet your
56 Asteriskceo : Ding! Ding! Ding! I agree 100%. McPaper...haha I love it.
57 ATCT : I just look at these remarks and laugh at all you ignorant fools. Im sorry, I tend to keep my remarks very professional on here, but the blatent igno
58 ModernArt : Baltimore-Washington International Airport was fully capable of deplaning and clearing the passengers on this flight. If Continental requested it be
59 SkyyMaster : Is it not true that the current ATC system is being run on IBM 360 technology? Yes it is. That technology was developed in the 60's. Not everyone is
60 Post contains images Bond007 : The following is real: PHL runways can handle around 50+ arrivals/hr in VMC. Airlines schedule 50+ arrivals/hr into PHL. In any kind of bad weather,
61 SEPilot : Please tell me that you read the NYT as a work of fiction.
62 Post contains images Ctbarnes : After reading USA Today's viewpoint, and the posts above, what most here seem to agree on is that the US air transport infrastructure is a mess. Furth
63 Bond007 : Again... please explain??? Sentences like this, with no reasoning, belong back in USA Today. Jimbo
64 Falcon84 : Never said it wasn't. But we don't know the circumstances behind what was going on. Also, another point that is never brought up by the airline-bashe
65 Post contains images Rampart : As I mentioned earlier, I understand that. In one breath you seem to criticize the fact that we have laws and fewer laws and government would help th
66 FlyABR : not sure why you took this so personally. the beef isn't with air traffic controllers, it's with our incompetent govt. per my quote of your text...yo
67 Bond007 : But that's a very small part of the problem anyway. The only way decreased separation would ever help this situation, is if ILS CatIII separation was
68 Post contains images Tango-Bravo : From the USA Today editorial: "At any rate, I don't see why passengers should be... treated like federal prisoners en route to their detention facilit
69 FlyABR : i don't think one should ever proclaim never. r u sure that the separation couldn't be narrowed a bit, even during ILS Cat3 operations with new and p
70 Access-Air : I also have been working in the undustry 18 years and I am sorry that you think my ideas are so flimsy or "Utopian" as you say....Biut I think that t
71 Post contains images Bond007 : Yes, I shouldn't have said "would ever help" But technology would have to be fairly advanced to make a big difference. Also remember there are physic
72 Post contains images Rampart : Careful. That type of thinking can't be refuted easily, so you are likely to be discredited. At least by some. -Rampart
73 Apodino : If this was the only thing RJ's were being used for I could see that. But the routes I am seeing CRJ's fly on is ridiculous. You are seeing CRJ's on
74 SEPilot : Have you ever seen a competent government? I think it's against the laws of nature. The real problem, from what I've seen, is that there is no slot c
75 Post contains images SPREE34 : You are incorrect. You are arrogant, ignorant, and incorrect. Do the terms STARS, ACD, MDM, EDARC, or URET mean anything to you? I doubt it. If they
76 ABQopsHP : On NBC Nightly news Monday the 20th, they had a report of a couple who took 3 days to get from SFO to MEM. The couple complained that they were Platin
77 SkyyMaster : Is the attitude necessary? I'm going by reports in more than a few publications I've read, including those of the FAA. I'd be more likely to respect
78 Rampart : Why? I would think that FF status entails some sort of enhanced effort from an airline. Because they were frequent fliers, are you saying they have a
79 ABQopsHP : If I could keep from getting into trouble I would rebook a customer, on the first seat I could find, regardless of the carrier. However since, mileage
80 Bond007 : Amazing isn't it? The guy spends $50,000 a year on fares, is encouraged to stick with the airline because of rewards, so does - then takes his 'free'
81 Rampart : At least that's refreshing to hear, even if the solution isn't there. FF programs are increasingly difficult to appreciate. They first rewarded brand
82 SPREE34 : Had AA rebooked these AAdvantage AAwards Ticket holders on another carrier's flight and gotten them on their way, AA would have had 2 hAAppy AAdvanta
83 Acey559 : I just pray to God that those updates/fixes don't involve user fees....
84 ABQopsHP : I agree, with you there Spree34. JD
85 SkyyMaster : Amen to that. I've been trying for weeks to book a trip to SFO using my AAdvantage miles as far out as next spring and can't get anything on reasonab
86 Post contains images Ctbarnes : Add another stakeholder to the list: airport owners/operators. Airport construction/expansion hasn't kept up with demand. My pont is that there is no
87 Post contains images SPREE34 : I ask you, is the attitude necessary? I stand by my statement, you are incorrect. But hey, what do I know. I only trained on and worked with the equi
88 Post contains images SkyyMaster : OK, I'll just ask my brother. He's a current controller and he's said on more than a few occasions the computer systems are outmoded and have been sl
89 Bond007 : I don't think any of us are actually doubting that .. are we? It's whether it's relevant to this discussion in the context that some have presented.
90 Post contains images Tango-Bravo : I too am failing to see how "outmoded" ATC is an acceptable excuse for the increasing incidence of U.S. airlines stranding pax in aircraft on the gro
91 Post contains images Falcon84 : In a sense, it is, as it's a very strict government mandate. The doors cannot be opened unless a customs official is there. You open it without them
92 Rampart : Sorry. This thread might have resulted in more constructive thought. There has been some civil discussion. I'm convinced now that the OP's original in
93 DashTrash : Ah yes.... users fees. You know what? The roads in my town need some repair. They can't handle all the traffic on them. Let's initiate road user fees.
94 Falcon84 : You can think what you want. It doesn't change my views. If you feel that way, that's your right. Aww. Taking your ball and going home. Can't stand t
95 Halls120 : With all due respect, Rampart, posts like this are almost as amusing as those occasional grand "I'm leaving Anet" posts from departing drama queens.
96 SkyyMaster : OK, despite the hostility and such, it seems most of the posts here have agreed the basic culprits in this issue are: needed for an updated ATC system
97 Bond007 : Actually, restricting and reducing schedules would fix it quite well. Would the airlines be happy, and/or could they handle the 'excess' capacity, is
98 SEPilot : Perhaps if heavily used airports like NYC area adopt flat landing fees (NOT based on weight) it would induce the airlines to go back to larger planes.
99 Post contains images ATCT : Yea actually I am. When you run 3 miles between similiar aircraft (lets say 2 B738's for the sake of conversation) the first aircraft touches down, a
100 Post contains images Bond007 : ...or you'd get no difference in number of flights, but just higher fares into those airports. If the objective is to restrict the number of flights
101 SkyyMaster : Let's suppose you are Mr. John Q. Public, who flies 3 out of 5 days a week for sales meetings. Would you prefer to fly an airline that offered, say 2
102 Bond007 : But as I've discussed a few times here and on other threads ... it's not that simple. Firstly, we're not talking about reducing schedules by 75% ....
103 SPREE34 : Not the impression I meant to leave. I agree with you that this is a combination of issues. I think the ATC portion of the equation is inflated by th
104 SkyyMaster : OK, have it your way. We see things differently. What works for me obviously doesn't for you. Nothing is perfect and I never claimed my statements to
105 Falcon84 : It is unreasonable to ask an airline to DELIBERATELY cut back on possible revenue. That's economic hari-kari, Bond. That is NOT a feesable option. It
106 Post contains images Bond007 : Very puzzled by the tone Did you read what I said ... I happen to fly 4 legs a week so I know what 'we' want. They DO NOT depart at the frequencies t
107 SPREE34 : Here is an example of where I have a bone to pick with folks. En Route thunderstorms and low ceilings are not ATC delays. The GDP is an ATC action to
108 Post contains images SkyyMaster : No "tone". We disagree and I see no sense in continuing the debate. This thread, like many others, has turned into one of those "I know more than you
109 Bond007 : Well, we don't disagree at all !! You said you were contradicting me, when in fact you were not ... if you read exactly what I said. Of course, of co
110 Apodino : I will raise the BS flag here. Yes PHL was in a ground delay program. And part of it is overscheduling. In my opinion, since PHL can only handle 36 a
111 Post contains images Bond007 : Same today ... for a 9hr period I believe
112 Post contains images Falcon84 : And that was due to WX/ATC. Jesus, Mary and Joseph, you just dont't get it. Been looking at the weather since late May? Almost daily thunderstorms in
113 HPAEAA : Falcon, I like you but I agree the BS flag is raised, reduced ceilings equal GDP, slower arrival rate.... when a city experiences the reduced ceiling
114 BillReid : This thread should be killed. Too many people have in the last several months been left for countless hours on board and we defend this? Give me a bre
115 Post contains images Bond007 : see below: OK? Uh, of course it does ... if we talk arrivals for a second .. PHL has been accepting 36/hr ... so if 36/hr were scheduled .. no proble
116 Post contains images SPREE34 : Who is defending this? It's criminal.(or should be) Mostly I'm seeing a discussion of why it's happening, not a defence of it. Words mean things. I g
117 Post contains images Falcon84 : Low ceilings. Let me ask you this: how often does something like this REALLY happen? A few times a year? Out of how many thousands and thousands and
Top Of Page
Forum Index

This topic is archived and can not be replied to any more.

Printer friendly format

Similar topics:More similar topics...
Libya To Spend $1.2 Bln On Airlines Overhaul posted Fri May 4 2007 19:18:13 by Aminobwana
Casino On Airlines posted Sat Mar 10 2007 03:30:29 by Tonytifao
Info On Airlines Issue Credit Cards Outside Origin posted Fri Oct 27 2006 07:10:26 by Carnoc
Crashes And The Effects On Airlines posted Wed Oct 4 2006 01:47:22 by ZschocheImages
Middle-Eastern Conflict, Effects On Airlines? posted Sat Jul 15 2006 08:56:22 by N8076U
Hilarious Piece On QF, EK, Socceroos And Airbus posted Sat Jun 24 2006 06:14:05 by DocPepz
Fuel Prices Effect On Airlines? posted Sat May 20 2006 23:02:44 by DYK
Asylum Seekers And Travel On Airlines posted Sun Apr 23 2006 15:55:55 by LTBEWR
Cell Phone Policies On Airlines In Your Country? posted Sat Mar 25 2006 19:03:54 by SA7700
Why Not Use Sporks/Splayds On Airlines? posted Tue Mar 21 2006 23:19:39 by SmithAir747