JOEYCAPPS From Italy, joined Jul 2008, 186 posts, RR: 1 Reply 1, posted (8 months 1 hour ago) and read 3796 times:
Not a chance.
As if the poorly edited planes (MS Paint) don't give away the bluff, I don't know what does.
Thats ludacris. Yet, judging from the past, there are probably plenty of people out there willing to do something like this. And probably some investors that would fall sucker for it!
Braniff747SP From United States, joined Oct 2008, 377 posts, RR: 0 Reply 2, posted (8 months 1 hour ago) and read 3790 times:
They fly Convair 550's!? I did not know parts for them still existed!
My God! and the website copyright is 2009, so these people are in the 21 century!
20 planes!? They haven't even started yet! There are operations that have been running for 50 years and they have 10 planes!
The 747 will always be the TRUE queen of the skies!
Flood From United States, joined Feb 2009, 133 posts, RR: 0 Reply 3, posted (7 months 4 weeks 1 day 23 hours ago) and read 3728 times:
I wouldn't call BS just yet, the site actually seems authentic with other (more established) companies such as petmeds linking back to petairways. TechCrunch mentions "Flights will be limited to start, basically from Los Angeles to the East coast with stops in Denver and Chicago."
The idea itself isn't far-fetched. Whether or not such an operation would be sustainable is another story.
CHRISBA777ER From Singapore, joined Mar 2001, 4926 posts, RR: 62 Reply 4, posted (7 months 4 weeks 1 day 23 hours ago) and read 3705 times:
Pets fly in the cabin all the time - i took CO EWR-SXM and the family i was sat with had four dog carriers with horrible little yappy balls of dog fur in them.
2707200X From United States, joined Mar 2009, 1743 posts, RR: 0 Reply 5, posted (7 months 4 weeks 1 day 23 hours ago) and read 3680 times:
The noise would probably be annoying to the pets not to mention spare parts for the old turboprop airliners. This reminds me of Family Airlines and SMINT, though I like the idea unlike the previous two, I don't think it will work out.
Mariner From New Zealand, joined Nov 2001, 13522 posts, RR: 94 Reply 6, posted (7 months 4 weeks 1 day 22 hours ago) and read 3658 times:
Quoting 2707200X (Reply 5): This reminds me of Family Airlines and SMINT, though I like the idea unlike the previous two, I don't think it will work out.
It's been around nearly as long as the Family idea.
I first came across this website when I was living in the US and needed to transport my dogs. That was about seven years ago.
I suspect it is a couple of animal lovers who make money selling pet supplies and who have a dream of an airline.
But they claim they have a 20 aircraft fleet and years of experience.
Website: "Our air operations group consists of a 20 plane fleet of Falcon 20, Convair 580 and 5800 and B- 727-100 aircraft. Our planes are operated under part 121 and part 135 of the FAA regulations and have had an exemplary record of safety for over 30 years, with experience flying throughout the U.S., Canada, Mexico, Caribbean and South America."
Signol From United Kingdom, joined Oct 2007, 954 posts, RR: 0 Reply 7, posted (7 months 4 weeks 1 day 18 hours ago) and read 3519 times:
I was on an Air France flight from Orly to Nice in 2000 and the lady behind me had a small dog under her seat... I was only aware once it started whimpering! It was well behaved, but there has to be a risk that it wouldn't be, or leave plenty of mess over the cabin.
0newair0 From United States, joined May 2007, 429 posts, RR: 0 Reply 8, posted (7 months 4 weeks 1 day 17 hours ago) and read 3488 times:
I hope these people know that they have to apply for an air carrier certificate. I cannot find mention of any FAA/DOT/GOV regulatory approval needed anywhere on the site or in any "news" articles.
"The future belongs to those who believe in the beauty of their dreams."
Max550 From United States, joined Nov 2007, 914 posts, RR: 0 Reply 10, posted (7 months 4 weeks 1 day 13 hours ago) and read 3381 times:
From reading the website I'm not sure if they plan on flying passengers.
If you read about how they fly your pet, it says you check them in and then they do everything from there. It doesn't say anything about people flying on the plane too.
Also, in the pictures of their planes, the Falcon 20 has a big cargo door, which, assuming that's actually their plane, leads me to believe they don't fly people.
I doubt it will ever take off, but it's an interesting idea.
I don't know how legit this can be if 1) they have not started an application to become a Part 135 or 121 air carrier and 2) if they intend to operate their flights via public charter, they have not submitted a public charter prospectus to the DOT. I just don't think we'll be seeing Pet Airways take to the sky this summer, or any time relatively soon for that matter.
"The future belongs to those who believe in the beauty of their dreams."
MetJetCEO From United States, joined Jun 2007, 118 posts, RR: 0 Reply 14, posted (7 months 4 weeks 1 day 11 hours ago) and read 3228 times:
I have questioned whether a service like this would make sense on major lanes (NYC to FL) and (NYC to LA). The thing I have always questioned is how you secure pets in the cabin and what liablity is there relating to allergies people have to pets, etc.
Im not talking Convair, either. I was thinking A320 or 737 type of service.
Max550 From United States, joined Nov 2007, 914 posts, RR: 0 Reply 15, posted (7 months 4 weeks 1 day 11 hours ago) and read 3211 times:
Quoting 0NEWAIR0 (Reply 12): Max, you're right. Pet will not fly people.
So what's the point? Isn't an animal flying on the main deck of a cargo plane the same as flying in the cargo hold of a passenger plane? The logistics of it would be hard too, not only do I have to find a flight for myself, but I also have to find one that is at almost the same time for my pet.
The article gives Pet no credibility whatsoever. I'm waiting for a PASI to be filed, or any other FAA/DOT correspondence before I lose any more time with this nonesense.
MrSkyGuy From United States, joined Aug 2008, 163 posts, RR: 0 Reply 17, posted (7 months 4 weeks 2 hours ago) and read 2884 times:
Occam's Razor is blaring in my ear.. five bucks (American, of course) says they've simply made an arrangement with an existing Part 135 (probably freight) operator somewhere out there and are taking creative license within the bounds of this "operator's" existing op.
Honk your horn if you love the old hardware! (707, 727, 732, etc)
Virginblue4 From United Kingdom, joined Jun 2008, 298 posts, RR: 0 Reply 18, posted (7 months 3 weeks 6 days 22 hours ago) and read 2799 times:
Quoting 0NEWAIR0 (Reply 12): I don't know how legit this can be if 1) they have not started an application to become a Part 135 or 121 air carrier and 2) if they intend to operate their flights via public charter, they have not submitted a public charter prospectus to the DOT. I just don't think we'll be seeing Pet Airways take to the sky this summer, or any time relatively soon for that matter.
It does say on their website under the our planes section "Our planes are operated under part 121 and part 135 of the FAA regulations and have had an exemplary record of safety for over 30 years"
Goldenshield From United States, joined Jan 2001, 4037 posts, RR: 13 Reply 19, posted (7 months 3 weeks 6 days 20 hours ago) and read 2770 times:
Quoting Virginblue4 (Reply 18): "Our planes are operated under part 121 and part 135 of the FAA regulations and have had an exemplary record of safety for over 30 years"
I think the PLANES have been flying for 30 years, NOT the carrier. There's nothing at the FAA about them, including applications for an operating certificate, etc.
Also of note, one of their partners is Best Friends Animal Society in Kanab, UT, which is a no-kill shelter about 100 miles from ANYWHERE. The closest airport that can accomodate the aircraft they want to use is PGA, followed by SGU.
[Edited 2009-03-28 03:30:16]
"I heard that there are rumors on the internets" -- G. W. Bush at the second 2004 debate
0NEWAIR0 From United States, joined May 2007, 429 posts, RR: 0 Reply 20, posted (7 months 3 weeks 6 days 17 hours ago) and read 2705 times:
Quoting Goldenshield (Reply 19): "Our planes are operated under part 121 and part 135 of the FAA regulations and have had an exemplary record of safety for over 30 years"
I think the PLANES have been flying for 30 years, NOT the carrier. There's nothing at the FAA about them, including applications for an operating certificate, etc.
You know, it would be quite hilarious if this "airline" tried to go and launch flights next month (so says the wall street journal) and the plane gets flown in to pick up its first batch of critters and it's met by FAA and/or DOT officials.
I wonder if anyone has ever tried to operate an air service without getting approval...anyone know? And, if it has happened, what did the FAA/DOT do?
"The future belongs to those who believe in the beauty of their dreams."
MrSkyGuy From United States, joined Aug 2008, 163 posts, RR: 0 Reply 21, posted (7 months 3 weeks 6 days 15 hours ago) and read 2644 times:
An amusing though to be sure, but definitely far fetched. I'm pretty certain this is just someone's fantasy with a good web designer.
Quoting 0NEWAIR0 (Reply 20): You know, it would be quite hilarious if this "airline" tried to go and launch flights next month (so says the wall street journal) and the plane gets flown in to pick up its first batch of critters and it's met by FAA and/or DOT officials.
I wonder if anyone has ever tried to operate an air service without getting approval...anyone know? And, if it has happened, what did the FAA/DOT do?
Honk your horn if you love the old hardware! (707, 727, 732, etc)
0NEWAIR0 From United States, joined May 2007, 429 posts, RR: 0 Reply 22, posted (7 months 3 weeks 6 days 15 hours ago) and read 2626 times:
Quoting MrSkyGuy (Reply 21): I'm pretty certain this is just someone's fantasy with a good web designer.
If it is just a fantasy then why are a lot of news outlets picking up the story - including the ATA Smartbrief?
I am not a "professional" reporter, but I can say that if I was a "professional" reporter, I would make sure something is legit before I put my name on it and send it out for the world to see. ...just saying.
Oh, and if someone happened to dupe me I would make their lie known to the world ASAP.
[Edited 2009-03-28 07:59:53]
"The future belongs to those who believe in the beauty of their dreams."
Seemyseems From United Kingdom (England), joined Jan 2009, 780 posts, RR: 0 Reply 25, posted (7 months 3 weeks 6 days 14 hours ago) and read 2566 times:
KLM I think used to allow pets in the cabin I think they still do in some circumstances, my dad once had a Bichon Frise in the seat next to him.
KLM ✈
26 Mayor: Here's a link to the WSJ article............ http://blogs.wsj.com/middleseat/2009...et-centric-airways-to-take-flight/ This would only seem to be an a
27 Goldenshield: The reason for this is due to to snub-nose dogs, and how they cannot effectively dissapate heat with tempuratures at or above 85 F. The airline is ba
28 Mayor: Actually, DL's limit for snub nosed dogs is 70F.....the 85F limit is for all other breeds.
29 Goldenshield: Now that I think about, you're right. It's been a while since I've worked cargo, so I'm getting a bit rusty there. Although, we did work 8 airlines,
30 Mayor: Well, while the snub nosed breeds are definitely the most vulnerable, it was also done because of connecting on the ramp, during the hot summer, part
Sponsor Message: 
From United States, joined Feb 2007, 9 posts, 
From Italy, joined Jul 2008, 186 posts, 
I did not know parts for them still existed!
From Singapore, joined Mar 2001, 4926 posts, 
From New Zealand, joined Nov 2001, 13522 posts, 
From United Kingdom, joined Oct 2007, 954 posts, 
From Netherlands, joined Dec 2007, 613 posts, 
.gif){kind=small}
From United Kingdom (England), joined Jan 2009, 780 posts, 
Printer friendly format 
