Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Infant Not Allowed On Malaysia 747 First Class  
User currently offlineHeeseokKoo From South Korea, joined Jan 2005, 612 posts, RR: 1
Posted (2 years 10 months 2 days 18 hours ago) and read 21246 times:

I'm not sure if there is any other cases where infant is not allowed in premium classes. But there was an announcement from MH to travel agencies in Korea that infant is not allowed in their first class on 747-400 aircraft. Maybe they don't have a safe bassinet hanger there. I hope this is not due to (possible) complains from premium class passengers. I assume "infant-on-a-lab" is blocked in this notice, not infant-on-a-separate-seat (I'm not sure actually).

(Korean only)
http://info.topasweb.com/BBS/BBSView...bbs_kind=2&info_div=1&info_code=mh

157 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlineAirNZ From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 1, posted (2 years 10 months 2 days 18 hours ago) and read 21270 times:

Disgraceful really and I would be very interested to learn more details of the 'reason' (which I will attempt to obtain on Monday!). Easily solved though and, dependant entirely upon that reason, I simply wouldn't use/book MAH for any flight.

[Edited 2011-06-19 03:42:30]

User currently offlinekaitak From Ireland, joined Aug 1999, 12321 posts, RR: 35
Reply 2, posted (2 years 10 months 2 days 18 hours ago) and read 21229 times:

Having been on a flight where a child has been crying, with little or no effort by the parent to do anything about it, I can sympathise with this; in that case, I was flying Economy and it was bad enough. Had I been flying J or F class and had been paying £3-5k/$6-8k for a seat and I was kept up by a crying baby, I'd be pretty cheesed off.

I think it's perfectly reasonable for airlines to limit infants and children below a certain age.


User currently offlineairtran737 From United States of America, joined Apr 2004, 3689 posts, RR: 12
Reply 3, posted (2 years 10 months 2 days 17 hours ago) and read 21075 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Good. It should be like that for all carriers. There is nothing worse than riding up front on a long haul flight with a screaming infant, or another little monkey running up and down the aisle.


Nice Trip Report!!! Great Pics, thanks for posting!!!! B747Forever
User currently offlinerwy04lga From United States of America, joined Jul 2005, 3107 posts, RR: 8
Reply 4, posted (2 years 10 months 2 days 17 hours ago) and read 20974 times:

I was in J returning from BOM on a DL 777 and there was a baby in the first row of Y that cried ALL the way to JFK. The J cabin was visibly upset. It's good that you can't open airliner windows...otherwise...LOL


Just accept that some days, you're the pigeon, and other days the statue
User currently offlineAirNZ From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 5, posted (2 years 10 months 2 days 17 hours ago) and read 20817 times:

Quoting kaitak (Reply 2):
Having been on a flight where a child has been crying, with little or no effort by the parent to do anything about it, I can sympathise with this; in that case, I was flying Economy and it was bad enough. Had I been flying J or F class and had been paying £3-5k/$6-8k for a seat and I was kept up by a crying baby, I'd be pretty cheesed off.

I think it's perfectly reasonable for airlines to limit infants and children below a certain age.

Yes, I can certainluy ubderstand, and essentially sympathise in certain circumstances but it equally must be acknowledged that flying in any aircraft is not exclusively about the 'comforts' of one person. On your own parameters, if I was the father of an infant and paying $6-8k for an F seat I personally wouldn't give a fiddlers damn what you were upset about, on the premise why would your 'requirments' have any priority over mine. It's swings and roundabouts and which is too often forgotten on here. In such a case as your suggestion I'll quite happily think it reasonable for me to then purchase F tickets on another carrier. Quite simple really.

Quoting airtran737 (Reply 3):
Good. It should be like that for all carriers. There is nothing worse than riding up front on a long haul flight with a screaming infant, or another little monkey running up and down the aisle.

And do those sentiments apply (i.e. self importance) when a said complainer has not even paid for the ticket, but is on a freebe upgrade?


User currently offlineFlying Belgian From Belgium, joined Jun 2001, 2389 posts, RR: 9
Reply 6, posted (2 years 10 months 2 days 16 hours ago) and read 20662 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting airtran737 (Reply 3):
Good. It should be like that for all carriers. There is nothing worse than riding up front on a long haul flight with a screaming infant, or another little monkey running up and down the aisle.

Couldn't agree more, it's sometimes PITA for 200+ pax just for ONE child whose parents don't care at all.

   MH.



Life is great at 41.000 feet...
User currently offlinesilentbob From United States of America, joined Aug 2006, 1962 posts, RR: 1
Reply 7, posted (2 years 10 months 2 days 16 hours ago) and read 20542 times:

Quoting AirNZ (Reply 5):
Yes, I can certainluy ubderstand, and essentially sympathise in certain circumstances but it equally must be acknowledged that flying in any aircraft is not exclusively about the 'comforts' of one person. On your own parameters, if I was the father of an infant and paying $6-8k for an F seat I personally wouldn't give a fiddlers damn what you were upset about, on the premise why would your 'requirments' have any priority over mine. It's swings and roundabouts and which is too often forgotten on here. In such a case as your suggestion I'll quite happily think it reasonable for me to then purchase F tickets on another carrier. Quite simple really.

Let's take your logic and work it the other way. Why should the discomfort of one passenger (infant) impact the comfort of every other passenger? The "I can do whatever I want, to hell with everyone else" attitude I see both online and in person disappoints me on a daily basis. Whatever happened to having a little courtesy for others?


User currently offlineqantasguy From United States of America, joined Oct 2003, 162 posts, RR: 0
Reply 8, posted (2 years 10 months 2 days 16 hours ago) and read 20511 times:

Ooooooh boy, don't get me started. There should be business only flights available for a fee. Sometimes there is only those few precious hours on a flight where you can catch a few zzzzzs or just relax. Getting kicked, jabbed or screamed at when you're already tired can really make these 'quiet' flights rather popular. I'd pay extra to have that guarantee. You can't act like a monkey in a public library, a 5 star restaurant or a court room, why should you do it in a tube hurtling through the air where the innocent people who just want some peace and quiet have to find solace in the bloody lavs as there is no where else to escape to? I fly too much, I've had my fair share of this to deal with. I've tried every product on the market to get rid of that one frequency that seems to pierce through lead. The only way to avoid it is to be aware at the gate, and get on a different flight. I've done this, sometimes at great cost, to avoid certain kids. I know I'll be flamed by parents who can control their kids, but I'm not talking about you, I'm refering to the parents who don't control their kids and let the rest of the passengers suffer their disturbance. If a kid's ears hurt, then my heart goes out to them, but if it's just mis-behaving in public-different story! Let the flames begin!


Airplanes Flown on..B-727-100, B-727-200, DC-9, F-27, B-707, B-717, B-737, B-747SP, B-747-100, B-747-200, B-747-300, B74
User currently offlineBabybus From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 9, posted (2 years 10 months 2 days 16 hours ago) and read 20456 times:

Quoting kaitak (Reply 2):
I think it's perfectly reasonable for airlines to limit infants and children below a certain age.

I'd agree with a baby and minors ban in premium cabins and lounges.

If I was on a business trip and had tons of work to sort out and in need of a good nights sleep I don't want some baby crying all the way from Singapore. It's the peace and solitude the company is paying for so I can work.

Some parents seem to delight in getting the baby noticed and not always for the right reasons.

I'm actually in favour of a dedicated baby and child cabin on all aircraft, like they used to have a smoking section, so parents can sit with their babies and their children can play happily in the aisles while other travellers get some rest.


User currently offlineqantasguy From United States of America, joined Oct 2003, 162 posts, RR: 0
Reply 10, posted (2 years 10 months 2 days 15 hours ago) and read 20376 times:

Babybus,
BINGO! There are actually people out there who really don't mind the sound of kids -can't imagine, but it's true. These can be the buffer between the kid section and the business section. It's when they put one in row 4 another in row 12 and one in 19 ect all down the airplane a chain reaction always happens and a zoo is inevitable. You got my passionate vote!



Airplanes Flown on..B-727-100, B-727-200, DC-9, F-27, B-707, B-717, B-737, B-747SP, B-747-100, B-747-200, B-747-300, B74
User currently offlinesignol From United Kingdom, joined Oct 2007, 2984 posts, RR: 8
Reply 11, posted (2 years 10 months 2 days 15 hours ago) and read 20339 times:

Quoting Babybus (Reply 9):
It's the peace and solitude the company is paying for so I can work

Actually you're paying for the seat, the food, the extra space. A parent with a child has just as much right to pay themselves for that larger seat. Imagine if you will 2 business types having a loud drunken conversation over their champagnes - that is just as loud, and probably more obnoxious, as the infant doesn't have the reasoning ability to choose not to cry.

Yes I'm a parent myself of an infant, but an infant crying on an aircraft affects the parents just as much - any parent worh their salt will prepare the flight to confort and entertain the child to reduce the chances of crying as much as possible. Please don't tar the 99% of responsible parents with the same brush as the 1% of lazy parents.

signol



Flights booked: none :(
User currently offlineEIRules From Ireland, joined Aug 2007, 701 posts, RR: 10
Reply 12, posted (2 years 10 months 2 days 15 hours ago) and read 20299 times:

Put it this way, I buy my J or F seat and I decide I'm going to be loud and annoying for 11 hours, whats likely to be done to me? Asked to stop and then perhaps kicked off. Parent with unpaying / discounted child ticket does the same essentially and what is done, nothing. Well done MH


Next Flights: EI DUB-LHR A320, BA LHR-SFO B744, UA SFO-LAS A320, BA LAS-LHR B744, EI LHR-DUB A320
User currently offlineOzGlobal From France, joined Nov 2004, 2701 posts, RR: 4
Reply 13, posted (2 years 10 months 2 days 15 hours ago) and read 20235 times:

Quoting AirNZ (Reply 5):
Quoting kaitak (Reply 2):
Having been on a flight where a child has been crying, with little or no effort by the parent to do anything about it, I can sympathise with this; in that case, I was flying Economy and it was bad enough. Had I been flying J or F class and had been paying £3-5k/$6-8k for a seat and I was kept up by a crying baby, I'd be pretty cheesed off.

I think it's perfectly reasonable for airlines to limit infants and children below a certain age.

Yes, I can certainluy ubderstand, and essentially sympathise in certain circumstances but it equally must be acknowledged that flying in any aircraft is not exclusively about the 'comforts' of one person. On your own parameters, if I was the father of an infant and paying $6-8k for an F seat I personally wouldn't give a fiddlers damn what you were upset about, on the premise why would your 'requirments' have any priority over mine.

Absurd. This is 'smokers logic'; my choice to smoke, your choice not to smoke; get over it; equal rights! What rubbish. Just as a smoker DECIDES FOR ME that I will be forced to smoke their cigarette on a cafe terrace where it is 'legally' allowed, a parent taking an infant or badly behaved child into a premium cabin is DECIDING for every passenger in that cabin what they will have to endure. The price of a packet of cigarettes or ONE J or F ticked did not buy you the right to destroy the value of everyone else's purchase and entitlement. It's called...narcissism



When all's said and done, there'll be more said than done.
User currently offlineSevenHeavy From United Kingdom, joined Mar 2004, 1146 posts, RR: 10
Reply 14, posted (2 years 10 months 2 days 15 hours ago) and read 20210 times:

The problem I have with this is that ( as before, when similar debates have surfaced) it penalizes the majority for the behaviour of the minority. Most parents are responsible and empathetic towards their fellow travelers, and will do everything possible to controls their children. Equally, if I had children who did not take well to flying I would take all possible steps to mitigate the effects on other travelers....or maybe even think twice before flying.

My son has flown over 150000 long haul miles since he was 8 weeks old. He has never uttered so much as a whimper and has attracted only compliments on his behaviour. In the same time I have personally witnessed at least 4 occasions where "adults" have made a nuisance of themselves by being drunk, or just plain loud and obnoxious. Amazingly, most of these observations have involved "premium" passengers.

Consequently, I get somewhat irritated when people start getting precious about banning kids from aircraft or premium cabins!



So long 701, it was nice knowing you.
User currently offlineMAN2SIN2BKK From Thailand, joined Feb 2009, 219 posts, RR: 0
Reply 15, posted (2 years 10 months 2 days 15 hours ago) and read 20175 times:

I look forward to my 13 month old upsetting everyone on board when we fly from Bangkok to London in October, haven't decided which airline to use or which class to fly YET         

User currently offlineSirThomas From UK - England, joined Jul 2009, 193 posts, RR: 0
Reply 16, posted (2 years 10 months 2 days 15 hours ago) and read 20162 times:

Quoting AirNZ (Reply 5):
I personally wouldn't give a fiddlers damn what you were upset about, on the premise why would your 'requirments' have any priority over mine.

Well you just don't seem like a particularly pleasant person to be sitting in my F cabin 

If I pay 3/4 Grand to sit up the front, it's because I want to be seated in luxury and relax in my bed.
There is no way I would keep quiet about a screaming baby or any other loud irritance. I appreciate that it can be hard for the parents in certain cases but in such a situation I would ask the stewards to talk to the parents without hesitation (if they hadn't already).

After all, people pay for upgrades because they need to get work done, or because they want to sleep/ have a rare treat.
You're certainly in the minority here I'm afraid!  

Tom

[Edited 2011-06-19 07:00:43]


Flown On: A319/A320/A321/A332/A333/AT45/734/736/738/744/DH8D/T204/T154/IL62/T134/IL-18/An-24
User currently offlineAirNZ From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 17, posted (2 years 10 months 2 days 15 hours ago) and read 20065 times:

Quoting Babybus (Reply 9):
If I was on a business trip and had tons of work to sort out and in need of a good nights sleep I don't want some baby crying all the way from Singapore. It's the peace and solitude the company is paying for so I can work.

With respect I'd completely disagree Babybus. Irrespective of what cabin you choose you are paying solely for transportation from A to B......the fact that you want to work is of absolutely no conern of the airline, and most certainly not to any other pasenger who, I may add, is also paying for their seat/transportation. To choose to work on an aircraft is exactly that....your choice. Equally, the company is paying to get you to a destination - if they want work done then they should pay for an extra day there, or whatever it takes. Indeed, one could validly argue that it isn't exactly good business accumen if one is not organised enough to get what needs to be ready that it has to be done on the way to a meeting. If you need a good nights sleep, there are plenty of hotels worldwide which are specifically designed for that very purpose. I honestly fail to understand why so many on here seem to think of an aircraft as their mobile office/hotel room, with everyone else excluded except their own 'requirements'. I will very respectfully ask, what gives you the right to exclusive 'preferences' in a premium cabin (or any other) more so than me choosing to travel with my child......especially if I happen to be the one paying for the tickets? Indeed, using your own logic, if one's exclusive travel to such a meeting is of utmost importance, why isn't your employer paying for a private jet to give you the comfort you 'need'. Interesting point though is they aren't, so thus it'smerely transportation they are paying for.

Quoting Babybus (Reply 9):
I'm actually in favour of a dedicated baby and child cabin on all aircraft, like they used to have a smoking section

Ah! you mean a little space where 'inferior' children/infants/parents can be put in order not to disturb those who feel important and more superior. The smoking section was always in the back of a cabin.....and, in case you perhaps aren't aware, anyone could sit in it because, funningly enough, they also had paid for a ticket for the flight. It was no more 'exclusive' for anyone who wanted to smoke than any one else who wants to make a show of using a laptop.

Quoting silentbob (Reply 7):
Let's take your logic and work it the other way. Why should the discomfort of one passenger (infant) impact the comfort of every other passenger? The "I can do whatever I want, to hell with everyone else" attitude I see both online and in person disappoints me on a daily basis. Whatever happened to having a little courtesy for others?

If you actually read it correctly you will notice that I'm not disagreeing with you at all, and it most certainly very much works both ways. However, what I am questioning is the self-imposed right of self-importance of many here who demand they have some sort of exclusive right by stating who can/cannot travel in the same aircraft cabin as them.
So yes, indeed your comment "The "I can do whatever I want, to hell with everyone else" attitude I see both online and in person disappoints me on a daily basis" should indeed disappoint you, as it would any couteous person....but does that seeming only apply if one has children instead of a laptop? By all means use my own logic, please do, because if you note I have never once in any thread on the matter advocated that children/infants have any more 'right' in an aircraft cabin than those who claim they, themselves, do. However, I will fully advocate they have an equal right to. Indeed, you'll find that most who spring to the defence of children on this subject make no such 'demands'......rather, those demands come from the section you seem to support. Lets be totally frank, it's about time this attitude of 'I'm dressed in a suit and my employer is paying for my flight to a meeting so I'm all-important, and look I've got a laptop'' needed to be ditched......the realization is quite simply that air travel is equally available to anyone who wants it, and on perfectly equal terms. A child has as much right to be playing in a street that many here also walk up/live on.......why is an aircraft thought to be any different?


User currently offlinetxagkuwait From United States of America, joined Aug 1999, 1803 posts, RR: 43
Reply 18, posted (2 years 10 months 2 days 14 hours ago) and read 19915 times:

Quote:
I'd agree with a ban on gays and caucasians in premium cabins and lounges.

If I was on a business trip and had tons of work to sort out and in need of a good nights sleep I don't want to hear some gay person lisping all the way from Singapore. I don't want to have to deal with the odor of a caucasian due to their bathing habits. It's the peace and solitude the company is paying for so I can work.

Change a few words, and voila.

Foreign carriers may get away with it, but regardless of how you slice it, it is discrimination.

Babies and minors? No different than Arabs, Blacks, Jews, Gays, Amputees. Hispanics, Elderly People, Carmellite Nuns. Discrimination is bad, mmmmm-kay? It is a slippery slope. A little bit of discrimination due to a crying baby becomes a whole lot of discrimination due to anti-semitism or the fact that rich American businessmen don't like blacks or rich Japanese businessmen think Americans smell bad.

If a parents can't or won't control a child in any cabin, then it becomes a different issue and the parent should be asked to control the child. If they are unable to do so, they can be moved to a galley area until the kid settles down or asked to use an emergency exit over the Pacific.

Denying a person an airline seat for which they have paid, IIRC, is illegal for a common carrier and would be a wonderful way to get sued. In fact, a carrier that engages in it might very likely find their ability to fly to and from and land withing the United States might disappear.


User currently offlineGBan From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 19, posted (2 years 10 months 2 days 13 hours ago) and read 19724 times:

Quoting SevenHeavy (Reply 14):
My son has flown over 150000 long haul miles since he was 8 weeks old. He has never uttered so much as a whimper and has attracted only compliments on his behaviour.


Similar for my 2 kids, never any complains.

Quoting SirThomas (Reply 16):
After all, people pay for upgrades because they need to get work done, or because they want to sleep/ have a rare treat.


Or they pay because they want their kids and themselves to be able to get sleep.


User currently offlineAirNZ From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 20, posted (2 years 10 months 2 days 13 hours ago) and read 19721 times:

Quoting txagkuwait (Reply 19):
If a parents can't or won't control a child in any cabin, then it becomes a different issue and the parent should be asked to control the child. If they are unable to do so, they can be moved to a galley area

I would agree with such entirely and not have a problem with it at all.......an uncomfortable infant is part of life and is seemingly ignored here that, other than by crying, it has no way of voicing it is in discomfort or by the fact it is an infant/toddler has no way of rectifying it's situation. However, some in making general statements that all parents aren't interested in helping the situation speaks of blatant arrogance.


User currently offlinebtblue From United Kingdom, joined Mar 2004, 578 posts, RR: 4
Reply 21, posted (2 years 10 months 2 days 13 hours ago) and read 19540 times:

Quoting AirNZ (Reply 17):
Irrespective of what cabin you choose you are paying solely for transportation from A to B......the fact that you want to work is of absolutely no conern of the airline

Funny, why do they call it business class? Perhaps you could elaborate and detail why you think airlines tout it as such when they have no care whether you want to work onboard. I don't understand your thinking, please clarify.

Quoting AirNZ (Reply 17):
Indeed, one could validly argue that it isn't exactly good business accumen if one is not organised enough to get what needs to be ready that it has to be done on the way to a meeting.

Business is 24/7, as I am sure (but not convinced) you can appreciate. Business never stops, tick tock tick tock... especially if you're at the top of your game or even in the middle of it. Email, phone etc... reports, updates, you name it... Not all business people switch off... Maybe you should have a word with business class passengers and tell them thet it's not good 'business accumen' to work onbaord, while wagging your finger telling them they should get 'organised', tut, tut, tut.



146/2/3 737/2/3/4/5/7/8/9 A320 1/2/18/19/21 DC9/40/50 DC10/30 A300/6 A330/2/3 A340/3/6 A380 757/2/3 747/4 767/3/4 787 77
User currently offlinefrmrCapCadet From United States of America, joined May 2008, 1688 posts, RR: 1
Reply 22, posted (2 years 10 months 2 days 13 hours ago) and read 19348 times:

This needent be the tempest in the tube. It is likely all a matter of law, and every country will make their own. Beings I am in Y I have no objection for a crying baby in First. LOL


Buffet: the airline business...has eaten up capital...like..no other (business)
User currently offlinecaetravlr From United States of America, joined Oct 2000, 908 posts, RR: 1
Reply 23, posted (2 years 10 months 2 days 13 hours ago) and read 19009 times:

Hmmm.... this is a very interesting topic. My one interesting experience with this was in business class on a Thai Airways flight from Paris to Bangkok. I had timed it perfectly so that I would sleep on the flight there and wake up when we landed at 6 am Bangkok time and have my body pretty set to their time zone. However, on the upper deck of the 747, there were kids running back and forth in the aisles in the middle of the night. It wasn't even the noise that woke me up, but the way they were shaking the floor. A stern look at the parents, and the kids were reigned in. I managed to get back to sleep and actually felt quite good when we landed so it wasn't a major issue in that case.

What I think the argument has more to do with is the parents that don't have the common sense or courtesy to do whatever they can to quiet a child or impose a level of discipline (in the case of toddlers and older children) appropriate for the situation. Parents with crying babies should be able to get up and walk around or hang out in the galley for a few minutes if that will help (with the exception of those times it's not permissible to walk around during a flight). Whether or not Malaysia is right in setting up such rules is going to be a matter of heated debate from both sides, but the problem could definitely be mitigated, and I believe that some of the posters on here who have traveled with children have proven that.



A woman drove me to drink and I didn't have the decency to thank her. - W.C. Fields
User currently offlinelax777lr From United States of America, joined Apr 2010, 73 posts, RR: 0
Reply 24, posted (2 years 10 months 2 days 12 hours ago) and read 18449 times:

The core issue is potential disruption in the premium cabin. Some infants are great, and some are endlessly screeching sirens in the middle of the night. You just never know what you are going to get. MH has made the business decision to eliminate that variable/potential disruption to premium passengers. Premium pax with infants can book elsewhere and MH seems willing to accept that. They are doing all possible to ensure the integrity of their premium product and experience according to what MH feels is important to their premium value proposition. It's that simple.

25 EnviroTO : I agree with excluding infants from First Class. I would have a bit of an issue with them being excluded from Business Class though. Economy Class is
26 GingerSnap : I'm fairly certain that you're not paying to sleep. All you should expect is a bigger seat, more space & a better service/meal etc. However, if s
27 silentbob : At one time this was true, I no longer believe that to be the case. While some will quibble with what exactly you pay for in Economy, paying for a bu
28 txagkuwait : In a totally free market economy, that would be true. But the U.S., at least, we are a nation of laws rather than a nation of men and the industry is
29 AirNZ : Sorry, but the fact is you are paying for transportation whether that travel be in Y, C or F. An aircraft is not automatically an hotel room, an offi
30 JAAlbert : Of course there have been many examples of adults causing an uproar in the premium cabin! True, they often wind up in hand restraints and a compliment
31 7673mech : Infants do not belong in First Class. Period. I don't care if their parents can afford it. Stay home. Fly coach. Or if you have the audacity to inconv
32 RamblinMan : Because I don't bother other people on a plane. Hell, I probably won't even look at you, certainly won't talk to you aside from normal pleasantries i
33 Post contains links MoltenRock : It's merely a bassinet issue. MH has always been a child / infant friendly airline. Please be informed that on all MH new versions B747-400 series air
34 asteriskceo : Rich babies have to fly too ya know.
35 Viscount724 : There is nothing to prevent an airline from excluding infants/children from first class or any other class, provided it's covered in their conditions
36 AirNZ : And I would most certainly do so, as would the vast majority of all parents. But, if a young baby is crying then I expect the same courtesy of the op
37 petrhsr : So the inevitable dichotomy emerges, with some comments expressing delight at the thought of a child-free F, and some expressing "disgust". Personally
38 zkpilot : Except that on most airlines infants fly for free or for a fraction of the cost of an adult ticket.... All an airline has to do is make an infant tic
39 Viscount724 : I don't agree. If an airline banned infants from premium classes, I would be very confident that they would generate far more additional traffic and
40 gigneil : I had come to expect a whole lot more of your posts. That's just utter crap. Children under a certain age should not be welcome in the front cabins,
41 AirNZ : There are....they're called private aircraft and, believe it or not, they are for hire by anyone. Okay, so what about the paying adult/child against
42 blueflyer : It is unfortunate that a (significant) minority of incompetent parents makes discussions such as these necessary. I would prefer a middle-of-the-road
43 Viscount724 : Please check your facts before you make incorrect statements. At least on domestic routes in the US and Canada (and transborder), infants certainly d
44 moriarty : I can partly understand that people paying loads of money for a seat gets upset by crying babies. I really do. Keep that in mind here. But I still can
45 DocLightning : I don't find it that disgraceful. A screaming infant will irritate a number of high-paying passengers. There are very few passengers who do take infa
46 moriarty : Parents (with babies) may also be in this category you know. Money talks for everyone that has them.
47 U2380 : Their 'skill in that meeting' will certainly be hindered if they are unable to sleep, when they expected to be able to, due to the insistent wail of
48 boacvc10 : So, can we hope for flights in the future where the airline limit petulant adults above a certain age, or who are determined to board with an obnoxio
49 txagkuwait : Some people would rather live in an apartment building that excludes Muslims. Or Blacks. Or Jews. Or Chinamen. But in a society where there are laws
50 Post contains images btblue : Wouldn't say the world revolves around them (your interpretation) but, the airline industry certainly relies on their business, correct me though if
51 DocLightning : Given that most people with infants are 20-30's, I'd say they are in a small minority of F passengers. Age has been a protected class within certain
52 jetdeltamsy : This practice has gone on since the beginning of time. With some airlines, the policy has come and gone. There are several airlines out there today t
53 EASTERN747 : Hello all, and Happy Fathers Day to all you Dads. I believe in this country it's call "discrimination". What next, don't want blacks, asian, pregnant
54 OzGlobal : 1. Glad to be "exactly correct", therefore 2. Your next point makes no sense to me; We agree buying your child a ticket does not outweigh the harm yo
55 sankaps : Can anyone clarify if MH has disallowed even those cases where the parents pay for a seat for the baby. or only the 10% fare and no-seat cases? If the
56 Post contains links and images 9MMAR : I just checked with MH and it is true that they are not allowing infants in the F cabin. View Large View MediumPhoto © Joule However it is not becaus
57 Post contains images mffoda : I think some of you are getting way to serious about this incident... Just out of curiosity... How many infants fit into a LD3 container?
58 GingerSnap : He probably did check his facts. He's listed as living in the UK, and no airline I've come across allows free travel for infants in the UK. The price
59 muzyck : What law dictates that infants must be able to sit in an F seat? This just sounds like a sound business "policy" to me. If there were exclusions base
60 Post contains images goblin211 : airlines should just ship babies on a separate flight and have them meet the parents with the luggage at baggage claim lol. Seriously though, and I'm
61 bananaboy : Just as is the person who floods the cabin with light when they are the only one to leave the window shades up when the cabin is dark. There is a sim
62 Amsterdam : All carriers should act like MH. Flew with AF from Santiago to Paris, 14 hours and this baby cried for 12 hours! And a parent can try everything, but
63 LordMontenegro : I've got to side with MH on this one. I understand, and empathize, with parents travelling with small children. Just the other day on my US Express fl
64 gasman : I was intrigued to see this topic - coincidentally I flew AKL-DXB two weeks ago in F class; in one of the suites was a mother and baby, probably aged
65 EDICHC : Presumably the exemption applied by Virgin Trains (trains I'm sure you will agree are a form of transportation) in the UK that have a designated 'qui
66 maxrockatansky : iI'm glad for this, I'm so tired of the people who think they can take their kids anywhere, guess what you can't. I have paid for Business and First c
67 Post contains images SonomaFlyer : As a father of two boys, I certainly understand both sides of this issue. They've done well on multiple TATL flights because we worked our **** off to
68 Post contains images gasman : As a post-script to this, on the return flight in J class, I seemed to be surrounded by octogenerians. They were MUCH more annoying to be around than
69 bananaboy : As I understand it, you are requested not to use walkmans or mobile phones (at least talk on them) in these carriages. When I last travelled in a qui
70 Mir : Except that some airlines market their premium classes as offering travelers the ability to either work or relax in peace. So it is the airline's bus
71 woodsboy : Airlines care very much that you can work onboard a long haul flight, airlines care very much for the comfort and satisfaction of their premium class
72 usafdo : GOOD! Babies should be restricted to Y/coach travel only. Why the hell should I have to expose myself to crying babies if I am traveling in a preimum
73 Flighty : Airlines would be smart to do this. The market opportunity for premium class babies is tiny. Conversely, the downside is pretty large -- maybe 90% of
74 usafdo : Maybe babies should be totally banned from air travel! Why should an innocent traveler be subjected to someone sitting next to them with a crying scre
75 anrec80 : +1 here. I find there are many parents who are just not willing to accept that the baby needs to be controlled and can disturb others around. They se
76 Post contains images GBan : Fortunately I'm allowed to and I will book my kids on any class we find suitable. We never had and never will have any problems with fellow traveller
77 Flighty : You're right -- my concern would be nonrevs. But I think most airlines have a policy on that.
78 maxrockatansky : noone thinks quiet children should be banned, but infants should be banned from premium products, its part of the value of first or business, the cost
79 Mir : It goes even beyond that - we're talking about infants here, and even if the parents have the best of intentions and do everything they can to look a
80 usafdo : Alot of the problem is really with Socialists countries like Spain, Sweeden, Holland, etc., they think it is their right to sit there in a premium cab
81 smoot4208 : That's how any normal person should act. If my infant had never flown before, I'm not going to purchase it's first ticket in F class out of respect t
82 OzGlobal : Interesting that you're able to diagnose the root cause as being what you call, 'Socialism'. (They are Social Democracies BTW, not Socialist, that wa
83 MAN2SIN2BKK : WTF has politics got to do with having kids in premium cabins?
84 slcdeltarumd11 : We all know that most kids with normal parents would be fine. Its when you are next to a kid who the parents don't even try to quiet them that they ar
85 gasman : Not necessarily. Babies are babies. They will cry and be possibly inconsolable, particularly if their ears hurt, even if their parents are Dr Spock a
86 GBan : No. Exactly. You don't have to wait 2 years, the behaviour of a 6 month old is rather predictable. And if it is not or if the parents are not able to
87 Post contains images planesmith : Children should be containerised and placed in the hold. Good grief - it's bad enough when you're shopping in the local supermarket and have screamin
88 bjorn14 : It's just not about pissing me off because of the crying baby but the pissing off of up to 36 F/J class pax and could mean they make different choices
89 IndianicWorld : The reality is that people pay a lot of money for their F class experience, and such things as crying babies do not please those pax. I have also been
90 farzan : Having four kids myself, I hate to admit that I agree with you. Unfortunately, people who can afford flying F typically have pretty spoiled children
91 chieft : Well, travelling with infants is always a challenge. But forbidding a full paying passenger in F to travel with his infant in F? In that case I would
92 OzGlobal : What on earth do you mean? We are discussing unacceptable behaviour of children in F and J (running up and down the aisles, climbing over the seat in
93 Post contains links 9MMAR : Just in case if the reason behind this motive is still unclear to some quarters, the Australian Business Traveller has ran an article about this very
94 moriarty : Wow. Now you're quite offensive aren't you? Mixing politics and quite derogatory descriptions of other people and nations. I'd say posts like that no
95 lh526 : Why not make it simple as that. Let parents with infants fly whereever they want, but make it clear to them that they have to keep their baby silent.
96 GBan : Sorry if I got you wrong. But you wrote in a reply to AirNZ. If you were referring to an attitude of not taking care of misbehaviour of accompagning
97 Post contains images moriarty : That's a thought. And a constructive suggestion too. But it puts the less expensive classes in an awkward position: "here's the Smith family, their b
98 silentbob : Age discrimination against children is not only legal, it's common. Things like smoking, drinking and driving age restrictions are even dictated by t
99 SingaporeBoy : I totally agree with MH with their decision....its not only babies....its children below 10yrs old...who think that screaming their heads off or runni
100 OzGlobal : Precisely! I'm not against children. Coming from an Anglo sphere country like Oz and having lived in the US and UK, I find most French kids wondrousl
101 Mir : And how else are they going to get their parents' attention? Raise their hand and say "excuse me, mother, but I find these cabin pressure changes rat
102 worldliner : Ive been in J class with children a few times on BA, and they were very well behaved. Surely it doesn't matter who is flying in the seat as long as th
103 Babybus : I liked that. That was funny. But it's not the same. In no circumstances would anyone ever ask the cabin crew to move a gay guy or black guy because
104 EASTERN747 : What am I reading here!!! I've never heard of such snobs and wanna bes. It's a seat on an airplane for crying out loud. I read many trip reportd and i
105 Mir : Actually, depending on the place, you might. The days of the suit and tie being the norm for upscale restaurants are over. True, but you have no need
106 EASTERN747 : To Mir....Granted, the days of suits and ties are over! IF YOU WANT IT TO BE....However. how does Brooks Bros., neimans, what ever, stay in business?
107 Mir : I didn't say there wasn't a market for their products anymore, only that the definition of fashionable clothing has expanded to include jeans, sneake
108 EASTERN747 : Back to the original topic! Forget the clothes issues for now. Ok...take an older person who needs to travel with an oxygen tank. By your standards, I
109 Mir : A medical condition is different. I'd have no problem with someone using an oxygen tank in F, even if people around were put off by it. But an infant
110 incitatus : Most people in this thread really do not know what they are talking about. I have a 2-year old who is a great traveler. Last trip was DXB-GRU and he s
111 Mir : This is a great example of why infants shouldn't be allowed in some premium cabins - they can't be controlled. They might be perfectly fine, but they
112 gasman : This is also a very sensible post. Good kids, and good parents are capable of creating a disturbace, just as are unruly kids and lazy parents. I woul
113 Post contains images SonomaFlyer : If the folks in this thread are providing an opinion with no reference point of traveling with a small child, I'd agree with your initial point. The
114 EDICHC : I would not argue with any of this, but in the context of the debate/original post, is it appropriate to have very young children or infants in premi
115 Mir : I'm not sure I'd go that far - I'd definitely say that is someone is young enough to be a lap child they're too young to be in a premium cabin. As fa
116 AirCanada787 : I doubt someone that paid for a Y ticket wants some kid screaming in their ears for hours either. Saying young children shouldn't travel is silly any
117 jgw787 : yes the same is true for me...but maybe your child is just more well behaved than the kid on the flight. everyone is different.
118 bananaboy : Yes. Two I think, but it was a weekday in term-time. I don't think is is particularly relevant though - the fact is children are not prohibited. Whet
119 maxrockatansky : infants are unpredictable maniacs, ban them from premium classes, I cant stand your crying kid and it makes me hate you for bringing the kid on the pl
120 Post contains images allrite : "It's all about me!" say those parents who want to relax while their kids run riot. "it's all about me!" say those passengers who want their premium
121 Post contains images GBan : It's also completely normal for infants not to cry. It's just not true that infants usually cry for no reason and you can't do anything about it. In
122 BrouAviation : Pubs, casinos, cruising ships, hotels, restaurants, theaters, all have the right to limit their product offering to a certain age, and an airline wou
123 hal9213 : The freedom of somebody ends at the freedom of another. I have no trouble whatsoever, if a baby or child is travelling in F, and I dont care if its ta
124 AirNZ : But that's exactly what I've been asking to those who suggest it, but no-one seems to be able (willing) to provide an answer....as an airline is a mo
125 BrouAviation : Why does being 'a mode of transportation only' remove the right to exclude your product to people of certain age, like the other examples are doing?
126 AirNZ : Because, quite simply, a mode of transportation is the method which permits the general public (as in anyone) to travel from A to B. By excluding a s
127 Kaiarahi : Many hotels in N. America and Asia have 'business' or 'executive' floors from which children are excluded. Exactly analagous to excluding children fr
128 Viscount724 : You're making too big a deal of this. The discussion involves first class. No one has suggested that infants should be prohibited from Y class, so ho
129 AirNZ : You are actually making the very point that I am asking the question on. It makes absolutely no difference whatsoever whether it be F, C or Y and any
130 Post contains links MoltenRock : The CEO of Malaysian Airlines, Tengku Azmil said via Twitter "Also hv many complaints from 1st class pax dat dey spend money on 1st class & can't
131 Viscount724 : What's your source of that surprising statement? It's rare to see children in F class in my experience, and it's even rarer to see infants under 2 ye
132 AAExecPlat : Honestly, I find this thread shocking. The attitude towards children in this thread is truly objectionable. I actually agree that airlines should be a
133 Kaiarahi : Light under the bushel - thank you! I've flown often with my kids when they were (very) young in F and J (on my own - I was a solo dad for sad reason
134 silentbob : It's not a "right" for anyone, I think that is part of the issue here. It's a contractual arrangement, not some civil rights issue. MGM Grand in Las
135 GBan : Sure, any airline following a "no infants" policy in whatever class will certainly not see any money from me. Exactly, It's rare in the first place,
136 bjorn14 : As when smoking was banned on virtually every airline....then I guess you'll have to take the bus, boat, train, etc....
137 GBan : Certainly not. Children and infants are not banned on ANY airline, the only exception beeing cabins with no bassinet facility. In the real world the
138 Post contains images AirNZ : What surprising statement.....that people who pay for F class tickets travel with their children? Hmm! what may I ask do you find surprising about it
139 AirNZ : Again, I'm not talking about individual airlines, and especially BA who anyone interested in aviation is fully aware, rarely if ever allows free upgr
140 Post contains images Quokka : While I personally have not seen an infant in First when travelling in F, I have no doubt that some passengers in F do fly with infants, although some
141 Post contains images EK413 : Totally agree 110%.. Nothing worse than having to deal with a infant crying during the flight...on my recent flight from LHR-BKK-SYD in J/C a crying
142 nonimaus : I think trying to draw a connection between those who dislike the company of children in confined spaces to those who'll later rely on the taxes of t
143 MAS777 : My last return trip from KUL-BKK-LHR on Thai had 2 children in First - with mum sat in front of me and dad sitting to my left. Both travelling with th
144 Post contains images MoltenRock : This is one of the things that is nearly a universal truth. Parents "tune out" their kids, and / or develop a "deaf ear" when it comes to the din of
145 davidlc3 : As a former FA I have to agree with restricting the premium cabin for adults only for a few reasons: 1. Comfort of those who are paying the big bucks
146 btblue : Some people do, some people always will, such is life. That's really interesting. Would you be able to go further and give some indication what your
147 Viscount724 : You said that a majority of F class passengers travel with children. That means at least 50% of F class passengers travel with children. That's what
148 AirNZ : That is completely fine and it is entirely your perogative to doubt whatever you choose. Such is not being questioned. However, what exactly are you
149 MoltenRock : Likewise, your perspective is no better or more accurate either unless you've quantitatively culled previous purchasing habits of your clientele, whi
150 AirNZ : Sorry, don't quite get your point at all. Are you saying that a quantative analysis pertaining to worldwide data is no more accurate than various a.n
151 MoltenRock : Um... no, the exact opposite. My point was that the same could be said for your memory or your perspective unless you've done quantitative analysis o
152 Post contains images btblue : Any chance you could flourish us with some info? Pretty please?
153 AirNZ : I'll email you when I get back home, can't get into my email from here.
154 ba286 : Instead of complaining about noisy children and their parents - why dont we all come up with some retaliatory measures appropriate for on-board utiliz
155 btblue : Didn't get your email. If you do get your findings, do share them here rather than email. Then we can tie this thread up.
156 AirNZ : A reason would be I haven't sent it......I'm not home but currently on holiday in SE Asia. You don't me to 'tie' up any thread, you do what you want
157 Post contains links MoltenRock : Malaysian Airlines has also come out and said that babies will not be allowed in first class on their A380s. http://www.boston.com/travel/blog/2011/06
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...
SQ 747 First Class, Have I Missed The Bus? posted Thu Jan 14 2010 11:55:00 by Readytotaxi
TWA 747 First Class Picture posted Thu Jun 18 2009 23:35:23 by M11Stephen
TWA 747 First Class& Upper Deck posted Sat Feb 16 2008 15:10:28 by SXDFC
Movies On 767-400ER First Class PTVs posted Tue Jul 11 2006 17:47:49 by 1337Delta764
Is This Allowed On All Airlines In C-class? posted Fri May 5 2006 19:18:49 by Bofredrik
Inseat Laptop Power On MH 747 posted Thu Mar 3 2005 11:04:49 by HansieAMS
MH New First Class & Business Class posted Tue Nov 16 2004 18:23:01 by Pers
747 First Class/Nose Gear Noises! posted Sun Oct 5 2003 15:32:12 by Tallguy14
Attention: Bull Whips Are NOT Allowed On Planes! posted Sat Aug 10 2002 05:51:19 by Bobcat
Questions On USAirways A330 First Class posted Wed Mar 8 2000 19:39:10 by ORD
Movies On 767-400ER First Class PTVs posted Tue Jul 11 2006 17:47:49 by 1337Delta764
Is This Allowed On All Airlines In C-class? posted Fri May 5 2006 19:18:49 by Bofredrik
747 First Class/Nose Gear Noises! posted Sun Oct 5 2003 15:32:12 by Tallguy14
Attention: Bull Whips Are NOT Allowed On Planes! posted Sat Aug 10 2002 05:51:19 by Bobcat
Questions On USAirways A330 First Class posted Wed Mar 8 2000 19:39:10 by ORD
First Class On BA´s 747-200? posted Sat Jan 26 2002 07:19:08 by TOMASKEMPNER