Panamair From United States of America, joined Oct 2001, 4583 posts, RR: 26 Posted (11 years 6 months 2 weeks 2 days 20 hours ago) and read 1240 times:
Limited Carry-Ons, Positive Bag Matching Enhance Security Efforts
PORTSMOUTH, N.H., Nov. 5 /PRNewswire/ -- One and a half months after implementing the airline industry's strictest carry-on baggage policy, Pan
American Airways Corp. today announced that its efforts to enhance passenger security and maintain the convenience and other advantages of traveling
through its metro-convenient airports have been well received by the traveling public. Pan Am passengers are required to check all bags, including briefcases and laptop computers. Carry-on items are limited to wallets,
purses, books and, for those traveling with infants, diaper bags.
Pan Am's Vice President of Marketing and Sales, Dan Fortnam, said "Our customers' reaction has been overwhelmingly positive. Our passengers have told us that they feel more secure. They also appreciate the fact that they can be cleared promptly through security screening." Fortnam added that "the
limitations on carry-on baggage have also expedited the process of getting our passengers off the aircraft, and on to their destinations."
Pan Am's President, David Fink, said "The hallmark of the Pan Am experience has been the ability of our passengers to enjoy the ease and comfort of traveling through airports which are less crowded and more
customer-friendly. Our strategy regarding carry-on baggage has enabled us to maintain that advantage, while at the same time providing an additional measure of security."
Fortnam also said that the airline goes a step beyond other domestic airlines by utilizing a positive bag matching system, which ensures that all
checked baggage is accompanied on the aircraft by the person who checked it. Other carriers are now evaluating the implications of initiating similar
policies. "This higher standard of safety and security, which is otherwise only required on international flights, is invisible to our passengers, and was built into Pan Am's operating procedures from day one. In that sense, we have always been ahead of the field," he added.
Pan Am recently announced that it would add service at Baltimore/Washington International Airport (BWI) and St. Petersburg-Clearwater (FL) International Airport in December. The airline currently serves
Bangor, ME, Portsmouth, NH, Worcester, MA, Allentown, PA (Lehigh Valley International Airport), Gary/Chicago Airport, Orlando/Sanford International
Airport and San Juan, Puerto Rico.
Thomasphoto60 From United States of America, joined Jan 2000, 3723 posts, RR: 25 Reply 2, posted (11 years 6 months 2 weeks 2 days 19 hours ago) and read 1177 times:
Obviously PA Mk3 is geared for the casual/leisure traveler as opposed to the business traveler. I seriously doubt that many business travelers would surrender their $2500.00 lap top or a briefcase containing valuable documents to any carrier! I would be curious to see the number of lost or damaged luggage reports that this carrier will no doubt be facing very soon as a result of this absurd new policy!
Jwenting From Netherlands, joined Apr 2001, 10213 posts, RR: 21 Reply 3, posted (11 years 6 months 2 weeks 2 days 19 hours ago) and read 1175 times:
I would never check something like a laptop or photographic equipment, unless I am able to load and unload it myself and witness the opening and sealing of the cargohold.
Too much is stolen or damaged by baggagehandlers, and insurance companies don't cover it.
Maybe Ilyushin had the right idea with their Il-86, where pax were expected to load their own luggage. The reason was different, communist equality (no people subservient in menial labour, etc...), but the principle is something PA could use.
It was of course completely impractical as loading took far longer, and the process was abandoned.
Prebennorholm From Denmark, joined Mar 2000, 6016 posts, RR: 55 Reply 5, posted (11 years 6 months 2 weeks 2 days 17 hours ago) and read 1150 times:
I can never go on PA3. My company prohibits that.
It does happen that I don't carry stuff, which cannot be surrendered to a bagsmasher. But only when I'm sleeping in front of my TV.
When PA3 tells us how happy their customers are, did they remember to ask the potential customers who had to take another airline, or the train, or their car? I just wonder.
If so complicated air travel becomes the norm, then better go and enlarge the deserts for white tail parking. At least in Europe it will spell a bright future for the railways. And even more congested motorways.
Regards, Preben Norholm
Always keep your number of landings equal to your number of take-offs, Preben Norholm
B-OTCH From United States of America, joined Feb 2001, 139 posts, RR: 1 Reply 6, posted (11 years 6 months 2 weeks 2 days 16 hours ago) and read 1141 times:
Sorry PAIII. I was looking into taking you guys SFB-SJU. You just lost a customer with this assinine rule. There is NO WAY I would check my camera bag, with 3 cameras and equipment totaling about $2000, when the whole point of my trip is to take photographs. A one bag limit is plenty fine.
Airlines dont cover for lost or stolen electronics in checked bags. I take it this means PAIII does? Anyone know?
VirginA340 From United States of America, joined Jul 2005, 15 posts, RR: 0 Reply 7, posted (11 years 6 months 2 weeks 2 days 15 hours ago) and read 1124 times:
The bag rule is good enough. Personally I'd like the 2 bagt limit rule back because humans (unless by physical disability) have 2 hands! I can't beleive that they got rid of this. But atleast I can take 1 bag with me.
Thomasphoto60 From United States of America, joined Jan 2000, 3723 posts, RR: 25 Reply 8, posted (11 years 6 months 2 weeks 2 days 14 hours ago) and read 1108 times:
I have a feeling that PA 3 will re-think this policy once they come to the conclusion that they are loosing revenue as a result of this. Not to mention the inevitable mountain of complaints of lost and damaged luggage, esecially lap top computers, cameras, ect.....
I seriously doubt that any other carrier, (aside from Ryanair of Ireland) will institute such draconian, idiotic and costly (loss of pax) measures. However if they do, then I'll be hitting the roads or the rails! I'll be damned if I am going to give some rammp rat the chance to destroy $3500.00 of photo gear!
Shrtaprch From United States of America, joined Feb 2000, 36 posts, RR: 0 Reply 12, posted (11 years 6 months 2 weeks 2 days 10 hours ago) and read 1079 times:
Well, I know that you folks that are airplane spotters probably won't be riding with PA III and I sympathize. The truth is though that the loads have been better than last year. My flight on Sunday was with 135 other folks and I haven't ridden with less that 90 in about a month. Maybe the leisure market is voting with their wallets on safety.
Thomasphoto60 From United States of America, joined Jan 2000, 3723 posts, RR: 25 Reply 13, posted (11 years 6 months 2 weeks 2 days 5 hours ago) and read 1058 times:
Indeed I am a spotter, but I do travel frequently and as a photographer. I can ill afford to trust any airline to carefully handle my camrea bag it is my bread and butter! Now when I do travel with big telephoto lenses that require hardened cases, suffice it to say these will go into the cargo hold. Aside from that and any other photo gear that has a case, everything else is in my camera bag.
If PA3 were catering to primairly the business market, I seriously doubt that they would have instituted said rules. Admittedly, I know very little about PA 3's prime passenger base, but one would conclude it is the leisure traveler, so perhaps this new rule may not have the same impact as it would if say a Delta or American were to start a similar policy. And if you say that the planes are full, then who am I to argue that point. But next time you go to the baggage claim to retrieve your luggage, stop by the lost luggage claims area in a months time and see how long the line is...or is not!
LAPA_SAAB340 From Spain, joined Aug 2001, 389 posts, RR: 5 Reply 14, posted (11 years 6 months 2 weeks 2 days 4 hours ago) and read 1054 times:
I think this is a bad move by Pan Am III, they have surely turned me away as a potential customer (and I had been considering them for future travel plans...)
This measure will not only turn away customers that might be flying for business reasons, but probably some of the leisure travellers as well. If I'm flying to go on vacation or to get away for a few days, I will very likely want to bring my camera with me to take pictures or shoot movies, and there is no way on earth that I'd surrender expensive equipment to be taken to the cargo hold. I happen to like spotting and filming when I fly, but there are many people out there who will want to carry such equipment for a variety of reasons, and this measure will most likely turn all of them away!
I guess we'll have to wait and see what happens as time goes by.