DC3Cowboy From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Posted (11 years 11 months 4 days 1 hour ago) and read 1628 times:
As you can tell from my username, I've been around awhile. I remember when flying was a joy, and passengers were treated like like valued customers. Well, no more. Now it's sit down and shut up. Now it's "step out of line and take off your pants". Well, I've had it. Until the airlines and the FAA get their act together and make flying both safe and enjoyable again, I, for one, am not about to pay them to abuse me anymore. Call me when it's better.
Aloha 737-200 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 3, posted (11 years 11 months 4 days 1 hour ago) and read 1513 times:
Every passenger in the world needs to do this until something is done about security. Even though it might be fatal to a number of airlines, a complete and utter shutdown needs to occur in the airline industry where pilots refuse to fly, and pax refuse to board, until security is reformed.
I'm sorry, no one will agree with me on this, but it NEEDS TO HAPPEN.
DC3Cowboy From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 6, posted (11 years 11 months 4 days 1 hour ago) and read 1482 times:
The "security" types (see chicken little) readily accept being pawed over by the Burger King rejects and, of course, the European types don't know any better. But red blooded Americans dont like being subjected to "feel good" searches that are basically
ILS From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 7, posted (11 years 11 months 4 days 1 hour ago) and read 1473 times:
"The "security" types (see chicken little) readily accept being pawed over by the Burger King rejects and, of course, the European types don't know any better. But red blooded Americans dont like being subjected to "feel good" searches that are basically
Vinovalentino From Canada, joined Nov 2001, 103 posts, RR: 0 Reply 8, posted (11 years 11 months 4 days 1 hour ago) and read 1460 times:
What a contradictory message... On one hand you call for increased security while on the other you complain about possible security measures. Here are some things that may make flying more "enjoyable " again...
1) Pedicures as you undergo a body cavity search
2) A cocktail while your plane is delayed 1 hours because of unattached baggage
3) Chips installed in every passengers head that detect suspicious activity.. Yours for a user fee of $10.. $15 for international flights.
JonPaulGeoRngo From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 9, posted (11 years 11 months 4 days 1 hour ago) and read 1443 times:
No question changes need to be made, but stop characterizing the airline industry like it's the lawless Old West.
Like most, you gladly hopped on plane prior to Sept. 11, rarely giving security a second thought. Now you appear like a crusader for a draconian, jack-booted security system that chokes at the very economics that allows travelers the freedom they enjoy.
As tragic as Sept 11 was, it was an anomoly. Since more rigorous, pre-flight inspections were introduced in the 60s and 70s, the number of passengers boarding flights at U.S. airports and later subjected to hijackings or other incidents involving injuries barely registers when you stop to consider the hundreds of millions of flights that flew without incident.
Maybe the sky is falling in your little world, but I happen to think that's a DAMN good record.
EWRvirgin From United States of America, joined May 2001, 358 posts, RR: 2 Reply 10, posted (11 years 11 months 4 days 1 hour ago) and read 1423 times:
Flying may have been fun for you when it was still a "niche" market but now it is mass transportation. The inconveniences come with the territory. You don't like being searched or interrogated? Think security is still not up to snuff? Fine, you have a choice. You may not want to pay to be "abused" but airline agents don't get paid to be abused! You see? It goes both ways. Granted, the airline industry has to get its act together when it comes to certain things but so does the flying public in the US which has shown itself to be very spoiled and childish.
For those who have a problem "surrendering" some liberties in order to fly remember that you're at an airport or on a plane and not taking a walk in the park or lounging around in your living room or on a beach.
DC3Cowboy From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 11, posted (11 years 11 months 4 days 1 hour ago) and read 1424 times:
Fine, beat me up. But when the airlines start to fold (and they are already close) remember this topic.
By the way, after 9/11, no one will ever again sit in their seat and let someone fly them into a building. And that is the best security you can get. The days of successful hijackings are over.
Jsuen From United States of America, joined Aug 2001, 211 posts, RR: 0 Reply 14, posted (11 years 11 months 4 days ago) and read 1380 times:
Hijackings? What about bombings...
We must remember that freedom and privacy come with a price, which in this case is several thousand lives. Because our Government and society feel that this price is unacceptable, we must trade our privacy for safety.
The current security situation does not help a thing. They are minimum wage workers who are about to be fired whose job is to run an X-ray machine and metal detector. I belive that the best way to obtain security is to replace, and keep replacing scanning equipment and complete replacement of security workers ASAP.
There are back scatter X-ray systems which essentially strip-search each passenger as they stand against a panel. Combining this with full CT baggage scans (Invision CTX machines) will result in very strong security that can be easily implemented and will not seem different to passengers than today's metal detectors and x-ray machines.
Biometrics and ID checking have minimal effect, in my opinion, as well as random searches. Today's enhanced security is consisted of all feel-good measures which cost nothing and provide nothing. We must spend money to acheive security that is not intrusive and replace equipment which has been around for over 75 years.
SJC-Alien From United States of America, joined Jul 1999, 919 posts, RR: 1 Reply 16, posted (11 years 11 months 4 days ago) and read 1365 times:
DC3 is right,,,,,a lot of us just don't mention it, but I won't fly either until I can walk into an airport and take a photo of a jet without having to buy a ticket....
Anybody hear recently about 'Christian Longo" the triple murderer from Oregon,,who lived in his car for a few days at SFO parking garage,,,,then with 'stolen' ID-etc, gets on a plane at SFO to Cancun, Mehico,......and escapes without a question of his ID at SFO....!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Where is the Media.......questioning the Gov't ad nausem(like the Monica Lweinsky event,,,with DAILY and HOURLY updates.....etec etc etec....parked out front with Mini-cams,,,,50 of 'em......) but not this.....I listened to every newscast, read all 3 major papers in the SFO area,,,and not 1(one) newsperson brought up the subject of how he got past security,,,other than to say,,,' used stolen ID'.....well I feel REAL secure now,,,,
So what is the use of all the stupid security? Why in hell(which is where I'm beginning to think we are...) didn't the FBI, in ALL it's POWER and Electronic snooping measures it has,,,,,,,,why in the Frick didn't anybody get a photo copy of the murderer to SFO or any friggin airport in our area,,,and post the photos at the ticket counters...??????? Do ya think that just maybe some clerk may have spotted his ID to be amiss...? BUT if you try to sit at an airport and take a GD photo of a jet, or just watching a/c movements.....some pencil-necked cop will drive up and order you away...!!!! Now that's efficiency at it's best........
I agree with DC-3......it's the principle of the matter...and unfortunately there are a lot of 'Fish" out there that have taken the bait..........anybody over 30 should know what I mean by that.......
VonRichtofen From Canada, joined Nov 2000, 4624 posts, RR: 38 Reply 17, posted (11 years 11 months 4 days ago) and read 1363 times:
Give me a break... Things are a little busier than they were in the 40's there grandpa. Nobody is going to stop flying because they don't like the delays or because you're not treated like a King. Do you get better service on Greyhound? C'mon, what a ridiculous thread. Do you realize how large of a role the Airlines play in the economy?
DC3Cowboy From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 18, posted (11 years 11 months 4 days ago) and read 1343 times:
I can't help but notice that those who disagree are: 1) name-callers 2)16-20 years old 3)From Canada and Hong Kong, and who knows where. And one lawyer.
Airlines are businesses. To remain in business, customers must be pleased. You teeny-boppers may not mind being abused, but the older generation (the ones with the money) mind very much. If we don't fly, the airlines will fold. Whether you like it or not.
BRANIFF PLACE From Australia, joined Sep 2001, 1125 posts, RR: 4 Reply 19, posted (11 years 11 months 4 days ago) and read 1328 times:
Iam 16-20 years old and as you can see from my username i truly value the days of fashionable and plentiful air travel, even though i havent be around long enough to experience it, things have changed and will never get better you just have to hold on to those memories of the good old days of space, colour, presitge and plenty.
Sure flying is no fun anymore full stop, but its just good to know for yourself that you have good standards and expectations and knowing that there once was airtravel that was genuinely a great experience.
174thfwff From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 20, posted (11 years 11 months 3 days 23 hours ago) and read 1326 times:
Yes DC3 Cowboy,
It needs to happen. Average Joe does not want to fly period. These people are fanatics about aviation. I love it too...but I am not flying as much anymore as I used to. 1 flight a month for me now...
I am serious when I say this (as you don't all ready know) but people are starting to drive more just to avoid airlines. Given if they need to go across the pond Air is sort of an only option here (besides boat..).
DC, it's all about money sir, and you know that. If they don't need to spend it, then they won't. They should spend money to update security, they should have better meals, they should have more respect for customers...but they don't. Will they ever? I don't think so. Better food? More money. Better security, yup. More money.
Until the airlines are faced again with another terrorist attack, they won't wake up.
"It's all about 9/11 that is causing us to let go of another 23,000 jobs..." All I hear is 9/11. Wake up! It's not all 9/11. It's about your poor security updates to please the average Joe. Start to add newer technology, start to implent dog sniffing dogs, hire Air Cops, and god damnit if it has to be done then start to racial profile. But something has to be done for once not because they want to please the stock holders, but for the average Joe who can only afford to fly to Cali once a year, but only flies because his kids want to, not becuase he wants to.
But thses poor ecnonmic choices that the airlines are making will prove once again that us tax payers need to help out the airline after such an attack. They will ask for money, they will go and cut more jobs, but nothing is done about security except take some insulin away because it was in a needle, and a nail clipper away from a pilot, and let a terrorist walk onto a plane with no bags...
CPDC10-30 From United Kingdom, joined Feb 2000, 4761 posts, RR: 25 Reply 21, posted (11 years 11 months 3 days 23 hours ago) and read 1322 times:
Both in Toronto and London on flights two weeks ago I noticed no difference in the security procedures from several years ago. Yes, in London they do pat you down but they have always done that, at least as far as I can remember.
Ryu2 From Taiwan, joined Aug 2002, 476 posts, RR: 0 Reply 22, posted (11 years 11 months 3 days 23 hours ago) and read 1320 times:
You could move to Asia and fly an Asian airline, like CX, SQ, or MAS. In most Asian countries, flying is still very much what flying was in the US or Europe 50 years ago -- something reserved for a privileged few, and not for the mass-market.
Thus, service is impeccable, and you are still treated like a king.
As for security -- well, no one in the world really has a beef against Singapore, Hong Kong, Malaysia, etc, right compared to the US/Europe/Israel? So, hopefully less risk of hijackings, etc.
AWspicious From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 23, posted (11 years 11 months 3 days 23 hours ago) and read 1310 times:
My impression was DC3cowboy's post didn't require a response. Let the man vent. He's obviously disillusioned by the drastic occurences of late. I for one am not too thrilled with the changes that's been taking place. Mind you, I don't think I'll abstain from air travel.
So, let's not bash him for feeling the way he does. Instead, let's all continue to enjoy aviation as we always have. If a few skeptics prefer to find other modes of transportation - Good for them. Via condias (spelling)
By the way, we Canadians (as do the rest of the world) also have concerns about security.
Trvlr From United States of America, joined Feb 2000, 4430 posts, RR: 22 Reply 24, posted (11 years 11 months 3 days 23 hours ago) and read 1305 times:
Sorry buddy, but larger populations call for larger-scale economics. Service standards on par with what you experienced "back in the day" have had to therefore go down. Lowest-common-denominator air travel isn't what it was like decades ago. Deregulation and Southwest changed all that, in my opinion for the better, even if that denominator is the lowest it can possibly be now.
Airlines are businesses, and you are correct in saying that they often rely on the older generations that have money. But airlines aren't in the business of providing air service for the sake of air service anymore, or service for the sake of service anymore. They're in the business of making money. And if the older generations have money, the airlines are more than willing to offer great service...for a price.
Now I don't intend my views on the matter to be incendiary towards yours...you are certainly an eligible critic considering your probably experience with airlines over the years. I'm just stating what it's like here and now. It may not be pretty, and I may not even like some parts of it, but it's what's happening, and we're either going to learn how to play it to our advantage (FF programs etc) or simply adapt.
Finally: I believe your solution to your disagreement with the airline industry is wrong, and even, ironically, a bit childish. On a related note, please don't pull the 16-20 age group inferiority card with me. It drastically lowers my opinion of you.
25 Vinovalentino: Hey you $$$^^^**** DC3 Iam 12.. from Canada and I don't understand micro or macro economics.. Yuk yuk yuk.. Pass me some more beer and maple syrup ple
26 Aloha 737-200: What I'm saying is that the security needs to be changed, we need to eliminate the methods that are not working while keeping the methods that are. I
27 VonRichtofen: So let me get this straight Dc3cowboy....you WANT the airlines to fold??? Obviously you don't understand economics because if the airlines fold, so wi
28 Dg_pilot: Let's just all agree that the security now is just plain crappy. Hell, most of the security agents in the U.S. aren't even American. The only passiona
29 SJC-Alien: .....And a lot of this may not have happened if it weren't for the Airlines not wanting to pay for advanced security measures that should have been in
30 Ceilidh: DC3Cowboy - I am 36, European and a former airline CEO. If security was so brilliant in the United States, then the events of the 11th September shoul
31 Jsuen: Here's a good way to put it: draw a triangle, at one point put money, other freedom, other security. You can have any two-- just not the other one. Ai