Ren41 From United States of America, joined Jan 2001, 1524 posts, RR: 1 Posted (12 years 6 months 1 week 3 days 8 hours ago) and read 2715 times:
A report on FOX 25 (Boston) airing either tonight or tomorrow at 10PM is saying a new airline is coming to BOS, it's Alaska Airlines and they're interviweing people who say it's an un-safe airline and they would refuse to fly it.
Are they saying all this just because there have been 2 big crashes (flight 261 and 1866)? Many US airlines have had a lot more crashes than them and there aren't report like this about them. Whats the deal? I heard Alaska was a great airline to fly.
Frequentflier From United States of America, joined Aug 2000, 422 posts, RR: 1
Reply 6, posted (12 years 6 months 1 week 3 days 5 hours ago) and read 2408 times:
Having flown Alaska several times as well, I can affirm that it is a perfectly safe carrier as well as having some of the best service in the country.
However, all of Alaska's older aircraft are quite old and outdated, and, to be honest, scare me. After flying on some beautiful new aircraft in the "lower 48" it's hard adjusting to first-generation MD-80s (with the seatbelt sign at the FRONT OF THE CABIN)
GD727 From United States of America, joined Mar 2002, 925 posts, RR: 10
Reply 8, posted (12 years 6 months 1 week 3 days 1 hour ago) and read 2326 times:
Jared: I haven't been to Logan for a while, but can't they fit them in Terminal D (the terminal that looks like a subway station restroom). I thought they moved Airtran's counters. Correct me if I'm wrong.
Spark From United States of America, joined Mar 2002, 431 posts, RR: 0
Reply 9, posted (12 years 6 months 1 week 3 days ago) and read 2317 times:
I certainly feel safe on Alaska, especially the 73NGs. I was talking to a dispatcher shortly after the 261 (a big deal in the Bay Area, since it was a SFO bound flight) and he told me Alaska had a paper work problem. Sure it looks bad, but I don't think represents a serious hazzard.
AlaskaMVP From United States of America, joined Jun 2001, 150 posts, RR: 0
Reply 10, posted (12 years 6 months 1 week 3 days ago) and read 2318 times:
MD-80's and 737's have tremendous safety records, about one hull damaging event every 3 million flights. Alaska has one of the youngest fleets of any major, average age 7.7 years. MD-80s are much younger than 727's, DC-8's, L1011s and DC-10s that many of the majors were flying just last year.
Alaska had one bad crash in bad weather in the state of Alaska 30 years ago, and fly in and out of some of the toughest airports in North America. Because of that they've been a leader in equipping their planes with advanced landing and navigational equipment. They had a second bad crash in LA, due to a maintainance error. Because of that I'm willing to bet that their maintanence practices are now among the best in the world.
In fact, I'm flying on an Alaska MD80 twice next week, with no more concern than on any other major carrier. BTW, Alaska is also profitable, unlike all the other majors with the exception of Southwest. So if you are worried about airlines cutting corners on safety, I'd worry first about the ones that are close to bankruptcy.
Jared From United States of America, joined May 2001, 685 posts, RR: 0
Reply 14, posted (12 years 6 months 1 week 3 days ago) and read 2269 times:
I too have seen the ad now a LOT of times. It is on tomorrow on the 10pm news on Fox after the X-Files.
They show this guy all like "DO NOT FLY ALASKA AIRLINES." Apparently he has some "beef" with them. I'm sure we can either recap the news clip for the rest of you all, or it will probably be posted online after it airs.
I have never heard anything like this about Alaska Airlines either. I am curious what this guy has to say about them (other than not to fly them.)
LH423 From Canada, joined Jul 1999, 6501 posts, RR: 54
Reply 16, posted (12 years 6 months 1 week 2 days 20 hours ago) and read 2225 times:
Well, I think that's the great thing about the airlines in Terminal A. For the most part, they're the airlines that don't have many flights.
Frontier currently only has one daily flight. Midwest Express isn't too prolific, maybe 3-4 flights a day, Cape Air doesn't even need gates, but it sure is convenient the little set up they have going in Terminal A, with the check-in and departure lounge just a staircase away from the planes. Continental almost never fills the amount of gates they have in Terminal A. All-in-all, of the 10 gates in Terminal A, you could probably fit them all in about 6. Just have 2 multi-airline gates for Frontier and Midwest Express. DL Shuttle is getting three in Terminal B, where Metrojet used to depart from. CO could use the two former TWA gates.
Sure, some airlines are gonna get shafted, but in the end, think about how much of it will be made up. When that terminal is done, you'll have consolidated all of Delta's operations, leaving gates open in Terminals B and C, and by then, I'm sure Terminal C will have some new plans for expansion. Boston will one day become too small for the market it serves, but until then, I have to say that I'm quite impressed with how Massport and the airlines are utilizing the space we have.
« On ne voit bien qu'avec le cœur. L'essentiel est invisible pour les yeux » Antoine de Saint-Exupéry
L-188 From United States of America, joined Jul 1999, 29799 posts, RR: 58
Reply 17, posted (12 years 6 months 1 week 2 days 19 hours ago) and read 2215 times:
Setting aside the fact that age shouldn't be a consideration in airline safety, Alaska Airlines has one of the youngest fleets out there. Especially when you stop figuring in the 7 or 8 Gravel kitted 737-200QC's that are used almost exclusivly within the state of Alaska.
I think your news station found a reference who is talking out of his ass.
OBAMA-WORST PRESIDENT EVER....Even SKOORB would be better.
Alaskaairlines From United States of America, joined Jan 2002, 2054 posts, RR: 15
Reply 18, posted (12 years 6 months 1 week 2 days 19 hours ago) and read 2217 times:
Alaska at one time was the airline with best service, I think it still is. They are a safe airline. They should talk about AA or something like that regarding safety. Alaska has some of the most experienced pilots in the world, if not the most experienced! For those of you who haven't been to Alaska you wouldn't know.
TNboy From Australia, joined Mar 2002, 1131 posts, RR: 19
Reply 19, posted (12 years 6 months 1 week 2 days 19 hours ago) and read 2206 times:
It's depressing the way the media can never be content to simply tell it like it is. They always need "an angle" or a headline. If that means that a report is biased, one-sided or based on speculation, individual anger or emotional overload, well, the public are suckers for a bit of sensationalism anyway. Aren't they?
Obviously I won't be able to see the program, but maybe someone will surprise me by letting us know that the "don't fly Alaska" comments are balanced by a suitable number of glowing passenger comments (based on factual surveys of Alaska satisfaction ratings).
Or would balanced reporting be a bit too difficult?
TNboy From Australia, joined Mar 2002, 1131 posts, RR: 19
Reply 22, posted (12 years 6 months 1 week 2 days 12 hours ago) and read 2167 times:
...and that's the problem. The more we watch the sensationalist stuff, the more that certain networks will continue to throw it at us "because it's what the public wants." But I guess it's such a habit for some of them now that they wouild probably just do it anyway. It's a great pity that they can damage reputations in the process. You have to admire the reporters, though. Can't be easy being an instant expert on everything!
UALPHLCS From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 23, posted (12 years 6 months 1 week 2 days 12 hours ago) and read 2165 times:
I agree w/ the assement that the media is planting the notion that Alaska is unsafe into peoples heads. AS hasn't had an acident in a few years, and it looks like they got thier act together w/ the maintenece record keeping which was a major concern. It must have been a slow news day in Boston for them to dig up old news to hysterical about.
Isnt the A terminal the one with the parking garage on the roof and the garage less than 300 ft. from the terminal. I think they have to demolish it to reconsturct it in accordance w/ new security procedures. Bit of a drastic solution if thats the case however.