Moderators: richierich, ua900, PanAm_DC10, hOMSaR

 
Socrates17
Posts: 157
Joined: Sun Sep 28, 2003 3:47 am

Re: Is United next airline with 29-seat pitch?

Sun May 28, 2017 8:01 pm

The price difference between the cheapest Y and W is asinine. The sort of heavily restricted "deals" that are regularly offered in Y have no equivalents in W and you can't be upgraded from an affordable Y fare. If your family is on any kind of a budget, W is simply never a viable option - ever. F in the US is a bad joke, and only suckers actually pay for it. Nevertheless, Kirby is correct to blame the pax more than anyone. As long as most leisure travelers scour the internet for fares that are $5, $10 cheaper, why shouldn't airlines take advantage of these idiots? The market simply doesn't reward airlines who offer affordable comfort, which relegates me to the train or my car. I'd cheerfully pay 10%, 20% or even 30% more for a comparable increase in comfort. But not 100% more, 200% more, 300% more. Not being a masochist, I'd drive before taking Spanish Inquisition Class, but I would pay a reasonable premium for a commensurate improvement in pitch. That, however, thanks to my "frugal" countrymen is not an option that I have within the continental US. In Europe, LCCs don't offer much in the way of comfort, but the prices are actually significantly better, which is not the case in the US, so I feel like I'm getting something in return for my abject suffering. But getting a trivial discount to fly transcon stacked like cordwood? No, thanks.
 
ikerua
Posts: 13
Joined: Sun Jun 26, 2016 11:39 pm

Re: Is United next airline with 29-seat pitch?

Sun May 28, 2017 8:14 pm

CriticalPoint wrote:
ikerua wrote:
jbs2886 wrote:

It wasn't so long ago basic economy would never happen. Now it has. Now apparently 29 inch pitch on some domestic flights LONGER than international flights. If you're theories as stated above are accurate certainly they would apply to international as well - "pay for it or shut up".

I'm sure you aren't meaning to come across poorly, but it's sounding terribly snobby and doing a disfavor to your airline.


I don't think this poster, to his or her credit, understands how horribly s/he comes across. A flight from Boston to San Francisco is in fact longer than a few TATLs. S/He responded to one poster that if one misses a connection, it's that person's fault is preposterous. I missed a connection in Newark. 52-minute connection. Back of the bus on a last-minute purchase with only middle seats in the back. Had to wait for everyone to disembark and change terminals only to learn that they closed the flights 20 minutes out.


Why did you book a 52 minute connection? That's your fault. You need 1.5 hours minimum to connect domestically and 2.5 - 3 to connect internationally. Sure you can do it in less time but it's not realistic and is irrersposible to book. It's not the airlines, the gate agents, the airplanes, or the seats fault. Read your itenarary and plan ahead.

And yes BOS to the west coast is a long flight but it is domestic. United is not adding Basic Economy to International flights.


Sorry. A typo. It was a 59-minute connection. It's the only flight that United was offering at the time of booking, as it was a last-minute purchase. I presume that the other flights were sold out. A United apologist, I see.
 
Socrates17
Posts: 157
Joined: Sun Sep 28, 2003 3:47 am

Re: Is United next airline with 29-seat pitch?

Sun May 28, 2017 8:26 pm

rbavfan wrote:
jetBlue has done very well with 34" seating vs 31-32 for everyone else. Now that the others are dropping to 29-30" they are going to 32-33" and adding a row. They still have better pitch and you are not crammed in. So it can work with better seat pitch, you just have to control business.


Market analysts are not thrilled with JetBlue's profit margins and have been kvetching about them for a while. We'll see how long the current strategy lasts. I'm not optimistic. The opinions of pax are essentially irrelevant.
 
ikerua
Posts: 13
Joined: Sun Jun 26, 2016 11:39 pm

Re: Is United next airline with 29-seat pitch?

Sun May 28, 2017 8:32 pm

ikramerica wrote:
CriticalPoint wrote:
cheapgreek wrote:

If it was a listed connection in res system, its not the fault of the passenger. I have made many,many connections with 1 hour or a little less and international flights are not that much different since the passenger clears security from their home originating airport. If the airline shows the itinerary as valid in the res system, how could it be the fault of the passenger?


Cheap Greek this post is not directed straight at you.


Does no one accept responsibility for anything anymore? My drive to the airport is 1 hr 5 mins. Should I just assume it will be that way everyday all day? Will the world just stop for me and wait?

Look at what you are buying and make a responsible decision. The airline doesn't know if you walk slow, are handicapped or are otherwise slowed down. If you buy a seat in the back of the plane then you should know that it will take time to get off.

Just because it's an option doesn't make it a good option. Take responsibility and stop blaming everyone else.

A 50- minute connection is a risk you choose to take. The airline offers it because some can take the risk and they can usually get your baggage connected in that time. If you are in F, Jor Y+ you should be okay if everything goes smoothly. But to get mad st the airline because you opt for a tight connection is madness.


I should like to add that I was not upset at United because I missed my connection. It was the only flight connection that was available at the time of booking, and I didn't have the option of not going. My mother was having an emergency surgery. I understood the risks. I was replying to the following remark that CriticalPoint (a United employee) made to CapCadet (a paying customer) for missing a 'legal' connection: "If you miss your connection after landing on time that's your fault and no one else's." I replied in an effort to point out the utter lack of empathy that United employees can sometimes have. I contend that if United sells a ticket itinerary, whether reasonable or not, that the passenger is not at fault for the missed connection.

For the record, as a 1K & GS, I routinely caught flights from DCA to SFO via Chicago -- I hated schlepping out to Dulles -- with connections that were well less than an hour. And if my connection come through, I invariably caught a seat on the next flight out. And when I missed my connection, I didn't complain. I went with the flow. And no one at United approached me to say that it was my fault. That was the old United. The new United is not customer-facing.
 
CriticalPoint
Posts: 1112
Joined: Thu Jan 19, 2017 5:01 pm

Re: Is United next airline with 29-seat pitch?

Sun May 28, 2017 8:39 pm

ikerua wrote:
CriticalPoint wrote:
ikerua wrote:

I don't think this poster, to his or her credit, understands how horribly s/he comes across. A flight from Boston to San Francisco is in fact longer than a few TATLs. S/He responded to one poster that if one misses a connection, it's that person's fault is preposterous. I missed a connection in Newark. 52-minute connection. Back of the bus on a last-minute purchase with only middle seats in the back. Had to wait for everyone to disembark and change terminals only to learn that they closed the flights 20 minutes out.


Why did you book a 52 minute connection? That's your fault. You need 1.5 hours minimum to connect domestically and 2.5 - 3 to connect internationally. Sure you can do it in less time but it's not realistic and is irrersposible to book. It's not the airlines, the gate agents, the airplanes, or the seats fault. Read your itenarary and plan ahead.

And yes BOS to the west coast is a long flight but it is domestic. United is not adding Basic Economy to International flights.


Sorry. A typo. It was a 59-minute connection. It's the only flight that United was offering at the time of booking, as it was a last-minute purchase. I presume that the other flights were sold out. A United apologist, I see.


I'm not apologizing for anything. As others have posted if you want to take the risk of an hour connection that's on you no one else. United doesn't make decisions for you, and neither does anyone else.
 
MaksFly
Posts: 377
Joined: Fri Jun 24, 2016 5:50 am

Re: Is United next airline with 29-seat pitch?

Sun May 28, 2017 8:48 pm

VC10er wrote:
It would, IMHO, be good for UA to do something even a tad more special with E+ (More than the rest and stand out) On domestic E+ flights UA could potentially attract even more revenue because of the good it does as a brand - like free beer and wine, blankets and pillows even 10% more miles for buying E+. Nothing hits the bottom line better than being people's #1 favorite. Then Y is simply a commodity- fine!


You mean what delta has been doing with e+ for a while?
 
spacecadet
Posts: 3585
Joined: Thu Sep 20, 2001 3:36 am

Re: Is United next airline with 29-seat pitch?

Sun May 28, 2017 8:54 pm

Socrates17 wrote:
The opinions of pax are essentially irrelevant.


Said the CEO's of many airlines that are now out of business.
 
jbs2886
Posts: 4339
Joined: Wed Apr 01, 2015 9:07 pm

Re: Is United next airline with 29-seat pitch?

Sun May 28, 2017 9:21 pm

CriticalPoint wrote:
ikerua wrote:
CriticalPoint wrote:

Why did you book a 52 minute connection? That's your fault. You need 1.5 hours minimum to connect domestically and 2.5 - 3 to connect internationally. Sure you can do it in less time but it's not realistic and is irrersposible to book. It's not the airlines, the gate agents, the airplanes, or the seats fault. Read your itenarary and plan ahead.

And yes BOS to the west coast is a long flight but it is domestic. United is not adding Basic Economy to International flights.


Sorry. A typo. It was a 59-minute connection. It's the only flight that United was offering at the time of booking, as it was a last-minute purchase. I presume that the other flights were sold out. A United apologist, I see.


I'm not apologizing for anything. As others have posted if you want to take the risk of an hour connection that's on you no one else. United doesn't make decisions for you, and neither does anyone else.


You are really doing a disservice to your airline by blaming passengers. If a passenger books a legal connection on UA - they should be able to make it. If you need 1.5 minimum domestically and 2.5-3, why is UA selling less? Yes, more experienced travelers know to book with longer connections, but just blaming someone for doing what UA sold is pretty bad.

I would recommend you not blame everyone for making any sort of critical comment. Sure travelers make stupid decisions sometimes, even smart travelers, but that attitude is bad.
 
CriticalPoint
Posts: 1112
Joined: Thu Jan 19, 2017 5:01 pm

Re: Is United next airline with 29-seat pitch?

Sun May 28, 2017 9:42 pm

jbs2886 wrote:
CriticalPoint wrote:
ikerua wrote:

Sorry. A typo. It was a 59-minute connection. It's the only flight that United was offering at the time of booking, as it was a last-minute purchase. I presume that the other flights were sold out. A United apologist, I see.


I'm not apologizing for anything. As others have posted if you want to take the risk of an hour connection that's on you no one else. United doesn't make decisions for you, and neither does anyone else.


You are really doing a disservice to your airline by blaming passengers. If a passenger books a legal connection on UA - they should be able to make it. If you need 1.5 minimum domestically and 2.5-3, why is UA selling less? Yes, more experienced travelers know to book with longer connections, but just blaming someone for doing what UA sold is pretty bad.

I would recommend you not blame everyone for making any sort of critical comment. Sure travelers make stupid decisions sometimes, even smart travelers, but that attitude is bad.


If you call a bank and say how much can I be approved for Id like to buy a home? The bank says we could approve you for $500,000. You say WOW and run out and buy a $500,000 home. Is it legal? yes. Now you don't change a thing about your life and you run out of money because your mortgage is so high. The bank comes and forecloses on your house and you are broke and homeless.

So the question is who's fault is it? The bank offered you a loan that was legal but it was you that decided to max it out. This is what happened in the US in 2008 and caused the financial collapse.

I realize this is a major step up from booking a flight that doesn't give you time to connect. But it does illustrate that anyone can sell you anything as long as you will buy it. It's up to the consumer to look at the purchase and decide if it makes sense.

An hour connection is very doable from Eco+ forward the airline doesn't know what seat you purchased and doesn't have the ability nor the time to sell a connection based on every seat location and gate location. At some point the consumer needs to make a decision for themselves and not just blindly walk off a cliff.
 
cheapgreek
Posts: 566
Joined: Mon Feb 13, 2017 3:57 pm

Re: Is United next airline with 29-seat pitch?

Sun May 28, 2017 9:46 pm

CriticalPoint wrote:
cheapgreek wrote:
CriticalPoint wrote:

Why did you book a 52 minute connection? That's your fault. You need 1.5 hours minimum to connect domestically and 2.5 - 3 to connect internationally. Sure you can do it in less time but it's not realistic and is irrersposible to book. It's not the airlines, the gate agents, the airplanes, or the seats fault. Read your itenarary and plan ahead.

And yes BOS to the west coast is a long flight but it is domestic. United is not adding Basic Economy to International flights.


If it was a listed connection in res system, its not the fault of the passenger. I have made many,many connections with 1 hour or a little less and international flights are not that much different since the passenger clears security from their home originating airport. If the airline shows the itinerary as valid in the res system, how could it be the fault of the passenger?


Cheap Greek this post is not directed straight at you.


Does no one accept responsibility for anything anymore? My drive to the airport is 1 hr 5 mins. Should I just assume it will be that way everyday all day? Will the world just stop for me and wait?

Look at what you are buying and make a responsible decision. The airline doesn't know if you walk slow, are handicapped or are otherwise slowed down. If you buy a seat in the back of the plane then you should know that it will take time to get off.

Just because it's an option doesn't make it a good option. Take responsibility and stop blaming everyone else.


I have done well over the years both domestic and international and I only have a carry on. As far as handicapped, that should be in the record locator. If you are handicapped or elderly, then its up to you to choose your flights carefully. I was referring to connecting flights, not the originating flight. The time getting to the airport is not tied in with the connecting times, but as I have said, I have no trouble with the listed connecting times. All hub airports have carts for those who are slow movers and the zoom by me many times. No system is perfect and neither are people so there will always be a few missed connections but in all, the system pretty well. Forgot one group, the ones who wander away from the gate area to buy a greasy burger or some overpriced snack and then complain about missing their flight. Too bad.
Last edited by cheapgreek on Sun May 28, 2017 9:49 pm, edited 1 time in total.
 
ikerua
Posts: 13
Joined: Sun Jun 26, 2016 11:39 pm

Re: Is United next airline with 29-seat pitch?

Sun May 28, 2017 9:49 pm

jbs2886 wrote:
CriticalPoint wrote:
ikerua wrote:

Sorry. A typo. It was a 59-minute connection. It's the only flight that United was offering at the time of booking, as it was a last-minute purchase. I presume that the other flights were sold out. A United apologist, I see.


I'm not apologizing for anything. As others have posted if you want to take the risk of an hour connection that's on you no one else. United doesn't make decisions for you, and neither does anyone else.


You are really doing a disservice to your airline by blaming passengers. If a passenger books a legal connection on UA - they should be able to make it. If you need 1.5 minimum domestically and 2.5-3, why is UA selling less? Yes, more experienced travelers know to book with longer connections, but just blaming someone for doing what UA sold is pretty bad.

I would recommend you not blame everyone for making any sort of critical comment. Sure travelers make stupid decisions sometimes, even smart travelers, but that attitude is bad.


In fact, booking an itinerary with a 59-minute connection doesn't make a passenger stupid. I purposely booked the itinerary because it was the only one (That's right, the only one) that was available. And some passengers may not have the experience to know the inherent risks, but CriticalPoint lacks wisdom and grace. While s/he can blame the paying public, it underscores my contention that the airline has lost its roots: Uniting people and bridging cultures. The people don't truly care why the people are on the plane. They only care that people are on the plane. Flying United nowadays is truly a business transaction and the service suffers as a result. Best of luck CriticalPoint.
 
kalvado
Posts: 3748
Joined: Wed Mar 01, 2006 4:29 am

Re: Is United next airline with 29-seat pitch?

Sun May 28, 2017 9:50 pm

CriticalPoint wrote:
jbs2886 wrote:
CriticalPoint wrote:

I'm not apologizing for anything. As others have posted if you want to take the risk of an hour connection that's on you no one else. United doesn't make decisions for you, and neither does anyone else.


You are really doing a disservice to your airline by blaming passengers. If a passenger books a legal connection on UA - they should be able to make it. If you need 1.5 minimum domestically and 2.5-3, why is UA selling less? Yes, more experienced travelers know to book with longer connections, but just blaming someone for doing what UA sold is pretty bad.

I would recommend you not blame everyone for making any sort of critical comment. Sure travelers make stupid decisions sometimes, even smart travelers, but that attitude is bad.


If you call a bank and say how much can I be approved for Id like to buy a home? The bank says we could approve you for $500,000. You say WOW and run out and buy a $500,000 home. Is it legal? yes. Now you don't change a thing about your life and you run out of money because your mortgage is so high. The bank comes and forecloses on your house and you are broke and homeless.

So the question is who's fault is it? The bank offered you a loan that was legal but it was you that decided to max it out. This is what happened in the US in 2008 and caused the financial collapse.

I realize this is a major step up from booking a flight that doesn't give you time to connect. But it does illustrate that anyone can sell you anything as long as you will buy it. It's up to the consumer to look at the purchase and decide if it makes sense.

An hour connection is very doable from Eco+ forward the airline doesn't know what seat you purchased and doesn't have the ability nor the time to sell a connection based on every seat location and gate location. At some point the consumer needs to make a decision for themselves and not just blindly walk off a cliff.

I would say this is a good analogy, if you assume customer = bank. Once you sign for mortgage, you promise to deliver - in terms of monthly payments. And bank takes that promise and pays for the house upfront. And if you fail - you fail.
It is pretty much the same - airline promised to deliver, to connect a pax from flight A to flight B. Pax paid for the promise upfront. And if airline fails to deliver.. We all love to blame banks for 2008 crisis, you know..
 
CriticalPoint
Posts: 1112
Joined: Thu Jan 19, 2017 5:01 pm

Re: Is United next airline with 29-seat pitch?

Sun May 28, 2017 10:00 pm

kalvado wrote:
CriticalPoint wrote:
jbs2886 wrote:

You are really doing a disservice to your airline by blaming passengers. If a passenger books a legal connection on UA - they should be able to make it. If you need 1.5 minimum domestically and 2.5-3, why is UA selling less? Yes, more experienced travelers know to book with longer connections, but just blaming someone for doing what UA sold is pretty bad.

I would recommend you not blame everyone for making any sort of critical comment. Sure travelers make stupid decisions sometimes, even smart travelers, but that attitude is bad.


If you call a bank and say how much can I be approved for Id like to buy a home? The bank says we could approve you for $500,000. You say WOW and run out and buy a $500,000 home. Is it legal? yes. Now you don't change a thing about your life and you run out of money because your mortgage is so high. The bank comes and forecloses on your house and you are broke and homeless.

So the question is who's fault is it? The bank offered you a loan that was legal but it was you that decided to max it out. This is what happened in the US in 2008 and caused the financial collapse.

I realize this is a major step up from booking a flight that doesn't give you time to connect. But it does illustrate that anyone can sell you anything as long as you will buy it. It's up to the consumer to look at the purchase and decide if it makes sense.

An hour connection is very doable from Eco+ forward the airline doesn't know what seat you purchased and doesn't have the ability nor the time to sell a connection based on every seat location and gate location. At some point the consumer needs to make a decision for themselves and not just blindly walk off a cliff.

I would say this is a good analogy, if you assume customer = bank. Once you sign for mortgage, you promise to deliver - in terms of monthly payments. And bank takes that promise and pays for the house upfront. And if you fail - you fail.
It is pretty much the same - airline promised to deliver, to connect a pax from flight A to flight B. Pax paid for the promise upfront. And if airline fails to deliver.. We all love to blame banks for 2008 crisis, you know..



Fair point and I don't have a response. :D
 
jbs2886
Posts: 4339
Joined: Wed Apr 01, 2015 9:07 pm

Re: Is United next airline with 29-seat pitch?

Sun May 28, 2017 10:09 pm

ikerua wrote:
jbs2886 wrote:
CriticalPoint wrote:

I'm not apologizing for anything. As others have posted if you want to take the risk of an hour connection that's on you no one else. United doesn't make decisions for you, and neither does anyone else.


You are really doing a disservice to your airline by blaming passengers. If a passenger books a legal connection on UA - they should be able to make it. If you need 1.5 minimum domestically and 2.5-3, why is UA selling less? Yes, more experienced travelers know to book with longer connections, but just blaming someone for doing what UA sold is pretty bad.

I would recommend you not blame everyone for making any sort of critical comment. Sure travelers make stupid decisions sometimes, even smart travelers, but that attitude is bad.


In fact, booking an itinerary with a 59-minute connection doesn't make a passenger stupid. I purposely booked the itinerary because it was the only one (That's right, the only one) that was available. And some passengers may not have the experience to know the inherent risks, but CriticalPoint lacks wisdom and grace. While s/he can blame the paying public, it underscores my contention that the airline has lost its roots: Uniting people and bridging cultures. The people don't truly care why the people are on the plane. They only care that people are on the plane. Flying United nowadays is truly a business transaction and the service suffers as a result. Best of luck CriticalPoint.


Didn't mean to imply that your connection time booking was stupid. I meant it generally speaking.
 
ikerua
Posts: 13
Joined: Sun Jun 26, 2016 11:39 pm

Re: Is United next airline with 29-seat pitch?

Sun May 28, 2017 10:09 pm

kalvado wrote:
CriticalPoint wrote:
jbs2886 wrote:

You are really doing a disservice to your airline by blaming passengers. If a passenger books a legal connection on UA - they should be able to make it. If you need 1.5 minimum domestically and 2.5-3, why is UA selling less? Yes, more experienced travelers know to book with longer connections, but just blaming someone for doing what UA sold is pretty bad.

I would recommend you not blame everyone for making any sort of critical comment. Sure travelers make stupid decisions sometimes, even smart travelers, but that attitude is bad.


If you call a bank and say how much can I be approved for Id like to buy a home? The bank says we could approve you for $500,000. You say WOW and run out and buy a $500,000 home. Is it legal? yes. Now you don't change a thing about your life and you run out of money because your mortgage is so high. The bank comes and forecloses on your house and you are broke and homeless.

So the question is who's fault is it? The bank offered you a loan that was legal but it was you that decided to max it out. This is what happened in the US in 2008 and caused the financial collapse.

I realize this is a major step up from booking a flight that doesn't give you time to connect. But it does illustrate that anyone can sell you anything as long as you will buy it. It's up to the consumer to look at the purchase and decide if it makes sense.

An hour connection is very doable from Eco+ forward the airline doesn't know what seat you purchased and doesn't have the ability nor the time to sell a connection based on every seat location and gate location. At some point the consumer needs to make a decision for themselves and not just blindly walk off a cliff.

I would say this is a good analogy, if you assume customer = bank. Once you sign for mortgage, you promise to deliver - in terms of monthly payments. And bank takes that promise and pays for the house upfront. And if you fail - you fail.
It is pretty much the same - airline promised to deliver, to connect a pax from flight A to flight B. Pax paid for the promise upfront. And if airline fails to deliver.. We all love to blame banks for 2008 crisis, you know..


An apt analogy is that you call a company to service an appliance. The service center provides a window of three hours for the repair to be made but the repairman shows up outside of this time, necessitating a reschedule

The bank analogy doesn't make any sense because in this case the passenger has complied with the carriage contract, provided s/he checks in on time, is at the gate on time and boards on time. In your analogy the homeowner fails to meet its obligations under his/her agreement with the bank.
Last edited by ikerua on Sun May 28, 2017 10:10 pm, edited 1 time in total.
 
ikerua
Posts: 13
Joined: Sun Jun 26, 2016 11:39 pm

Re: Is United next airline with 29-seat pitch?

Sun May 28, 2017 10:14 pm

jbs2886 wrote:
ikerua wrote:
jbs2886 wrote:

You are really doing a disservice to your airline by blaming passengers. If a passenger books a legal connection on UA - they should be able to make it. If you need 1.5 minimum domestically and 2.5-3, why is UA selling less? Yes, more experienced travelers know to book with longer connections, but just blaming someone for doing what UA sold is pretty bad.

I would recommend you not blame everyone for making any sort of critical comment. Sure travelers make stupid decisions sometimes, even smart travelers, but that attitude is bad.


In fact, booking an itinerary with a 59-minute connection doesn't make a passenger stupid. I purposely booked the itinerary because it was the only one (That's right, the only one) that was available. And some passengers may not have the experience to know the inherent risks, but CriticalPoint lacks wisdom and grace. While s/he can blame the paying public, it underscores my contention that the airline has lost its roots: Uniting people and bridging cultures. The people don't truly care why the people are on the plane. They only care that people are on the plane. Flying United nowadays is truly a business transaction and the service suffers as a result. Best of luck CriticalPoint.


Didn't mean to imply that your connection time booking was stupid. I meant it generally speaking.


No offense taken. Thanks ;)
 
FlyHappy
Posts: 1173
Joined: Sat May 13, 2017 1:06 pm

Re: Is United next airline with 29-seat pitch?

Sun May 28, 2017 11:39 pm

spacecadet wrote:
Socrates17 wrote:
The opinions of pax are essentially irrelevant.


Said the CEO's of many airlines that are now out of business.


Yes - but unfortunately the 4 (maybe 5) majors are now "too big to fail" (not the case in the past) , so there will continue to be no real consequences for these CEO's !
 
FlyHappy
Posts: 1173
Joined: Sat May 13, 2017 1:06 pm

Re: Is United next airline with 29-seat pitch?

Mon May 29, 2017 12:00 am

CriticalPoint wrote:
ikerua wrote:
CriticalPoint wrote:

Why did you book a 52 minute connection? That's your fault. You need 1.5 hours minimum to connect domestically and 2.5 - 3 to connect internationally. Sure you can do it in less time but it's not realistic and is irrersposible to book. It's not the airlines, the gate agents, the airplanes, or the seats fault. Read your itenarary and plan ahead.

And yes BOS to the west coast is a long flight but it is domestic. United is not adding Basic Economy to International flights.


Sorry. A typo. It was a 59-minute connection. It's the only flight that United was offering at the time of booking, as it was a last-minute purchase. I presume that the other flights were sold out. A United apologist, I see.


I'm not apologizing for anything. As others have posted if you want to take the risk of an hour connection that's on you no one else. United doesn't make decisions for you, and neither does anyone else.


argh. The airlines (United and everyone else) DOES make decisions for me. They do so thru their scheduling practices. There are such things as once a day flights, full flights, etc - and providing a connecting itinerary with no other options is a decision, made on my behalf, that the connection can be made.

I recently missed a connection (I do not recall the time) on WN, it was the only booking possible to a small city destination - I was at the "back of the bus" (no choice there, be it open seating or not). When flying UA/DL/AA/AS I also don't always have a choice to be at the front, the flight could be full obviously, and there is also the disconcertingly common occurrence of an automated (I guess) seat re-assignment. I so commonly chose seating months ahead of time only to find a seat reassignment at check in.

Sorry, this is not the fault of the paying passenger; and its disheartening to read your posts in this thread with the blame-the-customer-first attitude.
 
PlanesNTrains
Posts: 9524
Joined: Tue Feb 01, 2005 4:19 pm

Re: Is United next airline with 29-seat pitch?

Mon May 29, 2017 2:22 am

CriticalPoint wrote:
jbs2886 wrote:
CriticalPoint wrote:

I'm not apologizing for anything. As others have posted if you want to take the risk of an hour connection that's on you no one else. United doesn't make decisions for you, and neither does anyone else.


You are really doing a disservice to your airline by blaming passengers. If a passenger books a legal connection on UA - they should be able to make it. If you need 1.5 minimum domestically and 2.5-3, why is UA selling less? Yes, more experienced travelers know to book with longer connections, but just blaming someone for doing what UA sold is pretty bad.

I would recommend you not blame everyone for making any sort of critical comment. Sure travelers make stupid decisions sometimes, even smart travelers, but that attitude is bad.


If you call a bank and say how much can I be approved for Id like to buy a home? The bank says we could approve you for $500,000. You say WOW and run out and buy a $500,000 home. Is it legal? yes. Now you don't change a thing about your life and you run out of money because your mortgage is so high. The bank comes and forecloses on your house and you are broke and homeless.

So the question is who's fault is it? The bank offered you a loan that was legal but it was you that decided to max it out. This is what happened in the US in 2008 and caused the financial collapse.

I realize this is a major step up from booking a flight that doesn't give you time to connect. But it does illustrate that anyone can sell you anything as long as you will buy it. It's up to the consumer to look at the purchase and decide if it makes sense.

An hour connection is very doable from Eco+ forward the airline doesn't know what seat you purchased and doesn't have the ability nor the time to sell a connection based on every seat location and gate location. At some point the consumer needs to make a decision for themselves and not just blindly walk off a cliff.


I think what rubs some people wrong in this thread is that you are the equivalent of the bank loan officer telling the customer who just lost their home "Hey, not my fault. You're the one who took the loan out. Tough luck pal. A smarter person wouldln't have been such an idiot." Most people can wrap their heads around your point. It's being told by an employee of the airline that sells the tight connection and then misses their flight "You're an idiot."
 
jbs2886
Posts: 4339
Joined: Wed Apr 01, 2015 9:07 pm

Re: Is United next airline with 29-seat pitch?

Mon May 29, 2017 2:40 am

PlanesNTrains wrote:
CriticalPoint wrote:
jbs2886 wrote:

You are really doing a disservice to your airline by blaming passengers. If a passenger books a legal connection on UA - they should be able to make it. If you need 1.5 minimum domestically and 2.5-3, why is UA selling less? Yes, more experienced travelers know to book with longer connections, but just blaming someone for doing what UA sold is pretty bad.

I would recommend you not blame everyone for making any sort of critical comment. Sure travelers make stupid decisions sometimes, even smart travelers, but that attitude is bad.


If you call a bank and say how much can I be approved for Id like to buy a home? The bank says we could approve you for $500,000. You say WOW and run out and buy a $500,000 home. Is it legal? yes. Now you don't change a thing about your life and you run out of money because your mortgage is so high. The bank comes and forecloses on your house and you are broke and homeless.

So the question is who's fault is it? The bank offered you a loan that was legal but it was you that decided to max it out. This is what happened in the US in 2008 and caused the financial collapse.

I realize this is a major step up from booking a flight that doesn't give you time to connect. But it does illustrate that anyone can sell you anything as long as you will buy it. It's up to the consumer to look at the purchase and decide if it makes sense.

An hour connection is very doable from Eco+ forward the airline doesn't know what seat you purchased and doesn't have the ability nor the time to sell a connection based on every seat location and gate location. At some point the consumer needs to make a decision for themselves and not just blindly walk off a cliff.


I think what rubs some people wrong in this thread is that you are the equivalent of the bank loan officer telling the customer who just lost their home "Hey, not my fault. You're the one who took the loan out. Tough luck pal. A smarter person wouldln't have been such an idiot." Most people can wrap their heads around your point. It's being told by an employee of the airline that sells the tight connection and then misses their flight "You're an idiot."


This. 100% :checkmark: :checkmark: :checkmark: :checkmark: :checkmark:
 
CriticalPoint
Posts: 1112
Joined: Thu Jan 19, 2017 5:01 pm

Re: Is United next airline with 29-seat pitch?

Mon May 29, 2017 2:52 am

I'm done posting on this kind of stuff I'll stick to airplane talk if anyone is interested.

THE VIEWS AND OPINIONS I HAVE POSTED ARE MY OWN AND BELONG TO ME ALONE. MY VIEWS DO NOT REFLECT THAT OF UNITED AIRLINES OR ANY OF ITS EMPLOYEES.

I can't change the world on an annonymos chat board and I will not lose my job trying. You will no longer see me post on any thread that is opinion based. However I do respect a lot of you and will continue to offer insights into aircraft and flying. That is my true passion and it is what I love.

I love United, I love my fellow employees. I'm passionate about the service we provide and will continue to be.
 
jbs2886
Posts: 4339
Joined: Wed Apr 01, 2015 9:07 pm

Re: Is United next airline with 29-seat pitch?

Mon May 29, 2017 2:55 am

CriticalPoint wrote:
I'm done posting on this kind of stuff I'll stick to airplane talk if anyone is interested.

THE VIEWS AND OPINIONS I HAVE POSTED ARE MY OWN AND BELONG TO ME ALONE. MY VIEWS DO NOT REFLECT THAT OF UNITED AIRLINES OR ANY OF ITS EMPLOYEES.

I can't change the world on an annonymos chat board and I will not lose my job trying. You will no longer see me post on any thread that is opinion based. However I do respect a lot of you and will continue to offer insights into aircraft and flying. That is my true passion and it is what I love.

I love United, I love my fellow employees. I'm passionate about the service we provide and will continue to be.


Thank you - but your attitude towards passengers does not demonstrate that you are "passionate about the service" you provide - unless that passion is just making passengers feel like sh*t. Anytime someone said something you went out of your way to respond and to blame them.

Lets get back to UA's 29 inch pitch.
 
PlanesNTrains
Posts: 9524
Joined: Tue Feb 01, 2005 4:19 pm

Re: Is United next airline with 29-seat pitch?

Mon May 29, 2017 3:13 am

jbs2886 wrote:
CriticalPoint wrote:
I'm done posting on this kind of stuff I'll stick to airplane talk if anyone is interested.

THE VIEWS AND OPINIONS I HAVE POSTED ARE MY OWN AND BELONG TO ME ALONE. MY VIEWS DO NOT REFLECT THAT OF UNITED AIRLINES OR ANY OF ITS EMPLOYEES.

I can't change the world on an annonymos chat board and I will not lose my job trying. You will no longer see me post on any thread that is opinion based. However I do respect a lot of you and will continue to offer insights into aircraft and flying. That is my true passion and it is what I love.

I love United, I love my fellow employees. I'm passionate about the service we provide and will continue to be.


Thank you - but your attitude towards passengers does not demonstrate that you are "passionate about the service" you provide - unless that passion is just making passengers feel like sh*t. Anytime someone said something you went out of your way to respond and to blame them.

Lets get back to UA's 29 inch pitch.


I don't necessarily disagree with his point of view. He's mostly advocating for personal responsibility. I just think he chooses (self-admittedly) to do it in a more in-your-face, I-don't-care-if-you-like-it manner, which when you know they are an employee just sort of rubs you wrong. I like his posts generally and don't equate anything he is saying to UA as a whole, one way or the other, just as passengers are not all the same. He's just venting his frustration with those people who get what they asked for then (in his opinion) complain about it.
 
jbs2886
Posts: 4339
Joined: Wed Apr 01, 2015 9:07 pm

Re: Is United next airline with 29-seat pitch?

Mon May 29, 2017 3:40 am

PlanesNTrains wrote:
jbs2886 wrote:
CriticalPoint wrote:
I'm done posting on this kind of stuff I'll stick to airplane talk if anyone is interested.

THE VIEWS AND OPINIONS I HAVE POSTED ARE MY OWN AND BELONG TO ME ALONE. MY VIEWS DO NOT REFLECT THAT OF UNITED AIRLINES OR ANY OF ITS EMPLOYEES.

I can't change the world on an annonymos chat board and I will not lose my job trying. You will no longer see me post on any thread that is opinion based. However I do respect a lot of you and will continue to offer insights into aircraft and flying. That is my true passion and it is what I love.

I love United, I love my fellow employees. I'm passionate about the service we provide and will continue to be.


Thank you - but your attitude towards passengers does not demonstrate that you are "passionate about the service" you provide - unless that passion is just making passengers feel like sh*t. Anytime someone said something you went out of your way to respond and to blame them.

Lets get back to UA's 29 inch pitch.


I don't necessarily disagree with his point of view. He's mostly advocating for personal responsibility. I just think he chooses (self-admittedly) to do it in a more in-your-face, I-don't-care-if-you-like-it manner, which when you know they are an employee just sort of rubs you wrong. I like his posts generally and don't equate anything he is saying to UA as a whole, one way or the other, just as passengers are not all the same. He's just venting his frustration with those people who get what they asked for then (in his opinion) complain about it.


Same, I don't really disagree with his point. More of his approach and attitude on this thread.
 
mm320cap
Posts: 329
Joined: Wed Jul 14, 2004 12:35 pm

Re: Is United next airline with 29-seat pitch?

Mon May 29, 2017 3:42 am

ASQ400 wrote:
CriticalPoint wrote:
Cubsrule wrote:

Those of us who book close in often do not have that choice, thanks to 15,000,000 "credit card elites" who upgrade.


As an employee that commutes I only get the last seats available and 9 times out of 10 I'm in ECO+ and 9 times out of 10 from there I'm in the EXIT row. Granted 9 times out of 10 it's a middle seat......I'm actually surprised close in ECO plus is not available.

We all saw what UA does to get seats for its employees, so that's a poor indicator. Just ask Dr. Dao.
I'm aware procedures are changing, but my point is that UA bumps passengers to make space for y'all, which means the seat you get isn't necessarily the same as the seat normal people can grab


This is the problem with the internet. You post something like this are just dead wrong. But people read it and assume you know what you're talking about.

When commuting to or from work, we get a seat only if one is available after all revenue customers are taken care of. Frequently in my experience this is E+, though not always. Just did an ORD-SAN in economy and it was hellishly tight. Horrible seat pitch. Republic flight 3411 (Dao flight) was about crew that was being DH'ed. They are "must ride" and have priority over revenue customers in order to prevent a downline cancellation. TOTALLY different situation
 
slcdeltarumd11
Posts: 5337
Joined: Fri Jan 09, 2004 7:30 am

Re: Is United next airline with 29-seat pitch?

Mon May 29, 2017 6:23 am

The legacies are desperate to become ULCCs :)
 
User avatar
seahawk
Posts: 10417
Joined: Fri May 27, 2005 1:29 am

Re: Is United next airline with 29-seat pitch?

Mon May 29, 2017 6:31 am

29" is generous, 27" is the future. As long as the majority of customers buy the cheapest ticket, the trend will continue.
 
User avatar
LTU330
Posts: 261
Joined: Sun Jun 05, 2005 4:40 pm

Re: Is United next airline with 29-seat pitch?

Mon May 29, 2017 7:06 am

Some of the replies from (I assume) UA or former UA employees on here regarding the connecting flights are embarrassing. "Your own fault". So, a normal person (not an armchair CEO / Avgeek) goes on to the United website and books a flight from A to B via C. That person is right to assume the connecting time is sufficient on every bookable option, and keep in mind a normal person is not even thinking that he might have to run a sub 4 minute mile to make the connection, he is thinking that he is the Customer and the Airline wouldn't expect him to run through the terminal to make a connection. This blaming the passenger is everything that is wrong with the industry nowadays.
 
bennett123
Posts: 11296
Joined: Sun Aug 15, 2004 12:49 am

Re: Is United next airline with 29-seat pitch?

Mon May 29, 2017 9:07 am

If airlines KNOW a 50 minute connection is not practical, then perhaps a warning should be given when booking.

After all they have better information than the customers.
 
oldannyboy
Posts: 2817
Joined: Wed Jun 15, 2016 8:28 am

Re: Is United next airline with 29-seat pitch?

Mon May 29, 2017 9:31 am

Lousy corporate sh*t from a lousy manager.

Legacies must compete with LCCs on the grounds of [their supposedly] better offerings, including connections to a vast network, better service, meals and better legroom. And accordingly charge pax a premium for that. Going LCC-way is a not the way forward.
 
axiom
Posts: 901
Joined: Mon Aug 10, 2015 10:39 pm

Re: Is United next airline with 29-seat pitch?

Mon May 29, 2017 9:47 am

I am in disbelief that an airline employee would suggest that a missed connection is the fault of the passenger. The airline sold the ticket. Period. *The airline* took the risk of a missed connection by selling that suboptimal itinerary. It's on them to accommodate the passenger (and no, not in the Dao fashion).
 
ryanov
Posts: 260
Joined: Sat Nov 03, 2012 4:38 am

Re: Is United next airline with 29-seat pitch?

Mon May 29, 2017 3:05 pm

I have made every 45 minute connection I've taken at ATL where the flight operated close to on time. Sometimes that's required a crew asking non-connecting or long-connecting passengers to stay seated. Granted I think DL has a reputation for schedule padding.

Do you really need to be seasoned traveler to think under an hour is tight and maybe then look at "how big is the airport?" These are the same people that are in my way in the security line for a flight that boards next Thursday.
 
ikerua
Posts: 13
Joined: Sun Jun 26, 2016 11:39 pm

Re: Is United next airline with 29-seat pitch?

Mon May 29, 2017 6:23 pm

To further the discussion, there appears to be two major stated beliefs as to what may be contributing or causing this trend of airlines maximizing passenger loads: 1) Some 30% of passengers select flights based on cost such that the legacies feel that they must add seats to compete on cost; vs. 2) the way of the NYTimes article which explains that airline management teams, by virtue of how their compensation is structured, are now focused more on being a competitive investment which is in conflict with customer-centric metrics, which they arguably still measure.

I feel it's a somewhat simplistic argument to state that it's the fault of the 30-odd percent of passengers who look solely at cost, as it leaves roughly 70% of passengers who select airlines for a variety of other reasons. I can think of schedules, frequency, soft product/offerings, ancillary fees, seat and cabin comfort, frequent flyer programs and even nostalgia. In point of fact, the ULLCs are able to offer cheap seats because their cost structures are different. What's next . . . break unions to lower benefits and compensation to be competitive with the ULLCs?

I'm more apt to believe that how CEO compensation is structured somehow plays a greater role. Sure there are folks who will choose seats solely on cost, but United and the other legacies aren't equipped to fill their all the seats with bottom-of-the-bucket fares. It'll still be about yield management, with the exception that there will be a few more seats to price, at the expense, of course, of it's customers.

The only way for legacies to halt or reverse the trend is when people in large numbers choose airlines who offer more personal space. If United does shrink pitch to 29", it puts into question the integrity of it's customer friendly ad campaign, which I personally feel is disingenuous. They are not leaders in the industry but travel down the well-trodden path that others have cleared before them.
 
tjh8402
Posts: 957
Joined: Sat Jan 12, 2013 4:20 am

Re: Is United next airline with 29-seat pitch?

Mon May 29, 2017 9:23 pm

I'm not an airline employee, never, have been, never will be, but I absolutely agree with the bank loan analogy. If you borrow more than you can afford, that's your fault. If you book a tighter connection than you can make, that's ultimately your own fault. I generally never book a domestic connection less than an hour 15 minutes, but I prefer an hour and a half. If you want to roll the dice, you're welcome to do that.

As far as the larger issue goes, you get what you pay for. As long as the buying public rewards Spirit and Allegiant with massive profits for being cheapskates and treating passengers poorly while Jet Blue struggles and Virgin America goes away, you can't blame for-profit companies for going where the money is. As long as E+ and W fill up with upgrades instead of paying customers, they will remain the exception in the cabin rather than the norm. As others have noted, the airlines have sophisticated software that keeps track of what seats are going for. If Y cabins are having to be filled with bottom basement fares, then you need to adjust your product to match.
 
B737900ER
Posts: 1028
Joined: Thu Aug 31, 2006 10:26 am

Re: Is United next airline with 29-seat pitch?

Mon May 29, 2017 9:38 pm

ikerua wrote:

I feel it's a somewhat simplistic argument to state that it's the fault of the 30-odd percent of passengers who look solely at cost, as it leaves roughly 70% of passengers who select airlines for a variety of other reasons.

30% base on cost alone
40% say cost is a factor
That's 70% of passengers who take cost into consideration.
That leaves only 30% who buy tickets solely based on schedule or amenities. That being said, I think 29" pitch is terrible. But so is 17" width on a 777. But people voted yes with their wallets for that change. And they'll vote yes for this one also. You can't blame the airline. They are just giving the majority what they want.
 
cheapgreek
Posts: 566
Joined: Mon Feb 13, 2017 3:57 pm

Re: Is United next airline with 29-seat pitch?

Tue May 30, 2017 1:37 am

tjh8402 wrote:
I'm not an airline employee, never, have been, never will be, but I absolutely agree with the bank loan analogy. If you borrow more than you can afford, that's your fault. If you book a tighter connection than you can make, that's ultimately your own fault. I generally never book a domestic connection less than an hour 15 minutes, but I prefer an hour and a half. If you want to roll the dice, you're welcome to do that.

As far as the larger issue goes, you get what you pay for. As long as the buying public rewards Spirit and Allegiant with massive profits for being cheapskates and treating passengers poorly while Jet Blue struggles and Virgin America goes away, you can't blame for-profit companies for going where the money is. As long as E+ and W fill up with upgrades instead of paying customers, they will remain the exception in the cabin rather than the norm. As others have noted, the airlines have sophisticated software that keeps track of what seats are going for. If Y cabins are having to be filled with bottom basement fares, then you need to adjust your product to match.


When an airline lists a connection time and shows it to the customer in the res system, how is that the passengers fault? If the passenger puts the flight combination together himself, that's a different story. As a non-rev retiree, I can list for flights shown on the company web site or I can put together my own flights and hope for the best. Over the years I only had one trip where I missed the connecting flight and that was due to two factors, 1. My originating flight was 45 minutes late departing due to traffic at the hub airport and 2. The pilot of the connecting flight departed 20 minutes early to avoid bad weather. The airline is supposed to know their system and build flight combinations accordingly and the majority of the time it works well. Nothing or nobody is perfect.
 
Virtual737
Posts: 1471
Joined: Tue Jul 19, 2016 6:16 am

Re: Is United next airline with 29-seat pitch?

Tue May 30, 2017 4:43 am

CriticalPoint wrote:
I'm done posting on this kind of stuff I'll stick to airplane talk if anyone is interested.

THE VIEWS AND OPINIONS I HAVE POSTED ARE MY OWN AND BELONG TO ME ALONE. MY VIEWS DO NOT REFLECT THAT OF UNITED AIRLINES OR ANY OF ITS EMPLOYEES.

I can't change the world on an annonymos chat board and I will not lose my job trying. You will no longer see me post on any thread that is opinion based. However I do respect a lot of you and will continue to offer insights into aircraft and flying. That is my true passion and it is what I love.

I love United, I love my fellow employees. I'm passionate about the service we provide and will continue to be.


I know you've said you wont post anymore opinion, but I felt I just had to comment, if I may.

Clearly you love United. I truly believe that you love our fellow employees. You may well be passionate about the service United offers but your posts come across as the exact opposite. It is pointless to care about the service offered if you don't care about the customers who purchase that service. Taking the ~50 minute connection / home loan analogy you used.

If I take out a home loan, I am the most qualified person to judge how much I earn and whether I personally can and will make the repayments. Sure the bank can use lots of historical data and it will probably be accurate based on 1000s of customers, but it might not be accurate based solely on me. If I get into debt up to my neck and bad things happen and I then wanted to apportion blame, that blame should be directed at myself above all else.

However, if I am just a passenger (and at times it seems that customers flying with United are just passengers) and I book a flight with a connection from United, it is reasonable to assume that United should be offering me a connection that I am highly likely to make. I may have never flown before. I may think that 52 minutes is a long time to wait between flights. This knowledge should not be my burden to bare. It is United's or whoever else is offering the ticket.

It may seem completely reasonable for you to blame the passenger. You know that a 52 minute connection has a good probability of being missed, but the customer does not and you should look at the organisation that you love, that offered this ticket, that caused YOUR customer (still just a passenger) to miss a flight and even if you cannot see why this is United's fault, you should at least look as to why it MIGHT be United's fault rather than instantly blaming the customer.

Until this attitude is eliminated within United / Airline2 / Whoever Airways, don't bother worrying about seat pitch comparisons, you've already lost.

...and by the way, calling a customer "price sensitive", even if true, is probably not going to give them that warm fuzzy feeling. I really would laugh if United renamed Economy Basic as "Price Sensitive".

Just my 2 pence worth. I truly hope you remain passionate about your career. All the best.
 
PlanesNTrains
Posts: 9524
Joined: Tue Feb 01, 2005 4:19 pm

Re: Is United next airline with 29-seat pitch?

Tue May 30, 2017 5:03 pm

bennett123 wrote:
If airlines KNOW a 50 minute connection is not practical, then perhaps a warning should be given when booking.

After all they have better information than the customers.


FWIW, I just was booking a trip for next month and the first itinerary that came up (Delta) had a 30 minute connection in SLC. However, it noted it in bright yellow "short connection". Had it not done this, someone could easily not even notice or realize it mattered.

Separate note, but on that same flight, it was interesting because it showed the following for the one way itinerary:

$103 Main Cabin +$0 Includes seat assignment
$108 Basic Economy +$5 No seat assignment
and then an Economy Comfort price I don't remember.

At first I thought "What could be cheaper than Basic Economy" but then realized that the fare was actually cheaper with the seat assignment than without. lol Buckets and all that, I guess.
 
sgbroimp
Posts: 283
Joined: Thu Sep 01, 2016 6:35 pm

Re: Is United next airline with 29-seat pitch?

Tue May 30, 2017 5:37 pm

I recently flew on LH with some new seats. Very slim profile with knee area "cutout". I am guessing they could reduce the pitch a bit with those.

Popular Searches On Airliners.net

Top Photos of Last:   24 Hours  •  48 Hours  •  7 Days  •  30 Days  •  180 Days  •  365 Days  •  All Time

Military Aircraft Every type from fighters to helicopters from air forces around the globe

Classic Airliners Props and jets from the good old days

Flight Decks Views from inside the cockpit

Aircraft Cabins Passenger cabin shots showing seat arrangements as well as cargo aircraft interior

Cargo Aircraft Pictures of great freighter aircraft

Government Aircraft Aircraft flying government officials

Helicopters Our large helicopter section. Both military and civil versions

Blimps / Airships Everything from the Goodyear blimp to the Zeppelin

Night Photos Beautiful shots taken while the sun is below the horizon

Accidents Accident, incident and crash related photos

Air to Air Photos taken by airborne photographers of airborne aircraft

Special Paint Schemes Aircraft painted in beautiful and original liveries

Airport Overviews Airport overviews from the air or ground

Tails and Winglets Tail and Winglet closeups with beautiful airline logos