Posted on 09/20/2007 10:06:08 AM PDT by vietvet67
Like thousands of American Airlines passengers last Dec. 29, Kate Hanni and her family were stuck aboard a jet for hours out on the tarmac. They were hungry, bored, angry and, in the case of Flight 1348, sick from the smell wafting through the cabin from the lavatories.
When the ordeal finally ended, some passengers from the 67 separate American flights - which each spent at least three hours stranded - e-mailed or called in their complaints to the airline. Some vented on blogs. Most grumbled and went about their business. And the airline industry thought it would, too.
Hanni, who said she had never before written a letter of complaint, decided she would get a law passed making lengthy confinement on an airplane illegal. "I was fuming," she said. "It was imprisonment."
She thus became an unlikely and, thus far, powerful adversary to an industry accustomed to riding out its major service lapses with only the lightest of government scrutiny.
A successful real estate agent, occasional rock 'n' roll singer and mother of two, Hanni essentially put her life on hold to take on the airlines, leaning on her husband to earn more and spend more time looking after their children so she could battle the lobbying might of the airlines.
With the help of Internet chat boards, videos shot by stranded passengers that were posted on YouTube and a growing network of volunteers, she has gathered 18,000 signatures on an online petition supporting what she calls a passengers' bill of rights.
Her congressman, Representative Mike Thompson, Democrat of California, quickly introduced legislation at her behest to force airlines to let passengers off stranded planes after three hours, with two 30-minute extensions at the pilot's discretion.
(Excerpt) Read more at iht.com ...
The airspace is at its limit, too. Like real estate on the ground, they're not making any more of it.
Yes, I’ve heard something about this before. It being an obvious solution, why doesn’t SOMEONE consider it? I know, rhetorical question.
If there’s a shortage of gates at the airport, the plane can pull away from the gate without passengers, in order to free up the gate for another flight. If the airlines weren’t given government-endorsed credit for an “on time departure” just for pulling away from the gate, they wouldn’t put the passengers on the plane and pull away, while some condition existed that was clearly going to cause a significant delay between pull-away and becoming airborne.
We all understand about take-off delays caused by weather conditions, mechanical problems, etc. That’s not the main complaint — the main complaint is long delays between pull-away and take-off. Most of these “imprisonment” situations follow from gate pull-aways in which the pilot (and many other responsible parties) know full well that take-off isn’t likely to follow within a few minutes.
Ever notice how the announcement of a “slight delay” for a mechanical problem usually comes within a couple of minutes of the plane coming to a stop AWAY from the gate? Ever notice how rare it is to hear such an announcement BEFORE the pull-away? Amazing how these mechanical problems are endowed with some sort of magical invisibility cloak while the plane is at the gate, engines running, pilot in the cockpit. A little push-back from the tractor, and a slow taxi away from the gate (just like the preceding slow taxi to the gate), and off goes the invisibility cloak — suddenly the mechanical problems become visible to the powers that be.
The question is when does the clock start and who starts it?
The airline business in the U.S. is sick.
There are factors that reduce competition yet, at the same time, profit margins of U.S. airlines are low, even as there is no regulatory issue that limits the price of an airline ticket.
Consequently, airlines overbook and flight-times are significantly bunched (varying by route) as all airlines at one airport seek to obtain as much of the passengers they can at the optimum times that passengers most frequently choose.
You get airports idle in stretches and then massively backed up at other times.
The US airline industry needs an overhaul from the ground up and that needs to extend to the economic and operational relationships between airlines and airports as well.
If it were possible to have a larger number of airports in each of our metropolitan areas (how likely???), and that larger number each owned by a major airline, I wonder if their operations would be more efficient and if the drive-times to those airports would still provide reasonable competition between them. Just total speculation.
There should be a simple law: No aircraft may embark without immediate clearance for flying their route with pre-takeoff and pre-landing clearance, meaning they will be cleared for takeoff as soon as the other planes in front takeoff and the destination airport is cleared for their landing. If any plane is not able to takeoff and fly its intended route with pre-clearance to land, the plane should be required to immediately return to the terminal.
Fly a commuter airline and it's common.
I've crawled up the rear stairs of a 727 more than once.
***I was trying to encourage the guy next to me to storm the cockpit so that at least we’d be let out while he was arrested.***
Oh, that’s funny.
In addition to all the well-thought-out things you’ve said, it isn’t always possible to cancel a flight and get your money back. About five years or so ago, I cancelled a flight because the concert I was planning to see was cancelled. The airline would not refund my money, but would only give me a ticket for the same flight in the future. I never had cause to take the same flight. Total loss of air fare.
Even if you change your flight, there’s a pretty hefty charge.
My post isn’t about being stranded on the plane (was once, learned to plan for that) but a very silly questions that I’m sure the aviation experts can answer. Ready?
How do I fly with my grandson’s goldfish about 3500 miles, 4 airports? Without buying the fish a seat, and without freeze-drying the fish, of course!
blu wrote: “How do I fly with my grandson’s goldfish about 3500 miles, 4 airports?”
Should be pretty easy. Get a good strong plastic bag. Using water from the fish’s tank, fill the bag a couple inches deep. Dump the fish in and seal the bag, taking care to leave plenty of air. Put the bag in a strong box and ship normally in checked baggage.
As long as the bag contains enough water to cover the fish and there’s plenty of air, the fish will last a long time. I’m talking about 20% water / 80% air in a tightly inflated bag. Make sure the bag don’t leak of course, even if it’s upended. Oh, put the fish in right before you leave home so it has fresh air/water.
This is the same method used to ship exotic fish every day. As long as the box doesn’t freeze or cook in a very hot warehouse along the way, everything should be fine. You should probably also check with the airline to make sure all of the above advice is OK for them as each airline has their own way of dealing with pets.
I have to ask. Is this a federal policy? Is this an airline policy based on a federal policy? Or is this simply an airline policy based on nothing else?
Oh the horror!
It's a wonder you are still alive.
Wow, thanks!!! I was picturing myself, sitting in one of the seats that make you want to scream at the flight attendents “Hey, Greyhound bus company called, they want their vintage seats back” with the tray table in the down position, with Fishy sitting in a plastic cup in the cupholder!! (gawd, is there anything I won’t do for my grandkids???!)
Maybe I’ll go to Petsmart and get one of their boxes...and heat seal the poor thing in.
A lot of people think fish need lots of water, but they really need less water and more air. The more surface area between the water and the air the better. If you filled the bag all the way to the top, you’d likely kill the fish much faster. A shallow aquarium is better than a deep one for the same reasons.
Yep, in an area set aside for passenger movement and controlled by airline personnel. I’m talking about the ramp/taxiways where most jets sit when they can’t get to a gate. There’s no way the airline or the airport will let passengers walk around in unsupervised areas of the ramp or taxiways.
Where'd you hear that?
I'm guessing you've never actually worked on or around aircraft before.
I've been on many flights that will leave the gate in an attempt to make a certain "wheels up" time either before or after the "scheduled " time. They have to be on the taxiway in order to get in the departure line. Sometime that means waiting on the taxiway through various delays. If you go back to the terminal, you loose you spot in line, and you start the entire vicious cycle over again.
This is a very complex issue, with the airlines caught between pleasing customers, and dealing with government rules in regards to traffic control. So making blanket rules like that will only add complexity to the problem.
I'm not saying there isn't a problem, there certainly is. But as with most things, government is part of the problem. Then their solution to the problem they are at least partially responsible for is always more rules and power for government.
My cousin was a mechanic for United, and I watched some of the videos they have to.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.