Question:

http://www.smh.com.au/news/National/A-baggage-handler-took-my-camel-s… – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -> While we obviously wouldn’t put valuables in our luggage, I guess we > now have to worry about our clothes as well. Has this happened to > anyone else? > Yes. Iberia, LGW->MAD->RIO->SCL, with bags checked all the way through. > Someone stole a lightweight waterproof jacket from my wife’s rucksack. > We deliberately used old rather battered rucksacks for the trip and we > were a bit dismayed that something we needed for the trip had gone > missing, especially as we planned to do quite a bit more air travel in > Chile and Argentina. > We tied up the zips with bits of string and trimmed the ends so that > they would have to be cut off rather than untied, and we didn’t lose > anything else. > — > Simon Elliott    http://www.ctsn.co.uk

Response:

> How many times can they go through the machines without damage is the > point… I acknowledge once or twice may have no *noticeable* effect; > how many more times are safe  considering the other tourist site > security x-rays your stuff gets these days?  The pre-flight x-rays are > the only ones I hare a right and method to abstain and eliminate.

Why not just get your exposed film processed while traveling or mail it back home? When I shot photos with film, I would just buy mailers from a local photography store and drop them off at a post office during my travels, but these days, 1-hour photo places are common in many areas, so that’s an option for those who still shoot photos with film. The only reason not to do that that comes to mind is pros who may shoot with film that isn’t easily handled at 1-hour photo shops.

Response:

I don’t need the added expense if I can limit x-ray damage during the trip; every roll doesn’t go through every tourist site nuke, but they all go through the airport machines.  I can get nice size prints for just less that $3 per 24 exp roll with a coupon locally.  I’m taking Ten rolls; it adds up! Tim K

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -> How many times can they go through the machines without damage is the > point… I acknowledge once or twice may have no *noticeable* effect; > how many more times are safe  considering the other tourist site > security x-rays your stuff gets these days?  The pre-flight x-rays are > the only ones I hare a right and method to abstain and eliminate. > Why not just get your exposed film processed while traveling or mail it > back home? When I shot photos with film, I would just buy mailers from a > local photography store and drop them off at a post office during my > travels, but these days, 1-hour photo places are common in many areas, > so that’s an option for those who still shoot photos with film. The only > reason not to do that that comes to mind is pros who may shoot with film > that isn’t easily handled at 1-hour photo shops.

Response:

How many times can they go through the machines without damage is the point… I acknowledge once or twice may have no *noticeable* effect; how many more times are safe  considering the other tourist site security x-rays your stuff gets these days?  The pre-flight x-rays are the only ones I hare a right and method to abstain and eliminate. Tim K

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -> I’m even going to ask for the dreaded "hand inspection" of my 10 rolls > (400asa) of unexposed film so it won’t get fogged by x-rays, no matter > how much they *insist* it is "safe"… > It is safe. I have had hundreds of rolls of film inspected by the x-ray > machines at check-in stations in the United States and Europe without > any problem at all. In this day and age its a moot point for me though > because I shoot digital now.

Response:

> I’m even going to ask for the dreaded "hand inspection" of my 10 rolls > (400asa) of unexposed film so it won’t get fogged by x-rays, no matter > how much they *insist* it is "safe"…

It is safe. I have had hundreds of rolls of film inspected by the x-ray machines at check-in stations in the United States and Europe without any problem at all. In this day and age its a moot point for me though because I shoot digital now.

Response:

I *dared* to order a ’special’ low-fat in flight meal too!  The last vestige of gratuitous gastronomical transcontinental flight perks… <Bwahahaha> Tim K – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -> You may want to plan a meal after you go thru security.  The extra time > makes a nice cushion for problems and  will calm you after the ordeal.

Response:

- Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – > I’m even going to ask for the dreaded "hand inspection" of my 10 rolls > (400asa) of unexposed film so it won’t get fogged by x-rays, no matter > how much they *insist* it is "safe"… > A few times maybe… add in all the times at museum and attraction > Tim K  <bwahahaha> >>I’ll just brave the security screening this year; NOthing is going > to be >>checked…  I’ll make sure I’ve got my allotment of matches anyway; > Two >>hole packs in lieu of a disposable lighter; not to forget my blunt >>scissors and miniature nail trimmer… bwahahaha…<g> >>Tim K >I dare you to try and take 10 sets of metal knitting needles through >

You may want to plan a meal after you go thru security.  The extra time makes a nice cushion for problems and  will calm you after the ordeal.

Response:

I’m even going to ask for the dreaded "hand inspection" of my 10 rolls (400asa) of unexposed film so it won’t get fogged by x-rays, no matter how much they *insist* it is "safe"… A few times maybe… add in all the times at museum and attraction Tim K  <bwahahaha> – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -> I’ll just brave the security screening this year; NOthing is going to be > checked…  I’ll make sure I’ve got my allotment of matches anyway; Two > hole packs in lieu of a disposable lighter; not to forget my blunt > scissors and miniature nail trimmer… bwahahaha…<g> > Tim K > I dare you to try and take 10 sets of metal knitting needles through

Response:

> I’ll just brave the security screening this year; NOthing is going to be > checked…  I’ll make sure I’ve got my allotment of matches anyway; Two > hole packs in lieu of a disposable lighter; not to forget my blunt > scissors and miniature nail trimmer… bwahahaha…<g> > Tim K

I dare you to try and take 10 sets of metal knitting needles through

Response:

I’ll just brave the security screening this year; NOthing is going to be checked…  I’ll make sure I’ve got my allotment of matches anyway; Two hole packs in lieu of a disposable lighter; not to forget my blunt scissors and miniature nail trimmer… bwahahaha…<g> Tim K – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -> While we obviously wouldn’t put valuables in our luggage, I guess we > now have to worry about our clothes as well. Has this happened to > anyone else? > Yes. Iberia, LGW->MAD->RIO->SCL, with bags checked all the way through. > Someone stole a lightweight waterproof jacket from my wife’s rucksack. > We deliberately used old rather battered rucksacks for the trip and we > were a bit dismayed that something we needed for the trip had gone > missing, especially as we planned to do quite a bit more air travel in > Chile and Argentina. > We tied up the zips with bits of string and trimmed the ends so that > they would have to be cut off rather than untied, and we didn’t lose > anything else. > — > Simon Elliott    http://www.ctsn.co.uk

Response:

Pete, Thanks for your reply. Some thoughts: >Who would watch the cameras?

They would be recorded to tape, like most other cameras you pass at the ATM, 7-11, elevator, traffic intersection, hospital… >And are they going to cover the whole route?

At least the key points. A decent video camera and tape recorder will run you $300. There should be cameras at any point people are freely rummaging through checked luggage. In my girlfriend’s case, the thief examined the contents of her suitcase, chose the two best items (which together would have filled a backpack), and walked out of the airport with them. This is evidence to me of outrageous security lapses. >Inside the cargo hold as well?

I guess the question is: When you board your next plane, do you want a secure or insecure cargo hold? Planes already have cameras, though I’m not sure about in the cargo hold. If this is a place where large items can be stolen (and perhaps bombs placed) with impunity, then yes. Every bus in my city has a camera. Planes should too. >With the recent requirement by TSA to send checked baggage unlocked

(or with TSA-approved combo locks which amounts to the same thing), it’s a lot easier for theft to occur. Exactly, before we always locked our suitcases. The TSA changed the rules so I can’t secure my bag, but they refuse to make sure it’s secure. >Just make a claim and the airline will make all the right noises and

pay up. Thanks, that’s what we’re doing. But we also want the problem fixed. >Theft from checked luggage is rare

In Seattle alone it was $689,427 over a two year period. See: http://www.katu.com/stories/73487.html . How many $300 cameras can you buy for that kind of money? Burt

Response:

> While we obviously wouldn’t put valuables in our luggage, I guess we > now have to worry about our clothes as well. Has this happened to > anyone else?

Yes. Iberia, LGW->MAD->RIO->SCL, with bags checked all the way through. Someone stole a lightweight waterproof jacket from my wife’s rucksack. We deliberately used old rather battered rucksacks for the trip and we were a bit dismayed that something we needed for the trip had gone missing, especially as we planned to do quite a bit more air travel in Chile and Argentina. We tied up the zips with bits of string and trimmed the ends so that they would have to be cut off rather than untied, and we didn’t lose anything else. — Simon Elliott    http://www.ctsn.co.uk

Response:

What make you so sure that it wasn’t the security officers that ‘confiscated’ the clothes? As for explosive. Any explosive put in the aircrafts is ‘authorized’ by airport security. No, make that it’s ‘authorized’ to be strapped inside the body of the aircraft, since that if it’s put in the cargo hold of the aircraft it wouldn’t severly damage the aircraft.

Response:

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -> My girlfriend had a favorite skirt disappear a couple of years > ago on a CHO-ORD flight connecting through IAD (which > is otherwise our preferred United connection versus CLT). > It was an expensive Banana Republic number. > I remember seeing her pack it in Chicago, her sister looked for > it high and low in Virginia.  It could only have gotten pulled > along the way. > gld >While we obviously wouldn’t put valuables in our luggage, I guess we >now have to worry about our clothes as well. Has this happened to >anyone else? Does anyone know if there are indeed cameras out the >luggage route?

Who would watch the cameras? And are they going to cover the whole route? Inside the cargo hold as well? Theft from checked luggage is rare, and so long as the thieves are reasonably discreet and don’t get too greedy, all but impossible to trace. An airline or airport would happily pay the occasional claim rather than pay for full time security officers and a camera system. Unless it became cost-effective for them to do so. With the recent requirement by TSA to send checked baggage unlocked (or with TSA-approved combo locks which amounts to the same thing), it’s a lot easier for theft to occur. Just make a claim and the airline will make all the right noises and pay up. Pete

Response:

My girlfriend had a favorite skirt disappear a couple of years ago on a CHO-ORD flight connecting through IAD (which is otherwise our preferred United connection versus CLT). It was an expensive Banana Republic number. I remember seeing her pack it in Chicago, her sister looked for it high and low in Virginia.  It could only have gotten pulled along the way. gld – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – >While we obviously wouldn’t put valuables in our luggage, I guess we >now have to worry about our clothes as well. Has this happened to >anyone else? Does anyone know if there are indeed cameras out the >luggage route? >Thanks, >Burt

Response:

My girlfriend just returned on an American Airlines flight from Boston to San Francisco. Two leather jackets and a shirt are missing from her luggage. I’m shocked- there must be no camera survalence or security on the route her luggage took to or from the plane. If these areas are insecure enough to steal bulky jackets, I doubt it would be hard to smuggle in an explosive. While we obviously wouldn’t put valuables in our luggage, I guess we now have to worry about our clothes as well. Has this happened to anyone else? Does anyone know if there are indeed cameras out the luggage route? Thanks, Burt

Response:

Question:

- Hide quoted text — Show quoted text ->>   Why are first class seats so much more expensive that the rest of the >>plane? >>   If they take up 50% more space, then I can see a 50% price increase. >>But really. >>   A quick check shows about $730 from my home town in the US to Dublin >>Ireland for basic fare but the lowest first class I could find was about >>$2730 almost 4 times the price and that is better than I usually have >>found. > Twice as wide, twice the pitch would mean 4 times the floor space per seat. > Plus extra service, baggage allowance, luxury longe, etc. > Plus some people just do not care much about the fare as long as they are > comfortable. > True enough.  But what gets me is the lack of anything inbetween coach > and business/first class – at least on Continental and many other airlines. > I would love a few extra inches of space in my seat, in a real bona-fide > "coach plus" class, and I’d be willing to pay a little more ($100 or > $150) for a round trip ticket for that.  But I can’t justify the excess > in price of a business or first class ticket.  So I relegate myself to > plain old coach and seldom enjoy flying.

Evergreen used to offer something like that. Don’t know if they’re even around any more.

Response:

>I had the privilege of visiting Continental Airlines with a group from >another newsgroup several weeks ago.

Was that visit with the flyertalk group?

Response:

>they run it to >Jakarta twice a day to check for minor faults (seats, in seat entertainment >systems, etc) so they can fix them before the long flight.

That’s not the primary reason for the relatively short runs. Aircraft aged based on cycles (one takeoff, landing, pressurization), and hours. Aircraft used exclusively for long haul flights typically run up their hours, but not very many cycles. Shorter runs help balance the hours and cycles thus extending the time before an expensive maintenace period, as well as provide opportunities for the pilots of those aircraft to maintain their landing proficiency.

Response:

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text ->they run it to >Jakarta twice a day to check for minor faults (seats, in seat >entertainment >systems, etc) so they can fix them before the long flight. > That’s not the primary reason for the relatively short runs. Aircraft aged > based > on cycles (one takeoff, landing, pressurization), and hours. Aircraft used > exclusively for long haul flights typically run up their hours, but not > very > many cycles. Shorter runs help balance the hours and cycles thus extending > the > time before an expensive maintenace period, as well as provide > opportunities for > the pilots of those aircraft to maintain their landing proficiency.

Well, that is what the senior steward told me. We had quite a long chat about the plane as I was so impressed by it and he obviously liked workng on it. He called the Jakarta flight a warm-up run and said they felt is was very important to sort out minor faults before the long haul – I wish more airlines would do that. If you reason is correct why don’t SQ ever seem to run 747s on short-haul (though they sometimes have done in the past on the very busy Jakarta route)? The landing and take-off practice reason makes sense to me, though I thought all the airbuses were so similar to fly that it may not be an issue with them. Anyway I have no idea personally, you can argue your point with the steward if you meet him

Response:

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text ->>   Why are first class seats so much more expensive that the rest of the >> plane? >>   If they take up 50% more space, then I can see a 50% price increase. >> But really. >>   A quick check shows about $730 from my home town in the US to Dublin >> Ireland for basic fare but the lowest first class I could find was about >> $2730 almost 4 times the price and that is better than I usually have >> found. > Twice as wide, twice the pitch would mean 4 times the floor space per > seat. Plus extra service, baggage allowance, luxury longe, etc. > Plus some people just do not care much about the fare as long as they are > comfortable. > True enough.  But what gets me is the lack of anything inbetween coach and > business/first class – at least on Continental and many other airlines. > I would love a few extra inches of space in my seat, in a real bona-fide > "coach plus" class, and I’d be willing to pay a little more ($100 or $150) > for a round trip ticket for that.  But I can’t justify the excess in price > of a business or first class ticket.  So I relegate myself to plain old > coach and seldom enjoy flying.

Agree. I found just that last week on a Singapore Jakarta flight – the Singapore Airlines Airbus A340-500 (I think that is the number) which is the new long range plane that goes non-stop Singapore-USA (LA?); they run it to Jakarta twice a day to check for minor faults (seats, in seat entertainment systems, etc) so they can fix them before the long flight. The economy seats (I think they are sold as premium economy on the long haul) have maybe 15cm more leg room and a few cm more width – not a huge amount but a great difference in comfort for long haul. I have no idea what the extra cost is. Sadly they do not seem interested in putting them on my usual Singapore-London route.

Response:

- Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – > I had the privilege of visiting Continental Airlines with a group from > another newsgroup several weeks ago.  We met with some of the senior people > at Continental, including the President, who said that DOMESTIC First Class > service costs them fully twice as much to offer as economy class, due to the > additional space, better food, etc.  And intercontinental business and/or > first class probably costs easily twice that to provide, because of the > additional room, luxurious food, lounge access, etc. because of things like > lie-flat beds, 55" pitch, etc.

That’s exactly right, based on the square-footage per passenger seat, in Coach, vs First, vs Business First on CO airlines. > I think that the intercontinental Business Class and First Class product is > totally different from economy, and is probably priced reasonably close to > its cost to the airlines.  And some people are going to be willing to pay > the additional for a superior intercontinental product.

I don’t think the International Business Class seats are priced close to its cost — else CO would be LOSING money to those passengers who use FFMs to upgrade OR get free Business First tickets with miles, which have the nominal cash-equivalent of $20 per 1000 FFM. > I don’t know about > other large countries where the airlines offer a Business Class or First > Class service domestically (Australia and Canada come to mind), but in the > U.S., Continental says only 1% of its passengers actually PAY for domestic > first class service.

That surprised even me.  I had thought that PERSONAL purchases of domestic First may be quite low, but those Firsts paid by clients or Business Corporations would be considerably higher than 1%. > The rest are upgrades.

I resemble that remark. For FIVE years, everyone of my CO domestic First flights were FREE (complimentary) upgrades from my coach tickets because of my Platinum Status, in that new FF structure since 1999. It wasn’t until last year when CO changed its upgrade rules that I missed my first complimentary upgrade, on the popular connection of LAX to EWR. CO is changing its pecking-order upgrade rule AGAIN, effective now I presume, as announced in the April issue of the InSight newsletter – for OnePass Elite members. To save its own neck (up to ears in debt and quarterly losses, as all major domestic airlines are experiencing), CO has been screwing its passengers in UPGRADE requirements as well as screwing some of its new-found partners.   For a roundtrip coach ticket from ATL/HKG, the old upgrade to Business First was 50K FFM, the nominal equivalent of $1,000 over the cheapest coach fare. When I did the same trip last November, it was $600 additional fare over my cheapie coach fare, PLUS the upgrade FFMs. Here was an concrete example of how CO screw BOTH its customer AND its partner, on an actual flight THIS MONTH. For an ATL to San Juan PR flight via EWR, on the "cruiseship dates" I needed, was 70K FFM for a free COACH, double the normal 35K, and higher than the normal First Class FFM-tickets.   And I had to stay overnight in San Juan on my return because the tickets on the flights suitable for cruise passengers were all sold out! I had ALMOST decided to pay that $1,400-equivalent coach plus a one-night stay in San Juan for about $200, since my unused CO FFMs had already exceed 7 figures, a helpful Platinum Elite agent found me a DIRECT flight from ATL, on Delta (CO’s screwed partner <G>) in FIRST CLASS, for less than my CO Coach ticket!  It cost me only 60K CO’s FFM to get the Delta First Class roundtrip ticket. There are other similar instances where I noticed CO agents were quite eager to put me on a PARTNER’s First Class flights (even for the same FFMs) when I was using my miles for free flights. It made sense.  CO is not getting any revenue from my use of the CO Frequent Flyer Miles.  So, it "pays" CO to put such passengers on it’s Partner-airlines’ seats to save the CO seats for "revenue passengers"!  I often wondered why CO, a much healthier airline bankrupcy-wise, took on Delta as partner when Delta was on the brink of bankrupcy — and still is.  NOW I see why — to unload CO’s liability in FFMs.   I still have over a million unsed CO FFMs, but I am not worried about not using them before CO files Chapter 11, if it goes that route in the near future, because the way CO is raising its FFM requirements for its own flights, I would have no trouble using a million FFMs for just a few international Business First flights. — Bob.

Response:

- Hide quoted text — Show quoted text ->   Why are first class seats so much more expensive that the rest of the >plane? >   If they take up 50% more space, then I can see a 50% price increase. >But really. >   A quick check shows about $730 from my home town in the US to Dublin >Ireland for basic fare but the lowest first class I could find was about >$2730 almost 4 times the price and that is better than I usually have >found. > Twice as wide, twice the pitch would mean 4 times the floor space per seat. > Plus extra service, baggage allowance, luxury longe, etc. > Plus some people just do not care much about the fare as long as they are > comfortable.

True enough.  But what gets me is the lack of anything inbetween coach and business/first class – at least on Continental and many other airlines. I would love a few extra inches of space in my seat, in a real bona-fide "coach plus" class, and I’d be willing to pay a little more ($100 or $150) for a round trip ticket for that.  But I can’t justify the excess in price of a business or first class ticket.  So I relegate myself to plain old coach and seldom enjoy flying.

Response:

Instead of thinking on why First class seats are VERY VERY VERY expensive (relatively), you maybe might want to think first on why the Economy class seats are so VERY VERY VERY cheap (relatively). Lets assume that the average person couldn’t afford the price of air travel and you couldn’t lowered the price down to the level that they could afford. What if that’s the truth? That the average person even today actually couldn’t afford air travel? How do you do transport all of these people who are only willing to pay so little for air travel? One way is that you made the First class passengers pay a large share of the cost for transportating the economy class passengers, they basically subsidize the Economy class passengers. This let people with less money to ride airplanes and gives the impression that air travel is affordable to the general public with medium budget. Of course, this make no sense, since on why the airline companies would want carry a lot of more people than needed, when they instead can just only cattered to people who will bring the maximum amount of profit to them? Unless of course, they are ordered to do so, being ordered to let a large part of the population be able to ride airplanes. Of course, budget airliner companies seems to take this order to the extreme. While we always being told that these companies managed to bring down the airfares down beyond the current level (which is already pretty much very cheap) is because on how they managed to ‘cut cost’. But what if that is not the case? And instead they are subsidised from a external party, with the intention to let a much larger part of the population being able to ride airplanes, and of course also to pressure the bigger airline companies, even down to the point of bankruptcy (which of course later these bigger companies and/or their assets will change ‘hands’). And of course, there’s the train companies. And also even personal transportation. As for the luxurious services and the luxurious facilities that First Class passengers get. Well… While the higher price of First class seat always said because due the higher price of the luxurious services and the luxurious facilities. When you think about it, the cost of transporting a First class passenger and an Economy class passenger might not be so different at all, even if one factored in the cost of the services and the facilities. The luxurious services and the luxurious facilities might be an attempt to disguise the higher price of a First class seat, more of a bonus for paying more rather the things that contribute to the drastic difference in price. As for the differences in classes. Well…. It probably done to let more people be able to travel with airplanes like I mentioned above. Another reason is that it might be also done with the intention to cause rifts between people, what happen if you put two different kind of people with two different kind of lifestyle together? Though of course, to let more people travel might caused some pretty major rifts by itself. The effects are congestion, doing an air travel when you shouldn’t do, and so on. It might be better to let those who usually travel in First class to be in their own airplanes, those who usually travel in Business class to be in their own airplanes, those who usually travel in Economy class to be in their own airplanes, and so on since they each have their own needs and capabilities. But if it’s done, then it’s possible that people wouldn’t be fighting each other so much, and there’s a group who wouldn’t want that to happen.

Response:

> Then you need to consider that "more space" is only a tiny part of the > difference. I fly Singapore Air regularly and get upgraded to First > Class probably 1/3 of the time. You don’t just get more space. They > come to you and hand you Givenchy pajamas to change into. While you’re > changing they lay out your seat into a full, flat, level bed.

They make you change yourself? You need to bank a few more miles, my friend. miguel — Hit The Road! Photos from 36 countries on 5 continents: http://travel.u.nu Latest photos: Jordan, Turkey, Malaysia, Thailand, Indonesia, Israel

Response:

>>>>> Why are first class seats so much more expensive that the rest of the >>>> plane?

Because it is profitable for the airline(s).   If nobody ever bought those seats, they would have all coach.  Airlines are not dumb–if these seats did not bring a cash win for them, they would get rid of them, or adjust the size of the first class compartments for greatest profit. You or I may not fly upfront in First or Business, but some people can afford it, and do (like the Catholic archbishop I just read about on another discussion site)–the airlines can then use the unsold space upfront to provide perks to attract frequent fliers who will keep general revenue for the airline high.

Response:

>  it’s set like that because that’s what > people are prepared to pay to get out of cattle class!

It might be to ensure that the cattle don’t get into first class, too. And after another long flight, I can see the thinking in that. Some of them behave disgustingly. I wonder if they let crying babies into first class? ant

Response:

—snip— > I wonder if they let crying babies into first class? >ant

They will let anyone into F who is willing to pay for it.  Note that the payment can be currency, miles, upgrade certs, or loyalty.  I frequently fly with my son so he can visit the grandparents while my wife and I take a vacation alone.  His first flight was in F when he was 8 months old.  At 3.5 years old, he has spent more time in F than in Y.  Before the "I hate kids on planes" troop chimes in, Let me add that he is a very good flyer.  He has only disturbed other passengers twice in over a dozen flights.  Once was during takeoff when he announced "wheeeeeeeeee" as we started rolling down the runway.  The other was a 30 second crying episode after waking up while we were deplaning.  One time, while deplainng, I had a snooty guy say to me that F passengers get to deplane first.  To which I replied, OK then we are deplaning at the right time.  He couldn’t believe that a 2-yr old was quiet in F for 2.5 hours in a plane.

Response:

- Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – > —snip— > I wonder if they let crying babies into first class? > ant > They will let anyone into F who is willing to pay for it.  Note that > the payment can be currency, miles, upgrade certs, or loyalty.  I > frequently fly with my son so he can visit the grandparents while my > wife and I take a vacation alone.  His first flight was in F when he > was 8 months old.  At 3.5 years old, he has spent more time in F than > in Y.  Before the "I hate kids on planes" troop chimes in, Let me add > that he is a very good flyer.  He has only disturbed other passengers > twice in over a dozen flights.  Once was during takeoff when he > announced "wheeeeeeeeee" as we started rolling down the runway.  The > other was a 30 second crying episode after waking up while we were > deplaning.  One time, while deplainng, I had a snooty guy say to me > that F passengers get to deplane first.  To which I replied, OK then > we are deplaning at the right time.  He couldn’t believe that a 2-yr > old was quiet in F for 2.5 hours in a plane.

My idea of a long flight is 10 hours plus. The last one was 14 hours, and there was 2 chainsaws going off for long periods through out the flight. Their considerate parents would often pick them up and take them for a walk around the cabin when they erupted, ensuring that even passengers seated a long way from them got their fair dose of screeching. ant

Response:

>    Why are first class seats so much more expensive that the rest of the > plane? >    If they take up 50% more space, then I can see a 50% price increase. > But really. >    A quick check shows about $730 from my home town in the US to Dublin > Ireland for basic fare but the lowest first class I could find was about > $2730 almost 4 times the price and that is better than I usually have > found.

Twice as wide, twice the pitch would mean 4 times the floor space per seat. Plus extra service, baggage allowance, luxury longe, etc. Plus some people just do not care much about the fare as long as they are comfortable.

Response:

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text ->    Why are first class seats so much more expensive that the rest of the > plane? >    If they take up 50% more space, then I can see a 50% price increase. > But really. >    A quick check shows about $730 from my home town in the US to Dublin > Ireland for basic fare but the lowest first class I could find was about > $2730 almost 4 times the price and that is better than I usually have > found. > Twice as wide, twice the pitch would mean 4 times the floor space per > seat. Plus extra service, baggage allowance, luxury longe, etc. > Plus some people just do not care much about the fare as long as they are > comfortable.

I had the privilege of visiting Continental Airlines with a group from another newsgroup several weeks ago.  We met with some of the senior people at Continental, including the President, who said that DOMESTIC First Class service costs them fully twice as much to offer as economy class, due to the additional space, better food, etc.  And intercontinental business and/or first class probably costs easily twice that to provide, because of the additional room, luxurious food, lounge access, etc. because of things like lie-flat beds, 55" pitch, etc. I think that the intercontinental Business Class and First Class product is totally different from economy, and is probably priced reasonably close to its cost to the airlines.  And some people are going to be willing to pay the additional for a superior intercontinental product.  I don’t know about other large countries where the airlines offer a Business Class or First Class service domestically (Australia and Canada come to mind), but in the U.S., Continental says only 1% of its passengers actually PAY for domestic first class service.  The rest are upgrades. Jeff – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text –

Response:

>    Why are first class seats so much more expensive that the rest of the >plane? >    If they take up 50% more space, then I can see a 50% price increase. >But really. >    A quick check shows about $730 from my home town in the US to Dublin >Ireland for basic fare but the lowest first class I could find was about >$2730 almost 4 times the price and that is better than I usually have found.

Typical coach has a 31 to 33 inch seat pitch, and first is 60 to 94 inches.  On a typical 777, coach is 9 across, and First is 4 across (6 or 7 for Business Class).  So if you Have a First Class seat with 94" pitch and 4 across, your seat is actually taking up 6 times more space than the coach seat.  If you ahve a F (or Business) seat with a 60" pitch and 7 across, you are taking up slightly less than 3 times the space.  So 3×730=2190.  Plus you get lounge access, better meal, and complimentary alcoholic beverages.  Therefore, on a pure space analysis, 2730 doesn’t seem that out of line.  However, airlines do not price premium cabin seats based on how much more space they take up over coach seats.  They price them for what they think the market will pay.  Sometimes this is good for the consumer, and sometimes it is bad.  For example, an F seat on Air france JFK-CDG this summer will cost around $10k (bad for consumer).  However, a pretty good Business seat on a Continental EWR-CDG can be found for $1650 (good for consumer).  Coach on either is in the $800-$1000 range.

Response:

>    Why are first class seats so much more expensive that the rest of the > plane? >    If they take up 50% more space, then I can see a 50% price increase. > But really. >    A quick check shows about $730 from my home town in the US to Dublin > Ireland for basic fare but the lowest first class I could find was about > $2730 almost 4 times the price and that is better than I usually have > found.

It’s not just the space for the seats, most of the price is for the *service*, i.e. more personal attention from the FA’s. It is that which costs the extra cash. But also in airlines the price has little connection to the actual cost of running the aircraft, it’s set like that because that’s what people are prepared to pay to get out of cattle class!

Response:

    Why are first class seats so much more expensive that the rest of the plane?     If they take up 50% more space, then I can see a 50% price increase. But really.     A quick check shows about $730 from my home town in the US to Dublin Ireland for basic fare but the lowest first class I could find was about $2730 almost 4 times the price and that is better than I usually have found. — Joseph Meehan Dia’s Muire duit

Response:

> Why are first class seats so much more expensive that the rest of the > plane? >     If they take up 50% more space, then I can see a 50% price increase. > But really. >     A quick check shows about $730 from my home town in the US to Dublin > Ireland for basic fare but the lowest first class I could find was about > $2730 almost 4 times the price and that is better than I usually have

found. Airlines charge much more for First Class in part because they can. They have to price compete to sell Coach seats but not First Class. Next point is that hardly anyone ever pays for First Class. It’s usually an upgrade, particularly on domestic US or intra-Europe flights. Then you need to consider that "more space" is only a tiny part of the difference. I fly Singapore Air regularly and get upgraded to First Class probably 1/3 of the time. You don’t just get more space. They come to you and hand you Givenchy pajamas to change into. While you’re changing they lay out your seat into a full, flat, level bed. They add a mattress pad, comforter, full size pillow, etc. Better food, bigger TV, first off the plane, assitance in airports if needed, separate Lots of differences.

Response:

Question:

>Can anyone tell me if there’s a British Airways home page that can be >accessed through LYNX ? (or a database containg Airline data, such as the >number of flights each airline makes between B.C. and London. I’m currently >attending a travel college that requires me to do a class project. My >project is actually an assignment to convince tourist to visit London, >but I’d like to do a little more that a basic brochure.

Try http://www.cs.ucl.ac.uk/misc/uk/london.html for a lot of info on London. BA home page, will be up by end August – URL not clear yet, as Bell Atlantic got www.ba.com! If you want flight schedules – try one of the travel agency sites such as PCTravel ot Internet Travel Network (find them in Yahoo).

Response:

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Cook) writes: >Can anyone tell me if there’s a British Airways home page that can be >accessed through LYNX ? (or a database containg Airline data, such as the >number of flights each airline makes between B.C. and London. I’m currently >attending a travel college that requires me to do a class project. My >project is actually an assignment to convince tourist to visit London, >but I’d like to do a little more that a basic brochure. >Try http://www.cs.ucl.ac.uk/misc/uk/london.html for a lot of info on London. BA home page, >will be up by end August – URL not clear yet, as Bell Atlantic got www.ba.com! >If you want flight schedules – try one of the travel agency sites such as PCTravel >ot Internet Travel Network (find them in Yahoo).

Did you ever think about http://www.ba.co.uk?  (After all, they are in the UK :>)   (anxiously awaiting the world favourite airline online…) –Jake Allan

Response:

Can anyone tell me if there’s a British Airways home page that can be accessed through LYNX ? (or a database containg Airline data, such as the number of flights each airline makes between B.C. and London. I’m currently attending a travel college that requires me to do a class project. My project is actually an assignment to convince tourist to visit London, but I’d like to do a little more that a basic brochure.

Response:

As far as I am aware, BA will have a home page soon.  I imagine it will be accessible using any browser….but switch to Netscape, its the best. — Best Regards, Addison Schonland Phone (619) 637-4000 Fax (619) 637-4040

Response:

[This followup was posted to rec.travel.air and a copy was sent to the cited author.]  I had BA cancell my flight on the concorde and they didn’t bother to call me. Hmmm I was thrilled when I got to the airport.  "no you dont need to reconfirm" said the BA agents that I spoke to…..

Response:

That’s also what they say on their web site. Frank Matthews – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – > [This followup was posted to rec.travel.air and a copy was sent to the > cited author.] >  I had BA cancell my flight on the concorde and they didn’t bother to > call me. Hmmm I was thrilled when I got to the airport. >  "no you dont need to reconfirm" said the BA agents that I spoke to…..

Response:

[This followup was posted to rec.travel.air and a copy was sent to the cited author.] @aol.com says… > Sorry to hear about your BA problems.  BTW, what city is ARN?

ARN is Stockholm – ARlaNda. /P-O — Per-Olof Litby Product Mgr, Microsoft Nordic, Box 27, 16493 Kista, Sweden Mobile +46 70 452-2885 As I have discovered by examining my past, I started out as a child.

Response:

Stockholm-Arlanda, Sweden. Also known as ESSA. -Preston – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – > … > Sorry to hear about your BA problems.  BTW, what city is ARN?

Response:

> I just got back from my LAX-LHR-ARN flight on BA, and this time they didn’t > cancel any flights But, on the other hand, they lost my bags. > This is the third time in a row BA screws up. The previous times: > December 1998, LAX-LHR-ARN: They lost my bags, got them back after christmas… > January 1999, ARN-LHR-LAX: The first flight was cancelled because of technical problems, so I was rerouted ARN-LHR-JFK-LAX and was supposed to be able to > take the late flight from JFK so I would arrive at LAX _only_ 8 hours late. > Of course, the LHR-JFK flight was delayed (technical problems), so I had to > spend the night in NY. Arrived in LA approx. 20 hours later than I was > supposed to do. > Anyone else who has bad experiences from BA?

Sounds like par for the course to me. — Regards from Bill a.k.a.

Response:

My Friends had the same expierience in January, flying to YVR – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – > I just got back from my LAX-LHR-ARN flight on BA, and this time they didn’t > cancel any flights But, on the other hand, they lost my bags. > This is the third time in a row BA screws up. The previous times: > December 1998, LAX-LHR-ARN: They lost my bags, got them back after christmas… > January 1999, ARN-LHR-LAX: The first flight was cancelled because of technical problems, so I was rerouted ARN-LHR-JFK-LAX and was supposed to be able to > take the late flight from JFK so I would arrive at LAX _only_ 8 hours late. > Of course, the LHR-JFK flight was delayed (technical problems), so I had to > spend the night in NY. Arrived in LA approx. 20 hours later than I was > supposed to do. > Anyone else who has bad experiences from BA?

Response:

I just got back from my LAX-LHR-ARN flight on BA, and this time they didn’t cancel any flights But, on the other hand, they lost my bags. This is the third time in a row BA screws up. The previous times: December 1998, LAX-LHR-ARN: They lost my bags, got them back after christmas… January 1999, ARN-LHR-LAX: The first flight was cancelled because of technical problems, so I was rerouted ARN-LHR-JFK-LAX and was supposed to be able to take the late flight from JFK so I would arrive at LAX _only_ 8 hours late. Of course, the LHR-JFK flight was delayed (technical problems), so I had to spend the night in NY. Arrived in LA approx. 20 hours later than I was supposed to do. Anyone else who has bad experiences from BA?

Response:

>I just got back from my LAX-LHR-ARN flight on BA, and this time they didn’t >cancel any flights But, on the other hand, they lost my bags. >This is the third time in a row BA screws up. The previous times:

<snip> Begs the question, why do ytou continue flying with them instead of SAS, or are you tied to them by miles or company policy? replace royaumeuni with the abbreviation of the U_nited K_ingdom of England, Scotland, Wales & N. Ireland  to reply

Response:

Fortunately I have had nothing but good experiences with BA.  I usually travel the EWR-LHR-LGW-VRN route. Even with the transfer from LHR to LGW I have never had any problems.  The flights to Verona are quick and easy and are never crowded. Sorry to hear about your BA problems.  BTW, what city is ARN?

Response:

I have flown on British Airways from the US to France, Germany and England in the past.  All of the British Airways legs were staffed by friendly people who did have the British style that BA is famous for. I fly US Airways often in the US and have usually good experiences there as well but sometimes get the F/A from hell or a gate agent who has had a rough year, etc.  But the bottom line has been that most people are concerned about making the customer happy. I just try to take whatever comes my way and roll with it.  I wouldn’t give up on British Airways if I were you because they are a great airline, IMHO, and can provide good service. John Gray – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – > I just returned from England and one of the legs on my trip (Manchester > to Heathrow) involved a BA flight.  The contrast with all my other > flights this trip (on United Airlines) was dramatic.  The agent on check > in was extremely rude to my wife; I asked a question of another agent > and was met with an annoyed stare and a terse remark; the reading of the > emergency procedures on the plane was bizarre in its’ lack of any > feeling; the "snack" was horrible; the general attitude of the > attendants ranged from bored to just plain rude. > The whole experience was in such contrast to the overall demeanor of the > British people and the United Airlines staff.  I had figured that > British Airways would reflect the efficiency, friendliness and courtesy > that I experienced throughout all of my stays in England. > I was wrong, and won’t make the mistake again. > Thanx > Stan

Response:

- Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – > I just returned from England and one of the legs on my trip > (Manchester > to Heathrow) involved a BA flight.  The contrast with all my other > flights this trip (on United Airlines) was dramatic.  The agent on > check > in was extremely rude to my wife; I asked a question of another agent > and was met with an annoyed stare and a terse remark; the reading of > the > emergency procedures on the plane was bizarre in its’ lack of any > feeling; the "snack" was horrible; the general attitude of the > attendants ranged from bored to just plain rude. > The whole experience was in such contrast to the overall demeanor of > the > British people and the United Airlines staff.  I had figured that > British Airways would reflect the efficiency, friendliness and > courtesy > that I experienced throughout all of my stays in England. > I was wrong, and won’t make the mistake again. > Thanx > Stan

Are there two British Airways??? The folks here in Houston and on flights to & from Gatwick have always been quite pleasant.  The flights are crowded in summer & the staff are sometimes harried but quite pleasant. Frank Matthews

Response:

I just returned from England and one of the legs on my trip (Manchester to Heathrow) involved a BA flight.  The contrast with all my other flights this trip (on United Airlines) was dramatic.  The agent on check in was extremely rude to my wife; I asked a question of another agent and was met with an annoyed stare and a terse remark; the reading of the emergency procedures on the plane was bizarre in its’ lack of any feeling; the "snack" was horrible; the general attitude of the attendants ranged from bored to just plain rude.   The whole experience was in such contrast to the overall demeanor of the British people and the United Airlines staff.  I had figured that British Airways would reflect the efficiency, friendliness and courtesy that I experienced throughout all of my stays in England. I was wrong, and won’t make the mistake again. Thanx Stan

Response:

>you that probably a million others just like it have been written about >every airline. When you are traveling AD50/75 ID90 you are gonna get a >back seat at the end of the shift/the last flight whatever. You just >simply shouldn’t expect to get treated like a revenue passenger. Pay >Anyway, it’s been going that way for many years…and it’s probably not >gonna change.

Sad, but true. I don’t think it’s anything to do with what you pay, though. More of a culture thing. Us Brits just aren’t as good at customer service as Americans, not usually. Last trip I made on BA was a cut-rate fare, and my "window seat" going out was beside a blank wall, while the return trip was in "steerage" with the off-duty stewardesses etc. (Not that I minded – and the fare was right). But the contrast with free (frequent flyer) trips on NorthWest was considerable. —

Response:

> Well certainly if you want your letter to receive any attention at all > you shouldn’t post it in some obscure corner of the net.  You should > bring it right out into the bright daylight where everyone can see it. > There, I’ve done you the favor.  I think your letter deserves it.

Truthfully there is really no point in such a letter because I assure you that probably a million others just like it have been written about every airline. When you are traveleing AD50/75 ID90 you are gonna get a back seat at the end of the shift/the last flight whatever. You just simply shouldn’t expect to get treated like a revenue passenger. Pay full price and you WILL get treated like one. They know that your dissatisfaction isn’t really gonna change how much business you do with them in the long run. If that was the case then agents here in the US would have put DL out of business years ago just out of spite. They have what you need and a lot of the time you can’t make your passengers use another carrier. Anyway, it’s been going that way for many years…and it’s probably not gonna change. Andrew Williams Global Link Travel Network

Response:

>Oh No!  I just booked my flight to France on British Airways.   Oh well, I >guess I can survive 2 flights, but hope it’s better when I fly than what you >experienced

I flew with BA last week, and had nothing to complain about. In fact, I have trouble finding any real difference between any of the airlines. Perhaps I am too focussed on getting to my destination than worrying about adequate locker space. (…and I have certainly flown enough of them!) — — DFM – http://www.deepfriedmars.com — —

Response:

>I just feel he’s making a big fuss over nothing. So what if they let >everyone board at once? He had just as much time to find his way onto the >plane as everyone else. He’s the one who decided to wait until most of the >other passengers had boarded. No one was holding him back. >Richard

Considering what the stupid tw(vowel)t wrote, its patently obvious that he is not a very regular air traveller.

Response:

And I’ve seen *very few* rude FA’s on any airline.  But most seem to get a bit testy when someone gets loud & obnoxious. I flew last summer from Dammam, Saudi Arabia to Frankfurt on Lufthansa with my cat in business class.  The leg from Dammam to Dubai was fine, the flight attendents were very friendly.  At Dubai, the crew was changed, and at first they were also very friendly, that is, until they asked me if I would change from my window to another aisle seat.  Not wishing to further strain the cat, I declined.  After that, I was virtually ignored.  It had nothing to do with my behavior, it was just because I wouldn’t go along with their request.  I find some people in the airline industry unwilling to be helpful, and many down right obnoxious. Once when flying to Steamboat Springs from Denver on United Express, it was foggy in the morning and flights were delayed or canceled.  The staff made no effort at all (actually virtually refused to help) to get on another flight.  After making several inquiries over several hours and getting no response except just wait, I noticed flights departing again to Steamboat Springs.  Counting the number of passengers, I realized that they were only half full.  I went up and inquired again, and they sent me to another gate where I got a boarding pass immediately.  The person in front of me asked innocently about his luggage, and the woman at the counter exploded and virtually accused him of assaulting her, and said something about not allowing him on the plane because of his obnoxious behavior.  She was the only obnoxious one.  If she had been a man, and he didn’t slug her, I would have. Nobody deserves to be treated like that, and I was going to also ask the same question.  I can’t imagine letting anybody like that deal with the public.  And when I got to Steamboat Springs, there was my suitcase sitting in the middle of the floor, probably for hours, waiting for somebody to walk off with it. George

Response:

That is odd, I have flown with BA, Luftansa, AA, Continental, and US Air, and BA was one of the best experiences other than Luftansa. My last transcontinental flight was in 1998. Has flying become such an ordeal in 7 years? Anyone else have the same experiences with BA?

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -> April 1, 2005 > Mr.Martin Broughton > Chairman > British Airways PLC > Waterside > PO Box 365 > Harmondsworth, West Drayton > Middlesex UB7 0GB > Dear Mr. Broughton: > Re: British Airways service > My wife and I went to Venice on March 7 for a few days to celebrate our > wedding anniversary.  We had a very good time and thoroughly enjoyed > ourselves.  Unfortunately we travelled on British Airways which was not > enjoyable. > Most airlines have worked out that it is more convenient for passengers to > be boarded by rows so that people who sit close to the front of the plane > don

Question:

:>>What’s the issue with batteries? I’ve never encountered anything of that :>>nature, thankfully. :>If the batteries are not in the item, the theory is it cannot operate. Very :>easy to make a PDA for example which still works the trigger for a device. Much easier to use a laptop as a trigger. Nobody that I know of has been requested to remove the battery from a laptop. :>It comes down in the end to balancing the risk against the inconvenience. — http://www.dissensoftware.com Should you use the mailblocks package and expect a response from me, you should preauthorize the dissensoftware.com domain. I very rarely bother responding to challenge/response systems, especially those from irresponsible companies.

Response:

:>>>> If you carry spare re-chargeable batteries for your digital camera, or :>>>> other devices, you might want to consider packing them in your checked :>>>> luggage. Some reports of batteries being confiscated in some airports, :>>>> this is in the Photo newsgroup. :>>> A few weeks ago, security at Tel Aviv airport confiscated my battery :>>> charger but not the battery that it went with (in fact, I insisted they :>>> allow me to use the power outlet in the security screening room to :>>> recharge the battery before they took the charger away). They would not :>>> allow it to travel in checked luggage either, but they did have it (along :>>> with my equally fearsome toothpaste and deodorant) delivered to my home a :>>> couple days later. :>> Excuse my ignorance – but why? What is the security hazard? :>As best I could figure, the hazard was that if they didn’t invent new ways :>to harass me at every turn, I might come back for another visit at some :>future point. You were probably acting like the typical European assh*le visiting Israel. What is the current objection to Jews defending themselves from terrorists? :>(Slightly) more to the point, every time I asked a question like that, I was :>told that they cannot discuss any of their security policies. Why assist the enemy? — http://www.dissensoftware.com Should you use the mailblocks package and expect a response from me, you should preauthorize the dissensoftware.com domain. I very rarely bother responding to challenge/response systems, especially those from irresponsible companies.

Response:

>>What’s the issue with batteries? I’ve never encountered anything of that >nature, thankfully. > If the batteries are not in the item, the theory is it cannot operate. Very > easy to make a PDA for example which still works the trigger for a device. > It comes down in the end to balancing the risk against the inconvenience.

If they start mucking with camera batteries life will get very difficult.  It could put me completely off traveling. – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -> –   > Lansbury > www.uk-air.net > FAQs for the alt.travel.uk.air newsgroup

Response:

>> A few weeks ago, security at Tel Aviv airport confiscated my battery > charger but not the battery that it went with (in fact, I insisted they > allow me to use the power outlet in the security screening room to > recharge the battery before they took the charger away). They would not > allow it to travel in checked luggage either, but they did have it (along > with my equally fearsome toothpaste and deodorant) delivered to my home a > couple days later. > Did they give you a reason for their interest in those items?  Just > curious.

Nope – they were pretty chatty in general (I spent several hours with them so there was ample chance to get chummy) but would clam up when I asked anything substantive about the security process itself. miguel — Hit The Road! Photos from 35 countries on 5 continents: http://travel.u.nu Latest photos: Malaysia, Israel, Palestine, Austria, Thailand

Response:

>Tends to cloud ones judgment a bit, knowing you are responsible if you get it >wrong. Stuff the inconvenience I will always go on the side of safety.

But one does wonder why there are so few anecdotes about how successful all this inconvenience has been in increasing safety. Eventually, I expect we’ll all have to strip off and fly naked, despite the obvious inconvenience, as it will be the only way to guarantee we aren’t carrying any objects that might compromise safety. (We are halfway there with these new body scanners). — Roland Perry

Response:

>>It comes down in the end to balancing the risk against the inconvenience. >And yet those "in power" seem very bad at assessing the inconvenience >factor.

Maybe, but very good at assessing just how much all those people with a first class honours degree in hindsight will come to the fore and be only too willing to point the finger if you get it wrong. Tends to cloud ones judgment a bit, knowing you are responsible if you get it wrong. Stuff the inconvenience I will always go on the side of safety. –   Lansbury www.uk-air.net FAQs for the alt.travel.uk.air newsgroup

Response:

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -> If you carry spare re-chargeable batteries for your digital camera, or > other devices, you might want to consider packing them in your checked > luggage. Some reports of batteries being confiscated in some airports, > this is in the Photo newsgroup. > A few weeks ago, security at Tel Aviv airport confiscated my battery charger > but not the battery that it went with (in fact, I insisted they allow me to > use the power outlet in the security screening room to recharge the battery > before they took the charger away). They would not allow it to travel in > checked luggage either, but they did have it (along with my equally fearsome > toothpaste and deodorant) delivered to my home a couple days later. > miguel > — > Hit The Road! Photos from 35 countries on 5 continents: http://travel.u.nu > Latest photos: Malaysia, Israel, Palestine, Austria, Thailand

Did they give you a reason for their interest in those items?  Just curious.

Response:

>It comes down in the end to balancing the risk against the inconvenience.

And yet those "in power" seem very bad at assessing the inconvenience factor. If you have a TV remote control in your baggage [yes, I have had one] then the inconvenience of removing the battery is very slight. If you have a PDA whose data is held by a battery (to old or cheap to have flash or HDD storage) then removing that battery is tantamount to criminal damage. — Roland Perry

Response:

>>I dunno, it was mid 90’s and the checking was done in their checkin area >which was a very claustrophobic "cave" inside T3 >Might have been, can’t remember for sure when the company, an outside >contractor not United I should stress, failed the tests. Would have been >97/98ish so might well have been the same lot. This was the pre-checkin >security.

Having looked it up: November 92. (An interesting trip – I flew to Los Angeles to interview Larry Ellison [Oracle] for a glossy magazine; but he changed his plans and flew to London, so we missed one another. Doesn’t feel like 12 years ago.) — Roland Perry

Response:

>What’s the issue with batteries? I’ve never encountered anything of that >nature, thankfully.

If the batteries are not in the item, the theory is it cannot operate. Very easy to make a PDA for example which still works the trigger for a device. It comes down in the end to balancing the risk against the inconvenience. –   Lansbury www.uk-air.net FAQs for the alt.travel.uk.air newsgroup

Response:

>I dunno, it was mid 90’s and the checking was done in their checkin area >which was a very claustrophobic "cave" inside T3

Might have been, can’t remember for sure when the company, an outside contractor not United I should stress, failed the tests. Would have been 97/98ish so might well have been the same lot. This was the pre-checkin security. –   Lansbury www.uk-air.net FAQs for the alt.travel.uk.air newsgroup

Response:

> If you carry spare re-chargeable batteries > for your digital camera, or other devices, > you might want to consider packing them in your > checked luggage. Some reports of batteries being > confiscated in some airports, this is in the Photo > newsgroup.

I have traveled throughout the United States on several air carriers with recharagable batteries in my carry-on luggage. Not once has anyone made the slightest issue of it. I can’t comment about air travel outside the United States though, in that regard.

Response:

> If you carry spare re-chargeable batteries > for your digital camera, or other devices, > you might want to consider packing them in your > checked luggage. Some reports of batteries being > confiscated in some airports, this is in the Photo > newsgroup.

Last summer flying back home from MBJ on US Airways I had an unopened package of 8 AA alkaline batteries in my carryon and was told the limit was 6.  Had to open it up and give 2 batteries to the security agent before they let me through.

Response:

What’s the issue with batteries? I’ve never encountered anything of that nature, thankfully. ant

Response:

>About four years ago on a trip to Colombia, South America on Avianca >Airlines from Miami I had some loose double A batteries in my checked >baggage.

Hi A few years ago, I passed through Houston on the way to Central America, with quite a lot of spare batteries in my carry-on baggage – we were going for nearly a month and I didn’t want to risk running out of camera batteries/torch batteries/alarm batteries etc. in the middle of the jungle. Presumably because of these batteries, as my rucksack emerged from the X-Ray machine a security guy seized the rucksack, grabbed my shoulder and more or less frog-marched me (protesting) to a table some distance away to be searched.  He refused to let me speak; just shouted me down every time I opened my mouth.  The reason for my "protests" and attempts to speak was that I had spotted – he obviously hadn’t – that one strap of my rucksack had caught in the workings of the X-Ray machine and was unravelling a strong, thin nylon thread across the airport.   As the ensuing chaos spread – just think ten pin bowling alleys – and more and more people tripped over the nylon thread, falling in a heap, my wife quietly pretended I wasn’t with her!!! Eventually, the line snapped, security were happy with the contents of my rucksack and let me continue on my journey. It caused utter and complete chaos for a few minutes though; I don’t think anyone apart from myself – and my wife – knew what had caused it (we both decided a discrete silence would be the best policy). Regards KGB

Response:

|> If you carry spare re-chargeable batteries for your digital camera, or |> other devices, you might want to consider packing them in your checked |> luggage. Some reports of batteries being confiscated in some airports, |> this is in the Photo newsgroup. | |A few weeks ago, security at Tel Aviv airport confiscated my battery charger |but not the battery that it went with (in fact, I insisted they allow me to |use the power outlet in the security screening room to recharge the battery |before they took the charger away). They would not allow it to travel in |checked luggage either, but they did have it (along with my equally fearsome |toothpaste and deodorant) delivered to my home a couple days later. | |miguel Excuse my ignorance – but why? What is the security hazard? Cheers, Alan

Response:

>>Years ago I had my hand luggage subjected to a "random" check by United >at LHR, and they insisted I remove the dry cells from my PDA (in my >pocket) and put them in my checked luggage. >I wonder if that was the company before the one they use now. They were so bad >I don’t think any company has failed random security checks so badly. United >were more or less forced to cancel their contract and employ another company >on the spot.

I dunno, it was mid 90’s and the checking was done in their checkin area which was a very claustrophobic "cave" inside T3. They offered me two alternatives: take out the batteries or don’t fly. I’ve never been able to determine what risk they had in mind or whose authority they were operating under. — Roland Perry

Response:

About four years ago on a trip to Colombia, South America on Avianca Airlines from Miami I had some loose double A batteries in my checked baggage. When it was time to board, my name was called and the gate attendant advised me that I was being denied permission to board the flight because they had apparently X-rayed my checked luggage and detected loose bullets in the luggage. After explaining to her that what they saw on the X-rays were in fact batteries she notified a supervisor who requested that I return back to the baggage check in area. After explaining the circumstances to him he cleared me to fly and I ran back to the gate for my flight. Luckily they delayed the departure long enough for me to return to the gate. My luggage arrived in Colombia two days later and the batteries were still there.

Response:

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text ->> If you carry spare re-chargeable batteries for your digital camera, or >> other devices, you might want to consider packing them in your checked >> luggage. Some reports of batteries being confiscated in some airports, >> this is in the Photo newsgroup. > A few weeks ago, security at Tel Aviv airport confiscated my battery > charger but not the battery that it went with (in fact, I insisted they > allow me to use the power outlet in the security screening room to > recharge the battery before they took the charger away). They would not > allow it to travel in checked luggage either, but they did have it (along > with my equally fearsome toothpaste and deodorant) delivered to my home a > couple days later. > Excuse my ignorance – but why? What is the security hazard?

As best I could figure, the hazard was that if they didn’t invent new ways to harass me at every turn, I might come back for another visit at some future point. (Slightly) more to the point, every time I asked a question like that, I was told that they cannot discuss any of their security policies. miguel — Hit The Road! Photos from 35 countries on 5 continents: http://travel.u.nu Latest photos: Malaysia, Israel, Palestine, Austria, Thailand

Response:

>A few weeks ago at LHR I had my luggage screened before checkin, I was asked >to remove all batteries from the things in my checked luggage and take the >batteries in my hand-luggage. > Were these *all* the batteries (including things like button cells in > watches), just rechargeable ones (such as in a laptop or mobile phone), > or just the dry cells (eg in a Walkman).

All  I declared was the AA duracell battery type batteries, I had forgotten about the button cell battery in my little alarm clock.

Response:

>Years ago I had my hand luggage subjected to a "random" check by United >at LHR, and they insisted I remove the dry cells from my PDA (in my >pocket) and put them in my checked luggage.

I wonder if that was the company before the one they use now. They were so bad I don’t think any company has failed random security checks so badly. United were more or less forced to cancel their contract and employ another company on the spot. –   Lansbury www.uk-air.net FAQs for the alt.travel.uk.air newsgroup

Response:

> If you carry spare re-chargeable batteries for your digital camera, or > other devices, you might want to consider packing them in your checked > luggage. Some reports of batteries being confiscated in some airports, > this is in the Photo newsgroup.

A few weeks ago, security at Tel Aviv airport confiscated my battery charger but not the battery that it went with (in fact, I insisted they allow me to use the power outlet in the security screening room to recharge the battery before they took the charger away). They would not allow it to travel in checked luggage either, but they did have it (along with my equally fearsome toothpaste and deodorant) delivered to my home a couple days later. miguel — Hit The Road! Photos from 35 countries on 5 continents: http://travel.u.nu Latest photos: Malaysia, Israel, Palestine, Austria, Thailand

Response:

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -> If you carry spare re-chargeable batteries for your digital camera, or > other devices, you might want to consider packing them in your checked > luggage. Some reports of batteries being confiscated in some airports, > this is in the Photo newsgroup. > A few weeks ago, security at Tel Aviv airport confiscated my battery charger > but not the battery that it went with (in fact, I insisted they allow me to > use the power outlet in the security screening room to recharge the battery > before they took the charger away). They would not allow it to travel in > checked luggage either, but they did have it (along with my equally fearsome > toothpaste and deodorant) delivered to my home a couple days later. > miguel

A few weeks ago at LHR I had my luggage screened before checkin, I was asked to remove all batteries from the things in my checked luggage and take the batteries in my hand-luggage.

Response:

>A few weeks ago at LHR I had my luggage screened before checkin, I was asked >to remove all batteries from the things in my checked luggage and take the >batteries in my hand-luggage.

Were these *all* the batteries (including things like button cells in watches), just rechargeable ones (such as in a laptop or mobile phone), or just the dry cells (eg in a Walkman). Years ago I had my hand luggage subjected to a "random" check by United at LHR, and they insisted I remove the dry cells from my PDA (in my pocket) and put them in my checked luggage. This was a brave thing to ask as all the data was then only held by virtue of the backup button cell. Of course, the PDA had all the data in it about my schedule, where I was staying and so on, which was needed in-flight to fill out the immigration slips. As well as being my only "watch" to tell the time, and the device on which I was intending to spend some time writing memos on the journey. So I felt justified in buying replacement dry cells at the airside shop. — Roland Perry

Response:

If you carry spare re-chargeable batteries for your digital camera, or other devices, you might want to consider packing them in your checked luggage. Some reports of batteries being confiscated in some airports, this is in the Photo newsgroup.

Response:

Question:

I really do. The average cost of domestic air travel in the US has decreased by 60% in the last 21 years (in constant dollars). You can Google this if you like. Here’s a start: http://www.olin.wustl.edu/faculty/gowrisankaran/pdf_papers/airline_co… For anecdotal evidence, I have this: My first ever NY-LA flight in 1984 was $660. I remember this because, as a 20-year-old punk, I had to scrimp and save and suffer to pay for this flight. I just Yahoo’ed the same flight, scheduled for mid-June 2005. The quote is $310. Looks like the statistical analysis quoted above was pretty damn accurate. $310 for RT airfare across the continent is a joke. Carriers are dropping like flies, their employees are treated shabbily and service on domestic flights is akin to that offered on Greyhound. I would gladly pay $660 RT for NY-LA (or in my case, SEA to EWR) if it meant a full meal, better seats, courteous staff and airline patrons who didn’t behave like baboons. What I won’t do, however, is pay $1058 for first class on the same flight, when what I’ve seen from "First Class" is an incremental boost in comfort and solace. If I have to abide screaming brats and obese stinko’s, I’m not going to pay extra. Demand for air travel has skyrocketed, but the childish antics of major carriers in the fare wars has eroded the cost (and value) of domestic flights to a preposterous extreme. It’s my opinion that if carriers boosted the cost of domestic flights by 40-50% across the boards, we’d go a long way in restoring sanity to air travel. Worthless "parents" with screaming brats would think twice if they had to pay an additional $1200 to haul Snotleigh and Brattyn across country to visit grandma. The sudden influx of dollars would restore air staff’s confidence in their careers and afford all of us a more civil experience when flying. Granted, business travelers (I am one) would feel the pinch and be forced to make cautious decisions about employee travel expenses. But this may be a good thing. It may accelerate network technology and aid in limiting the number of nights that employees spend away from home and their families. Critical trips would go on, but frivolous ones would stop. So, what brought on this rant? My dislike of air travel. In the 1980’s, I found air travel to be civil. I was even able to quietly read a book. Nowadays, planes are fucking zoos and if you are unlucky to be stuck in economy class, you may as well bring ear plugs and Marilyn Manson CD’s to drown out the bedlam that occurs on most domestic flights. I’m flying to Baltimore next week. I’m absolutely dreading it. I need to go on this trip, and my company benefits from cheap (practically nothing) airfare. But I think we’d have survived if my airfare was $660 and my hotel, rather than $250/night, was $150/night. I’d gladly trade a mahogany entertainment center for 6 hours of tranquil travel. – TR – worth noting: after 6-7 business trips each year, I’ve lost all interest in domestic holiday flights. Unless the trip is overseas, I’ll just drive or stay home.

Response:

>  If I have to abide > screaming brats and obese stinko’s, I’m not going to pay extra. (snip) > Worthless "parents" with screaming brats would think twice > if they had to pay an additional $1200 to haul Snotleigh and Brattyn > across country to visit grandma. (snip) > Nowadays, planes are fucking zoos and if you are unlucky > to be stuck in economy class, you may as well bring ear plugs and > Marilyn Manson CD’s to drown out the bedlam that occurs on most > domestic flights.

(snip) I’ve noticed this in the US too. Stuff that used to be found on Greyhound, now is on aeroplanes. Absolutely appalling. ant

Response:

> It’s my opinion that if carriers boosted the cost of domestic flights > by 40-50% across the boards, we’d go a long way in restoring sanity to > air travel.

Dream on.  Any airline that tries that would be undercut by a discount carrier, and have no passengers.  Why else do you think the "full service" airlines are in trouble? You might be willing to pay more, but you would be very lonely on the near-empty flight.

Response:

> What I won’t do, however, is pay $1058 for > first class on the same flight, when what I’ve seen from "First Class" > is an incremental boost in comfort and solace. If I have to abide > screaming brats and obese stinko’s, I’m not going to pay extra.

aw, just go charter your own bleeping jet!

Response:

>You might be willing to pay more, but you would be very lonely on the >near-empty flight.

And in fact, those aircraft (with higher fares and a better travel environment) already exist. They’re called charters and fractional ownership.

Response:

Question:

Wife and I are going to Europe to enjoy some of the nudist spots.  We’d like to get a jump start on things by getting nude on the way over there.  Are there any nudist airlines that fly to Europe?  Or at least airlines that are nudist friendly and won’t mind if you take your clothes off in flight.

Response:

Dear Willy,

> Wife and I are going to Europe to enjoy some of the nudist spots.

To give you a leg up, over there, they’re mostly naturist spots. > We’d like > to get a jump start on things by getting nude on the way over there.  Are > there any nudist airlines that fly to Europe?  Or at least airlines that are > nudist friendly and won’t mind if you take your clothes off in flight.

AFAWK, there are no nudist or nudist friendly airlines; that’s probably VERY far in the future. Once or twice a year, there are nudist charter flights from one specific location to another, only. So far, again AFAWK, none of them have gone to the continent. In Hot Water, Camilla Van Sickle & Bill Pennington El Dorado Hot Springs, A Million Miles From Monday… POB 10, Tonopah, Arizona  85354        623-386-5412 "SHe Who Knows That Enough Is Enough Will Always Have Enough."           Lao Tzu

Response:

Hi, > AFAWK, there are no nudist or nudist friendly airlines; that’s probably VERY > far in the future. Once or twice a year, there are nudist charter flights > from one specific location to another, only. So far, again AFAWK, none of > them have gone to the continent.

Maybe if the airlines start putting disposable plastic covers on the seats in case some passengers shit themselves in the event of a possible crash or high turbulence, then that could make them nudist friendly. Dario Western

Response:

why don’t you start in the airport of your own country ?? – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -> Wife and I are going to Europe to enjoy some of the nudist spots.  We’d > like to get a jump start on things by getting nude on the way over there. > Are there any nudist airlines that fly to Europe?  Or at least airlines > that are nudist friendly and won’t mind if you take your clothes off in > flight.

Response:

> Wife and I are going to Europe to enjoy some of the nudist spots.  We’d > like to get a jump start on things by getting nude on the way over there. > Are there any nudist airlines that fly to Europe?  Or at least airlines > that are nudist friendly and won’t mind if you take your clothes off in > flight.

Use the toilet cabin like everyone else.

Response:

>Maybe if the airlines start putting disposable plastic covers on the seats >in case some passengers shit themselves in the event of a possible crash or >high turbulence, then that could make them nudist friendly.

Ha! Perhaps that identifies one difference between ‘nudists’ and ‘naturists’. Each well brought up naturist provides his/her own small towel (or towelling beer-mat) on which to sit — Mike Hopkins Swim? Naturally with MADNAT <http://www.madnat.org/>

Response:

>Wife and I are going to Europe to enjoy some of the nudist spots.  We’d like >to get a jump start on things by getting nude on the way over there.  Are >there any nudist airlines that fly to Europe?  Or at least airlines that are >nudist friendly and won’t mind if you take your clothes off in flight.

I don’t believe so, but it sure would make going through the TSA crap easier!

Response:

Virgin was supposed to be scheduling/trying some nude flights.  I don’t know what ever happened with that – did they do it or not, did it work or not, did they schedule more or not ?? . . . – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text ->Wife and I are going to Europe to enjoy some of the nudist spots.  We’d like >to get a jump start on things by getting nude on the way over there.  Are >there any nudist airlines that fly to Europe?  Or at least airlines that are >nudist friendly and won’t mind if you take your clothes off in flight. > I don’t believe so, but it sure would make going through the TSA crap > easier!

Response:

> Wife and I are going to Europe to enjoy some of the nudist spots.  We’d like > to get a jump start on things by getting nude on the way over there.  Are > there any nudist airlines that fly to Europe?  Or at least airlines that are > nudist friendly and won’t mind if you take your clothes off in flight.

My recollection of air travel is that there are all sorts of strange airstreams travelling around the cabin, at different temperatures. Were I to strip off in a plane, I’d then immediately have to ask the crew for a blanket, which rather seems to defeat the object. Sylvia.

Response:

plastic covers on the seats > in case some passengers shit themselves in the event of a possible crash > or > high turbulence, then that could make them nudist friendly. > Dario Western

What a dumb post Dario……you post stupidity but none quite as stupid as this. Geez–GROW UP.

Response:

> Wife and I are going to Europe to enjoy some of the nudist spots.  We’d > like to get a jump start on things by getting nude on the way over there. > Are there any nudist airlines that fly to Europe?  Or at least airlines > that are nudist friendly and won’t mind if you take your clothes off in > flight.

try www.troll-air.com

Response:

> Wife and I are going to Europe to enjoy some of the nudist spots.  We’d like > to get a jump start on things by getting nude on the way over there.  Are > there any nudist airlines that fly to Europe?  Or at least airlines that are > nudist friendly and won’t mind if you take your clothes off in flight.

If the TSA had it’s way, ALL airline passengers would be neked.. I am BillGatus of Borg.  Resistance is futile.  You will be assim [General Protection Fault]

Response:

> > Wife and I are going to Europe to enjoy some of the nudist spots.  We’d like > to get a jump start on things by getting nude on the way over there. Are > there any nudist airlines that fly to Europe?  Or at least airlines that are > nudist friendly and won’t mind if you take your clothes off in flight. > If the TSA had it’s way, ALL airline passengers would be neked..

And without luggage.

Response:

Willy, Actually there have been nudist flights (although not European). I think the Bulletin (AANR) advertised that. Dan P.s. I think they went to either Mexico, or some places in the caribbean.

Response:

>> Wife and I are going to Europe to enjoy some of the nudist spots.  We’d > like to get a jump start on things by getting nude on the way over there. > Are there any nudist airlines that fly to Europe?  Or at least airlines > that are nudist friendly and won’t mind if you take your clothes off in > flight. >try www.troll-air.com

That link doesn’t work. — — DFM – http://www.deepfriedmars.com — —

Response:

> Willy, > Actually there have been nudist flights (although not European). I > think the Bulletin (AANR) advertised that.

Not to be confused with Mile-High Club flights, which also are available.

Response:

>>> Wife and I are going to Europe to enjoy some of the nudist spots.  We’d >> like to get a jump start on things by getting nude on the way over there. >> Are there any nudist airlines that fly to Europe?  Or at least airlines >> that are nudist friendly and won’t mind if you take your clothes off in >> flight. > try www.troll-air.com > That link doesn’t work.

http://miami.about.com/cs/nudistsnaturists/a/aa011603a.htm But you knew that already.

Response:

>>Wife and I are going to Europe to enjoy some of the nudist spots.  We’d >like >to get a jump start on things by getting nude on the way over there.  Are >there any nudist airlines that fly to Europe?  Or at least airlines that >are >nudist friendly and won’t mind if you take your clothes off in flight. > Try Air France.  The French are always getting naked everywhere they go.

That comment just goes to shows how little you know about the French. David.

Response:

Yes! Because everytime I’ve traveled through France, I’ve gotten the worst treatment – worse than any airport or country I’ve ever traveled to. Of course we know little – our initial experiences keep us from wanting to know more. So I’ll just generalize like other Frenchies do. Of course, I’m just pulling you chain (except about the part of traveling in and through France has been rotten . . .) – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text ->>Wife and I are going to Europe to enjoy some of the nudist spots.  We’d like >>to get a jump start on things by getting nude on the way over there.  Are >>there any nudist airlines that fly to Europe?  Or at least airlines that are >>nudist friendly and won’t mind if you take your clothes off in flight. > Try Air France.  The French are always getting naked everywhere they go. > That comment just goes to shows how little you know about the French. > David.

Response:

> Yes! Because everytime I’ve traveled through France, I’ve gotten the > worst treatment – worse than any airport or country I’ve ever traveled > to.

Funny, I travel through France regularly, and haven’t noticed any such thing. Go figure. Bertie  Posted Via Usenet.com Premium Usenet Newsgroup Services     ** SPEED ** RETENTION ** COMPLETION ** ANONYMITY **                 http://www.usenet.com

Response:

Load of taurus poop they do!  It’s only in select areas of the French Reveira that they go around nude.  Going naked out on the streets in Paris or Calais will get you arrested just as anywhere else. Dario Western – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text ->Wife and I are going to Europe to enjoy some of the nudist spots.  We’d like >to get a jump start on things by getting nude on the way over there.  Are >there any nudist airlines that fly to Europe?  Or at least airlines that are >nudist friendly and won’t mind if you take your clothes off in flight. > Try Air France.  The French are always getting naked everywhere they go.

Response:

good if everybody from where you are could be like you guys, it would be a wonderfull world… please don’t change your mind and stay where you are….and please try to convince more of your own people to do the same…stay home I am serious and further more recall any other citizens from your country to come back quick…please do that for the world… I personnally thanks all French people that gave you that treatment…thanks jumbo the french

> Yes! Because everytime I’ve traveled through France, I’ve gotten the worst > treatment – worse than any airport or country I’ve ever traveled to. > Of course we know little – our initial experiences keep us from wanting to > know more. So I’ll just generalize like other Frenchies do. > Of course, I’m just pulling you chain (except about the part of traveling in and through > France has been rotten . . .)

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text ->>>Wife and I are going to Europe to enjoy some of the nudist spots.  We’d like >>>to get a jump start on things by getting nude on the way over there. Are >>>there any nudist airlines that fly to Europe?  Or at least airlines that are >>>nudist friendly and won’t mind if you take your clothes off in flight. >> Try Air France.  The French are always getting naked everywhere they go. > That comment just goes to shows how little you know about the French. > David.

Response:

Question:

Rudest air line check in person I’ve ever encountered was at Dublin Airport. She worked for the Airport, and was handling check in for Lufthansa. Hung Over!! She opened her booth late, after sitting head in hands for 20 minutes. We were travelling Business Class, and she obviously thought she ‘had’  us in the wrong queue! Made us weigh our (smallish) carry on – even though we were entitled to two carry ons. Questioned us on matters of no concern to her, delayed issuing our boarding passes for no obvious reason. She was the only rude person we encountered in 2 weeks in the country – but she took the shine right off the Irish experience for us. Sadly when we talk about Ireland – we always seem to get back to the ogre at Dublin airport!! Pity Really!!! – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -> Everyone I’ve ever asked about Aer Lingus has had an awful story to tell. > This really surprised me.  I’m planning a trip to Ireland and was > thinking of taking Aer Lingus from New York but now I’m rethinking that. > Too many stories about terrible service on board, terrible service at the > airport, terrible food, rude flight attendants (this really surprised > me!).  It’s a bit shocking, I always thought the Irish were friendly.  Or > at last that’s their reputation, since I’ve never been there.  Is Aer > Lingus that bad?  I’d be interested to hear people’s opinions here.  Oh, > and what does "Lingus" mean? > I honestly don’t think that Aer Lingus "does" have a bad reputation at > all. I have always found them the epitomy of courtesy and helpfulness > actually. Are you sure you are not confusing them with Ryanair?? > A certain difference, it has to be said! > — > Hal

Question:

> The marketplace should decide which airlines keep flying.

That depends on where you live.  If you live in one of the 50 (an arbitrary number) largest cities, you will always have an airline or three doing business in your city.  But if you live in some tiny city and the local airline goes out of business, you now must drive to the nearest city with air service (with Bush trying to eliminate Amtrak, that will no longer be an option soon).  In the old days, those small cities were subsidized by flyers traveling to larger cities. Deregulation has a price.  I live in a hub city, so I don’t really care, but I would have a different attitude if I lived in a small city. Casey

Response:

> EDITORIAL > U.S. Airlines Under a Tax Cloud > February 10, 2005

Even the nation’s > healthiest airlines are ill equipped to deal with another tax increase.

I suspect they’d deal with one just as they have with those before, passing the increased tax through. Increased taxes/fees/etc. have hardly been the source of the airlines’ fiscal pain. > Market forces are likely to shutter some of the weakest airlines, and > that’s > all to the good because more-efficient carriers will take their place.

The potential problems from "shuttering" are somewhat different than than you might imagine, the potential for reduction/curtailment/ababdonment of service into a number of small and medium markets, all with vocal Congress(wo)men.  WN loves to move into substantial but poorly developed/ill-served markets, while having no interest in small cities, other than those located close enough to draw pax from a "big" airport. USeless Air "pays" contract commuter carriers or subsidizes its own to deliver potential mainline traffic from many small/medium markets incapable of generating "big plane" traffic.  Shutter USeless, and could you expect CO to leap to serve all of those markets?  What would likely happen is bloodthirst combat between survivors to cherry pick the best of the un- & under-served destinations, a mutually destructive competitive course. > …….The > government shouldn’t disrupt that process with more bailouts, but it also > shouldn’t push airlines prematurely over the brink by increasing taxes > they > can’t afford to pay.

Taxes are far less of a problem than marketing ploys, image promotion and corporate inability to understand and predict competitor actions and their effect on internal finance. > The marketplace should decide which airlines keep flying.

But if General Motors only built cars in lavender and puce, just as the legacies seem unable to move beyond imaginary and unrealistic service models, the "marketplace" would become less the judge than had been prejudgement based the ineptitude of GM’s management.  Like many other corporations, half a century ago, the legacy airlines structured themselves upon unsupportable compensation and current/potential benefit packages, along with routes and services based on prestige rather than real fiscal projections.  Who knows how many (certainly a few, since the feed trough is pretty big and experience may prevent some continued repititon of past errors) will survive and prosper? Then there’s the entire issue of the down side of laudable anti-trust regulation which forces airlines into the most expensive transportation alternatives.  My own market would be best served by a couple of flights a day in 100 pax a/c then with a surface shuttle – operated or contracted for by a major airline, its fares "sold" as part of a conventional airticket – every couple of hours from 6AM until 10PM.  From rwo and one half to three and one half hours away from two major "hubs" by ground transport, but with an actual two hoour time frame by air travel, counting boarding, deboarding and required terminal transfers, both AA and CO could easily and successfully market such a service if they "ran" it and could sell combined travel, now illegal under federal law as I understand it. TMO

Response:

EDITORIAL U.S. Airlines Under a Tax Cloud February 10, 2005 A $1.5-billion airline tax hike in President Bush’s proposed budget is supposed to fund tougher security measures to protect passengers, flight crews and those on the ground from terrorists. But it could be a knockout punch for some airlines already reeling from high fuel costs and cutthroat fare wars that make it difficult to raise ticket prices. The federal government was obligated to dramatically strengthen national security in the wake of 9/11, and airlines should pay a fair share. But air carriers were already hit disproportionately hard by the Sept. 11 attacks, and they’re in no position now to foot an even larger bill. Domestic airlines lost more than $9 billion last year and have lost a cumulative $30 billion since the terrorist attacks. Immediately after 9/11, Washington offered cash infusions, federally backed loan guarantees and insurance assistance to keep the troubled industry flying. Despite that federal largess, two of the industry’s largest competitors are in bankruptcy court and a third is teetering on the edge. The same fare wars that delight passengers keep the industry from boosting ticket prices to cover rising costs. Airlines have laid off 125,000 employees. If they can’t increase revenue, they’ll be forced to cut costs by laying off more employees and dropping more destinations. Even the nation’s healthiest airlines are ill equipped to deal with another tax increase. Market forces are likely to shutter some of the weakest airlines, and that’s all to the good because more-efficient carriers will take their place. The government shouldn’t disrupt that process with more bailouts, but it also shouldn’t push airlines prematurely over the brink by increasing taxes they can’t afford to pay. The marketplace should decide which airlines keep flying. http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/la-ed-airtax10feb10,0,3287174.story

Response:

Question:

Subject to Bush’s Knife: Aid for Food and Heating By ROBERT PEAR (New York Times) WASHINGTON, Feb. 7 – Under President Bush’s budget, many food stamp recipients, farmers, veterans, small-business owners, nursing students, air travelers and Amtrak passengers would have to pay more or would receive less from the government. One indication of new priorities is Mr. Bush’s proposal to end the Community Services Block Grant, a $637 million program that helps pay for community action agencies begun more than 35 years ago as part of the fight against poverty. The agencies provide housing, nutrition, education and employment services to low-income people. But the Bush administration said the program had been "unable to demonstrate results." The Low-Income Home Energy Assistance Program, which helps people pay their heating bills, would be cut 8.4 percent, to $2 billion. Michael O. Leavitt, the new secretary of health and human services, defended Mr. Bush’s proposal to cut the budget of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, including grants to help state and local agencies prepare for bioterror attacks. He said Mr. Bush had significantly increased such aid since 2001. But the Association of State and Territorial Health Officials, representing health officers of the 50 states, said the cuts would "leave the nation vulnerable to public health emergencies," including bioterrorist attacks and infectious disease. In Medicaid, the federal-state health program for more than 50 million people, Mr. Bush is seeking changes that he says will save $60 billion over the next 10 years. Lawrence A. McAndrews, president of the National Association of Children’s Hospitals, said the cuts would force many hospitals to reduce or eliminate services. Medicaid accounts for more than 40 percent of the revenue at such hospitals, he said, and "the care of all children, not just those on Medicaid, would be affected by the reduction of services." The president would also cut $100 million from a $301 million program that trains doctors at children’s hospitals. He would cut the budget for training other health professionals by 64 percent, to $160.5 million.

Response:

- Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – > Subject to Bush’s Knife: Aid for Food and Heating > By ROBERT PEAR > (New York Times) > WASHINGTON, Feb. 7 – Under President Bush’s budget, many food stamp recipients, > farmers, veterans, small-business owners, nursing students, air travelers and > Amtrak passengers would have to pay more or would receive less from the > government. > One indication of new priorities is Mr. Bush’s proposal to end the Community > Services Block Grant, a $637 million program that helps pay for community > action agencies begun more than 35 years ago as part of the fight against > poverty. > The agencies provide housing, nutrition, education and employment services to > low-income people. But the Bush administration said the program had been > "unable to demonstrate results." > The Low-Income Home Energy Assistance Program, which helps people pay their > heating bills, would be cut 8.4 percent, to $2 billion. > Michael O. Leavitt, the new secretary of health and human services, defended > Mr. Bush’s proposal to cut the budget of the Centers for Disease Control and > Prevention, including grants to help state and local agencies prepare for > bioterror attacks. He said Mr. Bush had significantly increased such aid since > 2001. > But the Association of State and Territorial Health Officials, representing > health officers of the 50 states, said the cuts would "leave the nation > vulnerable to public health emergencies," including bioterrorist attacks and > infectious disease. > In Medicaid, the federal-state health program for more than 50 million people, > Mr. Bush is seeking changes that he says will save $60 billion over the next 10 > years. > Lawrence A. McAndrews, president of the National Association of Children’s > Hospitals, said the cuts would force many hospitals to reduce or eliminate > services. Medicaid accounts for more than 40 percent of the revenue at such > hospitals, he said, and "the care of all children, not just those on Medicaid, > would be affected by the reduction of services." > The president would also cut $100 million from a $301 million program that > trains doctors at children’s hospitals. He would cut the budget for training > other health professionals by 64 percent, to $160.5 million.

Shit according to one genius who posts in this cesspool regularly poor people only represent 5 per cent of the population and "make out like bandits". Bush’s supporters, at least his favourite chosen people are the "haves" and "have mores". You know, like those greedy cocksuckers who ran Enron into the shitter. Bush has the singular talent of being able to fall head first into a pool of festering pig shit and come out smelling like a rose. He should have been impeached as a war criminal, but he’s still hanging on and his approval rating is actually going up. Abso-fucking-lutely amazing. Bob

Response:

- Hide quoted text — Show quoted text ->Subject to Bush’s Knife: Aid for Food and Heating >By ROBERT PEAR >(New York Times) >WASHINGTON, Feb. 7 – Under President Bush’s budget, many food stamp > recipients, >farmers, veterans, small-business owners, nursing students, air > travelers and >Amtrak passengers would have to pay more or would receive less from > the >government. >One indication of new priorities is Mr. Bush’s proposal to end the > Community >Services Block Grant, a $637 million program that helps pay for > community >action agencies begun more than 35 years ago as part of the fight > against >poverty. >The agencies provide housing, nutrition, education and employment > services to >low-income people. But the Bush administration said the program had > been >"unable to demonstrate results." >The Low-Income Home Energy Assistance Program, which helps people pay > their >heating bills, would be cut 8.4 percent, to $2 billion. >Michael O. Leavitt, the new secretary of health and human services, > defended >Mr. Bush’s proposal to cut the budget of the Centers for Disease > Control and >Prevention, including grants to help state and local agencies prepare > for >bioterror attacks. He said Mr. Bush had significantly increased such > aid since >2001. >But the Association of State and Territorial Health Officials, > representing >health officers of the 50 states, said the cuts would "leave the > nation >vulnerable to public health emergencies," including bioterrorist > attacks and >infectious disease. >In Medicaid, the federal-state health program for more than 50 > million people, >Mr. Bush is seeking changes that he says will save $60 billion over > the next 10 >years. >Lawrence A. McAndrews, president of the National Association of > Children’s >Hospitals, said the cuts would force many hospitals to reduce or > eliminate >services. Medicaid accounts for more than 40 percent of the revenue > at such >hospitals, he said, and "the care of all children, not just those on > Medicaid, >would be affected by the reduction of services." >The president would also cut $100 million from a $301 million program > that >trains doctors at children’s hospitals. He would cut the budget for > training >other health professionals by 64 percent, to $160.5 million. > Shit according to one genius who posts in this cesspool regularly poor > people only represent 5 per cent of the population and "make out like > bandits". Bush’s supporters, at least his favourite chosen people are > the "haves" and "have mores". You know, like those greedy cocksuckers > who ran Enron into the shitter. > Bush has the singular talent of being able to fall head first into a > pool of festering pig shit and come out smelling like a rose. He should > have been impeached as a war criminal, but he’s still hanging on and > his approval rating is actually going up. Abso-fucking-lutely amazing. > Bob

Hi, Maybe the popularity poll is rigged TOO!, LOL Tony

Response:

- Hide quoted text — Show quoted text ->>Subject to Bush’s Knife: Aid for Food and Heating >>By ROBERT PEAR >>(New York Times) >>WASHINGTON, Feb. 7 – Under President Bush’s budget, many food stamp > recipients, >>farmers, veterans, small-business owners, nursing students, air > travelers and >>Amtrak passengers would have to pay more or would receive less from > the >>government. >>One indication of new priorities is Mr. Bush’s proposal to end the > Community >>Services Block Grant, a $637 million program that helps pay for > community >>action agencies begun more than 35 years ago as part of the fight > against >>poverty. >>The agencies provide housing, nutrition, education and employment > services to >>low-income people. But the Bush administration said the program had > been >>"unable to demonstrate results." >>The Low-Income Home Energy Assistance Program, which helps people pay > their >>heating bills, would be cut 8.4 percent, to $2 billion. >>Michael O. Leavitt, the new secretary of health and human services, > defended >>Mr. Bush’s proposal to cut the budget of the Centers for Disease > Control and >>Prevention, including grants to help state and local agencies prepare > for >>bioterror attacks. He said Mr. Bush had significantly increased such > aid since >>2001. >>But the Association of State and Territorial Health Officials, > representing >>health officers of the 50 states, said the cuts would "leave the > nation >>vulnerable to public health emergencies," including bioterrorist > attacks and >>infectious disease. >>In Medicaid, the federal-state health program for more than 50 > million people, >>Mr. Bush is seeking changes that he says will save $60 billion over > the next 10 >>years. >>Lawrence A. McAndrews, president of the National Association of > Children’s >>Hospitals, said the cuts would force many hospitals to reduce or > eliminate >>services. Medicaid accounts for more than 40 percent of the revenue > at such >>hospitals, he said, and "the care of all children, not just those on > Medicaid, >>would be affected by the reduction of services." >>The president would also cut $100 million from a $301 million program > that >>trains doctors at children’s hospitals. He would cut the budget for > training >>other health professionals by 64 percent, to $160.5 million. > Shit according to one genius who posts in this cesspool regularly poor > people only represent 5 per cent of the population and "make out like > bandits". Bush’s supporters, at least his favourite chosen people are > the "haves" and "have mores". You know, like those greedy cocksuckers > who ran Enron into the shitter. > Bush has the singular talent of being able to fall head first into a > pool of festering pig shit and come out smelling like a rose. He should > have been impeached as a war criminal, but he’s still hanging on and > his approval rating is actually going up. Abso-fucking-lutely amazing. > Bob > Hi, > Maybe the popularity poll is rigged TOO!, LOL > Tony

LOL Bob

Response:

- Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -> >>Subject to Bush’s Knife: Aid for Food and Heating > >>By ROBERT PEAR > >>(New York Times) > >>WASHINGTON, Feb. 7 – Under President Bush’s budget, many food stamp > > recipients, > >>farmers, veterans, small-business owners, nursing students, air > > travelers and > >>Amtrak passengers would have to pay more or would receive less from > > the > >>government. > >>One indication of new priorities is Mr. Bush’s proposal to end the > > Community > >>Services Block Grant, a $637 million program that helps pay for > > community > >>action agencies begun more than 35 years ago as part of the fight > > against > >>poverty. > >>The agencies provide housing, nutrition, education and employment > > services to > >>low-income people. But the Bush administration said the program had > > been > >>"unable to demonstrate results." > >>The Low-Income Home Energy Assistance Program, which helps people >pay > > their > >>heating bills, would be cut 8.4 percent, to $2 billion. > >>Michael O. Leavitt, the new secretary of health and human services, > > defended > >>Mr. Bush’s proposal to cut the budget of the Centers for Disease > > Control and > >>Prevention, including grants to help state and local agencies >prepare > > for > >>bioterror attacks. He said Mr. Bush had significantly increased >such > > aid since > >>2001. > >>But the Association of State and Territorial Health Officials, > > representing > >>health officers of the 50 states, said the cuts would "leave the > > nation > >>vulnerable to public health emergencies," including bioterrorist > > attacks and > >>infectious disease. > >>In Medicaid, the federal-state health program for more than 50 > > million people, > >>Mr. Bush is seeking changes that he says will save $60 billion over > > the next 10 > >>years. > >>Lawrence A. McAndrews, president of the National Association of > > Children’s > >>Hospitals, said the cuts would force many hospitals to reduce or > > eliminate > >>services. Medicaid accounts for more than 40 percent of the revenue > > at such > >>hospitals, he said, and "the care of all children, not just those >on > > Medicaid, > >>would be affected by the reduction of services." > >>The president would also cut $100 million from a $301 million >program > > that > >>trains doctors at children’s hospitals. He would cut the budget for > > training > >>other health professionals by 64 percent, to $160.5 million. > > Shit according to one genius who posts in this cesspool regularly >poor > > people only represent 5 per cent of the population and "make out >like > > bandits". Bush’s supporters, at least his favourite chosen people >are > > the "haves" and "have mores". You know, like those greedy >cocksuckers > > who ran Enron into the shitter. > > Bush has the singular talent of being able to fall head first into >a > > pool of festering pig shit and come out smelling like a rose. He >should > > have been impeached as a war criminal, but he’s still hanging on >and > > his approval rating is actually going up. Abso-fucking-lutely >amazing. > > Bob > Hi, > Maybe the popularity poll is rigged TOO!, LOL > Tony >LOL >Bob

Dumber’nyuh got a mini- boost from the Iraq election — now that Iraq is reverting to the same violent mess it was before the election, that will go away very fast.        Posted via TITANnews – Uncensored Newsgroups Access              >>>> at http://www.TitanNews.com <<<< -=Every Newsgroup – Anonymous, UNCENSORED, BROADBAND Downloads=-

Response:

http://www.negativepositive.org/fuck-canada.html

Response:

> Hi, > Maybe the popularity poll is rigged TOO!, LOL > Tony

Oh, did you read that in one of those Chinese govt-controlled  newspapers you seem to think are such reliable sources of unbiased information?

Response:

> > Hi, > Maybe the popularity poll is rigged TOO!, LOL > Tony > Oh, did you read that in one of those Chinese govt-controlled newspapers > you seem to think are such reliable sources of unbiased information?

Fuck off, troll. Bob

Response:

> http://www.negativepositive.org/fuck-canada.html

Actually, Fart Valve, I didn’t write that at all. Bob

Response:

http://www.evilgopbastards.com/

Response:

> http://www.negativepositive.org/fuck-canada.html

Lard Vulva has once again regressed to his cut and paste state- must have pissed him off good. Bob

Response:

>http://www.negativepositive.org/fuck-canada.html

He didn’t write that. You lied again. The Repair Guy http://repairguy1993.netfirms.com/

Response:

>>Hi, >Maybe the popularity poll is rigged TOO!, LOL >Tony > Oh, did you read that in one of those Chinese govt-controlled  newspapers > you seem to think are such reliable sources of unbiased information?

Hi, Is there any politicians or political system based on the truth? Name one. You don’t even know how to read/write Chinese. Mind you I am NOT Chinese. Tony

Response:

- Hide quoted text — Show quoted text ->> Hi, >> Maybe the popularity poll is rigged TOO!, LOL >> Tony > Oh, did you read that in one of those Chinese govt-controlled   > newspapers you seem to think are such reliable sources of unbiased > information? > Hi, > Is there any politicians or political system based on the truth? > Name one.

As you know, some more than others. The Chinese Govt is a cesspool, as you also also likely know. Just because ‘politics’ often manifests itsself as advocacy for a certain point of view, that does not make all governments, or ‘political systems’ equivalent, as your post cynically implies. All due respect, and rock on.

Response:

> Hi, > Is there any politicians or political system based on the truth? > Name one. You don’t even know how to read/write Chinese. > Mind you I am NOT Chinese. > Tony

WTF? You posted not so long ago that you found the coverage of Iraq in Chinese newspapers to be enlightening, you suggested they are a better source of information than western papers.  Given that the news media in China is under the thumb of a government that does not hesitate to imprison or eliminate those it wants silenced, your views on the trustworthiness of the news media in China are absurd.  And your response to that is to point out that no political system is perfect?  Nobody said anything about perfection, but as you have chosen to live in a more-or-less free-enterprise western democracy, it would seem that you’ve already made your choice as to which form of government is better.

Response:

- Hide quoted text — Show quoted text ->Hi, >Is there any politicians or political system based on the truth? >Name one. You don’t even know how to read/write Chinese. >Mind you I am NOT Chinese. >Tony > WTF? > You posted not so long ago that you found the coverage of Iraq in Chinese > newspapers to be enlightening, you suggested they are a better source of > information than western papers.  Given that the news media in China is > under the thumb of a government that does not hesitate to imprison or > eliminate those it wants silenced, your views on the trustworthiness of the > news media in China are absurd.  And your response to that is to point out > that no political system is perfect?  Nobody said anything about perfection, > but as you have chosen to live in a more-or-less free-enterprise western > democracy, it would seem that you’ve already made your choice as to which > form of government is better.

Hi, Just visit China and see their TV broadcast including CNN, BBC there. And I never said it’s enlightening. I said, it showed more than what we see at home. Censorship is everywhere as you know. I am not dumb. I can sort out things and judge myself on current issues. Tony

Response:

in message >http://www.negativepositive.org/fuck-canada.html > He didn’t write that. You lied again. > The Repair Guy > http://repairguy1993.netfirms.com/

But isn’t kinda bizarre to see Wilbur parrot himself so much lately? It’s as if his brain went in phase locked loop mode. Either that or his mind-meld with the hive mind is on auto replay. KABONG!~!~!~

Response:

> But isn’t kinda bizarre to see Wilbur parrot > himself so much lately? > It’s as if his brain went in phase locked loop > mode.

Shit. That happened decades ago.

Response:

Question:

According to one Flight Simulator site, the Boeing 7E7 is now officially the 787. They are currently changing all references to downloads of the plane from 7E7 to 787. According to the site’s press release, Boeing has officially renamed the 7E7 to 787, according to flightsim.com

Response:

> According to one Flight Simulator site, the Boeing > 7E7 is now officially the 787. They are currently > changing all references to downloads of the plane > from 7E7 to 787. According to the site’s press > release, Boeing has officially renamed the 7E7 > to 787, according to flightsim.com

Hmm, wonder if the Flight Simulator site would tell me the price of hot dogs at O’Hare?  :)

Response:

S says… > Hmm, wonder if the Flight Simulator site would tell me the price of hot dogs > at O’Hare?  :)

It’s under the options menu. Check foodstuffs and specify mustard or mayo to get the appropriate stain on your boarding pass. Pete, making it up as he goes along

Response:

> According to one Flight Simulator site, the Boeing > 7E7 is now officially the 787. They are currently > changing all references to downloads of the plane > from 7E7 to 787. According to the site’s press > release, Boeing has officially renamed the 7E7 > to 787, according to flightsim.com

Apparently this is to make it more attractive to Asian carriers where 8 is a lucky number. Weird. Pete, thinking that the A380 has got a leg up in that market

Response:

Well… The Chinese word for the number "8" sounded like the Chinese word for "happy". It’s not weird at all, it’s like calling an aircraft’s engine with the acronym of "Super Advance Flight Engine" (S.A.F.E.). On the other hand, the Chinese word for the number "4" sounded like the Chinese word for "death", and it’s considered to be an unlucky number. That’s why China Southern ordered 5 A380 instead of 4 A380. The Airbus 340 and the Boeing 747 also might be a difficult sell toward the Chinese market, though the Chinese might have soften a little to the 747, if they consider the number 7 to be also lucky. It’s kinda like calling a home with the acronym of "Computerized Reliable Advance Super Home" (C.R.A.S.H.). As for Asian carriers liking the number "8". Only the Chinese ones and the Japanese ones. The rest of Asia don’t care much about the number "8" unless they deal with the Chinese and the Japanese. As for the A380. Well… The "8" in "A380" is definetly used to attract the Chinese market. The argument of the "8" was used because of the shape of the fuselage was never really a convincing one, and that argument probably is use to convince those who are against numberology to accept the A380. However, despite the clever numbering and the high capacity of the Airbus A380, it doesn’t necessary would be a big hit in the Chinese domestic market. You see, the Chinese domestic air travel while is quite high in the amount passengers traveling, it’s quite fragmented and irratic. So it’s not like a large amount of people travelling into certain cities at certain times, it’s more a small to medium amount of people travelling into a LOT of cities at a diverse times. However, there’s a high peak season here and there (like the upcoming Chinese New Year), so the Airbus A380 probably would be a good thing, provided that the airports are capable of loading and unloading the passengers effieciently (there are reasons on why the early concepts of the Boeing 747 becoming a full double decker airline were rejected). It should be noted that due the fragmented and irratic nature of the Chinese domestic air travel, the Chinese operated a LOT of the McDonnell-Douglas MD-80 family (notice the "8" trend again), I once ride a China Southern MD-90. And I think that there are a lot of companies in China that produce parts for the MD-80 family. And guess who own McDonnell-Douglas now? China Southern seems to operate a lot of Boeing 737 too. As for Boeing 787. It’s not really that suprising that the 7E7 will become the 787. The E in the 7E7 is bound to be a number anyway, the 787 is the next number inline after the 777, and of course, there’s the Chinese factor of the 787. If things go for the 787 family like it did for the MD-80 family and the 737 family, the 787 family probably would be a hit in the Chinese market. With the number 787 filled, that would mean that final number of the 7X7 family is the 797. If the Sonic Cruiser did become a production model, the 797 probably would have been taken by the Sonic Cruiser. Or  maybe Boeing now would jump to the 8X8 family now, aftering the Chinese markets?

Response:

> As for Asian carriers liking the number "8". > Only the Chinese ones and the Japanese ones. The rest of Asia don’t > care much about the number "8" unless they deal with the Chinese and > the Japanese.

The number "8" has no significance to the Japanese, either. "4" is traditionally avoided where possible, because it sounds the same as the word for death, but that obviously never frightened away Japanese carriers from buying Boeing 747-400s. — Dave Fossett Saitama, Japan

Response:

- Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – > Well… The Chinese word for the number "8" sounded like the Chinese > word for "happy". It’s not weird at all, it’s like calling an > aircraft’s engine with the acronym of "Super Advance Flight Engine" > (S.A.F.E.). > On the other hand, the Chinese word for the number "4" sounded like the > Chinese word for "death", and it’s considered to be an unlucky number. > That’s why China Southern ordered 5 A380 instead of 4 A380. The Airbus > 340 and the Boeing 747 also might be a difficult sell toward the > Chinese market, though the Chinese might have soften a little to the > 747, if they consider the number 7 to be also lucky. > It’s kinda like calling a home with the acronym of "Computerized > Reliable Advance Super Home" (C.R.A.S.H.).

Even today on many aircraft they don’t have a row 13 and in some airports they don’t have a gate 13.

Response: