|
|
 
|
|
Author
|
Topic: Flying is overrated (AKA: Northwest Airlines YOU SUCK!)
|
Sam Graham
AKA: "The Evil Sam Graham". Wackiness ensues.
Posts: 1431
From: Waukee, IA
Registered: Dec 2004
|
posted 04-04-2012 12:33 PM
Since we're at it...
Allegiant to Start Charging for Carry-On Bags
quote: airlinereporter.com
Allegiant Air has stated that they will start charging for carry-on bags starting Wednesday, April 4th — and no, this is not an April Fools’ joke.
“Allegiant will begin charging for carry-ons for travelers booking new reservations beginning Wednesday (it will go live on our website late Tuesday night PDT),” Jessica Wheeler, Public Relations Manager for Allegiant confirmed to AirlineReporter.com.
Although the airline has not publicly announced the changes, they sent an internal memo to employes. Passengers will be allowed one free personal item (purse, briefcase, laptop), but anything larger will require the carry-on bag fee. Paying for the carry-on at the airport will run you $35, but buying online will save you some money. Allegiant has not confirmed how much the fee will cost if purchased in advance, but inside sources have explained that they expect it to be between $14.99-29.99 — which matches Allegiant’s checked bag fees. The difference in price is route specific and depends on the length of the flight flown.
This is not a huge surprise, since Allegiant has previously stated that they were considering charging for carry-ons. With the success of Spirit Airline’s carry on fees (Spirit s the only other US-based airline charging for carry-ons), this seemed to be just a matter of time.
Allegiant, based in Las Vegas, is an ultra low cost airline that offers cheap, basic fares and then charge for additional services like seat reservations, boarding order, food and drinks and now carry-ons. This type of ala-cart pricing has been quite controversial, but does allow people traveling light, to travel cheap.
The model of ala-cart pricing and providing additional travel options (hotel, rental cars, etc) has worked out well for Allegiant — they were one of the most profitable airlines in 2011.
Passengers seem to complain about this type of pricing, yet they keep buying tickets. Why wouldn’t airlines look at additional revenue sources like this when they appear to work? If you don’t agree with an airline’s policies, show them with your wallet. Let the complaining begin…
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Paul Mayer
Oh get out of it Melvin, before it pulls you under!
Posts: 3836
From: Albuquerque, NM
Registered: Feb 2000
|
posted 04-06-2012 10:28 PM
I've never tried using a cell while flying. Funny, when I was at Allegiant, every aircraft in the fleet had a cell phone on the flight deck, for use when in areas where Selcal service wasn't available. But they were all removed by the time I left there.
I have used 2m ham radios while flying small planes (hey, I was the captain, I got to decide). Never noticed any weird behaviors out of the avionics I had, but of course I wouldn't try this in real IMC where I really needed to pay attention to what I was doing AND trust the nav gear.
Nowadays, things like flight plan revising/updating (or any web browsing/searching) can be done through many of the "glass cockpit" avionics packages that are available for either big or small planes.
I'm looking forward to the day I can afford to fly for myself again. Then the only use I'll have for riding in the back of an airliner would be for my overseas flights (and for backup on the occasional domestic trip where either I or my chosen aircraft are just not up to the challenge). I just LOVE being able to drive up and park next to the sky chariot, throw the bags in, fly the trip, land and pull up to my waiting rental car, throw the bags in, and be done with it! The TSA can kiss my ever widening ass! ![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
| IP: Logged
|
|
Randy Stankey
Film God
Posts: 6539
From: Erie, Pennsylvania
Registered: Jun 99
|
posted 04-06-2012 11:48 PM
It is my understanding that interference from cell phones is a concern but it's not the primary concern.
Properly installed and operated, modern avionics should be pretty safe from interference. Not to say that it won't happen but it SHOULDN'T happen.
The way it was explained to me, the problem comes from having too many cell phones in the air with direct line of sight to many cell sites. If it is way up in the air, a cell phone could be in range of several towers at the same time. On the ground, a phone is in contact with a couple, at most. If you have a phone in contact with many towers, the system will spend a lot more time trying to determine which towers to hand off to. If you have several phones all trying to handshake with towers, it uses up a lot of processing time on the system. If you have too many, it can cause the cellular phone system to get jammed up.
I don't know the ins and outs of this argument but it sounded plausible to me. Like many stories that are passed around from one person to another, it might have some truth to it but it might also be wrong in some respects.
However, I don't count the possibility of harmful interference to avionics out, either. Maybe the risk is small but the consequences could be catastrophic. I'd rather err on the side of caution until I know for sure.
What really bothers me is how airlines propagate hearsay and half truth as if it was fact. They say things like, "F.A.A. regulations require all cell phones to be turned off." The more truthful statement would be, "To ensure safety, please turn off your cell phones."
Cell phones on airplanes can't be all bad. Like Paul says, many airliners have them installed in the cockpit. None of those planes have plummeted from the sky.
I agree. When there are hundreds of lives at risk, it should be, "Safety First" but don't bullshit the passengers. Most of them see right through that smokescreen and it only pisses them off even more than they already are.
If you ask me, the safest plane is the one where the passengers are all comfortable and happy. Allowing cell phones to be used once cruising altitude is reached might be a good trade-off. Don't you think?
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Randy Stankey
Film God
Posts: 6539
From: Erie, Pennsylvania
Registered: Jun 99
|
posted 04-07-2012 10:54 AM
Not saying I want people to have cell phones on airplanes, either. Yes, it's annoying. My only point about allowing them would be to mollify the masses.
Neither do I mean to say that airlines are lying about F.A.A. regs. I'm sure they are real. My point is that I hate it when people fall back on government regulations to manipulate people into doing what they want.
I had a group of kids in the theater, last Monday, recording the movie on their iPhones. I just walked in and said, "Put that away, please," polite but firm. By the time I told the first one, the other two were already putting theirs away, too.
I could have said something like, "Federal laws prohibit unauthorized recording of copyrighted media," but who cares? I would have done nothing but piss them off. Their parents would have gotten involved and started getting in my face. I would have had a mess on my hands.
I could have gone on about how the light from the phones disturbs the people behind them. Again, kids don't care nor do they understand. A simple but firm, "Please" and "Thank you" will carry a lot more weight and have a lot better outcome.
Everybody "knows" that most regulations are bullshit. Most people don't think regulations apply to them, anyway. Quoting regs isn't going to get you anywhere.
We've said the same thing in the theater business for years: It's not WHAT you say, it's HOW you say it.
Airlines need to learn that lesson, too.
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
All times are Central (GMT -6:00)
|
This topic comprises 13 pages: 1 2 3 ... 8 9 10 11 12 13
|
Powered by Infopop Corporation
UBB.classicTM
6.3.1.2
The Film-Tech Forums are designed for various members related to the cinema industry to express their opinions, viewpoints and testimonials on various products, services and events based upon speculation, personal knowledge and factual information through use, therefore all views represented here allow no liability upon the publishers of this web site and the owners of said views assume no liability for any ill will resulting from these postings. The posts made here are for educational as well as entertainment purposes and as such anyone viewing this portion of the website must accept these views as statements of the author of that opinion
and agrees to release the authors from any and all liability.
|
Home
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
)![[Smile]](smile.gif)
Printer-friendly view of this topic