First time here? Check out the site's "greatest hits" or read a random post from the archives. Feel free to ask a question, and consider subscribing to the latest posts via RSS or e-mail. Thanks for visiting!

Downgraded: Short flights on United
Watching United and US Airways devalue their frequent flyer programs is like watching a tennis match, with the two players volleying back and forth. Every time one airline does something, the other does it a few weeks later. Lather, rinse, repeat. The latest: After US Airways did it a few weeks ago, United Airlines is eliminating the 500-mile minimum mileage earned. In an e-mail to customers, UA wrote:

Beginning July 1, 2008, for flights of less than 500 miles, passengers will earn redeemable miles equal to the actual miles flown. Elite Qualifying Miles (EQM) will also be awarded based on actual miles. Elite Qualifying Segments (EQS) are not affected. This new mileage accrual structure will apply to travel on or after July 1, 2008, regardless of when the travel was ticketed.

This affects road warriors who park their butts in seats on short flights most. It sure slows the trip on the road to elite status, or to that free ticket.

Update: The rules are now online, here. Thanks, Benet and Antonio!

Upgraded: Hassle
The agents of the Customs and Border Protection Service have 60 different reasons to deny a person entry into the United States, “at the discretion of border agents,” even if visitors have a valid ticket and don’t require a visa. “Looking at me funny” might be one of them, as an Italian visitor found out, ending up in the slammer for 10 days without charges. At what point is the appeal of travel to the United States — especially in light of the low dollar — outweighed by the government-paranoia BS factor?

Downgraded: Airspeed
Upgraded: Fuel efficiency
Think flights are moving a little slower lately? You may be right. Airlines are slowing down the engines and saving fuel in the process. Example: “Cutting the speed on a Northwest Minneapolis to Paris flight from 542 mph to 532 mph adds 8 minutes in flying time but reduces fuel consumption by 162 gallons, saving the airline around $535.”

The financial wiseguys at Minyanville have nailed it. They’ve pinned down, to a tee, the future of air travel fees.

I like the “Arial Font Fee” best. Can I get a discount for Palatino?

It’s item 4 of the “Five Things You Need to Know” today. The full “ticket” is here.

Merger speculation is no longer speculation
It’s on. Delta is officially offering 1.25 shares per Northwest Airlines share, a 16.75% premium over closing prices of DAL and NWA, respectively. Important to the success of the merger: The pilots’ union, ALPA, gets a seat on the resulting airline’s board and 3.5% equity in the company. The result, if it passes shareholder votes, is the world’s largest airline.

Up next: Continental-United. It’s going to happen, though nothing is official. Northwest’s linkup with Delta makes it possible, since Northwest held a “golden share” of Continental stock and could nix a merger if they wanted. Sigh. With several airlines folding in the past weeks, and with one or two mergers coming up, competition will (at least temporarily) be reduced significantly. Watch for prices to rise. But will rising prices kill demand?…

Who will be next to fall?
Chris Elliott may be making book on which airline will fold next, but it won’t be Virgin America. (I put an exacta box on Alitalia and SunCountry, with a side bet on Mesa and a long-shot on VA. The latter bet may be down the crapper. Thankfully, no money changed hands…) The Branson-powered airline will get another $100 million in capital from investors. Profitability is still 3 years away, they say. Three years for me to win that bet!

More FAA inspections… but no groundings
The FAA, fresh off its attempted legitimacy-building groundings of American’s MD-80s, is ordering the repair of wing de-icing systems, landing gear, and (!) oxygen masks on 1980s-era Boeing 737s. That means Continental, Delta, Southwest, United, and others will have some repairs to make. But it’s obviously not urgent, since the airlines have 36 months to fix things. So, three years from now, if airlines are grounded for these problems, you’ll know why. Bonus: United and the Air Transport Association asked for 48 months, instead of 36. Denied. This really, really, really must not be a big deal.

Peter Greenberg disagrees, after chatting up an FAA inspector responsible for Mesa’s fleet. But Peter, much like with a car, there are degrees of repair. Sure, I should get those wiper blades replaced on the old Honda, as they’re streaking a bit when I wipe the dew off in the morning, but they’re not a danger to me… yet. I agree that repairs should be made, and maintenance is important, but as long as the FAA says it’s minor work and the pilots are willing to put their lives on the line, I’m willing to take the chance and get onboard.

Urinals!
We’ve been promised martini bars, bedrooms, and even weight rooms, so I’ll believe it when I see it, but here’s another in the long line of upgrades to the inflight experience:

Airbus announces the option of urinals in onboard restrooms. That will make turbulence so much less … messy.

But not good enough, Airbus: I demand bidets!

Late last week, Frontier Airlines filed for chapter 11 bankruptcy. Unlike some of the recent airline shutdowns, Frontier IS still flying, much like Delta, Northwest, US Airways, and United did earlier this decade. But the real news nugget is Frontier’s stated reason for the timing of their bankruptcy filing. Not fuel prices, or competition. Credit cards.

In making the announcement, Frontier CEO Sean Menke stated that the Denver-based airline “filed for very different reasons than those of other recent carriers.” Indeed, Mr. Menke blamed the airline’s descent into bankruptcy on an “unexpected attempt” by credit card processor First Data “to start withholding significant proceeds received from the sale of Frontier tickets.”

Generally, credit card vendors turn over revenue to airlines from bookings in a matter of days. But in some cases, the companies hold on to a percentage of ticket receipts until customers actually take their flights. These so-called holdback policies vary, usually depending on the financial stability of an airline.

In Frontier’s case, the holdback rate went from 45% to 100%, effective May 1. Ouch.

For travelers, though, there are longer-term implications here: If airlines’ financial viability is a dance on a razor blade, and if accepting credit cards can create a risk of survival, then travelers are likely to see cash-payment incentives (or credit-payment disincentives), going forward.

European airlines have been charging a credit card surtax for some time, to dissuade customers from charging it. And a few months ago in the U.S., discounts were floated as a way of getting customers to pay by cash. And despite the fact that every airline has an affinity credit card that generates points in their loyalty program, Frontier’s bankruptcy is going to put more pressure on airlines to reduce the reliance on credit.

Just watch.

Related:
- Is there a backlash against credit cards brewing among U.S. airlines?
- Skybus shuts down abruptly, third scheduled U.S. airline to fold this week

(image)

Time to short Samsonite stock?
Continental is the latest in a long line of airline to slap an additional fee on checking in a second suitcase. Yes, some exceptions apply, so OnePass elites as well as premium-cabin customers won’t have to pay the bill. But the bottom line: The 2008 flying environment dictates that the “2PC” rule is dead. One checked bag per person, or pay up.

UPDATE: Cranky points out that United has tightened up its rules on the 2nd bag. Previously, a refundable (read: expensive) ticket meant you got a waiver on the 2nd bag fee. Not anymore. How nice of them to make the policy so much more consistent, while, surely coincidentally, adding a revenue opportunity for the airline!

Another one bites the dust
Not quite the level of drama as the ATA, Aloha, and Skybus shutdowns, but Midwest Express’ commuter feeder Skyway Airlines is no longer flying. Their routes are being taken over by Skywest, a few letters apart, but a different company nonetheless. Passengers may not even notice, as the tickets were sold by Midwest and simply subcontracted to a different supplier. But the pilots and employees of Skyway will be feeling the sting.

Fuel cell-powered airlines coming someday?
It’s a small plane, without tons of passengers and cargo, but an encouraging sign nonetheless. Boeing successfully tested a small plane that ran on batteries and fuel cells. Its only emissions: Water vapor. Now if only they could create a fuel cell large enough to fly to Singapore…

How would US Customs & Immigration rate?
Jan Chipchase blogs about customer service feedback opportunities at Beijing and Frankfurt airports. I’ve flown through Frankfurt, but not Beijing, yet I’ve never been asked to give my opinion of the customs/immigration experience. Harrumph. The Beijing mechanism — an electronic device that invites you to push a button, rating your customs agent on a Likert scale — is nutty, and frankly unexpected at ANY airport, much less in China. (Jan snapped a photo of the device in the airport, which, in itself, is amusing, considering the general securitization of the customs area…) Nice idea, as long as you can rate the agent AFTER you’ve completed your business. I can only imagine how the surly agents at JFK would rate.

(image)

Late Friday, Skybus announced on its website that it would shut down by the end of the day. If you hold tickets on the discount airline for travel today (Saturday, April 5, 2008) or later, call your credit card company immediately and try to secure a refund.

I say “try,” because you may not be able to get your money back. If you booked tickets well in advance and you’ve already paid the bill, you may run into snags with your credit card company in getting a chargeback. You generally can dispute charges when a company fails to deliver the services it promised, but if you’ve paid your bill, your bank is far less likely to work on your behalf. Banks vary; call them. Now.

If you’re already halfway into an itinerary, you can try to get your ticket honored by another airline, but as Chris Elliott has pointed out after previous airline shutdowns, there’s no law requiring them to do so. If any other airline accepts a Skybus ticket, even with a surcharge, it’s as close to an act of charity as you’ll ever see from a for-profit enterprise.

So far, no statement has appeared on any of the major airlines’ websites to woo Skybus customers. Who would want to attract a cheapskate customer who only paid a measly $10 one-way fare, I guess. In contrast, you’ll see announcements of standby policy for stranded ATA and Aloha customers on airline websites like Northwest, US Airways and United. For example, ATA customers can fly standby (on a space-available basis… good luck) on US Airways for $100 per segment. Not truly “cheap,” but better than paying a walk-up fare to, say, get back to the U.S. mainland from Honolulu.

But back to Skybus: Their failure is a surprise, but only for its timing. The third scheduled airline this week to close its doors, after the much older Aloha and ATA. (I’m sorry, I don’t count the charter airline Champion Air, which also folded this week. Bad week for the industry.) High fuel prices and bad business models combined to create this week’s carnage.

I never flew Skybus, though I had been considering trying them out on a Greensboro-Chicago/Gary flight. I flew Aloha inter-island in 1994, which was pleasant, and I flew ATA in 2003, which was less than pleasant. (I swore never to fly ATA again after a miserable experience with their front-desk staff at Chicago/Midway, who refused to issue a boarding pass, even though I was at the gate more than 45 minutes before the flight. “You’ll never make it through security in time.” “I bet I can.” “Nope, you won’t. The next flight is in 7 hours. You’re on the standby list.” I’ve never been angrier at an airline employee.)

Taking three airlines out of commission is pulling a good chunk of supply from the market, especially to Hawaii, which will allow other airlines to raise fares. For the short term, these airline failures are bad news for all flyers, not just the folks who hold tickets on the defunct carriers.

But rest assured, much like lottery tickets always find a market, capital always seems to flow to start-up airlines, though it’s not overnight. Perhaps a Charleston, West Virginia based airline might be the next big thing. Or even a Louisiana-themed discount carrier named after gumbo.

(image)

Upgraded: Evidence that airlines are unwilling to break the status quo
The Air Transport Association, fresh off its successful lawsuit that overturned the Passenger Bill of Rights in New York, is threatening to sue the Department of Transportation over the proposed introduction of congestion pricing at the busiest U.S. airports. The airlines will do what they can to stop the proposal, they say. So what’s the airlines’ solution to overbooked airports? Cue the crickets…

Upgraded: Olympic condoms
With the summer games coming up, Chinese hotels are stocking up on condoms. Yes, really. “The condoms shall not be used as evidence of prostitution and whoring.” Well thank goodness! But will they be found in the minibar?

Downgraded: Commemorative British Airways newsletters
Upgraded: FedEx
Five years, and billions of capital spent, and the Terminal 5 fiasco at London Heathrow continues to be a headache for all involved. Last week’s grand opening of the posh new terminal was marred by the now well-publicized luggage handling failure. 20,000 checked bags still need to be reunited with their owners, and British Airways is calling in the cavalry: FedEx. Another reason that BA has decided to scrap a commemorative in-house newsletter celebrating the terminal opening.

Upgraded: Single travelers in Delta coach
Downgraded: Ghetto upgraders
Delta is buying Thompson Solutions’ “Cozy Suites” for its widebody jets, to be installed in 2010. The seats are a little odd, with a staggered configuration with no two people sitting precisely next to each other. More armrest space is one perk with this approach. Good for solo travelers, bad for couples and families. But even worse for anyone hoping to get a “ghetto upgrade” — an entire row of seats to oneself, allowing you to lift the armrests and stretch across. It’s also somewhat reminiscent of the alternating forward-backward-forward seating that was floated just about a year ago. But it’s thinking differently, and I like that. (via Cranky)

Hopefully everyone got the April Fool’s ha-ha’s out of their system today. But the winner, in my book, is Canadian airline WestJet, which announced that they were converting their overhead bins into sleeper seats.

Their press release offered this explanation:

By offering our existing overhead bins as sleeper cabins, guests will now have the opportunity to lie down for a period of time and arrive at their destination refreshed, rested and ready to go.

Well-played, WestJet. Well-played.

And in an alternate joke bound to make Chris Elliott cringe, “Richard Branson’s Virgin Blue airline got into the April 1 spirit by running newspaper ads offering half-priced fares for passengers willing to stand, with free calf massages on flights longer than two hours.”

Uncovered: the previously secret blueprint for airline business plans. It’s all here: inventory management, pricing, flight scheduling, route selection, maintenance, and even duty free shopping. Courtesy of Monty Python.

American Airlines grounded its entire fleet of MD-80 jets to check wiring on the planes. As I write this, 325 flights are canceled.

Delta, also with a sizable MD-80 and -90 fleet, canceled several hundred flights for the same reason.

Earlier in the week, United took a number of its 747s out of service, also to perform maintenance checks, “to ensure compliance with federal maintenance standards.” All of a sudden? “The Federal Aviation Administration ordered the temporary groundings after discovering that test equipment used at a South Korea maintenance station was faulty.”

What’s going on?

After Southwest’s brief grounding of more than 40 737-300 jets because of possible damage to the aircraft’s metallic “skin,” the FAA is cracking down on maintenance. The agency “recently launched spot checks of compliance with safety requirements for all U.S. airlines.”

Well, good. After apparently not doing enough spot checking, the agency is playing catch-up. It’s encouraging, I suppose, that the inspections are being done now. But what does that mean for recent flights, like those, say, a week before these recent groundings? Wasn’t maintenance taken seriously before? Were you taking a risk?

There probably wasn’t much risk to passengers, frankly. I always comfort myself with the notion that the pilots are as much at risk as passengers. If they’re willing to get on board, then so am I.

But, as a matter of principle, I prefer that my airlines don’t cut corners and don’t skimp on maintenance. I also prefer that my government’s regulatory bodies do their job and actually keep companies under scrutiny in a clear, defined, and above all consistent manner. That clearly didn’t happen. And that is what needs to be addressed. The sky isn’t falling, but things could sure be better.

The airlines affected are canceling flights wholesale today, though they promise to be back on schedule soon. That’s the immediate bad news for travelers today. The fact that regulation has been haphazard is frankly of greater concern.

(image)

After 9/11, there was a debate over whether pilots should be trained in small firearms and permitted (or required) to carry a pistol in the cockpit. From the get-go, I objected. I felt that the risks of firearms exceeded their benefit, especially if the Federal Air Marshals program already had armed law enforcement officers on board.

The risk of an accidental discharge, or worse, a pilot with less-than-honorable purposes, makes guns in the cockpit a substantial risk. And now it’s happened: A US Airways pilot discharged his weapon during approach to Charlotte.

What on earth was the pilot doing with his pistol during the approach? Shouldn’t he have been working on landing the plane? And why wasn’t his weapon holstered, with the safety on? What were they doing up there, talking about their favorite (and still, to this day, most disturbing) scenes in Christopher Walken movies?

The whole thing makes me feel less safe. Both because I don’t like the idea of hot lead flying through the fuselage, and because I like my pilots to be flying, not playing with guns.

The pro-gun argument has always been that armed pilots serve as the last line of defense in the case of a hijacking or other incident. Or that armed pilots are themselves a deterrent to hijackers.

But it’s impossible to prove whether or not the arming of pilots actually improves safety by scaring potential bad guys from trying anything on board a plane. You can’t prove or disprove that proposition, unless you’ve got an al Qaeda focus group that you’re running.

A more concrete case that would support the pro-arming side would be incidents of threats who were subdued by an armed pilot. I haven’t heard of a single incident wherein a pilot was called upon to unholster his or her weapon in flight. If readers have a link to such a case, please send it my way.

As it is, the passengers on this plane were lucky that nothing worse happened. Arming pilots remains a bad idea.

(Thanks to David, Kim, and Richard for sending this one in!)

UPDATE:
Here’s a photo of the gunshot hole, via the Associated Press:

Reader Michelle sends in a link about the Port Authority of New York & New Jersey’s plan to make the outlying Stewart Airport “carbon-negative.” Carbon-negative? So flying from Stewart actually HELPS the environment? Uhh, yeah.

In reality, the airport would offset the carbon dioxide produced on its premises by planting forests wholesale. All well and good. But is it realistic to expect an airport to counteract all of the fossil fuel burning machines that grace its pavement? And then some?

I don’t buy it. Airports aren’t exactly minty-fresh. Never have been, and as long as their tenants burn hydrocarbons, they won’t be. Offsetting the pollution they create is an honorable goal, but face it, that’s a lot of trees. Especially if the airport is expected to grow.

And it doesn’t help the local environment. “People who live around Stewart have concerns that expanded operations will exacerbate air and noise pollution and fuel sprawling development.” Indeed, I’m sure they will. And planting trees fifty, a hundred, or a thousand miles away won’t fix that.

This is a “greenwashing” PR stunt.

(image)