The problem, for airlines, is that the US Congress is starting to take a closer look at these and other fees. Not, alas, because this kind of surcharging misrepresents the price of air travel to consumers. Rather, Congress has noticed that taxes aren’t collected on surcharges the same way they’re assessed on base fares.

If the fees are fare increases in disguise (which fuel surcharges and peak travel surcharges certainly are) then the government has every reason to want its money. Yes, those fees would be passed straight to the the consumer, but it would be logically consistent and fair.

The Government Accountability Office is investigating the surcharges, and public hearings are coming. Airline executives won’t enjoy their time on the stand, but it’s an important debate to have.

(image)

I offer no answers here, either, but another question: Would this have happened if passengers were able to hear the cockpit conversations?

I don’t fly United Airlines much anymore (and it seems I’m on United Express when I do), but the thing which made United unique (and to me, pleasant) was Channel 9. Audio channel 9 on the inflight entertainment system can, at the captain’s discretion, be set to the radio frequency which the pilots are using to communicate with the FAA center, airport approach, or tower handling that flight’s movements. I’m a nerd, I realize, but I’ve always found that audio interesting: You can hear the frustrations of pilots and controllers at busy airports like O’Hare. You can hear what the ride is going to be like minutes before you hit a patch of bumpy air. You can hear your pilots getting cranky when they’re delayed for takeoff, or guided to descend into severe wake turbulence (which I experienced once.)

But if I were a passenger on a Channel 9 enabled flight that was scheduled to arrive at 8, and it was 8:15 and we weren’t descending, with pilots silent on Channel 9, I would suspect something was up. I might ask the flight attendants questions. And maybe, just maybe, the incident in question might have played out differently.

Now, someone might argue that this degree of passenger empowerment leads to nuisance questions from travelers who don’t understand the technical lingo of aviation and who misinterpret the meaning things your pilots might say. (”Fuel emergency” on approach would scare the pants off of many people, I’m sure.) That’s part of the reason Channel 9 has been increasingly turned off on United flights in recent years.

But I am left thinking that Channel 9 would have been a healthy check on this wayward flight. Passengers could have raised the alarm, and a huge imbroglio could have been avoided — not to mention missed connections at MSP.

So what do you think? Should passengers be allowed to hear the pilots’ conversations with air traffic control? And what would you have done if you had been listening on a flight like NW 188 and heard nothing but dead air?

—

Image: Northwest 188’s flight path, courtesy of FlightAware. When the pilots didn’t respond to air traffic control, many suspected the possibility of a hijacking. Some of the twisting-back-and-forth maneuvers were apparently required by air traffic control to test whether the pilots were actually in command of their aircraft.

Airline staff will be present at boarding gates in terminals to ask passengers waiting to fly to relieve themselves before boarding, The Independent reported.

ANA hopes the weight saved will lead to a five-tonne reduction in carbon emissions over the course of 30 days.

The airline began the policy on October 1, according to Japan’s NHK television.

Although it is intended as an experiment lasting one month and 42 flights, the trial may be extended if it is well-received by passengers and if results are positive.

Based on an average human bladder capacity of 15oz, if 150 passengers relieved themselves on board an aircraft, this would amount to 63.7kg of waste.

…and that’s just the bladder… No word on the weight savings for performing other human activities on terra firma. Must be Japanese politeness that’s limiting discussion to #1.

(image)

Downgraded: American credit cards
For several years now, a pet-peeve of mine as an American traveling abroad has been the challenge of using a swipe-and-sign credit card in a country where chip-and-PIN is the norm. (Consider previous posts on chip-and-PIN challenges. I even wrote a piece for National Geographic Traveler on the issue.) Now the New York Times revisits the issue and finds that it’s getting worse, not better, for American cardholders. When will US card issuers catch up with the rest of the world? (Thanks, David!)

Downgraded: US Customs and Immigration
Did the gruff face of US immigration kill the city of Chicago’s bid for the Olympics? It was apparently a contributing factor, if reports from the IOC are to be believed: “Syed Shahid Ali, an I.O.C. member from Pakistan, in the question-and-answer session following Chicago’s official presentation, pointed out that entering the United States can be ‘a rather harrowing experience.’” Somehow, it’s not a shock that the guy from Pakistan had this particular critique of entering the US. But he’s hardly alone.

Downgraded: Cockpit decorum
When I draft my list of minimum requirements for pilot competence, I think “not getting into fistfights in the cockpit” goes unspoken, an assumed background condition for commercial travel. Apparently, I need to be more explicit with my expectations. An inflight cockpit brawl on Air India, anyone?

Upgraded: Hotel promo deals
Over at View from the Wing, read up on an ongoing Hyatt promotion “the best hotel promo I’ve ever seen.” The deal: 13,500 United Airlines miles and a free Hyatt night for a two one-night stays at a Hyatt property, including discounted Hyatt Place properties.

Downgraded: Brazilian justice
Three years ago, NYT columnist Joe Sharkey was onboard a plane that survived a midair collision over Brazil. He subsequently criticized Brazil’s fractured air traffic control system and came under nationalistic fire for refusing to go along with the official Brazilian line that the (American) pilots of the surviving business jet were solely at fault for the accident. Now, Sharkey is being sued for $250,000 for defaming the entire population of Brazil. The lawsuit is offensive and absurd. For more background on the case, see here and here.

Downgraded: Helicopter service in Manhattan
Helicopter service from downtown Manhattan to JFK, canceled? I’m shocked, shocked!

Upgraded: Electronic cigarettes on airplanes
Back in February, I posted about a report of an impending deal between an electronic cigarette manufacturer and an unnamed airline. Immediately, I thought it would be a European low-cost carrier. Sure enough, it’s the granddaddy of ‘em all: Ryanair. For €6, you can buy a pack of 10 (disposable, I assume) nicotine-vapor sticks.

Upgraded: Clear’s life chances
Clear / Verified Identity Pass, the subscription-based service that promised shorter airport security lines, before it died an abrupt and refund-less death, may be back. I was a skeptic from the get-go — frequent travelers already get shorter lines, without having to give up their personal information. I’m still a skeptic.

Upgraded: Bloggers branching out
Brett Snyder of CrankyFlier is expanding the Cranky franchise: He’s launching a new service, dubbed CrankyConcierge. For $30, he’ll help you find a low fare, track your flight status for you, look for alternatives in case of rebooking, and aid you in post-trip dispute assistance. At the same time, Gary Leff of View from the Wing is now charging $150 to help travelers book frequent flier tickets. I’m looking forward to seeing these business ideas develop. Good luck, guys!

(image)

I flew first class to Oslo on [Continental] a few months ago using miles (from Amex). Chief attendant (purser?) came around to all in 1st and asked if anyone had gold or better on another airline. My seatmate had SAS, so he filled out a form and got instant Gold on CO. Seems like a smart move.

Wow, that’s hustle.

Typically, requests for a status match — in which one airline attempts to poach the business of another airline by granting elite status to another airline’s upper-tier frequent flier program member — require the traveler to send in documentation proving their status on another airline. Perhaps the seatmate in this story had his SAS card handy and could be instantly verified by the purser.

Either way, that’s pretty proactive on Continental’s part. I’m curious to hear if any other travelers have witnessed a similar in-flight status matching on any airlines.

The original story (that prompted him to do further digging) has strangely disappeared from his BoardingArea blog, but still appears on a (legacy?) blogspot site:

Here’s a new one, at least to me. As we taxied before takeoff on a flight tonight from Denver to Tucson, the flight attendant announced that no personal possessions could be placed in the seat-back pocket, because of “FAA regulations.”

Nothing, she said. Not a pair of eyeglasses or a newspaper or a paperback book. Only “company-printed materials” were allowed in seat-back pockets, she said, and of course I quote her precisely.

What were these strange new “FAA regulations”? My seat-mate — a hard-core business traveler and until then a stranger to me — and I looked at each other. Surely this could not be a new law. But before takeoff, here the flight attendant comes marching down the narrow aisle on inspection, and right away she spots the books each of us had tucked into the pockets, as we had done thousands of times before.

She was on us like a prison guard. “Gentlemen, I told you, nothing in the pockets,” she said. Sheepishly, we put our books in our laps, while the “company-printed materials” (the crappy in-flight magazine, the sales catalog, the barf bag and who knows what else) rode merrily alone in the seat-back pockets.

One does not argue with a flight attendant if one wants to get where one needs to go.

Like Joe, I would have assumed that the flight attendant who was telling passengers that use of the seatback pockets was prohibited was on a power trip. I would have thought the same. Apparently, I would have been wrong, as Joe wrote in yesterday’s NYT column.

The Federal Aviation Administration said Monday that airlines whose flight attendants had been telling passengers that no personal items of any kind could be placed in seatback pockets were “following our guidance, if they are enforcing this with travelers.”

The agency’s response came after numerous inquiries following a flight I made from Denver to Tucson operated by SkyWest Airlines, on which the flight attendant announced before takeoff that, as a safety measure, nothing could be placed in seatback storage pockets — no eyeglasses, no ticket stubs, no iPods or bottles of water or magazines.

What. The. Hell.

I understand the ban on sticking your laptop computer into the seatback pocket. That’s a big item that peeks out of the pocket and can hurt someone if it flies out.

But a book? A sheet of paper? A ticket stub? Have we lost all sense of logic?

If the contents of the pocket are truly dangerous then ban everything. Ban SkyMall catalogs. Ban the safety cards. Ban barf bags (with ads, or with art, or anything on them.) Ban “American Way,” “Hemispheres,” and the (oh-so-creatively titled) “US Airways Magazine.” They’re a threat to your safety! Hide the kids!

For the time being, it doesn’t appear that airlines are actively enforcing this. Most appeared to be unaware of the rule — which originated in a 2007 cabin safety directive put out by the FAA — so for now, it’s still going to be the exception, not the rule, to hear this rule announced. But once is too much. This is just plain stupid.

I’m reminded of Ryanair. The much-maligned Euro-WalMart of the skies, has never had seatback pockets, as a way to save money on cleaning expenses (and restocking those magazines).

Apparently, we are all Ryanair passengers now.

(Thanks to reader Nicole Rowan for drawing the column to my attention!)

(base image)

I have been Chairman’s [Preferred, the top tier of elite status on US Airways] for many years. My wife is expecting our first during the fourth quarter and this will stop my travel for a period of about 3-4 months. I am hoping to retain Chairman’s status but am afraid that with the lack of 4th quarter travel, I will come short. Is
it possible to have this waived to continue my status which I have held for many years due to this circumstance? Thank you for the consideration.

Here is the airline’s response:

Mr. ******,
Thank you for contacting US Airways.
We can certainly understand your desire to maintain your status at this level. We do not make exceptions to Preferred levels in fairness to
those who have worked hard to reach the requirements. We encourage you to do all possible to meet the Preferred criteria before the end of the qualification year on December 31st.
We do allow former Chairman’s Preferred members to cover the difference in their Preferred mileage and segments with a purchase option, however, since you are already a Chairman’s Member, you would have to wait until your current Chairman’s membership expires and at that point we would be able to advise the fee to retain your status.
Thank you for your continued patronage of US Airways.
Molly H.
Club Services

By the book, the airline is absolutely right. He’s not meeting the required mileage cutoff for Chairman’s membership. So he doesn’t get it.

Looking forward, though, they’ve shot themselves in the foot with this customer, a top-tier, 100,000-miles-per-year elite flier for 8 years. As J.R. writes, the lack of flexibility feels like betrayal:

Never felt that I got kicked so hard in the teeth after all the revenue I gave them for so long. If they had someone with an MBA or basic business sense enough to do a forward looking cost-benefit analysis, they would likely see things differently. As it turns out, I will be looking for another airline.

So what’s an airline to do? Bend the rules for big money fliers and keep to-the-book to the run-of-the-mill traveler? Doesn’t seem fair to the lower-tier traveler.

The real solution is to keep some flexibility in an elite scheme. One way to ensure that, in my opinion, is multi-year membership. Lufthansa does this: Top-tier “HON Circle” membership in their Miles & More program is measured based on 600,000 miles (!) earned over two years. Low earnings in one year can be made up in the second.

Alternatively, much like “rollover minutes” on wireless plans, airlines could allow miles over a tier cutoff to go toward the next year. (Delta recently introduced this.) It may mean more top-tier elites than now, which could mean a battle for upgrades. But recognizing longevity of loyalty, and not just short-term loyalty, could still pay off for the airline.

But what do you think? Does J.R. deserve some flexibility after eight years of loyalty? Is US Airways being stupid, or fair, in denying his request? What’s the best way to keep rewarding long-term loyalty without harming your business?

Take the poll, and hit the comments.

(Reading this via a feed reader or otherwise can’t vote in the poll? Click here to visit the site to vote and leave comments.)

Upgraded: British Airways
Downgraded: “cheaper” airlines
A (non-scientific) study by the Times of London found that fares were lower on British Airways than on Ryanair. And that was before they took things like luggage fees and check-in fees into account. This just reinforces the importance of price comparison (which Ryanair and its ilk tend to make difficult by keeping their fares out of the global distribution systems). As I’ve always argued, don’t assume that a “low-cost” airline is automatically lower than others. (Thanks to reader J!)

Upgraded: Skycaps
A court has affirmed that American Airlines harmed Boston skycaps’ tip income when it imposed a $2 curbside check-in fee — which went to the airline, not the skycaps. (The $2 fee was dropped in May 2008, when American started charging a fee for all checked bags.)

Upgraded: Inflight wi-fi
In the last few weeks, Virgin America reduced the cost of its inflight wifi. Lufthansa hinted at relaunching global satellite-based wifi using Panasonic’s technology (essentially duplicating the service it once offered via Connexion by Boeing). And another satellite provider, Row 44, which has tested service on Southwest and Alaska Airlines, received approval from the FCC to offer its services.

Downgraded: Continental Express
Another “trapped passengers” story… Continental Express flight gets diverted, keeps passengers on board for NINE HOURS. I mean, really, nine hours? On a regional jet?? There is no excuse for that duration of delay without allowing passengers to disembark. None. I don’t believe that this is the number one problem facing passengers today, but stories like this make it clear that some time limits to passenger trappings do need to be part of any passenger rights bill.

Downgraded: Some of the best premium seats in the sky
Cathay Pacific, which offers one of the best premium class products in the air, is cutting back the number of first and business class seats.

Downgraded: Bangkok airport duty-free
If you’re in Bangkok, you might want to skip the duty-free shop. Customers have been falsely accused (better: framed) of shoplifting. And thanks to an apparently collusive agreement between the police, the duty free operator (King Power), and individual “translators,” all working in cahoots, travelers have been forced to pay up thousands of dollars in order to leave the country. “The British Embassy has also warned passengers at Bangkok Airport to take care not to move items around in the duty free shopping area before paying for them, as this could result in arrest and imprisonment.” Absurd! Read the whole convoluted story of the “zig zag scam” here.

Downgraded: OpenSkies
British Airways is looking to sell its all-business class OpenSkies subsidiary, only a year after buying L’Avion and merging the two operations. The airline-in-an-airline is still operating, though, and there are some pretty sweet deals for premium class travel. If you’re flying between New York and Amsterdam or Paris anytime soon and looking for a relatively inexpensive upgrade, this could be the ticket. (~$1230 all-in roundtrip for a 140° cradle seat, or ~$2100 for a 180° flat bed.) But I wouldn’t book more than a month or two out.

Upgraded: Inflight internet overseas
Lufthansa is reportedly exploring ways of restarting the now-defunct Boeing Connexion satellite-powered inflight internet service. The receivers are already installed on many of their planes (a process which was undertaken at a hefty cost. Panasonic is the most likely provider of the services to the airline.

Downgraded: The St. Regis Monarch Beach
Upgraded: Irony
You may recall the St. Regis Monarch Beach in California as the site of controversy — Weeks after accepting a huge federal bailout, AIG executives spent nearly half a million smackers to host a swank affair at the resort. Now the resort itself has gone into receivership: Creditor Citigroup has foreclosed on the property, taking possession from the franchisees, Makar Properties. (Perhaps not surprising if reports of 15% occupancy rates are true.) But foreclosure doesn’t mean closure. The property remains open, albeit under new ownership.

Upgraded: Exotic inflight vermin
Paging Samuel L. Jackson! A passenger on a Southwest Airlines flight departing Phoenix was stung by a scorpion in flight. The creature fell out of luggage in the overhead bin, where numerous other scorpions were residing.

Downgraded: Budget Rent-a-Car’s ethics
Budget Rent-a-Car is still working with Trilegiant, the shady operators who send out “checks” you shouldn’t endorse. Signing the back commits you to an expensive membership in a “consumer club” with minimal benefits — all billed to the credit card you used when you rented a car from Budget. I reported on this back in January. I just received a similar solicitation this week, offering me a $10 check in exchange for a $219.98/year membership in “HealthSaver.” Shame on you, Budget, for pimping out the credit card data that your customers trusted you with.

Downgraded: Airline fees
Another week, another hike of airline fees. Continental, as part of its earnings report, is raising the cost of checked luggage by $5, bringing it to $20 for the first bag and $30 for the second. Also: Delta is adding a $5 in-person luggage fee for bags not checked in in advance online.

(image)

Upon landing at Bali’s airport planes will be taken to a remote aircraft parking area where the plane and its passengers will be sprayed with disinfectant. Passengers will then be disembarked and subjected to thermal scanners.

However, the Jakarta Globe is reporting that Bali’s Ngurah Rai International Airport is now requiring all arriving international air passengers to undergo a blood test. Nyoman Murtiyasa, the head of the airport’s health office, quoted in the Jakarta Globe said that all passengers arriving from overseas would be required to take a blood test at the airport.

Thermal scanners? Sure. Blood tests for everyone? Extreme. They make United States passport control seem downright lovable.

Downgraded: Airline uniforms
The airport administrators at Nepal’s Kathmandu Airport are taking an unusual step in an effort to reduce bribery: They are banning pockets in airline personnel uniforms. In a few months, expect reports of secret back-room sewing operations and black market tailoring.

Upgraded: Onboard duty-free, online check-in
Remember when airlines gave you extra miles for online check-in? It’s not coming back, alas. But Virgin Atlantic will give you a coupon for £6 off onboard duty free shopping when spending £30 or more. Whoo?

Downgraded: Jamaican sand wars
500 truckloads of white sand were stolen from a Jamaican resort development site in July 2008. Now, it’s going to trial, and other resort owners are among the accused. (hat tip to Veronica Stoddart)

Upgraded: Overview of disparate carry-on luggage rules
Steven Frischling at Flying with Fish has compiled a great list of 65 airlines’ carry-on baggage restrictions. Be sure to check the rules before your next flight.

Upgraded: Cruises with a theme
Downgraded: Pirates; Conscience
Finally, a cruise concept for the bloodthirsty: A Russian company is sponsoring pirate-hunting cruises. $5000 gets you on board, and you can rent AK-47s and buy ammo. The money quote: “They are worse than the pirates. At least the pirates have the decency to take hostages; these people are just paying to commit murder.”

Upgraded: Eclipse travel
THIS is a concept trip I could do: Special flights to view the upcoming solar eclipse. (Thanks, Kim!)

The airline industry, represented by the International Air Transport Association, has set a target of carbon-neutral growth by 2020. More directly, this means:

The commitment to carbon-neutral growth completes a set of three sequential goals for air transport: (1) a 1.5% average annual improvement in fuel efficiency from 2009 to 2020; (2) carbon-neutral growth from 2020 and (3) a 50% absolute reduction in carbon emissions by 2050.

So how do the airlines and aircraft manufacturers think they can meet this goal? Biofuels.

The Wall Street Journal recently picked up on a Boeing report that fuels derived from vegetation or algae not only have a positive impact on carbon-footprint measures, but they actually perform quite well as a fuel in their own right. The various fuel options met or exceeded the standards for petroleum-based jet fuel.

Actual airline tests of blended jet fuel, composed of both traditional and newfangled sources, have been successful, so we know the stuff can propel a heap of metal through the air.

The problem remains at the level of production:

To quench the global aviation industry’s thirst with jatropha and camelina, [the plants from which the fuel is developed], says Boeing’s director of sustainable biofuels strategy Darrin Morgan, would require planting an area the size of Germany. But with some crop science and improved yields on these plants, the idea of using biofuels in airplanes “actually starts to add up,” he says.
(emphasis added)

Granted, it doesn’t need to be a contiguous land mass the size of Germany, but that’s a lot of land, nonetheless.

Reducing the airline industry’s carbon footprint can’t be entirely on the shoulders of biofuels (or Bio-Derived Synthetic Paraffinic Kerosene, or Bio-SPK, if you want to get jargony). Rather, a comprehensive transportation strategy designed to reduce fuel burn at all levels (including replacement of gas-guzzling short-hops flights with greater use of regional rail) needs to come first. Some of the conversation in the comments on the recent “pretend you’re running an airline” post brought in the notion of an integrated transportation company, rather than an airline itself.

Perhaps airlines need to start getting into the agricultural business, and planting acres of jatropha and camelina.

(image)

The U.S. airline industry collected $566.3 million in baggage fees in the first quarter, according to the U.S. Department of Transportation. That was up 13.6% from the fourth quarter, and more than four times what was collected in the first three months of 2008.

US Airways showed the most impressive gains:

US Airways stands out as a heavy bag fee collector at $94.2 million, up 1,160% from the same period of 2008. US Airways collected more in baggage fees than United Airlines or Continental Airlines, two larger airlines but with more elite-level fliers and international passengers who escaped baggage tolls.

To be fair, a huge increase on a percentage basis like that is not hard to do when fees are new… Those growth rates aren’t sustainable, unless US Airways starts charging $150 per bag next year, and $900 the next.

Those stats also don’t take all fees into account, of course. (Coffee and soda fee, anyone?)

And what about the hotels? Bjorn Hansen helps McCartney out on that front:

Bjorn Hanson, associate professor at New York University’s Tisch Center for Hospitality, estimates that hotel fees and surcharges before state and local taxes will total $1.65 billion this year — that’s more than airlines have collected in baggage fees over the past four quarters reported by the Department of Transportation. Still, the hotel-fee haul will be down 5.7% from 2008 because of the occupancy decline.

Those fees include everything from resort fees to valet parking, so it’s not an apples-to-apples comparison with the airlines.

For those interested, the Bureau of Economic Research has more information on the declining first quarter travel spend numbers. Overall spending is down an annualized rate of 5.9% over last year.