After last week’s incident in which a Northwest Airlines flight from San Diego to Minneapolis flew 150 miles past its destination before turning around and coming back to land, there have been more questions than answers. The pilots claimed to have been embroiled in a heated discussion. They deny reports that they were napping, and they had no alcohol in their systems. It’s unclear how long it will take before we really know what happened, and why these pilots were out of touch with air traffic control for so long.

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.

In an effort to reduce their fuel burn and carbon emissions, Japan’s ANA, a fine airline in most every regard, politely requests that its passengers visit the loo before their next flight. The more you leave on the ground, the lighter the plane, the lower the fuel burn, and the happier the planet.

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)

In the comments thread of a previous post, Steve Kalman offered this anecdote:

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.

A couple weeks ago, Joe Sharkey posted a tale on his blog of a flight attendant requiring passengers to keep their personal belongings out of the seatback pockets. He thought it was an overzealous airline employee. He was wrong.

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)

It’s commonplace to read that airlines will bend over backward for their most loyal customers. There was in fact an article in the NYT this week arguing just that point. But if you waver in your loyalty in any way, or for any reason, you’ll likely see that bending-over-backward ending really quickly. Timely, then, that reader J.R. writes in with a tale of frustration with the policies and practices of frequent flier program elite membership. He wrote to US Airways:

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.

 Loading ...

(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.)

Downgraded: Expectations
Five-star hotel not living up to its standards? How about a zero-star hotel instead? The lodging — a converted windowless bunker in Switzerland — is also an art project. Zero-star is a cute idea, and it’s certainly fun. (Spin the Wheel of Fate!) And cheap: $9. I like their motto: “The only star is you.” Nonetheless, I believe the correct term for this facility is “hostel” (or “backpackers” for the Aussies/Kiwis in the house). See a video of the ho(s)tel below. Actually, come to think of it, it’s actually nicer than some hostels I stayed in during college.

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.

When Continental leaves SkyTeam this fall, it won’t join Star Alliance the next day. Rather, there will be a period of transition as the airline shifts from one global airline alliance to another.

“With our final flight on 24 October, we will leave SkyTeam,” said outgoing Continental CEO Larry Kellner. “We will be in Star just as fast as we can be after that. We just can’t do anything until we get out of SkyTeam to jointly market with Star partners. It won’t be seamless; it will be a couple days in transition.”

Extracting itself from SkyTeam for Continental involves ending loyalty program and airport lounge reciprocity with Air France, Delta, KLM, Northwest and other soon-to-be former allies.

It also requires ending codeshare flights and joint corporate programs. On the former, some code shares with Delta and Northwest already have been discontinued, Kellner said, and “all drop off [by] the end of July.” On the latter, he acknowledged that “we have some joint contracts, but we don’t think that’s a significant risk for us. It’s a very small risk.”

How much time passes between the wind-down of the old partnerships and the initiation of the new ones is another open question.

The transition period may be a bumpy one for Continental loyalists — or for those planning on flying Continental and hoping for benefits via one alliance or the other. Stay tuned.

(image)

Spring Airlines of China is making a request to regulators to permit the reconfiguration of its aircraft to include standing-room “seating.”

When I first saw this, I had to check the calendar to make sure it really was July 1, not April 1. But sure enough, it’s being picked up by news services and MSNBC.

The standing jet could accommodate 40% more passengers compared to a traditional plane. It could also help airlines cut 20% of their costs, while lowering airfares for consumers.

Mr Wuan added: “It’s just like bar stools. The safety belt is the most important thing. It will still be fastened around the waist.” The airline would need government backing to go ahead with the plans. But Spring Airlines president Wang Zhenghua said that he was confident because the idea had been suggested by China’s vice premier Zhang Dejiang.

“He suggested that, for a lower price, passengers should be able to get on a plane like catching a bus, with no seat, no luggage consignment, no food, no water, but very convenient,” said Mr Zhenghua.

History really DOES repeat itself. Back in 2006, sketches of an Airbus-designed standing configuration were floated in the New York Times. Airbus backpedaled when outrage erupted, but the idea clearly survived. And Airbus is being named again in this latest iteration:

[Mr. Zhenghua] added that the company had consulted with Airbus, the company which built most of its aeroplanes, and had been told the proposals were safe. “So once the government approves it formally, we’ll try it,” he added.

My only disappointment is that Ryanair isn’t the one proposing this.

Here’s a visual from the last time this concept was floated. It still reminds me of “The Silence of the Lambs,” and the means of transporting Hannibal Lecter; I still chuckle with smug self-satisfaction at my labeling of this idea as “Hannibal Class” back in 2006.

(Hat tip to Marilyn Terrell)

Related:
- Think air travel is like riding the bus? Think subway.
- Standing room only: real or not?
- Short hops — May 2, 2006 — Standing seats (again), miles for dry cleaning, and more
- Posts tagged “Standing Seats” | Upgrade: Travel Better
- Looking backward: Airlines considering alternating forward and rear-facing seats

Downgraded: Bali’s public health strategy
While a vigorous attempt to contain the spread of the H1N1 flu virus is understandable and sensible, Bali is taking the notion to a new level:

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!)