Standby for more trouble with the airlines?

[Flash]

Roger that: and while you're patting yourself on the back for your great and good government service

Well, I guess I am just following others' lead on the site.......

ask the troops we flew and military cargoes we delivered to [places] during Gulf 1, before & after ... ask 'em if the airline guys were "serving their country" when they gave us -- those young Marines that we'd hauled from LeJeune over a 3 day evolution gave us -- gave us, mind you, -- 3 cheers

Congratulating one's self seems to be spreading.......

Our biggest fear that night was that some SCUDS might come rollin in according to the "best intelligence available", that was the 10-foot tall Republican Guard that we feared then, and all we had to defend ourselves with was good intentions and our little short-sleeved white airline shirts ....

If you rely on rumor and innuendo, especially from flight attendants, then you get you you pay for.......

Serving the "bottom line", my ass.

While I am certain that you and your fellow airline crews were happy and proud to be serving, I am sure the airlines were happy to be paid well for their services.

I am certain CRAF pays well, or else I doubt the airlines would do it, or Congress would hear about it via the airline lobbies. Shortly after ATA loses their work (through sub-contract) with the government, they go under. What other customer could keep a company afloat like that? Not many. Guaranteed payment for services rendered? Most businesses would do that, even with the attendant government hassle. A business is all about the bottom line, if it isn't it doesn't survive. Even I, government 'bureaucrat', know that.

*edit* ... I forgot to add:

 

[Flash]

We need to get that to be a procedure, maybe someone on the next AW NATOPS board can make that happen...

Maybe just a May.

"May" and "need not" mean procedure is optional.

 

[LazersGoPEWPEW]

I worked for one former SWA CEO who was a care-taker at a former airline of mine. He was an idiot. I don't think any airline "deserves" a government bail-out. I think government should either re-regulate the airline industry or be honest and get out of it -- completely.

Re-Regulation. Agreed.

SWA = Regional

Legacy Airlines = International

That in itself means a lot. For instance. American Airlines isn't doing so great but American Eagle Airlines, the airline that employs me is. It's a regional carrier. Of course there's more to it than that but it's a big part.

When the playing field is even ... then we'll see who "knows how to fly ... "

Exactly.

 

[PropAddict]

Airlines Don't Need Bailouts. . .

. . .They need to fire the cabin crews.

I flew SWA the other day and the stews went through the standard briefing that everyone's heard 6,000,000 times. And it ocurred to me: when I ride the train or a bus, nobody tells me how to sit in my seat, or fasten my seat belt, or put on a plastic life vest which has pictorial direction on it already. These all seem like relics from an era before people knew all of this.

Then I started thinking, how ofted do we use these dang "floating seat cushions" get used that they need to be explained to me on every flight? Airlines carried about 600 million passengers domestically last year. A little Google-ing showed 2 major commercial airline ditchings in the past 20 years: an Ethiopian Airline Boeing 767 and a Boeing 737-300 belonging to an Indonesian Airline. Since neither of these occurred domestically - I'd have to extrapolate to world-wide, but lets say it is twice the domestic figure or around 1 billion passengers. Now, the above are two instances in the past twenty years which is over approximately 20 billion passengers. I know, less people traveled twenty years ago, so lets call it 10 billion passengers. These ditchings affected some 300 people total, but lets round up in case we missed a ditching or two of a passenger airline. 1000 in 1 billion is 1 in a million. That happens to be just about the odds of getting hit by lightning in your lifetime. Yet, we do not require that people walk around with lightning protection, and be given a lightning brief given by a "trained safety attendant" before venturing outside.

"Oh, but the stews also bring me peanuts and cocktails."

Can't find any good data, but looking at the infrastructure required to get those drinks and snacks on the aircraft (the scissor trucks at the ramp, the metal carts that take up space and weight on the planes, the galleys on the planes, the stews who deliver them, etc.) I'm guessing it makes them cost a heck of a lot more than it would to have a snack bar right at the gate, or a vending machine near the aft lavatory. How many people would NEED that coke if there was a vending machine charging $5 for it, because I suspect that's about what we're paying? TO boot, with all the space we could gain by ripping out the galleys, we could add more seats. Which with domestic air routes at over 90% capacity, seems like a few more seats (but not more planes) could add profitability.


If anyone's still reading, the Europe analogy I think largely fails here. In Europe, folks don't look at air travel the same way. For them, it's a luxury. For us, as A4s keeps saying, it is a necessity. It is essential utilitarian transportation, not entertainment. I fly to get where I need to go. The days of the airplane ride being a fun and luxurious part of the vacation experience really died with the demise of the China Clippers. Stews and cabin service seem to be a carryover from that era, which are now just a leech on the back of the airline traveler, driving up ticket prices.

Granted, fuel prices are the real lynchpin to airline profitability, any measure that reduces $$ per passenger mile helps (ecce: charging for checked baggage), and I suspect this would be a not insignificant help.

So, it looks to me like we wouldn't be loosing anything, but possibly gaining. Or maybe I'm just sore that that hot stew didn't give me her digits. . .

 

[FrankTheTank]

flew SWA the other day and the stews went through the standard briefing that everyone's heard 6,000,000 times. And it ocurred to me: when I ride the train or a bus, nobody tells me how to sit in my seat, or fasten my seat belt, or put on a plastic life vest which has pictorial direction on it already. These all seem like relics from an era before people knew all of this.

But still required by the FAA... Shit, I have to give a brief to any jumpseaters.. Usually it is sit down and shut the fvck up but if it an LCA it better be good... Or god knows I am gonna be called to the carpet. GOVT... Hands in everything, understand/experience in nothing!

BTW not all bad.. It should be obvious not to smoke next to a gas pump but I know you and I have seen it before!!!!

 

[LazersGoPEWPEW]

. . .They need to fire the cabin crews.

I flew SWA the other day and the stews went through the standard briefing that everyone's heard 6,000,000 times. And it ocurred to me: when I ride the train or a bus, nobody tells me how to sit in my seat, or fasten my seat belt, or put on a plastic life vest which has pictorial direction on it already. These all seem like relics from an era before people knew all of this.

Then I started thinking, how ofted do we use these dang "floating seat cushions" get used that they need to be explained to me on every flight? Airlines carried about 600 million passengers domestically last year. A little Google-ing showed 2 major commercial airline ditchings in the past 20 years: an Ethiopian Airline Boeing 767 and a Boeing 737-300 belonging to an Indonesian Airline. Since neither of these occurred domestically - I'd have to extrapolate to world-wide, but lets say it is twice the domestic figure or around 1 billion passengers. Now, the above are two instances in the past twenty years which is over approximately 20 billion passengers. I know, less people traveled twenty years ago, so lets call it 10 billion passengers. These ditchings affected some 300 people total, but lets round up in case we missed a ditching or two of a passenger airline. 1000 in 1 billion is 1 in a million. That happens to be just about the odds of getting hit by lightning in your lifetime. Yet, we do not require that people walk around with lightning protection, and be given a lightning brief given by a "trained safety attendant" before venturing outside.

"Oh, but the stews also bring me peanuts and cocktails."

Can't find any good data, but looking at the infrastructure required to get those drinks and snacks on the aircraft (the scissor trucks at the ramp, the metal carts that take up space and weight on the planes, the galleys on the planes, the stews who deliver them, etc.) I'm guessing it makes them cost a heck of a lot more than it would to have a snack bar right at the gate, or a vending machine near the aft lavatory. How many people would NEED that coke if there was a vending machine charging $5 for it, because I suspect that's about what we're paying? TO boot, with all the space we could gain by ripping out the galleys, we could add more seats. Which with domestic air routes at over 90% capacity, seems like a few more seats (but not more planes) could add profitability.


If anyone's still reading, the Europe analogy I think largely fails here. In Europe, folks don't look at air travel the same way. For them, it's a luxury. For us, as A4s keeps saying, it is a necessity. It is essential utilitarian transportation, not entertainment. I fly to get where I need to go. The days of the airplane ride being a fun and luxurious part of the vacation experience really died with the demise of the China Clippers. Stews and cabin service seem to be a carryover from that era, which are now just a leech on the back of the airline traveler, driving up ticket prices.

Granted, fuel prices are the real lynchpin to airline profitability, any measure that reduces $$ per passenger mile helps (ecce: charging for checked baggage), and I suspect this would be a not insignificant help.

So, it looks to me like we wouldn't be loosing anything, but possibly gaining. Or maybe I'm just sore that that hot stew didn't give me her digits. . .

Well let's see not EVERYONE has heard the safety brief. Are you aware that there are still people that will step on their very first airplane today? That they're scared because they don't really understand it. It's not a bus. It's not usual to a lot of people. People are afraid of flying and even though it may not affect you or a well-seasoned airline traveller it does affect many other people.

How about what FAs do after they get off the plane? Many of them are there to take small children traveling by themselves to their parents or other relatives. They are also there to help comfort passengers in need. Air travel is not bus travel. It may seem like it to those who are used to it but those who are not or have a fear of flying....they really need an FA to calm them down sometimes.

Sure a pilot could do the safety brief but that's not really his job. His job is to fly the airplane and ensure it gets from A to B safely.

Not all airlines are about moving from point A to B.

A lot of them are very centered around PASSENGER SERVICE.

 

[Harrier Dude]

Then I started thinking, how ofted do we use these dang "floating seat cushions" get used that they need to be explained to me on every flight? Airlines carried about 600 million passengers domestically last year. A little Google-ing showed 2 major commercial airline ditchings in the past 20 years: an Ethiopian Airline Boeing 767 and a Boeing 737-300 belonging to an Indonesian Airline. Since neither of these occurred domestically - I'd have to extrapolate to world-wide, but lets say it is twice the domestic figure or around 1 billion passengers. Now, the above are two instances in the past twenty years which is over approximately 20 billion passengers. I know, less people traveled twenty years ago, so lets call it 10 billion passengers. These ditchings affected some 300 people total, but lets round up in case we missed a ditching or two of a passenger airline. 1000 in 1 billion is 1 in a million. That happens to be just about the odds of getting hit by lightning in your lifetime. Yet, we do not require that people walk around with lightning protection, and be given a lightning brief given by a "trained safety attendant" before venturing outside.

Aaahhhhhhhh.......you have much to learn about aviation safety. You'll be seeing logic defied like this many times over at a safety stand down near you.

Remember this:

When it comes to aviation safety, the facts, although interesting, are irrelevant.

 

[PropAddict]

Are you aware that there are still people that will step on their very first airplane today?

They are also there to help comfort passengers in need.

Very true. Put the safety brief on a movie (like many airlines are already doing). Or, have the gate attendant give the brief, then de-plane. Even if these people have never been on a plane, they have surely ridden in a car, whose seatbelts are functionally the same.

My wife hates flying. Deathly afraid. You can see it on her face sitting there at the gate. What do the FA's (to cave to PCism) do about it? "Ma'am would you like a coke or some water? Maybe some peanuts or a blanket? Would that help?" I'm sorry, I don't see it being a huge help to that anxious traveller, nor a service everyone on the plane should pay for.

How about what FAs do after they get off the plane?

Yes, I'm sure the captains would be heartbroken: they'll have to meet women in bars like the rest of us.

Many of them are there to take small children traveling by themselves to their parents or other relatives.

Sure, I can see that. They why don't we charge more for the "unaccompanied minor" tickets and assign each one a personal babysitter to take them where they need to go? Or, one FA could handle all the kiddos for each flight. This one collateral duty doesn't justify the need for a whole cabin crew.

Sure a pilot could do the safety brief but that's not really his job. His job is to fly the airplane and ensure it gets from A to B safely.

Not all airlines are about moving from point A to B.

(emphasis added)

I don't know about you, but I see a contradiction here. Also, if the airlines are not designed to get me where I want to go, what is their purpose? I know of no one who says "I wanna do something fun. Let's go ride an airliner, just you know, burn some wholes in the sky for the afternoon." or even "Let's go sit in an airliner somewhere and not go anywhere." We buy tickets to get where we want to go. Sailing (and train travel, to a certain extent) is about the journey; being an airline passenger is about the destination. For carriers to think otherwise is to lose touch with the customer.

A lot of them are very centered around PASSENGER SERVICE.

The best "passenger service" I've ever received was on British Airways. I love British Airways. Good food, free booze, and you get a nice set of socks with every flight. The cabin crews are professional and make my ride as enjoyable as they can. Still, I would never say it is an airline centered on "passenger service." The service, while a nice perk for the customer, is an extra trimming to entice people to fly a particular airline, usually for extra $$. (In fact, BA is always way more expensive than other carriers and more than I would pay if I had to foot the bill, but Uncle Sam doesn't seem to mind throwing down, so I go.)

All airlines are centered on moving around people and/or cargo for the purpose of making money. I've never heard of a bankrupt airline saying, "Well, we may have lost a lot of $$, but we sure did provide great passenger sevice and that makes us a success." Their investors never seem to say that, either.

Air travel is mass transit, not luxury travel. It used to be luxury, for sure, but someone realized that opening it up to the masses could bring in more $$. Yet, somewhere in there we forgot to get rid of all the luxuries, so we have some carryovers that in this day and age add very little value for their added cost. FA's will go, especially if fuel prices go up and passenger #'s go down.

 

[Flash]

Re-Regulation. Agreed.

And who would that help? The legacy airlines? Because I have no idea who else it would help......

SWA = Regional

Legacy Airlines = International

American Eagle Airlines, the airline that employs me is. It's a regional carrier.

Really?! Southwest is regional? In the same category as American Eagle? You sure about that?

And if anything, I would think international routes help the airlines quite a bit, since they are much more heavily regulated than domestic ones.

 

[webmaster]

Propaddict, the flight attendants serve a distinct function besides those you are focusing on. They are the flight station's eyes and ears in the back of the plane, and most definitely serve as a controlling factor from takeoff to landing. They are the authority figures that the "sheep" will follow. Countless hours, just like our military aircrews, are spent on emergency procedures to handle a wide range of scenarios. Joe and Jane Public aren't trained to handle the emergencies (the vast majority) and even with my training, I wouldn't be up to speed on every given aircraft I have been a passenger of. When emergencies happen, they are the ones that step forward in the cabin, take charge, and ensure the passengers follow instructions and are led to safety. Otherwise mob rule, and more than likely chaos would result with lives lost. Recently there have been a number of aircraft departing the runway as an example of where they have been necessary fixtures. Public transportation with busses and trains are completely different.

It appears to me that you are expressing more of your PERSONAL frustration. I have a couple thousand hours flying, and I still take the time to listen as a passenger on either a military or commair flight, aquaint myself with where the exits are, and ensure my personal gear is out of the way.

I think you need to break scope lock on just the beverage service aspect of what flight attendants DO...

Cheers,

John

 

[A4sForever]

Propaddict, the flight attendants serve a distinct function ...

Roger that, Web-Kahuna.

Flight attendants/stewardesses/stewards/pursers ..... whatever color or stripe you want to call 'em .... they are there for safety. For passenger evacs and inflight emergencies ... nothing more, nothing less. The rest is "fluff" ....

And for the record: I always "came up" out of my magazine/newspaper and paid attention to the F/A's pre-take-off briefings ... more out of respect for them than anything else. :icon_wink

Anything "else" can be handled w/ a vending machine and a bag of quarters ...

 

[PropAddict]

^^ Yep, that safety personnel bit is definitely one angle I hadn't considered. I'd say we best keep them around a while.

Unless we could get EP robots on each flight. . .:icon_wink

 

[phrogpilot73]

And let's not forget - the flight deck door is locked. What happens/who ensures the safety of the passengers when idiots/mentally challenged try to do something? I don't think the traveling public is ready for it to be their responsibility...

 

[HeloBubba]

And let's not forget - the flight deck door is locked. What happens/who ensures the safety of the passengers when idiots/mentally challenged try to do something? I don't think the traveling public is ready for it to be their responsibility...

Does the phrase "Let's Roll" bring anything to mind? While I agree that the traveling public is not ready for it to be their responsibilty, nor is it right or proper to try to make it their responsibilty, there has been more than one story since 9/11 where passengers have banded together to "handle" a problem passenger in the cabin.

 

[Harrier Dude]

Maybe they should just replace the skywaitresses with a vending machine and a rent-a-cop.

In any case, if they're going to keep the stews, they should be female only, max age of 29, height/weight controlled, attractive, and paid about $6 an hour (plus tips).

I've never seen them in action during an emergency, so maybe someday I'll change my mind.