Airline Service Worsened in 2004

[Candy]

Study: Airline Service Worsened in 2004 (http://dailynews.att.net/cgi-bin/news?e=pub&dt=050404&cat=news&st=newsd898dpio0&src =ap)
Airlines generally arrived later, lost more luggage and caused more consumer complaints in 2004 than they did the year before, an annual study of aviation quality finds.

Only four of the 14 major airlines rated in both 2003 and 2004 improved, according to the report released Monday. They were AirTran, Atlantic Southeast, JetBlue and United.
I feel so proud! :D

[tmosher]

If you want to read the entire sixty page report.

Airline Quality Rating 2005 (http://www.aqr.aero/aqrreports/2005aqr.pdf) - mind you, it's in PDF.

Press Release (http://www.aqr.aero/pressreleases/2005pressrelease.htm)

[fossilnut2]

I'm nearly aways pleasantly surprised by how good most service is.

One of the issues is one of a mature industry. Flying has lost its 'specialness'. Taking a flight used to be an event...one of those special adventures in life. Now for a lot of people it's 'ho hum' ...can't wait to get home and sleep in my own bed.

We don't complain as much about the late city bus or the rental car that is less than perfect. An aiplane ride, however, is still compared to the glory days when a 'stewardess' gave a big smile and it was fun to eat those little desert-thingys on the food tray.

Plane travel today is inexpensive to those golden days in comparable dollars. ...maybe a third of what it was 30 years ago. That's no excuse for poor service but at least explains some of the differences in reality and expectations.

[Candy]

Press Release (http://www.aqr.aero/pressreleases/2005pressrelease.htm)
The only traditional or “legacy” carrier at the top of the ratings was United.
8)

[Jpax2003]

Study: Airline Service Worsened in 2004 (http://dailynews.att.net/cgi-bin/news?e=pub&dt=050404&cat=news&st=newsd898dpio0&src =ap)
Airlines generally arrived later, lost more luggage and caused more consumer complaints in 2004 than they did the year before, an annual study of aviation quality finds.

Only four of the 14 major airlines rated in both 2003 and 2004 improved, according to the report released Monday. They were AirTran, Atlantic Southeast, JetBlue and United.
I feel so proud! :DOnly one direction do go after you hit bottom.

[Candy]

Only one direction do go after you hit bottom.
[-X

[tmosher]

Not if you worked for Braniff Airlines in fall 1989.

[Candy]

Not if you worked for Braniff Airlines in fall 1989.
or TWA :o

[tmosher]

Not if you worked for Braniff Airlines in fall 1989.
or TWA :o

TWA was assimilated. American made the Borg look like amateurs with that takeover.

My dead airline list (I either worked for them or did consulting work - and no, they didn't go under from what I did for them):

Nautilus (Premiere)
Air Niagara
Flying Tigers
Braniff II
Braniff III
SARO
Scibe Airlift

[Candy]

Not if you worked for Braniff Airlines in fall 1989.
or TWA :o

TWA was assimilated. American made the Borg look like amateurs with that takeover.
I wish we could've assimilated US Airways. Perhaps, after the bankruptcy has ended. 8-[

[tmosher]

Not if you worked for Braniff Airlines in fall 1989.
or TWA :o

TWA was assimilated. American made the Borg look like amateurs with that takeover.
I wish we could've assimilated US Airways. Perhaps, after the bankruptcy has ended. 8-[

United tried a merger with US Air once - I believe the Feds blew that one out of the water.

Ex-TWA people are still grumbling about American's takeover years after it happened.

[Candy]

Ex-TWA people are still grumbling about American's takeover years after it happened. Don't I know. My aunt worked for TWA some 30+ years. She got the ax, because she had no usable skills. She is still kicking herself for not moving around to different positions. She tells me she wished she would have done what I do - transfer to different cities/states (best to be at WHQ), learn multiple skills/departments, build up that internal resume for job security. Oh, yeah, and to remain spicy so the boss remembers you when it's time to cut a new body. :wink:

[Argos]

Services may have worsened but safety has improved. Last year was the safest in history.

[teddyv]

Ex-TWA people are still grumbling about American's takeover years after it happened. Don't I know. My aunt worked for TWA some 30+ years. She got the ax, because she had no usable skills. She is still kicking herself for not moving around to different positions. She tells me she wished she would have done what I do - transfer to different cities/states (best to be at WHQ), learn multiple skills/departments, build up that internal resume for job security. Oh, yeah, and to remain spicy so the boss remembers you when it's time to cut a new body. :wink:

North of the border, after Canadian Airlines went bust and was taken over by Air Canada, a lot of employees on both sides were extremely bitter and remained loyal only to their (former) airline. I heard rumours of outright sabotage of service.

Air Canada never really recovered from that essentially forced merger and now suck incredibly. My boss actively avoids flying with them.

[Spacewriter]

Not if you worked for Braniff Airlines in fall 1989.
or TWA :o

TWA was assimilated. American made the Borg look like amateurs with that takeover.
I wish we could've assimilated US Airways. Perhaps, after the bankruptcy has ended. 8-[

If you did, I'd hope that somebody somewhere would teach the USScareways folks how to behave toward the public. Every time I've flown them (and I wont' do it anymore, even if they ARE a codeshare with UAL) I've been met with surly jerks from start to finish.

[Demigrog]

Not if you worked for Braniff Airlines in fall 1989.
or TWA :o

TWA was assimilated. American made the Borg look like amateurs with that takeover.
I wish we could've assimilated US Airways. Perhaps, after the bankruptcy has ended. 8-[

So long as US Airways doesn't pull out of Roanoke Regional airport; it is hard enough to get anywhere from here as it is.

[Candy]

So long as US Airways doesn't pull out of Roanoke Regional airport; it is hard enough to get anywhere from here as it is.
Have you ever flown on the Saab 340? 8)
[I can't get their website to work. I'll report that tonight when I get to work. This is from www.united.com's website.]
It's a UAX (United Express) flight from ROA-IAD.
Homepage: http://www.aircraft.saab.se/proinf/s340.htm
No. Of Engines: 2
Aircraft Type: Turbo Prop
Passenger Capacity (Max): 39
Passenger Capacity (Min): 20
Range (in Miles): 920
Cruising Speed (MPH): 300
Payload Capacity (in Lbs): 8,555
Maximum Speed:
Wingspan: 70
Length: 64
Height: 22
Headroom:
Dry Weight (in Lbs):
Takeoff Weight (in Lbs): 29,000
Body Type:
Cabin Type: pressurized

The Saab 340 entered service in 1984 after an intensive four-year development program. Since then, the 340 has been continually modified and refined in response to customer needs. The low-wing, twin-turboprop 340 was designed to service major airline hubs as well as operating on regional point-to-point routes. Today the Saab 340 is the world's most popular regional airliner in the 20 to 39 seat category.

Saab Aircraft has an inovative history in both the military and commercial aircraft industries. Today it is a major producer of civilian regional aircraft.
* Edit - plus, they spelled innovative wrong. :o

[Demigrog]

Have you ever flown on the Saab 340? 8)
[I can't get their website to work. I'll report that tonight when I get to work. This is from www.united.com's website.]
It's a UAX (United Express) flight from ROA-IAD.


Yes, I have; I like it marginally better than the Dash 8-200s that US Airways flies out of here. At least on the Saab 340, you have a 33% chance of getting an aisle seat with a window. :roll:

If I'm really really lucky and am flying in a busy time, I get a Bae Jetstream 41. Once on a holiday flight, we got an actual Canadair Regional Jet that holds 50 people! ROA just lowered landing fees a little; maybe that will help bring in bigger planes.

Candy, perhaps you can explan my current airline confusion; many flights from Greensboro to Orlando stop over in Washington DC. For some reason, catching a direct flight from DC to orlando costs more. :-?

[Nicolas]

Have you ever flown on the Saab 340? 8)
[I can't get their website to work. I'll report that tonight when I get to work. This is from www.united.com's website.]
It's a UAX (United Express) flight from ROA-IAD.


Yes, I have; I like it marginally better than the Dash 8-200s that US Airways flies out of here. At least on the Saab 340, you have a 33% chance of getting an aisle seat with a window. :roll:

If I'm really really lucky and am flying in a busy time, I get a Bae Jetstream 41. Once on a holiday flight, we got an actual Canadair Regional Jet that holds 50 people! ROA just lowered landing fees a little; maybe that will help bring in bigger planes.

Candy, perhaps you can explan my current airline confusion; many flights from Greensboro to Orlando stop over in Washington DC. For some reason, catching a direct flight from DC to orlando costs more. :-?

As far as I know, that is rather standard:
direct flights cost more than flights having one or more stops/plane switches.

The advantage of a direct flight is the ease and speed for the passenger. Extra stops can give the airline higher occupation rates or passenger streams that allow for bigger planes on the routes.

[Demigrog]

As far as I know, that is rather standard:
direct flights cost more than flights having one or more stops/plane switches.

The advantage of a direct flight is the ease and speed for the passenger. Extra stops can give the airline higher occupation rates or passenger streams that allow for bigger planes on the routes.

I can see that as a general trend; what I am somewhat annoyed at is that the exact same plane is used for the direct route from DC to orlando as the DC-Orlando leg of the Greensboro-Orlando route; logic would suggest that the DC-orlando direct flight should cost less... or at least the same. Either way the passenger is getting on at DC. Only thing I can think of is that it costs more to check in a passenger in DC than it does in Greensboro, but that doesn't work given that there are other much cheaper flights from DC. I need an emoticon for "scratching my head"...

Anyway, I'm just happy that I can get a round-trip ticket to Orlando for $97 from Greensboro. :)

Edit to add: Roanoke's cheapest flight to Orlando is $220 at the moment... Grrrr....

[Nicolas]

As far as I know, that is rather standard:
direct flights cost more than flights having one or more stops/plane switches.

The advantage of a direct flight is the ease and speed for the passenger. Extra stops can give the airline higher occupation rates or passenger streams that allow for bigger planes on the routes.

I can see that as a general trend; what I am somewhat annoyed at is that the exact same plane is used for the direct route from DC to orlando as the DC-Orlando leg of the Greensboro-Orlando route; logic would suggest that the DC-orlando direct flight should cost less... or at least the same. Either way the passenger is getting on at DC. Only thing I can think of is that it costs more to check in a passenger in DC than it does in Greensboro, but that doesn't work given that there are other much cheaper flights from DC. I need an emoticon for "scratching my head"...

Anyway, I'm just happy that I can get a round-trip ticket to Orlando for $97 from Greensboro. :)

More factors than what I said come into play of course. I don't know the exact reasons in that case; airline economics is not my strongest point :).

BTW you could use #-o for scratching your head, though it does not express exactly what you want (so where's the use of an emoticon then!)

[tmosher]

As far as I know, that is rather standard:
direct flights cost more than flights having one or more stops/plane switches.

The advantage of a direct flight is the ease and speed for the passenger. Extra stops can give the airline higher occupation rates or passenger streams that allow for bigger planes on the routes.

I can see that as a general trend; what I am somewhat annoyed at is that the exact same plane is used for the direct route from DC to orlando as the DC-Orlando leg of the Greensboro-Orlando route; logic would suggest that the DC-orlando direct flight should cost less... or at least the same. Either way the passenger is getting on at DC. Only thing I can think of is that it costs more to check in a passenger in DC than it does in Greensboro, but that doesn't work given that there are other much cheaper flights from DC. I need an emoticon for "scratching my head"...

Anyway, I'm just happy that I can get a round-trip ticket to Orlando for $97 from Greensboro. :)

More factors than what I said come into play of course. I don't know the exact reasons in that case; airline economics is not my strongest point :).

BTW you could use #-o for scratching your head, though it does not express exactly what you want (so where's the use of an emoticon then!)

Don't get me going on airline economics - it's a black art. I took aviation ecomonics as a required course for my aviation management degree (totally worthless degree but it is a Bachelor of Science degree and it looks good on a resume).

Generally, an airline can reap economies of scale by using a hubbed flight (i.e., run all the passengers into a hub then disperse them out to the various destinations). However, using a hub tends to be personnel wasteful as you need more ticket agents, ground handlers, etc to handle the flights because every hub is peaked (i.e., aircraft land and takeoff in waves).

I could go on for pages concerning this subject as it was the subject of one of my term papers at OSU-Tulsa.

[Charlie in Dayton]

...Flying has lost its 'specialness'. Taking a flight used to be an event...one of those special adventures in life. Now for a lot of people it's 'ho hum' ...can't wait to get home and sleep in my own bed.


A good example of that was the flight of Apollo 15 (or so...not quite sure). I knew the bloom was off the rose when on the return to Earth, a live press conference was held from the spacecraft...and they interrupted it for a commercial!!! :o #-o [-X

[Brady Yoon]

Study: Airline Service Worsened in 2004 (http://dailynews.att.net/cgi-bin/news?e=pub&dt=050404&cat=news&st=newsd898dpio0&src =ap)
Airlines generally arrived later, lost more luggage and caused more consumer complaints in 2004 than they did the year before, an annual study of aviation quality finds.

Only four of the 14 major airlines rated in both 2003 and 2004 improved, according to the report released Monday. They were AirTran, Atlantic Southeast, JetBlue and United.
I feel so proud! :DOnly one direction do go after you hit bottom.

You're kidding right?

[Candy]

Have you ever flown on the Saab 340? 8)
[I can't get their website to work. I'll report that tonight when I get to work. This is from www.united.com's website.]
It's a UAX (United Express) flight from ROA-IAD.


Yes, I have; I like it marginally better than the Dash 8-200s that US Airways flies out of here. At least on the Saab 340, you have a 33% chance of getting an aisle seat with a window. :roll:

If I'm really really lucky and am flying in a busy time, I get a Bae Jetstream 41. Once on a holiday flight, we got an actual Canadair Regional Jet that holds 50 people! ROA just lowered landing fees a little; maybe that will help bring in bigger planes.

Candy, perhaps you can explan my current airline confusion; many flights from Greensboro to Orlando stop over in Washington DC. For some reason, catching a direct flight from DC to orlando costs more. :-?
A manager said basically it's a marketing ploy on certain days/nights when IAD traffic is low to offer lower fares from smaller airports to connecting destinations. IAD wants to generate traffic. For United, IAD is one of our HUB's.

I get the feeling, it's to keep traffic flowing to the airports, small or large. If there's no market, then flights start cancelling, small airports dry up, reservation offices start closing, mechanics are no longer needed, etc... The whole economy suffers.

Makes you want to go and buy a ticket on United, doesn't it? 8-[