What irritates you most while flying?

[Kiwi Flyer]

I've had a case where a through flight with stopover (and no crew change) on the second leg no one joined the cabin. As the previous leg was quite short most pax bored but a few (myself included) tried to get the FAs have the giggles - successfully. Oh the things we do for amusement.

 

[infoworks]

The crew is usually a reflection of their boss' attitude. I would have thought that enjoying passengers would make every trip better for everyone...but it rarely seems to be the way they think.

Mother's Club trans-Tasman is a good example of day-trip, do the minimum, forget the passenger mentality. I know this is generalising and it's not always that way, but when it is - aiyoh!

 

[observer]

flight irritations

I consider myself an ex heavy FF..eight flights weekly for 3 years, and reading the replies makes me even happier that I no longer fly for business, only pleasure.The biggest annoyance is people not considering others, be it the airlines not warning of delayed flights, the FA not helping find extra overhead space or other PAX taking on half their household to store overhead, the middle rowers insisting on spreading out their newspaper and taking both armrests, the hippy cutting his toenails during the flight ( yes, it happened), and those annoying little people who insist on reclining to the full.

 

[icarus]

Re the safety demonstration, I always recall the words of Shaun Micallef: "If travelling with a child, fit your own mask before assisting them. If travelling with more than one child, pick your favourite."

 

[thadocta]

I like to close my eyes and mouth the words of the safety briefing, particularly when the FA is at my row. I have the safety card ready for them, even before they go looking for one, and that tells them that I know the drill.

Still wonder about getting exit rows four hours before departure at the QP with an open bar though......

Dave

 

[Warks]

Safety demo

Do you always wonder how many people of a non-English speaking background handle the mysterious "sutterly(sic) all aircraft are different"? Surely there's a better word than 'subtly'.
I've been on flights (USA I think) where it has all been video and the FAs only point to the exits (if that). That was a whle back though.
I did go on a flight once where they neglected to do the demo - that was a domestic Air Zimbabwe flight!
I can understand why FAs get pssed off with no one paying attention but the fact is for the frequent flyer who has seen it hundreds of times when they start talking about how to put on a seatbelt then the brain switches off and doesn't come back on for a while.

 

[Yada Yada]

Re: Safety demo

Do you always wonder how many people of a non-English speaking background handle the mysterious "sutterly(sic) all aircraft are different"? Surely there's a better word than 'subtly'.

They should get Angela Catterns back in to spice it up a bit. Perhaps she could do a "voice from the vault" segment?

I've been on flights (USA I think) where it has all been video and the FAs only point to the exits (if that).

I took an Air NZ flight from SYD to LAX a few years ago and the bulk of the announcement was on the screen, and we were delayed taking off by 2 hours because they couldn't get the damn system to boot up and therefore couldn't take off!

 

[infoworks]

Some nice experienecs with the demo include the Southwestern Airlines Crew singing it one time but often including funny bits...everyone watches to se what they'll do, a crew memeber just speaking to me as I was the only pax (SQ and QF).

I tend to stop and observe the FA these days, regardless of how !!!sutlle!!! every aircraft is (I always have the same seat) because I know how frustrating it is when no one listens and if offers some respect for what they have to do.

 

[NM]

... a crew memeber just speaking to me as I was the only pax (SQ and QF).

According to the FA doing the demo for me as the sole pax in the F cabin of QF10 last week, they are no longer allowed to just speak to the solo traveller - they have to go through the whole shabang now. I think he said it was a new CASA requirement, so it might still happen on SQ.

 

[infoworks]

I saw that about CASA. It wasn't recently that they did that (just speak to me), unfortunately haven't had an empty plane to myself since SARS, and I am sure CASA needs to keep reregulating as part of being seen to be doing things...but when they could do that it was a nice experience! Thanks.

 

[cpl]

I hate it when people recline their seats when there is not enough room to do so. I agree with danielh that it is the airline's fault more than the passenger doing the reclining, but whoever's to blame, it wrecks a flight, particularly if you are trying to work.

I disagree. Poor seat pitch is not the airline's fault. It is the fault of paying passengers who are not willing to pay high enough fares for the airlines to be able to operate economically with fewer seats installed in the aircraft. As we all like to find the cheapest airfares, we are the ones forcing the airlines to install more seats into the aircraft.

Not quite. Look at Q and you see extremely poor seat pitch in economy and huge profits at the same time. 'Shareholder value' is the magic term. I don't see why someone's social behavior should change as they get on a plane. I do try to help if possible (within reason of course).

 

[NM]

Not quite. Look at Q and you see extremely poor seat pitch in economy and huge profits at the same time. 'Shareholder value' is the magic term. I don't see why someone's social behavior should change as they get on a plane. I do try to help if possible (within reason of course).

Huge profits?? Compared to what? Other airlines?? Compare Qantas profit as a portion of its market capitalisation with other listed businesses and you will quickly determine that even the most profitable airline is not a very good investment for shareholders. The raw dollar number may look big, but I can find a lot better places to invest my money right now.

Do you really think Qantas would remain viable if they reduced their capacity by, say 10%, in order to remove seats and provide more space between seats? Would you be willing to pay 10% more for your airfares to fly with an airline that offered more leg room? Would everyone else be willing to lay extra? Or do you just expect Qantas to reduce their revenue by 10%? Or should they invest in more aircraft to retain the same overall seat capacity with less seats on each aircraft?

American Airlines tried that theory (remember MRTC?). It worked for a while. But since the airfare wars of the last 4 years, they have not only been returning the previously removed seats back into their 767 and MD80 aircraft, but they have had to drop their fares to match the LCC's and that has left them in big financial strife.

In my opinion and experience, people flying short domestic sectors are more interested in finding the cheapest fare rather than the biggest seat pitch. I believe it is this demand that leads the airlines to provide the product they have today.

Now that is no excuse for not being courteous to your fellow passengers when traveling. Last week when traveling on a BA A320 aircraft (in Club Europe, where the seat pitch is woeful for what is claimed to be business class seating), when the cabin door closed and it was obvious there were a lot of spare seats, I moved to a seat where there was nobody seated behind me (and nobody in front) so I would not be reclining into somebody else. My allocated seat had someone in front and behind. Unfortately, not all flights have enough empty seats to permit such flexibility. Then again, if all flights were loaded that lightly, the airline would be deep financial trouble.

 

[cpl]

Would you be willing to pay 10% more for your airfares to fly with an airline that offered more leg room?

YES but I have done almost exclusively business travel (but rarely business class travel unfortunately) for the past xx_ years. But I also know a number of people NOT considering Q for international travel because of the poor seat pitch...

 

[swissbignose]

Re: Safety demo

I can understand why FAs get pssed off with no one paying attention but the fact is for the frequent flyer who has seen it hundreds of times when they start talking about how to put on a seatbelt then the brain switches off and doesn't come back on for a while.

It annoys me that so many flyers "switch off" and do not pay attention because they've happened to "hear" the safety demo several times in the past month. It's unrealistic to believe that once one has heard a speech, potentially several months/years ago, they are able to remember the exact details of the safety briefing in the event of an emergency.

Familiarity breeds comtempt. Contempt in an airline emergency could make the difference between a frequent flyer operating the emergency exit properly and people getting out...

Or not.

 

[straitman]

Re: Safety demo

I can understand why FAs get pssed off with no one paying attention but the fact is for the frequent flyer who has seen it hundreds of times when they start talking about how to put on a seatbelt then the brain switches off and doesn't come back on for a while.

It annoys me that so many flyers "switch off" and do not pay attention because they've happened to "hear" the safety demo several times in the past month. It's unrealistic to believe that once one has heard a speech, potentially several months/years ago, they are able to remember the exact details of the safety briefing in the event of an emergency.

Familiarity breeds comtempt. Contempt in an airline emergency could make the difference between a frequent flyer operating the emergency exit properly and people getting out...

Or not.

I agree entirely:!:

What would people think if the FA's and Pilots "switched off" when they did their recurrent training, some of which is as often as every 35 days :?:

 

[Warks]

I didn't say that I switch off - I just said that as soon as they start talking about something as mundane and basic as how to put on your seatbelt I can understand why minds would wander. Of course most FFs don't even give the FAs the courtesy of glancing in their direction as their heads are buried in the Herald or GQ.

Question: if airlines don't make money why are they in the game? (sorry that should be a separate topic)

 

[NM]

Question: if airlines don't make money why are they in the game? (sorry that should be a separate topic)

Because times have changed. The established airlines have too much capital tied up to be able to exit gracefully, as well as the employment and labour issues often driven by a unionised workforce.

How many new airlines have commence in the last 5 to 7 years (worldwide)? Quite a few, I suspect. How many of those a full service airlines? Very few, if any, except perhaps in major growth regions like China.

The current model for new start-up airlines is that of a Low Cost Carrier. Why? Because many travellers are very cost conscious and not willing to pay for some of things that were once considered standard inclusions in an airline product - such as food, FF programs, pillows, IFE, reserved seating, baggage interlining, decent seat pitch. Competition does this - reducing fares, service and profits; while increasing choice, availability and shareholder risk.

The airline that gets the mix right can be sustainable. Those that get it wrong learn a very expensive lesson. This is where we are seeing many long-term full service airlines reincarnating themselves in the LCC mould (eg AC), or moving into that market in some form (eg JQ).

Of course from a passenger point of view (which I am - I am not a shareholder or employee of any airline), we want better service and product innovation at the same time as lower fares. Its a bit like the old Better, Faster, Cheaper triangle - choose any two at the expense of the third.

So would I be willing to pay an extra 10-20% on my airfare in order to get better seat pitch? If my employer is paying the fare, then yes. I always try to minimise my company paid travel costs, but I could justify the cost for business related travel. In fact, I can often justify the 3 to 4 times cost for business class travel depending on the circumstances.

If I am paying the fare out of my own pocket, then it would depend on the situation - domestic flight, no; long haul international, probably. But I do have that option on some long-haul international routes, such as Air NZ or UA E+ to USA, and BA WT+ to SIN, BKK and London, albeit WT+ generally being more than 20% uplift on cheapest WT fare. But I would have to weigh up the value of investing in an airfare with greater comfort vs investing the same money in nicer accommodation, meals or activities at the destination, so there is no definite answer from me at this time.

 

[Warks]

Good points NM. It does ride on a knife edge whatever happens.

Remember the old saying? "How do you make a small fortune in the airline industry? Start out with a large fortune."

 

[infoworks]

I guess in summary, being smart about doing business is the key regardless of industry. Although why I can't get a toothpick in QF (including P where the FA gave me some of her floss to help out) remains a silly annoyance that suggests things can go too far!

 

[NM]

Although why I can't get a toothpick in QF ...

It must be a security measure :shock: . A wooden toothpick could be used as a leathal weapon ... or a combustable source in a fire. And think of the fuel savings by not loading toothpicks on every flight.

By the way, CX provide toothpicks in F with the standard flatware setting (ie without asking). Maybe QF believe their meat is more tender than on CX and hence no need for toothpicks :roll: .