Beware travelers with bratty kids

On Wed, 24 Jan 2007 15:53:22 -0800, in
.com, Jay Honeck wrote:
Here's a potential solution, from the folks at Airbus:

http://gridskipper.com/travel/flight...ats-169456.php

This could help GA more than anything I've ever seen!

If it is efficient to put the people vertically in seats, it should also
be efficient to put the people horizontally in seats... Having a series of
bunks that you could lay down on and sleep during a 6 hour flight might
not be a bad idea... I had a 6 hour flight from Alaska to Houston where I
was stuck in the exit row with seats that would not recline... Making it
more fun was the fact that the flight left Alaska at midnight, so
reclining so that I could catch some sleep was definitely something that I
wanted to do... Being "forced" to lay horizontally for the 6 hour flight
would have rather welcome...

Grumman-581 writes:

Being "forced" to lay horizontally for the 6 hour flight
would have rather welcome...

Virgin Atlantic is doing this, isn't it?

--
Transpose mxsmanic and gmail to reach me by e-mail.

"Jay Honeck" wrote in
oups.com:

Here's a potential solution, from the folks at Airbus:

http://gridskipper.com/travel/flight...ats-169456.php

This could help GA more than anything I've ever seen!

If you click back to the NYT article, it said that the idea was abandoned by
Airbus in 1993...

First off, the mother called the Flight Attendants as stewardess. She
might as well had called them whores. Ok, maybe not that bad but it is
demeaning and the term steward/ess has been out of use for a couple of
decades. She should learn the right name.


Jay Honeck wrote:
Can't get your kid to behave on a plane? There's always Trailways...

or the luggage hold.

Hooray for AirTran!

agreed 150%.


Now if only they would stop serving the lard-butt behemoths that
oooooze across the armrests -- or at least make them buy two seats (or
a wider First Class seat) -- I *might* consider flying commercial
again.

Agreed even more although in economy plus section on UA only which you
either pay for or have frequent flier status. They are generally
business travelers. The ones of gross size (pun intended) generally get
their companies to pay for C or F. Further, being a United 1K (I did
140k miles last year on UA), UA usually keeps the seats next to you
empty unless the load factor demands it.

The last time I had to deal with that was when I flew WN SJC SNA. I was
thee last person to get on the plane. Middle seat. Last Row. Aisle
seat had a 500 lb sau. Seconds after passing through FL180, the seat
belt sign and I jumped up. I started to ask the flight attendant about
the woman and in mid sentence she interrupted me and said I should
complain. While getting off the plane, another passenger came up to me
and said "wow. I felt really bad for you. You have all my sympathy." I
went down to the customer service desk and they sounded like they were
waiting for me. I got the price of the one-way ticket plus $100 in
voucher form. Not bad and it keeps WN honest.

My worst flight ever was flying HKG YYZ (toronto) SCL (Santiago) on AC.
First time I ever had paid business class seats. Change of A/C from
a A346 to a A345 (or A345 to A344). I got downgraded. Migrant farm
worker with his bare feet sticking in the aisle way, on the tray tables,
over the head of the passenger in front of him. The kid screamed for 5
hours straight. They tried quieting the baby by hitting the monster.
The changed the kid on the tray table too. Worst yet, I got up to
stretch and came back the M****er F***er was sleeping in my seats with
his lice-ridden hair on my pillows (AC gave me the 4 middle seats in Y).
The 2nd short flight, only 10 or so hours, was on a 762 that made
the old Archers I fly look like they were new. I said to the pilot,
"let me guess, this is thee gimli glider." Do a websearch for "air
canada gimli 767." This is during the early to mid-80's AC 767 after
running out of fuel and dead sticking it into a closed air field.

unfortunately my company wont' let employees fly themselves unless you
are flying 2 particular tail numbers. I guess I have to get a type
rating for a Citation and transfer departments. ;-) I wish I could use
my million miles on UA for a type rating in a RJ.

Ok enough talk about passenger'ing. I did have a beautiful San
fRancisco Bay Tour last night. 1 hour of piloting a 1981 Archer over
what looks like a model city of San Francisco complete with twinkling
lights is so much more enjoyable than sitting in first on a UA jet. My
pax enjoyed it too although they complained about no peanuts. ;-)

Gerald Sylvester

Jay Honeck wrote:
Can't get your kid to behave on a plane? There's always Trailways...or the luggage hold.

Careful how you "cut & paste" -- I didn't write that.

Ok enough talk about passenger'ing. I did have a beautiful San
fRancisco Bay Tour last night. 1 hour of piloting a 1981 Archer over
what looks like a model city of San Francisco complete with twinkling
lights is so much more enjoyable than sitting in first on a UA jet. My
pax enjoyed it too although they complained about no peanuts. ;-)

Now *that* is flying!

:-)
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

In article . com,
Jay Honeck wrote:

Ok enough talk about passenger'ing. I did have a beautiful San
fRancisco Bay Tour last night. 1 hour of piloting a 1981 Archer over
what looks like a model city of San Francisco complete with twinkling
lights is so much more enjoyable than sitting in first on a UA jet. My
pax enjoyed it too although they complained about no peanuts. ;-)

Now *that* is flying!

You need to fly Atlas out here sometime!

The sad thing is that I've done the Bay Tour so many times, I don't even
bother taking pictures any more, even though the bridge and the
city look very different depending on the lighting and cloud/fog
conditions. Passengers are always amazed though as we pass over
downtown and SFO at 1500ft.

John
--
John Clear - http://www.clear-prop.org/

On Thu, 25 Jan 2007 00:13:16 -0800, "G. Sylvester"
wrote:

First off, the mother called the Flight Attendants as stewardess. She
might as well had called them whores. Ok, maybe not that bad but it is
demeaning and the term steward/ess has been out of use for a couple of
decades. She should learn the right name.

It is.

I've been flying since they had fans on the front. They will always be
stews and stewardesses, just Oshkosh will always be "Oshkosh and not
Airventure

Roger Halstead (K8RI & ARRL life member)
(N833R, S# CD-2 Worlds oldest Debonair)
www.rogerhalstead.com

Roger wrote:
On Thu, 25 Jan 2007 00:13:16 -0800, "G. Sylvester"
wrote:
First off, the mother called the Flight Attendants as stewardess. She
might as well had called them whores. Ok, maybe not that bad but it is
demeaning and the term steward/ess has been out of use for a couple of
decades. She should learn the right name.

It is.

I've been flying since they had fans on the front. They will always be
stews and stewardesses, just Oshkosh will always be "Oshkosh and not
Airventure

Roger - I have plenty of respect for the things you have to say but in
this case, the term is wrong. It is nonetheless common and somewhat
offensive. Kind of like calling an Asian person an Oriental. It's
wrong and offensive. In NY where I grew up, everyone called Asians as
Orientals. it wasn't until I moved to California I learned that it was
wrong. History won't make it right.

Gerald

In article ,
"G. Sylvester" wrote:

Roger wrote:
On Thu, 25 Jan 2007 00:13:16 -0800, "G. Sylvester"
wrote:
First off, the mother called the Flight Attendants as stewardess. She
might as well had called them whores. Ok, maybe not that bad but it is
demeaning and the term steward/ess has been out of use for a couple of
decades. She should learn the right name.

It is.

I've been flying since they had fans on the front. They will always be
stews and stewardesses, just Oshkosh will always be "Oshkosh and not
Airventure

Roger - I have plenty of respect for the things you have to say but in
this case, the term is wrong. It is nonetheless common and somewhat
offensive. Kind of like calling an Asian person an Oriental. It's
wrong and offensive. In NY where I grew up, everyone called Asians as
Orientals. it wasn't until I moved to California I learned that it was
wrong. History won't make it right.

What Gerald seems to be saying is... you need to learn political
correctness.
The problem is, you don't know which of their self-appointed "leaders"
to follow.
Remember, it's not polite to offend anyone, even if they deserve it.

G. Sylvester wrote:
Roger - I have plenty of respect for the things you have to say but in
this case, the term is wrong. It is nonetheless common and somewhat
offensive. Kind of like calling an Asian person an Oriental. It's
wrong and offensive. In NY where I grew up, everyone called Asians as
Orientals. it wasn't until I moved to California I learned that it was
wrong. History won't make it right.


WTH? My sister in law was a Japanese national (now US citizen) and I asked her
about this one time. She seemed a little confused at the notion that "Oriental"
was somehow offensive. Frankly, so am I. All it refers to is someone from the
Orient. We call people from Europe Europeans and nobody's ass gets chapped.



--
Mortimer Schnerd, RN
mschnerdatcarolina.rr.com