Beware travelers with bratty kids

Judah wrote:
"Steve Foley" wrote in news:7LPth.7870$8P.7586
@trndny05:

"John Theune" wrote in message
news:5rPth.7114$qN1.5732@trndny02...

Just how long do you want to give them? According to the article the
flight was already delayed 15 minutes.
Did it say the 15 minute delay was caused by the unruly kid?

I got the impression ( I could be wrong - it happened once before) that
there had already been a delay boarding, and that the parents were given
virtually no time to try to settle the kid down.

I too got that impression, but it isn't clear. The passenger who was quoted
describing the situation was quoted as having seen it while he was
boarding. But the quote referring to the "walkie-talkie" person coming back
to kick them off was from the father, who probably did not track time
effectively while he was otherwise engaged in managing his crisis, so it
could have been 15 minutes before he was kicked off and felt like no time
at all.

I also agree that they should have returned the luggage. In fact, I'm
surprised that someone didn't make them do that under the "national
security" risk story. I have been on a plane that was delayed for a luggage
/ passenger check.

IMHO they should have given the parents the choice to get off the plane or
to force the child to sit seatbelted-in for taxi and takeoff - either in
her own seat or even on the father's lap at the window seat. The child
would most likely have calmed down after 5-10 minutes, and there would have
been no compromise to safety except to the parent and child themselves, who
volunteered to accept that risk by not getting off the plane.

It would have also helped to warn them of the choice during the final seat
checks. It would have escalated the urgency of the issue to the parents,
and force them to accept culpability for not being able to get the child
restrained in time. The end result may not have been any different, but the
parents would no longer be perceived as the victim - by themselves or
others.
The flight crew did not have the option to let them have the child ride
on a parent's lap. The FAR's are quite clear about age and need to be
in your seat with the seatbelt fastened.

yes, because it has interest payments, crew salaries, gate
space and a host of other costs.
"Peter R." wrote in message
...
| On 1/24/2007 5:41:08 PM, "Jim Macklin" wrote:
|
| Cost per hour for a USAir flight is [a guess] $3,000, so
| that kid and her parents cost the airline $750, more
than
| the cost of the ticket they had purchased and they got a
| full refund and an offer of another trip.
|
| Are you claiming that it costs the airline $3,000 per hour
(a guess) per
| aircraft while that aircraft is sitting at a gate with the
engines off and an
| APU connected?
|
|
| --
| Peter

What set-back?



"Peter R." wrote in message
...
| On 1/24/2007 5:42:25 PM, "Jim Macklin" wrote:
|
| I use my real name, and just how much do you make in a
week?
|
| LOL. Now that is balsy of you. If I answer, you will say I
am lying and
| others will think I have no class. If I don't answer, I
look like I am hiding
| the fact that I flip burgers at McDonalds. A no-win
situation.
|
| Let your imagination derive whatever figure you want, Jim;
I'll risk the
| negative connotation. And by the way, I will still read
and learn something
| from your GA-specific posts despite this minor setback.
|
|
| --
| Peter

Don't forget the crew has a working day time limit and if
they exceed that time OR WILL before the day is done, they
need an extra crew change. Violations of the duty time
limits cost start at $25,000 per crew member [pilot,co-pilot
and cabin attendants].

Every minute is costly, whether the plane is at cruise or
parked with the crew waiting.



"Grumman-581" wrote
in message
news | On Wed, 24 Jan 2007 17:14:33 -0600, in
| , Mike
Schumann wrote:
| I suspect that cost is while the airplane is in flight.
Cost on the
| ground would be significantly less.
|
| Well, probably depends upon the aircraft... Bigger engines
burn more fuel
| even on the ground... For example, the GE CF34-3B1 used on
the CRJ-200
| burns around 400 lbs per hour per engine at idle... With 2
engines, that's
| 800 lbs per hour... Perhaps add some more for the APU,
perhaps another
| 150 lbs per hour... That brings it up to 950 lbs per
hour... At 6.7 lbs
| per gallon, that's about 141.8 gallons per hour... For a
15 minute delay,
| that's about 35.4 gallons... According to AirNav, the FBOs
at MCO are
| charging at least $5.59 per gallon for Jet-A... Perhaps
the airlines get a
| discount, so the price is a bit cheaper... Would $5 per
gallon be a good
| figure? If so, that 15 minutes on the ground costs them
$177... Now,
| factor in possibly having to run at a higher speed in
order to make their
| scheduled arrival time or how being late is going to cause
other aircraft
| for connecting flights to perhaps sit at the gate idling
and I can
| definitely see where kicking the screaming brat off the
plane is best
| thing they could do... Well, either that or shipping the
brat as cargo...

Peter R. wrote:
On 1/24/2007 3:35:08 PM, "Mortimer Schnerd, RN" wrote:

As if I gave a ****.

Yes, the world needs more people who just don't give a ****.


Well, if I did, I'd give it to you.



--
Mortimer Schnerd, RN
mschnerdatcarolina.rr.com

In article ,
john smith wrote:

Kingfish wrote:
Can't get your kid to behave on a plane? There's always Trailways...
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/16773655/?GT1=8921

AirTran did everyone a favor...
- they removed the child and parents from the plane, giving the parents
time to get the child settled down
- in removing the child and parents from the plane, the aircraft was
able to procede on schedule

Everyones problems were solved. While the parents may not have been
happy, they received sufficient time to get the child under control
before the next one.

This is just another example of the "feel good" parenting that
psychologists were spouting in the 90's. In the real world, it doesn't
work. This was the first child for these parents, hopefully they have
learned a hard lesson and will not make the same mistake with the next one.


Sort of makes you want to support retroactive abortion?

On Jan 25, 11:49 am, Mxsmanic wrote:
Gig 601XL Builder writes:
Because they assume the male may be someone like you. You know, creepy.
Why do they make this assumption?

I wonder

John Theune wrote in
news:3cVth.7155$qN1.892@trndny02:

The flight crew did not have the option to let them have the child ride
on a parent's lap. The FAR's are quite clear about age and need to be
in your seat with the seatbelt fastened.

It's often amazing how large the 2 year olds are these days.

I think AirTran did the correct thing..
they got a noisy kid off a plane.. refunded tickets and got the family home
the next day..
1 ****ed off family..
112 happy travelers..
families do not travel much..
business people travel a lot..
who would you rather keep happy..

BT

"Kingfish" wrote in message
ups.com...



http://www.telegram.com/apps/pbcs.dl...0121/COLUMN01/...

After reading the second account (with the appropriate spin) it does
seem AirTran was a bit heavy-handed here. I think they did the right
thing by refunding the tickets and offering the free passes. I know if
I were stuck sitting behind that kid I'd go out of my tree after too
long

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