Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

FAO: teevee- Customer Service at our Favorite Airline

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • LH-B744
    replied
    Not Really.

    Leave a comment:


  • TheRealAncientMarine
    replied
    Originally posted by Gabriel View Post
    Really?
    Really!
    Per

    Leave a comment:


  • Gabriel
    replied
    Originally posted by LH-B744 View Post
    I don't know either if you fully understand what I wrote in #50.
    Really?

    Leave a comment:


  • LH-B744
    replied
    Originally posted by TheRealAncientMarine View Post
    There are actually real people, who pay real money, to fly with American airlines?
    Who would have thunk?
    Personally I had my last flight with Northwest?? or some such NRT to MNL in 2000.
    Never been tempted since. I don't like jails.
    Per
    Oha. Should I be glad that you didn't replace AA with LH?

    There are actually real people, who pay real money, to fly with American airlines?
    The man is mentioned in the topic name.

    Probably he hasn't yet read what you wrote. As I know him with VERY honest answers. And I don't know either if you fully understand what I wrote in #50. United Airlines and my favorite airline are members of the same aviation alliance. So, theoretically also Republic Air, who uses UA flight numbers, founded 1998, with a headquarter in

    Indianapolis Indiana,

    belongs to the same airline alliance which in a friendly manner connects a LH-B744 with UA-B744. Theoretically.

    Star Alliance and all aircraft who wear that sign have been and are a sign for aviation quality, since 1997. I don't know if Republic Air still fulfils that standard.

    Back on topic: "Customer Service at our Favorite Airline". So, it is not AA? But which one is it?

    Let me guess. Not Con Air (a really bad joke, but you started it). How about Scandinavian Airlines?

    Leave a comment:


  • TheRealAncientMarine
    replied
    There are actually real people, who pay real money, to fly with American airlines?
    Who would have thunk?
    Personally I had my last flight with Northwest?? or some such NRT to MNL in 2000.
    Never been tempted since. I don't like jails.
    Per

    Leave a comment:


  • LH-B744
    replied
    One last entry for today in this topic, without that anybody responded.. Ok, there are airlines in Indiana, founded in 1998, which are indeed smaller than only the fleet of all
    LH-A321 taken together.

    I don't say that in Germany everything is perfect. The words "Behördenterror" and "Bürokratiemonster" indeed were invented in Germany!

    But if there once has been friendship (between airlines), that lasts longer. And it even works bidirectional. One example.

    Not always, the bigger airline makes the first step. Formerly wholly owned by the LH mother, I still like to call them friends:
    Condor Flugdienst likes to invite you to the Maldives

    The Keyword? Communication. Not only between old friends, like in this case.
    Last edited by LH-B744; 2017-04-13, 05:22. Reason: I think, in this case, the Flugdienst was the prototype. One DE pilot might correct me.

    Leave a comment:


  • LH-B744
    replied
    #48 is the view of a person who never after 9/11 dared to book a flight Europe - USA - USA . Those waiting lines are also known on the whole planet.

    But if I were a (business) passenger of that Republic Airline flight 3411, born and raised in Chicago, you can be sure that I'd found out where that mini jet was registrated.
    Indianapolis, IN.

    And that, for God's sake, has nothin to do with the mother company. Imho, a subsidiary is only a subsidiary as long as it is able to
    - communicate a lack of seats to the mother company
    AND/OR
    - provide so many daily flights with that mini jet, so that no bigger jet is needed.

    80 seats? I dont't think that my favourite airline has ever used my home airport with such a small jet!

    Probably that's the difference between the mother company...
    and a mini jet.

    PS: I've never taken into account that the airport of Louisville KY until today is almost the smallest jet airport beyond the pond that I've ever known. It indeed is only double as big as TNCM, which in my eyes is the smallest jet airport in or beyond the Atlantic Ocean.

    But that's not important. If an Embraer 170 is too small, then it is too small, regardless of the airport size.
    Keyword: Chapecoense!

    KSDF offers one 12,000 ft rwy. That's even enough for me, with MTOW! So, why on earth a mini jet, after Republican Air has perceived that the mini jet does not fulfil the task.

    Chapecoense. We don't have to understand that.
    Last edited by LH-B744; 2017-04-13, 03:53. Reason: Less knowledge about KY state, but I'm learning.

    Leave a comment:


  • LH-B744
    replied
    Originally posted by TeeVee View Post
    further investigation shows that untied had a later flight, aa had a later flight, and swa had a later flight (out of midway). whaddaya think the chances are that ALL 3 of these later flights were fully booked and that untied could not have put their crew on one of them?
    That's what I've discussed with ATL only a few seconds ago, in a different forum section. If I can speak for my home airport, and for the distance which Mr Lester Holt has mentioned, those 245 nautical miles, this indeed seems a topic of too small aircraft.

    And if I were able, I'd correct the topic name where ATL and I have just discussed this lack of seats.

    It is not an United Airlines problem. If you're lucky, you're flown by the subsidiary of a worldwide known airline. And when Holt first mentioned UA flight 3411, I thought, ok, also a Boeing 737-900 has only 179 seats. What would I do if that flight number on that day theoretically are demanded by 189 passengers?

    But that's completely off-topic, as I've learned only a few minutes ago. This was hopefully not a sub of a sub of a sub of a sub,
    but with in fact only 80 passenger seats?! This is an a/c with less than 50% of 179 seats:
    Embraer 170 incident at O'Hare

    In a 747, there are (at least) two seats for pilots in the cockpit, plus x seats for crew members in the cabin, plus 374 seats for passengers. I know that there are smaller jets, which don't necessarily provide crew member only seats in the cabin.
    So, the pax capacity in an Embraer 170 is not 80, but 80 minus pilots minus crew.

    I know that subsidiaries of a worldwide known airline only survive if they know how to operate an a/c type. I just try to imagine that were an Embraer which was flown with LH flight numbers.
    I don't think that with the permission of the LH CEO, such a small sub-sub jet would again be a problem for the LH headquarter...
    Last edited by LH-B744; 2017-04-13, 01:37. Reason: United Express 3411

    Leave a comment:


  • 3WE
    replied
    Originally posted by TeeVee View Post
    a decade old list of things that are irrelevant to what untied did. whatever newspaper reported this is guilty of the same thing rapists do when they claim that the rape victim was promiscuous...
    That said: there is a set of behaviors that we should probably bone up on when dealing with authorities...stuff that goes slightly beyond the hard facts, into psychology...that will generally help things go better.

    While being polite and respectful to law enforcement may be PART of it, it's not pure Mayberry either, and some comments like: "What am I being charged with?", "What lawful orders from the flight crew am I charged with refusing to obey?", "Am I being detained?" "In what way am I threatening the safety of the flight?"

    Methinks the 'commandment' that thou shalt obey the flight crew really reads more like, 'thou shalt obey lawful orders of the flight crew'...not sure that "You are ordered to deplane for a crew" is lawful

    ...and seen some good legal reviews regarding the 'trespassing on my plane' argument...doesn't hold up in court very well when they offer to fly you somewhere and you pay them.

    Also, United could in fact request that the law remove the man...simple procedure- go get a Warrant....which they....whoops....did not.

    and this...."further investigation shows that untied had a later flight, aa had a later flight, and swa had a later flight (out of midway)." Whoops.

    Leave a comment:


  • TeeVee
    replied
    a decade old list of things that are irrelevant to what untied did. whatever newspaper reported this is guilty of the same thing rapists do when they claim that the rape victim was promiscuous...

    Leave a comment:


  • Gabriel
    replied
    On the other hand, the pax (google translation from a newspaper in Spanish)...

    ... was charged in 2005 with 98 counts of serious crimes related to the prescription and illegal trafficking of painkillers. At that time, prosecutors in charge of the case alleged that Dao delivered fraudulent recipes for hidocodone ...

    ... was also convicted of six counts of fraud and deception and in 2005 he was sentenced to 5 years probation ...

    ... was convicted of giving prescriptions and checks to a patient in exchange for sex. According to reports from the medical board that dealt with the case, Dao denied having paid for sex, but acknowledged that he accepted sexual favors in exchange for reducing a client's debt in his favor ...

    Leave a comment:


  • TeeVee
    replied
    further investigation shows that untied had a later flight, aa had a later flight, and swa had a later flight (out of midway). whaddaya think the chances are that ALL 3 of these later flights were fully booked and that untied could not have put their crew on one of them?

    Leave a comment:


  • TeeVee
    replied
    in general, if there is a disclaimer like, "including but not limited to..." then no, the maxim would not apply. also, if they reserve the right to refuse passage to anyone for any reason, i still do not believe force should be used. of course, the a/c is private property and if you are trespassing, the police can remove you, by force if necessary.

    i think that in a situation as this, the police had an obligation to do a bit of an inquiry before hauling the guy out. a simple "what did he do or what basis do you have for tossing a paying pax off the plane after he has boarded." if i'm the cop and i'm given a contractual basis for the pax removal, i'm gonna ask to see the contract. if that had happened, untied woulda been shit out of luck since their own contract does not permit what they did.

    Leave a comment:


  • Gabriel
    replied
    Originally posted by TeeVee View Post
    "expressio unius est exclusio alterius."
    Even if the document said that the list are only examples, that it is not exhaustive or complete, that there may be other reasons not listed, and that the company reserves the right to deny service to any person for any or no reason? (like restaurants do)?

    (ps, I am not saying that that's what the airline's contract of carriage says, just asking in general about the espresso principle.

    Leave a comment:


  • TeeVee
    replied
    and now they are admitting the flight wasn't overbooked (duh!)

    "I continue to be disturbed by what happened on this flight, and I deeply apologize to the customer forcibly removed and to all the customers aboard, "No one should ever be mistreated this way." (oscar munoz)

    get out the checkbook oscar. but hey, it wouldn't surprise me if they settle quietly for what will be a very large amount of money. nor will i be surprised by any BS defense untied puts forth if they do wind up in court.

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X