Results 1 to 8 of 8

Thread: Interesting Story about Passenger Perspectives on Safety

  1. #1
    Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Posts
    111

    Default Interesting Story about Passenger Perspectives on Safety


  2. #2
    Senior Member Evan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Posts
    5,323

    Default

    Maybe, instead of stonewalling them with vague 'computer problems' evasion, they could just explain exactly what happened.

    Apparently, two things occurred which were almost certainly unrelated. Not the luckiest flight of the day.

    I'm wild guessing the crew made an FMGC entry error which was revealed during the take-off roll, maybe as a performance problem, maybe an inadequate power setting, 80 kts coming too far down the runway, or something like that. Whatever the case, why don't they just tell them?

    Also, 80kts is considered low speed regime for the A320, entering high speed at 100kts.

  3. #3
    Super Moderator brianw999's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Tunbridge Wells, Kent. UK.
    Posts
    11,341

    Default

    Offered a $500 "credit against future travel" ???

    Most peoples reaction would be "Sorry Air Canada, I want cash. What makes you think I would want to fly with you again".

    As far as I am concerned whether I use them again or not, compensation to me means cash. Vouchers don't really cost the company offering them anywhere near their face value.
    Last edited by brianw999; 06-16-2017 at 10:46 AM.
    If it 'ain't broken........ Don't try to mend it !


  4. #4
    Senior Member Evan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Posts
    5,323

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by brianw999 View Post
    Offered a $500 "credit against future travel" ???

    Most peoples reaction would be "Sorry Air Canada, I want cash. What makes you think I would want to fly with you again".

    As far as I am concerned whether I use them again or not, compensation to me means cash. Vouchers don't really cost the company offering them anywhere near their face value.
    Compensation for what? As far as I can tell, the crew acted appropriately in both instances and protected the safety of the passengers. Beyond that, flying carries inherent risks. A $500 voucher is generous.

  5. #5
    Senior Member Evan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Posts
    5,323

    Default

    On the other hand, I wonder if high temps in the main gear bay might cause a malfunction with the fuel transfer system. If they did not allow for adequate cool-down after the reject (30 minutes) before the second roll, and this caused the in-flight problem, then you could have a case against them.

  6. #6
    Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    MA, USA
    Posts
    678

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Evan View Post
    If they did not allow for adequate cool-down after the reject (30 minutes) before the second roll, and this caused the in-flight problem, then you could have a case against them.
    Barely!

    If those pax think an RTO is a horrible awful experience, they should try being on a flight where the takeoff is not rejected and instead slams into a building off the end of the runway.
    Be alert! America needs more lerts.

    Eric Law

  7. #7
    Senior Member 3WE's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Posts
    3,964

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Evan View Post
    Compensation for what? As far as I can tell, the crew acted appropriately in both instances and protected the safety of the passengers. Beyond that, flying carries inherent risks. A $500 voucher is generous.
    To the best of my recollection: I will testify that:

    -Right main shimmy damper failure [without runway excursion and without air conditioning] in some instances (ISIs) will get you $100 voucher
    -Canceling your 7:00 PM flight at 1:30 AM with no open flights for 36 hours ISIs will get you a $50 gift card
    -4 hour delay ISIs gets you a $100 voucher

    I think $500 for slamming on the brakes and 20 seconds of being slammed against your belt and wondering if you'll go off the end in a big fire ball (hopefully at a speed below V-3BS).

    Footnote: I did redeem the gift voucher...11 more months on the 4-hour deal...The right main shimmy damper voucher expired.
    Les règles de l'aviation de base découragent de longues périodes de dur tirer vers le haut.

  8. #8
    Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Posts
    111

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by brianw999 View Post
    Offered a $500 "credit against future travel" ???

    Most peoples reaction would be "Sorry Air Canada, I want cash. What makes you think I would want to fly with you again".

    As far as I am concerned whether I use them again or not, compensation to me means cash. Vouchers don't really cost the company offering them anywhere near their face value.
    Pre-9/11 I used to fly every week out from Toronto to US destinations. Air Canada has been a monopoly here since the late 90's when they bought their largest competitor. I used to go out of my way to fly AA to spite them but that inevitably involved a bunch of non-direct flights because of monopolistic "airport" restrictions. I am the only one among my colleagues who did this.

    As for a $500 voucher I don't think it's too bad. I have received both cash and vouchers and depending on the circumstance I think they are both appropriate. AA gave some generous ones for overbooked flights which we took full advantage of (again opting for a non-direct "free" flight with a huge airport tax) and Air France dished out a generous amount of hard cash ($400 each) when they overbooked a flight forcing us to lose a day of our vacation. We spent the day shopping.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •