Earlier quoted context omitted.
No, it's not legal. Edit: See lawyer quote from tiatia.
In a way, there are two questions at work here. The first question is whether you can have rent-a-cops throw a passenger off a plane after they have taken their seat. As I understand it, that is not legal. The second question is about over-booking more broadly. After all, though there's a legal distinction between a passenger a second before boarding and a second after, from a customer service standpoint they're stil…
United removes first-class passenger to make room for 'higher-priority' traveler
291–300 of 464 posts
Re: United removes first-class passenger to make room for 'higher-priority' traveler
#292Earlier quoted context omitted.
Well, I'm very sorry your employees missed out on visiting NYC. As a NYC resident and as someone who has been to Paris many times, Paris is very nice. But people that come to NYC have a much greater experience. In the past month I met both an Italian who came here for the first time and an Israeli and both of them were so happy to be here. I think your employer should schedule a trip to NYC for these 70 employees --…
A recent story in Europe was that travellers entering the US could be forced to reveal social network passwords. No idea if that is true or not but it was a headline.
Re: United removes first-class passenger to make room for 'higher-priority' traveler
#293Earlier quoted context omitted.
Anecdotally I've noticed that for like 5 years now my friends and family have a pretty severe aversion to flying anywhere for anything. From needing to show up hours before the flight, to the invasive screenings, the insane restrictions on what you can and cannot bring, the sentiment that if you check any baggage it's basically as good as gone, the ever increasing cost, the delays, and even things like the worry abou…
IF the VLJ (Very Light Jet) segment would ever fully blossom a major Uber-style disruption would be possible. The biggest thing that could prevent this welcomed development? The government. Specifically that the FAA is likely to clamp down on "Uber Air Taxi" market and declare them common carriers. Got to protect those monopolies.
The FAA has some really arcane rules, which is why aviation law is an actual speciality. Like, for instance, as a private pilot I can't fly a coworker with me to a conference and be reimbursed by my employer, but I can fly just myself and be reimbursed. There's a lot of subtleties to the FARs.
But if you're talking about private pilots flying people around like Uber drivers do, I can understand why they would clamp down on that.
Commercial and Air Transport pilots have much more rigorous standards than private pilots do, including stricter medical requirements and more thorough yearly medical exams. Private pilots will soon be able to get by with just an annual physical at a family doctor after their initial medical, whereas ATPs have to have a yearly EKG done, for instance. There's also more thorough training, higher hour requirements, etc.
Basically, people and equipment flying passengers are held to the highest standards (sometimes, maybe too high) which is one reason commercial aviation is so safe, and the FAA does not want private pilots who may not meet those standards running underground, fly-by-night airlines. All it takes is one crash wiping out a family in an "uber air taxi," and maybe a few people on the ground if it hits a house or something. In addition to being a tragedy the people involved and aviation in general, it would bring a ton of negative publicity to the relevant licensing agencies followed by mountains of lawsuits.
Without massive changes to the current aviation legal system, I can't see any way an "Uber air taxi" could work. Unlike a lot of cities which may not fully enforce a prohibition on services like Uber, the FAA will bring the wrath of God down on anyone they find willfully breaking the rules.
Re: United removes first-class passenger to make room for 'higher-priority' traveler
#294Re: United removes first-class passenger to make room for 'higher-priority' traveler
#295Earlier quoted context omitted.
Is it possible to make something like a jet electric? If someone knows of one I want to see a picture. Sounds like something from one of my dad's old sci-fi novels.
I've seen a few articles about electric aircraft on HN. In addition to the Boeing plane, there's Wright Electric ( https://weflywright.com/ ). Light electric trainer aircraft have already been built, such as the Pipistrel WATTsUP. Not a jumbo jet, but pictures like you asked for: http://www.pipistrel.si/news/wattsup-the-new-2seat-electric-...
I'm pretty ignorant when it comes to piloting, but here on HN I've read other stories on light aircraft and training, and how forgiving it is and how it handles plays a very important factor in choosing an airplane as a trainer, no idea how that one does.
Re: United removes first-class passenger to make room for 'higher-priority' traveler
#296Earlier quoted context omitted.
The other issue is to stop overbooking every single flight and allow some slack to handle these unexpected situations that inevitably come up.
Which means increased costs, especially since every other airline is also overbooking flights. Free-market is an asshole in this case: gotta overbook to compete.
Re: United removes first-class passenger to make room for 'higher-priority' traveler
#297Re: United removes first-class passenger to make room for 'higher-priority' traveler
#298Travelling in the US or with US airlines is not looking very good right now. Not just the United incident(s) but also TSA, Trump travel restrictions, flights constantly overbooked, massively late etc. I wonder if it will start impacting traveller and tourism numbers at some point. I think anyone who doesn't really need to be in the US and/or is planning travelling with kids is likely to have some second thoughts at t…
At Boston Logan airport me and some colleagues (+ the rest of the people on the plane waiting at customs) were once barked at: "The next person who forgot to fill out the back of his green form will be sent back to his home country!" No smiles, just a death stare while you put in your finger prints... It's a shame, it's such a beautiful country but I could do without.
Re: United removes first-class passenger to make room for 'higher-priority' traveler
#299Earlier quoted context omitted.
Eh I actually have developed this same attitude in the past few years. I'd rather drive NY to St Louis than fly because even though it's much shorter to fly, it's an uncomfortable reminder that the world is taken over by the lowest grade idiots and the highest grade capitalists. Probably nothing new, but somehow it feels different.
Gotta support the TSA make work program though, think of the poor, unemployed person who could instead be groping you in the name of security theater! But seriously, flying sucks, I've driven 20+hrs to avoid it in the past. Usually worth it since I get to plan out stops and see old friends on the way down the west coast.
I'd rather rent a car and book overnight hotels than buy a US-based airline ticket, to the extent that I have driven (with another driver) 50 hours on the road to avoid 12 hours in the air. And with the prices of airline tickets, even renting the largest passenger vehicle for a week plus two weekends and staying in mid-range hotels was less than half the money cost for four passengers. Also, we got to see Oklahoma in its "everything is on fire" season.
That is the extent to which air travel has fallen. I would rather drive across a state that is literally on fire than fly an airline in the US. I would rather piss at a New Mexico low-water-use rest stop than in an airliner's toilet. I would rather be surrounded by an entire herd of leather-clad hog-riding bikers in the middle of nowhere than put a laptop or decent camera in checked baggage. And if I ever get forcibly dragged out of my seat by some thug, I'd like the cops to be on my side.
Re: United removes first-class passenger to make room for 'higher-priority' traveler
#300At the moment I wish United gets beaten up well for forced passenger removal earlier this week. However, IMO this article just tries to pile onto the "United stinks" meme and is poorly written (more emotions than facts). Some things missing (for me): 1. When did this happen? The article makes it look like this just happened, but does not mention a date. I suspect the omission is on purpose (if so, boo!; if not, sorry…
"IMO the main point is valid -- the person was first to the seat and in general whoever gets into the seat first keeps it in case of a seat collision or a duplicate ticket." I would be extremely annoyed if I were in the same situation as this flyer. However, I'm not really sure what United is supposed to do here ... according to the article they had a mechanical problem with the original plane and the replacement pla…
It isn't like a city bus where you can elbow your way to the front of the line and grab a seat. There's an assigned seating process that's 100% controlled by the airline. If they screw it up, that's on their heads.
It is an entirely reasonable expectation that once you've been issued a boarding pass, board the plane, put your bag up, belt in, and get a drink that you are sitting in that seat. There's nothing childish or primitive about having that expectation.