How Norwegian Air Upended Travel With Its Cheap Flights • Hacker News Board

Re: How Norwegian Air Upended Travel With Its Cheap Flights

#51

Post by davidf18 » Sun, Jun 25, 2017, 3:04 PM UTC

bronco21016 wrote: post #34

davidf18 wrote: post #16

"The U.S. Department of Transportation, besieged with opposition from domestic airlines, labor unions, and other interest groups, took three years to approve Norwegian’s transatlantic plan." This is the same government under Obama and Democrats that allowed for consolidation of United buying Continental and American buying US Air which resulted in less competition. The Democrats used to represent regular people inste…

At what expense of high paying, quality, American jobs? A huge cost advantage that NAI enjoys on many of their international flights is through a flag-of-convenience scheme. NAI is a Norwegian majority owned company but has established their base of operations for international flying in Ireland. Through this arrangement they are able to hire pilots and cabin crews under contracts and work rules of southeast Asia whe…

> "At what expense of high paying, quality, American jobs?"

When I fly to Israel with a layover in Istanbul to visit friends in Istanbul, I am using Turkish pilots, thus depriving Americans of jobs. They are lower cost than many European pilots. Are you saying I shouldn't be flying Turkish Air? I don't understand? Incidentally, the flights from NYC to Istanbul use very modern planes and are staffed with very friendly staff.

Direct flights to Israel on El Al use Israeli pilots whom I guessing don't get paid as much as their American counterparts and yet, highly trained as probably almost all of them were in the Israeli Air Force.

So, please explain your position.

I am concerned with safety and in fact part my work deals with safety in healthcare. Airlines landing in US airports should be following FAA regulations. It is important that the FAA regulate this.

I encourage US domestic carriers to change the way they operate so that they can match the Norwegian fares while retaining American jobs.

But to complain that Norwegian is offering fares that make Europe more accessible for people with fixed or limited income is just wrong.

Re: How Norwegian Air Upended Travel With Its Cheap Flights

#52

Post by zimzam » Sun, Jun 25, 2017, 3:10 PM UTC

davidf18 wrote: post #38

chinathrow wrote: post #4

I just leave those here in case you wonder how Norwegian works. They have brand new planes for efficiency on one hand but on the other, they screw their staff similar as to other budget airlines. https://www.quora.com/How-is-Norwegian-Air-so-cheap https://skift.com/2016/10/10/norwegian-air-accused-by-critic... "Norwegian’s modus operandi does raise interesting questions. Should a carrier established in one country be…

"Should a carrier established in one country be allowed to offer wages typical of another?" The chief concern is safety. America's airline industry especially with the consolidations of United buying Continental and American buying US Airways is dysfunctional. We have no equivalent of Ryan Air or EasyJet in the US and we should. US domestic carriers should strive to compete with Norwegian offering their prices and st…

We do have low-cost carriers like Spirit & Frontier airlines.

I know somebody who was in a long-distance Washington DC - Florida relationship and was able to get $20-$40 round-trip flights for weekend trips pretty regularly.

Re: How Norwegian Air Upended Travel With Its Cheap Flights

#53

Post by gambiting » Sun, Jun 25, 2017, 3:13 PM UTC

alkonaut wrote: post #28

Norwegian is at the better end of the low fare airlines. They don't use shady UI patterns (or ads!) on their website. They don't walk around the aisle selling lottery tickets. And they don't land on third tier airports with ridiculous transfer times to cities. Basically they work like a full service airline, but of course they only work from A to B and don't offer the fancy guarantees you need with more complicated b…

But then what do you do if only Ryanair flies remotely close to where you need to be? Every time I go home I could either fly ryanair and be home in about 3 hours, or fly with someone else + take the train, total journey time = 9-10 hours. Free market competition is great if there actually is any competition.

Re: How Norwegian Air Upended Travel With Its Cheap Flights

#54

Post by talldan » Sun, Jun 25, 2017, 3:20 PM UTC

coldcode wrote: post #35

I hate flying any cheap airline, at 2m tall I don't fit in typical sardine can seats at all. I always pay more to get a better seat, which I don't mind, but often cheap airlines don't even offer better seat pitch except on exit rows and unless you are lucky you can never count on getting one. Now that all airlines are getting into the cheap category, I fear eventually I can't fly at all.

I'm over 2m, and flew Norwegian last week. I just about fit into the seat, but it was very uncomfortable. I wouldn't want to fly for more than 2 hours at that kind of comfort level.

It is very frustrating just how much airlines fail to cater for tall passengers. They all have different rules for emergency exit seats, and the cost of upgrading can be quite high.

Re: How Norwegian Air Upended Travel With Its Cheap Flights

#55

Post by talldan » Sun, Jun 25, 2017, 3:26 PM UTC

untog wrote: post #20

When things go well with Norwegian it's a fantastic airline. But I've witnessed some absolutely awful experiences others have had - fights delayed 11 hours, some even more than that, leaving everyone stranded in the airport. Other times they've contracted out flights to a no-name airline that uses ancient planes with no in flight entertainment. I'm happy to take Norwegian when I'm travelling by myself, as I'm content…

I agree with this, at my work we fly regularly between London and Oslo, and some of the delays experienced have been incredible. On Friday I flew from Oslo to London, and the earlier flight was delayed for over 6 hours (they were still there at the gate when we took off). Our flight was an over an hour late and they had no food on board.

Colleagues have experienced cancelled flights and delays of over 12 hours a few times.

Despite that, there aren't many better alternatives. Ryanair are similarly unreliable and others are expensive.

Re: How Norwegian Air Upended Travel With Its Cheap Flights

#56

Post by jamesblonde » Sun, Jun 25, 2017, 3:29 PM UTC

aphextron wrote: post #6

For anyone travelling to Europe from the bay area, you can't beat Norwegian. They have nonstop flights from OAK to Stockholm and Oslo on brand new 787's for as cheap as <$300 each way. It's another $50 to anywhere in Europe from those two cities on the budget lines like Ryanair.

I fly OAK-ARN regularly. Biggest tip is being near the door when arriving at OAK. Security time is the quickest in the US if first out the door, and the slowest (2+ hrs) if last out the door. Of course, coming back in ARN, you're through in 5 mins. I can't understand why the US can't fix this with a few dollars - it's destroying your reputation.

Re: How Norwegian Air Upended Travel With Its Cheap Flights

#57

Post by Numberwang » Sun, Jun 25, 2017, 3:30 PM UTC

Theodores wrote: post #10

Numberwang wrote: post #2

I Love flying with Norwegian. Painful to say as a swede but they are my go-to low price airline.

I mistook a Swedish neighbour for being Norwegian, afterwards I felt stupid for this as clearly I had not been paying attention. (Her name begins with 'N' so that may be the cause of the 'senior moment'.) As an English person living in England I have no idea whether getting someone's country 'almost right' is a hurtful thing. Is the Norwegian vs Swedish thing real? If so, is it for the reason I give - not paying atte…

Not hurtful at all, just banter. I live in England and you got a similar thing going with Wales or Scotland. All in good fun.

Re: How Norwegian Air Upended Travel With Its Cheap Flights

#58

Post by Xophmeister » Sun, Jun 25, 2017, 3:38 PM UTC

gsnedders wrote: post #39

alkonaut wrote: post #28

Norwegian is at the better end of the low fare airlines. They don't use shady UI patterns (or ads!) on their website. They don't walk around the aisle selling lottery tickets. And they don't land on third tier airports with ridiculous transfer times to cities. Basically they work like a full service airline, but of course they only work from A to B and don't offer the fancy guarantees you need with more complicated b…

Note that some of their upcoming long haul stuff is to obscure airports: their new flights from Edinburgh are to "Providence/Boston T. F. Green Airport" which is an hour+ away from Boston. (Well, it's a totally reasonable airport for Providence, but marketing it as Boston is dubious!)

They fly direct to Logan and JFK from Gatwick. It probably doesn't make financial sense to connect "real" airports to relatively minor ones like Edinburgh.

Re: How Norwegian Air Upended Travel With Its Cheap Flights

#59

Post by _acme » Sun, Jun 25, 2017, 3:38 PM UTC

varjag wrote: post #13

adekok wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The utility of that depends on what your priorities are. Low-cost and longer flights, plus checking in again when you change airlines? Norwegian Air is good. If you want to get on a plane, go to sleep, and wake up at your destination, a extra few hundred dollars is worth it to some people.

How are they 'longer'? Fuel efficient cruise speed for an airliner is very much constant. All airlines try to stick to that, unless the flight is late and makes up to meet the landing slot.

Their flights have layovers, such as at Gatwick for the flight being discussed.

Re: How Norwegian Air Upended Travel With Its Cheap Flights

#60

Post by _acme » Sun, Jun 25, 2017, 3:41 PM UTC

davidf18 wrote: post #51

bronco21016 wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

At what expense of high paying, quality, American jobs? A huge cost advantage that NAI enjoys on many of their international flights is through a flag-of-convenience scheme. NAI is a Norwegian majority owned company but has established their base of operations for international flying in Ireland. Through this arrangement they are able to hire pilots and cabin crews under contracts and work rules of southeast Asia whe…

> "At what expense of high paying, quality, American jobs?" When I fly to Israel with a layover in Istanbul to visit friends in Istanbul, I am using Turkish pilots, thus depriving Americans of jobs. They are lower cost than many European pilots. Are you saying I shouldn't be flying Turkish Air? I don't understand? Incidentally, the flights from NYC to Istanbul use very modern planes and are staffed with very friendly…

How would you "encourage US domestic carriers to change the way they operate so that they can match the Norwegian fares while retaining American jobs." I think the point is that that is impossible.