|
|
|
#41
26th May 2009, 10:51 PM
|
|||
|
|||
Quote:
Why are airlines so affraid to show their faces and tell us what's going on? When this sort of thing happens, if they have a good reason for it why don't they tell us? These things do affect us, the traveling public, who's money the airlines want, so yes we do have a right to know. There are alot of well educated level headded people out there who if something is explained to them politely and propperly, will accept the situation and move on. All we ever hear are the reports from emotional people from the flight who get interviewed at the gate before the've had time themselves to process whatever's happened. Why don't the airlines tell their passengers what's happening to them? Why aren't the airlines straight in front of the cameras before a flight attendants phart becomes a front page explosion? The airlines, all of them, are causing this media whitewash problem, by only ever treating the public with utter contempt, hiding behind opperational issues, and never explaining even the things that can be easily understood by anyone. It only makes life miserable for the airline's staff as well, because as has been stated before, they are usually fed the same BS as us, but we expect them to know. Senior managment obvously needs a big culture shock and cleanout. Untill then, media reports like this (piece of tripe) will be the only "truth" we can rely on. |
|
#42
26th May 2009, 11:30 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
I think what a lot of you aren't getting, and as Owen has tried to point out, aircraft of this size in particular, have a MAXIMUM LANDING WEIGHT. I have operated aircraft before, where by the aircraft is well under the aircraft's Maximum Take Off Weight, however it is at the maximum weight you can achieve, and account for fuel burn to reach the Maximum Landing Weight upon reaching your destination.
No good taking off from Darwin, with all the fuel, passengers, freight, bags, and then arriving over Sydney with an excess of about 10 ton of fuel because the weather which you are legally required to plan for, didn't eventuate. Marty, are you in load control? Are you a pilot? What is it you do exactly? Just interested. Mick |
|
#43
27th May 2009, 01:21 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Quote:
The average Joe Public isn't going to read an article going into the intricacies for the reasons for their decisions nor are the media going to write it up in their newspapers (with the only notable exception possibly being Steve Creedy of The Australian in the weekly "Aviation" section of Friday's The Australian) - it's not going to sell... Such mundane articles such as the OP really do make for a slow news day...  I also wouldn't think the airlines are afraid to show their faces. What is it going to solve? IMO of the situation a plane load of bags may have been offloaded a flight and a plane load of freight may have stayed on the flight. Big freakin' whoop, isn't that what travel insurance is designed for? Have another cup of get over it and move on... |
|
#44
27th May 2009, 03:28 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Quote:
Quote:
|
|
#46
27th May 2009, 03:56 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Which policy? I want one. All I have found in the past is with delayed bags the carrier will give you an amenities kit and maybe a T shirt and the insurance company is not interested unless the bags have been lost for a while.
I have had my bags lost/delayed in some weird and wonderful locations from Vientianne to Brest, and London to Sydney. The only time I have ever been able to get anything was when my bags went to London instead of Vientianne flying with Thai airways. Thai was kind enough to pay the cost of my emergency clothes. |
|
#47
27th May 2009, 07:48 AM
|
||||
|
||||
|
Quote:
|
|
#48
27th May 2009, 07:58 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Quote:
|
|
#50
27th May 2009, 10:22 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Quote:
|
 |
|
|
Linear Mode
