Excel Airways, sort it out.

[mhk77]

Had the recent misfortune of flying to and from Greece with this shower recently from Manchester.

Seats were ridiculous. I'm 6'1 and had to stretch into the aisle so that my mate next to me (also 6'1) could stretch into the space in front of me. My other friend who is 6'4 actually couldn't fit into his seat and had to move half way down the plane to find 2 free seats so he could sit comfortably.

Cabin crew. Well, where do I start? Obviously didn't want to be there. Miserable, surly faced. Not a smile in sight. When my friend enquired about paying for an upgrade for the return flight, no help at all and no sympathy whatsoever. Had the misfortune of having one of the hosties on the way out to Greece, on the flight back. She was rude and appeared to have no sort of people skills whatsoever. Had a go at my wife because she hadnt put her 'bag' in the overhead locker, until my wife pointed out it was actually her cardigan. No apology whatsoever, just a grunt.

It was a 767 to Chania, so I feel incredibly sorry for the poor sods who have to sit on that thing to and from the Caribbean for 7+ hours. Quite literally the worst airline with the worst crew I have ever flown on. Needless to say will not be choosing to fly them again in the hurry.

[TSR2]

I am surprised at your comments regarding the attitude of Excel Airways Cabin Crew as this is far from my experiences with this airline. Having taken 4 return trips with XLA over the past 18 months or so, without exception the crews have been polite, friendly and efficient.

Regarding your comments on aircraft comfort, I sympathise with your situation as the B767 in 2-4-2 charter configuration is an extremely uncomfortable aircraft. This however, is by no means exclusive to Excel Airways.

Prior to booking a flight with any airline, I always check the aircraft type and give B767 in 2-4-2 configuration a miss.

[SXB]

The space limitations on such airlines are well documented so I'm not sure that can be blamed on the Excel.

Rude and surly cabin crew are another matter and don't have to be tolerated, on the (very) few occasions where I've experienced such behaviour I've either complained to the Cabin Services Director or, if that didn't work, to the captain of the Aircraft once landed. When I'm spending either my money or my company's money have zero tolerence for sub-standard service, they get one warning and if they don't fix it then they are finished with receiving my money, this applies to airlines, restaurants, shops, service companies, sub-contractors at work. There is plenty of competition out there just waiting for your business....

[TightSlot]

Know the feeling bushbolox, know it well http://i25.photobucket.com/albums/c57/TightSlot/Taz.gif - also know that some things are better left unsaid!


Good luck in your upcoming ordeal by flame!

:E

[mhk77]

I feel a response to bushbolox (fairly apt name by the way) coming on........


1. Discomfort I can accept on a flight. Flew back from America recently on Virgin and spent most of the night walking around the cabin due to the uncomfortableness of the seat. I could, however, fit in the seat. When someone actually cannot physically fit in a seat, then this goes beyond the realms of discomfort and starts breaching safety.

2. At what point did I a) talk about the facilities at the arrival airport (which were actually pretty good), and b) try and blame Excel for the standard of the arrival airport?

3. We actually paid for the flights separately from the villa we were staying in. ie it wasn't a '500 quid for a round trip to larnaca with one week hotac included and moan' type trip. Far from it. I don't think it's unreasonable to expect a seat you can fit in when you're paying £300 for it. And I challenge you to find anyone who would be prepared to put up with that level of comfort, whether payed for separately or as part of an all-inclusive trip.

4. With reference to your quote 'you are a big propforward too tight to buy a club ticket on you holidays.........', you appear to be contradicting yourself. On the one hand you excuse Excel because this is what one should expect when travelling on a 'charter not BA'. And yet you think I'm too tight to pay for a club ticket. I had no idea that there was a club class on Excel. Or Thompson. Or Monarch. Or First Choice. Or Jet2. Or Easyjet. Or Ryanair. Oh wait, there isn't. Oh sure there's 'Premium Economy'. Which provide slightly more legroom than economy on BA, Air France, Lufthansa etc, but if all those seats are sold (as they were as we did actually enquire about them) then we have no choice, do we?

5. If you're paying 'a grand for a weekend in prague, or amsterdam', then your getting seriously short changed. If you're in the industry, as I am, then you should know where to get the good deals. Hell, even if you're not in the industry, then you would be getting ripped off at that sort of price!

Before you start shooting from the hip, I would suggest you get your facts straight. You should never assume that something is so. You end up looking very stupid. As you have done.

[SXB]

Mhk77, I think bushbolox's post was meant to be a little ironic but there is some fact in what he says

1, If you're 6ft 1' and have been for a while then you should research what you're going to get, especially on a charter.

2, I think Bushbolox is referring to the impression that charter passengers tend to complain about everything (there is some truth in this as is illustrated in your post)

3, Refer to 1

4, Again, do your research. If premium economy was full (the fact that you knew it was full indicates you may already have known you might have a problem with the normal seat) you could then have made a choice as to either go by scheduled BA or not at all.

5, Not so. Try flying BA to Amsterdam tomorrow evening, stay 4 nights in the Hilton, eating out each night. You aint gonna see any change from a grand.....

To conclude, if you fly with such airlines you cannot expect to be accommodated in the same way as if you're travelling with a legacy carrier, everybody knows that. The reason they are cheap (yes, £300 is cheap for a 3 hour flight) is because they carry more passengers, they pay their cabin crew FA, you pay for your drinks and they try to flog you **** duty free products. As I said before if you don't like it then put your hand in your pocket and pay for a seat on a proper airline....

[mhk77]

SXB,

At 6'1 (which by the way is not exactly a height out of the ordinary these days), I was merely uncomfortable. My friend at 6'4 couldn't fit in the seat. He actually couldn't fit in the seat. Not width ways I hasten to add, but he couldn't get his legs behind the seat in front of him. Again I make the point, whether it's a charter flight or not, this is not safe and is therefore not acceptable.

Yes we looked into premium economy, because in this day and age economy across the board is pretty tight for space, not just on the so-called charters.

And please tell me when BA launched flights to chania. Because believe me, had we known that they did, we would have opted for them.

[mhk77]

bushbolox.

Once again shooting from the hip, not engaging brain before you type. You seem to be missing the point. Again. :ugh: :ugh: :ugh:

[Wipeout]

I always find it strange when people buy a seat on a charter airline and complain about the legroom AND price when a scheduled carrier would cost more. I have friends who don't work in the airline industry and whenever I try and explain any gripes (crew hours, atc issues, whether a plane actually works) it always falls on deaf ears.
At the end of the day, with regard to legroom, carriers are finding increasingly difficult to maintain profitability (increasing fuel prices, insurance premiums, general increase of operating costs) and taking 3 or 4 rows of seats out to give people an extra inch-or-two of legroom for four hours on a day would be stupid without increasing the costs dramatically to cover the loss of revenue from the removed seats. At which point people start whinging about the price of air-travel and blah, blah, blah.
Of course there are always going to be genuine complaints, such as the rude cabin-crew mentioned, or not being informed of an aircraft delay etc, but in terms of legroom/prices, its basic economics that any successful business have to abide by, so either put up with the cramped conditions for a few hours, pay an extra £100-£200 for a scheduled carrier or sail to the destination. :bored:

[TSR2]

Fully agree with your comments.

However there is another potential solution.

Do as Monarch Scheduled have done, increase the legroom of the first 4 rows of seats by 6" and charge a modest premium. The choice is then 'cough up' or 'shut up'.

[apaddyinuk]

MHK, Sorry to say it but bushbolox is simply saying what the rest of us are thinking so perhaps you should take a step back and listen to what he is saying in his colourful way.
6ft4 in ANY economy seat will be a crunch even on BA. The cheaper you pay for the ticket the less room you are likely to have. Thats pretty much common knowledge. There may or may not be a safety/moral question in there but hey...should people be allowed to have abortions??? Slightly different subject but still the same head banging type of topic!!!!
Now BA dont fly to Chania (never heard of the place myself) but you could have looked at other alternatives such as via Athens or into another airport where you could catch a bus/ferry or whatever. But you paid for Excel because it offered the "convenience" of a direct flight. So there you go, thats what you really paid for...not a seat with 36" seat pitch.
As for the rude crew...shame on them...I hope you have names!

[PPRuNeUser0172]

mhk 77

what do you want an apology???

Do you really think Excel give a flying f*ck

People will always fly charter as there will always be pikeys to buy package holidays, two things in life are certain, nurses and..................

get over it mate, if you pay peanuts you will get monkey's.

It's like watching "airline" where some business man turns up 30mins after check in closes and expects that he will get on, then starts to threaten that he will never fly pikey airlines again. Get a grip, if you want leg room and hosties who smile, then pay for club class otherwise shut up and stop pretending that airlines actually care.

After all, you probably paid a fare which wouldn't even get you half way there in your car let alone back again, so what do you expect?

[Bangkokeasy]

I love a lively thread!

I have sympathy with MHK77's viewpoint, if somewhat encrusted in rhetoric, which has brought out some strong reactions.

I recall some time back, discusssion about locos and comparing the service with paying, say, 10p for a mouldy cake, rather than a pound for a fresh one. My opinion, for what it is worth, is that there has always been a concept, at least in the British retail industry, that anything offered for sale, should be of "merchantable quality", or not be sold at all. It then follows that it is simply a matter of economics how much, or little the seller is able, or willing, to provide that product.

I would venture to suggest that the attitude of cabin crew falls well inside the "mouldy cake" category and if true, is a case for disciplinary action. As for the seat space, personally I agree that the space offered by many locos and charter airlines is insufficient to accomodate what is now a reasonably sized human. However, as to how to change that, if legislation is not an option for now, then the only thing to do is what MHK77 has alrady determined to do, i.e. not fly with them. :D

[mhk77]

Dirty Sanchez,

An apology? You must be joking. Wouldn't want one, wouldn't expect one.


I agree 'if you pay peanuts you get monkeys'. Yes it was uncomfortable, but I can live with that. See my first point in response to bushbolox about Virgin.

What the majority of you seem to be missing is the point about my friend not being able to fit in his seat due to his height Whether you lot like it or not, this is a safety issue, which the cabin crew on board seemed unwilling to address. I make no apologies whatsoever for starting this thread, or for writing what I have written.

Obviously this is an 'agree to disagree' situation.

[10secondsurvey]

I fully agree with the comments of mkh77, and cannot for the life of me understand the vitriol being directed against him. He has made a very valid point in a very reasoned and well constructed way, which is what we need on this forum. What we don't need is people trying to 'shout' him down, and thereby deliberately trying to stifle a full discussion.

It is clear from some of the vitriolic posters criticising him, that there are some seriously vested interests here.

What I cannot understand is this; some of the posters have effectively said, 'fly with excel airways and it will be crap' What a bizarre industry? No desire to produce a good quality product or service.

This poster had a legitimate point to make, it is truly ridiculous that the seat pitch is so low that someone of 6'4" (which actually isn't mega tall, that would be 6'7"-8" or more) cannot actually physically fit in the seat. The poster is quite correct to state that this endangers safety both for the tall passenger and those around him.

As regards this notion of 'doing your research', not everyone works in the travel industry, and I have said this before, your average punter books a flight, and assumes (why shouldn't they?) that there will be adequate provision for them to sit on the plane, people like excel airways don't exactly advertise that anyone over 5'8" won't fit in their seats.

The poster raised a legitimate point, and yes it does affect safety. In my opinion the person concerned really should raise hell directly with excel, as this continuous process of removing space between seat rows is getting ridiculous.

It would be good if people here could discuss the points raised, rather than criticising the poster.

[Harrier46]

mhk77 ..... You got a seat? Luxury, I travelled to work by bus yesterday and stood all the way!
But seriously it has always been this way since holiday charter flights began. I am 6 foot one myself and it never occurs to me to complain. For me the flight is to get me from A to B, as cheaply as possible, nothing more nothing less. If I save a few hundred quid for the priviledge of having my knees on my chest no problem. More money for beer! Of course if the company is paying then...........! :E

[TightSlot]

Would it help the thread if some slightly more precise numbers could be discussed, since this exercise would have to be repeated by the airlines themselves if the removal of seats were mandated?

For example, what constitutes an average size person? At various points in the thread, 6'1" and 6'4" have been described as both normal and tall. Other people on other threads have mentioned that it is the length of various leg bones that matter more than overall body height.

Once established, the next question is about what should then become the minimum seat pitch (presently 28"). 29"? 30"? 32"? or more? Should this become the minimum seat pitch throughout the cabin, or only in certain areas. Should those seats be sold as a commercial entity, or be occupied by 'tall' passengers only, without surcharge. Should 'tall' passengers have the right to one of these seats, even if they have all been allocated.

I'm not being cute by asking these questions. People often know what they feel is not wanted, but sometimes aren't certain what they actually want instead? The questions asked above (and others) need to be answered in order for a change in legislation. It seems reasonable to ask those driving for change what is actually required?

BTW - as one who has to deal with endless face-to-face complaints on the subject (without being able to ask the questions I just have), nobody would be more thrilled than I were the minimum seat pitch legislation to be amended.

[Cyrano]

Once established, the next question is about what should then become the minimum seat pitch (presently 28").

Here (http://www.caa.co.uk/default.aspx?categoryid=3&pagetype=90&pageid=1344) is the CAA's view:
Research, commissioned by the European Joint Aviation Authorities (JAA), and funded by the CAA, has confirmed an increasing average body size in the European population. This endorses the CAA's longstanding belief that there is a safety case for a minimum distance between seat rows. The concern is that, in the event of an emergency evacuation, too small a space between seats could affect some passengers' ability to quickly vacate their seats and enter the aisle.

Aircraft certification has been EASA’s responsibility since September 2003, and the forward rulemaking programme includes an investigation of all seat pitch issues. The CAA fully expects that the JAA research results will form a fundamental part of the EASA investigation.

It has been agreed that the UK will retain its existing criteria for minimum seat space until such time as a new European standard may be introduced. The minimum distance between the back support cushion of a seat and the back of the seat or other fixed structure in front is 26 inches (measured at 3” above the seat cushion) in the take-off and landing configuration, that is with seat in the upright (unreclined) position only.
Note that they define the current minimum as 26", but that's the distance between the front of your seat's vertical bit and the back of the seat in front rather than the pitch (so if the seat back is 2" thick, that's a 28" pitch, but if it's one of the new slimline ones that's only an inch thick, the minimum is a 27" pitch :eek: )

[10secondsurvey]

Following on from Tightslot (whose post I missed), I think there is an increasing need for some type of international standard for seat pitch. The original CAA minimum of 26" was set some time ago (50's or 60's) and at that time, the average height of the british population was much lower than it is now in 2006. It is also true that actual height is not the only determinant, but also the lengths of a persons femur (thigh). So one person at 6' may find 32" seat pitch to be fine, whereas another may find it very cramped indeed.

In terms of a standard, why doesn't someone like IATA cut to the chase, and set a minimum seat pitch of say 32", but at the same time make it mandatory for all airlines to clearly display seat pitch on their tickets, and in their advertising. This would have an important effect, firstly it sets a minimum standard, but secondly it ensures that those airlines who choose to cut costs by reducing seat pitch to the minimum would be clear for everyone to see. I think part of the difficulty at present, is that to many travellers, seat pitch is a 'hidden' aspect of a flight booking, and so airlines know they can get away with cutting this, without causing a reduction in bookings. If it is mandatory for seat pitch to be declared on all promotional materials, then that would have a significant effect, and remove the 'hidden' aspect of this.

To give you an idea of how well hidden economy seat pitch is, just look around at a few airlines web sites, and in most cases it is very hard to find, and in some cases it is not on the web site at all.

Either way, there is a need for some action to be taken, because problems like those highlighted with this post will only continue to get worse as the population on average gets much taller.

[NOTRO]

mhk77 - I agree with you entirely.

I am also 6'4" and also traveled to Chania with Excel recently on a B767.

I physically did not fit into my assigned seat.

It wasn't just uncomfortable or a bit of a tight squeeze - I did not fit into the seat that they sold me.

I'm not obese, I'm not registered as disabled, I fit into and drive an unadapted car, I buy my clothes from normal shops, I don't have to duck to got through normal sized doorways and I fit into the seat of every other form of public transport.

Why then should some airlines discriminate against certain members of population who happen to be tall?

I travel on an aircraft every few weeks and have done so with many airlines. I am taller than average so I don't expect to travel in luxurious comfort and I expect to seat to be cramped. But never before have I not been able to fit into the seat provided. Someone said "do your research" - not unreasonably it has never occurred to me that airlines have seats that I wouldn't be able to fit into - I'm not a freak! :)

On this occasion I raised the matter with the crew and also received a "shrugged shoulders" response. Fortunately, the flight wasn't full I found two spare seats together, left my friends, and went and sat on my own for 3hrs. Had the flight been full then offloading myself would have been an option I would have considered (I wonder if that would have provoked a positive response form Excel has they were faced with the delay of finding my bag, etc?)

On arrival I phoned Excel from Chania and asked if we could pre-book and pay for the extra-legroom seats on the way back? After being held for sometime I was informed that all such seats had already been pre-booked and non were available. This turned out to be a blatant lie - for when we checked in at Chania for our return flight we asked for and were assigned extra legroom seats, without extra charge - and had a very comfortable flight back!

I appreciate Excel are just trying to make a profit in a competitive market. That's fine. But if they are going to do that by only catering for those 6'0" tall or less, please say so at time of booking. Then those of us taller than this can make the necessary arrangements or go elsewhere.


Notro

[lexxity]

Average height. (http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk_news/story/0,3604,781616,00.html)

According to this article it's 5'9" for blokes and 5'4" for women. So looking at these stats it seems perfectly ok for excel to offer the seat pitch they do.

You can please some of the people all of the time, you can please all of the people some of the time, but you can't please all of the people all of the time.

[Cyrano]

In terms of a standard, why doesn't someone like IATA cut to the chase, and set a minimum seat pitch of say 32", but at the same time make it mandatory for all airlines to clearly display seat pitch on their tickets, and in their advertising.
And IATA's motivation in doing this would be... what exactly?

Don't get me wrong - I think that seat pitch is very important (well, I would, I'm 6'4"!) - but I can't see any reason why IATA would wish to become involved (even if they weren't a sclerotically bureaucratic nightmare :rolleyes: )

First, many of the LCCs and charter carriers - the worst offenders - aren't IATA members (Excel, First Choice, TUI, Ryanair and easyjet - not an IATA member among them);
Second, if you are an IATA member airline with low seat pitch, you're not going to be happy that your trade association to which you pay substantial annual fees is forcing you to publicise your inferior comfort levels;
And third and perhaps most importantly, as has already been remarked on above: for the majority of punters, seat pitch is simply not the determining factor - price is. If seat pitch is important to you in making your airline decision (e.g. if you're 6'4"), you probably already know of third-party websites where you can get this information (one example of several here (http://www.seatguru.com/charts/intl_economy.php); there are others).


Oh, and that minimum seat pitch of 32"? That would be relatively comfy, but for an LCC/charter-configured aircraft would mean about 10% fewer seat rows per aircraft, so about 10% higher fares. Can't you see the converse argument? 'The average person can fit in 29"! I'm average - why should I have to pay extra to subsidise tall people?'

C.

[10secondsurvey]

I suggested IATA as an example. There are many other ways the same could be achieved, but only if there is a will or enough people complain.

As to the thrust of the point just made regarding the cost implications. This is the kind of spin you see from beancounters at airlines. By increasing seat pitch a small amount, it does not mean fares automatically will go up to compensate, due to the fact that it is a competitive market. If all airlines were equally affected competition would keep the price rises (if any) very low. This is one of the advantages of a competitive market.

All service industries squeal like this when threatened with some regulatory requirement that may hurt profits, it's just that nowadays an awful lot of the general public have been duped into believing the spin. I assure you, that whilst theoretically you can calculate price rises, the reality would be quite different in a competitive market.

What would be the benefit? Faster loading and unloading of passengers/luggage/turnaround. More overhead locker space per pax. A more pleasant travelling experience overall, which may even make the life of airline employees much better too, with happier passengers. There are loads more if you think it through.

There is another aspect of this nonsense about price rises, the average flight ticket price rises and falls on a regular basis by much more than 10%, so would anyone actually be able to tell?

As regards this notion of average height people in some way 'subsidising' seats for taller people, could the same not also be said for people with hand baggage subsidising those with luggage, or those who need sky cots, or those who use the onboard toilets, or those who weigh more than average. In fact with some airlines such as SAS, it could be argued that those who foolishly purchase overpriced food in the cheap seats are effectively subsidising the free champagne being sloshed upfront.

Why not make the seat pitch lower - would that mean cheaper flights? No, of course not, just bigger profits. Simple really.

[10secondsurvey]

Lexxity,

I missed your post. It is a useful post you have made regarding average height, but the problem is it is an average, so there is a distribution around that average. I'm sure someone on this site who is more mathematically minded than I could elaborate further, but essentially this means there are probably quite a lot of people who are 6'2" or 6'3". It depends on the distribution. So whilst on the surface it seems like most men will be 5'9", the reality is a very large proportion of them will in fact be much much taller. Don't forget, that average figure is probably generated from a minimum sample male height of what? maybe 5'0" (I accept there may be exceptionally smaller cases) and a top height of say 6'7".

Anyway, if there are any statisticians present, maybe they can elaborate. Bottom line is that this effectively shows an awful lot of men will be 6'2" or more.

Maybe someone has access to the details?

[James 1077]

At 6'6" seat pitch is extremely important to me when I travel. But I generally don't pay extra for premium economy / business etc as I prefer to save my money and spend it staying in a nicer hotel or renting a bigger car etc during the bulk of the holiday.

At the end of the day the flight doesn't take up much of the holiday time so I can handle a few hours of discomfort.

Also I turn up early for check-in so that I can get an emergency exit seat; which works about 75% of the time. If it doesn't and it is an exceptionally long flight then I 'll ask for and may pay for an upgrade at the counter (normally cheaper than paying beforehand).

I also check SeatGuru to see where the best seats on the plane that I am flying in are and try and pre-book these as a backup. SeatGuru is also good if you have a number of options as to who to fly at about the same price / convenience.

Experience is a good one as well; I don't fly with a very large German carrier anymore as their seats are so uncomfortable and I can't take advantage of the meal / drinks that I have paid for in my ticket price due to not being able to get the tray table down. Likewise there is no point flying around Europe with any other legacy carrier as I can't eat or drink for the same reason so I may as well fly Loco as the service level is exactly the same for me and the price is cheaper.

But at the end of the day if I can't get a decent seat then I don't blame the airline as I don't want to pay any extra for my flight and so it is my fault for being a tight git that I am uncomfortable!

That said it would be good if all airlines had to publish seat pitch with flight price as it would make things much easier when comparing; especially as SeatGuru doesn't have all the airlines on it.


PS - Mods; I know I've mentioned SeatGuru a few times and am not sure if it is advertising (there are others out there). If you want then I'll edit my post!

[10secondsurvey]

James 1077

Your posting almost reads like a PR release for budget airlines. I did find it interesting that in previous posts you state that you are a regular flyer with BA, but in this post you state that you may as well use Low cost carriers. And this from someone who travels to Luton every day, and posts in the Cabin crew forum. Hmmmm..

[James 1077]

James 1077

Your posting almost reads like a PR release for budget airlines. I did find it interesting that in previous posts you state that you are a regular flyer with BA, but in this post you state that you may as well use Low cost carriers. And this from someone who travels to Luton every day, and posts in the Cabin crew forum. Hmmmm..

I am a reasonably regular flyer with BA; but I normally only fly them long haul rather than short haul (in the last 12 months I have taken 9 long haul BA flights for leisure (the 10th was a Qantas codeshare but I don't count that as BA) and 2 short hauls for business). Probably not regular in comparison to business travellers but probably one of the more regular leisure travellers.

Long haul was pretty good but I have flown better for cheaper (the wife used to like BA though; but worries about safety now). Short haul is as stated above; pointless for someone my size unless it is the cheapest option available.

If Locos start flying long haul from airports that suit me then I'll probably look into flying them long haul but I do quite like the added luxuries of a blanket, pillow and not having to search for my wallet when I want a cup of tea when I am only the plane for more than a couple of hours. However I can't really see how a true Loco model can fly long haul for this, and other, reasons so doubt that it will happen.

And does it matter that I work for a Loco? I am posting purely as SLF on this forum and stating what I do. At the end of the day I have flown quite a lot as SLF and, this topic being about height and seat pitch, thought that I could put my experience onto it. In my posting I don't think I told people to only fly with my company - as I don't do it myself. Again in the last 12 months I have flown Sterling, Ryan and easy and always chose on price and convenience. My next flight is in a couple of weeks with Virgin on long haul pleasure; so I don't think that I am all that biased.

[woolyalan]

I'm average - why should I have to pay extra to subsidise tall people?'


Just for a laugh, at the risk of bieng called a :mad:

what about small people????
why should small people subsidise average people :}

Wooly

[10secondsurvey]

woolyalan

Great post about small people subsidising average pax. When you think about it, most economy pax subsidise other economy pax in some aspect of flight or another.

I just find it difficult to believe the average punter really thinks:

"hmm..this airline really is crappy and dreadfully uncomfortable, but hey, they are quite right to make it crappy and uncomfortable. I must remember to fly with them again, as their advertising has all told me that if I want it to be at all marginally comfortable, I'll need to pay gazillions of pounds more for my ticket." Doh!

Honestly, if punters really do think that (as suggested by some above), then they are the consumer equivalent of turkeys voting for christmas, and things will only get worse for both the travelling public and, importantly, the cabin crew who have to deal with them.

[bbrown1664]

If you want poor seats, try Onur air (If are even flying in Europe again).

Last year myself and my family booked an early morning flight to Dalaman fro Gatwick. Problems (read never intended to fly) within Onur meant the flight was delayed and delayed then rescheduled to eventually fly 14 hours later meaning we then had a night flight. I paid £300 extra for the four of us to take a morning flight to avoid this in the first place.

If that was not bad enough, the return flight (on time) was in an A320/1 and we were given the exit row. Poor planning or not but it meant myself and two children having to swap seats to Take-off and landing even though my 11 year old is 5'3" tall and plays prop forward, he was considered too young to operate the emergency exit whilst allowing an 80+ year old who could barely stand to remain seated there :ugh:

I know who my money was on to get out first :ok:


When we were moved to take off, we went to the row behind.. Now I am not tall at 5'10" and, having measured my legs (back to knee) I need 24" from the front of my backrest to the back of the one in front to not be squished. Even with 2" seatbacks this means a sub-standard 26" pitch is the minimum I could fit in.

The seats we were given must have had a set pitch of 22" or less as I could not sit with my knees infront of me, i had to move my legs either side of the seat in front to even fit. It was far from comfortable and probably very dangerous.

Onur will never get my money again.

[Rwy in Sight]

bushbolox,

Which greek airport did you fly to and found the terminal bad? With the exception of LGIR (Heraklio) most terminals are fairly decent.



Rwy in Sight

[bushbolox]

I dont find them bad the punters do.:ok:

[SXB]

Bbrown I used Onur a few years ago on various trips from Istanbul to Eastern Europe. I don't remember them being any different to the other fly and pray brigades that existed at that time. Eastern Europe in the 1990's was an interesting place aother as far as aviation was concerned, anyone who took internal flights in those days will know what I mean. Anyone who didn't wouldn't believe what used to go on. additional PAX allowed to stand in aisles, sometimes no cabin crew, no functioning seatbelts.....

[sugden]

I just find it difficult to believe the average punter really thinks:
"hmm..this airline really is crappy and dreadfully uncomfortable, but hey, they are quite right to make it crappy and uncomfortable. I must remember to fly with them again, as their advertising has all told me that if I want it to be at all marginally comfortable, I'll need to pay gazillions of pounds more for my ticket." Doh!
Honestly, if punters really do think that (as suggested by some above), then they are the consumer equivalent of turkeys voting for christmas, and things will only get worse for both the travelling public and, importantly, the cabin crew who have to deal with them.
Punters don't think that it's great that the airline is crappy and uncomfortable. They DO think it's great that they got to Greece for £100. They're not turkeys voting for Christmas, they're people making a choice about how they spend their money. Or they're stupid.
You get what you pay for. Do you buy a cheap tiny car and then complain that it's too small? (If so, more fool you for buying it.) Spend the money and make your choice. The budget airlines are in a cut-throat market place where they need to pile 'em high (ie sqeeze in as many as they can) and sell 'em cheap. If you don't like it, don't fly them. BA would love to have your business.

[aw8565]

Excel Airways are a bit like the song Hotel California.....

"You check in but never leave......."

[RAC/OPS]

I consider myself at 6'1" to be normal sized, and like NOTRO, shop in normal shops etc. I take the point about you pays yer money and takes yer choice, but realistically what choice is there Manchester to Chania? Yes maybe via Athens or Timbuktu with a regular airline, but believe me, my experience on the likes of Emirates, Singapore Airlines, BA the seat pitch is not much better than the loco's or charter airlines. Malaysian on the other hand was great, but I don't think they fly to Chania. Nor do Virgin Blue.

Mhk77's original point was that a normal sized person could not physically fit in the seat and that the cabin crew were surly, a point that talkingbolox or whatever his name is chose to ignore and berate him for blaming the crappy terminal etc on the crew. Which he didn't.

I could not do the job of cabin crew purely because I could not tolerate the behaviour of some pax. Surely the people who are cabin crew though should have the necessary people skills, and like us who have the choice of which airline we fly - they have the choice of what job they do. I'm always pleasant to the crew and often just get a snarl in response. My experience with Excel was similar to mhk77's and I tried the whole flight to get a smile from the hostie. She tried just as hard (and succeeded) to not smile and in fact acted as though the whole trip was a painful chore.

Finally it has been said by bushbolox that the crew should be reported (how does he know they haven't been?) and that moaning on here won't fix it. Well I don't think that mhk was moaning, he was airing his views which this forum invites people to do:

Passengers & SLF (Self Loading Freight) If you are regularly a passenger on any airline then why not post your views or questions here? Many of us pilots like to know exactly what you think of us, the job, the airline or anything that you think we should hear about.

[firstforfirstchoice]

I am surprised at your comments regarding the attitude of Excel Airways Cabin Crew as this is far from my experiences with this airline. Having taken 4 return trips with XLA over the past 18 months or so, without exception the crews have been polite, friendly and efficient.

Regarding your comments on aircraft comfort, I sympathise with your situation as the B767 in 2-4-2 charter configuration is an extremely uncomfortable aircraft. This however, is by no means exclusive to Excel Airways.

Prior to booking a flight with any airline, I always check the aircraft type and give B767 in 2-4-2 configuration a miss.

Hi all,

Totally agree. The B767 in a 2-4-2 configuration is just awuful. Flew on Thomsonfly B767-200 and have to say it was the worst flight I have been on for space, e.g leg room and I was only flying on one of their shorter routes, Malaga to Manchester.

Anyone who is tall, give it a miss, or pay extra, for extra leg room.

Will never do that again.

Cheers all. :ok: :ok:

[10secondsurvey]

RAC/OPS

I so much agree with what you have said in your post, especially the final two paragraphs.

[10secondsurvey]

Punters don't think that it's great that the airline is crappy and uncomfortable. They DO think it's great that they got to Greece for £100. They're not turkeys voting for Christmas, they're people making a choice about how they spend their money. Or they're stupid.
You get what you pay for. Do you buy a cheap tiny car and then complain that it's too small? (If so, more fool you for buying it.) Spend the money and make your choice. The budget airlines are in a cut-throat market place where they need to pile 'em high (ie sqeeze in as many as they can) and sell 'em cheap. If you don't like it, don't fly them. BA would love to have your business.


I was referring to points made by James 1077, regarding this idea of pax thinking that a crappy experience is great. In his post he indicated that if he is uncomcomfortable, then that is just fine, and that he wouldn't complain, as the flight was cheap etc..

On the original poster's point about seats too small to physically fit in (not just uncomfortable), this is an issue that the aviation industry has not taken on board yet. A lot of general passengers who know little of the aviation industry, do want their flights cheap, but they also want (and rightly expect!) seats they can fit into.

If the general public cannot fit in a particular airlines seats, then that airline should clearly state the size limits of passengers they will accept for carriage (i.e pax up to 6'0" only, and no taller, for example). But it needs to be very clearly stated at the time of booking, and not hidden in small print. Either that or make the seats big enough for everyone, to ensure safety is not compromised.

As regards budget airlines needing to 'cram them in', there are many fine examples of budget airlines around the world that don't. In the USA for example, Jet Blue has a seat pitch of 34", some 5" more than the likes of excel/easy etc.. Even Southwest in the USA has a seat pitch of between 32 and 33" (according to a quick google search).

[MarlboroLite]

Being 6'9" tall, i'm considered to be of over ordinary height. But when i book my annual ski-ing/summer holiday with First Choice, i normally find them most helpful, when i ask for a seat with extra legroom they dont apply the normal charge as long as i send in a Dr's letter stating my height, and that im also able bodied so i can operate the emergency exits if needed.

Also i find Schedule carriers most helpful too, so far i have been upgraded free of charge on BA,AC,CX and QF. If i could afford to fly club/business then i would. But most carriers appreciate that i had no choice in the matter of being tall. And when i have finished my flights i always send a letter of thanks to the airlines involved for understanding that no matter how hard, i wont fit in a normal economy seat.