What do us pax *really* want?

[justapax]

That topic line is bound to get an instant response from Slasher. And there are a fair number of double-entendres below that I can't be bothered to render modernly politically-correct, innocuous, and humourless. But seriously...

The aviation marketeers.

They've tried packing us into planes at minimum price, giving us a bit more room and service at a higher price, titillating us with Singapore girls, offering us double beds, loyalty schemes, you name it; and yet we're never satisfied.

Are they getting it all wrong?

I think they are.

It's that old fallacy - everyone follows the same market research, focussed on 51% of the population, and compete with each other murderously for that sector of the market. The other 49% get ignored.

Londoners can hop on the tube to Heathrow, but for the rest of the people who live in Britain, LHR and LGW are a pain in the a rse. Crowded, and you can't fly there (from say BRS or SOU), nor can you drive there - unless you allow several extra days for your car journey. But we still go there like lemmings on valium, at 4 miles per hour up the M4 or M3, because flying from a regional, to the same Europen destination, is normally much more expensive. If airlines priced flights from regionals more competitively, I'm sure a lot of the congestion at the hubs would go away, to the relief of all, especially the pilots who have to fly 100's of tons of expensive machinery, which incidentally have their Prized Manhood (or Womanhood) inside, in conditions which combine the congestion of the M25 with the velocities of Silverstone, in fact rather more in the latter case.

I know it's the same in Ireland and Belgium, and I have little doubt it's the same in much of the rest of Europe. DUB is full, guys, building a second runway is just going to make the pax handling facilities fuller!

If we pax are going further afield, they put us in huge planes, the front ends of which are quite pleasant to travel in. The back end is one huge cavern of writhing humanity. One noisy baby, with lungs of leather and ambitions to be a RSM, can ensure that 200+ passengers are going to regard the flight at the worst part of their trip. Hmm, what's that doing for persuading people to fly more? Would a few soundproofing panels, dividing the volume up into smaller volumes, really add so much to the weight of the aircraft? This surely is a marketing opportunity begging for realisation. Just imagine if Economy were divided into:
- Football video section, with hosties bringing the beer. Footie heaven! Washable floors, sky marshal.
- Infant section, strategically positioned close to the baby-change and toilet ares, and with extra-powerful soundproofing
- I-really-ought-to-be-in-business-class section. Zero special facilities apart from a power point for the laptop. Should be a money-spinner!
- Now-this-is-me-and-your-Auntie-Flo-doing the-birdie-dance section. Soundproofing, washable floors, video, computer games, sangria.

Returning to sanity:

What ever happened to flying as an occasion? Some people (mostly rich and old) reminisce about flying boats. I just about remember Connies, and Comets and VC-10's... hopelessly unsafe I'm sure by modern standards, and they guzzled fuel, and as noisy as a jet engine pressed against your ear (hmm - but it *was*) but boy you felt you were special. People pay thousands to travel by Pullman trains, the Orient Express experience, that sort of thing - is aviation so concerned with the future that it forgets it has a past?

Rant over. Any constructive suggestions?

[Rollingthunder]

You're right.
Unfortunately you and I are getting old - with fond memories of aviation in the past. I'm too young for flying boats but I remember their "voyages" - six days England - Australia, civilized daylight sectors, fine hotels at night. I also remember Britannias,Stratocruisers, VC10's, 707s etc.

Price point has changed. You used to have be wealthy to travel by air, then you had to be in the upper middle class financial group, now most everyone can fly.

The industry has done that. Bigger and better aircraft, production line pax processing, volume volume volume. Next 3XX - 747-900 :) etc.

Today,unless you can see out the front, it's "just a bus" to most folks. For pax the destination has to be the great pleasure, except for an occasional rare interesting view out the side window, if you can actually see the side window.

[BigJETS]

Justapax--I think that was a wonderful piece. How about we create an airline "by pax - for pax" Get a few pilots on board, some good mechanics. Theyll be dying to insure us cuz we'll be so safe. You can be president. I dont really want that headache. I'll be quality control chief. We'll split the profits from our company evenly--that way everyone does a great job knowing that the pres. makes as much as the baggage handlers. We'll come up with some great Ideas like you suggested. What do you say? Sounds like fun huh?
Just out of curiosity...I wonder how much an even share of United Airlines profits is.

[Kaptin M]

Yep, it's all come down to "affordable" air travel, for the masses. As stated, it used to be only the moderately wealthy, who could afford an overseas vacation. With the advent of credit cards [instant debt], and the need for immediate self-gratification - rather than saving for years - everybody wants, and is now able, to travel tomorrow...make the booking, and pack the bags today!!

Hence the aircraft manufacturers' necessity to build larger capacity vehicles.

Justapax's concept of dividing the aircraft into different sections is interesting, provided you are able to fill each section.

Concorde, I understand, still offers travel on a limited basis, as do certain other charter companies, eg. Air 2000, for those willing to pay extra, and take their time...personally, I'd prefer a boat cruise!!

Ask the crew what the pax REALLY want, and I think you'll get a different response...let me guess though;

- a First Class size seat,
- 7 course, cordon bleu meal, served by at least one [but preferably two] attentive cabin crew,
- an unlimited beverage selection,
- no other pax in your section,
- a large, fully tiled bathroom,
- access to ALL of your baggage,
- an opportunity to visit the cockpit, and 'have a go' at flying the beast,
- on call masseuse,
- a telephone/fax/internet connection to stay in touch [and add "Oh, I'm calling you from 41,000 feet.."]
- a 'Thank You' gift from the Airline..preferably a $25,000 watch

What did I forget??

[BigJETS]

Justapax--
Never fear Re. Kaptin M's >>Justapax's concept of dividing the aircraft into different sections is interesting, provided you are able to fill each section<<

We'll just make the dividers movable. Rows 9-13 need the football game one day, and the next day theres demand for rows 9-16. I reckon Superbowl comes around youll need more planes. Besides, dividing sections would create a stronger airframe if engineered right. Air rage would probably be less a factor because folks would be pacified by the beer service (free?). Trouble could be the game going into OT and the aircraft about to arrive.

Let's hear it...PAXair "by pax-for pax" http://www.pprune.org/ubb/NonCGI/tongue.gif

[ExSimGuy]

Realistically?

- I'll settle for seats that are big enough for a six-footer (me), and wide enough so that fat b@astard they always sit beside me doesn't need half of my seat space as well! (Make it compulsory for fat b@stards to fly in special wider and more expensive seats?)

- A power point for the lap top would be nice - though I rarely get that pressed for time that I REALLY need to use it in flight for hours at a time except to "pose" (but I guess it would be useful to recharge it ready for the next sales presentation)

- A good supply of beer or G&T, preferably "comp" is always a plus and makes me les interested in the smoothness of the flight, bumpy landings, etc

- Cabin Crew - whether male or female, I like the ones who somehow make me feel I am a "special" PAX, despite the fact there are a couple of hundred other "special" PAX on the same flight (yes, it can be done - I experienced it many times on many airlines!)

- Flights from the Middle-East to LGW instead of LHR (okay, I'd settle for SOU as well) as I come from the South Coast and at the moment only EK seems to be able to take me to an airport that does not involve the M25 as the "PAX approach" - even EK only seems to make LGW "some days"

:) See? I'm easily pleased! :)

------------------
Flight Sims, very expensive toys - but real fun to play with!

[Evening Star]

Too true about LHR and LGW being a pain in the proverbial. Most people in the UK live outside London, and nothing is worse than getting off a long haul flight only to either do battle with the tube/M25 or hang arond LHR for the onward flight. Wish list would include flights that end up at provincial destinations. Cannot expect everything for NEW, but even MAN is preferable to LHR.

What else? Well, a bit of space for my 6 foot plus frame would go down well (following with interest the thread about the brace position, and hoping I never have to try that for real). And hosties that smile back, although I cannot blame the Gill hosties for not having a lot to smile about at the moment.

------------------
92220

[BRUpax]

I want a comfortable seat with comfortable seat pitch for a fair price. I want to be treated as a human being and above all as a CUSTOMER. I don't want to be patronised and bull s h i t t e d by airline personnel. In return I will treat them with the courtesy and respect they deserve.

[Mycroft]

Have a look at www.sultansflight.com (http://www.sultansflight.com) - I wonder if he does charters

[Sturmvogel]

As far as I am concerned, what the passenger requires as a priority on long haul flights is a proper fresh air cabin environment, not the nauseous, co2 enriched, germ laden atmosphere peddled as breathable air on a lot of long hauls these days.

------------------

[VelvetStrokes]

Well, I'd really like to get through security without hassle. I'd really like to see all the security scanners working at the same time. I'd really like to see the security wotsit's ensure that the pax get through with the minimum of fuss and the maximum speed. I'd really, really like to know that all the security measures in place really do keep us from being terrorised, hi-jacked or blown-up when we fly.

I was delayed, virtually to the point of having my luggage unloaded and missing my flight to Singapore because LHR Terminal 3 Security, in their wisdom, closed down 50% of the available scanners. This caused immense queues, with hundreds of people trying to get through only 3 scanners. It did not help the frustrations of the pax, that some of the security personnel did not appear to be doing anything but watching their colleagues.

Now maybe they have a hard job watching the luggage of thousands of people pass through their security block. But do they really have to cause even more delays by not working out the most effective way of passing people through these gates. Okay, I understand that one person only can go through the gate, but do you need two or three security to make sure that nothing larger than a quantum molecule of metal is in their pockets. Do you really need two or three security to search the odd bag that may contain an unusual item. Do you really need to cordon off the gate attached to the working scanner and send everyone through the adjacent, causing even more havoc as people from two scanner queues did not really know which gate to use.

Incidentally, I've had my bags searched twice. The first time they asked me to turn on my electronic Psion organiser - not sure why they thought that was a risk. The second time was also for a trivial item that was easily explanable. My point is that neither of these items they wanted to look at was even remotely a problem and have been passed through dozens of times without question. Is there a spot-check they carry out, just to keep on their toes - if so understandable, but think it ought to be made clear.

You know I wonder at the end of the day, whether it is effective. Has anyone carried out objective research into how many security risks, threats potential or otherwise have been avoided / reduced / exposed by the security scanner system at most airports.

How much air-rage is exacerbated by the frustrations built up by these rather cumbersome procedures. I know I was ready to kill anyone who looked crooked at me by the time I boarded the aircraft.

Now, I travel frequently short-haul and it is increasingly uncommon for all the security scanners to be working at the same time in Terminals 1 or 2. Maybe, they are just not working when I go through. However, lack of staff does not seem to be the issue. There never seems to be less than 5 or 6 personnel tending to each working scanner's needs. I know that it's a hard job, because it can take one to watch the scanner and one to watch him. Sorry any security guys who read this, but seen it frequently.

Now I understand they are beginning to stop pax from accessing the flight deck (even at the Captain's discretion). Think this is all part of the security mindset that authority has become fixated on. Any before anyone asks 'Do I want to take the risk'; well no-one can live a risk-free life and if you think that flying can be risk free you're living in cloud cuckoo land. After all there's only 30,000ft of thin air between you and terra firma.

I've yet to be convinced that the security measures are anything more than window-dressing. Do you really believe that the bad guys could not circumvent the existing security measures if they wanted to.


So, that's what happens when I can't access chat. I start to think and well......................................................

[Avman]

Security will deter the average demented crank (most of the time) of which there are enough in this world. However, it is true that if a well organised terrorist faction want to attack or down an airliner it is still relatively simple.

[ExSimGuy]

The reason for asking you to turn on your Psion is that (I am told by the local Brit Embassy Security Expert) a quite adequate amount of semtex can be hidden is something this small (or smaller) to blow a hole in a brick wall.

So if a suicide-bomber or other nutter can pack his battery-pack in a Psion with semtex he can easily hold it against the cabin wall/window - or perhaps the flight deck door.

Whilst I agree that we would like to be passed swiftly and smoothly through airport security, I don't envy these guys the job of making sure our flight is a safe one!

[Mycroft]

Velvet - some innocent items look strange on X-Rays, particularly if obscured by other objects, I even had a book searched on one occasion

[Self Loading Freight]

ExSimGuy--

Yes, but you can stash enough HE to matter into an electronic device *and leave it working*, at least enough to pass a "turn it on please, sir" check. I refuse to believe this intelligence is somehow not obvious to people motivated enough to contemplate this in the first place.

In any case (so to speak), if you're walking something nasty onto the a/c with the intent on detonating it in transit, you might as well put it in the checked luggage. The effect on your person will be the same.

As to why security is such a pain to pax in the first place, given that it's often run so badly -- I dunno. But I'll hazard a guess or two. A great deal is psychological, to put off low-grade nutters. A great deal is due to the culture of secrecy, where operational decisions are made at a high level due to information that isn't to be passed on. In such situations, managerial cock-ups can easily be disguised -- and the effects further down the line dismissed. Will this lead to a highly motivated corps of staff intent on maximising the customer experience? I doubt it...

R

[justapax]

SLF, if you put a slab of Semtex in your camera, the extremely tiny spark when you take a picture may set it off - unless the camera is entirely mechanical, rare these days. The powers-that-be assume that people who have got Semtex airside are going to try and put it on a flight that they aren't on themselves; therefore this test won't stop a suicide bomber. It just mean he gets blown up in a capacious airport rather than the more vulnerable environment of an aircraft.

Aah, I hear you say, but I wasn't talking about a camera, I was talking about a Psion organiser, which has a membrane keyboard, which doesn't spark or even generate high external electric fields! Well, you can't expect airport security to have in-depth knowledge... They are just given a simple set of rules to follow mindlessly. Namely, ask the pax to switch on any electrical items.

The threads drifted a bit from what I put up originally, but so what, it's still interesting, indeed becoming more so. Thanks everyone for your comments.

[mik]

justapax - semtex won't go off from a spark in your camera. It won't even ignite. It won't explode if you set fire to it with a match or put it in a fire. It will just burn. Most (probably all) modern plastic explosives behave this way.

Semtex requires a detonator of some kind (e.g. a blasting cap, shotgun shell, detonating cord,...) to get it to actually explode.

Strangely enough, gunpowder although only a low explosive, is more hazardous to handle than semtex or modern smokeless firearm propellants as a static spark CAN set it off. It won't explode (unless confined), but it burns EXTREMELY rapidly, much more so than semtex or nitrocellulose. I enjoy demonstrating this!

Mik
(muzzle-loading firearms instructor)


[This message has been edited by mik (edited 07 July 2000).]

[justapax]

Thanks for the correction. So the guys at the airport are looking for electronic equipment full of gunpowder?

Or was it nitroglycerine I was thinking of? I'm sure there's some substance which goes bang with even the tiniest spark. Apart from petrol.

I never cease to be amazed at the range of expertises available within Pprune. I'm sure that if I put up an aviation-related post about the breeding habits of pottoes, with a couple of days I'd get a reply starting "Having just returned from the Cameroons...."

[mik]

They won't be looking for gunpowder as it has to be enclosed to produce an explosion, isn't very powerful (needs enclosing), and is hard to handle. All of these make it a poor choice for a terrorist.

I haven't any direct experience with nitroglycerine (and I don't want any!), but again I doubt that it's particularly sensitive to static electricity. Being a high explosive, it is the shockwave moving through the substance that causes the explosive reaction to occur.

Petrol vapour can be ignited with a fairly small spark, and I've ignited bunsen burners by shuffling across a nylon floor and then touching the end of the burner with my finger. Static electrity can also ignite kerosene vapour, hence the precautions taken at airports.

Mik

[This message has been edited by mik (edited 07 July 2000).]

[Self Loading Freight]

The details need not concern us... but I stand by my original statement that the security checks we know we go through are there as much to deter the low-grade nutters as anything else. An intelligent, well motivated and properly resourced terrorist wouldn't be unduly bothered.

R

[Rollingthunder]

Nitroglycerine - goes off if you look at it wrong or if there are sufficient shocks/vibrations.

"Security personnel are minimum wage staff and you will get get what you pay for". Confucious.(I think)

[The Guvnor]

Have to admit I'm rather confused by this. If I was a suicide bomber (and curiously, there appear to be fewer suicidal pax than there are aircrew) I'd be inclined to put the Semtex in a 'smuggler's waistcoat' (remember the ones they used on the routes from DXB to India, for the 10 Tola bars?) as it wouldn't set off the detectors. A det you can stick in a pocket, say well swaddled in cotton wool in a box - and away you go.

Boom!!

Kaptin M - you can indeed have your wishlist on our superduper L1011s. Only problem is it will cost you US$100k per seat to fly LHR-SYD one way: but hey, you get the watch!!

------------------
:) Happiness is a warm L1011 :)

[blackadder]

Getting back to the subject of a wish list.
I have only one wish.

Decent seat pitch in zoo class, & I don't mind paying extra.
Along the lines of EVA's 'deluxe' zoo class.
Are there any other longhaul airlines offering this class?

[TinnedSardine]

I always seem to spend every long haul flight behind the guy who immediately has to put his seat back the minute we level off. Spent the last two flights like that, with someone's stinking greasy hair in my face, absolutely no room to put down my tray to eat (or breathe). Usually that and someone very tall behind, with knees in the back for ten hours...

[Evening Star]

TS

"Usually that and someone very tall behind, with knees in the back for ten hours."

The tall person behind will be me. Sorry about the kness, I am having an equally uncomfortable time from your unyielding back.

[mutt]

Velvet,

What really annoys me about LHR’s Terminal 3 is that as a staff passenger I have to pay a security fee as well as the departure tax. (Non staff probably don’t see this fee as it’s in the ticket cost.) The security fee ranges from 8.10 – 18.20 depending on the time of day. It is therefore infuriating knowing that I have paid for the service to get to the security area to find half of the checking areas closed. I have had the pleasure of joining queues that began up at the shops.

Mutt.

[pax domina]

I've just returned from my first experience of "one class" flying, and I greatly enjoyed it.

Flying from MCO to MKE usually involves a change of plane - often at the dreaded DTW. (DTW Rule One: All pax changing planes must have at least one-quarter mile distance between arrival and departure gates.)

This time I opted to spend a little more and fly non-stop to MKE. Wide leather seats, real china and metal utensils, cloth napkins, complementary wine (even though I don't drink, appreciated by my parents when they fly MCO to MKE).

The people sitting next to me agreed - there is something about the clink of metal utensils on china that makes it seem more like a restaurant meal. And I was very pleased that on both flights a member of the cabin crew arrived at my seat with a smile and a questioning look on their face . . . and before they even asked the question I said, "Yes, I ordered a vegetarian meal". : )

I've had airlines screw this up or - more likely - some inconsiderate $%#^@ who forgot to order their own vegetarian meal *took* mine!!!

And we also agreed that we like the "one class" plane.

It was the opposite of being a tinned sardine when I had to fly from MCO to Tallahassee every week in the late 80s on a shuttle flight. I'm 5'9-1/4" and 135 lbs and I could barely fit in those seats!!!

Just a hassle free, pleasant journey. I should post separately about some of my security and carry-on experiences . . .

[The Guvnor]

Pax Domina - you flew Midwest Express, didn't you? :) :) A really classy operation - and at a fare that's often cheaper than via DTW!!

That's the sort of service we're looking to provide to our Y class pax between PIK/SNN and PSM/SFB

------------------
:) Happiness is a warm L1011 :)

[pax domina]

Uh-oh, rumbled by the Guv! :)

More to the point, my father (who has extensive pax experience) has been so impressed that he will now *only* fly Midwest Express between MCO and MKE. (Our usual "family route" since most of our extended family live in Wisconsin.) And this is a guy who is expert at sweet-talking reservation clerks in to upgrades! Of course, my father is 6'1-1/2" and probably weighs something over 250 (the very definition of self-loading freight!). He can fit, but not comfortably, in to the average tinned sardine seat.

My cousin's husband (see posting under Rumours and News under, "The Passenger is always right - unless he's a tosser !") had an interview on Thursday to fly with Midwest Express. (I'm relating an incident where he confronted a, well, tosser who yelled at him.)

Good luck with Guv-air . . . you obviously care about what pax really want!

Most of my NWA journeys between MCO and MKE went through DTW on the way up and MEM on the way down. The only really good thing about going through MEM was the opportunity to purchase tacky Elvis postcards. And I haven't seen any new designs recently . . . but how can you really top the shot of a bloated Elvis shaking hands with Richard Nixon with the presidential seal in the background? This was when Elvis offered to help the Prez in the war against *drugs*.

[Mighty Hunter]

Justapax - re your first and safety (hopelessly unsafe). Correct me if I am wrong - but I don't think a VC-10 has ever crashed?

[OO-AOG]

A VC-10 did crash, Nigeria Airways on final to LOS I think.

[justapax]

Mighty Hunter, I was just referring to a common perception that anything without state-of-the-art avionics, and with engines which probably haven't burnt fuel in anger in years, is less safe than the latest airliners.

As to whether this perception is right or not - that's one I'll leave to the experts.

Does anyone think we mere pax should read anything into the fact that, on the Pprune listing "Passengers and SLF" is the lowest of the low? :) :) :) :)

[dr]

We want our frequent flier miles! :)

Oh, and Elite status too! ;)

[The Guvnor]

OO-AOG - Actually, there were no less than seven VC10 incidents, of which two were fatal crashes.

The first was on the 20 November 1969, when 5N-ABD, a BOAC VC10 on wet lease to Nigeria Airways crashed 8 miles short of Lagos Airport. All 87 people on board were killed.

The second was on the 18 April 1972, when 5X-UVA of East African Airways crashed at Addis Ababa. 43 out of 107 people on board were killed.

Check out http://aviation-safety.net/database/type/491.shtml for more information.


------------------
:) Happiness is a warm L1011 :)

[This message has been edited by The Guvnor (edited 10 August 2000).]

[bigseat]

Current economy seats are for smurfs.

Passengers want decent pitch, decent height, decent width of seat. Oh, and try to stick to schedule.
Thats all pretty obvious - can't the marketing guys suss it????
Beggars belief.

Reccomendations of long haul airlines with good econo seat, are their any???

[Dupre]

Quantas is the only airline on which I've thought "do I usually have this much room?" And that's a big thing to ask as I'm 6'3" (actually it was more like asking "do I usually have this 3 inches between my knees and my chin?")

Why don't they have arrays of horizontal bed/sleeper things - with soundproofed walls. 6 high, 10 wide, reckon you could get 20 of these batteries on a 744 . . . 600 people. All in fully reclined 'pleasure cabins'. It'd be a goer for sure!

[northernlight]

I want to get from A to B safely - that's all. No booze necessary, no films, no bad food, no hostess's, just security staff to keep the plane safe (oh and super pilots)! That's all -

[This message has been edited by northernlight (edited 23 August 2000).]