Even the Fisho's are slagging JetStar
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: australia
Posts: 83
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Why do fisherpeople think they are above everyone else with their smelly bait, waders and tall stories.
From a regional perspective the number of times prospective pax wanted to take their 20 foot or 6m surf rods with them in the back of an SF3, only to get upset when asked if they broke down into something no bigger than 2m in length was numerous.
And then they would have the hide to ask about how they could fly all their fish back. The steam from the phone when told the max allowance ie 14/15kgs and any excess might be sent FOC on the remaining days flights, but if it spoiled was at the pax responsibility was legendary.
They could not understand that they were wanting 4WD freight allowance, but wanting bus fares with aircraft speed!
And lets not get started about the surfies wanting to take their boards to seek nirvana, and I don't mean the band.
Conditions of Carriage are clearly stated for all to read including luggage allowances.
Travel Insurance companies will not repeat not cover for missed flight connections as the cost is prohibitive.
So when the weather closes aerodromes what option is their for the airline.
If the fare was a flat $500 for every seat, on every flight year round, such a fare allowing for such incidents where pax are overnighted, would all pax be happy paying that? I don't think so.
So where is the line drawn?
Agree that J* couldv'e handled the PR side perhaps a bit better. But it was an operational requirement and I bet there is not a single contributor nor reader of PPRUNE that has not had to endure weather induced delays or cancellations but still continues to fly on whatever fare they think is a fair amount for the price and convenience offered.
If you were Mr Joyce, what would you have done?
I agree with Ferris that sometimes its all a bit of a one way street.
Imagine the PR kudos an airline could achieve if via the pax profile, the amount of time the pax was delayed was logged, which could be credited towards those times when one arrived late at check-in or needed to change the flight on say day of travel only.
The back office would be a nightmare (means trusting crew, to start with, to truthfully log actual beacons on/wheels up - wheels down/beacons off times which might affect any OTP bonuses) but the public might just go for it.
But I'm not holding my breath that's for sure.
Rock on!
From a regional perspective the number of times prospective pax wanted to take their 20 foot or 6m surf rods with them in the back of an SF3, only to get upset when asked if they broke down into something no bigger than 2m in length was numerous.
And then they would have the hide to ask about how they could fly all their fish back. The steam from the phone when told the max allowance ie 14/15kgs and any excess might be sent FOC on the remaining days flights, but if it spoiled was at the pax responsibility was legendary.
They could not understand that they were wanting 4WD freight allowance, but wanting bus fares with aircraft speed!
And lets not get started about the surfies wanting to take their boards to seek nirvana, and I don't mean the band.
Conditions of Carriage are clearly stated for all to read including luggage allowances.
Travel Insurance companies will not repeat not cover for missed flight connections as the cost is prohibitive.
So when the weather closes aerodromes what option is their for the airline.
If the fare was a flat $500 for every seat, on every flight year round, such a fare allowing for such incidents where pax are overnighted, would all pax be happy paying that? I don't think so.
So where is the line drawn?
Agree that J* couldv'e handled the PR side perhaps a bit better. But it was an operational requirement and I bet there is not a single contributor nor reader of PPRUNE that has not had to endure weather induced delays or cancellations but still continues to fly on whatever fare they think is a fair amount for the price and convenience offered.
If you were Mr Joyce, what would you have done?
I agree with Ferris that sometimes its all a bit of a one way street.
Imagine the PR kudos an airline could achieve if via the pax profile, the amount of time the pax was delayed was logged, which could be credited towards those times when one arrived late at check-in or needed to change the flight on say day of travel only.
The back office would be a nightmare (means trusting crew, to start with, to truthfully log actual beacons on/wheels up - wheels down/beacons off times which might affect any OTP bonuses) but the public might just go for it.
But I'm not holding my breath that's for sure.
Rock on!
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: 24 27 45.66N 54 22 42.28E
Posts: 987
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Not defending J* but has anyone tried flying with United in the states!?! Makes any other airline look good. Sat on the aircraft parked at the gate for 40 minutes at DFW with no explanation why, and then finally get told that it is due to a shortage of pilots and will have to wait for one to arrive from Chicago. Continue to sit for another 45 minutes, with the offer that we can get a drink at the princely sum of $5 a pop. Finally the Captain arrives and we depart 2 hours late (all the while sitting on a stationary A320), and arrive in LAX to find that I and 20 others have missed our connecting international flight. Initial response from United staff, "I guess you are out of luck!".
The future of Air travel I guess.
The future of Air travel I guess.
Jetstar is NOT at all popular within NT, based on comments and articles in the NT news.
jetstar fares are not much different to Qantas, just the quality has changed.
I would imagine Virgin loads have significantly increased.
jetstar fares are not much different to Qantas, just the quality has changed.
I would imagine Virgin loads have significantly increased.
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Footlights College, Oxbridge
Age: 47
Posts: 225
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Enema Bandit's Dad
Two dildos and a set of joy balls. 
And I think the ben-wah balls count as "carry-on"...
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Australia
Posts: 756
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by RENURPP
jetstar fares are not much different to Qantas, just the quality has changed.
As an example on BNE-DRW Jetstar's Saver fares starts at $174 with most seats below $250 (though the last Saver seats are $400). The Flex fare is $449. Qantas on the same route is $233-340 for discount Y right up to $603 for flexible Y and $830 for full Y. Quite a difference. The fares are MUCH cheaper in each category on Jetstar.
Comfort-wise the JQ 320s seats are wider and softer and there is far more locker space over a QF 738. The difference in legroom between JQ 320s and QF 738s is marginal (around half an inch) and in some rows the same. On a 3-4 hour flight I imagine that these things become noticeable. I say this as it has been a comment by friends and family in Darwin (my hometown). Though they all hate the free seating/boarding - doesn't everyone?
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Sydney Australia
Posts: 166
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hope you don't mind me jumping in Ditz. 
Rows 11 and 12 are locked upright so that they don't impede the exit in case of an evacuation. I understand other airlines and aircraft have the seats unlocked after take off but it is not JQ policy to do so.
So for those who are wanting extra leg room and a seat that also reclines Row 13 is tha place to be on a JQ A320.
Rows 11 and 12 are locked upright so that they don't impede the exit in case of an evacuation. I understand other airlines and aircraft have the seats unlocked after take off but it is not JQ policy to do so.
So for those who are wanting extra leg room and a seat that also reclines Row 13 is tha place to be on a JQ A320.
Bottums Up
Iguanahead
I understand the principal of not blocking egress. I'm curious as to whether 'the' seats in the A320 able to be unlocked or are they fixed upright?
I understand the principal of not blocking egress. I'm curious as to whether 'the' seats in the A320 able to be unlocked or are they fixed upright?
Join Date: May 2004
Location: all over the shop
Posts: 986
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
DJ 737 seats that could block an exit are locked too... I wish we had the ability to unlock them! I know how to do so (with a bit of crafty engineering work - thanks for showing me that fellas), however the only time I ever do this is when a pax seat recline button (other than on a seat in front of an exit) is fcuked inflight.
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Australia
Posts: 756
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
What is more annoying is that the seats in front of exits have the recline lock - though it has been deactivated.
We were told CASA disallowed this during the JQ 320 certification as the pitch did not meet their requirements for recline locks to be used. I wondered why CASA allowed recline locks for Qantas and not Jetstar or Virgin Blue.
I researched the CASA website and found that they follow the US FAA rules (part 121 carriers) regarding exit access. I think for the seats to be able to recline the pitch must be a minimum of 40" or the window seat must be removed (eg. the ex-TWA 717s row 13 in front of exits did not recline as the first exit row was only 39") The window seat forward of the exit must not block the exit when in full recline. I do not think they use seat locks in the US as it is not mentioned.
I do not think either exit row on Jetstar's 320s is 40". I remember seeing the engineering plans of the cabin at it said they were like 35" and 39". In Europe they only require 34" at the exit row but the seats in front cannot recline.
The above rules confuse me as the A and F seats on QF 738s do come across the exit when they recline. I have seen this atleast once but have not made an effort to look again on other aircraft - that particular seat may have been broken - dunno. My other points of confusion are the last config of the 733s had only 33" at the exit (with A and F seats removed though the seats when reclined made it difficult to eat from the tray table let allow masses to evacuate rapidly - yet they had recline locks. The FAAA lobbyed QF and CASA about the config and were told the regulations allowed this? Also DJ advertise their exit row legroom at 40" so I dunno why they do not have recline locks?
I could not find any information about seats in front reclining except that when reclined the seats cannot block the exit but that does not wash with what CASA allows at QF. Any one know more?
We were told CASA disallowed this during the JQ 320 certification as the pitch did not meet their requirements for recline locks to be used. I wondered why CASA allowed recline locks for Qantas and not Jetstar or Virgin Blue.
I researched the CASA website and found that they follow the US FAA rules (part 121 carriers) regarding exit access. I think for the seats to be able to recline the pitch must be a minimum of 40" or the window seat must be removed (eg. the ex-TWA 717s row 13 in front of exits did not recline as the first exit row was only 39") The window seat forward of the exit must not block the exit when in full recline. I do not think they use seat locks in the US as it is not mentioned.
I do not think either exit row on Jetstar's 320s is 40". I remember seeing the engineering plans of the cabin at it said they were like 35" and 39". In Europe they only require 34" at the exit row but the seats in front cannot recline.
The above rules confuse me as the A and F seats on QF 738s do come across the exit when they recline. I have seen this atleast once but have not made an effort to look again on other aircraft - that particular seat may have been broken - dunno. My other points of confusion are the last config of the 733s had only 33" at the exit (with A and F seats removed though the seats when reclined made it difficult to eat from the tray table let allow masses to evacuate rapidly - yet they had recline locks. The FAAA lobbyed QF and CASA about the config and were told the regulations allowed this? Also DJ advertise their exit row legroom at 40" so I dunno why they do not have recline locks?
I could not find any information about seats in front reclining except that when reclined the seats cannot block the exit but that does not wash with what CASA allows at QF. Any one know more?
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Sydney Australia
Posts: 166
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Capt Claret, the seats are unable to be unlocked. We are told the seat lockout mechanism has been disabled and is fixed upright at all times.
Years ago when I was on the 767 (can't remember if 200 or 300 series) we used to have to unlock the seats after takeoff and relock them for landing. It would be interesting to find another carrier with the A320 and see what their policy is. We've always been told the Airbus comes as standard but who knows.
Years ago when I was on the 767 (can't remember if 200 or 300 series) we used to have to unlock the seats after takeoff and relock them for landing. It would be interesting to find another carrier with the A320 and see what their policy is. We've always been told the Airbus comes as standard but who knows.
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: OZ
Posts: 24
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Ditzy is correct. The reason the seats are locked upright at the exit rows is because they do not meet the minimum pitch requirements set by CASA for windows exits. An exemption was therefore given to Jetstar provided that the said seats remain locked upright at all times. This was discovered during the A320 proving flights with CASA. You will notice also that the seat cushions at the exit rows are also shorter than the other seats, to squeeze out a couple more inches in the pitch.
Ditzy,
I guess it is all a matter of oppinion or maybe available $$$. Although I would like the $60 in my pocket, I would be perfectly happy to pay $233 for a flight to Melbourne, $174 is great but at the end of the day ???.
I see that as close enough. If we were talking $174 v say $300+ I would reconsider
Do you ever read the NT news. Pick it up most days and you will see the complaints.
Comfortable seats are nice, but it takes more than that to make a 4hr flight enjoyable.
Mind you a 4hr flight in an uncomfortable seat is murder.
I guess it is all a matter of oppinion or maybe available $$$. Although I would like the $60 in my pocket, I would be perfectly happy to pay $233 for a flight to Melbourne, $174 is great but at the end of the day ???.
I see that as close enough. If we were talking $174 v say $300+ I would reconsider
Do you ever read the NT news. Pick it up most days and you will see the complaints.
Comfortable seats are nice, but it takes more than that to make a 4hr flight enjoyable.
Mind you a 4hr flight in an uncomfortable seat is murder.
