ZB 533 01/09/06 ex PMI
Join Date: Nov 1999
Posts: 2,312
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Cessna,
I am sorry you had such a bad flight and found the points you raised frustrating as I am sure they were to you and your family. Although I was not there on this flight I can assure you that as far as the crew are concerned, it is nobodies idea of a good flight when the customers are seriously unhappy, particularly if it concerns something that might be within their control.
As you make no mention of it, I am assuming the contracted service of transportation was provided and reasonably on time ?
To deal with the points you do raise : The galleys would normally have been stocked in accordance with the standard dispatch for that particular flights service. As you will appreciate the sale of consumables on board is a profit centre, and it is very much in a companies interest to be able to properly satisfy the level of demand. On short haul aircraft there are normally two galleys, one at the front and one at the rear of the aircraft. It is often the case that the volumetric capacity of these galley stowages is biased towards the rear. In other words the back one is bigger and stores more. For this reason it is often necessary to seek certain items from the back. Although it might have appeared that nothing seemed to be in either galley, the fact that there clearly was a service seems to negate that as a reality.
Sales service normally commences from two points on the aircraft, if you like the front and the back. Often it is the case that the aircraft is divided into halves and the service will commence from the front of the 2 halves (if you see what I mean) and progressively work aft. This means that by the time the front cart has worked its way back 15 rows the aft cart has done the same, and 30 rows have been serviced by that time. On occaisions and perhaps inevitably some high demand items will have been exhausted by this point, as seems to have been the case on your flight. Tightslot and others have already stated that the amount of product loaded is based on a historic and projected figure that may or may not be adequate on the day. On poor sales flights, the perishables ( sandwiches etc) are discarded at the end of the flight obviously at a loss. Demand is normally met on a first come first served basis, and as the service progresses there will inevitably be more call to seek products from whichever galley or cart still has it, and this seems to have been very evident on your flight, frustrated by the fact that by the time you were served some of it had run out.
You ask why the drinks service took 50 minutes to travel 9 rows ? Although this would seem a long time, on a narrowbody airliner 9 rows is in the order of 54 seats and if all of those passengers required service from one cart that would amount to around 56 seconds per passenger for two cabin crew members to, deal with the questions, take the order, pour the drink, serve the food, take the money, sort the change, obtain any necessary additional supplies and move on. I know it can seem a long time when you are waiting, but it doesn't when at the point of sale. 50 minutes can fly by.
On the subject of sales pitches, I have some sympathy with you. It can be very irritating to be bombarded with PA's for all sorts of periphery that may be of no interest to you personally. From a companies perspective there is a requirement to use that facility to advertise and promote. The crew have little discretion in the matter. Certainly what the crew did on the ground would have no bearing whatsoever on this issue.
On the subject of staff shops, I am not sure what they have in Palma these days. There used to a van that visited the aircraft selling wine and beers and garlic and the like. few people seem to avail themselves of it these days as there is often precious little price advantage in making these purchases. Duty free is not an option because this was abolished between EEC member states a few years ago. In any event if a couple of crew wish to avail themselves of this facility during a turnaround, it would only be with the Captains permission on the understanding that all other functions had been completed and the complete turnaround would not in anyway be time compromised.
Dealing with what you call your rant :
I believe you raise a valid point about passengers not paying enough attention to the safety briefing. As aircrew I always give the crew my full attention, even though I am very au fait with the emergency procedures, and am regularly tested on them and indeed rely on them. This is because it is important on 3 counts. (1) Refreshing even the obvious reduces the opportunity for omission and error should a sudden event occur. (2) It sets a good example to others around (3) It is simple good manners. However as we all know and regularly observe not everybody feels the same way. On scheduled flights in particular, frequent travellers are often satisfied in their own minds that they do know what to do, and are much too bored to be able to give any impression to the contrary. We are required to provide a safety briefing, but you cannot know or insist that it is understood. The only case where you may have a valid complaint is if the video screens ( if applicable) are being obstructed by said passengers paper. We do stress the importance of the crews pre-flight briefing in the flightdeck introductory welcome and again at the start of the safety announcement itself.
Just from what you have said, I have to take issue with the idea that the crew where in any way "inept". Nor do I agree from what you have said that they "couldn't perform a basic function". It sounds as though they had a busy flight with high demand. It sounds as though they briefed properly even though some passengers chose not to put down their papers as one might expect or hope.
I am sorry this service did not meet with your expectations, and in many regards I can see why. The lack of available products on board and the time you waited in order to be dissapointed by the fact, would be frustrating to most people. It is certainly worth a complaint in this regard, and perhaps the level of stock, number of carts and crew will be increased in the future ? These days of low lost flying have set up a new dynamic that is still subject to the basic economic rules of profit and loss. It is not in any companies interest for its customers or potential customers to be dissastified or driven away by an inability to deliver what may be promised, and the best way of making this point is to write to them and let them know.
I travel on other airlines a lot and see much of the same problems you have described, albeit perhaps with a marginally better understanding of the realities. Like you that understanding still doesn't always mask the annoyance I feel as a result.
One final point on the cabin service. There are normally commission incentives to achieve high sales on individual flights. It is therefore very much in the crews interest to maximize sales on board, and that can best be achieved by ensuring as much demand as possible is satisfied in the time available and the constraints of product level. I know that crewmembers often raise, via their flight reports, complaints about the stock levels on particular routes and services. Adjustments are often made but it is still an inexact science.
Finally I am sorry that this flight was dissapointing for any of the reasons you have given, but I do feel the crew did nothing that was obviously wrong. On reflection I suspect you might agree that it is a case of citing everything and anything because of the dissatifaction ?
If I can address any other specific point go ahead and ask. Truth is we as crew ( front or back) only want happy customers, and although we are to a large extent constrained by the product the management give us to sell to the customer, we do take a pride in what we do, and we do feedback complaints and information to that management.
I am sorry you had such a bad flight and found the points you raised frustrating as I am sure they were to you and your family. Although I was not there on this flight I can assure you that as far as the crew are concerned, it is nobodies idea of a good flight when the customers are seriously unhappy, particularly if it concerns something that might be within their control.
As you make no mention of it, I am assuming the contracted service of transportation was provided and reasonably on time ?
To deal with the points you do raise : The galleys would normally have been stocked in accordance with the standard dispatch for that particular flights service. As you will appreciate the sale of consumables on board is a profit centre, and it is very much in a companies interest to be able to properly satisfy the level of demand. On short haul aircraft there are normally two galleys, one at the front and one at the rear of the aircraft. It is often the case that the volumetric capacity of these galley stowages is biased towards the rear. In other words the back one is bigger and stores more. For this reason it is often necessary to seek certain items from the back. Although it might have appeared that nothing seemed to be in either galley, the fact that there clearly was a service seems to negate that as a reality.
Sales service normally commences from two points on the aircraft, if you like the front and the back. Often it is the case that the aircraft is divided into halves and the service will commence from the front of the 2 halves (if you see what I mean) and progressively work aft. This means that by the time the front cart has worked its way back 15 rows the aft cart has done the same, and 30 rows have been serviced by that time. On occaisions and perhaps inevitably some high demand items will have been exhausted by this point, as seems to have been the case on your flight. Tightslot and others have already stated that the amount of product loaded is based on a historic and projected figure that may or may not be adequate on the day. On poor sales flights, the perishables ( sandwiches etc) are discarded at the end of the flight obviously at a loss. Demand is normally met on a first come first served basis, and as the service progresses there will inevitably be more call to seek products from whichever galley or cart still has it, and this seems to have been very evident on your flight, frustrated by the fact that by the time you were served some of it had run out.
You ask why the drinks service took 50 minutes to travel 9 rows ? Although this would seem a long time, on a narrowbody airliner 9 rows is in the order of 54 seats and if all of those passengers required service from one cart that would amount to around 56 seconds per passenger for two cabin crew members to, deal with the questions, take the order, pour the drink, serve the food, take the money, sort the change, obtain any necessary additional supplies and move on. I know it can seem a long time when you are waiting, but it doesn't when at the point of sale. 50 minutes can fly by.
On the subject of sales pitches, I have some sympathy with you. It can be very irritating to be bombarded with PA's for all sorts of periphery that may be of no interest to you personally. From a companies perspective there is a requirement to use that facility to advertise and promote. The crew have little discretion in the matter. Certainly what the crew did on the ground would have no bearing whatsoever on this issue.
On the subject of staff shops, I am not sure what they have in Palma these days. There used to a van that visited the aircraft selling wine and beers and garlic and the like. few people seem to avail themselves of it these days as there is often precious little price advantage in making these purchases. Duty free is not an option because this was abolished between EEC member states a few years ago. In any event if a couple of crew wish to avail themselves of this facility during a turnaround, it would only be with the Captains permission on the understanding that all other functions had been completed and the complete turnaround would not in anyway be time compromised.
Dealing with what you call your rant :
I believe you raise a valid point about passengers not paying enough attention to the safety briefing. As aircrew I always give the crew my full attention, even though I am very au fait with the emergency procedures, and am regularly tested on them and indeed rely on them. This is because it is important on 3 counts. (1) Refreshing even the obvious reduces the opportunity for omission and error should a sudden event occur. (2) It sets a good example to others around (3) It is simple good manners. However as we all know and regularly observe not everybody feels the same way. On scheduled flights in particular, frequent travellers are often satisfied in their own minds that they do know what to do, and are much too bored to be able to give any impression to the contrary. We are required to provide a safety briefing, but you cannot know or insist that it is understood. The only case where you may have a valid complaint is if the video screens ( if applicable) are being obstructed by said passengers paper. We do stress the importance of the crews pre-flight briefing in the flightdeck introductory welcome and again at the start of the safety announcement itself.
Just from what you have said, I have to take issue with the idea that the crew where in any way "inept". Nor do I agree from what you have said that they "couldn't perform a basic function". It sounds as though they had a busy flight with high demand. It sounds as though they briefed properly even though some passengers chose not to put down their papers as one might expect or hope.
I am sorry this service did not meet with your expectations, and in many regards I can see why. The lack of available products on board and the time you waited in order to be dissapointed by the fact, would be frustrating to most people. It is certainly worth a complaint in this regard, and perhaps the level of stock, number of carts and crew will be increased in the future ? These days of low lost flying have set up a new dynamic that is still subject to the basic economic rules of profit and loss. It is not in any companies interest for its customers or potential customers to be dissastified or driven away by an inability to deliver what may be promised, and the best way of making this point is to write to them and let them know.
I travel on other airlines a lot and see much of the same problems you have described, albeit perhaps with a marginally better understanding of the realities. Like you that understanding still doesn't always mask the annoyance I feel as a result.
One final point on the cabin service. There are normally commission incentives to achieve high sales on individual flights. It is therefore very much in the crews interest to maximize sales on board, and that can best be achieved by ensuring as much demand as possible is satisfied in the time available and the constraints of product level. I know that crewmembers often raise, via their flight reports, complaints about the stock levels on particular routes and services. Adjustments are often made but it is still an inexact science.
Finally I am sorry that this flight was dissapointing for any of the reasons you have given, but I do feel the crew did nothing that was obviously wrong. On reflection I suspect you might agree that it is a case of citing everything and anything because of the dissatifaction ?
If I can address any other specific point go ahead and ask. Truth is we as crew ( front or back) only want happy customers, and although we are to a large extent constrained by the product the management give us to sell to the customer, we do take a pride in what we do, and we do feedback complaints and information to that management.
Last edited by Bealzebub; 5th Sep 2006 at 20:23.
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Ex Rompers Green
Age: 65
Posts: 3
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
mon533
Tightslot, an excellent post explaining many of the facets of airline operation, both accurately and succinctly. As you say, you were not there at the time. I do know someone who was, however, and the following information may shed more light on the flight and close the thread. The aircraft was on time at PMI, but was allocated a takeoff slot only 50 mins later. This reduced the effective turnround time, as the minimum time between push and takeoff at PMI is 10 mins. Monarch endeavour to meet the published departure times. To that end when the cleaners did not turn up at the aircraft, and were unlikely to do so until 10 mins to pushback, the cabin crew did the cleaning. This prevented the oncoming passengers having to sit in the litter, detritus, and general mess that the public seem unable to avoid generating on aircraft. The cabin crew did not get a break other than one member who managed a couple of bites before the passengers arrived. The ‘staff shop’ was not used as there was no access from the stand to the terminal. Cessna Student will recall very well the welcome address by the captain, I certainly do, which specifically asked people to pay attention to the safety brief. Overselling of products on aircraft occurs on all flights, irritating though it might be to all of us it is a fact of the industry. The aircraft pushed on time, and landed 8 mins late due to strong headwinds (probably Monarchs’ fault). There was a slight delay positioning the airbridge, and unusually the captain was available in the cabin during disembarkation; no one presented themselves to comment on the service.
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: UK
Posts: 28
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Agree - Tightslot, Bealzebub and Slugg have put some very objective and informative comments.
Cessna - let it go - save yourself the ink, the postage and, more importantly, the heartbeats - Life is too short to get worked about these things.
Cessna - let it go - save yourself the ink, the postage and, more importantly, the heartbeats - Life is too short to get worked about these things.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Manchester
Age: 53
Posts: 272
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Fair comments from everyone (nearly). I accept that the effects of filty commerce play a huge part. I now stand corrected as to crew leaving the aircraft for shopping purposes.
As I previously said, had I paid £20 per ticket this thread would probably never have been started, but I paid in the region of £600, this is not a lo-co price, and to be fair, for that amount of money I expect a decent level of service, although I can now see some of the reasons as to why this didn't happen, and working within the field of the industry, and not being a total numpty, I accept that on this occasion, maybe I have been a little over the top in what I said, although I still stand by the original point that the in-flight service was lousy, even if there are mitigating circumstances.
As for safety, I have read what has been written along the "lead a horse to water" line, and indeed would fully accept that crew being carried as pax always pay attention to safety briefings. I am aware that the captain made the usual pre departure announcement about safety. Sad thing is, in this day and age of locked cockpit doors the cockpit announcments are generally quiet to the point of inaudible in some cases. What I find different is that today I went to GLA and back on BAC, and the announcments were clear. What was said by the captain was not "please pay attention", but "it is a legal requirement that you pay attention" On both sectors today, everyone, and sat at the back I could see everyone, paid attention, fully!
In my experience, a plane load of arrogant business types is more likely to read the paper at safety time, than a bucket and spade plane load. But no, everyone paid attention, all because we weren't asked, we were told to, nicely, but were told to pay attention.
This is a problem that I undestand appears all over the world, and not just on the one flight I took. As operating crew, what are you opinions on being more forceful at briefing time?
One final thing. There was a huge sales pitch after landing for new routes, that took the entire post landing taxi to complete. My point is it was scripted by the company, and delivered in a professional manner, the sales pitch for hello wasn't. It doesn't servce anyone in the indusrty to be unprofessional in any way.
As I previously said, had I paid £20 per ticket this thread would probably never have been started, but I paid in the region of £600, this is not a lo-co price, and to be fair, for that amount of money I expect a decent level of service, although I can now see some of the reasons as to why this didn't happen, and working within the field of the industry, and not being a total numpty, I accept that on this occasion, maybe I have been a little over the top in what I said, although I still stand by the original point that the in-flight service was lousy, even if there are mitigating circumstances.
As for safety, I have read what has been written along the "lead a horse to water" line, and indeed would fully accept that crew being carried as pax always pay attention to safety briefings. I am aware that the captain made the usual pre departure announcement about safety. Sad thing is, in this day and age of locked cockpit doors the cockpit announcments are generally quiet to the point of inaudible in some cases. What I find different is that today I went to GLA and back on BAC, and the announcments were clear. What was said by the captain was not "please pay attention", but "it is a legal requirement that you pay attention" On both sectors today, everyone, and sat at the back I could see everyone, paid attention, fully!
In my experience, a plane load of arrogant business types is more likely to read the paper at safety time, than a bucket and spade plane load. But no, everyone paid attention, all because we weren't asked, we were told to, nicely, but were told to pay attention.
This is a problem that I undestand appears all over the world, and not just on the one flight I took. As operating crew, what are you opinions on being more forceful at briefing time?
One final thing. There was a huge sales pitch after landing for new routes, that took the entire post landing taxi to complete. My point is it was scripted by the company, and delivered in a professional manner, the sales pitch for hello wasn't. It doesn't servce anyone in the indusrty to be unprofessional in any way.
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Bangkok, Thailand
Age: 64
Posts: 191
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
One point that comes back again in this thread is the lack of attention by some passengers to the safety announcements. I have to admit I am sometimes guilty of this. I try to be polite and sit up and listen, but sometimes, I am just too tired or fed up. I usually glance round to make sure I know where my nearest exit is, but that's it. Some may say I am taking a risk, but the only thing I am doing is being a tad impolite. As an example, in the US, they usually say even FF should pay attention as individual aircraft vary in subtle ways. However, a year or so back I decided to play anorak and noted the names of the aircraft I was flying in. Within a year, I had flown in over half of TG's entire fleet and had indeed, flown in the same individual aircraft on many occasions. I, and millions of other FFs are completely familiar with the way to open and close a seatbelt, or that the plane is a no smoking flight and smoking is prohibited, even in the toilets, etc, etc, etc. It is therefore, nonsense to suggest that I am somehow taking a personal risk by not giving the PA my undivided attention. I can only think that possibly, my inattention might somehow influence some rookie SLF to do the same. In which case, some way needs to be found to get FFs to pay lip service to this. The only way people like me are going to put down our newspapers, is either for there to be something new in it, or for CC to appeal to our sense of politeness.
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Milton Keynes
Posts: 1,070
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Bangkok easy really don't agree. It's like those of us ( me amateur) who fly not doing checklists because we know item X is not fitted. But we stll check and say not fitted each and every time. We still look round because today it might be different. May be you're seated next to a senior citizen who you might like to help in the event of an emergency.
As a pax you are in aviation even though you might like to pretend it's your living room or your office! It's not!!
As a pax you are in aviation even though you might like to pretend it's your living room or your office! It's not!!
Guest
Posts: n/a
Bangkokeasy
As FQTVs we should realise that we have a supportive role (to the crew) to play in paying attention and demonstrating the behaviour that all should adopt in taking on board the briefing.
In an incident, we want everyone to know what to do.
As FQTVs we should realise that we have a supportive role (to the crew) to play in paying attention and demonstrating the behaviour that all should adopt in taking on board the briefing.
In an incident, we want everyone to know what to do.
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: LGW
Age: 51
Posts: 539
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
One point that comes back again in this thread is the lack of attention by some passengers to the safety announcements. I have to admit I am sometimes guilty of this. I try to be polite and sit up and listen, but sometimes, I am just too tired or fed up. I usually glance round to make sure I know where my nearest exit is, but that's it. Some may say I am taking a risk, but the only thing I am doing is being a tad impolite. As an example, in the US, they usually say even FF should pay attention as individual aircraft vary in subtle ways. However, a year or so back I decided to play anorak and noted the names of the aircraft I was flying in. Within a year, I had flown in over half of TG's entire fleet and had indeed, flown in the same individual aircraft on many occasions. I, and millions of other FFs are completely familiar with the way to open and close a seatbelt, or that the plane is a no smoking flight and smoking is prohibited, even in the toilets, etc, etc, etc. It is therefore, nonsense to suggest that I am somehow taking a personal risk by not giving the PA my undivided attention. I can only think that possibly, my inattention might somehow influence some rookie SLF to do the same. In which case, some way needs to be found to get FFs to pay lip service to this. The only way people like me are going to put down our newspapers, is either for there to be something new in it, or for CC to appeal to our sense of politeness.
Riding the Euro Gravy Plane
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Strasbourg
Posts: 455
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Getoutofmygalley
Under what circumstances is it legal for an aircraft to fly with an emergency exit out of service ? Whilst it might appear reasonable for a 747 to fly with one out of use exit out of use when it's not full I wouldn't be happy about one exit being out of use on a CRJ-200.
In these circumstances who decides if the flight can operate ? Are there established parameters for this or is it decided, on the day, by an outside party ?
Thanks
SXB
Under what circumstances is it legal for an aircraft to fly with an emergency exit out of service ? Whilst it might appear reasonable for a 747 to fly with one out of use exit out of use when it's not full I wouldn't be happy about one exit being out of use on a CRJ-200.
In these circumstances who decides if the flight can operate ? Are there established parameters for this or is it decided, on the day, by an outside party ?
Thanks
SXB
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: LGW
Age: 51
Posts: 539
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Getoutofmygalley
Under what circumstances is it legal for an aircraft to fly with an emergency exit out of service ? Whilst it might appear reasonable for a 747 to fly with one out of use exit out of use when it's not full I wouldn't be happy about one exit being out of use on a CRJ-200.
In these circumstances who decides if the flight can operate ? Are there established parameters for this or is it decided, on the day, by an outside party ?
Thanks
SXB
Under what circumstances is it legal for an aircraft to fly with an emergency exit out of service ? Whilst it might appear reasonable for a 747 to fly with one out of use exit out of use when it's not full I wouldn't be happy about one exit being out of use on a CRJ-200.
In these circumstances who decides if the flight can operate ? Are there established parameters for this or is it decided, on the day, by an outside party ?
Thanks
SXB
Also, there would be restrictions on the amount of pax that the aircraft would be allowed to carry on the flights when the door is U/S as well as restrictions on where the pax can be seated within the cabin.
And a CRJ-200 might be covered by the same rules as I have just mentioned, but it certainly would not be allowed to be despatched full!!
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Bangkok, Thailand
Age: 64
Posts: 191
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If something was wrong, such as a faulty emergency exit, I can guarantee CC making such an announcement would have the undivided attention of FFs! As I said, this comes under the heading of "something new". And, yes I do check the condition of my chosen emergency exit in my glance. It didn't take more than that to notice, a while back, a Lion Air (Indonesian domestic loco) overwing emergency exit sealed with duct tape. I guess it would have taken more than the usual "being able to lift 15kg" to dislodge that!
Some of the posters assume that because a FF doesn't pay attention, they don't know. The point I made was that we don't pay so much attention because we know it off by heart.
Instead of forcing bored FFs to sit through the same inane announcements, why don't we get creative and serious about making the cabin a safer place? May I suggest:
- If there REALLY is something different about that aircraft, such as carrying a unique design of life jacket, then say so.
- Issue FFs with "proficiency" cards, after being tested as to whether they know the safety features of that aircraft. Then enlist those card holders to help others become aware.
- Include something different in every announcement, such an anecdote to accompany one or two explanations.
Some of the posters assume that because a FF doesn't pay attention, they don't know. The point I made was that we don't pay so much attention because we know it off by heart.
Instead of forcing bored FFs to sit through the same inane announcements, why don't we get creative and serious about making the cabin a safer place? May I suggest:
- If there REALLY is something different about that aircraft, such as carrying a unique design of life jacket, then say so.
- Issue FFs with "proficiency" cards, after being tested as to whether they know the safety features of that aircraft. Then enlist those card holders to help others become aware.
- Include something different in every announcement, such an anecdote to accompany one or two explanations.
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Derbyshire
Posts: 33
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Monarch ZB 535 PMI-MAN
Returned to man on this flight last Tuesday 19 Sept.
Crew safty annoucement OK and they did ask passengers to stop reading and pay attention. After release by the captain they did the bar run, followed by the meal service about 60 mins. after takeoff. After the meal service, we then had duty free sales followed by the game card and then a request for loose change for charity.
So,all in all, six cabin announcements,of these only one contained any sales pressure, (duty free). Could not fault the cabin crew,sat in row 4 extra leg room seats,which when you are tall are very welcome.
Arrived on stand on time 20:40, had no baggage,and made the 21:04 train from the airport into Manchester.
Would suggest the first thread on this post,was unlucky or just anti Monarch.
Just to finnish off,outward flight was on jet2 757 also sat in the front part of the A/c and have to say it was noisy (lack of insulation perhaps) and a touch more leg room would have helped,but you only get what you pay for.
Regards
peakp
Crew safty annoucement OK and they did ask passengers to stop reading and pay attention. After release by the captain they did the bar run, followed by the meal service about 60 mins. after takeoff. After the meal service, we then had duty free sales followed by the game card and then a request for loose change for charity.
So,all in all, six cabin announcements,of these only one contained any sales pressure, (duty free). Could not fault the cabin crew,sat in row 4 extra leg room seats,which when you are tall are very welcome.
Arrived on stand on time 20:40, had no baggage,and made the 21:04 train from the airport into Manchester.
Would suggest the first thread on this post,was unlucky or just anti Monarch.
Just to finnish off,outward flight was on jet2 757 also sat in the front part of the A/c and have to say it was noisy (lack of insulation perhaps) and a touch more leg room would have helped,but you only get what you pay for.
Regards
peakp
Join Date: May 2005
Location: CNX/AGP
Posts: 72
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I think Final 3 Greens has a very important point here. We, as the experienced ones, have our own interests at stake in showing the occasional traveller how to behave.
Believe me, I could recite to you here and now, word for word, the safety briefings of about a dozen airlines (don't worry I'm not going to). Yes, it bores me rigid, and yes, I find it a little frustrating to be told how to open a seatbelt buckle. Notwithstanding that, I never, ever, fail to put away the magazine and at least give the impression of paying attention.
Many years ago in my homeland of the UK, it was considered fairly normal to drive your car to the pub, have half a dozen pints of beer and then drive back home again. A concerted campaign by government (rightly) has led to a situation where this is no longer socially acceptable.
I would submit to fellow Ppruners that it would be to the benefit of us all if we could strive to make it similarly un-acceptable to neglect to pay attention to that which one day, and let us hope it never arrives, might save our skins.
Believe me, I could recite to you here and now, word for word, the safety briefings of about a dozen airlines (don't worry I'm not going to). Yes, it bores me rigid, and yes, I find it a little frustrating to be told how to open a seatbelt buckle. Notwithstanding that, I never, ever, fail to put away the magazine and at least give the impression of paying attention.
Many years ago in my homeland of the UK, it was considered fairly normal to drive your car to the pub, have half a dozen pints of beer and then drive back home again. A concerted campaign by government (rightly) has led to a situation where this is no longer socially acceptable.
I would submit to fellow Ppruners that it would be to the benefit of us all if we could strive to make it similarly un-acceptable to neglect to pay attention to that which one day, and let us hope it never arrives, might save our skins.
