Are the "use CO or WN instead of DL/NW" folks pointing out CO/WN flaws?
Jul 19, 2009, 8:38 pm
#1
Original Poster
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Atlntida, Canelones, Uruguay (MVD) and rarely GNV
Programs: AV LifeMiles, CM ConnectMiles, BA Exec Club. Former:ex-ASGold, ex-UA1K, ex-COPlat, ex-NWGold.
Posts: 2,673
Are the "use CO or WN instead of DL/NW" folks pointing out CO/WN flaws?
Note to mods: I do not think this is outside of the spirit of the board, and is not meant to target anyone; it is not an attack at all IMHO. However I do feel it is valid to bring this up due to a vocal minority who are very anti-DL/NW nowadays, including posting links to "Delta Sucks" type blogs.
In those blogs frequently linked from this and the DL forum, every time there is a "smoke in cabin" or "return to airport" or even a minor safety issue, it seems that there is a post about it, implying DL/NW is unusually unsafe.
The same happens in-line here on FT itself at times. Meanwhile the posters involved often recommend how much better WN and CO are than DL/NW.
I'm just wondering if they also bring attention to items like the NTSB blaming the CO pilots on the CO1404 DEN flight last December that veered from the runway and burst into flame.
Data Suggest Crew in Denver Crash Failed to Respond to Wind Gusts .
Or how about the chunk of fuselage that ripped of the WN flight the other day?
Thankfully nobody was killed nor seriously injured in either incident. But it just seems like a cheap shot to use the internet to trash DL/NW on safety while promoting other airlines that also have occasional safety issues.
Maybe the DL/NW "antis" should take safety issues off the table entirely because it's a cheap shot. Including on blogs that are prominently linked from FT. I think we all should consider the US domestic majors as essentially equal in safety and not part of why we might try to convince others to fly or not fly them. (I'm leaving regionals out of that for now - I have concerns about some of all the major's regional affiliates).
Plenty of reason to be pro, con, or anti DL/NW or WN or CO, UA, US, AA without trashing any of them on safety.
In those blogs frequently linked from this and the DL forum, every time there is a "smoke in cabin" or "return to airport" or even a minor safety issue, it seems that there is a post about it, implying DL/NW is unusually unsafe.
The same happens in-line here on FT itself at times. Meanwhile the posters involved often recommend how much better WN and CO are than DL/NW.
I'm just wondering if they also bring attention to items like the NTSB blaming the CO pilots on the CO1404 DEN flight last December that veered from the runway and burst into flame.
Data Suggest Crew in Denver Crash Failed to Respond to Wind Gusts .
Or how about the chunk of fuselage that ripped of the WN flight the other day?
Thankfully nobody was killed nor seriously injured in either incident. But it just seems like a cheap shot to use the internet to trash DL/NW on safety while promoting other airlines that also have occasional safety issues.
Maybe the DL/NW "antis" should take safety issues off the table entirely because it's a cheap shot. Including on blogs that are prominently linked from FT. I think we all should consider the US domestic majors as essentially equal in safety and not part of why we might try to convince others to fly or not fly them. (I'm leaving regionals out of that for now - I have concerns about some of all the major's regional affiliates).
Plenty of reason to be pro, con, or anti DL/NW or WN or CO, UA, US, AA without trashing any of them on safety.
Jul 19, 2009, 8:48 pm
#2
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: DFW
Programs: OWE AA EXP;*A TK Gold; Marriott LTT; Hyatt Globalist; IHG Plat; National VIP
Posts: 3,098
This actually sparked my interest and I am going to check out those other forums to see what people are posting about DL safety. Personally, I don't think there are any reasons for safety concerns on DL.
On the other hand, what always interested me is the fact that those people that are so vocal about how horrible DL/NW has become do still take a very active role on the DL/NW threads just to post something negative, at least that is what it seems. Why do it? Why not concentrate on the allegedly greener pastures of CO and WN boards?
In any event, everyone is free to post wherever they want, of course, just a curious observation.
On the other hand, what always interested me is the fact that those people that are so vocal about how horrible DL/NW has become do still take a very active role on the DL/NW threads just to post something negative, at least that is what it seems. Why do it? Why not concentrate on the allegedly greener pastures of CO and WN boards?
In any event, everyone is free to post wherever they want, of course, just a curious observation.
Jul 19, 2009, 8:49 pm
#3
A FlyerTalk Posting Legend
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: PSM
Posts: 69,232
There isn't much of a point in claiming that any carriers currently operating with service in the USA are truly suffering from poor operational safety. It simply isn't true.
As for whether people can come into FT and start threads on such topics, sure they can. And when they demonstrate irrational thought others can take that into account when considering their opinions on other topics. It isn't really worth fighting with them, however. Lots of effort and not much upside.
As for whether people can come into FT and start threads on such topics, sure they can. And when they demonstrate irrational thought others can take that into account when considering their opinions on other topics. It isn't really worth fighting with them, however. Lots of effort and not much upside.
Jul 19, 2009, 8:49 pm
#4
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: MCO
Programs: DL-DM/1MM, HILTON-DIA, .HYATT-DIA/GLOB , IHG-PLT,HERTZ 5*, NATIONAL ES
Posts: 8,691
Note to mods: I do not think this is outside of the spirit of the board, and is not meant to target anyone; it is not an attack at all IMHO. However I do feel it is valid to bring this up due to a vocal minority who are very anti-DL/NW nowadays, including posting links to "Delta Sucks" type blogs.
In those blogs frequently linked from this and the DL forum, every time there is a "smoke in cabin" or "return to airport" or even a minor safety issue, it seems that there is a post about it, implying DL/NW is unusually unsafe.
The same happens in-line here on FT itself at times. Meanwhile the posters involved often recommend how much better WN and CO are than DL/NW.
I'm just wondering if they also bring attention to items like the NTSB blaming the CO pilots on the CO1404 DEN flight last December that veered from the runway and burst into flame.
Data Suggest Crew in Denver Crash Failed to Respond to Wind Gusts .
Or how about the chunk of fuselage that ripped of the WN flight the other day?
Thankfully nobody was killed nor seriously injured in either incident. But it just seems like a cheap shot to use the internet to trash DL/NW on safety while promoting other airlines that also have occasional safety issues.
Maybe the DL/NW "antis" should take safety issues off the table entirely because it's a cheap shot. Including on blogs that are prominently linked from FT. I think we all should consider the US domestic majors as essentially equal in safety and not part of why we might try to convince others to fly or not fly them. (I'm leaving regionals out of that for now - I have concerns about some of all the major's regional affiliates).
Plenty of reason to be pro, con, or anti DL/NW or WN or CO, UA, US, AA without trashing any of them on safety.
In those blogs frequently linked from this and the DL forum, every time there is a "smoke in cabin" or "return to airport" or even a minor safety issue, it seems that there is a post about it, implying DL/NW is unusually unsafe.
The same happens in-line here on FT itself at times. Meanwhile the posters involved often recommend how much better WN and CO are than DL/NW.
I'm just wondering if they also bring attention to items like the NTSB blaming the CO pilots on the CO1404 DEN flight last December that veered from the runway and burst into flame.
Data Suggest Crew in Denver Crash Failed to Respond to Wind Gusts .
Or how about the chunk of fuselage that ripped of the WN flight the other day?
Thankfully nobody was killed nor seriously injured in either incident. But it just seems like a cheap shot to use the internet to trash DL/NW on safety while promoting other airlines that also have occasional safety issues.
Maybe the DL/NW "antis" should take safety issues off the table entirely because it's a cheap shot. Including on blogs that are prominently linked from FT. I think we all should consider the US domestic majors as essentially equal in safety and not part of why we might try to convince others to fly or not fly them. (I'm leaving regionals out of that for now - I have concerns about some of all the major's regional affiliates).
Plenty of reason to be pro, con, or anti DL/NW or WN or CO, UA, US, AA without trashing any of them on safety.
Obama is better than Bush, No Bush was better, no Palin is better.. sort of thing.
Jul 19, 2009, 8:53 pm
#5
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: DFW
Programs: Marriott Life Titanium, Hilton Diamond, Delta and United Silver, IHG Plat
Posts: 2,891
Well I'm fleeing the DL/NW counter disaster for CO on my next trip.
I guarantee though that if I see similar mayhem on CO I'll post it - I'm an equal opportunity hit-taker when I've been wronged.
I guarantee though that if I see similar mayhem on CO I'll post it - I'm an equal opportunity hit-taker when I've been wronged.
Jul 19, 2009, 9:05 pm
#6
Original Poster
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Atlntida, Canelones, Uruguay (MVD) and rarely GNV
Programs: AV LifeMiles, CM ConnectMiles, BA Exec Club. Former:ex-ASGold, ex-UA1K, ex-COPlat, ex-NWGold.
Posts: 2,673
Totally agree with you about the DL/NW counter fiascos. Better than the HP/US merger counter issues, but that sure is faint praise.
Jul 19, 2009, 10:15 pm
#7
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: MSP
Programs: Fallen Plats, ex-WN CP, DYKWIW; still PAL Premier Elite & Hilton Diamond
Posts: 25,419
Note to mods: I do not think this is outside of the spirit of the board, and is not meant to target anyone; it is not an attack at all IMHO. However I do feel it is valid to bring this up due to a vocal minority who are very anti-DL/NW nowadays, including posting links to "Delta Sucks" type blogs.
In those blogs frequently linked from this and the DL forum, every time there is a "smoke in cabin" or "return to airport" or even a minor safety issue, it seems that there is a post about it, implying DL/NW is unusually unsafe.
In those blogs frequently linked from this and the DL forum, every time there is a "smoke in cabin" or "return to airport" or even a minor safety issue, it seems that there is a post about it, implying DL/NW is unusually unsafe.
However, I do thank you for the unsolicited publicity!
As for whether or not this thread is a rather poorly veiled personal attack, I'll leave that to the moderators to decide.
Jul 19, 2009, 11:17 pm
#8
Original Poster
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Atlntida, Canelones, Uruguay (MVD) and rarely GNV
Programs: AV LifeMiles, CM ConnectMiles, BA Exec Club. Former:ex-ASGold, ex-UA1K, ex-COPlat, ex-NWGold.
Posts: 2,673
Asking a question isn't an attack. You're not the only poster here who, IMHO, is anti-Delta to the point of excess. But your blog is one of the things I considered. Your blog is linked to every single post you make on FT because it's in your "Visit MikeMpls' Homepage" link to the left of every post.
Given that every single post links to that blog, and that blog is full of "DL hit a bird" type stuff, and that you as a prominent FTer, and others who are anti-Delta, often promote CO and WN, it is entirely valid to question whether you and others are giving "equal time" to the serious safety-related issues that have recently occurred on your two favorite, much-better-than-Delta (per you and others) airlines. If you haven't, then I submit that it's unfair to single out Delta's safety issues.
This is not a personal attack. Think of it as a "letter to the editor" about the coverage.
As a CO and UA and DL and NW elite and regular flyer, I don't have a dog in this fight. As an FTer, I feel called to be one of the many voices giving fair-and-balanced (gag me but it fits) comments. As somebody who does intend, both by choice and by fare/route-system fit, to continue flying DL/NW, I've been disturbed about the signal-to-noise ratio of meaningful information to repetitive diatribes here (and I'm not pointing at you, Mike). Sometimes I just want to read or share information about flying DL/NW, without the noise. And I'm really tired of being called pro-Delta just because I happen to be realistic about the merger and don't have a lifelong love affair with NW the way some folks here do.
Questioning and differing what particular posters write on a message board or on blogs linked regularly from that message board is what teh interwebs are about. The tubes are full of that. That does not constitute a personal attack in any reasonable definition. I'm sure you're a fine fellow. I'm sure you have good reasons, to you, for your opinions. But if you call a questioning of your editorial slant, so to speak, a personal attack, perhaps you shouldn't be posting such opinions.
It is curious how the anti-delta posters often play the personal attack card. One on the receiving end of that could actually interpret that as a personal attack in and of itself, as an attempt by a non-mod to bring down the "weight of moderation" on them as an attempt to stifle dissent. But I'm sure nobody would attempt to do that...
Given that every single post links to that blog, and that blog is full of "DL hit a bird" type stuff, and that you as a prominent FTer, and others who are anti-Delta, often promote CO and WN, it is entirely valid to question whether you and others are giving "equal time" to the serious safety-related issues that have recently occurred on your two favorite, much-better-than-Delta (per you and others) airlines. If you haven't, then I submit that it's unfair to single out Delta's safety issues.
This is not a personal attack. Think of it as a "letter to the editor" about the coverage.
As a CO and UA and DL and NW elite and regular flyer, I don't have a dog in this fight. As an FTer, I feel called to be one of the many voices giving fair-and-balanced (gag me but it fits) comments. As somebody who does intend, both by choice and by fare/route-system fit, to continue flying DL/NW, I've been disturbed about the signal-to-noise ratio of meaningful information to repetitive diatribes here (and I'm not pointing at you, Mike). Sometimes I just want to read or share information about flying DL/NW, without the noise. And I'm really tired of being called pro-Delta just because I happen to be realistic about the merger and don't have a lifelong love affair with NW the way some folks here do.
Questioning and differing what particular posters write on a message board or on blogs linked regularly from that message board is what teh interwebs are about. The tubes are full of that. That does not constitute a personal attack in any reasonable definition. I'm sure you're a fine fellow. I'm sure you have good reasons, to you, for your opinions. But if you call a questioning of your editorial slant, so to speak, a personal attack, perhaps you shouldn't be posting such opinions.
It is curious how the anti-delta posters often play the personal attack card. One on the receiving end of that could actually interpret that as a personal attack in and of itself, as an attempt by a non-mod to bring down the "weight of moderation" on them as an attempt to stifle dissent. But I'm sure nobody would attempt to do that...
Jul 19, 2009, 11:41 pm
#9
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: The best state in the USA - Florida!
Programs: Marriott Titanium/LT Plat, AS MVP75K, AA PlatPro, UA Premier, Disney AP
Posts: 14,499
At the end of the day, the one thing where I won't argue over any major airline here in the United States is on safety - I have no hesitation boarding a plane with the name Delta, Northwest, Continental, Southwest, American, US Airways, AirTran, Allegiant, Frontier, United, etc. etc. here in the United States.
Things can and do happen, but I feel safe getting on any reputable carrier in this country. Otherwise the FAA wouldn't be letting them fly.
There's plenty to debate between DL/CO/WN/whoever. Safety should absolutely not be one of those topics.
Things can and do happen, but I feel safe getting on any reputable carrier in this country. Otherwise the FAA wouldn't be letting them fly.
There's plenty to debate between DL/CO/WN/whoever. Safety should absolutely not be one of those topics.
Jul 20, 2009, 12:04 am
#10
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: MSP
Programs: Fallen Plats, ex-WN CP, DYKWIW; still PAL Premier Elite & Hilton Diamond
Posts: 25,419
I forgot about that FT Profile home page, never noticed that it shows up that way. I love it!!!!
My FT Profile home page was where I was told years ago by a moderator that links to xxx.com sites have to go as opposed to signature lines, so I'm just following instructions.
Two big TOS problem for you to ponder:
#1 is debate of an other member, but personally I will overlook that in this case & keep my fingers off the"bad post" button.
#2 is misrepresentation of a subject. A quick count of the last 20 entries shows that only 7 deal w/ airframe incidents. The two most recent postings involve a once-drunk (on-duty) pilot, and much more recently drunk (off-duty) FA whose court-imposed restrictions fortunately have kept her grounded. It covers a lot more than you would lead people to believe.
If you don't like the postings, constructively-worded feedback actually makes it through the screening. Only off-topic/vulgar/personal attack types of responses are weeded out (& there was one bozo who was so continuously off the wall that I added an email filter to route his to the bit bucket & save my time).
If you feel the coverage is biased, you're also free to start your own blog(s), eg. DL Doesn't Suck or CO Sucks or WN Sucks or whatever suits your fancy. It's a great country!
My FT Profile home page was where I was told years ago by a moderator that links to xxx.com sites have to go as opposed to signature lines, so I'm just following instructions.
Two big TOS problem for you to ponder:
#1 is debate of an other member, but personally I will overlook that in this case & keep my fingers off the"bad post" button.
#2 is misrepresentation of a subject. A quick count of the last 20 entries shows that only 7 deal w/ airframe incidents. The two most recent postings involve a once-drunk (on-duty) pilot, and much more recently drunk (off-duty) FA whose court-imposed restrictions fortunately have kept her grounded. It covers a lot more than you would lead people to believe.
If you don't like the postings, constructively-worded feedback actually makes it through the screening. Only off-topic/vulgar/personal attack types of responses are weeded out (& there was one bozo who was so continuously off the wall that I added an email filter to route his to the bit bucket & save my time).
If you feel the coverage is biased, you're also free to start your own blog(s), eg. DL Doesn't Suck or CO Sucks or WN Sucks or whatever suits your fancy. It's a great country!
Last edited by MikeMpls; Jul 20, 2009 at 12:10 am
Jul 20, 2009, 12:09 am
#11
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: MSP
Programs: Fallen Plats, ex-WN CP, DYKWIW; still PAL Premier Elite & Hilton Diamond
Posts: 25,419
At the end of the day, the one thing where I won't argue over any major airline here in the United States is on safety - I have no hesitation boarding a plane with the name Delta, Northwest, Continental, Southwest, American, US Airways, AirTran, Allegiant, Frontier, United, etc. etc. here in the United States.
Things can and do happen, but I feel safe getting on any reputable carrier in this country. Otherwise the FAA wouldn't be letting them fly.
There's plenty to debate between DL/CO/WN/whoever. Safety should absolutely not be one of those topics.
Things can and do happen, but I feel safe getting on any reputable carrier in this country. Otherwise the FAA wouldn't be letting them fly.
There's plenty to debate between DL/CO/WN/whoever. Safety should absolutely not be one of those topics.
Jul 20, 2009, 5:20 am
#12
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: National Capitol Region
Programs: Delta Dirt Medallion,AA,USairways, WN Rapid Rewards, National Emerald Club
Posts: 3,912
http://news.moneycentral.msn.com/pro...10&id=10134390
Jul 20, 2009, 6:37 am
#13
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: SUX
Programs: DL 2MM GM
Posts: 320
Equally annoying are the "my airline can do no wrong" posts. Sometimes I think they are employees paid to sing the praises. But then that is fully acceptable also.
Jul 20, 2009, 6:52 am
#14
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Jun 2008
Programs: Formaldehyde Medallion DL DieMiles
Posts: 12,646
There is no disputing the fact that Delta Airlines was #1 in customer complaints filed with DoT for the month of May. WN had the least amount of customer complaints in May. Something is not right in Atlanta.
http://news.moneycentral.msn.com/pro...10&id=10134390
http://news.moneycentral.msn.com/pro...10&id=10134390
DL has been and could be (should be) a better airline than it is now.
The management attitude that allows this poor service trend to continue does a disservice to both DL passengers and the DL employees... who rely on the airline's success for their welfare.
Jul 20, 2009, 6:53 am
#15
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Some place in this wonderful world (usually at 39,000 ft in seat 1C)
Programs: CO Gold Elite / NW Gold Elite
Posts: 13,747
There is no disputing the fact that Delta Airlines was #1 in customer complaints filed with DoT for the month of May. WN had the least amount of customer complaints in May. Something is not right in Atlanta.
http://news.moneycentral.msn.com/pro...10&id=10134390
http://news.moneycentral.msn.com/pro...10&id=10134390