HangTen

This discussion is silly.

There is no financial advantage for ANY airline to compromise safety, especially airlines with, quite literally, billions in their bank accounts.

Now, if an airline is on its last legs fiscally, I can see how it could theoretically occur, but even then, in North America and most of Europe, I'm highly skeptical it would ever happen.

The danger of ice on a wing, even if it is virtually invisible, is drilled into pilots heads within the first 5 minutes of flight training, and beyond regularly thereafter. If you know anything about pilots, they live and die by SOP's.

Unless you know the precise movement history of each tail at an airport, it's ridiculous to make claims that some airlines deice whilst others don't.

I've seen WJ deice aircraft mid summer due to super cooled fuel freezing portions of the wing.

Let's move on, shall we?

I

robsaw

And 737's can be allowed "frost" on the upper wing surface (within specific limits), which is not the same for other aircraft.

Yes, it is silly for non-experts to make claims based on one or two anecdotal stories and uninformed personal observations. I am no expert, but I am getting more informed with all things aircraft safety since I've been working on the management side of aircraft maintenance organization.

Symmetre

We're not very deep into 2016 yet but the allegation that WS would skip deicing to save money may hang on to be the most foolish statement of the year.

Tracon, are you really serious? Please tell you you don't actually believe that.

Good God, man. If you think safety is expensive, try having an accident. The cost of deicing is the cheapest insurance going.

tracon

I'm not saying WS would skimp on safety.
I'm saying WS is less paranoid than it's main competitor.
At +1C I've seen AC do a lot more deicing than WS.
They statement about frost allowing to form on the upper surface of a 737 wing may be more in line with the truth.

HangTen

Boeing and operators noted the issue early on with the NG roll out.

You can often see the area in the summer months on a very specific portion of the wing, near the power plants.

Boeing did extensive testing on the issue and concluded it was safe. The various national aviation authorities have long since concurred.

There is no economy when it comes to skimping on safety. Even clearing MEL's instead of letting them build up over the course of a day or two is false economy.

Every airline exec worth anything knows this.

Hull losses are expensive. Lest anyone forget, WJ has had none it's 20 year history. The same cannot be said for its principle domestic competitor.

In saying that, I wouldn't think twice about either carrier when it comes to safety.

Allegiant? Personally, I wouldn't go anywhere near them.

arf04

In the AC vs WS discussion column: witnessed a 4-5 year old kid this morning having a major meltdown (the kind of tantrum that only small children can have) prior to boarding my WS flight. Overheard the dad tell the mom that the kid was very upset because they weren't flying on AC! Hilarious!!

As they were boarding, the gate agent managed to coax a reluctant high five out of the kid, but he still wasn't a happy camper.

DrunkCargo

The cynic in me wants to say AC crew like longer hours and more pay at the expense of greater delays... Or AC metal sits longer between flights than WS.

DrunkCargo

This is exactly what I felt on 3 recent WS flights after realigning my loyalty away from AC this new year. It's a lot less stressful to wonder what will happen at the gate, or prior to the gate, or if the SD or delegate FA will shortchange me my priority meal selection, or ... The more features I expect, the more expensive the enforcement... and in my case, the expense is my mental energy onboard.

I don't have high expectations with WS, and WS exceeds that greatly at the moment. With AC as a SE, I have expectations and find myself having to enforce my entitlements rather than just sit back and relax. And it looks like WS crew still understand it's a job, not an entitlement.

I have no problems paying for Plus so far, and compared to high flex, it's essentially the same.

Hard product is meaningless when soft is what you remember...

Also on the side, I've had a run-in with this clause of Altitude terms and conditions: "Air Canada Altitude status is a privilege, which can be revoked by Air Canada at its discretion."