beckoa

Wirelessly posted (beckoa's PWP wonderous device: BlackBerry9000/5.0.0.1067 Profile/MIDP-2.1 Configuration/CLDC-1.1 VendorID/102)

Great I have a KL flight next month AMS-HEL... Hope its not though

China Clipper

Wow, that's ironic all right. Reading through this thread again, KLM is exactly what I was thinking of since the Dutch are the world's tallest people now.

I wish all airlines had a provision whereby one could purchase extra legroom without paying up for First Class. Going overseas it's no issue for me since I fly Business Class on transoceanics. Flying from the East Coast to the West here in the USA it's another matter altogether. Like many, I just try to fly less often nowadays.

pacer142

I think it's because the Asian airlines are still operated with an element of national pride. Other things can vary, e.g. the TG 747s don't have seat back entertainment, but I was glad of the extra space and there's always the option to read a book. But the best economy class I have ever used bar none is that found in Malaysia's 777s - 3-3-3 arrangement rather than trying to get the extra seat in across the cabin as some do (yes, that also means you, KLM), 34in pitch and good seat back entertainment. Superb, and no need to scrap over the exit row. Indeed, I actually found the seat more comfortable than their Business Class one (though obviously with less space and not quite the same level of service!)

Depends with KLM to some extent which aircraft you get, though. The new style seats have thinner backs and so can be more tolerable than the older ones mainly found in the 747s and older 737s, which are inhuman. Particularly for the national airline of a country where I'm considered average height to short at 6' 4".

Or that they would just provide adequate legroom in Economy in the first place.

Neil

edgewood49

Along with reading posts and my personal flying there seems to be a breakdown in the level of customer service at Alaska Airlines which is very concerning to me.

While they have "owned " the West Coast and Alaska for years, and serviced it well, but now they seem to have "lost it". Maybe it's the high flying stock of theirs !

Also when times were tough a few years back the top management would personally call the top 2/3 % of flyers to check in with us twice a year. The past 18 months no calls! And I know I am in the top 2% miles wise.

UA/CO is looking better.

NW Mourning

It's interesting that, as airlines have reduced pitch and width of seats in order to pack in more passengers, most of the passengers seem to place the blame for their increasing discomfort on some of the other passengers. Some people are taller, shorter, wider, or less able than others, and it would be great if the carriers and their fellow passengers could all be considerate and try to make them more comfortable. A bulkhead aisle seat is a reasonable accommodation for a person with mobility impairments, and maybe an exit row seat is a reasonable accommodation for someone with a 38 inch inseam. I certainly would trade with him, but I really don't think he should have to rely upon the kindness of strangers. His height makes him unusual but shouldn't mean that he has to suffer.

I also don't think that overweight people should have to pay for second seats; if airlines find it profitable to cram in more and narrower seats, then, in those instances where the seats are too narrow for some people, maybe a second seat should be provided without charge (as part of the cost of doing business while profiting from squeezing in more seats). Obese people suffer plenty of humiliation every day; they don't need more. Obesity is also linked to poverty, and paying for extra seats is not something everyone can do.

Similarly, there was less angst about carryon space before the checked-bag charges resulted in people bringing more luggage aboard. I watched a woman board yesterday with 3 carryons, and I suspect that the people giving her dirty looks didn't realize that her third bag held medical equipment which could not be checked.

And as for the metroliner... it had a middle seat in the back, with infinite legroom, that was usually my tall son's choice...

Compassion and empathy?

Jack Burton

OT, but wanted to reply to the OT point,...

As a firm believer that all bags with wheels and/or larger than a backpack should be checked,...here is my concern in this case,...

If this woman's "3rd" bag was indeed medical gear and was absolutely needed as a carry-on, then she should have checked one or both of her other 2 non-medical bags. Don't you agree?

pacer142

There's a difference between being tall and morbidly obese. One is a result of lifestyle choices, one isn't.

(OK, there are some people who have a medical condition causing them to be obese. But they are in the minority; most people are obese because they eat too much and/or do too little exercise.)

Neil

pacer142

Defintely not if one of them contained a laptop or other valuable items that you should not check in, no. Should people with a medical requirement e.g. CPAP not be allowed to travel with a laptop?

Neil

jwright

That's because the width of seats on narrowbodies hasn't changed in 50 years.

AS Flyer

However, the width of people in the United States has most definitely changed over the last 50 years. We're fatter than ever. Odd that some would blame the airlines for that.

meballard

The rules explicitly exclude medical equipment from the normal rules. It can be carried on separately, and the liquid quantity rules don't apply (and are separate from other liquids).

Is it fair to restrict their other carry-ons due to medically necessary equipment?

Jack Burton

Well, since you are only allowed 2 bags, some concessions need to be made as to what is most important. What if everyone on that flight made the same claim about "needing" 3 bags? Then no one would have space in the overheads.

Let's face it, most people carry on far too much just to avoid checked baggage fees, and do not care if it affects other people. Generally, I board early enough for bin space not to be an issue, but on a few tight connections, I wasn't able to find space for a single small backpack when everyone else had planet-sized rollerbags.

Jack Burton

This is assuming that this bag is legit and was absolutely needed in the cabin. If so, fine. But most people I have found lie about such things. I'm sure you've seen late comers argue about being forced to gate check their bags when the bins have been full. Each and every one of them claim that they NEED to have their items with them.

jwright

Please share the details of your scientific survey.

Jack Burton

Scientific? Your word, not mine. No science needed, just eyes and ears.

Nearly every time I've seen someone told that their bag is too large and/or that the bins are full, the story plays same,...other than for a few cases where it gets resolved in seconds. Starts with a debate with the FA that their mega-sized bag must remain in the cabin for this reason or that,...the importance, the value, etc. Then a bit of foot stomping and heavy sighing before finally conceding their position. Funny that all these people are carrying such essential items in suitcases, while still carrying at least one other small bag or backpack, which I'm sure is actually the bag which contains what they truly need.

All the fuss, and waste of other people's time, simply to avoid having to pay to check-in their bag, and/or spend their own time later to retrieve it. No consideration for others, simple as that. Solved easily if only true carry-ons were permitted in the cabin,...nothing with wheels, nothing larger than a standard backpack. I know it would brighten my day!


Sorry to the OP, as we continue to drift off-topic here. This will be my last reply to anything other than the original topic.