A disappointing experience - or a reflection of how things are?
Apr 4, 2012 | 6:03 pm
#76
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Southern California
Programs: DL DM, EY Plat, MM Senator
Posts: 493
The behaviour of the FA was poor, sorry to hear the children were sick and kudos for your help with the sick passenger but this bears repeating over and over again:
You're already more likely to disturb other passengers when traveling with young children, but for the sake of everyone else on the plane don't spread the disturbance across two cabins. Get four seats in J, or ask for a row of 4 Y seats right at the back of the economy cabin.
Someone posted that this would not have happened on an SQ or a CX. Which is why in my experience on Asian carriers, the number of times on night flights the flight crew did exactly what the OP requested and everyone around the PAX in either cabin is kept awake by the shuffling up and down the aisles, agitated whispering in hushed tones, bumping of seats etc etc. Just when you think they're finally sorted out in the business cabin and you are about to fall asleep again, they pop back into economy and thrash around in the overhead bins and hand luggage for some other emergency item and wake everyone in their vicinity again.
There's a reason Malaysia Airlines is banning kids from First Class and introducing a kid-free zone on their A380.
You're already more likely to disturb other passengers when traveling with young children, but for the sake of everyone else on the plane don't spread the disturbance across two cabins. Get four seats in J, or ask for a row of 4 Y seats right at the back of the economy cabin.
Someone posted that this would not have happened on an SQ or a CX. Which is why in my experience on Asian carriers, the number of times on night flights the flight crew did exactly what the OP requested and everyone around the PAX in either cabin is kept awake by the shuffling up and down the aisles, agitated whispering in hushed tones, bumping of seats etc etc. Just when you think they're finally sorted out in the business cabin and you are about to fall asleep again, they pop back into economy and thrash around in the overhead bins and hand luggage for some other emergency item and wake everyone in their vicinity again.
There's a reason Malaysia Airlines is banning kids from First Class and introducing a kid-free zone on their A380.
No other airline, as far as I know, has imposed any "kids bans" so far.
I read the tread several times and did not see that the OP requested anything out of the ordinary.
Apr 4, 2012 | 6:32 pm
#77
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 32
Regarding MH:
http://www.heraldsun.com.au/travel/n...-1226318376116
"FIRST it banned babies from first class, and now Malaysia Airlines has declared a child-free zone on its Airbus A380s.
The child ban applies to the upper deck economy section of its jets, restricting children to the lower deck, Australian Business Traveller reports.
The move was revealed in an advisory issued to travel agents which stated that children under 12 would be banned from the section on its new superjumbo, which is set to make its debut on July 1.
It hopes that the adults-only cabin will ensure a more enjoyable flight for business travellers who have to fly in economy.
According to an airline memo sent to South Korean travel site Topasweb: "(the booking system) is currently being developed so that, when customer has (a child or infant booking), seats on upper deck will automatically be excluded from selection.
"Please make your seat selection at lower level if you are travelling with children under 12 years old."
The airline banned babies from its first class section on its A380 and 747-400 fleet last year after receiving a number of complains about crying infants.
Its first flight will be between Kuala Lumpur and London, with a Sydney-Kuala Lumpur flight on September 25." --Melbourne Herald Sun
http://www.heraldsun.com.au/travel/n...-1226318376116
"FIRST it banned babies from first class, and now Malaysia Airlines has declared a child-free zone on its Airbus A380s.
The child ban applies to the upper deck economy section of its jets, restricting children to the lower deck, Australian Business Traveller reports.
The move was revealed in an advisory issued to travel agents which stated that children under 12 would be banned from the section on its new superjumbo, which is set to make its debut on July 1.
It hopes that the adults-only cabin will ensure a more enjoyable flight for business travellers who have to fly in economy.
According to an airline memo sent to South Korean travel site Topasweb: "(the booking system) is currently being developed so that, when customer has (a child or infant booking), seats on upper deck will automatically be excluded from selection.
"Please make your seat selection at lower level if you are travelling with children under 12 years old."
The airline banned babies from its first class section on its A380 and 747-400 fleet last year after receiving a number of complains about crying infants.
Its first flight will be between Kuala Lumpur and London, with a Sydney-Kuala Lumpur flight on September 25." --Melbourne Herald Sun
Apr 4, 2012 | 6:43 pm
#78
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Southern California
Programs: DL DM, EY Plat, MM Senator
Posts: 493
Regarding MH:
http://www.heraldsun.com.au/travel/n...-1226318376116
"FIRST it banned babies from first class, and now Malaysia Airlines has declared a child-free zone on its Airbus A380s.
The child ban applies to the upper deck economy section of its jets, restricting children to the lower deck, Australian Business Traveller reports.
The move was revealed in an advisory issued to travel agents which stated that children under 12 would be banned from the section on its new superjumbo, which is set to make its debut on July 1.
It hopes that the adults-only cabin will ensure a more enjoyable flight for business travellers who have to fly in economy.
According to an airline memo sent to South Korean travel site Topasweb: "(the booking system) is currently being developed so that, when customer has (a child or infant booking), seats on upper deck will automatically be excluded from selection.
"Please make your seat selection at lower level if you are travelling with children under 12 years old."
The airline banned babies from its first class section on its A380 and 747-400 fleet last year after receiving a number of complains about crying infants.
Its first flight will be between Kuala Lumpur and London, with a Sydney-Kuala Lumpur flight on September 25." --Melbourne Herald Sun
http://www.heraldsun.com.au/travel/n...-1226318376116
"FIRST it banned babies from first class, and now Malaysia Airlines has declared a child-free zone on its Airbus A380s.
The child ban applies to the upper deck economy section of its jets, restricting children to the lower deck, Australian Business Traveller reports.
The move was revealed in an advisory issued to travel agents which stated that children under 12 would be banned from the section on its new superjumbo, which is set to make its debut on July 1.
It hopes that the adults-only cabin will ensure a more enjoyable flight for business travellers who have to fly in economy.
According to an airline memo sent to South Korean travel site Topasweb: "(the booking system) is currently being developed so that, when customer has (a child or infant booking), seats on upper deck will automatically be excluded from selection.
"Please make your seat selection at lower level if you are travelling with children under 12 years old."
The airline banned babies from its first class section on its A380 and 747-400 fleet last year after receiving a number of complains about crying infants.
Its first flight will be between Kuala Lumpur and London, with a Sydney-Kuala Lumpur flight on September 25." --Melbourne Herald Sun
The only thing that was done is no bassinets in F. Kids of all ages can be in F and J as long as they have a ticket. Yes, there apparently will be a cildren-free zone in Y on the upper deck of 380, but nothing more than that. Children can fly in all three classes of service.
Apr 4, 2012 | 6:55 pm
#79
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: SYD
Programs: |QF LTG|DL Gold|
Posts: 1,784
Do not provide information unless you are sure about it. You are wrong about MH. The only thing they did, and it was done because of the suite configurations in First, is not installing bassinets there. Otherwise, children are welcome to fly in 1st, business, or coach classes. Buy a seat and enjoy the flight!
No other airline, as far as I know, has imposed any "kids bans" so far.
I read the tread several times and did not see that the OP requested anything out of the ordinary.
No other airline, as far as I know, has imposed any "kids bans" so far.
I read the tread several times and did not see that the OP requested anything out of the ordinary.
Apr 4, 2012 | 7:05 pm
#80
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Southern California
Programs: DL DM, EY Plat, MM Senator
Posts: 493
I'm sure about it (http://www.ausbt.com.au/malaysia-air...on-airbus-a380), more airlines should take a leaf out of MH's book, and the fact the OP's request is seen as "nothing out of the ordinary" reflects a lack of consideration for other passengers.
Still could find any requests in the original post.
Apr 4, 2012 | 7:28 pm
#81
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: SYD
Programs: |QF LTG|DL Gold|
Posts: 1,784
Like I said above, children can fly in all three classes on MH. Babies cannot be in F. There will be a kid-free zone in one section of Y on 380. No "kid bans" otherwise. You said that MH is banning kids from First Class. It is not.
Still could find any requests in the original post.
Still could find any requests in the original post.
The request made by the OP is to override the requirement that passengers stay in their allocated cabin. If economy toilets are all occupied, you can't "request" to use the business class ones because you need to go, to minimize disruption to the passengers there. No reason that "request" should be granted just because someone split their family up between different cabin classes.
Apr 4, 2012 | 7:42 pm
#82
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: May 2008
Location: CHA, MAN;
Programs: Delta DM 1 MM; Hz PC
Posts: 11,174
dont worry about it
Apr 4, 2012 | 7:47 pm
#85
Join Date: May 2004
Programs: AA Gold
Posts: 1,263
Thanks for asking! I got the NR but not the SA.
Apr 4, 2012 | 7:49 pm
#86
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Southern California
Programs: DL DM, EY Plat, MM Senator
Posts: 493
The request made by the OP is to override the requirement that passengers stay in their allocated cabin. If economy toilets are all occupied, you can't "request" to use the business class ones because you need to go, to minimize disruption to the passengers there. No reason that "request" should be granted just because someone split their family up between different cabin classes.
Apr 4, 2012 | 8:05 pm
#88
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: SAT
Programs: Delta DM, Marriott Titanium, Hilton Gold (LT), Nat EL Exec, Hertz PC
Posts: 637
There will always be facts (or biases or perspectives) in play that a particular participant in a given situation won't have... and the presence of those facts (or biases or perspectives) should never tend to invalidate the specific perspective of someone, yet all through the Delta threads people invalidate and dismiss the stories (perspective) of posters (some frankly in very obtuse ways).
Perhaps this occurs in other threads also (not generally in the other threads I participate in).
Case in point: Four people standing in a line watching an accident happen will see and accurately describe four different accidents. Each one's perspective will provide an accurate rendition of the events, and their assessment on the "what caused it" portion of the accident will be significantly impacted by their own perspective.
The OP in this case presented his perspective on events he experienced. I see no reason why an adult conversation wouldn't include various brainstorming on how the activity (or his perspective) was impacted by other events or facts. But attacking him for posting it? Or criticizing him for posting it? Criticizing his review of what he experienced? How does that serve to benefit anyone?
NOT supporting someone's post (or perspective) on FT doesn't require an attack. There are several examples in this thread of people who disagree and are clearly respective of the OP's opinion / perspective. But there are others that really should be moderated out of the thread (all threads?).
Perhaps this occurs in other threads also (not generally in the other threads I participate in).
Case in point: Four people standing in a line watching an accident happen will see and accurately describe four different accidents. Each one's perspective will provide an accurate rendition of the events, and their assessment on the "what caused it" portion of the accident will be significantly impacted by their own perspective.
The OP in this case presented his perspective on events he experienced. I see no reason why an adult conversation wouldn't include various brainstorming on how the activity (or his perspective) was impacted by other events or facts. But attacking him for posting it? Or criticizing him for posting it? Criticizing his review of what he experienced? How does that serve to benefit anyone?
NOT supporting someone's post (or perspective) on FT doesn't require an attack. There are several examples in this thread of people who disagree and are clearly respective of the OP's opinion / perspective. But there are others that really should be moderated out of the thread (all threads?).
Apr 4, 2012 | 8:35 pm
#89
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Southern California
Programs: DL DM, EY Plat, MM Senator
Posts: 493
There will always be facts (or biases or perspectives) in play that a particular participant in a given situation won't have... and the presence of those facts (or biases or perspectives) should never tend to invalidate the specific perspective of someone, yet all through the Delta threads people invalidate and dismiss the stories (perspective) of posters (some frankly in very obtuse ways).
Perhaps this occurs in other threads also (not generally in the other threads I participate in).
Case in point: Four people standing in a line watching an accident happen will see and accurately describe four different accidents. Each one's perspective will provide an accurate rendition of the events, and their assessment on the "what caused it" portion of the accident will be significantly impacted by their own perspective.
The OP in this case presented his perspective on events he experienced. I see no reason why an adult conversation wouldn't include various brainstorming on how the activity (or his perspective) was impacted by other events or facts. But attacking him for posting it? Or criticizing him for posting it? Criticizing his review of what he experienced? How does that serve to benefit anyone?
NOT supporting someone's post (or perspective) on FT doesn't require an attack. There are several examples in this thread of people who disagree and are clearly respective of the OP's opinion / perspective. But there are others that really should be moderated out of the thread (all threads?).
Perhaps this occurs in other threads also (not generally in the other threads I participate in).
Case in point: Four people standing in a line watching an accident happen will see and accurately describe four different accidents. Each one's perspective will provide an accurate rendition of the events, and their assessment on the "what caused it" portion of the accident will be significantly impacted by their own perspective.
The OP in this case presented his perspective on events he experienced. I see no reason why an adult conversation wouldn't include various brainstorming on how the activity (or his perspective) was impacted by other events or facts. But attacking him for posting it? Or criticizing him for posting it? Criticizing his review of what he experienced? How does that serve to benefit anyone?
NOT supporting someone's post (or perspective) on FT doesn't require an attack. There are several examples in this thread of people who disagree and are clearly respective of the OP's opinion / perspective. But there are others that really should be moderated out of the thread (all threads?).
But this is an MO of many on this board! The art of civil discussion and debate is rapidly disappearing in our society, and its tiny slice represented here is a great example of what is going on in the society at large. Accusations and insults, and even thinly veiled profanity fly within a post or two. The general perception on this board is that anyone who complains is automatically wrong, a DYKWIA type. It is especially surprising given that many (most?) on this board are well educated, well traveled people who know basic etiquette and manners -- and yet here they behave as bullies. Compensating for something?
One does not need to be a mental health professional to see that for some this must be an outlet for their unresolved frustrations in life. A friend, a top notch psychiatrist, got so interested in this phenomenon that he started building a profile of several particularly intereting posters. It will be a fascinating research report to read if it ever materializes -- and there are no patient confidentiality concerns either, everything is anonymous from the get go. The trends are so brilliant though! Wouldn't it make a fabulous case study for the Journal of Mental Health? Would love to read it, even though it is not my field at all.
Apr 4, 2012 | 8:47 pm
#90
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Gulf Coast/Ventura County/Somewhere in between
Programs: DL GM, Marriott PP, Avis Something or other
Posts: 4,432
But this is an MO of many on this board! The art of civil discussion and debate is rapidly disappearing in our society, and its tiny slice represented here is a great example of what is going on in the society at large. Accusations and insults, and even thinly veiled profanity fly within a post or two. The general perception on this board is that anyone who complains is automatically wrong, a DYKWIA type. It is especially surprising given that many (most?) on this board are well educated, well traveled people who know basic etiquette and manners -- and yet here they behave as bullies. Compensating for something?
One does not need to be a mental health professional to see that for some this must be an outlet for their unresolved frustrations in life. A friend, a top notch psychiatrist, got so interested in this phenomenon that he started building a profile of several particularly intereting posters. It will be a fascinating research report to read if it ever materializes -- and there are no patient confidentiality concerns either, everything is anonymous from the get go. The trends are so brilliant though! Wouldn't it make a fabulous case study for the Journal of Mental Health? Would love to read it, even though it is not my field at all.
One does not need to be a mental health professional to see that for some this must be an outlet for their unresolved frustrations in life. A friend, a top notch psychiatrist, got so interested in this phenomenon that he started building a profile of several particularly intereting posters. It will be a fascinating research report to read if it ever materializes -- and there are no patient confidentiality concerns either, everything is anonymous from the get go. The trends are so brilliant though! Wouldn't it make a fabulous case study for the Journal of Mental Health? Would love to read it, even though it is not my field at all.