Go Back  FlyerTalk Forums > Travel&Dining > TravelBuzz
Reload this Page >

boarding zone cheating

Community
Wiki Posts
Search

boarding zone cheating

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old Sep 7, 2014 | 9:39 am
  #61  
Suspended
 
Join Date: May 2014
Posts: 3,445
Originally Posted by MSPeconomist
What makes you so sure that, given that elites and those with confirmed FC/biz seats must board first, the maximum (constrained) efficiency isn't obtained by the boarding by row process that most USA legacy carriers follow in their assignment to zones?
What makes me so sure is that the airlines that have discarded this process have shorter turnaround times, and that's the reason that they discarded this process.
lhgreengrd1 is offline  
Old Sep 7, 2014 | 7:44 pm
  #62  
FlyerTalk Evangelist
40 Countries Visited
3M
All eyes on you!
25 Years on Site
 
Join Date: May 1998
Location: Massachusetts, USA; AA 2.996MM & Plat Pro, DL 1MM, GM & Flying Colonel
Posts: 25,037
It has been stated that boarding order can (a) reward elites and high-paying pax or (b) speed the boarding process. This is true.

It has also been stated that attempts to combine both of these are silly. This is hogwash.

The field of multi-criteria decision making has been around for years and has a number of methods for combining two (or more) criteria for an optimal decision. A standard classroom example is students who want a section of a large course in which they will (a) learn a lot, (b) not have to work hard, (c) be graded easily and (d) not have to get up too early. While it may not be possible to get the best of all four worlds at the same time - the best teacher who assigns the least homework may not also be the easiest grader, or may teach at 8 am - there are many well-known methods for eliminating some of the options and finding the best of the remaining ones. The same concepts apply to boarding.

As an example, suppose an airline put passengers in five groups for speed of boarding. Next, any elites or full-fare passengers who ended up in group 5 would be moved to group 4, and any mid-level or top-level elites then in group 4 would be moved to group 3. That would have little to no impact on boarding time, but would effectively guarantee overhead space somewhere in the vicinity of their seat to all mid-level and top-level elites, and almost guarantee it to bottom-tier elites and full-fare passengers. I'm not saying this is an optimum solution, but it is one approach that provides measurable benefits to those whom an airline wants to reward while not impacting the overall process.

The question of enforcing boarding order is a separate issue. To me, deliberate poachers rank about two levels below pond scum. Tearing up their tickets seems a bit extreme, but forced gate-checking of their carry-ons sounds like a cure.
Efrem is offline  
Old Sep 7, 2014 | 8:03 pm
  #63  
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Fort Lauderdale, FL
Posts: 3,359
Originally Posted by Efrem
The field of multi-criteria decision making has been around for years and has a number of methods for combining two (or more) criteria for an optimal decision.
Good observation. This is similar in concept to the multivariate analysis I use with quantitative data for my dissertation. I'd bet good money that when studying boarding procedures, airline factor in that there will be X percentage of "pond scum" who think that rules don't apply to them.

Of course, sometimes a little knowledge sometimes is worse than no knowledge. In complex systems, what seems reasonable sometimes is false, thereby making the actions of a "devil's advocate" opposite of the intended outcome. Classic example: Adding a lane on a crowded highway could make traffic worse due to latent demand.
writerguyfl is offline  
Old Sep 7, 2014 | 10:47 pm
  #64  
FlyerTalk Evangelist
10 Countries Visited
20 Countries Visited
30 Countries Visited
10 Years on Site
 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Sydney Australia
Programs: No programs & No Points!!!
Posts: 14,392
Originally Posted by carsonheim
I don't. But I've seen others cheat and I always silently give a big HOORAH! to the GA who sends the cheater away
I couldn't care less if someone gets on before they are supposed to, however, I too would give a silent cheer for their plans being foiled!
Annalisa12 is offline  
Old Sep 7, 2014 | 11:04 pm
  #65  
Suspended
 
Join Date: May 2014
Posts: 3,445
Originally Posted by Efrem
It has been stated that boarding order can (a) reward elites and high-paying pax or (b) speed the boarding process. This is true.

It has also been stated that attempts to combine both of these are silly. This is hogwash.

The field of multi-criteria decision making has been around for years and has a number of methods for combining two (or more) criteria for an optimal decision. A standard classroom example is students who want a section of a large course in which they will (a) learn a lot, (b) not have to work hard, (c) be graded easily and (d) not have to get up too early. While it may not be possible to get the best of all four worlds at the same time - the best teacher who assigns the least homework may not also be the easiest grader, or may teach at 8 am - there are many well-known methods for eliminating some of the options and finding the best of the remaining ones. The same concepts apply to boarding.

As an example, suppose an airline put passengers in five groups for speed of boarding. Next, any elites or full-fare passengers who ended up in group 5 would be moved to group 4, and any mid-level or top-level elites then in group 4 would be moved to group 3. That would have little to no impact on boarding time, but would effectively guarantee overhead space somewhere in the vicinity of their seat to all mid-level and top-level elites, and almost guarantee it to bottom-tier elites and full-fare passengers. I'm not saying this is an optimum solution, but it is one approach that provides measurable benefits to those whom an airline wants to reward while not impacting the overall process.

The question of enforcing boarding order is a separate issue. To me, deliberate poachers rank about two levels below pond scum. Tearing up their tickets seems a bit extreme, but forced gate-checking of their carry-ons sounds like a cure.
And yet, much of life as we know it here on planet earth could not exist without pond scum. Similarly, most meaningful breakthroughs of human accomplishment are achieved by those who are unwilling to follow the rules of convention in society.
lhgreengrd1 is offline  
Old Sep 8, 2014 | 12:38 am
  #66  
FlyerTalk Evangelist
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: QLA
Programs: SBUX Gold
Posts: 14,508
A fair system would be to have gates for self-scanners/boarders. Anyone boarding out of turn won't be allowed to board until the last passenger who boarded correctly.

Originally Posted by Amelorn
This seems like a uniquely American problem.

IMO, "sensible" practices are based on F/J/elites, Y+ (if applicable), and Y by row.
Have you never flown in Asia (except Japan)?
IceTrojan is offline  
Old Sep 8, 2014 | 7:57 am
  #67  
FlyerTalk Evangelist
10 Countries Visited20 Countries Visited30 Countries Visited15 Years on Site
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Bangkok or San Francisco
Programs: United 1k, Marriott Lifetime PE, Former DL Gold, Former SQ Solitaire, HH Gold
Posts: 11,889
Originally Posted by LAXative
A fair system would be to have gates for self-scanners/boarders. Anyone boarding out of turn won't be allowed to board until the last passenger who boarded correctly.
A fair system would be to have gates as you describe but add a built-in taser for everyone who tried to board out of turn.
Tchiowa is offline  
Old Sep 8, 2014 | 7:59 am
  #68  
FlyerTalk Evangelist
10 Countries Visited20 Countries Visited30 Countries Visited15 Years on Site
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Bangkok or San Francisco
Programs: United 1k, Marriott Lifetime PE, Former DL Gold, Former SQ Solitaire, HH Gold
Posts: 11,889
Originally Posted by lhgreengrd1
Your handle is very apropos. I already stated that I don't actually do this...
You didn't say "No, actually I have a better experience if I successfully circumvent the rules and you all follow them."?
Tchiowa is offline  
Old Sep 8, 2014 | 8:38 am
  #69  
FlyerTalk Evangelist
10 Countries Visited
20 Countries Visited
30 Countries Visited
15 Years on Site
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Posts: 13,595
It would be nice if a little logic applied to the boarding - for example, the one group that need overhead space would be the exit / bulkhead rows - they are not allowed ANY of their baggage, including their small purse or coat in the row, it has to be overhead. But it is incredibly rare that they get to board near the beginning - in some cases (AC at LHR I am talking to you) the front bulkhead is the very last bit allowed on board). I will also put my hand up as someone who has boarded ahead of my allotted section, for that very reason. I told the gate agent why I wanted to board early (full flight, me in bulkhead) and she told me it made sense and let me on.
emma69 is offline  
Old Sep 8, 2014 | 8:39 am
  #70  
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: BWI
Posts: 1,782
I assume most everyone tries to board early, except on Southwest where it would be slightly obvious if 45 people were trying to stand in an area that was for 15 passengers or whatever.

The worst I saw was that some kid was trying to get on the flight as an unaccompanied minor from PBI-BWI. The gate agent said he needed some kind of form and that he had to walk back to the counter by the gate. We thought it was terrible to suggest a kid to walk by himself in a busy gate area. As it turned out, his parents were with him and they tried to pass him off as an unaccompanied minor so he could get on board first and save seats.

Finally, plenty of people get on Southwest flights claiming they need assistance. They roll down in a wheel chair. Somehow, they're healed on the way down. I think if you need assistance getting on the flight, you should have to wait until everyone else gets off and then you must have assistance getting off the plane. That would stop that nonsense.
farbster is offline  
Old Sep 8, 2014 | 8:59 am
  #71  
Senior Moderator
10 Countries Visited
30 Nights
2M
20 Years on Site
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: San Francisco, CA
Programs: UA Plat/2MM [23-yr. 1K, now emeritus] clawing way back to WN-A List; MR LT Titanium; HY Whateverist.
Posts: 12,458
Moderator note.

Recently, this thread garnered a few posts which have attacked or debated members rather than discussing the topic. They have been deleted. Going forward, please follow the FlyerTalk Rules and avoid personalizing the discussion toward members. Thanks, Ocn Vw 1K, Moderator.
Ocn Vw 1K is offline  
Old Sep 8, 2014 | 9:33 am
  #72  
Suspended
 
Join Date: May 2014
Posts: 3,445
Originally Posted by Tchiowa
You didn't say "No, actually I have a better experience if I successfully circumvent the rules and you all follow them."?
I did, but that was based upon my assumption that it would be a better experience for me, as opposed to boarding later and not being able to stow my carry-on. It was not based upon actual experience - since I've not actually been compelled to do this. But it's true that a fundamental requirement is that other folks do NOT attempt to do this - and if that happens, the individual who tries and succeeds in doing so clearly ends up better off.
lhgreengrd1 is offline  
Old Sep 8, 2014 | 9:53 am
  #73  
10 Countries Visited
20 Countries Visited
30 Countries Visited
20 Years on Site
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: usually DCA
Posts: 1,839
Originally Posted by lhgreengrd1
Yes, but once the airlines allow you to buy your way ahead of those reasonable prioritizations, at the detriment to those efficiencies, the rules of the process ceases to be reasonable.
Is there a list of what other rules / laws don't you follow because, in your role as judge and jury, you've decided they are unreasonable? Would help out the rest of us to know which rules you choose to follow.
haveric is offline  
Old Sep 8, 2014 | 10:06 am
  #74  
FlyerTalk Evangelist
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Formerly HPN, but then DCA and IAD for a while, and now back to HPN!
Programs: Honestly, I've been out of the travel game so long that I'm not even sure. Maybe Marriott Gold?
Posts: 10,677
Originally Posted by carsonheim
I don't. But I've seen others cheat and I always silently give a big HOORAH! to the GA who sends the cheater away
I don't not recall a time when I cheated on purpose. There have been times when I showed up at a gate as the boarding process was underway and did not know which group they were on. In those cases, I left it to the gate agent to shoo me away if it wasn't my turn. I think there have been times when they let me go ahead.

I would prefer that the gate agents send prospective cheaters to the back of the line, but I know that doesn't always happen.
dchristiva is offline  
Old Sep 8, 2014 | 10:17 am
  #75  
1M
40 Countries Visited
60 Nights
15 Years on Site
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: South Yorkshire, UK
Programs: VS Silver
Posts: 2,478
I don't know if anyone has read The Selfish Gene by Richard Dawkins, but he describes how "cheating" or displaying leeching behaviour as a component of a whole group is beneficial to the population, however, if the proportion of leeches becomes too great the population suffers and will likely die.

It seems an apt metaphor for boarding group cheaters - the system can tolerate a certain number of them and the population as a whole may actually benefit from their behaviour in small numbers (as they're on the plane and being less of a bother to everyone else) but if the proportion of cheaters gets too high then chaos ensues and the plane is delayed. The GA's have to try and catch the cheaters out or their numbers will swell but their existence will prevail unless something is done to terminate repeated attempts at their behaviour, i.e. banning serial cheaters from the airline.

Anyway... Just a bit of Monday fun.
roberino is offline  


Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service -

This site is owned, operated, and maintained by MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. Copyright © 2026 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Designated trademarks are the property of their respective owners.