eagle007

JAC-LAX-SFO. CRJ equipment.

They needed to pull 6 passengers off the plan for weight. They pleaded and pleaded for a long time, only offered people $250 voucher and overnight stay. Next flight was the following day.

Only 5 volunteered. So, they then grabbed a cart full of bags off the plane (like 20 of them), put them out the plane window and said "do you see your bags? they're not going with us unless someone else gets off the plane. and if you need your bag with you, then you should get off the plane".

Then had like 7 passengers with connections to SYD freak out. They totally got screwed. There were some passengers that volunteered to have their bags removed and they didn't care! Nobody else got off the flight, so the bags didn't go.

Really unprofessional and very disappointing.

Oh and I missed my connection to SFO, next flight was 4.5 hours later and ruined my saturday night - that's a different thread coming soon.

PDXPremier

This was the first time you've seen Skywest remove passengers for weight and balance issues?? Wow, you must not fly them too often...happens all the time...it was one of the reasons my wife and I got VDB off our PDX-SEA UAX flight...it was on the EMB120 and the gate agent said we were one of the few passengers that was NOT connecting on to NRT. We only got $200...for $250 and overnight at United's expense in JAC? That would be a no-brainer for me...I'm never in THAT big of a hurry to get anywhere

eagle007

Yeah, I do everything I can to stay away from the regionals...

cchuang1980

Sounds like the $300 VDB offered at the first round on the MKE-IAH was not a bad deal! That was also because of overweight issue, that flight needed 10 out of the 39 passengers VDBed on the E145.

TimeToEarnMiles

The bag thing was unprofessional. Just IDB someone.

emcampbe

It's not odd to have weight restrictions on a 50-seat RJ, which is what I assume this is. However, if the paragraph about them holding the bags out the window and threatening pax with their bags not going with them is as I am reading it, I agree, very unprofessional.

And of all the regional carriers, I am very surprised to hear this from a SkyWest operation - they are usually very courteous, professional and some of the most customer-friendly crew in the US skies. I would absolutely send in a complaint over this. Having to IDB pax (or even bags) is one thing, but if it is in the way you described, absolutely unacceptable. Not sure why they didn't just IDB someone.

Also sounds like the bags that were pulled off were random, just happened to be the last ones to be loaded. I can say I would be absolutely livid if I were one of the pax to SYD, saw this show with the bags, and then upon arrival were to find out my bag didn't make it on the SYD flight.

mduell

It's so common to DB pax on <60 seat aircraft the carrier doesn't even have to pay compensation to IDB on them.

tmm1012

Technically, this is indeed correct. I will say that the vast majority of my ~$3000 in VDB vouchers have come from overbooked regional jets, but if the airline wanted to be really frugal, they do have that option.

walkerci

Something is seriously wrong here. If the aircraft cannot fly the route with a full passenger and baggage load, regardless of weather, at least 95% of the time, then the aircraft cannot be used on that route. How hard is that? Why isn't the FAA protecting passenger safety and rights???

wtigerFF

Years ago, this happened to me on the USAirways Shuttle DCA-BOS, which was definitely not a regional jet. I think it was an air density issue. A GA told me that 1/3 of the plane had to take a later flight.

B787938

These $250 offers are ridiculous. The fact that there were SYD bound passengers on this flight is even better.

I remember a certain Chicago-based airline used to offer a price point of $400. What happened to that airline? Oh, yeah...it got all Jeff'ed up. Good thing the synergies are helping the new United make $$$$ hand over fist.

javabytes

So what is removing bags and/or pax due to excess weight if not "protecting passenger safety"?

Weight and balance issues are quite common with smaller regional jets. As mentioned up thread, airlines aren't even required to provide IDB comp if removing pax from a CRJ-100 or -200 for these reasons, so the voucher is a goodwill gesture.

JAaronT

I mean, I know we're fat as a society, but just how fat does the FAA think we are that 20 bags = 1 pax!?

fastair

I guess all the 737-900 need to be retired because in icing conditions, they can take a HUGE weight penalty. Just the other day, ORD-DEN, I had to hold off 20 over seats due to the anti-icing penalty it has.

By the way, it is protecting passenger's safety...this is why they held people off. And rights...well, the FAA finds it difficult to penalize a carrier for being sae. Usually, they penalize a carrier when they do not follow the FAA safety rules.

So I guess we need to eliminate regional jets an 737. Basicly anything small, becuase they may have weight penalties in certain weather situations. Let's see how long domestic airlines can survive without any feeder routes, but only flying ultra long haul aircraft (which may be too heavy to land at some of the airports with shorter runways or high altitude) that will always be able to carry a full load of bags, and pasengers in every possible weather/runway condition.

Heck, even 747, the only scheduled comercial airliner for decades capable of flying trans Pacific can be weight restricted on routes far short of their max range when the jetstream or storms enroute require longer flight paths due to atmospheric conditions.

B787938

What sort of comp were you able to offer for those folks not being able to fly?