uastarflyer

Airlines that insist masks be worn and block seats such that nobody is a neighbor (besides couples)

UA packs them in. Then tells the customer it is their fault they aren’t flying.

This is unconscionable- after we bailed them out no less.

WineCountryUA

CDC Guidelines on Social Distancing
Have not seen anything that suggest under 2 feet adds any appreciable safety.
And no (domestic) airline is enforcing the use of masks. (and wearing a mask does not protect you)
And during disembarking, how close are people?

If you are flying, you and the air carrier are defying the CDC guidelines.

The traveler's choice to take the risk but don't suggest it is remotely possible to comply with the CDC guideline on any carrier.

Silver Fox

It doesn't matter. The point is that people are pilloried, rightly, for breaking social distancing guidelines and so should any organization/body/other entity that encourages it. This is what airlines are doing. It is not enough to make a statement, renege on it, then say "well we tried". Of course people don't have to fly but that would be missing the point entirely.

FlytheTail

Completely agree. I think blocking middle seats and the wearing of non-surgical masks gives people the false impression they are then no longer at risk.

CALMSP

why is the 319 the right size plane? based on bookings, this is MORE than enough plane to carry the booked passengers.

goalie

Given the current situation, if the flight is full, then it's the wrong aircraft and as I posted upthread, while we (the general public) are sucking it up, United needs to suck it up as well and fly a larger aircraft to ensure social distancing as best they can-and yes, it is not an economical decision but cutting hub to hub non-stop flights down to 1 daily flight and using one of the smallest mainline aircraft in the fleet is, imho, a bad decision from a p/r standpoint

LReyes66

I may have to fly into LAX next week. Last time i had to fly was early last month into LAX as well except at the time it was at the height of the lockdown so the airports and the aircraft i rode in had very little people in it.

Im looking at recent articles of united and these full planes with the middle seat taken is worrying.

CALMSP

so a one time public shaming gives you enough knowledge that UA is not using the right a/c for a route? Look at your parents flight tonight, its barely half full, so are you still lambasting that UA is flying the wrong a/c when load factors are less than 50%? and that's a bad PR standpoint why? For PR reasons, UA should fly wide bodies when there are only 50 people on a plane? come on .

spin88

This is dangerously wrong for a number of reasons. First other (domestic) airlines are requiring masks. Delta for one does: https://news.delta.com/facecoverings And since the wackos can't bring guns on board (yet) it is being enforced. There is no way a flight crew will let someone on a DL flight w/o a mask. It endangers them. My guess is that UA will not let you fly w/o a mask either, but given this change in policy I have no idea what they will do now, they seem to have let go of there senses.

Second of all 6 feet is the "safe space." It is actually 12 feet for those aerobically exercising. (Which somewhat tangentially is part of why re-opening gyms/exercise classes is such a crazy idea). Masks are designed to address places where it is impossible to do this and/or inside spaces. Hong Kong - right next to China and with very early cases has had 4 deaths ( .5/Million) and only 1051 infections ( 140/Million), and most of the cases were "imported" and it is impossible to stay 6 feet away from people in Hong Kong. What Hong Kong did was require masks AND spacing that was not 6 feet, but as much as possible.

["We are #1 " is BTB at 84,141 deaths (254/Million) and 1,417,398 confirmed cases.]

The problem in your entire suggestion is suggesting that if you can't get 6 feet away, well then might as well just push folks as close to each other as possible. This is dangerously wrong medically. The original recommendations BTB was 3 feet, finally ended up at 6 feet. As the guy who was saying that Covid-19 was going to crash the economy back in February I have been paying more than a little attention to this. Is there a peer reviewed study on 8" to someones mouth/nose vs. 2 feet or 3 feet or 6 feet? No. But we know from lots of studies that how much exposure you get (how many covid-19 particles you get) are directly linked to risk of infection and more importantly severity of infection. Given filtration and diffusion, being 8" from the mouth/nose of an infected person, even if both are wearing a mask is almost a sure fire infection. In a medical setting no one is allowed that close to nose/mouth without full air filtration.

The difference in that and sitting 2 feet or 3 feet away from someone (no middle seat) is a vast difference. Early on in the pandemic since I flew heavily from Jan-March, and was very well aware of Covid-19, I ran this by three doctors, two of which (one at UCSF/Zuckerberg and one in Hong Kong at Queen Mary/HKU) were and/or later became involved with covid-19 issues - the other of which is a neurosurgeon at UCSF, so I'm sure he does not know squat.... - all said that flying was a calculated risk, but they said under no circumstances sit in a seat where someone is in a middle next to you. All three said this. And keep in mind this was in February/March when some were pretending that this would all magically go away.

The public is scared, and justifiably so. And the public is very reasonably concerned about sitting right next to someone, let alone for hours on end. Keep in mind that this story blew up because a group of San Francisco Medical professionals who had volunteered to go to NYC to help with Covid-19 were freaked out at United breaking it's promise. These doctors saw the danger that the public understands, but United seems to just want to ignore.

Flying at this point is a risk. There is no way to fly now and not have some risk. Requiring masks and wiping down the area you sit in - which I have been doing on planes since January, Yes, January, much to some funny looks - is the easiest thing. Avoiding middle seats filled with a stranger is probably the only other thing that airlines can really do, other than adding more outside air into the filtration mix. United by very publicly NOT doing this is just putting up a big flashing multi-colored neon sign surrounded by huge neon covid-19 molecules saying "fly someone else, don't risk your safety on the diseased skies."

WineCountryUA

Some anecdotal data
EWR-SFO
Monday 11 May -- 3 flights 2x738s (Economy less than 50% filled -- per seatmap), 1x788 (economy maybe 20%. lots of upgrades)
Tuesday 12 May -- 3 flights 2x738s (Economy less than 60% filled), 1x788 (economy maybe 10%, lots of upgrades)

WineCountryUA

Multiple reports disagree, including DL
Exclusive: U.S. airlines tell crews not to force passengers to wear masks
https://www.cnn.com/2020/05/13/busin...ent/index.html

https://thehill.com/policy/transport...-passengers-to

All are requiring face masks to board but once boarded widespread enforcement is not happening on any carrier -- numerous social media postings affirm this (as do statements from AA, DL, UA, ...)

Was responding to the comment implying UA was the only airline "defying" CDC guidelines, that is demonstrably false. No airline is meeting the CDC guidelines.
The debate on what is the right guideline is for elsewhere, but the CDC guidelines are clearly published and impossible to meet on an airplane without taking the load factor well below 10%

Note I am not trying to support the 100% flights (which seem very rare) , I have made my own decisions not to fly.

uastarflyer

UA policy is everyone wear a mask besides small children. That they won’t emergency divert a flight if a passenger takes it off in flight isn’t the measure.

The CDC guidelines recognizes social distancing isnt always possible therefore the added guidance regarding masks.

Middle seat empty is a min expectation in this environment. And UA marketed this as a selling point. To say everyone is bad as a blanket defense of the indefensible is a stretch.

Dao was within policy too after all.

Unfortunately Kirby won’t suffer for cutting corners v emphasizing customer safety. It will be the workers.

HNLbasedFlyer

This middle seat thing is so overblown - if it is that important to someone, for no real good reason - there are choices to not fly, drive instead (unless like me in Hawaii), or fly another airline. I definitely don't, as a taxpayer, support flying larger planes to bleed more money for something that won't help you anyway.

And now the mask thing is now overblown - for the longest time the CDC didn't say anything about wearing masks - then public pressure got them to change their minds - now making people think it actually helps them.

Anyone stepping inside a plane has a chance to get this regardless of middle seats. I think this is more wanting middle seats open for the sake of them being open for comfort rather any medical reason.

uastarflyer

The incident that went, ahem, viral, was about a doctor working in the NYC area with their crisis. And about 25 other medical personnel. Essential travel. And UA was marketing free flights for such personnel. Just as they market being clean and safe.

Besides, another flaw - By your logic UA shouldn’t bother any of the extra cleaning measures. Travelers can always drive or levitate or whatever.

Again - it was UA that made a public show of keeping middle seats open and being serious about establishing some level of social distancing.

goalie

• Public shaming (one time or multiple times): never said that-just voicing my opinion
• Enough knowledge that UA is using the right aircraft: never said that-ijust voicing my opinion
• Load on my parents's flight: perhaps you have access to information that I don't?
• Lambasting UA: Nope and pretty much never will (unless they really screw the pooch) and again, voicing my opinion

So with that, I'm sure you have seen the recent 737 flight EWR-SFO which was full. Yes, UA was flying medical professionals home from working in NY for free but they messed up on that one big time.

And going back to my basic point-sometimes you have to do the right thing. Will big corporations do it? Only they know for sure