Comp Upgrades; Fainting
Mar 13, 1999, 1:23 am
#1
Original Poster
Join Date: Jan 1999
Location: Manhattan
Programs: 40 46'N 73 57'W; AA Gold; CO Silver
Posts: 381
Comp Upgrades; Fainting
Sat and chatted with an off-duty flight attendant on a transcon red-eye last week. The middle seat (757) in my row had been blocked off due to my 1K status, but she sat there after inventory of open seats was taken. I didn't mind; she was cute and conversant.
Interesting things that came up:
1) Any flight attendant on a judgment basis can now perform complimentary upgrades for coach-class passengers who have been mistreated or otherwise gone through hell. That used to be the territory of only the main pursar. Before, flight attendants could be fired for doing it. (Ed. note- More incentive now for those shameless enough to create scenes)
2. She's done a lot of red eyes and had seen an unbelievable number of people fainting in mid-flight (often when getting up to use the bathroom). This usually goes so far that oxygen is used and a request for a doctor goes out on the intercom. Kind of amusing.
3. Fighting for the duties on in-flight merchandise purchases is a real pastime, esp. on Japan flights where a ton of stuff is bought (and commissions generated). Less so on S. Pacific flights (cheapo Aussies & Kiwis)
4. UA pays $500k to play each of the in-flight movies and really generates rev. only on int'l flights.
5. Most of the transcontinental red-eyes run full these days (I'd agree with that!).
[This message has been edited by 100K (edited 03-13-99).]
Interesting things that came up:
1) Any flight attendant on a judgment basis can now perform complimentary upgrades for coach-class passengers who have been mistreated or otherwise gone through hell. That used to be the territory of only the main pursar. Before, flight attendants could be fired for doing it. (Ed. note- More incentive now for those shameless enough to create scenes)
2. She's done a lot of red eyes and had seen an unbelievable number of people fainting in mid-flight (often when getting up to use the bathroom). This usually goes so far that oxygen is used and a request for a doctor goes out on the intercom. Kind of amusing.
3. Fighting for the duties on in-flight merchandise purchases is a real pastime, esp. on Japan flights where a ton of stuff is bought (and commissions generated). Less so on S. Pacific flights (cheapo Aussies & Kiwis)
4. UA pays $500k to play each of the in-flight movies and really generates rev. only on int'l flights.
5. Most of the transcontinental red-eyes run full these days (I'd agree with that!).
[This message has been edited by 100K (edited 03-13-99).]
Mar 13, 1999, 2:22 am
#2
Original Member
Join Date: May 1998
Location: New York - DL Gold, AA Gold, AC Prestige, VS Silver
Posts: 811
4. UA pays $500k to play each of the in-flight movies and really generates rev. only on int'l
flights.
UA doesn't charge anyone for headsets on intl flight even in eco - how do they generate rev from the movies on int'l ?
flights.
UA doesn't charge anyone for headsets on intl flight even in eco - how do they generate rev from the movies on int'l ?
Mar 13, 1999, 2:36 am
#3
Join Date: Jan 1999
Posts: 3,065
If UA are paying $500K for each file they are being had - BA paid $3.2m for all it's inflight licences last year (Film's, TV & Music) and they are getting that reduced.
$500k inclusive of in-flight capital/equipment perhaps?
MF
$500k inclusive of in-flight capital/equipment perhaps?
MF
Mar 13, 1999, 9:13 am
#4
Commander Catcop
Join Date: May 1998
Posts: 10,259
We're going a little off topic here... but I'm wondering if 500K per film or $3.5 million discount is worth it when most of the time we get movies like the horrific "The Waterboy."
Now that F-A's can give comp upgrades supposedly... I will learn to be even nicer to them )and flash those cat pictures more often!)
------------------
CATMAN
Now that F-A's can give comp upgrades supposedly... I will learn to be even nicer to them )and flash those cat pictures more often!)
------------------
CATMAN
Mar 13, 1999, 11:26 am
#5
Original Member
Join Date: May 1998
Location: Detroit, MI
Posts: 2,581
interesting note about fainting--I noticed I had a strange thing happen a month or so ago-it was lunchtime, I was in F/C and had a couple drinks and I noticed I was feeling unusually lightheaded--I realized that I was breathing very shallow and just not getting enough oxygen. It isn't too far out of the realm of possibility--someone has a cocktail or two, drops off, wakes up, stands up quickly and blacks out!
Mar 14, 1999, 3:46 pm
#6
Original Member and FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: May 1998
Location: Kansas City, MO, USA
Programs: DL PM/MM, AA ExPlat, Hyatt Glob, HH Dia, National ECE, Hertz PC
Posts: 16,579
Catman ~ Even though you may object with The Waterboy, that movie did earn well in ecess of $100 million here in the US, indicating it was a relatively popular movie!
What pisses me off is when they show really crappy movies that lasted a week in theatrical release. Delta always seems to have one good movie and one bad movie ...
What pisses me off is when they show really crappy movies that lasted a week in theatrical release. Delta always seems to have one good movie and one bad movie ...
Mar 14, 1999, 3:58 pm
#7
Original Member
Join Date: May 1998
Location: New York - DL Gold, AA Gold, AC Prestige, VS Silver
Posts: 811
I agree with Beckles - recently on flights I've been subject to "Holy Man" and "Star Trek: Insurrection" - I'd take "Waterboy" over them anyday. I watch "hollywood" movies but I also watch a lot of alternative, independent art films and appreciate both separately. I've seen "Waterboy" - if you check your brain at the door, and not attempt to think about it too much, it's funny and much better than many other movies out there.
Mar 15, 1999, 6:43 am
#8
Original Member, Ambassador: External Miles and Points Resources
Join Date: May 1998
Location: Digital Nomad Wandering the Earth - Currently in LIMA, PERU
Posts: 58,626
We'd better not start getting into film critique, or this thread will degenerate QUCIKLY (and leave my Star Trek franchise alone!!! Although I do have to agree with you about Holy Man).
Rudi says he hasn't watched the in-flight movie in 6 months, but that his eyes are "drawn" to the screen. Along these lines, I am amazed at how the airlines have not made multichannel movie and program viewing more available on domestic long-hauls in order to draw our interest. On transatlantic (on the RIGHT 777s anyway) this seems common practice, even in coach. Another example, I suppose, of how we Americans have become accustom to inferior services...
I guess UA's bi-monthly rotation is a step in the right direction...
Rudi says he hasn't watched the in-flight movie in 6 months, but that his eyes are "drawn" to the screen. Along these lines, I am amazed at how the airlines have not made multichannel movie and program viewing more available on domestic long-hauls in order to draw our interest. On transatlantic (on the RIGHT 777s anyway) this seems common practice, even in coach. Another example, I suppose, of how we Americans have become accustom to inferior services...
I guess UA's bi-monthly rotation is a step in the right direction...
Mar 15, 1999, 8:57 am
#9
Join Date: Feb 1999
Location: DEN, UA PE, Hilton Gold, ** Reactivate Delete Feature**
Posts: 650
My current strategy is that no matter how abysmal I believe the movie will be I watch it. At least in coach, 90 minutes of bad movie is still 90 minutes of distraction from wanting to beat to a pulp the person who had reclined their seat into my lap 
-Q-
-Q-
Mar 15, 1999, 1:18 pm
#10
Commander Catcop
Join Date: May 1998
Posts: 10,259
Thank you Lt. Cat Cop Matt... for helping direct this board back to Comp Upgrades and NOT film criticism.
BUT ONE FINAL OMNI HERE: Don't get me started about Films! I am very catty and very picky about movies. I will discuss this is depth sometime off the board and over drinks at some airport bar or other drinking establishment.
------------------
CATMAN
BUT ONE FINAL OMNI HERE: Don't get me started about Films! I am very catty and very picky about movies. I will discuss this is depth sometime off the board and over drinks at some airport bar or other drinking establishment.
------------------
CATMAN
Mar 15, 1999, 1:22 pm
#11
Original Member
Join Date: May 1998
Location: Palo Alto, CA, USA
Posts: 3,223
Viz. the fainting . . . would this have anything to do with quality of air onboard, especially during a long flight? I wonder if there's less oxygen available than that to which folk are used.
Mar 15, 1999, 1:34 pm
#12
Join Date: Jan 1999
Location: Too many
Programs: Lots
Posts: 5,761
KatW -- I'm sure this is a factor. I recall seeing a report some time back where they mentioned that airlines in recent years have cut back on the amount of "fresh" oxygen coming into the cabin, instead just recycling the air.
I believe they said that by just cutting the fresh oxygen percentage by 5%, they save millions of dollars in fuel a year.
I believe they said that by just cutting the fresh oxygen percentage by 5%, they save millions of dollars in fuel a year.
Mar 15, 1999, 3:05 pm
#13
Original Member
Join Date: May 1998
Location: Pasadena, CA. USA
Posts: 1,438
I cannot recall whether I read it on this board or not, but a person brought his Casio altimeter watch onboard to do an informal study. He was trying to find out what is the equivalent altitude inside the cabin based on the air pressue.
His finding? It is equivalent of being on a mountain 8000 feet high. More importantly, this is about ~2000 feet higher than the equivalent cabin pressue 10 years ago! This, coupled with the recycling of air, prob explains the fainting.
(Feel free to correct me on the actual numbers or locate the actual article.)
His finding? It is equivalent of being on a mountain 8000 feet high. More importantly, this is about ~2000 feet higher than the equivalent cabin pressue 10 years ago! This, coupled with the recycling of air, prob explains the fainting.
(Feel free to correct me on the actual numbers or locate the actual article.)
Mar 15, 1999, 4:15 pm
#14
Join Date: Feb 1999
Location: Chicago, IL
Posts: 7
I know I have read several articles about recycling cabin air and the side affects of too much stale air.
About 6-7 years ago, I flew a 757 on AA from ORD-LAX, and the majority of the passengers, including myself got off the plane with a splitting headache. Some folks even had upset stomachs. I, for one made sure I had no alcohol, and kept very hydrated throughout the flight. Still, I felt like I horrible. Not the best flight I can recall.
However, Consumer Reports came out with rankings several years ago, of the best and worst airplanes to fly, and they remarked specifically about the 757. They warned passengers to avoid that aircraft, due to the least amount of cubic space per passenger, and the higher levels of CO2 in the cabin air. They added that it was up to the pilots to regulate the amount of oxygen in the cabin, and that many pilots were directly instructed by the airline to lower the amounts of O2 pumped into the cabin, and to recycle air. They said a lot of people would come off the plane with symptoms of light-headedness, dizziness, and nausea. The older aircraft never ran into this problem (like 727s, 737s, and older 747s). Thus, Consumer Reports reccomended these older aircraft just based on quality of air alone.
I might add that 757s were made to be the most efficient aircraft in the industry. Airlines love them because of their low operating costs. They were definitely not designed for passenger comfort.
I know since the probelms surfaced years ago, the problem with 757s has been addressed, and passengers no longer encounter the same probelms as before.
I am sure that there are still occassional flights where stale air in the cabin has definitely affected the passengers in all types of aircraft (including the older ones).
But I know that all of the 757 flights I have personally flown on (which are quite a few), since then, especially on United, have been fine.
Hopefully none of you will ever get a flight like I had from LAX-ORD!
About 6-7 years ago, I flew a 757 on AA from ORD-LAX, and the majority of the passengers, including myself got off the plane with a splitting headache. Some folks even had upset stomachs. I, for one made sure I had no alcohol, and kept very hydrated throughout the flight. Still, I felt like I horrible. Not the best flight I can recall.
However, Consumer Reports came out with rankings several years ago, of the best and worst airplanes to fly, and they remarked specifically about the 757. They warned passengers to avoid that aircraft, due to the least amount of cubic space per passenger, and the higher levels of CO2 in the cabin air. They added that it was up to the pilots to regulate the amount of oxygen in the cabin, and that many pilots were directly instructed by the airline to lower the amounts of O2 pumped into the cabin, and to recycle air. They said a lot of people would come off the plane with symptoms of light-headedness, dizziness, and nausea. The older aircraft never ran into this problem (like 727s, 737s, and older 747s). Thus, Consumer Reports reccomended these older aircraft just based on quality of air alone.
I might add that 757s were made to be the most efficient aircraft in the industry. Airlines love them because of their low operating costs. They were definitely not designed for passenger comfort.
I know since the probelms surfaced years ago, the problem with 757s has been addressed, and passengers no longer encounter the same probelms as before.
I am sure that there are still occassional flights where stale air in the cabin has definitely affected the passengers in all types of aircraft (including the older ones).
But I know that all of the 757 flights I have personally flown on (which are quite a few), since then, especially on United, have been fine.
Hopefully none of you will ever get a flight like I had from LAX-ORD!
Mar 16, 1999, 3:15 pm
#15
Suspended
Join Date: May 1998
Location: Maryland
Programs: UA MM Gold, Marriott LT Titanium
Posts: 23,764
Very interesting about the comparitive altitude, headaches, etc... I have experienced the same problem but not correlated it to any specific aircraft type. If the altitude is approx 8K then I can understand why we feel the way we do after long flights. After my last BWI-LAX I had extremely dry eyes and associated headache. I now carry eye drops and use them several times a flight.
Once I asked an FA if she had any advice on how to keep from feeling crappy (can I say that)while flying. She didn't and most of the time I do OK, but once in awhile I feel like you know what.
Unfortunately the only thing that seems to help is flying a lot and developing a tolerance.
Once I asked an FA if she had any advice on how to keep from feeling crappy (can I say that)while flying. She didn't and most of the time I do OK, but once in awhile I feel like you know what.
Unfortunately the only thing that seems to help is flying a lot and developing a tolerance.