Irrational Behavior

Yesterday on a short US flight from IND to ORD this is what I experienced

1. No Premier Boarding. When asked why, the response was because we're not doing it. Not a good way to treat your best customers that will help to keep your airline going.

2. Load Factor: 757: 10 of 24 (including 2 pilots) 74 in coach

3. First Class Lavatory was off limits to give a safety zone around the cockpit

4. First Class galley was also off limits for loitering

5. Notified by the captain that the seat belt sign would remain on for the entire flight (43 minutes)

6. No corkscrew for wine in First

Is it me, or do these types of things make people think that it is not yet safe to fly if you need a safety zone around the cockpit? I feel that the message that is being sent by some of the pilots is that we are still afraid to get things back on track and as a result the passengers will be put on short leaches. Is this what you are experiencing on other flight that are a longer haul? How about the other airlines?

You may want to check out a thread on the AA board called something like My Pilot Takes Charge. Think it's on the third page.

What I am experiencing is that every flight is different, depending of the wishes of the crew.

Some of them are extremely different.

But most of mine so far have been pretty normal with no or few additional restrictions while onboard.

My experiences on Continental in the last two weeks have continued to be uniformly customer oriented and friendly. Their crews always behave like they want the business. In hearing of pilots like this posting I think we continue to see individuals trying to have greater influence over their safety even though they inconvenience customers for questionable gain.

Come on - a 43 minute flight and you're complaining?! Jeez. . .

Here is a link to the thread: My LHR-JFK Captain "takes charge"

Ridiculous. Having a pilot's license obviously does not confer wisdom. It's a shame the jerk can have so bad an influence over a captive group. Maybe this "pilot in command" concept needs some more guidelines or avenues of redress.
edited to clarify that comment is to the story linked by the LHR-JFK Captain takes charge

[This message has been edited by Warrenlm (edited 10-01-2001).]

Actually, it has been my experience that the pilot keeping the seatbelt light on for the duration of the flight happens about 60%+ IND-ORD/ORD-IND.

The other stuff seems a little severe.

It might seem to be severe, but put yourself in the captains shoes for a bit. Its painfully obvious their not getting much help on the safety front. So why not take it upon yourself? The same low paid, poorly trained people are still working the check points to the terminals.

I think not being able to use the front lav and no corkscrews *is* too severe. All the new "security" introduced in the last weeks (with the possible exception of banning 4" knives) would not have stopped what happened on 9/11.

Keeping the seatbelt light on in this case could have been related to weather, and I accept that as it happens a lot.

Banning cutlery and people form using the front lav is dumb.

I think the captain should put himself (herself) in the passengers shoes. Passengers are every bit as scared as those in the flight deck, but everyone wants to see a return to normalcy. When the captain of a flight decides that all passengers must remain seated, that no passenger can enter the forward galley, and that a beverage cart must block the cockpit door, the passengers get the illusion that the captain doesn't feel that flying is safe, and then how could a passenger possibly think that flying is safe? So the passenger gets back on the ground, tells all his (her) friends about the captain's actions, and then the friends decide to stay home too. When I get back in the skies next week, I'm hoping for flying to be as similar to the pre September 11 days as possible.

Let's see, four knife wielding hijackers on the flight. Captains says "everybody remain in their seat and the seat beat sign will remain on". Hijackers think "Gee, we better seat here and not move or we will get in alot of trouble."

That has to be the silliest thing I have ever heard. If you are willing to kill yourself by crashing a plane into a building you are not going to sit there and follow the captains orders. These announcements only serve to distress passengers and possibly make them more uncomfortable. They certainly are not going to prevent a hijacking.

I think that Captain and crew should be as nice a possible to all passengers as they are the ones who can make a difference if a hijacking attempt is made.

[This message has been edited by dallasflyer (edited 09-29-2001).]

I agree completely. The people implementing these largely ineffective "security" procedures either have lost their minds or are just trying to reassure ignorant passengers. The passengers who go along with this nonsense are sheep or just don't know any better.

When a security nitwit tried to confiscate my disposable razor at LGA on 9/19, I protested until they gave it back to me.

Could someone please get serious about security and stop bothering us with ridiculous, ineffective measures like checking picture IDs repeatedly? (Didn't the hijackers have picture IDs that they had to show on September 11?) Reinforcing cockpit doors and increasing the number of sky marshals is all that's necessary. The rest is just silly.

Bruce

I just flew LAX-IAD and IAD-LAX, and the two flights were like night and day! On the LAX-IAD flight, the grizzly captain got on the PA and said, "We have heightened security in effect on this flight. If the fasten seat belt sign is on, you MUST remain seated or YOU WILL BE CHALLENGED! Don't line up for the lavatory in the galley area. And I am requiring all of you to stay in the seat you were originally assigned to."

On the IAD-LAX flight, it was just like the pre-WTC days (well, except for the plastic knife). No silly "security" messages, no asisine restrictions. The captain and F/O were friendly and acted normal. And that's the way it should be. Reminding people of "heightened security efforts" and implementing silly and arbitrary rules does nothing and only makes the pax MORE uncomfortable and nervous, and in most cases, resentful. Senior management at UA really needs to come up with CONSISTENT guidelines regarding security on their flights. It's one thing if the captain has a legitimate reason on that specific flight for having increased security, but not if he's paranoid or doing it simply "because he can."

I had similar "non-eventful" flights this weekend between IAD and MSY. I was in row 1 and 3 of the flights, and the only issue was on one of the flights, no Y passengers were permitted to use the F lav strictly for security reasons. Otherwise, the plastic knives cut just fine and the wine splits poured just the same. I, for one, am fully confident in flying again.