It isn't a unique situation at all. As previously stated, it was a FAM situation, which overrides everyone's seat assignments. Whether it worked out later that the marshal didn't get on the flight is beside the point (and the subsequent upgrade situation that occurred was an offshoot of that). No one at the airline is allowed to tell you why this happens for security purposes, and it's a federal law with penalties attached. There's absolutely no point in getting angry about it or demanding an explanation because you'll never get one. It's also part of the contract of carriage that you're not GUARANTEED your assigned seat due to situations exactly like this. What is standard with VX when this happens (and it happens on all airlines) was that you should have received a credit for the inconvenience as well as a refund of the difference between your original fare and the fare for new seat you occupied. If you didn't get that, call their guest relations line and follow through.

Rick Steves, is that you?

What fatal crash has SQ had? Silk Air doesn't count.

With regards to VX, so sad. I'm based out of ORD so didn't get to fly them much, but I never even considered other airlines when traveling to LAX/SFO. Gonna have to spend my bank of 50k miles.

SQ6 in TPE. 747 attempted departure from the wrong runway and crashed into construction equipment at high speed. Of course, this is nothing like the AS261 crash (I have trouble even calling that an accident because the airline knew exactly what they were doing).

At any rate, the industry-leading VX domestic F product is likely dead. Thank goodness we can have more homogenized crap F products in the US now. :rolleyes::td:

Only hope is that regulatory agencies actually do their job for the first time and block this.

I'll be damned, never knew about that one.

Yeah, if memory serves, they were trying to take off before a typhoon reached it's peak. Because of slower taxiing and low visibility, the SQ 747 turned into the wrong runway (5R) and accelerated into construction equipment.

5L, the correct runway, was the adjacent one about 20 yards away.

PS - Regarding the AS accident, a stiffer penalty should have been handed out. Willful neglect, falsifying records, and knowingly send up unsafe equipment leading to loss of lives. Unbelievable.

Agreed.

After VX F, I don't think I can ever go back to paying for any F class where 90% of capacity is given away for free.

Once I burn off my points for VX Friday, back to Southwest and Jetblue coach for me. Refuse to fly the garbage known as American and United. Delta not convenient for me.

90% of AS capacity is not given away for free. Some short haul routes, probably 75%, but go get an upgrade on a SEA transcon or HI route. Good luck.

While I'm sure that's true, it doesn't make up for it being some crappy standard "F" seat with no leg rest, terrible recline, and 36" of pitch. MCS is a better product in reality.

I sure feel like a schmuck! I recently got an AmEx PRG with the idea that I'd primarily fly VX as well as WN since I'm sick of AA treating people like gAArbage.

I'll probably just keep flying VX and burn points as they come, then switch over to WN for domestic flights. The only reason AA gets any of my business is their Lat Am network, and even then LAN have pretty decent options.

I really enjoyed my first flight with VX and hope to enjoy the rest of them as well. Shame what's gonna happen but that's flying in America in 2016 for you: mediocrity for all, because even high-rollin' F pax still have to put up with the same airports, airframes, and delightful staff that we Y pax get.

Those seats are going away within a year or so. F is going from 16 to 12 seats (on most aircraft) with expanded recline and pitch. They're also putting in an expanded "premium" sort of Y seating, and I wouldn't be surprised if it turns into some sort of VX-style MCS - one can hope.

You shouldn't, since MR points aren't captive and may be used with other Carriers. There won't be any substantial changes in VX for at least 8 - 12 months. So, you have plenty of time to use them, I'd imagine,

Back in the old days, Alaska did a bunch of advertising in the LA and SF markets differentiating themselves from the other airlines. For example, their catering was superior to regular coach tray meals. "At Alaska, you just get more...." was the tagline.

One particularly memorable commercial showed two guys in airline business attire reading a handwritten letter under a sign that said "Airline Consumer Complaints" or some such. One says to the other "I had better food in..... In..... What's this word?" and the other guys looks hard at the letter and says "Prison!" "Yes," says the first guy, "Prison!"

Then some announcer pointed out the virtue of Alaska's better meals for the same fare.

So Alaska USED to be a better class of airline, in my ancient memory. Maybe they can catch some of VX's innovation? They're stuck with the seatback TV, satellite service, purple lighting and so forth on 60 airplanes, maybe this will cause them to step up their game.

The last few years it seemed to me that Alaska sort of abandoned the Bay Area, except for their expanded services from all three airports to Hawaii, which has been a godsend given the withdrawal of AA (and DL's attempts to fly people on red-eyes back to SJC).

I'm sure the VX evaporation will raise Hawaii fares for us, but then again maybe not: WN may someday give the islands a shot, and Hawaiian has certainly upped their game with widebodies to all three bay area airports.

I'll just miss the quirkiness of the Branson influenced program: it certainly didn't hurt to hire all new staff and let them build something, too. Of course, as a shareholder in VX, I enjoyed the buyout premium, too. Maybe enough there to get a cheap ticket to HNL, no?

Is there any chance Alaska maintains the VX routes with the airbus planes as is?