Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


1 posted on 09/20/2007 10:06:11 AM PDT by vietvet67
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies ]


To: vietvet67

Three to four hours is still a very long time.


2 posted on 09/20/2007 10:12:06 AM PDT by Lil'freeper (Don't taze me, bro!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: vietvet67
I pity the fool who tries to get me on a plane!


3 posted on 09/20/2007 10:13:16 AM PDT by NRA1995 (Mr. President and Congress: This is OUR country and don't you forget it!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: vietvet67
Interesting article.

I met Ms. Hanni at a luncheon a few months back. She seemed very nice and is certainly passionate about her issue. However, I have the nagging feeling that something about her doesn't ring true. I certainly wish her well, but I am leery of her.

4 posted on 09/20/2007 10:19:13 AM PDT by blau993
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: vietvet67
Her congressman, Representative Mike Thompson, Democrat of California, quickly introduced legislation at her behest to force airlines to let passengers off stranded planes after three hours, with two 30-minute extensions at the pilot's discretion.

This is still basically imprisonment for up to 4 hours in conditions far more confined than a jail cell, since the plane is going nowhere. Maybe someone more knowledgeable about airport operations can clue me in - if a plane is required to sit on the tarmac for a significant length of time, why can't passengers be removed using shuttles and given the choice to wait inside the airport or cancel their tickets and go home?
5 posted on 09/20/2007 10:19:46 AM PDT by AnotherUnixGeek
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: vietvet67

As an aside, note that all the video captures we read about are on YouTube. You never hear mention of AlGore’s Emmy-award winning Current (which is soooo not current). I guess they had to award him something before everyone realized that Crnt is betamax to YouTube’s VHS.


6 posted on 09/20/2007 10:20:40 AM PDT by NonValueAdded (Fred Dalton Thompson for President)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: vietvet67

I don’t understand why we need laws to prevent airline passengers from being stranded on the tarmac for hours at a time. Good grief! Must the government do everything for us? You would think that the airlines and the airports, after so many of these incidents, would get a clue and work toward preventing or at least minimizing these things. They shouldn’t need laws to fix this.

Seems to me that most of the problems we now have with air travel were minimal or didn’t exist at all prior to deregulation. Ever since deregulation, air travel has become a real nightmare. I used to love to fly — now it’s a royal pain in the keister.


7 posted on 09/20/2007 10:25:11 AM PDT by fatnotlazy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: vietvet67

If this happens to me I will immediately develop “chest pain”.


8 posted on 09/20/2007 10:26:14 AM PDT by Kozak (Anti Shahada: There is no god named Allah, and Muhammed is a false prophet)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: vietvet67

Passengers shouldn’t be left stranded on an airplane for hours. This is an airline policy that should be condemned. It doesn’t take all that much to return to the terminal and get the passengers deplaned. Sheesh! I’ve been stuck on an airplane for several hours in Denver. Made me angry!


9 posted on 09/20/2007 10:28:03 AM PDT by lilylangtree (Veni, Vidi, Vici)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: vietvet67

The time period should be one hour or whenevr an airline knows the delay will be one hour or more.

Actually, it should reduce expenses for the airlines since they wouldn’t have to keep the engines or power generators going.


21 posted on 09/20/2007 10:50:04 AM PDT by wildbill
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: vietvet67

3 hours... I would say she is a frontwomen for the industry..

If a plane cannot take off within 20 min of the time scheduled after boarding passengers. The Passengers should be disembarked, the flight canceled or rescheduled and the Passengers Compensated..

3 hours is a Load of Crap.

W


24 posted on 09/20/2007 11:23:19 AM PDT by WLR (Build the Fence)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: vietvet67
Yeah, that's what we need, more laws!

If there's a problem, more government involvement is sure to make it better!

</sarcasm>

Here's an idea: Get the word out every time this happens, then don't use that airline any more. The loss of revenue from the bad publicity will quickly persuade the airlines to change their policies.

Too many people believe that lawsuits, petitions, laws and government enforcers are the best or only way to fix something. The long-term effects of that thinking are usually worse than the problems they sought to solve.

34 posted on 09/20/2007 12:25:18 PM PDT by TChris (Governments don't RAISE money; they TAKE it.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: vietvet67

The airline business in the U.S. is sick.

There are factors that reduce competition yet, at the same time, profit margins of U.S. airlines are low, even as there is no regulatory issue that limits the price of an airline ticket.

Consequently, airlines overbook and flight-times are significantly bunched (varying by route) as all airlines at one airport seek to obtain as much of the passengers they can at the optimum times that passengers most frequently choose.

You get airports idle in stretches and then massively backed up at other times.

The US airline industry needs an overhaul from the ground up and that needs to extend to the economic and operational relationships between airlines and airports as well.

If it were possible to have a larger number of airports in each of our metropolitan areas (how likely???), and that larger number each owned by a major airline, I wonder if their operations would be more efficient and if the drive-times to those airports would still provide reasonable competition between them. Just total speculation.


45 posted on 09/20/2007 1:38:27 PM PDT by Wuli (u)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: vietvet67

There should be a simple law: No aircraft may embark without immediate clearance for flying their route with pre-takeoff and pre-landing clearance, meaning they will be cleared for takeoff as soon as the other planes in front takeoff and the destination airport is cleared for their landing. If any plane is not able to takeoff and fly its intended route with pre-clearance to land, the plane should be required to immediately return to the terminal.


46 posted on 09/20/2007 1:47:29 PM PDT by CodeToad
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson