Heathrow: The world's least favourite airport
Jul 22nd 2007 | 4:34 am
#46
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Heathrow: The world's least favourite airport
In article <[email protected]>,
Molesworth <[email protected]> wrote:
> Probably why you have to be at the airport 3 hours before takeoff...
> Gives you a bit of time to shop.
Sometimes it seems you stand in line most of the time. But one thing
that really irritated me at Heathrow apart from the long hunt through
shops for a WC was that the departure gate wasn't announced until almost
boarding time and was then--of course-- as far as possible from the
shopping area where I'd had to wait.
--
Mary, biblioholic
bib-li-o-hol-ism : the habitual longing to purchase, read, store,
admire, and consume books in excess.
http://www.airstreamcomm.net/~erilarlo
Molesworth <[email protected]> wrote:
> Probably why you have to be at the airport 3 hours before takeoff...
> Gives you a bit of time to shop.
Sometimes it seems you stand in line most of the time. But one thing
that really irritated me at Heathrow apart from the long hunt through
shops for a WC was that the departure gate wasn't announced until almost
boarding time and was then--of course-- as far as possible from the
shopping area where I'd had to wait.
--
Mary, biblioholic
bib-li-o-hol-ism : the habitual longing to purchase, read, store,
admire, and consume books in excess.
http://www.airstreamcomm.net/~erilarlo
Jul 22nd 2007 | 4:36 am
#47
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Heathrow: The world's least favourite airport
In article <[email protected]>,
"Lennart Petersen" <[email protected]> wrote:
> "lhr" <lhr@london's.hellhole.row> skrev i meddelandet
> news:57m4a3htvqkapik8dplgf820n7g60hb0qr@news...
> > http://news.independent.co.uk/uk/tra...cle2788626.ece
> >
> > Heathrow: The world's least favourite airport
> ----------------
> Is it really possible to be
> A: The worldÂŽs least favourite airport
> and
> B: The worldÂŽs busiest international airport
> at the same time ??
> Sounds like a contradiction.
Well, B at least partly explains A 8-)
--
Mary, biblioholic
bib-li-o-hol-ism : the habitual longing to purchase, read, store,
admire, and consume books in excess.
http://www.airstreamcomm.net/~erilarlo
"Lennart Petersen" <[email protected]> wrote:
> "lhr" <lhr@london's.hellhole.row> skrev i meddelandet
> news:57m4a3htvqkapik8dplgf820n7g60hb0qr@news...
> > http://news.independent.co.uk/uk/tra...cle2788626.ece
> >
> > Heathrow: The world's least favourite airport
> ----------------
> Is it really possible to be
> A: The worldÂŽs least favourite airport
> and
> B: The worldÂŽs busiest international airport
> at the same time ??
> Sounds like a contradiction.
Well, B at least partly explains A 8-)
--
Mary, biblioholic
bib-li-o-hol-ism : the habitual longing to purchase, read, store,
admire, and consume books in excess.
http://www.airstreamcomm.net/~erilarlo
Jul 22nd 2007 | 4:37 am
#48
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Heathrow: The world's least favourite airport
On 22 Jul, 16:54, "William Black" <[email protected]> wrote:
> "Mel Rowing" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>
> news:[email protected] oups.com...
>
> >I sometimes wonder what passengers find to put in luggage (we travel
> > very light well below our allowances)
>
> Try living somewhere else for three month of the year and you'll find
> yourself lugging your full luggage allowance and waiting for extra 50Kg you
> sent by courier to arrive...
We will be leaving the country for a couple of months at the end of
this year.
I can assure you that we will be carrying 1 medium sized grip each.
Mine will contain a suit, 3 or 4 dress shirts, tie a change of casual
clothing a pair of shoes, and a couple of changes of underwear.
Anything else we need will be bought locally used and dumped
(including toiletries) with the exception of 2 or 3 T-shirts brought
back as souvenirs. Allowing for presents etc. we will bring back a
little more than we took.
This stuff is so cheap it's hardly worth the armache.
In any case my point is that it is the allowances that are the
problem. How many times have you been held up in a queue whilst
someone argues over allowances or what they can/cannot take into the
cabin etc. Far better that everything that is not actually being worn
by the passenger is handed over, weighed and a charge made
accordingly.
The "heavy" passenger pays more fare than the "lighter" passenger,
there is an incentive in operation that reduces the overall weight of
the aircraft, stuff more appropriately carried in the hold does not
end up in overhead lockers and so on. Nobody should feel unjustly
treated.
> "Mel Rowing" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>
> news:[email protected] oups.com...
>
> >I sometimes wonder what passengers find to put in luggage (we travel
> > very light well below our allowances)
>
> Try living somewhere else for three month of the year and you'll find
> yourself lugging your full luggage allowance and waiting for extra 50Kg you
> sent by courier to arrive...
We will be leaving the country for a couple of months at the end of
this year.
I can assure you that we will be carrying 1 medium sized grip each.
Mine will contain a suit, 3 or 4 dress shirts, tie a change of casual
clothing a pair of shoes, and a couple of changes of underwear.
Anything else we need will be bought locally used and dumped
(including toiletries) with the exception of 2 or 3 T-shirts brought
back as souvenirs. Allowing for presents etc. we will bring back a
little more than we took.
This stuff is so cheap it's hardly worth the armache.
In any case my point is that it is the allowances that are the
problem. How many times have you been held up in a queue whilst
someone argues over allowances or what they can/cannot take into the
cabin etc. Far better that everything that is not actually being worn
by the passenger is handed over, weighed and a charge made
accordingly.
The "heavy" passenger pays more fare than the "lighter" passenger,
there is an incentive in operation that reduces the overall weight of
the aircraft, stuff more appropriately carried in the hold does not
end up in overhead lockers and so on. Nobody should feel unjustly
treated.
Jul 22nd 2007 | 4:38 am
#49
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Heathrow: The world's least favourite airport
In article <[email protected]>,
"tim....." <[email protected]> wrote:
> As this is an international group I expect that many can use
> AMS, CDG or FRA to transit in instead of LHR.
FRA any day over the other two!
--
Mary, biblioholic
bib-li-o-hol-ism : the habitual longing to purchase, read, store,
admire, and consume books in excess.
http://www.airstreamcomm.net/~erilarlo
"tim....." <[email protected]> wrote:
> As this is an international group I expect that many can use
> AMS, CDG or FRA to transit in instead of LHR.
FRA any day over the other two!
--
Mary, biblioholic
bib-li-o-hol-ism : the habitual longing to purchase, read, store,
admire, and consume books in excess.
http://www.airstreamcomm.net/~erilarlo
Jul 22nd 2007 | 4:52 am
#50
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Heathrow: The world's least favourite airport
Mel Rowing wrote:
> On 22 Jul, 02:13, "RAK" <[email protected]> wrote:
>> "NotABushSupporter" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>
>> Like an earlier poster I also get pissed off with the retail outlets
>> cluttering up the airport. In at least one terminal (T3 I think, which is my
>> usual one) it seems impossible to get from immigration to the gates without
>> passing through the zig-zag aisles of a duty-free alcohol and cigarettes
>> outlet, often crowded with shoppers - extra annoying if I am a bit late
>> after the tedious security check..
>
> You get them on all commercial airports which, like any other business
> exist to make money.
Not always so many stores, though.
I certainly think there's an overabundance of shops airside at Heathrow,
but it's usually struck me, using terminal 3 at Pearson airport in
Toronto, that there aren't really *enough* retail facilities airside.
That doesn't mean I think the entire international pier should be turned
into a mall, but I think there'd be room for a decent bookstand back
there, and a slightly bigger selection of catering facilities (of
course, it's a year or so since I used the international wing of T3, so
maybe there are more facilities now than there were the last time I was
there).
--
Stephen
You sit in your seat, you eat your peanuts, you watch the movie...
Well, unless it's about a dog or Chevy Chase.
> On 22 Jul, 02:13, "RAK" <[email protected]> wrote:
>> "NotABushSupporter" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>
>> Like an earlier poster I also get pissed off with the retail outlets
>> cluttering up the airport. In at least one terminal (T3 I think, which is my
>> usual one) it seems impossible to get from immigration to the gates without
>> passing through the zig-zag aisles of a duty-free alcohol and cigarettes
>> outlet, often crowded with shoppers - extra annoying if I am a bit late
>> after the tedious security check..
>
> You get them on all commercial airports which, like any other business
> exist to make money.
Not always so many stores, though.
I certainly think there's an overabundance of shops airside at Heathrow,
but it's usually struck me, using terminal 3 at Pearson airport in
Toronto, that there aren't really *enough* retail facilities airside.
That doesn't mean I think the entire international pier should be turned
into a mall, but I think there'd be room for a decent bookstand back
there, and a slightly bigger selection of catering facilities (of
course, it's a year or so since I used the international wing of T3, so
maybe there are more facilities now than there were the last time I was
there).
--
Stephen
You sit in your seat, you eat your peanuts, you watch the movie...
Well, unless it's about a dog or Chevy Chase.
Jul 22nd 2007 | 6:02 am
#51
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Heathrow: The world's least favourite airport
On Sun, 22 Jul 2007 17:52:22 +0100, Stephen Farrow
<[email protected]> wrote:
> I certainly think there's an overabundance of shops airside at Heathrow,
> but it's usually struck me, using terminal 3 at Pearson airport in
> Toronto, that there aren't really *enough* retail facilities airside.
> That doesn't mean I think the entire international pier should be turned
> into a mall, but I think there'd be room for a decent bookstand back
> there, and a slightly bigger selection of catering facilities (of
> course, it's a year or so since I used the international wing of T3, so
> maybe there are more facilities now than there were the last time I was
> there).
Almost every time I'm at Heathrow, I'm there waiting for a connecting
flight. I actually like the stores there, not because I buy anything,
but because window shopping makes the time pass faster.
--
Ken Blake
Please Reply to the Newsgroup
<[email protected]> wrote:
> I certainly think there's an overabundance of shops airside at Heathrow,
> but it's usually struck me, using terminal 3 at Pearson airport in
> Toronto, that there aren't really *enough* retail facilities airside.
> That doesn't mean I think the entire international pier should be turned
> into a mall, but I think there'd be room for a decent bookstand back
> there, and a slightly bigger selection of catering facilities (of
> course, it's a year or so since I used the international wing of T3, so
> maybe there are more facilities now than there were the last time I was
> there).
Almost every time I'm at Heathrow, I'm there waiting for a connecting
flight. I actually like the stores there, not because I buy anything,
but because window shopping makes the time pass faster.
--
Ken Blake
Please Reply to the Newsgroup
Jul 22nd 2007 | 6:45 am
#52
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Heathrow: The world's least favourite airport
"William Black" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
>
> "Mel Rowing" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected] oups.com...
>
>>. I
>> sometimes wonder what passengers find to put in luggage (we travel
>> very light well below our allowances)
>
> Try living somewhere else for three month of the year and you'll find
> yourself lugging your full luggage allowance and waiting for extra 50Kg
> you sent by courier to arrive...
I've done that too, but I think you have to accept that someone
moving house by plane is a pretty unusual occurrence.
IME about 50% of the pax on a plane check in far more
than is necessary for a two week holiday. I don't believe
that most of them are moving house.
>
> > One
>> thing that does annoy me are "sleepers" I am fully aware that on
>> airports there are people who have travelled in from other time zones.
>> Why can't they catch up on their sleep whilst they are on the
>> aircraft?
>
> Some people can't sleep on aircraft, some people get stuck at airports
> for 16 or 18 hours, sometimes flights get canceled, sometimes you can't
> get a room...
Sometimes there's not transport to get you to the airport
for a 5:00 check in.
tim
news:[email protected]...
>
> "Mel Rowing" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected] oups.com...
>
>>. I
>> sometimes wonder what passengers find to put in luggage (we travel
>> very light well below our allowances)
>
> Try living somewhere else for three month of the year and you'll find
> yourself lugging your full luggage allowance and waiting for extra 50Kg
> you sent by courier to arrive...
I've done that too, but I think you have to accept that someone
moving house by plane is a pretty unusual occurrence.
IME about 50% of the pax on a plane check in far more
than is necessary for a two week holiday. I don't believe
that most of them are moving house.
>
> > One
>> thing that does annoy me are "sleepers" I am fully aware that on
>> airports there are people who have travelled in from other time zones.
>> Why can't they catch up on their sleep whilst they are on the
>> aircraft?
>
> Some people can't sleep on aircraft, some people get stuck at airports
> for 16 or 18 hours, sometimes flights get canceled, sometimes you can't
> get a room...
Sometimes there's not transport to get you to the airport
for a 5:00 check in.
tim
Jul 22nd 2007 | 7:56 am
#53
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Heathrow: The world's least favourite airport
Ken Blake wrote:
> On Sun, 22 Jul 2007 17:52:22 +0100, Stephen Farrow
> <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>
>> I certainly think there's an overabundance of shops airside at Heathrow,
>> but it's usually struck me, using terminal 3 at Pearson airport in
>> Toronto, that there aren't really *enough* retail facilities airside.
>> That doesn't mean I think the entire international pier should be turned
>> into a mall, but I think there'd be room for a decent bookstand back
>> there, and a slightly bigger selection of catering facilities (of
>> course, it's a year or so since I used the international wing of T3, so
>> maybe there are more facilities now than there were the last time I was
>> there).
>
>
> Almost every time I'm at Heathrow, I'm there waiting for a connecting
> flight. I actually like the stores there, not because I buy anything,
> but because window shopping makes the time pass faster.
>
That's usually what I'm doing at Heathrow as well, and I do like, for
example, that there's a decent bookshop in Terminal 4 where I can kill
some time. I do think there's a little too much retail space in there,
and that more seats would be useful - but on the other hand, I don't
suppose the shops would be there if people weren't prepared to spend
money in them.
--
Stephen
That was the funnest coma ever.
> On Sun, 22 Jul 2007 17:52:22 +0100, Stephen Farrow
> <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>
>> I certainly think there's an overabundance of shops airside at Heathrow,
>> but it's usually struck me, using terminal 3 at Pearson airport in
>> Toronto, that there aren't really *enough* retail facilities airside.
>> That doesn't mean I think the entire international pier should be turned
>> into a mall, but I think there'd be room for a decent bookstand back
>> there, and a slightly bigger selection of catering facilities (of
>> course, it's a year or so since I used the international wing of T3, so
>> maybe there are more facilities now than there were the last time I was
>> there).
>
>
> Almost every time I'm at Heathrow, I'm there waiting for a connecting
> flight. I actually like the stores there, not because I buy anything,
> but because window shopping makes the time pass faster.
>
That's usually what I'm doing at Heathrow as well, and I do like, for
example, that there's a decent bookshop in Terminal 4 where I can kill
some time. I do think there's a little too much retail space in there,
and that more seats would be useful - but on the other hand, I don't
suppose the shops would be there if people weren't prepared to spend
money in them.
--
Stephen
That was the funnest coma ever.
Jul 22nd 2007 | 8:10 am
#54
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Heathrow: The world's least favourite airport
On Sun, 22 Jul 2007 11:34:57 -0500, erilar <[email protected]> wrote:
>In article <[email protected]>,
> Molesworth <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> Probably why you have to be at the airport 3 hours before takeoff...
>> Gives you a bit of time to shop.
>
>Sometimes it seems you stand in line most of the time. But one thing
>that really irritated me at Heathrow apart from the long hunt through
>shops for a WC was that the departure gate wasn't announced until almost
>boarding time and was then--of course-- as far as possible from the
>shopping area where I'd had to wait.
Maybe you would do better putting up with rude Frenchmen at CDG?
--
Martin
>In article <[email protected]>,
> Molesworth <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> Probably why you have to be at the airport 3 hours before takeoff...
>> Gives you a bit of time to shop.
>
>Sometimes it seems you stand in line most of the time. But one thing
>that really irritated me at Heathrow apart from the long hunt through
>shops for a WC was that the departure gate wasn't announced until almost
>boarding time and was then--of course-- as far as possible from the
>shopping area where I'd had to wait.
Maybe you would do better putting up with rude Frenchmen at CDG?
--
Martin
Jul 22nd 2007 | 8:52 am
#55
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Heathrow: The world's least favourite airport
"tim....." <[email protected]> skrev i meddelandet
news:[email protected]...
>
> "Lennart Petersen" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
>>
>>
>> "William Black" <[email protected]> skrev i meddelandet
>> news:[email protected]...
>>>
>>> "Lennart Petersen" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>>> news:[email protected]...
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> "lhr" <lhr@london's.hellhole.row> skrev i meddelandet
>>>> news:57m4a3htvqkapik8dplgf820n7g60hb0qr@news...
>>>>> http://news.independent.co.uk/uk/tra...cle2788626.ece
>>>>>
>>>>> Heathrow: The world's least favourite airport
>>>> ----------------
>>>> Is it really possible to be
>>>> A: The worldÂŽs least favourite airport
>>>> and
>>>> B: The worldÂŽs busiest international airport
>>>> at the same time ??
>>>> Sounds like a contradiction.
>>> Not really.
>>> In many cases if you wish to fly from the UK on a scheduled flight you
>>> have little choice unless you want to pay a great deal more money.
>>>
>>> --
>>> William Black
>> ----------
>> So what about those many in transit ? I've used Heathrow many times
>> but never for a trip to/from U.K
>
> but why did you do this?
>
> a) because you like transiting in LHR?
>
> b) because there was no other reasonable routing?
>
> tim
Because I've nothing particular against Heathrow as a transit airport.
And no particular reason to avoid Heathrow.
news:[email protected]...
>
> "Lennart Petersen" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
>>
>>
>> "William Black" <[email protected]> skrev i meddelandet
>> news:[email protected]...
>>>
>>> "Lennart Petersen" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>>> news:[email protected]...
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> "lhr" <lhr@london's.hellhole.row> skrev i meddelandet
>>>> news:57m4a3htvqkapik8dplgf820n7g60hb0qr@news...
>>>>> http://news.independent.co.uk/uk/tra...cle2788626.ece
>>>>>
>>>>> Heathrow: The world's least favourite airport
>>>> ----------------
>>>> Is it really possible to be
>>>> A: The worldÂŽs least favourite airport
>>>> and
>>>> B: The worldÂŽs busiest international airport
>>>> at the same time ??
>>>> Sounds like a contradiction.
>>> Not really.
>>> In many cases if you wish to fly from the UK on a scheduled flight you
>>> have little choice unless you want to pay a great deal more money.
>>>
>>> --
>>> William Black
>> ----------
>> So what about those many in transit ? I've used Heathrow many times
>> but never for a trip to/from U.K
>
> but why did you do this?
>
> a) because you like transiting in LHR?
>
> b) because there was no other reasonable routing?
>
> tim
Because I've nothing particular against Heathrow as a transit airport.
And no particular reason to avoid Heathrow.
Jul 22nd 2007 | 9:38 am
#56
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Heathrow: The world's least favourite airport
"Lennart Petersen" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
>
>
> "tim....." <[email protected]> skrev i meddelandet
> news:[email protected]...
>>
>> "Lennart Petersen" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>> news:[email protected]...
>>>
>>>
>>> "William Black" <[email protected]> skrev i meddelandet
>>> news:[email protected]...
>>>>
>>>> "Lennart Petersen" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>>>> news:[email protected]...
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> "lhr" <lhr@london's.hellhole.row> skrev i meddelandet
>>>>> news:57m4a3htvqkapik8dplgf820n7g60hb0qr@news...
>>>>>> http://news.independent.co.uk/uk/tra...cle2788626.ece
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Heathrow: The world's least favourite airport
>>>>> ----------------
>>>>> Is it really possible to be
>>>>> A: The worldÂŽs least favourite airport
>>>>> and
>>>>> B: The worldÂŽs busiest international airport
>>>>> at the same time ??
>>>>> Sounds like a contradiction.
>>>> Not really.
>>>> In many cases if you wish to fly from the UK on a scheduled flight you
>>>> have little choice unless you want to pay a great deal more money.
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> William Black
>>> ----------
>>> So what about those many in transit ? I've used Heathrow many times
>>> but never for a trip to/from U.K
>>
>> but why did you do this?
>>
>> a) because you like transiting in LHR?
>>
>> b) because there was no other reasonable routing?
>>
>> tim
> Because I've nothing particular against Heathrow as a transit airport.
> And no particular reason to avoid Heathrow.
I'm surprised.
Even before someone started this thread, it was the LON airport
of last resort for me (and that became true whilst it was my
nearest, which it isn't ATM)
tim
>
>
news:[email protected]...
>
>
> "tim....." <[email protected]> skrev i meddelandet
> news:[email protected]...
>>
>> "Lennart Petersen" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>> news:[email protected]...
>>>
>>>
>>> "William Black" <[email protected]> skrev i meddelandet
>>> news:[email protected]...
>>>>
>>>> "Lennart Petersen" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>>>> news:[email protected]...
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> "lhr" <lhr@london's.hellhole.row> skrev i meddelandet
>>>>> news:57m4a3htvqkapik8dplgf820n7g60hb0qr@news...
>>>>>> http://news.independent.co.uk/uk/tra...cle2788626.ece
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Heathrow: The world's least favourite airport
>>>>> ----------------
>>>>> Is it really possible to be
>>>>> A: The worldÂŽs least favourite airport
>>>>> and
>>>>> B: The worldÂŽs busiest international airport
>>>>> at the same time ??
>>>>> Sounds like a contradiction.
>>>> Not really.
>>>> In many cases if you wish to fly from the UK on a scheduled flight you
>>>> have little choice unless you want to pay a great deal more money.
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> William Black
>>> ----------
>>> So what about those many in transit ? I've used Heathrow many times
>>> but never for a trip to/from U.K
>>
>> but why did you do this?
>>
>> a) because you like transiting in LHR?
>>
>> b) because there was no other reasonable routing?
>>
>> tim
> Because I've nothing particular against Heathrow as a transit airport.
> And no particular reason to avoid Heathrow.
I'm surprised.
Even before someone started this thread, it was the LON airport
of last resort for me (and that became true whilst it was my
nearest, which it isn't ATM)
tim
>
>
Jul 22nd 2007 | 10:22 am
#57
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Heathrow: The world's least favourite airport
"tim....." <[email protected]> wrote ...
>
>
> They count number of international passangers, and ignore
> all of the local passangers.
>
> A not unreasonable thing to do if your claim is busiest
> *international* airport.
>
.....But on the other hand, many of the "domestic" flights out of ORD or
ATL, both "busier" than LHR, travel far greater distances than do many of
LHR's "International" flights. Laughably, DL has a number of "commuter"
routes, non-stops served by Bombardier or Embraer a/c, stretching out 1000
miles or so from its ATL hub. TUSAIAVBP, and Killeen, Texas to Atlanta is
bound to be close to LHR to Moscow....
TMO
>
>
> They count number of international passangers, and ignore
> all of the local passangers.
>
> A not unreasonable thing to do if your claim is busiest
> *international* airport.
>
.....But on the other hand, many of the "domestic" flights out of ORD or
ATL, both "busier" than LHR, travel far greater distances than do many of
LHR's "International" flights. Laughably, DL has a number of "commuter"
routes, non-stops served by Bombardier or Embraer a/c, stretching out 1000
miles or so from its ATL hub. TUSAIAVBP, and Killeen, Texas to Atlanta is
bound to be close to LHR to Moscow....
TMO
Jul 22nd 2007 | 12:12 pm
#58
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Heathrow: The world's least favourite airport
On Sun, 22 Jul 2007 08:45:16 -0700, Mel Rowing
<[email protected]> wrote:
>On 22 Jul, 14:31, "DVH" <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> The problem is that commerce is sitting there claiming to deliver me
>> something I want, and doing it more efficiently than, say, the government.
>> But the claim is false.
>>
>> Sure, sometimes I want a book. Sometimes I also want a car. But what I
>> really want is to be in the city I bought a ticket for. So although Heathrow
>> offers me bookshops and car dealerships, I'd prefer to be offered them
>> another time. Why can't commerce deliver on this
>
>But it does!
>
>Whenever and wherever there's a market or even a niche in a larger
>market there's a trader there trying to fill it. Just look how
>umbrellas appear on the streets when it starts raining.
>
>There is nothing I would prefer more than to turn up at an airport in
>my own time, go through the formalities with the minimum of fuss and
>climb aboard my own private or charted aircraft. However, I am not in
>that income bracket.
>
>Because of this constraint I have to use scheduled aircraft. You dare
>not allow time for transport delays. Then there is check in.
>Electronic ticketing has not speeded up this process a great deal. I
>sometimes wonder what passengers find to put in luggage (we travel
>very light well below our allowances) perhaps airlines could
>experiment with cutting ticket prices and heavily charging for luggage
>by weight. All in all, for one reason or another, you can bank on a
>minimum of two hours on an airport. That being the case, there you
>have your market.
>
>Beyond that, some of your fellow passengers are in transit. They might
>have to wait even longer before their connecting flight is called. One
>thing that does annoy me are "sleepers" I am fully aware that on
>airports there are people who have travelled in from other time zones.
>Why can't they catch up on their sleep whilst they are on the
>aircraft? Why must they lie all over the place? I have seen situations
>where airports have been busy there is an obvious shortage of seating
>yet you will see a body stretched across 4 or 5 seats asleep. It
>eludes me as to why airport security doesn't keep these characters
>moving.
>
>That's one reason why I get to the boarding gate as quickly as
>possible. It's not that I am afraid of missing the aircraft. It's
>because there you can sit down in peace relax, read, talk, do whatever
>you want to in relative peace up until boarding time approaches.
>
>Another source of annoyance is the "sophisticated" passenger who has
>to be called individually after the rest have boarded. In the meantime
>everybody else is strapped in their seats unable to move waiting for
>the damned aircraft to take off. Why can't the gate be locked after
>the last passenger present has passed through it and the luggage of
>any absentees off loaded. They being left behind even if they were
>close enough to spit onto the aircraft. You'd only have to do it a few
>times before word got round!
>
>Travelling by air can be stressful but all to often the source of the
>stress is not the airport or its facilities but other users.
I agree about the latecomers - but not the sleepers.
They are not the problem. The problem is that in all this
glitzy commercial push no entrepreneurs around the world
have recognised the need and decided to meet it. There is a
business opportunity there. I am one of millions of
transitting passenger who would pay a few dollars for a soft
couch to sleep on in a dorm-style facility while between
flights. Something with an alarm or wake-up service to meet
the flight and a shower available. The only options at the
moment are the unsuitable seats in the airport or expensive
Airport Hotels (if one is nearby) which sometimes offer a
short-stay room. A dorm-style setup offering couches with a
wake-up service for, say $5-10 per hour, would meet the need
and make a fortune.
Your lack of empathy for jetlagged people in transit shines
through. You may be aware that people have crossed time
zones but you certainly don't understand the effects.
As to "Why can't they catch up on their sleep whilst they
are on the aircraft?" Just how much long-distance flying
across time zones have you done? Some airlines try to
encourage sleeping - Qantas, BA are good at this, but there
will still be constant movement around the plane, passengers
disrupting you to go to the loo and a million other
distractions. Others couldn't give a damn - Iberian are a
classic example, keeping the lights on and the PA going for
hours into the flight until they had sold their duty-free
quota when I crossed the Atlantic with them.
Cheers, Alan, Australia
--
http://loraltraveloz.blogspot.com/
latest: Mossman Gorge in the Daintree Rainforest
http://loraldiabetes.blogspot.com/
latest: Self-Testing and Type 2 Management
<[email protected]> wrote:
>On 22 Jul, 14:31, "DVH" <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> The problem is that commerce is sitting there claiming to deliver me
>> something I want, and doing it more efficiently than, say, the government.
>> But the claim is false.
>>
>> Sure, sometimes I want a book. Sometimes I also want a car. But what I
>> really want is to be in the city I bought a ticket for. So although Heathrow
>> offers me bookshops and car dealerships, I'd prefer to be offered them
>> another time. Why can't commerce deliver on this
>
>But it does!
>
>Whenever and wherever there's a market or even a niche in a larger
>market there's a trader there trying to fill it. Just look how
>umbrellas appear on the streets when it starts raining.
>
>There is nothing I would prefer more than to turn up at an airport in
>my own time, go through the formalities with the minimum of fuss and
>climb aboard my own private or charted aircraft. However, I am not in
>that income bracket.
>
>Because of this constraint I have to use scheduled aircraft. You dare
>not allow time for transport delays. Then there is check in.
>Electronic ticketing has not speeded up this process a great deal. I
>sometimes wonder what passengers find to put in luggage (we travel
>very light well below our allowances) perhaps airlines could
>experiment with cutting ticket prices and heavily charging for luggage
>by weight. All in all, for one reason or another, you can bank on a
>minimum of two hours on an airport. That being the case, there you
>have your market.
>
>Beyond that, some of your fellow passengers are in transit. They might
>have to wait even longer before their connecting flight is called. One
>thing that does annoy me are "sleepers" I am fully aware that on
>airports there are people who have travelled in from other time zones.
>Why can't they catch up on their sleep whilst they are on the
>aircraft? Why must they lie all over the place? I have seen situations
>where airports have been busy there is an obvious shortage of seating
>yet you will see a body stretched across 4 or 5 seats asleep. It
>eludes me as to why airport security doesn't keep these characters
>moving.
>
>That's one reason why I get to the boarding gate as quickly as
>possible. It's not that I am afraid of missing the aircraft. It's
>because there you can sit down in peace relax, read, talk, do whatever
>you want to in relative peace up until boarding time approaches.
>
>Another source of annoyance is the "sophisticated" passenger who has
>to be called individually after the rest have boarded. In the meantime
>everybody else is strapped in their seats unable to move waiting for
>the damned aircraft to take off. Why can't the gate be locked after
>the last passenger present has passed through it and the luggage of
>any absentees off loaded. They being left behind even if they were
>close enough to spit onto the aircraft. You'd only have to do it a few
>times before word got round!
>
>Travelling by air can be stressful but all to often the source of the
>stress is not the airport or its facilities but other users.
I agree about the latecomers - but not the sleepers.
They are not the problem. The problem is that in all this
glitzy commercial push no entrepreneurs around the world
have recognised the need and decided to meet it. There is a
business opportunity there. I am one of millions of
transitting passenger who would pay a few dollars for a soft
couch to sleep on in a dorm-style facility while between
flights. Something with an alarm or wake-up service to meet
the flight and a shower available. The only options at the
moment are the unsuitable seats in the airport or expensive
Airport Hotels (if one is nearby) which sometimes offer a
short-stay room. A dorm-style setup offering couches with a
wake-up service for, say $5-10 per hour, would meet the need
and make a fortune.
Your lack of empathy for jetlagged people in transit shines
through. You may be aware that people have crossed time
zones but you certainly don't understand the effects.
As to "Why can't they catch up on their sleep whilst they
are on the aircraft?" Just how much long-distance flying
across time zones have you done? Some airlines try to
encourage sleeping - Qantas, BA are good at this, but there
will still be constant movement around the plane, passengers
disrupting you to go to the loo and a million other
distractions. Others couldn't give a damn - Iberian are a
classic example, keeping the lights on and the PA going for
hours into the flight until they had sold their duty-free
quota when I crossed the Atlantic with them.
Cheers, Alan, Australia
--
http://loraltraveloz.blogspot.com/
latest: Mossman Gorge in the Daintree Rainforest
http://loraldiabetes.blogspot.com/
latest: Self-Testing and Type 2 Management
Jul 22nd 2007 | 2:03 pm
#59
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Heathrow: The world's least favourite airport
"Mel Rowing" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected] oups.com...
> On 22 Jul, 14:31, "DVH" <[email protected]> wrote:
>
(snip)
> Beyond that, some of your fellow passengers are in transit. They might
> have to wait even longer before their connecting flight is called. One
> thing that does annoy me are "sleepers" I am fully aware that on
> airports there are people who have travelled in from other time zones.
> Why can't they catch up on their sleep whilst they are on the
> aircraft? Why must they lie all over the place? I have seen situations
> where airports have been busy there is an obvious shortage of seating
> yet you will see a body stretched across 4 or 5 seats asleep. It
> eludes me as to why airport security doesn't keep these characters
> moving.
>
(snip)
Well, I don't sleep in terminals, but I also don't sleep on aircraft. I've
tried, even on redeye or 10+ hour flights. It Just Doesn't Work for me,
being 6'3", and all. Went from the States to northern Europe 2 years ago-
ended up staying awake 30 hours both ways, until I could get to a bed.
So sleeping during the flight simply isn't an option for some people.
aem sends....
news:[email protected] oups.com...
> On 22 Jul, 14:31, "DVH" <[email protected]> wrote:
>
(snip)
> Beyond that, some of your fellow passengers are in transit. They might
> have to wait even longer before their connecting flight is called. One
> thing that does annoy me are "sleepers" I am fully aware that on
> airports there are people who have travelled in from other time zones.
> Why can't they catch up on their sleep whilst they are on the
> aircraft? Why must they lie all over the place? I have seen situations
> where airports have been busy there is an obvious shortage of seating
> yet you will see a body stretched across 4 or 5 seats asleep. It
> eludes me as to why airport security doesn't keep these characters
> moving.
>
(snip)
Well, I don't sleep in terminals, but I also don't sleep on aircraft. I've
tried, even on redeye or 10+ hour flights. It Just Doesn't Work for me,
being 6'3", and all. Went from the States to northern Europe 2 years ago-
ended up staying awake 30 hours both ways, until I could get to a bed.
So sleeping during the flight simply isn't an option for some people.
aem sends....
Jul 22nd 2007 | 4:15 pm
#60
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Heathrow: The world's least favourite airport
In article <[email protected] om>,
[email protected] says...
> On 22 Jul, 14:11, "tim....." <[email protected]> wrote:
> > "'Surly' Jock McSurly" <[email protected]> wrote in messagenews:[email protected] glegroups.com...
> > > On 22 Jul, 12:19, "tim....." <[email protected]> wrote:
> > >> >"'Surly' Jock Surly" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> > >> >we pay a shitload in airport taxes and get treated like animals,
> > >> >I think thats the problem.
> > >> Which country do you live in where airport fees are a tax?
> > >> In my country (the one that the airport in the subject is
> > >> located) the fee is a cost for providing the services connected
> > >> with providing the flight that I have chosen to use. Any
> > >> excess goes into the pocket of some fat cat businessman,
> > >> and nowhere near a government.
> > >> So, If I don't like the service that this commercial operation
> > >> is giving me for my money, I take my business elsewhere.
> > > the website calls them taxes.
> > What website. The airlines perhaps? Calling them taxes
> > is a fiction that the airlines like to perpetuate because it
> > passes the blame for them being so high to someone else.
> > They try and pretend that if HMG didn't collect e.g. 20
> > pounds (pp) for landing an aircraft at an airport it would be
> > free, of course HMG does no such thing.
> just semantics, its a cost to the passenger for using the airport.
It sounds like they are charging a per-head arrival fee, which is
passed on as a specific line-item to the passengers?
Auckland International Airport in NZ charges an individual,
separate fee that the passenger must pay in order to *leave* on
an international flight. Like being held hostage for twenty-five
bucks.
> > > BAA pay taxes to the government.
> > On their profits, just like every other coporate concern.
> > The price charged by a company for goods/services don't
> > include an element of 'tax', they include an element of profit
> > which ends up getting taxed.
And many, many businesses list a separate line item for Goods And
Services Tax, or sales tax, or whatever. Some utilities have
more items. My electric bill includes one called, "Electricity
Commission Levy."
--
Get Credit Where Credit Is Due
http://www.cardreport.com/
Credit Tools, Reference, and Forum
[email protected] says...
> On 22 Jul, 14:11, "tim....." <[email protected]> wrote:
> > "'Surly' Jock McSurly" <[email protected]> wrote in messagenews:[email protected] glegroups.com...
> > > On 22 Jul, 12:19, "tim....." <[email protected]> wrote:
> > >> >"'Surly' Jock Surly" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> > >> >we pay a shitload in airport taxes and get treated like animals,
> > >> >I think thats the problem.
> > >> Which country do you live in where airport fees are a tax?
> > >> In my country (the one that the airport in the subject is
> > >> located) the fee is a cost for providing the services connected
> > >> with providing the flight that I have chosen to use. Any
> > >> excess goes into the pocket of some fat cat businessman,
> > >> and nowhere near a government.
> > >> So, If I don't like the service that this commercial operation
> > >> is giving me for my money, I take my business elsewhere.
> > > the website calls them taxes.
> > What website. The airlines perhaps? Calling them taxes
> > is a fiction that the airlines like to perpetuate because it
> > passes the blame for them being so high to someone else.
> > They try and pretend that if HMG didn't collect e.g. 20
> > pounds (pp) for landing an aircraft at an airport it would be
> > free, of course HMG does no such thing.
> just semantics, its a cost to the passenger for using the airport.
It sounds like they are charging a per-head arrival fee, which is
passed on as a specific line-item to the passengers?
Auckland International Airport in NZ charges an individual,
separate fee that the passenger must pay in order to *leave* on
an international flight. Like being held hostage for twenty-five
bucks.
> > > BAA pay taxes to the government.
> > On their profits, just like every other coporate concern.
> > The price charged by a company for goods/services don't
> > include an element of 'tax', they include an element of profit
> > which ends up getting taxed.
And many, many businesses list a separate line item for Goods And
Services Tax, or sales tax, or whatever. Some utilities have
more items. My electric bill includes one called, "Electricity
Commission Levy."
--
Get Credit Where Credit Is Due
http://www.cardreport.com/
Credit Tools, Reference, and Forum
