Posted by Seth on August 16, 2008 under Uncategorized | 
Of the three major international airline alliances, only two have significant joint-venture marketing agreements for trans-Atlantic service. StarAlliance has a deal with nine of their airlines with Continental trying to add themselves into the program, and SkyTeam has six in their deal. But OneWorld has no similar arrangement. It is actually even worse than that. Its two main carriers, British Airways and American Airlines are actually prohibited from having some benefits for their customers flying on the other carrier on trans-Atlantic routes in an effort to prevent them from operating in a monopolistic fashion since they dominate the market, particularly into London Heathrow.
OneWorld has finally decided to fight back, filing paperwork to establish a joint venture agreement between AA, BA and Iberia. It won’t be quite as pervasive as the other carriers’ but it should be beneficial to them to have operating. Plus, with the Open Skies treaty now in place Heathrow is wide open for competition, though BA will still have the majority of the slots there. I can’t imagine that the application will be denied, so expect to see the new marketing start to take shape in the near future.
I think that this is good for folks who fly OneWorld, and has no material effect on others. Overall a good thing for the industry.
Posted by Seth on August 16, 2008 under TSA |
The TSA has been working for the past few months to relax one of the most annoying rules that they enforce at the checkpoints – the need to remove a laptop from a bag to have it screened. As of today their policy has officially changed. Now, if you buy a special bag, you can leave your laptop in it for the screening. I’m glad that we’re making some progress, but it seems that the TSA has been responsible for a number industries popping up or growing significantly, from the RubberMaid contract for those gray bins to the ZipLoc 1 quart baggie sales increases. Now they’re apparently branching out into luggage, too.
And, the TSA still reserves the right to arbitrarily and randomly ignore this rule in the name of their layers of security, so no guarantees….
Given TSA’s use of random screening protocols, TSA reserves the right to re-screen any bag or laptop regardless of the design of the bag.
I’m not buying a new bag just for this. Seems like a waste at many levels. I’ll check out what the options are next time I’m actually in the market for a bag, but the sample models I’ve seen thus far don’t look all that promising. I wonder when the USA will catch up with the rest of the world that doesn’t have this ridiculous requirement. I wonder if the other screeners are just better than ours or if they just realize that it is a stupid requirement.
Posted by Seth on August 13, 2008 under TSA |
Is has been revealed that over the past couple months the TSA has been compiling a list of air travel passengers who refused or were unable to show their ID at security checkpoints. Even when the passengers’ identity was verified by the TSA their name, address, Social Security number, nationality, race and physical features, as well as identifying information about a traveling companion was added to a database and set to be kept for a period of 15 years. The database has also been used to hold the names of people who were questioned by the police for one reason or another, even if they were not charged with any crimes.
Asked about the program, TSA chief Kip Hawley told USA TODAY in an interview Tuesday that the information helps track potential terrorists who may be “probing the system” by trying to get though checkpoints at various airports.
Later Tuesday, Hawley called the newspaper to say the agency is changing its policy effective today and will stop keeping records of people who don’t have ID if a screener can determine their identity. Hawley said he had been considering the change for a month. The names of people who did not have identification will soon be expunged, he said.
No need to actually do anything wrong or even show any indication that you intend to do something wrong. Our government is still going to put your name on a secret list and track your every move. Comforting, huh?
I’m pretty sure that my name is in the database based on this information, though I haven’t played the ID game since the June changes. Still, I’ve had interactions with airport cops because of ID issues. The good news is that whatever list I’m on doesn’t prevent me from flying. The bad news is that the TSA continues to generate lists of names that don’t actually help with security.
Update(8.14.08): The TSA has responded on their blog. Basically they state that it isn’t happening now and won’t in the future, and accuse USA Today of making a mountain out of a mole hill, while ignoring that the DIRECTOR of their agency admitted it was happening and it was such a bad idea that they decided to stop once they were called on it. Morons.
Posted by Seth on August 11, 2008 under Uncategorized |
One airline, SkyEurope, apparently seen the light and has removed the concept of a surcharge from their systems. Of course, they are a small LCC from Central Europe so the number of affected passengers is relatively low, but the move is a very refreshing one in an industry where airlines seem to be focusing on finding new ways to extract cash from customers rather than just charging a fare that covers the costs.
Our customers have told us it’s important to be completely transparent about the final price of their journey with SkyEurope. We have eliminated the complex structure of surcharges and fees and we have implemented one easy to understand price point. We have also taken one more exciting step by eliminating the fuel surcharge for our customers to provide further relief from increasing fuel costs.
Then again, like anything else, the fine print reveals some caveats:
Additional products and services such as checked baggage, airport lounges or any other paid services not directly related to the air ticket purchase are communicated separately
So there are no additional fees for your ticket, but that doesn’t include baggage, concessions, or anything other than a seat on the plane. Still, it is better than just about every other carrier operating today, with the main exception being Southwest, that still have virtually zero fees for anything.
This happened a month ago and is just now making it out into wider coverage, so it certainly isn’t groundbreaking in a manner that would seem to be affecting the rest of the industry, but I can dream.
Posted by Seth on August 10, 2008 under Uncategorized |
If you’re willing to hack your CharlieCard then it would seem that it actually isn’t all that hard to give yourself some additional fare value on the Boston mass transit system. A group of MIT students were prevented from presenting their report on the flaws in the system thanks to a last minute injunction handed down by a judge in Massachusetts. The trio was poised to present the findings at Defcon, an annual security/hacker conference. The MBTA effectively petitioned the courts that they’d lose too much money if the report was presented before they could fix the problems and managed to get a judgement in their favor.
Of course, the slides for the presentation were published before the injunction came down, so plenty of folks have some of the details. Something about the horses already being out of the barn comes to mind. They apparently offered to tell the MBTA about the problem a while ago and were rebuffed. Better to sue later than solve the problem now. When will people learn that you cannot actually silence people who discover security holes. Just fix them and move on.
Oh, and they got an A on their research from their professor.
Posted by Seth on August 10, 2008 under Uncategorized |
A pilot of a small private plane found himself in a not so uncommon predicament last November – loss of electrical power in his twin-engine plane. The engine was still running, and the pilot has a mobile/cell phone with him, but the calls kept dropping out. Lacking any other communication options, the air traffic controller working the tower in Cork, Ireland began sending SMS text messages to the pilot, providing him with instructions for the approach and other details.
Pretty ingenious action on the part of the controller. I guess banning mobiles in the air isn’t really a great idea, huh?
Posted by Seth on August 8, 2008 under TSA |
I like to pick on the TSA a fair amount – I think that they deserve it for most of their policies. So when the Director of the Department of Homeland Security got himself an interview in Wired I was certainly interested to see what he would have to say about the TSA and some of the other programs that they are running these days. Since the article was in Wired the focus was on technology programs, though there are plenty of travel-related bits in the interview.
One of the main points of discussion was the ability of Customs agents to seize a laptop or other electronic device, as the contents of such are just considered part of a passenger’s luggage. This policy has been upheld by the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals and I can’t imagine that the SCOTUS is going to overturn it, so this is pretty much the way it is. Here’s part of what Chertoff has to say on the topic:
You are looking for material that is contraband itself, such as child pornography or information about how to set up remote control IEDs. Or if they are non-Americans, you are looking for information on the laptop about why they should not be admitted.
So they’re looking for things that are illegal, as well as things that aren’t actually illegal. It turns out that information on how to set up remote control IEDs isn’t actually illegal by virtue of existing. But Chertoff seems to think that possession of written material is actually illegal, just because he doesn’t want folks having documentation on IEDs.
In the posted details on the DHS website they state that:
…[T]here are numerous laws that apply to such material at the border including laws regarding intellectual property rights, technical data that can be imported or exported only under state department license and child pornography.
Yet somehow they’ve also decided to extend these laws to cover things that don’t fall in any of those categories. Go figure.
Chertoff also comments on the watch lists. His claim is that the airlines are at fault for not gathering an additional data point (usually date of birth) to verify the identity of passengers. That program only came in to existence a couple months ago, and yet Chertoff is already blaming the airlines for not implementing the system quickly enough. Never mind that the lists don’t actually have the names of the riskiest people on them, because then those people would know that they were considered terrorists. And there is no accountability for how names are added to the list or really any easy way to get off the list, despite the TSA’s claim that the redress program is in effect.
There may be people for whom it is inconvenient to be patted down or asked a few questions. The downside is that if we don’t do that except if we have proof someone is an actual terrorist, you are going to have a Mohammed Atta getting on an airplane or crossing the border and that’s going to raise the risk.
And he also puts aside the fact that it isn’t just a pat down or some questions. The need to interact with a check-in agent and go through the secondary screening wastes hours of peoples’ time, every day.
The most interesting bit of the whole thing, however, is the final comment he makes about the watch list program:
But if you are asking if we would do a court process where we litigate it, I mean, that effectively would shut it down.
In other words, there is something inherently wrong with the program that Chertoff feels wouldn’t actually stand up to a court process. So why are we still operating such a program??
He also makes sure to raise the “think of the children” argument true to form:
And then I guarantee what would happen is this: If you stopped using the watch list and basically anybody could get on a plane without knowing their identity, sooner or later something would happen — and people would lose their lives, and then there would be another 9/11 Commission and we’d hear about how you had this system and you would have kept them off and these people lost their loved ones on a plane.
I agree that terrorists should be kept off of planes. I don’t think that anyone would argue that. But the current system has very little relationship with actually identifying passengers or terrorists, and the the TSA doesn’t seem willing to admit that. Moreover, identifying a person should be way less of a goal than actually stopping weapons from getting on the plane, stopping bombs from getting on to planes through cargo, which remains wholly unscreened or stopping water bottles from getting on the plane that cannot be used to launch a reasonable attack.
But that would involve the TSA and DHS reversing a policy decision and admitting that the risks aren’t really there. And that would diminish the cycle of fear that the TSA and DHS are so keen on promoting. And we can’t have that, can we?
Posted by Seth on August 7, 2008 under Uncategorized |
JetBlue has announced their planned date for the grand opening of their new terminal at JFK: October 1, 2008. There will be a ceremonial opening on September 22nd and then overnight on September 30th they’ll move all operations over to the new facility, with the initial flights operating at the new terminal being some red-eye flights arriving from Denver and Oakland around 5:30am on the 1st.
The announcement came in an appearance on Larry King Live last night by Dave Barger, the carrier’s CEO. The date had been rumored for a while but this was the first time I have found that someone in an official position stated something in public.
Yes, it’s a — well, first of all, from our, again, our home in New York — and we’ll open a new terminal in about 60 days, October 1st, as a matter of, the new building here at Kennedy Airport.
I’m a bit surprised that the announcement happened in such a subdued and incoherent way, considering how big this deal is and how well run the JetBlue marketing and publicity team usually runs. But it is still exciting to hear that there is a target on the calendar.
For more on the JFK T5 terminal, check out my previous post from a tour I did with a bunch of folks a couple months back.
And if you’re in the JFK area on August 23rd and are looking for something to do, you might want to head out to Terminal 5 and help them test out the luggage handling, sorting and screening systems. They’re trying to avoid a T5 fiasco on the scale of London’s Heathrow T5 opening and looking for 1000 folks to assist. If I weren’t already committed to being in Florida that weekend I’d definitely be there. I’ll just have to settle for pulling an all-nighter (or at least a VERY early wake up call) to be out at T5 when they open the doors for the first real flights.
Posted by Seth on August 5, 2008 under Uncategorized |
A few months ago the FAA announced that they would be implementing slot controls for the NYC airports to help reduce the systemic delays that the city experiences (Story 1; Story 2). By limiting airlines to only scheduling the number of flights that can actually take off and land in a given time frame there was a small chance that the system would actually operate smoothly at least part of the time.
That plan is now on hold as the Port Authority, with the support of Senator Chuck Schumer, have refused to go along with the government plan. Schumer took a very reasonable approach to the proposal in his response:
The D.O.T. appears hell-bent on jamming this unworkable plan down the throats of the Port Authority and New York City air travelers, but we are going to fight them every step of the way. The Port Authority is absolutely right to block the D.O.T.’s efforts. The bottom line is this harebrained, untested scheme will cause chaos at our airports, raise fares, and reduce travel options and not ease delays one bit. The D.O.T. needs to back down from this crusade and finally take the obvious steps of updating antiquated technology and fully staffing New York’s air traffic control towers so we can finally deliver some long overdue relief.
OK…maybe not at all reasonable. Yes, the technology is in desperate need of updates. Yes, we need more controllers. Yes, we need to adjust the routings of planes to allow for more efficient use of the airspace around the airports. But none of those are going to happen this month. Odds are none of those are going to happen this year, or even in the next 5 years. But in the mean time, Schumer feels that it is in the best interests of New York and the rest of the country to continue under a system that is actually operating at worse levels than Chicago did in 2000/2001, and that is hard to do.
The FAA, for its part, points out that they’re talking about very few slots, and that they are going to pretty much allow the folks who are already flying to the airports to keep doing so:
Although market-based mechanisms are the most effective way to allocate scarce resources—like slots—we have taken a very conservative approach to introducing these mechanisms with this proposal. The vast majority of hourly operations at the airport, as much as 90 percent or more, would be “grandfathered” and leased to the existing operators for non-monetary consideration. The market-based aspect of our proposal involves auctioning off leases for only a limited number of the remaining slots.
So the FAA slot controls are in place now, but they cannot actually assign any new slots it seems. And we’re getting no closer to actually solving any of the problems, but claiming that it is in the best interest of the public. Come on Chuck…get a clue. Actually he’s my senator. Maybe I’ll give him a call tomorrow and tell him how stupid his plan is.
Slot controls work just fine all over the world, including the ability for the airline who owns the slot to sell it to someone else if they want to. There are plenty of problems at London’s Heathrow, but the slot control system and resale market there works just fine. Sure, you don’t want to be Continental who paid $209MM to get their 4 pairs of slots, but that’s what the market dictates. And anything is better than what we have now.
Posted by Seth on August 5, 2008 under Uncategorized |
I was reading one of Lucky’s posts over at One Mile at a Time and started thinking about the concept of the “3 Perfect Days” series from United. The few times I’ve flown on United I’ve actually looked forward to reading those articles, and in a few instances they actually were about places I was head on that trip or an upcoming one. Considering how infrequently I fly UA I found that pretty coincidental.
Lucky’s post got me thinking about the fact that I’m a hit-and-run tourist. No, I don’t go around crashing cars into pedestrians (though I do have a spotty driving record overseas). But when I head out to see a place, spending more than two or three nights in one place seems strange to me. I actually had only one limitation put on my honeymoon itinerary planning – no single night cities. I managed to plan it that way (for the most part) and we had a great trip, but I still like the shorter stays and getting to see more places.
Could we have spent more time in Bangkok? Maybe. But I don’t think that we would have enjoyed our additional time more than the initial three nights there. Ditto for our two nights in Paris. Though I’m sure we could’ve continued to eat the great food, the other aspects of the touristing there weren’t so great. And I actually felt that more than one night in Venice was too much, each of the three times I’ve been there, so there are times the hit-and-run approach makes sense.
I’ve also been to plenty of places that I want to go back to, where the 2-3 nights isn’t enough. But even for those places I’m not sure I’d stay too much longer on subsequent visits. I like getting my exposure to the places a little bit at a time, and circling back later to see more. Of course, you run the risk of circling back later to find out that the sight you wanted to spend more time at is gone, but I look at those situations as an opportunity to find something new to see.
And there are certainly plenty of new (to me) things to see out there in the world.
