Big gamble asked of passengers on flight

[dellzeqq]

Perspective yourself. There were people with babies and no milk yet the waitresses refused to supply them even with water. It was a massive inconvenience. If it wouldn't have been for you, then you are an exceptionally experienced zen practitioner. It was rules and regulations, which seem to have overtaken sense as the primary philosophy in running airports. And as mentioned, we all know that 'rules and regulations' are a priority and yet they were overlooked in luggage travelling on a plane without the passeger(s) it belongs to How come one rule was floowed and another ignored? And assumption on your part; the airport manager was not a he.

You are Naomi Campbell and ICMFP!!!

 

[4F]

I quite like Bournemouth

 

[martint235]

How self-righteous. You weren't there so didn't go through the massive inconvenience we had but the even worse inconvenience the passengers asked to travel instead to Bournemouth were 'invited' to go through. The duty airport manager told those of us more vociferous in our opinions that we were totally correct and that as the pilot hadn't had an indication that the chute was defective, only one that didn't indicate it was ok was fretting over the malfunction of a light bulb and should treat the situation accordingly. How many times, for instance, have you had to exit a plane down a chute? Additionally, those gullible enough to accept the appalling air-waitresses assurances that they would be bussed back to Manchester and their luggage from 300+ miles away were too glaikit to demand compensation. It's a truism of life that we get what we settle for, and so they did.

Never ....... yet. When my first time does come, I'd like to be very sure that chute is working because sitting in several tons of metal on top of water doesn't sound like my idea of fun.

 

[Piemaster]

Worse things happen at sea. You can get thrown overboard if the ship is in danger. Fact.

Oi! I'm working on one now. Nobody is throwing me overboard, mostly 'cos it would grind to a halt if they did and nothing to do with my winning personality.

As to OP. Pffft. Deal with it.

 

[taxing]

Never ....... yet. When my first time does come, I'd like to be very sure that chute is working because sitting in several tons of metal on top of water doesn't sound like my idea of fun.

Not a fan of boats, then?

 

[thomas]

No offence taken, but I am getting fed up with people complaining over minor inconveniances like you have done. Take a step back and look at the bigger picture than you own selfish needs. No offence.

+1. Boo hoo, you got delayed...it's a regular part of flying. If you can't deal with that, don't fly! Simple.

On holiday this year, outbound flight was delayed about 4 hours so we missed our connecting flight. Got put up in a hotel and flown out the morning after. Not really that nice, not having basic things like your toothbrush with you...but we dealt with it (and ultimately saved 60€ on the hotel room). Even all that (say 24hours of travelling), would still have been quicker than any other method.

When I was getting my flight back, the plane was delayed by about 6 hours. turned out someone had a heart attack on the way there so they had to divert. Coupled with us missing our slot because someone was drunk and abusive. Annoying yes, a 'big gamble' or major risk to my life. No.


Perhaps use: http://www.eurolines...oach/index.aspx
in the future.

 

[jonesy]

Last time I flew, with SAS from Copenhagen, there was an announcement shortly before boarding that the plane was overbooked, and that they would make a payment to anyone willing to take a later flight. Can't remember off-hand what the payment was, but I think it was something a like a couple of hundred Euros; enough to make the delay worthwhile to anyone not in a rush. Nothing more was mentioned, so presumably this was enough to solve the problem. Sometimes taking a hit like that is the most sensible commercial solution in the longer term.

 

[Archie_tect]

Last time I flew, with SAS from Copenhagen, there was an announcement shortly before boarding that the plane was overbooked, and that they would make a payment to anyone willing to take a later flight. Nothing more was mentioned...

Probably the co-pilot, they never do anything anyway.

 

[Arch]

How many times, for instance, have you had to exit a plane down a chute?

Personally, never, but you have to need it once for it to be rather important. Or would you have sat back in your burning seat and said, "ho hum, that's the risk you take...."

Why not hop on the next plane to Indonesia, and explain to someone who's just had their family washed away by the tsunami or burned by the volcano how 'absolutely awful' it all was.

Annoying. But hardly earthshattering.

 

[Headgardener]

So how come some engineer chap couldn't have come with his meter and tested the circiut?

 

[martint235]

Not a fan of boats, then?

Ok ok, but boats are kind of designed to float (and yes I do ignore the fact that if any one turned the pumps off I'd be in trouble!!!) but planes aren't.

Just imagine being at the back of a plane that crashes on the sea, the front door and chute open so people rush to the front dipping the nose of the plane. Water starts to enter through the open door and your door at the back won't open!!!!

 

[Bayerd]

I reckon someone from Bike Events sabotaged it ......

 

[asterix]

Probably the co-pilot, they never do anything anyway.

Isn't it their job to keep the pilot awake?

 

[Archie_tect]

Isn't it their job to keep the pilot awake?

That's Trixie-Belle's job.... while the auto- pilot lands the plane.

 

[Flying_Monkey]

I read the title and thought this was going to be about something really serious... 'absolutely awful', 'massive gamble'... but it was about some minor travel problems.

As Arch says, hardly earthshattering.