Mexican authorities to allow mobile phone calls on commerical flights

by Scott Carmichael on

Good news! The Mexican FCC just canceled directive NOM-019SCT3-2001!

Sure, I’ll forgive you if you have no idea what this means (I didn’t either at first). The directive was a 2001 piece of law banning the use of mobile phones on commercial planes.

This means passengers will be legally permitted to yap away on their phones during “certain phases” of flight. The source article does not mention what those “certain phases” are, but it is probably just a way of saying you can use your phone after the take off and landing phase.

There is of course one small snag in this plan – no Mexican carriers actually offer inflight calling technology, and once you get above 10,000 feet, you won’t be in range of any cell towers. That said – it is probably just a matter of time till the airlines start seeing Peso bills, and install the equipment required to make calls. Other airlines that introduced inflight calling, did so with rates of about $4 per minute. You thought $12.95 for WiFi was too much? Try paying $20 for a call back home telling people what a great time you are having.

So far, US law still prohibits the use of mobile phones in flight, and if US Congressman Peter DeFazio has his way, that isn’t about to change any time soon. His ridiculously named ‘Hang-Up act” (Halting Airplane Noise to Give Us Peace) is trying to convince the FCC that removing the ban will kill air travel for everyone.

So dear readers, what do you think of inflight mobile phone calls?

%Poll-32293%

(Via: Engadget)

Irony alert – airlines not happy with new airport fee hikes

by Scott Carmichael on

In what I can only describe as “you have to be kidding me”, the Association of European Airlines (AEA) slammed European airports for increasing the fees they charge for the right to use their facilities.

These fees are passed on to passengers in the form of “passenger facility charges”. The airlines claim that increasing these fees is not fair in this current economic climate, and that the fees will only hurt them even more, especially since air travel is at an all time low.

What they really meant to say is that they should be the only ones that are allowed add ridiculous fees to their tickets.

It boggles the mind that the very same airlines that are introducing baggage fees, booking fees, airport check-in fees and other insane charges don’t want to allow airports to recoup some of their investments by raising their prices.

The airport fee hikes are used to improve facilities, add more gates and expand when needed. Unlike the airlines who use these fees as nothing but a new money making scheme. If adding a couple of bucks to my ticket means I get a better airport, I’m 100% for it – I wish the same could be said for the fees the airlines charge – I pay more, but on many carriers I get the same crappy service.

Peter Graves discusses Gogo Inflight Internet etiquette on AirTran – gladiator jokes included

by Scott Carmichael on

For anyone in the air a lot, Peter Graves is probably a bit of a cult hero. His role as Captain Oveur in Airplane! is one of my all time favorites.

So, when I came across Peter Graves (and a couple of other celebs) explaining “Internetiquette” on board AirtTan flights with the Gogo Inflight service, I just had to share them with you.

The site has three hilarious clips and a guidebook, and even if you don’t plan to fly AirTran any time soon, I highly recommend making some time to watch them – you won’t regret it (unless of course, you hate Airplane! and Peter Graves).

All joking aside – their Internetiquette guide actually provides some common sense tips about online security and the kind of photos you shouldn’t be looking at in public. Enjoy!

Mexican airlines grounded after safety violations and unpaid bills

by Scott Carmichael on

It’s one thing when the recession leads to higher prices and a general doom and gloom in the travel industry. But when the economic downturn actually starts jeopardizing aviation safety, it’s a pretty serious issue.

In Mexico, the aviation sector has been in a real double nightmare – the economy sucks and they had to deal with the swine flu outbreak.

The Mexican government recently grounded their fourth airline since 2007. The airlines had performed insufficient maintenance checks, resulting in fluid leaks and other technical deficiencies.

The airlines were also guilty of not repairing aircraft damage and poor pilot training.

In addition to this, three airlines have been grounded because they failed to pay the required government fees and taxes.

One of the airlines involved, Aviacsa, operates a daily Mexico City – Las Vegas flight and was grounded when inspectors discovered a whopping 280 problems with their fleet of 23 planes. When the suspension was overturned by a court, the airline was once again grounded when they failed to pay a $21 Million air-traffic control bill.

The airline called the 280 problems “cosmetic”, but the head of enforcement at the Mexican transportation department correctly states that even cosmetic problems could easily become big problems. In the end, it is reassuring to see that the Mexican aviation inspectors are doing a good job, and are doing everything they can to keep unsafe planes on the ground, where the belong. And remember, not all Mexican carriers can be as sexy as Viva Aerobus!
%Gallery-65766%

%Gallery-43444%

The high price of low cost airlines

by Scott Carmichael on

Low cost airlines are awesome – they have completely changed the way people fly, but they also helped redesign the entire aviation world, sending a powerful wakeup call to the legacy carriers.

There is however a nasty side to them – in their drive to cut costs and keep prices low, they have started to alienate customers and take on a very nasty attitude.

When flying with a low cost carrier, you need to pay very close attention to their rules, regulations and fees.

A good example of the inflexibility of the low cost carriers (Ryanair in particular) comes from The Netherlands. When Mrs. Raaijmakers and her family arrived at Weeze Niederrehin airport, she was told that since she had not checked in online, she’d have to pay a EUR160 airport check-in fee (about $230). Since she did not have that kind of cash, the airline simply told her that her family could not fly with them, and departed without her.

Now in the defense of Ryanair, these rules are spelled out quite clearly, and are published right on the main page at Ryanair.com. That said – to tell a passenger that they can either pay, or miss their flight seems quite rude. A Ryanair spokesperson said that the airline is “sick and tired of people who don’t read the rules”, and that “not paying means not flying”.

Because Mrs. Raaijmakers will arrive later at her destination, she and her husband are going to lose their jobs (in a bar). When confronted with this, Ryanair said “that is not our problem”.

I’m not one to blame the consumer, and it doesn’t seem right to blame Ryanair for this either, but it really should be a valuable lesson for anyone trying to save some money by picking a low cost carrier – the hidden cost is that not paying attention will cost you a lot more in the long run. Things that make sense on legacy carriers (like checking in at the airport) do not work with the low cost carriers, so be sure to read their site and check up on user experiences on aviation web sites before clicking “buy now”.
%Gallery-66271%

%Gallery-68288%