The last boarding at SWA that I made with my grandson two weeks ago had the family with children boarding age of 4 years old. Older kids use the boarding pass sequence. What isn't clear is why all this egotistical passenger's tickets weren't in the same sequence (having been purchased at the same time) and why priority boarding is such a big deal. You all get there at the same time and sometimes you don't get to sit up front. Deal with it. While the TSA agent could have broken the rule for one passenger, then you would have dozens of other passengers wanting special favors because of connecting flights, legroom, adjacent seating - the list goes on. (As an aside, TSA agents don't board passengers, that's done by SWA personnel after passengers have cleared the TSA checkpoint.)
I was a deputy sheriff years ago and assigned to prevent traffic from turning down one road to avoid congestion. One driver defied my command not to turn because he lived down that road and didn't want to
The world is full of people who believe they have self-empowered authority to break the rules that apply to everyone else. Priority boarding is a status symbol for some of these, and shoehorning non-priority passengers in front of legitimate priority boarders would have angered those who felt their status was being one-upped.
TSA agents are like all law enforcement officers. When a command is given within the jurisdiction of their authority, there can be no compromise - do it or else. While this was not an egregious violation of the rules, it was nonetheless a violation. The response and attitude of the passenger to a reasonable command is inexcusable. His actions suggest he is a hot head that was probably deserving of his eviction.
Or only one lav in the cattle car because the front lav is reserved for pilots and 1st class. The rest of the 120 or so bovines can learn to share. Personally, I don't see how Starbucks can survive selling to departing cattle.
It's even more (or less) hilarious since terrorism safety rules prevent passengers from collecting in the aisles, not to mention the trim issues that would result from a center of gravity shift to the rear at the critical speed / trim envelope at cruising altitude.
Impressive. Note that although the main gear is off-center, the nosewheel is almost perfectly on the center line of the runway on touchdown. That is an excellent example of a master pilot.
Sadly, potential terrorism is a government concern, not a concern to be left to profit-minded private industry with little authority to deal with violations. The real question is a subject of considerable moral controversy regarding allowing those who can pay to buy their way in line ahead of those who cannot. There is an excellent study of the idea of buying your way to the front of the line and displacing others patiently waiting their turn, by Michael Sandlin, a Harvard professor, called "The Moral Limits of Markets."
Yes, it was about width. But on commercial airliners, unless it's a large aircraft (i.e. 777, etc.) or wide body, the way they are increasing seating is to decrease seat distance front to back to cram in an extra row or two. You can see this by how the windows now don't line up with the seating. "Dishing" out the seatbacks doesn't remove the seatback frame which forces you to sit for hours with your knees together or wedged against the seatback frame in front of you.
And the argument to pick economy-plus seats is largely an illusion. If you buy tickets too far in advance, the airlines don't know what type of aircraft may be allocated to that flight and do not have seat choice available yet. Then when you can choose seating, they either charge you for that, or you find all the choice seats already assigned. One airline (I wish I knew which one) had the audacity to ask my wife for $40 to pick an economy seat of her choice!
The point is that with rare exception, my commercial f
Yes, they are driving people away. I'm 6'4" and not obese. My height isn't my fault or choice. But travel is, and my last two trips from middle U.S. to the east coast were in my private vehicle, not in a cattle car. The cost of first class is more than enough to pay for a motel, gas and meals for two days and I know where the hell my luggage is. So-called economy-plus seats are usually already full, and I'll be damned if I'm going to pay any airline for the "privilege" of picking my own seat among the remains.
I'll bet some carrier could make a fortune by increasing seat room for passengers, charging one fair, flat fee for two bags and cut the stupid antics of fighting for elbow room. Look at Southwest on the baggage issue - it works.
One problem I see with the demand theory is that airlines have no way to monitor demand. I would always pay a bit more (not first class more) for a mere 2" of knee room. But since those seats are seldom if ever available and I sit in steerage, they never know my demand is there. It's like walking through a check-out counter when the cashier asks if I found everything. I say "no, you were out of swiss cheese" and that message is never passed along to the buyers.
That's nice theory, but it doesn't work for me. I live in driving distance of several airports (KXNA, KTUL, KSGF, KJLN and a looong drive to KMCI). None of these airports are serviced by JetBlue or VirginAmerica. I would gladly spend $25-50 for adequate legroom on long flights cross country or international, but there are very few such seats available and they always seem to have been taken when I purchase my tickets. There just aren't enough of them. Why don't airlines quit playing games and raise ticket prices on all steerage seats to cover 2" of extra legroom?
