Aviation Discussion

[Jetlagged]

What's wrong with Norwegian?

Nothing as far as we are concerned. Flew with them to Puerto Rico last year and had no complaints at all. The flights were on time and aboard new Boeing 787 Dreamliners. The meals were better than average and we had plenty of legroom. Wouldn't hesitate to fly with them again and would be keen to try these super cheap new connections from Cork and Edinburgh to the East coast of the US.

 

[fowler9]

Given my predilection for obscure destinations if I could get a cheap fight to Rhode Island I would quite happily fly Norwegian if the price was right. If I really wanted to go to Boston (Which is somewhere I would like to visit) I would make damn sure that it was going to be cheaper going this route including transfers etc. If Norwegian (and Ryanair via connections) are actually advertising them to the public as flights to Boston and NYC I would say that is a little unfair.

 

[Techniquest]

What's wrong with Norwegian?

Without a doubt I've mentioned it many times before on this thread, let alone in my trip report thread last March, and I also posted a thorough review on TripAdvisor. Nevertheless, a quick recap:

- Disengaged unfriendly staff
- Meals were lousy and poorly marked
- Seats were uncomfortable
- Legroom in economy was disgraceful
- I didn't get the sxtra legroom seats I booked on the homeward flight, much to my dismay on a red-eye flight

I'm sure I'm not making my point clear enough in the above, please feel free to find my full review about a year's worth of posts back.

I refuse to fly with Norwegian again, even if just within Europe.

 

[Bletchleyite]

- I didn't get the sxtra legroom seats I booked on the homeward flight, much to my dismay on a red-eye flight

That raises an interesting question - what if you are too tall to sit down at all (not even painfully, my backside cannot reach the seat, as the distance between the seat back and cushion is shorter than the length of my thigh bone plus padding/knee joint) in the normal seats? That is the case for me on Wizz (who despite published figures have the worst legroom I have ever encountered - I think it's due to the shape of the hard plastic seatback on their older aircraft).

 

[Techniquest]

Apparently if you get a doctors note of some sort you have to be given an extra legroom seat. Can't remember what the condition is you have to have.

 

[Butts]

Apparently if you get a doctors note of some sort you have to be given an extra legroom seat. Can't remember what the condition is you have to have.

Being Six Foot Three, there is nothing more galling than my getting on a Plane and seeing a short arse sat in an exit seat

 

[Bletchleyite]

Apparently if you get a doctors note of some sort you have to be given an extra legroom seat. Can't remember what the condition is you have to have.

I've had DVT if that counts. Though it was caused by trauma from falling over on a rock, not a flight, so far as the doctor thought.

The problem would come if in later life I'm not mobile enough to sit there...I have bad knees already, not enough to be an issue (if I can run a marathon and rock climb I reckon I can open an exit door and get out of a plane ) but at some point it will be an issue, and it will effectively bar me from flying Wizz.

Maybe that wouldn't be a bad thing overall

 

[WestCoast]

BA 787-8s are pretty tight too, probably about the same as Norwegian Long Haul. The staff on Norwegian remind me of Ryanair, usually well meaning but not really trained to offer customer service.

I've always enjoyed my flights with Aer Lingus across the Atlantic; nice staff, tidy and comfy A330s and the fares are usually very competitive. Plus, Dublin T2 is easily the best place to transfer when heading across the pond.

Worst I've ever experienced in terms of legroom was the old Monarch A300s, gosh those things were horrendous for comfort. The days before we had low cost carriers with relatively plush new fleets, you had to fly charter on a rust bucket for a cheap fare! I remember crossing the Atlantic on an Air Transat L1011 in the early 2000s and don't remember that being particularly nice either.

From Manchester, we've got Thomas Cook instead of Norwegian offering low fare flights to the States and I've heard they're alright nowadays.

 

[fowler9]

Circular runways around airports, are they the daftest idea you have ever heard, if not why not. Go!

 

[atillathehunn]

Without a doubt I've mentioned it many times before on this thread, let alone in my trip report thread last March, and I also posted a thorough review on TripAdvisor. Nevertheless, a quick recap:

- Disengaged unfriendly staff
- Meals were lousy and poorly marked
- Seats were uncomfortable
- Legroom in economy was disgraceful
- I didn't get the sxtra legroom seats I booked on the homeward flight, much to my dismay on a red-eye flight

I'm sure I'm not making my point clear enough in the above, please feel free to find my full review about a year's worth of posts back.

I refuse to fly with Norwegian again, even if just within Europe.

I don't think any of these are endemic to Norwegian.

Have you ever flown KLM long haul? Talk about lack of legroom...

Disengaged staff - every airline. Sample size of 2 is not worth anything.

Bad food - it's a cheap ready meal microwaved along with 300 others. With the exception of Turkish I've never had particularly good food in the air.

Extra legroom - grounds for a refund on the supplement they charged you which at least helps soften the blow

On the other hand they give you a cheap route across the Atlantic which is why you flew them, and they know that when the memory fades and their latest sale comes in, you're going to book them.

 

[Techniquest]

Oh really? I'm reasonably sure Norwegian will have had a sale on in the last 12 months, can't say as much as I've cared to look. I sure haven't booked with them, and my memory of my flights with Norwegian has yet to fade and probably never will do.

For what it's worth, we did research opinions on Norwegian before we booked. The review spoke highly of them, so it was considered worth a try.

Never got anything back from Norwegian for the lack of promised extra legroom seats, and it took a long time to hear back from them whatsoever anyway. My point at the time still stands that Ryanair's crews are thousands of times better, and I've only ever had service better once, that being a Scottish Flybe crew.

Norwegian could offer me London to New York and back for £50 and I wouldn't take it.

Never flown with KLM so I can't comment on your post about them, but it's worth noting for future reference.

 

[atillathehunn]

Oh really? I'm reasonably sure Norwegian will have had a sale on in the last 12 months, can't say as much as I've cared to look. I sure haven't booked with them, and my memory of my flights with Norwegian has yet to fade and probably never will do.

For what it's worth, we did research opinions on Norwegian before we booked. The review spoke highly of them, so it was considered worth a try.

Never got anything back from Norwegian for the lack of promised extra legroom seats, and it took a long time to hear back from them whatsoever anyway. My point at the time still stands that Ryanair's crews are thousands of times better, and I've only ever had service better once, that being a Scottish Flybe crew.

Norwegian could offer me London to New York and back for £50 and I wouldn't take it.

Never flown with KLM so I can't comment on your post about them, but it's worth noting for future reference.

I didn't say it would happen now, but all of these business models (in fact any business model customer facing) is that in the event of a bad publicity period (or what you experienced) they make enough noises about improving, lower the prices a bit and you'll be back.

Look at Ryanair. In their darker days they noticed people were leaving, so they made overtures about changing and now people are coming back.

It'll happen.

 

[306024]

Oh really? I'm reasonably sure Norwegian will have had a sale on in the last 12 months, can't say as much as I've cared to look. I sure haven't booked with them, and my memory of my flights with Norwegian has yet to fade and probably never will do.

For what it's worth, we did research opinions on Norwegian before we booked. The review spoke highly of them, so it was considered worth a try.

Never got anything back from Norwegian for the lack of promised extra legroom seats, and it took a long time to hear back from them whatsoever anyway. My point at the time still stands that Ryanair's crews are thousands of times better, and I've only ever had service better once, that being a Scottish Flybe crew.

Norwegian could offer me London to New York and back for £50 and I wouldn't take it.

Never flown with KLM so I can't comment on your post about them, but it's worth noting for future reference.

I've done a fair few short haul flights with Norwegian and I don't recognise the airline you are so keen to denigrate. OK, they didn't meet your expectations, but perhaps they do get good reviews one simple reason. Would chose them over Ryanair and EasyJet any day.

 

[Hornet]

That raises an interesting question - what if you are too tall to sit down at all (not even painfully, my backside cannot reach the seat, as the distance between the seat back and cushion is shorter than the length of my thigh bone plus padding/knee joint) in the normal seats? That is the case for me on Wizz (who despite published figures have the worst legroom I have ever encountered - I think it's due to the shape of the hard plastic seatback on their older aircraft).

7ft tall athlete deemed too tall to fly

7ft tall athlete deemed too tall to fly
MARCH 16, 20171:13PM

Athlete Alexander Kimerov was asked to leave a flight for being 213cm tall.

THIS is the moment armed police arrive on board a plane to haul a seven-foot (or 213cm, if you were born post-1980) volleyball player off a plane — for being too tall.
The uniformed officers have an animated conversation with the man, who clearly isn’t too impressed about being unceremoniously hauled off.
Even sitting down, he’s the same height as the cops, and when they eventually get him onto his feet, you really start to understand just how imposing his height is.
The towering 20-year-old found it impossible to cram his legs between the seats.
The fiasco started when flight attendants argued 20-year-old athlete Alexander Kimerov was blocking the aisle with his very long legs.
How bad could it be? Obese people can fly, after all. Babies are allowed on board. Plenty of people have flown with illnesses like stomach bugs. And there’s no rule stopping people getting onto a plane if they haven’t had a shower for the better part of a week.
In this case, however, things escalated pretty quickly.
Cabin crew ended up calling police to get him removed from the flight from Novy Urengoy, in Siberia, to the Russian capital Moscow, even though he’s flown it before.
Of course, everyone else on the plane decided to pipe up as police ordered Kimerov to “behave like a man and vacate your seat”.
Apparently, volleyball is huge in Russia, and the debacle has caused quite a stir since it was posted on social media.
Kimerov is apparently a well-known sports figure in Russia.
Moscow Dynamo player Alexander Volkov expressed his shock at his fellow player’s treatment, saying: “What’s going on with this world, friends?
“A man is being taken off plane because of his height.
“And not just an ordinary man but a prominent sportsman who plays for Russia.”

http://www.news.com.au/travel/trave...y/news-story/efb2e5831ba8957782d1e96d854ec7c5

 

[Techniquest]

I've done a fair few short haul flights with Norwegian and I don't recognise the airline you are so keen to denigrate. OK, they didn't meet your expectations, but perhaps they do get good reviews one simple reason. Would chose them over Ryanair and EasyJet any day.

See, I'm the opposite, I'm very happy to fly Ryanair. easyJet I don't particularly care about.

I didn't think much of BA but I would happily choose them over Norwegian. Same for Aer Lingus, and think what you will of it but I'd choose Manx2 over Norwegian.

 

[AlterEgo]

See, I'm the opposite, I'm very happy to fly Ryanair. easyJet I don't particularly care about.

I didn't think much of BA but I would happily choose them over Norwegian. Same for Aer Lingus, and think what you will of it but I'd choose Manx2 over Norwegian.

Choosing Manx2 would be quite difficult seeing as it went out of business five years ago.

 

[Techniquest]

Choosing Manx2 would be quite difficult seeing as it went out of business five years ago.

Well would choose them if still in business. That LET L410 was mighty hellfire!

 

[306024]

See, I'm the opposite, I'm very happy to fly Ryanair. easyJet I don't particularly care about.

I didn't think much of BA but I would happily choose them over Norwegian. Same for Aer Lingus, and think what you will of it but I'd choose Manx2 over Norwegian.

Each to their own, the crew of my BA flight back to London City last week were very friendly by the way. Mind you I prefer to take just one train from Liverpool St to Stansted Airport rather than change 6 times and wait 29 minutes at Roydon along the way

 

[Techniquest]

Those shacks needed doing! Plus as nice as 379s are they're not exactly thrilling. Now if it had been a pair of 317s on the StanEx...

I need to get London City done, one of my top 3 airports to go and get (Luton and Heathrow being the other two)!

 

[atillathehunn]

How do you quantify top of the list? What's the ranking scale or selection criteria?

 

[atillathehunn]

Those shacks needed doing! Plus as nice as 379s are they're not exactly thrilling. Now if it had been a pair of 317s on the StanEx...

I need to get London City done, one of my top 3 airports to go and get (Luton and Heathrow being the other two)!

+ Luton is a complete dump. I think if your ambition is to fly to Luton you may wish to raise your ambitions slightly.

 

[Shaw S Hunter]

Circular runways around airports, are they the daftest idea you have ever heard, if not why not. Go!

Firstly congratulations on posting about actual aviation as opposed to perceived notions of customer service (or lack thereof) which seem to dominate this thread currently!

Biggest problem is how on earth due you set up any form of ILS if approach is possible from any direction? And what if variable winds on the approach require a turn to regain the desired runway centreline? The most important principle of flying the approach is that it should be stable, which in practice means straight with a steady rate of descent. What about ATC routes in busy areas if the optimum approach path varies day by day?

I can see the theoretical appeal of the idea but I can't see how it could be practical in busy areas of air traffic such as most of north-western Europe.

 

[Techniquest]

+ Luton is a complete dump. I think if your ambition is to fly to Luton you may wish to raise your ambitions slightly.

I just want it off my list of airports to fly into/out of. It cannot be any worse than Blackpool or Waterford airports, or for that matter Knock Ireland West. Cork was nothing to shout about either thinking about it. I've never set foot in Luton itself, only ever on the northbound fast line platform and southbound slow line platform, so Luton as a town/city I cannot comment on.

Anyway, as for the circular runway thing, as a novice when it comes to aviation I really can't see it working. It just doesn't make sense.

 

[atillathehunn]

Firstly congratulations on posting about actual aviation as opposed to perceived notions of customer service (or lack thereof) which seem to dominate this thread currently!

Biggest problem is how on earth due you set up any form of ILS if approach is possible from any direction? And what if variable winds on the approach require a turn to regain the desired runway centreline? The most important principle of flying the approach is that it should be stable, which in practice means straight with a steady rate of descent. What about ATC routes in busy areas if the optimum approach path varies day by day?

I can see the theoretical appeal of the idea but I can't see how it could be practical in busy areas of air traffic such as most of north-western Europe.

Is the sarky jibe really necessary?

As, I would imagine, 99.99999% of the people on this forum are not professional pilots what else do we have to say? My experience of flying is limited to sitting down the back. That's aviation. And we're discussing.

Did you bring anything to the table as a counterpoint?

Circular runways could be a good solution to the noise problems.

Optimal approach won't mean all that much in this kind of environment, and the theoretical appeal will be tempered by the practicalities.

Innovative, potentially useful in challenging airports to boost capacity.

 

[atillathehunn]

I just want it off my list of airports to fly into/out of. It cannot be any worse than Blackpool or Waterford airports, or for that matter Knock Ireland West. Cork was nothing to shout about either thinking about it. I've never set foot in Luton itself, only ever on the northbound fast line platform and southbound slow line platform, so Luton as a town/city I cannot comment on.

Anyway, as for the circular runway thing, as a novice when it comes to aviation I really can't see it working. It just doesn't make sense.

Those airports at least have either novelty or appeal of destination (definitely not in the case of Blackpool).

Luton serves a dump, and the airport is dingy and badly laid out.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Luton serves a dump, and the airport is dingy and badly laid out.

Luton itself is a dump, but it serves fairly wide swathes of the Home Counties and South Midlands which aren't.

The airport itself isn't bad in my view, certainly not the worst I've used, just a bit overcrowded while expansion work is going on.

 

[atillathehunn]

Luton itself is a dump, but it serves fairly wide swathes of the Home Counties and South Midlands which aren't.

The airport itself isn't bad in my view, certainly not the worst I've used, just a bit overcrowded while expansion work is going on.

Oh I know it serves a huge area. I actually live nowhere near it and use it, because it's logistically easy to share rides to it.

I should, then, apologise. My sample size is small and I've never used it as a passenger when it wasn't closed for the building work. I dropped and picked up when it was open, but I wasn't paying close attention.

With the building work, it felt very enclosed and dark.

 

[Tetchytyke]

I've used Luton a few times and it is chaotic. The shuttle buses to the car parks are woefully inadequate, the baggage handling is woefully inadequate, the departure lounge is woefully inadequate. It was before the building work too. But it was convenient, 15 miles from my house in Hemel (although the farting around for shuttle buses to the car park made me wish I'd gone slightly further to Heathrow instead).

As for aviation, my aeronautical experience consists solely of sitting down the back getting drunk on cheap wine, watching badly edited films. So I'll talk about that. If I wanted to pretend Microsoft Flight Simulator was the same as being a pilot, I'd head over to PPRUNE.

 

[Bald Rick]

Luton: in my experience (c 50 flights over 20 years)

It is cramped, but no more than Heathrow T4 was in the BA days, or Gatwick is always.

Check in, security, immigration all vastly improved in the last 5 years or so. For my last 3 arrivals with luggage I have had to wait no more than a few minutes at reclaim, having got through immigration in under 60 seconds.

Car parks - I use either the station or the short stay, the former is a pain but relatively reliable; the latter is remarkably good value for a long weekend if you book far enough out. Combined with quick check in and security, I did my front door (south St Albans) to the departures lounge in under 30 minutes a few weeks ago, and that was with checked baggage.

When the building work completes (next year?) the terminal including the departures lounge will be much bigger and better, easing the cramp. When the transit opens in a couple of years, I will stop driving and use the train as it will be almost as quick and quite a bit cheaper.

Given that Luton is by far the fastest growing London airport (+50% in 3 years), there's an awful lot of people who think its advantages outweigh its disadvantages.

 

[atillathehunn]

Well I'll admit defeat. Apparently Luton airport should be in a top 10 and worth visiting. What a world we live in.

If we are desiring 'real' aviation discussion, a lucky escape for passengers on this flight from Juba to Wau.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/03/20/south-sudan-plane-crashes-49-passengers-crew-survive/