Have Your Say

I think something to look out for is the regional subsidiaries of major airlines. I have flown Thai Smile (a subsidiary of Thai) a number of times, but have had the following difficulties. They don’t have interline agreements with any other airline except Thai. If you’re connecting in Bangkok but arriving or leaving on another airline, this means you will have to go landslide (through immigration and customs if arriving), and check for your Thai Smile flight there. Allow a minimum of three hours for connection, if this is the case. They advertise free online seat selection in a clear and unambiguous way, and being 195cm this is appealing to me. But after I’ve paid for the non-refundable ticket, I also get a note saying that I can only select my seat at the airport. It’s the result of this dubious corporate behaviour but it’s what I’m left with. So my suggestion is to check everything before buying a ticket with a regional airline, including the fine print.

I am wondering about the accuracy of your safety statistics as the Germanwings airline is shown as being fatality free whereas everyone knows that one of their pilots committed suicide in 2015 killing everyone on board. I would appreciate your comments please.

In your Safety Ranking Criteria, Copa Airlines got 7 stars. However, in the Icao Country Audit comparison, Panama is 0 on 8. Can you confirm which is the correct evaluation? Thanks.

B777’s all over getting the 10 across seating in Economy but you’re still paying the ‘full service’ cost of the ticket. Was sandwiched into one of these narrow seats recently on Qatar Doha > Perth for 10+ hours. Will look NOT to fly Airlines using 777’s on route I’m planning to fly. If they are going to jam me in I might as well just buy a ticket for half the price and fly Budget / LCC for half the price on a A320 / B737 – or look for a B787 option

Re BA adding so many extra seats to economy. As my wife & I are not either tall or wide travellers, this will have a limited effect on us.
However, as the seats will be smaller but travellers by & large are bigger, BA really need to enforce their Person of Size policy. At present airlines appear happy to leave this up to travellers to sort out, which is outrageous. I have been squashed for hours by a huge traveller, it is a situation airlines MUST address. POS travellers must be made to pay for larger seats & must NEVER simply occupy part of another’s seating.

Sharon Petersen’s review of AirAsiaX was outstanding, despite a spelling error or two.

A surprising number of Australians – although diminishing – are first time flyers or new to low cost carriers so her tips such as ‘carry an empty water bottle thorugh security to avoid paying through the nose on board’, while obvious to those of us fortunate enough to have travelled many times overseas, are handy to new travellers.

It is a disgrace that some airlines do not provide potable drinking water for free on board. Railways in Australia such as V/Line, NSWTrainLink and QR do on all country trains, many of which are for journeys shorter in duration than any AirAsiaX flight out of Australia.

I realise that some of the Airline Ratings’ staff are based in Perth but it would be great if in time they could eventually review Philippine Airlines (which now flies from manila to Brisbane via Darwin, Cairns, Melbourne and Sydney as well as Cairns – Auckland) and Cebu Pacific (manila – Sydney). Philippines is one of the fastest growing tourism destinations in southeast Asia and despite being almost totally ignored by group tours has a lot of independent travellers visiting it for the beaches and great typical southeast Asian lifestyle, once one escapes from chaotic larger cities.

Banning Hand Baggage to Improve Evacuation of Aircraft in Emergencies
When I was regular traveller on the British Airways shuttle from London, Heathrow to Belfast in the early 1980s during what was euphemistically known as ‘The Trouble’, for a period no hand baggage of any sort was permitted on the flights. Even women had to check their handbags. Unless I was staying overnight I just took a couple of meeting papers in an open manila folder. Nobody complained and the system worked very well. Of course, this was before the age of pocketable mobile phones, laptops and tablets. Even though bombs were going off in London from time to time and much more regularly in Northern Ireland, apart from the ban on hand baggage security was nothing like as obtrusive as it is today. I am not aware of any incident involving flights in and out of Belfast during this period. Given the continued failure rate by airport screeners in detecting dangerous items that was recently reported perhaps there is a need to re-appraise the current approach.

Why can’t planes have a safety catch that automatically locks overhead bins if there is an emergency. Passengers can be advised during the safety briefing and reminded during an evacuation.

Overhead bins should have a locking mechanism so that passengers cannot open them to remove luggage in case of an emergency.

Having recently flown (business class) on both B787 (both variants 800-900) and A350-900 on three flights within a 36 hour period in basically the same position (seat) on all flights I am in the unique position of being able to compare aeroplanes.
Without any doubt the A350 is superior.
Whilst it is noisy on take off, infact I’ve never heard a jet engine make so much noise, but when in the cruise it’s almost silent, the only perceptible noise in the cabin is that of the air rushing past the fuselage, no engine noise is heard.
The B787 is quieter on take off, but once in the cruise a low pitched constant throb/vibration can be heard and felt from it’s engine. This vibration, whilst not overly pronounced, was transmitted through the airframe and could be heard/felt anywhere.
Which is a bit odd as both aeroplanes (on my flights) use basically the same engine, RR Trent 1000 for B787 and RR xwb for A350, the xwb being basically a Trent 1000 with an extra compressor turbine.
It may well be related to the following comment.
The A350 feels stronger and more robust, whereas the B787 has a flimsy feel to it.
Vibrations caused by take off and landing turbulence and equipment like landing gear were also more pronounced in the B787.
Whilst there are design differences both technically and within the cabin the lack of centre overhead bins in the A350 Business cabin gives it a much more ‘roomy’ feel.
Technically (for which I am no expert) the A350 uses more traditional ‘air bleed’ powered systems over the ‘electrically’ powered system employed by Boeing in the dreamliner, the reliability of which will probably only be proven over time.
Traditionally hydraulic systems have been favoured over electrical because of reliability.
Both aeroplanes use composite materials, both have lower altitude pressurisation and higher humidity air systems but for some unknown reason to me the atmospheric comfort level in the A350 cabin was better, and that was the longest flight at 9+ hours where as the B787 flights were 2.5 and 5.5 hours respectively.
Some people may find, as I did, that the extra large windows in the B787 a little unnerving as they allow you to see more clearly just how far above the ground you are.
Note: Whilst the A350 windows are bigger than A330 windows, they are not as big as the B787 windows, and have traditional blinds rather than the ‘fadamatic’ B787 windows.
Just as a comment, the curved pilot/co pilot (front) windows on the A350 give it a unique look unlike any other modern jet aircraft, and is thus easily identified.