Examination of videos has revealed that the Japanese Coast Guard Plane, a DHC8 turboprop, was lined up on runway 34L for take-off when it was struck by the landing Japan Airlines A350 on Tuesday evening.
Why the Coast Guard plane was lined up is a mystery but advice from ATC (NOTAM) that critical Stop Bar Lighting were unserviceable for a series of taxiway to runway junctions (C1 to C14) could be a critical factor.
Did the Coast Guard pilot assume he could enter the runway as there were no Stop Bar warning lights on (Below Images)? Did the Coast Guard crew read the NOTAM? What instructions did it receive from ATC? These questions will be the key to the investigation.
The Japan Airlines crew wouldn’t have seen anything on their Traffic Collison Avoidance System (TCAS) as this is disabled passing through 900ft on the approach to land. The blame appears to be with either the Coast Guard Pilot or ATC for not knowing where the a/c under their control was.
Five Coast Guard crew died in the tragedy although the pilot survived, while all 379 passengers and crew of the Japan Airlines A350 survived.
The accident mirrors an almost identical collision in Los Angeles at night in 1991 when a USAir Boeing 737, Flight 1493 was cleared to land on runway 24L and at the same time a SkyWest Metro II aircraft, Flight 5569 to Palmdale, was permitted to line up on runway 24L but hold.
The air traffic controller became distracted and confused by another aircraft problem and tragically a collision occurred killing 12 passengers and crew on the MetroLiner and 22 on the 737.
Airlineratings.com is packed with information about air travel and answers questions that many of us may have thought of, but didn’t know who to ask. Well, now you do!
Airlineratings.com was developed to provide everyone in the world with a one-stop shop for everything related to airlines, formed by a team of aviation editors, who have forensically researched nearly every airline in the world.
Our rating system is rated from one to seven stars on safety – with seven being the highest ranking. Within each airline, you will find the country of origin, airline code, booking URL and seat map information. The rating system takes into account a number of different factors related to audits from aviation’s governing bodies, lead associations as well as the airline’s own safety data. Every airline has a safety rating breakdown so you can see exactly how they rate.
Over 230 of the airlines on the site that carry 99 per cent of the world’s passengers have a product rating. Given that low-cost, regional and full-service carriers are so different we have constructed a different rating system for each which can be found within each airline
In this week’s long-haul, low-cost vs full-service airline comparison, we take a look at Vietjet and Vietnam Airlines on a return flight from Melbourne to Ho Chi Minh (SGN).
In perhaps the toughest review yet, the winner of this comparison between the two Vietnamese airlines will come down to seat selection and baggage.
Our flight to Ho Chi Minh will be taking place on August 11th and returning on August 26th, 2023. Both Vietjet and Vietnam Airlines operate direct flights on this route with an A330 and A350 respectively.
Our return flight with Vietjet came to $597 AUD which included seat selection, 40kg of checked baggage, a 10kg carry-on bag, meal, and drink. There is no in-flight entertainment, Wi-Fi or in-seat power and extra snacks and drinks need to be purchased.
Our flight with Vietnam Airlines came in at $666 AUD which included meals, snacks, unlimited drinks, in-flight entertainment through seat back screens, in-seat power, blankets and pillows plus 23kg of baggage and a 7kg carry-on bag.
However, and this is where it gets interesting, when we add extra baggage and seat selection to the Vietnam Airlines booking to match Vietjet and compare ‘like with like’ the price jumps up an extra $600 AUD to make the total cost $1523 AUD.
If we take the baggage and seat selection out of the equation, then Vietnam Airlines with its onboard comfort and in-flight entertainment would be a winner. When we add extra baggage and seat selection to match the Vietjet offering then Vietjet becomes the winner with a far cheaper cost.
So, who is the winner? For the first time, we do not have a clear winner. Put simply, if you’re travelling with just 23kg of baggage and don’t mind where you sit then Vietnam Airlines is our choice, however, if you want more luggage and to choose your seat then we would choose Vietjet.
If you missed last week’s long-haul comparison between British Airways and Play check it out here
Are you enjoying our reviews so far? Are there any routes would you like us to evaluate? Place a comment below or get in touch via our social pages
In this week’s long-haul, low-cost vs full-service airline comparison, we take a look at the ever-popular London to New York route. There are loads of full-service flight options for this route but we have opted to compare the UK’s legacy carrier, British Airways and the new Icelandic low-cost carrier, PLAY Airlines. For the first time yet in this series we had a very clear winner.
Our return flight with PLAY came to $ 664 USD (£532) which includes an $80 USD allowance for meals, drinks and snacks on board, 20kg of checked luggage, carry-on baggage, seat selection and priority boarding. Amenity kits, blankets and pillows, in-flight entertainment, in-seat power and WiFi are not available.
Flights with Play departed and arrived at London Stansted and New York Stewart respectively. Each flight also stops over in Iceland for roughly 2 hours. The total flight time (including the stopover) from London to New York is 11h 15 and from New York to London 10h 20. New York Stewart is a small airport on the outskirts of New York and passengers need to allow approximately 90 minutes to get into New York Central (bus or train) and allow an additional $ 20-25 USD each way.
Our flight with British Airways came in cheaper at $605 USD (£485) which included meals, snacks, drinks, in-flight entertainment, amenities upon request, 23kg of baggage and a 7kg carry-on bag.
The flights with British Airways outbound departed from London Gatwick and arrived at JFK. Coming back they departed JFK and arrived at London Heathrow. Both flights are direct and fly into more ‘central’ airports.
On the topic of central airports, the centrality of these airports really depends on where you are going/living within each city. Where a city has multiple airports always factor the cost and time of getting to/from the airport into your final decision.
In terms of comfort, both airlines offer 30-31 inches of legroom and some seat recline. The aircraft operated on these flights are however very different with PLAY operating the single-aisle A321 and British Airways the far more comfortable twin-aisle Boeing 777.
In this week’s head-to-head we have a very clear winner in British Airways. British Airways offers not only a cheaper fare but far more comfort on board with included drinks, meals and in-flight entertainment. For the author flying into JFK rather than SWF is also a big factor in the decision and unless you are after a holiday in Iceland, a direct flight is usually preferable.
If you missed last week’s long-haul comparison between Scoot and Singapore Airlines check it out here
Are you enjoying our reviews so far? Are there any routes would you like us to evaluate? Place a comment below or get in touch via our social pages
In this week’s long-haul, low-cost vs full-service airline comparison, we take a look at Scoot and Singapore Airlines on two different flights from Singapore to Europe. Why two different destinations?
Scoot is Singapore Airlines’ low-cost subsidiary and provides passengers with direct flights into Europe via Athens or Berlin. Singapore Airlines operates direct flights to numerous ports in Europe however excludes those operated by Scoot. For this comparison, we used the direct flight with Scoot into Athens and the Singapore Airlines direct flight into Rome.
Our return flight with Scoot came to $1830 SGD with the inclusion of a meal, snack and drink on each segment, a standard window seat, 30kg of checked baggage and a 10kg carry-on bag. Amenity kits such as blankets and pillows are also available for purchase ($24 SGD) on board but given most passengers wouldn’t buy these, we left that off the price for this exercise. I also added an additional $40 SGD to each flight ($80 in total) for the purchase of in-seat power, additional drinks, meals and snacks over the 11-hour flight.
Our flight with Singapore Airlines came in at $2787 SGD which included meals, snacks, unlimited drinks, in-flight entertainment, amenity kits, blankets and pillow plus 30kg of baggage and a 7kg carry-on bag.
In terms of comfort, Scoot offers 30-31 inches of legroom and Singapore Airlines 32 inches. Both offer an 18-inch seat width and a 6-inch seat recline.
Having flown both airlines multiple times the author can vouch for the value Scoot provides and the excellence in dining, inflight entertainment and comfort you receive on Singapore Airlines. Anyone who’s flown Singapore Airlines long haul will know what I mean.
Even though Scoot has no in-flight entertainment, less legroom, a buy-on-board menu and comfort packs that need to be purchased, with a saving of $957 SGD this author would have to choose Scoot over Singapore Airlines. The Rome flight is longer than the Athens flight (60-90 minutes) so you would expect a higher fare however not that high!
If the budget allowed and you aren’t travelling with anyone under 12, I would recommend upgrading your flight to the Scoot In Silence cabin for an additional $200 SGD
If money was no object, it would be Singapore Airlines all the way but looking at the value proposition of getting from Singapore to Europe, Scoot would be the easy choice on this occasion.
If you missed last week’s long-haul comparison between WestJet and Air Canada check it out here
Are you enjoying our reviews so far? Are there any routes would you like us to evaluate? Place a comment below or get in touch via our social pages
This week we compare WestJet and Air Canada on a long-haul return flight from Calgary to London Heathrow. Considering the overall cost, comfort, aircraft and flight time we will see who offers the best value. This review will demonstrate why it is so important to check all prices on a route rather than simply assuming low cost is cheaper.
Our economy flight to London will be taking place on September 11th and returning on September 23rd 2023. Both WestJet and Air Canada operate direct flights on this route with a Boeing 787 Dreamliner.
Our return flight with Westjet came to $1557 CAD with the inclusion of meals, snacks and drinks, in-flight entertainment through seat back screens, in-seat power, a standard window seat, blankets and pillows, 23kg of checked baggage and a 7kg carry-on bag. Wifi Is also available for a fee.
Our flight with Air Canada came in cheaper at $1507 CAD which included meals, snacks, unlimited drinks, in-flight entertainment through seat back screens, in-seat power, a standard window seat, blankets and pillows plus 23kg of baggage and a 7kg carry-on bag. Wifi Is also available for a fee.
What was particularly interesting about this flight comparison was not only that Air Canada was cheaper than its low-cost competitor Westjet but that Westjet actually offered more legroom and seat width in economy. It is unusual to find the low-cost carrier offering more personal space than a full-service carrier.
So which one would we pick to fly? With both airlines offering almost identical onboard service, having similar departure and arrival times plus the same aircraft, the choice has to come down to price. For this reason, the author would choose Air Canada but I would encourage anyone doing this route to compare the prices for both airlines for your specific dates and take your pick from there as both offer comfort and value so you can’t lose.
If you missed last week’s long-haul comparison between Cebu Pacific and Philippine Airlines check it out here
Are you enjoying our reviews so far? Are there any routes would you like us to evaluate? Place a comment below or get in touch via our social pages
In this week’s long-haul, low-cost vs full-service airline comparison, we take a look at Jetstar vs Qantas on a flight from Sydney to Honolulu. Looking at cost, comfort, aircraft and flight time we will see who offers the best value.
Our Jetstar vs Qantas fly-off to Honolulu will be taking place on August 28 to September 11th, 2023. Both Jetstar and Qantas operate direct flights on this route with a 787 and A330 respectively.
Our return flight with Jetstar came to $1192 AUD with the inclusion of a meal, snack and four bottles of water on each segment, a standard window seat, access to the in-flight entertainment, 20kg of checked baggage and a 7kg carry-on bag. Amenity kits such as blankets and pillows are also available for $25 but given most passengers wouldn’t buy these, we left that off the price for this exercise.
Our flight with Qantas came in at $1494 which included meals, snacks, unlimited drinks, in-flight entertainment, amenities, 23kg of baggage and a 7kg carry-on bag.
In terms of comfort, the leg room is only one inch (or 2.5 cm) more on Qantas than Jetstar however the seat recline is roughly double. The actual seat width is virtually the same.
The Qantas A330 offers a comfortable 2-4-2 seating configuration across the plane where as the 787 is fitted out as 3-3-3.
Despite the layout of the A330 being one of my favourites, with a $302 AUD difference in the fare and a comparable level of comfort and flight time, in this example the author would opt to save that $302 for the destination and take Jetstar.
If you missed last week’s long-haul comparison between AirAsiaX and Malaysia Airlines check it out here
Are you enjoying our reviews so far? Are there any routes would you like us to evaluate? Place a comment below or get in touch via our social pages
In the year post COVID we have seen the demand for travel rise like never before. There’s friends and family to catch up with, bucket lists to tick off and savings to be spent. However, the rise in demand has also resulted in an expected but significant rise in the price of airfares, accommodation, and experiences.
Travellers are looking for ways to cut costs where they can and one of these is to consider a low-cost airline for their long-haul travel. On the surface, the low-cost airline fare is attractive and affordable but what is the real cost of travelling long haul by the time you add food, water, bags and seats? Let’s not forget the comfort factor too – on a long-haul flight every extra inch of space makes a difference.
To answer this question, we are compiling a series of low cost vs full service airline comparisons on certain routes around the world. We will look at cost and comfort to determine if long haul low cost is really worth it.
Our first comparison looks at the total cost and on board experience flying low cost AirAsiaX or full service legacy carrier Malaysia Airlines. Our trip from Kuala Lumpur to Auckland will depart on August 28 and return on September 15th 2023.
Our flight with AirAsiaX came to 3854 MYR ($1305 AUD) with the inclusion of a meal and one small bottle of water on each flight leg, a standard window seat, 20kg of checked baggage and a 7kg carry on bag. Admittedly you would likely need to spend at least another 120 MYR ($40 AUD) to purchase extra drinks and snacks, but for this exercise we left that out. This airline offers no in flight entertainment or seat back power to recharge your device.
Our flight with Malaysia Airlines came in at 5174 MYR ($1753) which included meals, snacks, unlimited drinks, in flight entertainment, amenities, 20kg baggage and a 7kg carry on bag.
With a 1320 MYR ($448 AUD) difference in the fares the question of ‘which is better’ really comes down to where the traveller places value.
For the author (who is admittedly a tired mother to two babies), the thought of a direct flight with a little extra seat width, more seat recline, unlimited beverages, meals and snacks, a seat back screen for in-flight entertainment and a cosy blanket and pillow makes the extra cost worthwhile.
However, when discussing this with my 18 year old niece, the value for her is placed on the saving she can make flying long haul, low cost. For her, she can easily go without the comforts and endure the longer flight time to have that extra money in her pocket to spend at the destination.
Qatar Airways Cargo has announced the opening of its state-of-the-art Animal Centre and the relaunch of its Next Generation Live product, setting new benchmarks in the transport of live animals.
As a leading transporter, with over 550,000 animals including 10,000 horses flown in 2023, the airline reaffirms its commitment to animal welfare.
Mark Drusch, Chief Officer of Cargo at Qatar Airways Cargo, shares his vision: “At Qatar Airways Cargo, we recognise our responsibility extends far beyond the mere transportation of animals. We are committed to advocating for their welfare globally, ensuring our operations respect and contribute positively to their overall well-being. This holistic approach to animal care is a fundamental part of our ethos, driving us to innovate and lead in the industry. With our new Animal Centre and service enhancements, we’re not just setting new standards for animal transport, we’re actively working towards a future where every aspect of our operations reflects a deep respect for animal welfare, embodying our commitment to making a meaningful difference in their lives.”
Qatar Airways Cargo Animal Centre Highlights
Facility Size: 5,260 square meters, featuring full temperature control for optimal animal comfort.
Kennel Capacity: 140 dog kennels and 40 cat kennels.
Horse Stables: 24 stables distributed in 4 zones with separate airflows for proper segregation.
Specialty Areas: Custom spaces designed for day-old-chicks, birds, fish, reptiles and exotic animals.
Handling Features: Includes airside and landside interfaces with multiple docks for efficient operations. Equipped with a sophisticated HVAC system for maintaining optimal air quality.
Technology: Capacity for handling up to 47 ULD positions, with specialized ULD rooms for various operations.
Live Product Enhancements
Qatar Airways Cargo proudly introduces significant enhancements to its live animal transport services:
Kennel Calculator Tool: An innovative online resource for determining the ideal kennel size, ensuring comfort and compliance with IATA LAR standards.
Streamlined Customer Service: Procedures have been refined for faster and more efficient customer interactions with a dedicated Control Tower for the most sensitive shipments
Digitalized IATA LAR Training: Ensures rapid compliance and enhances staff proficiency in animal handling.
Pet Card Service: Continues to offer a personal touch by sharing updates and photos of pets during transit, enhancing customer experience and peace of mind.
About Qatar Airways Cargo
Qatar Airways Cargo, the world’s leading international air cargo carrier is based in Doha, State of Qatar. It serves a global network of more than 70 freighter destinations and 170 passenger destinations utilising freighters and belly-hold passenger aircraft. The airline’s freighter fleet includes 28 Boeing 777 freighters and 230 belly-hold planes. It also has an extensive road feeder service (RFS) network. The cargo airline is the launch customer for the innovative Boeing 777-8F featuring advanced technology, and a 25% improvement in fuel efficiency and emissions, with the first delivery arriving in 2027.
As a market leader, the cargo carrier provides high operating standards for the transportation of cargo, with considerable investments in digitalisation, products, facilities and services.
Qatar Airways Cargo remains committed to sustainability and giving back to communities it serves through its sustainability programme WeQare, built on the key pillars of sustainability: environment, society, economy and culture.
With considerable investments in its products, services, quality handling, infrastructure, facilities, people and procedures at each of its destinations, the cargo carrier provides high operating standards for the transportation of cargo. Qatar Airways Cargo remains committed to sustainability and giving back to communities it serves through its sustainability programme WeQare, built on the key pillars of sustainability: environment, society, economy, and culture.
The Star is reporting that Capital A Bhd has entered into a conditional share sale and purchase agreement with AirAsia Group Sdn Bhd (AAG) to dispose of its 100 per cent equity interest in AirAsia Aviation Group Ltd (AAAGL) and AirAsia Bhd (AAB) for RM6.8 billion.
The move will see the formation of a new AirAsia Group, comprising the former AirAsia Aviation Group’s airline units in Malaysia, Thailand, Indonesia and the Philippines, as well as AirAsia X and Thai AirAsia X.
This will make AirAsia the largest low-cost airline group in Asia.
Pursuant to AirAsia X Bhd’s (AAX) proposed internal reorganisation, AAG will assume the listing status of AAX before the completion of the proposed disposals.
CEO of Capital A and Advisor to the newly formed AirAsia Aviation Group, Tony Fernandes said, “Today’s announcement is more than just a transaction, but a unique and time-sensitive opportunity to elevate our aviation business to the next level, while driving growth and profitability across core non-airline business portfolios for Capital A. The divestment facilitates clear distinction between Capital A’s main portfolios of businesses – the aviation group, digital businesses, and logistics plus aviation services to optimise synergies across entities and unlock greater value for all stakeholders.”
He added,“When AirAsia was founded in 2001, our vision was clear: to establish a low-cost airline model focused on simplicity and cost-efficiency, primarily operating single-type narrowbody aircraft optimised for short-haul flights. To capture the medium-haul market, AAX was created in 2007 adhering to the same principles of low-cost, and efficient operations. The emergence of Airbus’ A321LR and A321XLR, is an unprecedented, game-changing opportunity.”
Bo Lingam, Group CEO of AirAsia Aviation Group said, “We are excited about the dawning of a new era, where AirAsia and AAX operations will unify to create a single-type fleet that can reach the entire world, without the complexities associated with a mixed fleet. With extended 7- to 10-hour range capabilities and unparalleled fuel efficiency, these aircraft can fly further and more efficiently than previous narrowbodies, allowing us to explore new destinations and pioneering new and underserved routes, which has been the hallmark of AirAsia’s success. Our ambition is to rival global giants with a profitable, low-cost network spanning the globe.”
Benyamin Ismail, CEO of AirAsia X said, “We wholeheartedly welcome the strategic acquisition. Over the next five years, we plan to leverage the extended range capabilities of the new specification aircraft to connect Asean to Europe, Africa, Central Asia, and North America, solidifying our position as a key player in the global aviation market. The “One Airline” strategy accelerates our journey, leveraging existing routes, approvals, and slots for rapid expansion. For AirAsia X shareholders, this is a rare opportunity to acquire not one, but four established and growing Asean-based airlines with existing routes, approvals and slots – at a cost outlay of just RM3 billion in new shares issuance. The proposed exercise offers AirAsia X a growth lifeline leveraging Capital A’s aircraft order book of almost 400 aircraft with an ongoing delivery timeline up to 2035. While the process has been long-winding and intricate, we remain committed to safeguarding shareholder interests.”
Fernandes explained,“Turning Capital A’s shareholders’ equity positive, which is a major step forward in exiting Practice Note 17 (PN17), is a welcome benefit but ultimately immaterial in our decision to pursue this proposed divestment. The puzzle of bringing together all AirAsia airlines under a single umbrella had been on our minds for many years and the missing piece has finally arrived in the form of the new-generation Airbus aircraft. Our driving motivation has been to unlock and realise value for our shareholders, though we also remain steadfast in our commitment to emerge successfully from PN17, propelled by our resilience and determination to navigate challenges.
“We have emerged out of the long tunnel called Covid, more resilient, refined and fortified. We have created five great companies– aviation, logistics, digital businesses, aviation services and IP business – all with enormous value and immense potential. I am confident they will evolve into the next AirAsia’s, embodying value and innovation,” he added.
Korean Air is launching a new daily service between Seoul Incheon and Macau from July 1.
Flights depart from Incheon International Airport at 9:15 pm and arrive at Macau International Airport at 11:55 pm. The return flight departs from Macau International Airport at 1:10 am the next day and arrives at Incheon International Airport at 6:00 am. The flight time is approximately 3 hours and 40 minutes.
Macau, a special administrative region of China, offers a unique blend of Chinese and Portuguese cultures. With its mild winters, it is considered a great travel destination year-round. Visitors can explore exotic streets, historic buildings and the vibrant skyline as well as enjoy many activities such as night bus tours and fountain shows.
Macau’s proximity to Hong Kong, accessible within an hour by ferry or bus, offers further travel convenience. Korean Air also operates four daily flights between Seoul Incheon and Hong Kong.
In response to growing travel demand, Korean Air is restoring services and exploring new markets to strengthen its China network. The airline has resumed three weekly flights between Seoul Incheon and Zhangjiajie and four weekly flights between Seoul Incheon and Zhengzhou from April 23 and 24, respectively.
Airlineratings.com is packed with information about air travel and answers questions that many of us may have thought of, but didn’t know who to ask. Well, now you do!
Airlineratings.com was developed to provide everyone in the world with a one-stop shop for everything related to airlines, formed by a team of aviation editors, who have forensically researched nearly every airline in the world.
Our rating system is rated from one to seven stars on safety – with seven being the highest ranking. Within each airline, you will find the country of origin, airline code, booking URL and seat map information.
The rating system takes into account a number of different factors related to audits from aviation’s governing bodies, lead associations as well as the airline’s own safety data. Every airline has a safety rating breakdown so you can see exactly how they rate.
Over 230 of the airlines on the site that carry 99 per cent of the world’s passengers have a product rating.
Given that low-cost, regional and full-service carriers are so different we have constructed a different rating system for each which can be found within each airline.
Airlineratings.com has information on over 30 types of aircraft from the latest Boeing 787 to the A380 and smaller jets.
Best of all, there are simple answers to many of the quirky questions including:
“What are all those noises after takeoff and before landing?” “Why do you have to put the window shades up for landing and takeoff?” “What is a winglet and what is it for? “Why is it so costly to fly short distances?” “How often is an aircraft maintained? “How strong is a wing?” “How do they test aircraft” “How often do plane tyres need to be replaced?”
For most of us, it’s hard to imagine a world where travel by jet airliner wasn’t the norm. Yet from ancient times to the mid-20th century, ships dominated global passenger transportation.
Within the historical record, wooden-hulled sailing ships reigned supreme for most of the passenger ship’s almost 6,000-year heritage. From the Polynesian islands to ancient Egypt, China and the once numerous European empires, sailing ships facilitated the movement of people across the globe.
While rudimentary steam engines had existed for centuries, the 1830s and 1840s saw the technology adapted for widespread use aboard ships. The gradual replacement of sail with steam gave birth to the era of the steamship. As these ships grew, engineers adapted iron and later steel, to build even larger hulls and superstructures – doing away with the wooden designs that had endured for thousands of years.
Throughout the late 19th century and early 20th century, shipbuilders expanded their designs to create larger, faster, and more comfortable ocean liners. The 1880s saw the widespread adoption of electricity aboard. The 1890s witnessed an upscaling of amenities and passenger comforts, while in the 1900s fast and efficient turbine engines powered the giant Lusitania and Mauretania at record-breaking speeds – allowing them to cross the Atlantic in under 6 days.
The Atlantic speed record, known as the Blue Riband, was held by the ship that made the fastest Westbound crossing – west being more challenging due to the Atlantic currents.
Throughout the 20th century, speeds quickened. Queen Mary achieved a crossing in under 4 days in 1938, and the SS United States crossed in 3 days, 12 hours 12 minutes in 1952 – the fastest transatlantic transit ever achieved by Ocean Liner.
The QE2 survived the jet age by blending resort facilities with traditional transatlantic liner capabilities.
However, by the 1950s the global travel paradigm was starting to shift. The same year as SS United States blitzed her way across the Atlantic, the de Havilland Comet entered service with BOAC.
While the range of the first Comet variant meant the aircraft could not make efficient transatlantic crossings, the comfort and convenience of jet air travel took the world by storm. But the Comet’s reign was short-lived, with the airliner suffering numerous fatal crashes that irreversibly damaged its reputation.
Yet despite devastating losses, the pace of change quickened. In 1957, for the first time, the number of air travellers eclipsed sea travellers on the prestigious transatlantic service.
This shift was driven by improvements in large piston driven airliners, such as the Lockheed Constellation and the Douglas DC-7. Yet there were still plenty of travellers taking ocean crossings, and for a brief period, shipping executives attempted to maintain the status quo.
BOAC Douglas DC-7C
However, on October 26, 1958, the Boeing 707 entered service with Pan American Airways. This aircraft, N711PA ‘Clipper America’, set off from New York flying an 8-hour, 41-minute service to Paris.
Though the aircraft did make a fuel stop at Gander, Canada, on the return service, the speed of the service was a true game-changer. The 707-made ships, even the mighty SS United States, appear positively glacial.
Pan American Boeing 707
As more jet aircraft, entered service on the North Atlantic, passengers with means flocked to the airlines. The question on the mind of many travellers was: ‘Why spend days at sea on a ship when I can cross the Atlantic in just a few hours by air?’
Nearly always, the answer resolved in favour of air travel. And as Douglas DC-8s joined the world’s fleets from 1959 and Vickers VC10s from 1964, there were ever more airlines operating jet services.
Douglas DC-8 on its first flight in 1958
Passenger shipping on the North Atlantic was almost immediately impacted. And the shift to jets spread globally, meaning the loss of ocean liner passengers was not constrained to the North Atlantic.
BOAC VC-10
Qantas, for example, was the first non-US carrier to operate the 707, flying the modified long range -138 model from June 1959. These jets allowed the Australian flag carrier to compete head-to-head with long-established ocean liner operators for business travellers, as well as people with means emigrating to Australia.
Widebody airliners were the final death knell for passenger ships as a primary form of transport. The efficiency and capacity of the Boeing 747, Douglas DC-10 and Lockheed L-1011 led to an almost global adoption of air travel as the main way to travel between continents.
Throughout the 1960s and 1970s, ocean Liners were laid up en masse. Many were sent to scrap yards. A few, such as the iconic QE2, Mardi Gras and SS Norway, were able to transition successfully to a cruising role.
It may surprise you to know that the modern-day cruise industry owes much of its success to the same airlines that decimated ocean liner travel. But that is a story best left for another day.
Airlineratings.com is packed with information about air travel and answers questions that many of us may have thought of, but didn’t know who to ask. Well, now you do!
Airlineratings.com was developed to provide everyone in the world with a one-stop shop for everything related to airlines, formed by a team of aviation editors, who have forensically researched nearly every airline in the world.
Our rating system is rated from one to seven stars on safety – with seven being the highest ranking. Within each airline, you will find the country of origin, airline code, booking URL and seat map information.
The rating system takes into account a number of different factors related to audits from aviation’s governing bodies, lead associations as well as the airline’s own safety data. Every airline has a safety rating breakdown so you can see exactly how they rate.
Over 230 of the airlines on the site that carry 99 per cent of the world’s passengers have a product rating.
Given that low-cost, regional and full-service carriers are so different we have constructed a different rating system for each which can be found within each airline.
Airlineratings.com has information on over 30 types of aircraft from the latest Boeing 787 to the A380 and smaller jets.
Best of all, there are simple answers to many of the quirky questions including:
“What are all those noises after takeoff and before landing?” “Why do you have to put the window shades up for landing and takeoff?” “What is a winglet and what is it for? “Why is it so costly to fly short distances?” “How often is an aircraft maintained? “How strong is a wing?” “How do they test aircraft” “How often do plane tyres need to be replaced?”
India’s Indigo Airlines has opted for the Airbus A350 to expand its international operations with a massive order for 30 plus 70 options.
The airline stated that the exact configuration of the aircraft would be decided at a later stage, and the deliveries are expected to start in 2027.
Pieter Elbers, CEO of IndiGo, (centre above) said the historic moment marks a new chapter for IndiGo and will further shape the future of the airline and for Indian aviation at the same time. “For IndiGo, after successfully pioneering the Indian skies with an unprecedented journey, its fleet of 30 Airbus A350-900 aircraft will allow IndiGo to embark on its next phase of becoming one of the leading global aviation players.”
Airlineratings.com is packed with information about air travel and answers questions that many of us may have thought of, but didn’t know who to ask. Well, now you do!
Airlineratings.com was developed to provide everyone in the world with a one-stop shop for everything related to airlines, formed by a team of aviation editors, who have forensically researched nearly every airline in the world.
Our rating system is rated from one to seven stars on safety – with seven being the highest ranking. Within each airline, you will find the country of origin, airline code, booking URL and seat map information.
The rating system takes into account a number of different factors related to audits from aviation’s governing bodies, lead associations as well as the airline’s own safety data. Every airline has a safety rating breakdown so you can see exactly how they rate.
Over 230 of the airlines on the site that carry 99 per cent of the world’s passengers have a product rating.
Given that low-cost, regional and full-service carriers are so different we have constructed a different rating system for each which can be found within each airline.
Airlineratings.com has information on over 30 types of aircraft from the latest Boeing 787 to the A380 and smaller jets.
Best of all, there are simple answers to many of the quirky questions including:
“What are all those noises after takeoff and before landing?” “Why do you have to put the window shades up for landing and takeoff?” “What is a winglet and what is it for? “Why is it so costly to fly short distances?” “How often is an aircraft maintained? “How strong is a wing?” “How do they test aircraft” “How often do plane tyres need to be replaced?”
A Lufthansa Boeing 747-8I has been videoed in a very rough landing and around at Los Angeles International Airport by Airline Videos Live.
The touch-down of the Lufthansa 747 was very heavy and the aircraft bounced back into the air before touching down again and then the pilots initiated a go-around.
Airlineratings.com is packed with information about air travel and answers questions that many of us may have thought of, but didn’t know who to ask. Well, now you do!
Airlineratings.com was developed to provide everyone in the world with a one-stop shop for everything related to airlines, formed by a team of aviation editors, who have forensically researched nearly every airline in the world.
Our rating system is rated from one to seven stars on safety – with seven being the highest ranking. Within each airline, you will find the country of origin, airline code, booking URL and seat map information.
The rating system takes into account a number of different factors related to audits from aviation’s governing bodies, lead associations as well as the airline’s own safety data. Every airline has a safety rating breakdown so you can see exactly how they rate.
Over 230 of the airlines on the site that carry 99 per cent of the world’s passengers have a product rating.
Given that low-cost, regional and full-service carriers are so different we have constructed a different rating system for each which can be found within each airline.
Airlineratings.com has information on over 30 types of aircraft from the latest Boeing 787 to the A380 and smaller jets.
Best of all, there are simple answers to many of the quirky questions including:
“What are all those noises after takeoff and before landing?” “Why do you have to put the window shades up for landing and takeoff?” “What is a winglet and what is it for? “Why is it so costly to fly short distances?” “How often is an aircraft maintained? “How strong is a wing?” “How do they test aircraft” “How often do plane tyres need to be replaced?”
Qantas has reported its best on time performance since February 2023, with nearly 80% of flights departing as scheduled. This marks the 19th consecutive month Qantas has outperformed its main domestic competitor in terms of punctuality.
In March, Qantas (including QantasLink) achieved a 78.2% on-time departure rate, while its major domestic competitor reached 76.2%. Although pilot industrial action in Western Australia led to over 40% of flight cancellations, the rest of the network’s cancellation rate matched the industry average of 2.2%. Meanwhile, the competitor’s cancellation rate for the same period was 2.8%.
Additionally, Qantas recorded its lowest mishandled baggage rate in six years, demonstrating a commitment to improving customer experience. The airline carried over two million bags in March, and mishandled baggage incidents were almost 35% lower than the previous year.
Jetstar, a Qantas subsidiary, also saw improvements, with more than 80% of its domestic flights arriving on time in March, and cancellation rates decreasing to 1.5%.
Despite adverse weather conditions in Sydney, Qantas’s reliability in April remains steady, with on-time performance in the high 70% range.
Daniel Dihen, Head of Qantas Operations Centre, remarked on the positive results, attributing them to efforts made over the past six months to improve reliability. He noted that the airline’s on-time performance is approaching pre-COVID levels, emphasizing that the priority for everyone at Qantas is ensuring customers reach their destinations safely and on time.
How would you feel if you hopped on to an 11.5-hour long-haul flight only to be sat next to a dog that you are highly allergic to? This exact scenario happened to Rosie and Steve Molinari on Lufthansa flight LH507 from Sao Paulo to Frankfurt and it’s only by sheer chance that it didn’t end in disaster.
At no stage during the booking, check-in, or boarding process was it made known to the passengers that there would be pets in the cabin or their whereabouts.
Worryingly it gets worse and could have ended in disaster if this didn’t happen…
According to Mr Molinari, the presence of the dog only became known to him when he asked the passenger next to him to move his large bag to the overhead lockers as it was too big and was encroaching on his foot space. The passenger replied that he could not do that because he had a dog in the bag!
If the dog’s bag had not been so big that it took up some of Mr Molinari’s foot space then he would have been unaware of it until in acute respiratory distress over the Atlantic Ocean in which case a medical emergency would have had to be declared.
As soon as the couple learned of the dog they brought the matter to the attention of the stewardess. The Molinari’s asked that they (or the dog and its owner) be moved to alternative seating. The stewardess’s initial response was patronising saying that as the flight was full nothing could be done, and then, “What do you want me to do about it – make an announcement and ask if someone will swap?” The Molinari’s responded with an appreciative “yes”, however, no announcement was ever made.
After some discussion, the stewardess offered to selectively ask other passengers nearby whether they would be willing to swap seats but to no avail. The Molinari’s shared with AirlineRatings that they did not witness the Stewardess asking other passengers and therefore were not surprised when told Mr Molinari had no choice but to separate from his wife and move to a windowless bulkhead seat with limited recline.
At no time was the dog owner inconvenienced, with the stewardess making it very clear that it was a problem for the Molinaris on the basis that the dog owner had paid for his dog and an aisle seat.
Windowless seats with little recline are generally not sold to passengers
When Mrs Molinari complained again she was advised that the next time they booked a flight to mention her husband is allergic to dogs. It’s worth noting that the booking system doesn’t allow for this type of notification, except for general allergies such as peanuts. In addition to this, the airline does not state on its booking site that pets are carried on board and therefore how would a passenger know to even raise the issue?
Mr Molinari spoke to two other single passengers immediately next to his new seating and enquired if either would swap seats with his wife so that they could be together. He also asked if the stewardess had already requested this of them. They said they were unaware of the situation and both happily offered to move.
Of the entire incident Mr Molinari said,
“The lack of concern by Lufthansa management and staff remains stunning. This airline has minimal concern for the onboard medical safety and well-being of its passengers. Presumably, this is about putting money ahead of passenger well-being. The passenger should be treated respectfully with due regard for their health and welfare. An airline with such disregard for its customers is not one we will be rushing to use again!”
The Molinaris have written letters of complaint to the airline and requested that the rules around animals in the main cabin be reviewed with their concerns regarding medical safety and passenger comfort in mind.
The Global Customer Relations Expert, Disability Claims at Lufthansa simply sent irrelevant and unhelpful internet links that effectively passed the buck back to the passenger. The replies to Molinari’s complaints are poorly written and dismissive of their concerns. Requests for compensation have been ignored. The Molinari’s shared these responses with AirlineRatings and they are quite simply, unacceptable.
We are very sorry to hear that you had health concerns during your flight to Frankfurt on March 16, regarding your asthma allergy and being seated next to a passenger with a dog. Due to a full flight, re-seating to another seat for both of you was unfortunately not possible.
To communicate with us your health concern, may we suggest to contact our medical operation centre for further information and guidance – https://www.lufthansa.com/gb/en/travelling-health
As Lufthansa allows passengers to travel with pets, like any other airline, we hope you understand that we cannot assume responsibility for this. Here we have a link for you to see Lufthansa animal policies – https://www.lufthansa.com/gb/en/reisen-mit-tieren#TravelOpportunities
We hope that you continue to put your trust in Lufthansa and we can welcome you on board again in the near future.
AirlineRatings has attempted to contact the Lufthansa Media Relations Office in the Americas and Europe for comment but with no response. We have also contacted their Social Media team but again, we received no reply.
This incident raises a whole host of questions and concerns and we ask our AirlineRatings community to share this story so it does not happen again.
All passengers have the right to know about pets on planes at the time of booking and if an airline chooses to carry pets then they must be in a set-aside section of the plane. If airlines are going to carry pets then there needs to be a place for passengers to highlight their allergy to pets during the booking process.
This story also raises the question about animal welfare, and how a dog can endure an 11.5-hour flight (plus boarding) without passing waste into its carrying bag, and making sounds/smells that are unacceptable to human passengers but that’s an issue for another day.
Rosie and Steve Molinari’s experience illustrates the risks when airlines fail to disclose the presence of pets on board. Despite requests to change seats, Lufthansa’s crew was dismissive and unhelpful, prioritizing the comfort of the dog owner. The incident raises concerns about airline transparency, the need for clear policies on pets, and better accommodation for passengers with allergies.
On April 22, Korean Air and WestJet announced an expanded codeshare partnership that will offer more transpacific travel options for their customers. Starting May 17, Korean Air will begin selling tickets for WestJet’s new route between Seoul Incheon and Calgary. This new service will operate three times a week using Boeing 787 Dreamliners.
The Seoul Incheon – Calgary flights will connect Korean Air passengers to Calgary, a gateway to Canada’s Banff National Park, renowned for its stunning Lake Louise and scenic mountain trails.
“We are thrilled to expand our codeshare agreement with WestJet, allowing our valued customers access to a wider range of transpacific destinations,” said Tae Joon Kim, Senior Vice President and Head of International Affairs & Alliance at Korean Air. “The launch of WestJet’s Calgary – Seoul Incheon route will strengthen connections between Korea and Canada, providing seamless access to a broader selection of Asian and Canadian cities through our hubs at Incheon and Calgary.”
WestJet customers, in turn, will gain access to flights operated by Korean Air to six new destinations—Bangkok, Da Nang, Hanoi, Ho Chi Minh City, Hong Kong, and Singapore—via Korean Air’s hub at Incheon Airport.
“As we prepare for WestJet’s first flights between Calgary and Incheon, this codeshare expansion comes at the perfect time. We’re enhancing connectivity for our guests and WestJet Rewards members to more destinations in Asia through Korean Air’s global hub,” said Jeff Hagen, WestJet Vice-President of Commercial Development and Strategic Partnerships. “Our enduring partnership with Korean Air provides excellent opportunities for both leisure and business travelers to explore the Asian continent, while also offering new guests from Asia easy access to Canada through our Calgary hub.”
Since Korean Air and WestJet began their codeshare partnership in June 2012, it has continued to grow, initially covering Korean Air’s flights from Seoul Incheon to Vancouver and Toronto, and WestJet’s domestic routes within Canada. With this latest expansion, the codeshare network will grow to 36 routes, providing broader connectivity across both continents.
About Korean Air
Korean Air, serving global destinations for over 55 years, ranks among the world’s top 20 airlines, transporting more than 27 million passengers in 2019, pre-pandemic. With its main hub at Incheon International Airport (ICN), Korean Air operates in 110 cities across 39 countries on five continents with a modern fleet of 160 aircraft and more than 20,000 skilled employees.
The airline’s dedication to safety and exceptional customer service has garnered various accolades, including a 5-star rating from Skytrax, as well as Airline of the Year and Cargo Operator of the Year awards from Air Transport World.
Korean Air is a founding member of the SkyTeam airline alliance and has become one of the largest transpacific carriers through its joint venture with Delta Air Lines.
MH370 (MR0) in Perth, Western Australia. Credit Alan Pepper
It has been revealed that there is critical and damming evidence about the captain’s flight simulator program missing from MH370 crash reports.
In a major revelation MH370 expert Richard Godfrey has found that key data recovered by the FBI showed Captain Zaharie Shah was checking on his home flight simulation program how far the fuel load would take him into the Southern Indian Ocean.
This new revelation adds significant weight to the mounting evidence indicating that the captain was the perpetrator of the disappearance of MH370.
The time of the simulation – February 2, 2014 – was just before the captain was due to fly MH150 to Jeddah but he did not divert it into the Southern Indian Ocean. Read more on this aspect here.
Mr Godfrey said “The major question arising from the FBI data, in the possession of the ATSB (Australian Transport Safety Bureau), but missing from the Royal Malaysian Police report is why the RMP did not include all the data from the FBI? Did the RMP have the data and decide not to include in their internal report? I doubt it.”
“In an email to the Independent Group dated 5th October 2017, the ATSB admits that they have several pages more data from the FBI, which was recovered from the home flight simulator of Captain Zaharie Shah than is contained in the leaked Royal Malaysian Police (RMP) report. This was originally thought to just be header and footer data, that was not relevant to the investigation of the disappearance of MH370. It turns out that this original assessment was wrong,” said Mr Godfrey,
“The question is then, why was the data given to the ATSB, but not to the RMP?”
“The ATSB has not disclosed the complete FBI data in their possession and this should now be done to provide transparency in the investigation. This would also enable independent investigators to analyse the data from the home flight simulator of Captain Zaharie Shah.”
Airlineratings.com is packed with information about air travel and answers questions that many of us may have thought of, but didn’t know who to ask. Well, now you do!
Airlineratings.com was developed to provide everyone in the world with a one-stop shop for everything related to airlines, formed by a team of aviation editors, who have forensically researched nearly every airline in the world.
Our rating system is rated from one to seven stars on safety – with seven being the highest ranking. Within each airline, you will find the country of origin, airline code, booking URL and seat map information. The rating system takes into account a number of different factors related to audits from aviation’s governing bodies, lead associations as well as the airline’s own safety data. Every airline has a safety rating breakdown so you can see exactly how they rate.
Over 230 of the airlines on the site that carry 99 per cent of the world’s passengers have a product rating. Given that low-cost, regional and full-service carriers are so different we have constructed a different rating system for each which can be found within each airline.
Airlineratings.com has information on over 30 types of aircraft from the latest Boeing 787 to the A380 and smaller jets.
Best of all, there are simple answers to many of the quirky questions including:
“What are all those noises after takeoff and before landing?”
“Why do you have to put the window shades up for landing and takeoff?”
AIRLINE SAFETY RATINGS The only place in the world to get ALL Airline Safety Ratings in one place! The ONLY airline rating that includes Safety, Product and COVID-19 safety ratings!Visit our Ratings Now!
2024 Airline Excellence Awards
View our special section announcing the 2024 Airline Excellence Awards!
AIRLINERATINGS NEWSLETTER
Subscribe to have AirlineRatings.com Newsletter delivered to your inbox!
Privacy PolicyWe have placed cookies on your device to enhance your browsing experience. We are collecting cookies for marketing purposes. To allow all cookies click OK. Otherwise you can use this tool to manage.
Cookies are very small text files that are stored on your computer when you visit some websites.
We use cookies to make our website easier for you to use. You can remove any cookies already stored on your computer, but these may prevent you from using parts of our website.
Use the slider below to see the different types of cookies you can choose to allow.
Drag the slider across to change your cookie settings
