9 ms·

Ya there are. I've had planes take off fairly delayed because of folks doing just this. We just sit there as the airline tries to reconcile why the number of ch

by enjo 16y ago

Ya there are. I've had planes take off fairly delayed because of folks doing just this. We just sit there as the airline tries to reconcile why the number of checked-in passengers doesn't match their passenger count. I'm guessing this is some sort of security rule? It doesn't matter tho, it absolutely sucks for everyone else on the flight.

hugh3 16y ago
I'm guessing this is some sort of security rule? It's a security rule if you have checked bags. If you're gonna blow up a plane they want to make sure you're at least onboard when you do it. Otherwise it's just a convenience thing -- they don't wanna close the doors and then have you show up two minutes later, because then you're a problem they have to deal with. The one time I actually did miss a connection I wound up with a free night in a very nice hotel, but the whole thing soaked up quite a few man-hours of time at the airline's end.
- jrockway 15y ago
  It's a security rule if you have checked bags. No it's not. People fly on flights other than their bags all the time. If you check in and miss your flight, your bags often get there before you do and might even take a different routing. I missed a Southwest flight from MDW to PDX once. I ended up flying MDW-OAK-PDX, and my bags were in Portland long before I was. There may be a rule for international flights, but I can't find a source on this. (The "you must use the lav in the cabin in which you are ticketed" rule only applies on international flights, for example. It may even only apply on international flights to the US, not from the US. After all, the 9/11 planes were international flights to the US. Oh wait...)
sliverstorm 16y ago
Who cares about delaying an entire plane of busy people when you can save $20? [/bitter]
- hugh3 16y ago
  Sadly this is the attitude that some people really have. And if challenged on it, they'll rationalize it by blaming the airline for setting their prices that way. It's much like the drug user's rationalization of the fact that the money he spends goes to support organized crime. "Well," he says, "that's the government's fault for not legalizing the drugs I wish to take!"
  - wnoise 16y ago
    In both cases they are right too: the people creating the messed-up market (government via drug laws) and (airlines via schedules) are creating incentives that have built-in externalities.
    - aterimperator 16y ago
      I agree with both of you. I'm not entirely sure where that leaves me. Conflicted. On the one hand I fully agree that these markets are kind of silly and incentivize dickish behavior. On the other hand, both the drug users and the time-wasters are knowingly inflicting those evils upon the world and other people through their own behavior. I think I've decided where it leaves me: upset at both the bad-market creators and at the individuals who make choices knowing the ill-effects of those choices.
- aboodman 16y ago
  The article has an example of saving $189 (about 50% of the published price of the ticket in question), and a post in this thread had an example of saving 500 euro on a transatlantic flight. So it's not always trivial amount of money.
  - hugh3 16y ago
    How many man-minutes of inconvenience are you willing to create for random strangers for every dollar you can save for yourself? Come to think of it, this question is about as close to an objective measure of an individual's level of morality as we can get. Screw all theories of moral relativism; I can tell whether you're a good person or not by knowing how much money it would take to tempt you to leave an entire planeload of people sitting on the tarmac for an extra ten minutes.

by enjo 16y ago

hugh3 16y ago

I'm guessing this is some sort of security rule? It's a security rule if you have checked bags. If you're gonna blow up a plane they want to make sure you're at least onboard when you do it. Otherwise it's just a convenience thing -- they don't wanna close the doors and then have you show up two minutes later, because then you're a problem they have to deal with. The one time I actually did miss a connection I wound up with a free night in a very nice hotel, but the whole thing soaked up quite a few man-hours of time at the airline's end.

jrockway 15y ago
It's a security rule if you have checked bags. No it's not. People fly on flights other than their bags all the time. If you check in and miss your flight, your bags often get there before you do and might even take a different routing. I missed a Southwest flight from MDW to PDX once. I ended up flying MDW-OAK-PDX, and my bags were in Portland long before I was. There may be a rule for international flights, but I can't find a source on this. (The "you must use the lav in the cabin in which you are ticketed" rule only applies on international flights, for example. It may even only apply on international flights to the US, not from the US. After all, the 9/11 planes were international flights to the US. Oh wait...)

sliverstorm 16y ago

Who cares about delaying an entire plane of busy people when you can save $20? [/bitter]

hugh3 16y ago
Sadly this is the attitude that some people really have. And if challenged on it, they'll rationalize it by blaming the airline for setting their prices that way. It's much like the drug user's rationalization of the fact that the money he spends goes to support organized crime. "Well," he says, "that's the government's fault for not legalizing the drugs I wish to take!"
- wnoise 16y ago
  In both cases they are right too: the people creating the messed-up market (government via drug laws) and (airlines via schedules) are creating incentives that have built-in externalities.
  - aterimperator 16y ago
    I agree with both of you. I'm not entirely sure where that leaves me. Conflicted. On the one hand I fully agree that these markets are kind of silly and incentivize dickish behavior. On the other hand, both the drug users and the time-wasters are knowingly inflicting those evils upon the world and other people through their own behavior. I think I've decided where it leaves me: upset at both the bad-market creators and at the individuals who make choices knowing the ill-effects of those choices.
aboodman 16y ago
The article has an example of saving $189 (about 50% of the published price of the ticket in question), and a post in this thread had an example of saving 500 euro on a transatlantic flight. So it's not always trivial amount of money.
- hugh3 16y ago
  How many man-minutes of inconvenience are you willing to create for random strangers for every dollar you can save for yourself? Come to think of it, this question is about as close to an objective measure of an individual's level of morality as we can get. Screw all theories of moral relativism; I can tell whether you're a good person or not by knowing how much money it would take to tempt you to leave an entire planeload of people sitting on the tarmac for an extra ten minutes.