Caution keeps B737 Max jet grounded

Courtesy Getty Images

Carriers which had been hopeful that the Boeing B737 Max jet would return to the skies as early as next month have deferred scheduled dates to operate the aircraft.

Earlier in August, Boeing CEO Dennis Mullenburg was hopeful that this would happen in the fourth quarter of the year and the airlines could look forward to capturing the peak holiday season traffic.

American Airlines which owns 24 of the Max jet is pushing the date to Dec 3. United Airlines with a fleet of 14 is moving it further down the road to Dec 19. It looks like both carriers are still hoping to cash in on what shall remain of the peak season including the Christmas holiday. But Southwest Airlines, the largest of the Max operators worldwide with 34 aircraft has moved the scheduled date to Jan 5 next year.

North of the border, Air Canada (which owns 24 Max jets) and Sunwing (with 4 aircraft) are not expecting the aircraft to be operational until next year. For Air Canada, it is Jan 8. And for Sunwing, even later in May. WestJet (with a fleet of 13 Max jets) too is not scheduling Max flights during the year-end holiday season, but said the company might consider an occasional flight to ease the demand should the ban be lifted then.

WestJet’s vice-president in charge of scheduling said: “It’s a little harder to unmix the cake at that point, but we would look at peak days, the Friday before Christmas (for example) where we can still sell seats and we’ll put the airplane back in.”

Elsewhere across the world, affected carriers remain non-committal on their plans. Other major operators until the jet was grounded include Norwegian Air Shuttle (18 aircraft), China Southern Airlines (16), TUI Group (15), China Eastern Airlines (14), Lion Air (14), FlyDubai (14), Turkish Airlines (12), and XiamenAir (10).

The B737 Max jet was grounded globally following two fatal incidents, one involving Indonesian carrier Lion Air in Oct last year and the other involving Ethiopian Airlines in Mar this year, both crashes claiming a total of 346 lives.

Quite naturally, carriers which own the Max jet are keen to see its early return to the skies. Many of them have cut back capacity to cope with the shortage of aircraft and are reporting losses as a consequence. United which took out 70 flights a day in its September schedule will see the number increased to 90 in December. Together, the three airlines – American, United and Southwest – have cancelled 30,000 flights. Delta Air Lines, however, stands to gain from these airlines’ disadvantage as it does not own any Max aircraft.

Budget carrier Norwegian Air Shuttle which plies the ultra-long haul is said to be on the brink of collapse, and the grounding of the B737 Max jet isn’t helping. According to former CEO Bjorn Kjos, the restriction has cost the airline US$58 million. Norwegian, which took the US by storm with its low fares, raising objection from American carriers, has cancelled numerous flights between Europe and the U.S.

Both the US Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) and Boeing have suffered some loss of credibility in the wake of the two crashes. Stories about Boeing’s shoddy work at is plants and allegations of FAA’s relegating its oversight role to the manufacturer had hit hard. FAA’s delayed action to ground the Max jet after a number of authorities across the globe had done so also called into question FAA’s leadership role in the field.

However, FAA may have learnt its lesson. Following meetings between Boeing and various industry players where disagreement on the readiness of the Max jet was apparent, FAA had said, “Our first priority is safety, and we have set no timeframe for when the work will be complete. Each government will make its own decision to return the aircraft to service, based on a thorough safety assessment.”

Europe’s aviation safety watchdog – the European Aviation Safety Agency (Easa) – for one will not rely entirely on a US verdict on whether the Max jet is safe to resume flying. It will instead additionally conduct its own tests on the plane before giving its final approval.

Transport Canada has insisted on the need for essential simulator training in early discussions when Boeing said it was not necessary since the Max jet was a variation of the B737 master model. The authority said it “will not lift the current flight restriction… until it is fully satisfied that all concerns have been addressed by the manufacturer and U.S. Federal Aviation Administration, and adequate flight crew procedures and training are in place.”

According to a report by the Wall Street Journal, multiple regulatory bodies around the world were not satisfied with Boeing’s briefing on the Max software update. They contended that Boeing “failed to provide technical details and answer specific questions about (the) modifications.” Boeing is expected to resubmit documents providing more details, and that these should be first approved by FAA before a follow-up meeting is convened. This in a way reminds FAA of its oversight role.

While affected airlines are looking forward to normalising their operations with the return of the B737 Max jet, what happens post-ban is another story. In fact, it may present a more difficult problem to handle than the technical aspects of the saga as the carriers try to win back the trust of travellers. If, indeed time is the healer, then taking the time to be absolutely convinced of the jet’s airworthiness before lifting the ban may be a good thing for the airlines.

Advertisements

Is Istanbul Airport the new Middle East hub?

Courtesy Getty Images

Turkey’s new Istanbul Airport is set to be the world’s largest airport, capable of handling up to 90 million passengers by 2021 with room for expansion to increase capacity to 200 million by 2028.

By comparison, Hartsfield-Jackson Atlanta International Airport in the United States – the current title holder – is capable of handling 104 million. Neigbouring Dubai International Airport has a capacity for 84 million, behind Beijing Capital International Airport’s 94 million but ahead of Haneda Airport’s 80 million, Heathrow Airport’s 76 million and Frankfurt Airport’s 61 million. (2016 figures provided by Airports Council International).

The airport was declared open on Oct 29 by Turkey’s President Recep Tayyip Erdogan. However, not all flights operating at the existing Ataturk Airport have been transferred to the new airport – not until the end of the year according to plans.

Mr Erdogan referred to the new airport as the “most important transit location on the north-south, east-west axes, connecting 60 countries and US$20 trillion economies”.

So, is Istanbul Airport the new Middle East hub, overtaking Dubai International?

No reason why not if you consider how geographically Istanbul is positioned not much differently from its Gulf neighbours. In fact, Istanbul, situated in a country that straddles both Asia and Europe, makes a viable alternative considering touristic interest in the region and how it is actually located on the doorstep of the wider Europe.

Already the authorities are encouraged by Istanbul’s growth of transit traffic albeit at the Ataturk Airport, and analysts are inclined to think that the new airport is likely to grow at the expense of other Middle eastern airports including Dubai, Doha and Abu Dhabi. That is, if Istanbul can ramp up the game to match what these other airports are offering in terms of cost, facilities and service. And, of course, if the volatile political climate in the region can be contained.

The competition will be fierce.

It cannot be denied the Gulf airports have been growing in tandem with that of their home airlines – Dubai/Emirates Airlines, Abu Dhabi/Etihad Airways, and Doha/Qatar Airways. Turkey’s national carrier, Turkish Airlines, is no small player. It operates scheduled services to 304 destinations in Europe, Asia, Africa and the Americas, making it the largest carrier in the world by number of passenger destinations, serving more destinations non-stop from a single airport than any other carrier in the world.

However, Turkish is ranked 18th in the 2018 Skytrax survey of the world’s top airlines, behind Emirates (4th) and Etihad (15th). But that’s still ahead of some major European carriers including KLM (19th), Air France (25th) and British Airways (31st).

Right now, Ataturk Airport is the 11th busiest airport in the world in terms of total passenger traffic and the 10th busiest in the world in terms of international passenger traffic. As of 2017, it is Europe’s 5th busiest airport after London Heathrow, Paris Charles de Gaulle, Frankfurt Airport and Amsterdam Schiphol Airport. The new airport, larger and capable of providing better facilities, should not fare any worse off.

What defines a best airline?

What defines a best airline, considering the different surveys that rank them? Conde Nast Travel has just released its readers’ choice of the best in 2017, and it is no surprise the list is made up of Asian, Middle East, European and SW Pacific carriers.

Courtesy Air New Zealand

Of course, it depends on the readership, but recognizing that, it also points to what really makes these airlines stand out. It is clear that the premium class service weighs heavily – the seat comfort and the fine food.

Etihad Airways (ranked #16) offers “the future of first-class comfort: a three-room “residence” with a bedroom, private bath with shower, and lounge.” Emirates (#4) offers “posh perks for premium fliers – cocktail lounges, in-flight showers… part of the reason it scores so high among travellers.” And the suites on Singapore Airlines (#3) offer “a pair of fully flat recliners that can be combined into a double bed.”

Mention is made of the premium economy class in almost all the ranked airlines” KLM (#20), Lufthansa (#19), Japan Airlines (#17), All Nippon Airways (#13), Qantas (#12), Cathay Pacific (#10), Virgin Atlantic (#7), Virgin Australia (#6), Singapore Airlines (#3) and Air New Zealand (#1).

So it may appear to be the voice of the premium travellers that is being heard. Maybe coach travellers aren’t too concerned about the ranking, more driven by price and less frilly factors, although to be fair, the Conde Nast report did mention of at least one airline, i.e. Etihad Airways (#16), not ignoring “those sitting in the back.” While many travellers may resign to the belief that the economy class is about the same across the industry, it is reasonable to assume that an airline that strives to please its customers in the front cabins will most probably carry that culture or at least part of it to the rear.

Although you may draw consensus across many of the surveys, it is best best to treat each one of them in isolation. It is more meaningful to try and draw intra conclusions within the findings of the particular survey.

You will note in the Conde Nast findings, there is an absence of American (including Canadian) carriers, never mind that of African and South American carriers.

Asiana Airlines (#8) is ranked ahead of Korean Air (#11).

All Nippon Airways (#13) is ranked ahead of Japan Airlines (#17). V

Virgin Australia (#6) is ranked ahead of Qantas (#12).

The order of the “Big 3” Gulf carriers is as follows: Qatar Airways (#2), Emirates (#4) and Etihad Airways (#16).

Of European carriers, there is the conspicuous absence of the big names of British Airways (compare Virgin Atlantic #7) and Air France, and the pleasant surprise of Aegean Airlines (#9) while SWISS seems to be regaining its erstwhile status years ago as being the industry standard.

The best belongs to Air New Zealand as the quiet achiever.

Ultimately, the results also depend on the group of respondents whose experiences may be limited to certain airlines.

Other airlines ranked in the top 20 of the Conde Nast survey: Finnair (#14), Turkish Airlines (#15), EVA Air (#18).

More Middle East airlines allow laptops in cabin

Good news for Middle East carriers as the United States gradually exempts them from the ban imposed on the carriage of laptops and other electronic gadgets in the cabin.

Etihad Airlines was the first to announce the lift of the ban, followed by Emirates Airlines and Turkish Airlines. Now Qatar Airways becomes the fourth airline to join the list this week. Saudia, the flagship carrier for Saudi Arabia, said its passengers would be able to carry the electronics on board US-bound flights from 19 July.

This follows strengthened security to meet US standards, which include measures such as enhanced screening, more thorough vetting of passengers and the wider use of bomb-sniffer dogs.

Morocco, Jordan, Egypt and Kuwait have yet to announce similar exemption. The UK government which followed the US in imposing similar restrictions on flights originating from Turkey, Lebanon, Jordan, Egypt, Tunisia and Saudi Arabia have not indicated its readiness to also lift the ban.

For all the initial outcry against the ban and questions about its wisdom, one might concede that the good that came out of it was the greater awareness of in-flight security. But for the airlines compliance means holding up the bottom line. Emirates for one had reported a drop in business because of the ban.

Consistency defines Skytrax best airlines

The 2017 Skytrax list of the top ten airlines is as in previous years hardly changed of note. Only two airlines dropped out of the list – Turkish Airlines and Qantas, making way for Garuda which was listed in 2015 and 2014, and Hainan Airlines which in 2014 was commended for clean cabins and amenities in business class.

Courtesy Qatar Airways

year’s champion Emirates Airlines went down to fourth place, followed by Cathay in fifth, making way for All Nippon Airways (ANA) in third.

This speaks of the consistency that makes these airlines the travellers’ perennial favourites. SIA has long been reputed for premium service and emulated by the Middle East carriers making them fierce competitors in the field.

However, it is more interesting to look at the movements into and out of the top ten list. Turkish Airlines which was included in the last three years dropped to 12th position this year, and Qantas moved further down from 9th last year to 15th this year. What is most noticeably absent is Asiana Airlines, which was voted the best in 2010 and continued to be one of the best since then until last year when it dropped to 11th and this year ranks 20th. If the Skytrax ranking is anything to go by, then Asiana should be concerned, perhaps not as much about the quality of its service as being surpassed by the competition.

On a more positive note, Hainan Airlines becomes the first China carrier to be ranked in the top ten, and Garuda re-entered the list boosted by its best cabin crew win.

Not surprisingly, the top ten list is dominated by Asian carriers with the exception of Lufthansa. Just a dash shy of that honour and ranked 11th is Thai Airways International.

No US airline has made it to the top ten, and don’t bother asking if they were really concerned,

US & UK ban laptops on board: Will this become the security standard?

Courtesy Emirates

SOON after the United States bars passengers on foreign airlines taking off at ten airports in Africa and the Middle East from carrying electronic devices larger than a cellphone, the United Kingdom announced a similar ban although the list of airlines and airports may be different.

The ban will affect items such as laptops, tablets, e-readers, cameras, printers, electronic games and portable DVD players. However, these articles may be carried in checked baggage.

Affected airlines and airports

The US restriction affects nine airlines: EgyptAir, Kuwait Airways, Royal Air Maroc, Royal Jordanian Airlines, Saudi Arabian Airlines, Turkish Airlines, and the Gulf big three of Emirates, Etihad Airways and Qatar Airways. The airports affected are sited in Amman (Jordan), Cairo (Egypt), Casablanca (Morocco), Doha (Qatar), Dubai and Abu Dhabi (United Arab Emirates), Istanbul (Turkey), Jeddah and Riyadh (Saudi Arabia), and Kuwait City (Kuwait). It is estimated about 50 flights daily would be affected.

The British ban affects 14 airlines arriving from Egypt, Jordan, Lebanon,Saudi Arabia, Tunisia and Turkey. While the US ruling exempts US carriers flying from the listed airports, the British restriction applies as well to home-based airlines British Airways and EasyJet.

Why the restrictions?

The reason for the bans is of course one of security, aimed at preventing terrorist attacks on commercial airlines. The US Department of Homeland Security said: “Terrorist groups continue to target commercial aviation and are aggressively pursuing innovative methods to undertake their attacks, to include smuggling explosive devices in various consumer items.”

The British government said it recognised the inconvenience these measures may cause but “our top priority will always be to maintain the safety of British nationals.”

Few air travellers, if any, will take issue with enhanced security measures since it means a safe flight. Any averse reaction is to be expected, as when full-body x-ray and search became mandatory at US airports. The inordinately long wait to clear security at US airports has since then become an accepted practice.

However, it will do well not to ignore the arguments put forth by experts who may not yet be fully convinced. Technology experts have questioned the premises which in their mind appear to be at odds with basic computer science.

What goes with the ban?

The ban on laptops means no one will be able to work during a flight, something that businessmen and women will sorely miss. Keeping yourself or your kids entertained with electronic games of your personal selection will be a thing of the past if you do not like what the airline offers in its system. What about that novel you thought you might at last be reading during the long journey, having loaded it in your e-book?

Sure, you can pack these (and your camera) in your checked baggage to loaded in the aircraft hold, but it defeats the purpose if they are intended for use during the flight. Also, if these are expensive equipment, passengers are often reluctant to pack them in checked baggage for fear of losing them or having them damaged. Some observers are predicting a rise in incidents of theft in the baggage holding area and cargo hold, and airlines will be confronted with the messy business of handling claims. Apparently baggage theft skyrocketed when Britain imposed a similar ban in 2006.

Laptops, tablets, cellphones and cameras are among the items that are already being subjected to additional security checks before they are cleared as carry-ons. It can only point to the suspicion that the current procedures are not robust enough.

Looking at the bigger picture, some experts fear the ban seems lopsided. First, if a laptop as an example may be used as an incendiary device, it is equally dangerous in the cabin as it is stowed in the baggage hold. Second, the ban targets named originating airports, but a terrorist suspect could always connect a flight from a presumed safe airport or fly on a presumed safe airline. Third, in the case of the US, to make exceptions for flights originating in the US is turning a blind eye to the possibility that mischief could also be traced to a home source.

Some airlines may benefit from the ban

It looks like an unexpected turn of events for the US big three of American Airlines, Delta Air Lines and United Airlines in their quest to get the US government to act against the perceived unfair competition by the Gulf big three (Emirates, Etihad and Qatar). The ban may well benefit the American trio as travellers are likely to want to travel with their electronic devices on board than to have them stowed in the baggage hold. A pertinent question would be how the US carriers would ensure the devices brought on board are safe the way that other carriers may not be able to do so?

Similarly, in the case of the UK ruling which covers also budget carriers, legacy airlines will have the edge if, unlike budget carriers, they do not charge for checked baggage. Easyjet, for example, will be challenged to think up an innovative approach to this issue.

And will airlines across the industry introduce loans of security-screened laptops on board for a fee?

The future

Although the ban is said to be temporary (as indicated by the US), will there be a change of mind to make it permanent, like the ban on liquid obtained before security clearance? Amuse yourself about a future when all you are allowed to bring on board are the clothes you are wearing and a wallet. Everything else needed or desired for the journey as determined by the authorities and the airlines may be purchased after take-off.

For now, some airlines may mull over the use or disuse of a happy passenger working on his or her laptop in their ads.

Is Singapore Airlines liable for misconnections?

sia-logoamericanemirates-logoetihad-logoturkish-airliens-logoSingapore Airlines (SIA) is among five major carriers taken to task by the British Civil Aviation Authority (BCAA) for not compensating their customers for flight delays that resulted in missed connections. Emirates Airlines is said to be the worst offender. The other three carriers are American Airlines, Etihad Airways and Turkish Airlines.

According to BCAA Director of Consumers and Markets, Richard Moriarty, the five carriers have “systematically” denied the passengers their rights. He said: “Airlines’ first responsibility should be looking after their passengers, not finding ways in which they can prevent passengers upholding their rights. So it’s disappointing to see a small number of airlines continuing to let a number of their passengers down by refusing to pay them the compensation they are entitled to.”

Under EU regulations, which apply to airlines even if they are not based in the EU, a delay of more than three hours becomes compensable, unless caused by “extraordinary circumstances”. An airline is off the hook if the delay is caused by factors outside their control, such as inclement weather, but not if it is due to poor performance resulting from, say, the lack of maintenance, procedural hiccups or staff negligence.

This is not the first time an airline has been charged with not giving their customers their dues. Protecting air passengers’ rights has been a long running battle between regulators and the airlines, and the matter is far from being satisfactorily concluded. Nor is it as widely pursued as in the EU, United States and Canada. Even then, monitoring is not an easy task, and as arduous is the arbitration to decide if an airline should be held accountable. Ever since the EU ruling came into force, many airlines have been fighting the cases in court, and this can mean unduly long delays of compensatory payments if ever they are ruled in favour of the passengers.

Singapore airlines is putting compensation claims “on hold” if they involve connecting flights. This is a contentious issue as the delivering carrier has no control over a passenger’s choice of onward journey if he or she makes separate bookings. The question hinges on what is considered a reasonable connecting time. If an airline arranges the entire journey including the connection, it is usually obliged to look after the passenger who misses the connection as a result of a flight delay. This may cover a stopover stay at a hotel, meals, rebooking on the next flight or an alternative flight, and other related expenses. Some airlines have leveraged on short-connecting times as a marketing strength.

Following the US Department of Transportation final ruling on protecting passengers’ rights, SIA published a customer service plan for tickets purchased in the US for flights to and from that country. The plan stipulates: “In the event that Singapore Airlines cancels, diverts or delays a flight, Singapore Airlines will, to the best of our ability, provide meals, accommodation, assistance in rebooking and transportation to the accommodation to mitigate inconveniences experienced by passengers resulting from such flight cancellations, delays and misconnections. Singapore Airlines will not be liable to carry out these mitigating efforts in cases where the flight cancellations, delays and misconnections arise due to factors beyond the airline’s control, for example, acts of God, acts of war, terrorism etc., but will do so on a best effort basis.”

While an airline like SIA is unlikely to put its reputation on the line (the airline has often been commended by its customers for going the extra mile), there is always the caveat that it can only do so much to the best of its ability and on a best effort basis. In response to BCAA, SIA pointed out “a lack of clarity in the law” which it hoped would be resolved in the ongoing discussion with the British authority.