Out of necessity a few years ago, I started flying SW, They received about 20% of my flights and caused me about 2% of my flying grief. The attitude of their employees is heads and shoulders above Continental and AA, my other two choices.

 

Tip on SW. My favorite seat is row 2, window. I never, ever, want a window seat on a regular airplane, except for that one. The first row has two seats facing backwards, row two is three seats facing forward. There is a nice ledge that the window seat occupant can stretch out and rest.

Tex, learn to grab the exit rows on the right side of the plane. 3 seats with awesome legroom, than on the left there is an exit row where one of the seats has no seat in front of it. Best spots on the plane, imo.

Tex, learn to grab the exit rows on the right side of the plane.  3 seats with awesome legroom, than on the left there is an exit row where one of the seats has no seat in front of it.  Best spots on the plane, imo.

 

Yep, those are my next favorite.

 

http://www.snopes.com/travel/airline/announce.asp

 

I think some attendants have read and used these. I have heard the adults acting like kids comment and the Capt Kangaroo

By the way, another reason Southwest works so well.

 

Great relationship with its unions. It's one of the most unionized airlines out there.

Frequent Flier miles are one of the last things that airlines will eliminate in bankruptcy. To do so would put the airline at a competitive disadvantage.

Frequent Flier miles are one of the last things that airlines will eliminate in bankruptcy. To do so would put the airline at a competitive disadvantage.

Agreed. I was just pointing out the risk, that's all, even though it's minimal.

Im probably in the minority on this one but there was a guest on CNBC that made a great point yesterday. The government needs to get out of the business of subsidizing airlines. Its clear that the legacy carriers such as Delta, AMR and UAL with their bloated business models can't hack it in this environment. Instead of the feds turning the major airlines into a flying version of Amtrack ( which these subsidies are essentially doing ), let consolidation and market forces weed out the weak. In the end everyone would be better off.

Im probably in the minority on this one but there was a guest on CNBC that made a great point yesterday.  The government needs to get out of the business of subsidizing airlines.  Its clear that the legacy carriers such as Delta, AMR and UAL with their bloated business models can't hack it in this environment.  Instead of the feds turning the major airlines into a flying version of Amtrack ( which these subsidies are essentially doing ), let consolidation and market forces weed out the weak.  In the end everyone would be better off.

Nuke, you and I may disagree on what is considered a subsidy to the airlines (do you count building an airport?), but overall we're in complete agreement for once...the 2nd "bailout" package that the government gave to the airlines after 9/11 was complete garbage, and I think the first one was too much money as well (the day Congress passed the first post-911 airline bailout, one of the airlines immediately ordered like 7 new jumbo jets with the money).

Nuke, you and I may disagree on what is considered a subsidy to the airlines (do you count building an airport?), but overall we're in complete agreement for once...the 2nd "bailout" package that the government gave to the airlines after 9/11 was complete garbage, and I think the first one was too much money as well (the day Congress passed the first post-911 airline bailout, one of the airlines immediately ordered like 7 new jumbo jets with the money).

 

 

Building an airport is one thing. It drives the local economy and the airlines have to pay rent to fly out of there. The community gets its money back. With a straight out cash payment the money is flushed down a money-losing hole never to be seen again.

Building an airport is one thing.  It drives the local economy and the airlines have to pay rent to fly out of there.  The community gets its money back.  With a straight out cash payment the money is flushed down a money-losing hole never to be seen again.

In that case...then yes, Nuke and I actually seem to be in full agreement on an issue.

 

So let's see...first the 15 game lead falls to 4.5

Then Nuke and Balta agree on something...

 

Presumably the next step involves 4 guys on horseback?

In that case...then yes, Nuke and I actually seem to be in full agreement on an issue.

 

So let's see...first the 15 game lead falls to 4.5

Then Nuke and Balta agree on something...

 

Presumably the next step involves 4 guys on horseback?

 

[checks cubs magic number]

 

Nope you guys are all right for at least another year.

Nuke, you and I may disagree on what is considered a subsidy to the airlines (do you count building an airport?), but overall we're in complete agreement for once...the 2nd "bailout" package that the government gave to the airlines after 9/11 was complete garbage, and I think the first one was too much money as well (the day Congress passed the first post-911 airline bailout, one of the airlines immediately ordered like 7 new jumbo jets with the money).

 

Actually, do some research on that 9/11 bailout. Most of the money was never actually passed on to the airlines.

 

And Amtrak doesn't make money because the semi-private/quasi government rail company has never received full funding and as such has been unable to expand the high speed rail network, or properly maintain and update rolling stock. In the mean time, Congress and state governments frequently require Amtrak to service certain cities that are unprofitable for the company yet don't foot the bill for the service.