Airline and Airport News

Travel site TripAdvisor.com has named what it considers the 10 best airlines in the world. Unless you do a lot of international travel, you might not get to enjoy most of them.

Coming out on top is Emirates, based in the United Arab Emirates (UAE). It's followed by Singapore Airlines, and then Brazil's Azul.

It's only in the fourth spot that a U.S.-based airline -- JetBlue -- makes an appearance. It's followed by Air New Zealand, Korean Air, Japan Airlines, and Thailand-based Thai Smile at number eight.

Alaska Airlines, the only other U.S.-based carrier to earn a spot on the list, is ninth and Garuda Indonesia rounds out the top 10.

Some airlines investing in improved service

"The airline industry is investing billions of dollars in new aircraft and service enhancements to differentiate the flying experience and these awards recognize the carriers offering the very best experiences and value to the traveling public," said Bryan Saltzburg, Senior Vice President and General Manager for TripAdvisor Flights.

In addition to the top 10 list, TripAdvisor rated airlines in different categories of service, such as first class, business class, premium economy and economy. The awards were based on an algorithm that analyzed airline reviews and ratings submitted by travelers worldwide over the last year.

Besides being named number one overall, Emirates took honors for Best First Class and Best Economy Class.

"The fact that the awards are a result of unbiased reviews and feedback speaks to our commitment to deliver a superior travel experience for our customers," said Sir Tim Clark, President, Emirates Airlines.

Russia's Aeroflot was awarded Best Business Class and Air New Zealand was named Best Premium Economy Class.

Special category for U.S. carriers

Since U.S. carriers were not overly represented on the list, TripAdvisor created a category for North American airlines. It named Delta the top major airline in the U.S.

When it comes to mid-size and low-cost North American carriers, it breaks down this way:

1. JetBlue
2. Alaska Airlines
3. Southwest
4. Virgin America
5. Westjet (Canada)

If you're flying into American airspace anytime soon, make sure your phone, laptop and other devices all have fully charged batteries, because as of last weekend, you must add “any phone or laptop computer with a dead battery” to the list of “things you can't carry on an airplane, or else the Transportation Security Administration will think you're a terrorist.”

That list has been in flux since the TSA first invented it. Back in the summer of 2005, all small metal grooming tools, such as tweezers and nail clippers, were banned in carry-on luggage, then they were allowed again.

Shampoo, liquid soap and other toiletry gels were initially allowed, then briefly forbidden altogether, then re-allowed provided they were in labeled bottles or tubes each containing three ounces or less, although that limit has since increased so that today, you can have moisturizer, toothpaste and other personal-hygiene gels in bottles or tubes containing up to 3.4 ounces apiece. However, for terrorist-prevention reasons those individual bottles and tubes all must fit in a plastic resealable sandwich bag no larger than one quart.

All carry-on electronics were banned for a day or two after Christmas 2009, during which time the TSA also imposed a set of rules governing passenger behavior during the last hour of a flight: hands were to be visible at all times, nothing was to be kept in people's laps, no reaching into your pocket or carry-on bag, and no leaving your seat for any reason.

Those punitive restrictions were soon rescinded. One year later, in October 2010, the TSA started requiring fliers in American airspace to submit to what it calls “enhanced patdowns” -- the explicit genital-grabbing all-body searches which, as a TSA agent admitted at the time, were deliberately intended to intimidate fliers into walking through the TSA's then-new full-body scanners instead.

And, of course, there have been the periodic TSA warnings against everything from shoes to cupcakes, all of which might, possibly, have the potential to be a bomb, or hide a bomb, or otherwise do something dangerous.

Old is new again

Hence the justification for the TSA's latest edict: if you are going to fly in American airspace and your cell phone has a dead battery (more specifically, if you show up with a device that cannot be turned on where a TSA agent can see it), they'll suspect the device is actually a disguised bomb, and then treat you as a suspect.

Hopefully, no terrorist or potential terrorist anywhere in the world is smart enough to disguise a bomb as an electronic device and then give it an actual working screen. But this possibility has already been considered and discarded by Jason Harrington, a former TSA agent who wrote in the Guardian that "the new airport cellphone rules wouldn't stop an iBomb" and warned that "the latest ad hoc security directive might actually make us less safe."

Those of a certain age may recall that this is actually not the first time the "turn on your devices" rule has been implemented. Long before there was a TSA -- back in the 1990s -- security guards at many U.S. airports used to ask travelers to turn on their laptops. Since this was in the Windows XP days, when a boot-up could take several minutes, it resulted in some pretty major back-ups and was eventually abandoned.

The story has generated many international headlines. For example: the U.K.'s Telegraph, on July 3, reported a “UK terror alert: body searches at British airports” with the subheading “New security regime imposed on passengers as American intelligence suggests al-Qaeda plot to use Western fanatics to bring down a US-bound plane.”

The next day, when the Express reported the news, it included warnings from a British travel agency, advising all travelers in the country to allow extra time for airport checks. The Express also said that the increased security measures were due to fears that terrorists might have an “undetectable 'stealth bomb'.”

"More like a physical assault"

Incidentally, both of those British news stories quoted an American tourist, Lisa Simeone, who was in Europe when local news reported the latest changes in American airport security rules. While Simeone and her husband were at Heathrow about to fly back home, a reporter strolling through the airport asked them what they thought about the new rules, and the Express said this:

American journalist Lisa Simeone, 57, said: “When I came through here last it was a cursory pat-down.

“This time it seems they are being a lot more aggressive and really groping people, it’s more like a physical assault.”

She said officials were swabbing belongings, clothes and shoes and even swabbed a baby’s pushchair.

No bombs or terrorists were found.

Simeone, a Baltimore resident and a frequent contributor to the TSA News Blog, is a frequent traveler who said she stopped flying in American airspace in 2010, when the TSA's “enhanced patdown” policy started.

“We used to travel a lot; it was a big part of my life,” Simeone said in a phone interview with ConsumerAffairs. The thought of never visiting Europe again made her rather depressed until she discovered that the Queen Mary 2 docks in New York and takes passengers across the Atlantic, so she and her husband got into the habit of driving from Baltimore to New York, taking the ship to Europe [it makes port calls in England and Germany], then flying back to the U.S.

“The QM2 is not expensive [compared to an airline ticket]; the problem is that it takes time,” Simeone said. A trans-Atlantic flight takes less than a day, whereas the Queen Mary 2 requires nearly a week to cross the ocean. “Not many Americans have enough time to take a vacation without flying.”

Latest American export

At any rate, Simeone and her husband said their vacation took three weeks in all, including the week they spent on the Queen Mary 2. Two and a half weeks into their vacation, Simeone learned, the TSA practices she sought to avoid in America had followed her to Europe.

“We were in Vienna, at the two and a half week mark, when the news reports started to come out: U.S. demanding other countries do this … I thought, 'Oh, my God, This is what's going on in the U.S., and now it's coming to Europe …. the U.S. makes an edict, and every other country knuckles under. They said the bomb they're looking for is 'undetectable,' but they think groping people will help them find it?”

A two-way ocean voyage from Europe to New York and back takes two weeks in all: as much vacation time as many Americans get in an entire year. “I work freelance, so I can take the time if I have to; my husband can't,” Simeone concluded glumly. She hopes the new regime in European airports proves only temporary, though fears that might be unduly optimistic: “The thing about civil liberties — once they're taken away, it's very unlikely you'll get them back.”

With nearly every airline charging a checked bag fee, passengers are trying to cram more and more into the overhead bins.

That creates problems for both airlines and passengers but the chore might get a little easier on new and retrofitted Boeing 737s.

Alaska Airlines is taking delivery of some of the new jets that feature Boeing's new Space Bins, which the airline says will increase the room for carry-on bags by 48%. Alaska says its the first airline to line up for the capacity-adding feature.

"Alaska is relentlessly focused on making the travel experience better," said Sangita Woerner, Alaska Airlines vice president of marketing. "We've been on a mission to improve our cabin experience for several years and Space Bins are part of a $150 million investment we've made to make flying more comfortable and enjoyable.”

By the end of 2017, Woerner says nearly half of Alaska Air's fleet will have larger bins to accommodate a carry-on bag for virtually every passenger.

Installed on 34 new jets

The airline said it will take delivery of 34 737s and one MAX in the next two years and will begin retrofitting 34 Boeing Sky Interior aircraft, primarily 737-900ERs, in 2016.

Other airlines are sure to explore this option, since all are wrestling with the space issue. Maura, a United passenger, posted this response from United Customer Service at ConsumerAffairs, when he complained that he could not find space for his bags.

“We strive to accommodate carry-on bags for the greatest number of customers possible,” the United rep wrote. “More customers are choosing to bring their luggage onboard, which could cause a shortage of storage space. Our planes have some of the largest overhead storage bins in the industry. When the bins become full, remaining bags must be gate-checked.”

Holds six bags

Alaska Airlines says very soon, it will have the largest overhead capacity. It says each Space Bin can hold six bags, two more than the current pivot bins installed on Next-Generation 737s with the Boeing Sky Interior. That's based on a standard size carry-on bag measuring 9 inches x 14 inches x 22 inches.

"We work closely with our customers to continuously enhance their airplanes so they can offer great passenger experiences," said Brent Walton, manager of 737 Interiors New Features for Boeing Commercial Airplanes. "We have a strong record of delivering value with innovative interiors features, like bigger bins that help reduce passenger anxiety about overhead storage and provide a better travel experience."

Improving acccess

When open, the bottom edge of the Space Bin will hang about two inches lower, so travelers can lift their carry-on bags in and out more easily. The deeper bins will allow more bags to be stowed and increase visibility into the back of the bins.

Alaska also says the Space Bins, designed without a flight attendant bin assist mechanism, will be easier to close.

Alaska Airlines said it is installing Space Bins on all its 737-900ERs and MAX aircraft currently on order and by 2017 will have 69 airplanes, or 46% of its passenger fleet, outfitted with Space Bins.

It turns out there are a number of interested parties following the Justice Department's investigation into possible collusion among U.S. airlines.

In particular, it is travel-related businesses that have expressed some concern.

“We applaud the Department of Justice for its interest in protecting air travel for consumers,” the Travel Technology Association (Travel Tech) said in a statement. “There is less competition in air travel due to carrier consolidation. As a result, it is more important than ever that consumers continue to have the ability to effectively shop for transparent travel options across suppliers.”

The Travel Technology Association represents many of the websites consumers use to book travel, including Orbitz, Expedia, Priceline, Sabre, Amadeus, Travelport, Skyscanner, Airbnb, HomeAway, TripAdvisor, CheapOAir, and Vegas.com.

As such, it has a bone to pick with airlines that it says have adopted policies that restrict the availability of fare and schedule information in the marketplace.

Negatively impacting consumer welfare

“Limiting access to airline content through the independent channel – which provides travelers with the transparency and choice they demand – negatively impacts consumer welfare,” the group said.

In a study it released in May, the association claims that if airlines are successful in efforts to restrict access to flight information, ticket prices would rise more than 11% for leisure and unmanaged business travelers. That, I says, would translate into about $30 more for the average ticket.

“Preserving the competitive benefits of consumers’ ability to access comparative and transparent information on prices and schedules of major U.S. airlines is more important than ever,” writes Scott Morton, author of the study. “At a time when independent, transparent comparison shopping is most needed, some airlines are attempting to restrict access to their fare and schedule information, reduce the ability of consumers to easily compare prices, and drive travelers to their own websites, which do not offer price comparisons with other airlines.”

Statements by airline executives

The association has also expressed concern about recent statements by airline executives during a June round table discussion in Miami, hosted by the International Air Transport Association (IATA). The group of airline CEOs reportedly talked approvingly of recent actions by a U.S. airline to implement new discriminatory surcharges on consumers who choose to book travel through third-party channels.

“The events at the Miami IATA meeting may suggest a coordinated effort by the airlines present – and by the larger trade group – to promote and potentially collectively impose the surcharge,” Travel Tech said. “Those events raise serious questions as to whether the airlines and IATA departed from their obligations to compete, not coordinate, when it comes to the imposition of fares, fees and surcharges on their customers.”

Travel Tech is not the only trade group unlikely to volunteer as character witnesses should the Justice Department eventually bring anti-competitive charges against United, America, Delta and Southwest airlines – the objects of the probe. Others in the travel industry might prove reluctant as well.

Alarm

Earlier this month the U.S. Travel Association expressed “alarm” at the government's announcement of the airline investigation. Association CEO Roger Dow worried that the traveling public is already “jaded” about flying and hoped that, where the Justice Department sees smoke, there is no fire. Still, he says the airline industry has invited much of this unwelcome scrutiny.

"If not for the radical consolidation we have seen in the airline industry in the last few years, we probably would not even be having this conversation,” Dow said. “Now that 4 carriers control 85% of domestic routes, 'collusion' is a thought that's constantly going to be in the back of the minds of federal regulators.”

Dow says Congress could increase airline competition by making it easier for airports to raise funds for expansion. Many Wall Street analysts disagree, however. They says airlines have only recently become profitable by consolidating and, in essence, reducing competition.

The chief executive of beleaguered JetBlue is winning kudos from crisis management experts less than 10 days after the ice storm that put his airline into the deep freeze.

A contrite David Neeleman has issued profuse public apologies on network television, on the video-sharing site YouTube, on newspaper front pages, and on the JetBlue website.

He's not only offered millions of dollars in compensation but issued a consumer-friendly Passenger Bill of Rights, retroactive to cover the victims of the newest St. Valentine's Day massacre, with vows to enforce it.

He's told employees -- the prime target of customer wrath -- to put on the friendly face JetBlue patrons experienced prior to the Feb. 14 fiasco.

Most importantly, Neeleman has looked and sounded sincere in all his public appearances.

Crisis management experts have noticed.

"People see through it when the typical CEO hides behind the podium or the press release," said Bernstein Crisis Management president Jonathan Bernstein. "(Neeleman) gave the public ample face time and did so with passion in his voice. He talks the talk of everyman, which is exactly what he needed to do."

Fellow Californian Alex Anolik, a San Francisco attorney who represents travel agents and tour operators, agreed. He called JetBlue's Passenger Bill of Rights "a good PR move."

Richard Levick, president of the Washington-based Levick Strategic Communications, went even further. "JetBlue has run to the crisis, taking responsibility not just for itself but for the entire industry."

According to Levick, JetBlue's CEO met all five key tenets of sound crisis management:

1. Run to it. Avoid "duck and cover."
2. All companies will have a crisis. Be prepared.
3. Know your crisis team. Now.
4. Make a sacrifice. Companies often want to win it all.
5. Avoid saying "no comment." A crisis abhors a vacuum.

"The critical role is to run to the crisis," he said. Accepting responsibility with sincerity also may defray legal consequences.

"People don't want to sue people they like and trust," Levick noted. "What happens so often is that CEOs lawyer-up and say nothing."

Such actions often hurt the company, he said, because media reports are based solely on the reactions of victims and their elected representatives.

For his part, Neeleman admitted to being "humiliated and mortified" by the weather-caused snafu that kept seven flights on the JFK airport tarmac for times that ranged from six-and-a-half to nearly ten-and-a-half hours. Food, water, working toilets, and patience ran out.

It took six days -- and a total of 1,000 cancelled flights -- to get JetBlue's schedule back to normal.

Neeleman swears that won't happen again. Now he has to hope that prospective passengers believe him.

Consumers will be on the move this Thanksgiving holiday weekend, resulting in a significant rise in air travel, according to Airlines for America (A4A), an industry trade group.

In its annual forecast, the group predicts 25.3 million passengers will travel on U.S. airlines during the 12-day Thanksgiving travel period, a 3% increase over last year and the highest number since the Great Recession.

What's behind the increase? The trade group says an improving economy and still-low gasoline prices have put consumers in the mood to travel over the holiday.

Airlines are expected to add capacity, in the form of larger planes and additional routes, to handle the increase in passenger traffic.

Busiest travel days

According to the airlines' calendar, the Thanksgiving air travel period extends from Friday, Nov. 20 through Tuesday, Dec. 1. Daily passenger volumes are projected to range from 1.4 million to 2.7 million, with the busiest travel days in ranked order expected to be:

• Wednesday, Nov. 25
• Sunday, Nov. 29
• Monday, Nov. 30

To avoid the rush, A4A says your best travel days during this busy period will be Thursday, Nov. 26, and Friday, Nov. 27.

Expanding capacity

“As competition continues to boost schedules and drive down airfares in 2015, customers are seeing more opportunities to fly during the holiday season,” said A4A Vice President and Chief Economist John Heimlich. “Airlines are taking delivery of new, larger aircraft to accommodate the increase in passengers.”

A4A says the continued profitability of U.S. airlines will allow them to increase capacity to meet the short-term increase in holiday demand. Airlines have been more profitable in recent years, since adding fees to baggage and other items that were once provided at no charge. Lower fuel prices have also increased profitability.

During the first nine months of 2015, the 10 largest publicly traded U.S. passenger carriers reported pre-tax earnings of $18.8 billion, resulting in a profit margin of 15.6% – up from 7.7% in 2014.

On a net basis, the group reported $17.9 billion in earnings, or 14.8% of revenues – up from 5.7% in 2014.

The mystery of the disappearance of Flight MH370 is fueled, in large part, because we just don't know what happened to the Malaysia Airlines jet in the minutes after communication with ground controllers broke off.

Was the plane hijacked or did it suffer some catastrophic event? We won't know unless or until investigators can recover the “black boxes,” devices that are aboard every commercial airplane.

There are two black boxes, which are actually orange. One, the Flight Data Recorder, records the activity of aircraft systems. The other, the Cockpit Voice Recorder, records conversation among the flight crew in the cockpit. Located in the tail of the aircraft, these boxes can help investigators piece together the events that lead to a crash.

No black boxes

But MH370, along with its black boxes, is nowhere to be found, leaving investigators completely in the dark about what happened to the aircraft, and why. Some aviation experts have argued for some time that technology now allows this data to be available to investigators instantly, long before crews arrive at the scene of an air disaster.

"It's time to move the black box to 'the cloud' at least for essential limited flight recorder data for long flights over areas like the Indian Ocean, or other remote areas across large land masses like across the Brazilian Amazon," said Oliver McGee, former U.S. Deputy Assistant Secretary of Transportation for Technology Policy in the Clinton Administration.

The idea of remote flight data collection began to get serious discussion following the 2009 crash of Air France Flight 447, which plunged into the South Atlantic on a flight from Rio de Janeiro to Paris. It took two years to located the wreckage and retrieve the black boxes.

Time to enter 21^st century

Mark Rosenker, former chairman of the U.S. National Transportation Safety Board, told Reuters the MH370 disappearance is all the more reason to find a way to record at least some of each aircraft's data in the cloud. It's time, he says, to bring accident investigation into the 21^st century.

Some aviation experts say the technology to stream aircraft data to the cloud for real-time access already exists. Others say it's too costly for the industry to justify. But Peter Stewart, senior vice president for strategy and partnerships at technology firm PGi, says it should be a priority.

"We need to dig deeper into the technical details of retrieval and storage of cloud data systems, as well as, observe how other industries and firms have transformed how they store and transmit data," he said.

These technology experts concede the enormous bandwidth requirements to transmit constant, real-time data from an aircraft. But they argue limited data retrieval is possible, and is better than no data.

In fact, planes currently have the capability to transmit limited data about engine performance to remote storage servers. In the case of the missing Malaysia jetliner, there is no evidence any such data was sent or retrieved.

So, until the black boxes can be located and examined, what happened to MH370 remains a mystery.

American Airlines flight 1348, bound from San Francisco to Dallas-Fort Worth on Dec. 29 sat on an Austin runway for nearly nine hours while fierce but slow-moving thunderstorms pounded the state of Texas.

Food, water, and patience were soon in short supply, along with working toilets.

But passengers had plenty of time to prepare the groundwork for a new Congressional lobbying group called the Coalition for Airline Passengers' Bill of Rights. With consumer-conscious Democrats controlling both houses, passage of legislation seems more likely than it did in 1999.

That was the year the airline industry adopted a voluntary standard that effectively killed a bill created after a Northwest plane was stranded on the tarmac for many hours.

Story continues below video

Furious passengers from the latest fiasco insist the voluntary standard is worthless. They've started a website called www.flyersrights.org/index.php.

"Enough is enough," said American passenger Kate Hanni in a Jan. 22 press release published by the coalition. "This is not the first time, nor it is likely to be the last, that this kind of degrading treatment is visited on passengers.

"Thousands of legitimate complaints by travelers mistreated by the airlines are regularly dismissed or inadequately addressed by the industry," she fumed.

Now that the legacy carriers are making money again, they do not figure to retain the sympathy of lawmakers who voted them generous subsidies and immunity from lawsuits after their airplanes were used in the terrorist attacks of Sept. 11, 2001.

In fact, carriers could be in for a rude awakening after legislators collect all the testimony from passengers trapped in grounded planes on New Year's weekend.

Flight 1348, for example, was an hour late leaving San Francisco because of a mechanical problem. Had that delay not occurred, it could have reached DFW before the bad weather arrived. Instead, the MD-80 was diverted to Austin as one of 85 American flights diverted from Dallas that day.

Not until 12 hours after departure from San Francisco could passengers disembark.

American flight 37 from Zurich to Dallas suffered a similar fate, landing at the airport in Tulsa, which did not have the appropriate customs and immigration personnel to clear passengers for entry into the U.S.

By the time the flight finally reached Dallas after a 10-hour wait on the Tulsa tarmac, the Zurich passengers had been on board for 22 hours.

AA flight 1682 from Oklahoma City pushed back from the gate at 2:07 p.m. and sat on the tarmac for eight hours and two minutes before it was cancelled and sent back to the gate.

Austin airport authorities, overwhelmed when 14 planes landed unexpectedly, managed to move flights headed for Chicago or St. Louis but didn't do much for Dallas planes other than deliver food and drinks. The only passengers allowed off flight 1348 were 20 passengers whose final destinations were Austin or San Antonio. Luggage retrieval posed additional problems.

Passengers remaining in their seats claim they suffered from hunger, thirst, unsanitary conditions, and anxiety caused by unfulfilled promises from the captain plus the frustration of watching other planes come and go from the four American gates at the Austin airport.

Witnesses said a woman complained her diabetes medication was packed in her luggage -- the result of Transportation Security Administration (TSA) guidelines limiting liquids in carry-ons -- while a smoker ran out of Nicorette gum. They added that hungry babies screamed incessantly.

Fifteen of the stranded passengers from AA flight 1348 explained their complaints in a letter sent to U.S. Sen. Daniel Inouye (D-Hawaii), chairman of the Senate Commerce, Science, and Transportation Committee.

The proposed Passenger Bill of Rights would require that airlines:

• Establish procedures for returning passengers to gates during delays so that no plane sits on the tarmac longer than three hours;

• Provide passengers with food, water, sanitary facilities, and medical needs during delays that exceed three hours;

• Publish updated lists of flights delayed at least a half-hour 40 per cent of the time in any given month;

• Compensate bumped passengers or those delayed by cancellations or postponements of more than 12 hours by a refund worth 150 percent of the ticket price;

• Create a passenger review committee, including consumers, with the formal ability to review and investigate complaints.

Though it admitted no wrongdoing, Northwest settled a class-action lawsuit by paying $7.1 million in compensation to more than 7,000 storm-stranded passengers who sat on the Detroit tarmac on Jan. 3, 1999. That action is likely to be used as a precedent in any litigation arising from the American case.

Northwest now refuses to let passengers sit on airport tarmacs more than three hours.

For its part, American apologizes to stranded passengers and sent them vouchers valid for future flights.

According to AA spokesman Tim Wagner, "We have examined our reaction to the weather that day and we have reemphasized areas of our procedures that will help ensure that the situation never happens again."

Industry-wide, flight delays and reports of lost bags have both climbed steadily over the last four years. Staff and service cuts, coupled with congestion in the air and on the ground, have been major contributing factors. In addition, federal rules limit the number of hours flight crews work per day, sometimes making it impossible for delayed flights to take off because the crews have exceeded their allotted time.

Southwest Airlines faces $328,550 in fines for two alleged safety violations, including one involving a loss of cabin pressure during a flight from Boston to St. Louis.

The Federal Aviation Administration said that on May 13, 2013, a Southwest Boeing 737 lost cabin pressure, the cabin’s oxygen masks deployed and the aircraft made an emergency landing in Baltimore.

The FAA alleges that after the event, Southwest mechanics failed to complete a mandatory inspection to check whether the change in cabin pressure damaged the aircraft and to ensure used oxygen bottles were replaced.

The airline allegedly operated the plane on 123 flights before completing the inspection on June 3. 

Additionally, the airline allegedly operated the aircraft on May 14 and 15 flights with two of the four portable oxygen units unserviceable.

Further, the agency alleges the airline operated the aircraft on approximately 120 additional flights with a portable oxygen unit that did not comply with federal regulations. The FAA proposes a $265,800 civil penalty in this case.

In the second case, the FAA alleges Southwest failed to comply with Federal Aviation Regulations for accurately recording repairs in an aircraft’s logbook. 

On March 18, 2013, the pilot of a Boeing 717 operated by Southwest Airlines under the Air Tran Airways livery reported seeing ice and water coming from the jetliner’s galley vent. Over the next few weeks, maintenance technicians replaced several components in an attempt to correct the problem, which was traced to a faulty component in one of the aircraft’s air-conditioning systems. 

The FAA alleges that the airline failed to follow proper procedures in making the repairs and detailing them in the logbooks. And it said the aircraft was flown on several passenger-carrying flights before repairs were completed. The FAA proposes a $62,750 civil penalty in this case.

I was shocked. The last time a flight attendant called me by name was when United threw me off a flight in Denver because the gate agent had given my seat to someone else.

While Lufthansa may be a step ahead in the customer service department, other airlines are closing fast. Soon, the Wall Street Journal reports, flight attendants will know our birthdays, how we like our coffee and whether we're likely to buy anything on board.

Not to mention whether we're likely to drink too much and cause trouble. In that case, maybe we'll get the treatment I received in Denver. (I was sober as the proverbial judge, by the way). 

After all, the airlines already have a lot of this information lurking in their databases. And thanks to such Big Data troves as Experian, it won't be long before they can fill in any blanks that remain.

This could mean that as the flight attendant wanders down the aisle with a tablet computer, he'll have a good idea of what we're likely to want and, perhaps, whether we'll be in a pleasant mood or whether we're the type who writes to ConsumerAffairs after each flight to complain about something.

More significantly, the tablet may have information on our food allergies, medical conditions and disabilities, which could actually be a good thing.

Gut reaction

Unlike some industries, the airlines have been slow to actually put all of this into practice. American Airlines, for example, has until recently had a "gut reaction" that it should protect its customers' privacy.

But now, Maya Leibman, chief technology and information officer for AA, says the carrier is learning to walk the line "between providing excellent customer service and suddenly becoming creepy," the Journal reports.

Allegiant seems to be the carrier that has most enthusiastically embraced all this data. That's at least partly because it's really more of a flying salesroom than transportation company. During its flights to and from Las Vegas, flight attendants pitch everything imaginable, including show tickets and tours. This reliance on in-cabin sales gives it a real incentive to keep track of the big spenders on board.

Do you think the airlines will soon know which passengers are likely to have crying babies with them? 

American Airlines has been slapped with a $60,000 fine for being less than forthcoming with consumers.

The U.S. Department of Transportation (DOT) says the carrier violated the federal full-fare advertising rule when its agents told consumers that surcharges levied by the airlines were government-imposed taxes. DOT also ordered the carrier to cease and desist from further violations.

“We expect airlines to be truthful to their customers when they provide information about their fares,” said Transportation Secretary Anthony Foxx. “We will continue to take enforcement action when airlines fail to disclose their fares fully and accurately.”

Full-fare disclosure

Under the DOT's full-fare advertising rule, the first price quoted for air transportation made by an airline or ticket agent must state the entire price to be paid by the consumer -- including all mandatory taxes, fees and airline surcharges. Airlines do not have to break out the components of the fare, but if they do, they must accurately show the costs of the services or taxes.

Following a complaint from a consumer, the Aviation Enforcement Office investigated how American described to potential passengers the taxes and carrier surcharges that it collected. It found that on a number of occasions in 2012 and 2013, American’s telephone reservation agents mistakenly told consumers that a variety of additional taxes and carrier-imposed surcharges were collectively “taxes.”

A significant portion of these charges were not taxes but fees imposed by the airline, such as fuel surcharges. In addition, pop-ups on the airline’s website claimed that these surcharges were taxes and, on at least one occasion, American issued a reservation statement labeling surcharges as taxes.

The carrier has corrected its website and provided additional training to its agents.