Talk to WXXV’s anchors, reporters and meteorologists. When you see news happening, share it! We’d love to hear from you.

Escalating tensions in and around Kashmir between Pakistan and India has led to chaos in the skies with passenger services to Europe cancelled and flights diverted.

Numerous planes have been forced to avoid Pakistan following the closure of its airspace after two Indian military jets were shot down, meaning routes that would ordinarily take around two hours are now lasting longer than five.

British Airways, Air India and Singapore Airlines are among those airlines forced to reroute services that would normally fly over northern India, with many forced to make additional stops to refuel.

BA services stopped at Bucharest, while Singapore flights were operating via Dubai or Mumbai. Pakistan International Airlines has suspended all its flights.

Thai Airways made the decision to cancel all its flights to Europe, all of which it said would resume by Friday. On Thursday afternoon, a London-bound service took off from Bangkok, heading north over China.

On Wednesday, one Spicejet service from Kabul to Delhi that should have been in the air for an hour and 40 minutes, instead took five hours 40 minutes. Other major disruptions included an Air Canada flight from Toronto to Delhi on Tuesday that turned back over Sweden after seven hours in the air and returned to Canada. 

Eamonn Brennan, the director general of Euromonitor, which handles European airspace, said it was working with the airlines “to minimise the impact on European air traffic”. Euromonitor estimated 400 flights daily have been affected, with severe impact on services to Iran, Georgia and Azerbaijan.

There were hopes of a thaw in relations on Thursday when Pakistan said it would release a captured Indian pilot as a “peace gesture”, but the country’s air space is set to remain closed until Friday morning.

Other political incidents to have affected flight times in the past include the war in Ukraine in 2014, forcing carriers to go around much of the east of the country, and more recently the Qatari crisis when four of the country’s Middle Eastern neighbours banned its flag carrier from flying overhead.

What does the Foreign Office say?

The Foreign Office advice advice, updated this week, reiterated guidance against travel to Kashmir and surrounding areas.

It advised against all travel to “the immediate vicinity of the border with Pakistan [and India], other than at Wagah… Jammu and Kashmir, with the exception of travel within the city of Jammu, travel by air to the city of Jammu, and travel within the region of Ladakh”. It advised, too, against all travel to Manipur, except the state capital Imphal, where the FCO advises against all but essential travel.

It added that the tourist destinations of Pahalgam, Gulmarg and Sonamarg are included within the prohibited areas.

“Following a terrorist attack in Pulwama on February 14,” the FCO said, “there are heightened tensions between India and Pakistan, particularly across the Line of Control.

“There may be disruption to air travel in Jammu and Kashmir and northern India at short notice. You should continue to exercise caution, monitor news reports and keep up to date with this travel advice and the advice of local authorities.”

The escalated tensions might be of some concern to British Airways which last year announced it would be returning to Pakistan for the first time in 11 years. From June, the airline will fly to Islamabad three times a week from London Heathrow.

Can I can claim compensation if my flight is cancelled?

If your flight is cancelled, you have a right to a refund or a seat on an alternative service.

A spokesperson for Thai Airways said that any passenger who hold tickets on affected routes may change their itineraries free of charge.

A spokesperson for Singapore Airlines said any passengers affected should email SQ_support@singaporeair.com.sg with their six-character booking reference number and contact details for any assistance.

If your flight has been delayed, then you are eligible for compensation as set out by EU law, providing you are departing an EU airport or arriving at an EU airport on an EU carrier.  

The airline must provide food and drink appropriate to the time of day (this is often in the form of a voucher) and a means of communicating your delay or a refund on the cost of essential calls.

Upgraded transpacific flights for Delta and newly renovated aircraft for Alaska Airlines lead this week’s air travel news. 

This week Delta announced a number of new transpacific options out of its Seattle gateway. The airline is expanding its premium seat products on flights to Shanghai, Seoul-Incheon and Tokyo-Narita, allowing customers to choose from 29 Delta One Suites, 28 Delta Premium Select seats, 56 Delta Comfort+ seats and 168 Main Cabin seats on new, widebody aircraft: the low-carbon-footprint Airbus A330-900neo. The new options will be available starting July 1 on flights to Shanghai; August 1 for flights to Seoul; and August 31 for flights to Tokyo. 

Delta also reports that it is investing in a new, state-of-the-art immigration and customs facility in Seattle, set to open in 2020. 

In other new aircraft news, this week Alaska Airlines’ newly retrofitted Airbus aircraft took flight. The revamped aircraft now have a newly upgraded cabin experience that the carrier says combines the best of the Alaska Airlines cabins with the best of those from recently acquired Virgin America. New cabin features include a refreshed color palette, ambient mood lighting, advanced high-speed satellite Wi-Fi, redesigned first class Recaro seats, ergonomically-friendly tablet holders, upgraded premium and main cabin seats, conveniently-placed power outlets at every seat and a curated onboard music program.

Alaska’s Airbus fleet of A319, A320 and A321 aircraft are in the process of being updated in phases this year and by early 2020, 36 percent of the mainline fleet – including the entire Airbus fleet, Boeing 737-700s and three new Boeing MAX 9 planes – will feature the new cabin interior, the airline said.

Related Stories

Today Show Segment on Costco Travel Deals Causes Controversy

Avoya, Travel Leaders Network and Dream Vacations Win Honors

Discover Puerto Rico Aims to Lead Comeback of the Island

Mexico Tourism Board Talks Closure Timeline, Plus What’s Next

After U.S. Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, D-N.Y., unveiled the Green New Deal, Republican critics said it would eventually ground air travel.

Sen. Rick Scott, R-Fla., outlined his opposition to the Democrats’ Green New Deal in a Feb. 25th Orlando Sentinel op-ed:

“If you are not familiar with it, here’s the cliff notes version: It calls for rebuilding or retrofitting every building in America in the next 10 years, eliminating all fossil fuels in 10 years, eliminating nuclear power, and working towards ending air travel (to be replaced with high-speed rail).”

Scott described mayhem if a Democrat wins the presidency; some 2020 presidential candidates are co-sponsors of the Green New Deal.

“What then? Tear down all buildings, eliminate oil and gas, and stop air travel?”

Let’s hit the brakes right there — do the Democrats want to end air travel? 

We found that Scott is ignoring the actual text of the resolution. The resolution does not ground airplanes, either now or in the future. And climate advocates told us the elimination of air travel isn’t a practical goal.

The “Green New Deal,” resolution was introduced by Ocasio-Cortez on Feb. 7 and has 89 Democratic co-sponsors.

A companion measure in the Senate, introduced by Sen. Ed Markey, D-Mass., has nearly a dozen sponsors — all Democrats — including presidential candidates Cory Booker, Kirsten Gillibrand, Kamala Harris, Amy Klobuchar, Bernie Sanders and Elizabeth Warren.

Broadly, these resolutions address ways to curb climate change and protect the environment. Even if it were to pass both chambers, the resolution would be nonbinding.

So what does the House resolution say about air travel? In a word, nothing. It makes no mention of airplanes at all. It does call for “overhauling transportation systems in the United States to remove pollution and greenhouse gas emissions from the transportation sector as much as is technologically feasible,” which includes “investment in high-speed rail.”

We reached out to Scott’s press office and did not hear back by deadline, but the senator was probably referring to some supporting documents released by Ocasio-Cortez’s staff.

A frequently asked questions, or FAQ, document mentioned airplanes twice, stating (emphasis ours) “we aren’t sure that we’ll be able to fully get rid of farting cows and airplanes that fast, but we think we can ramp up renewable manufacturing and power production, retrofit every building in America, build the smart grid, overhaul transportation and agriculture, plant lots of trees and restore our ecosystem to get to net-zero.”

The FAQ also called for the United States to “totally overhaul transportation by massively expanding electric vehicle manufacturing, build charging stations everywhere, build out high-speed rail at a scale where air travel stops becoming necessary, create affordable public transit available to all, with goal to replace every combustion-engine vehicle.”

(For the record, according to the UC Santa Barbara ScienceLine, “cows do contribute to global warming, although in fact they mostly do so by burping rather than farting.”)

As soon as the the FAQ document became public, the idea that the Democrats wanted to make air travel obsolete was picked up by Fox News and some Republican politicians, including President Donald Trump.

Ocasio-Cortez’s press office did not reply for this fact-check, but her chief of staff previously said that there were many shared documents among various interest groups, and that the release of this particular document was a mistake.

Experts on climate change say it’s important to focus on the language in the actual resolution and not the FAQ, which carries no weight.

“It seems to me those lines from the FAQ were lighthearted and ill-considered, and it’s not clear why they were posted,” said Sean Hecht, Co-Executive Director, Emmett Institute on Climate Change and the Environment at UCLA law school.

Hecht noted that the FAQ doesn’t include any regulatory strategy to ban or even reduce air travel.

“It’s framed even in the FAQ as creating conditions where ‘air travel stops becoming necessary’ because alternatives are available — not limiting or ending air travel,” he said.

David Weiskopf, climate policy director for NextGen Climate America, said the Green New Deal calls for a “net-zero” goal, which recognizes that emissions — including from air travel — won’t be eliminated in 10 years, so there would need to find negative emissions to balance them out. (NextGen Climate America was started by billionaire Tom Steyer. In 2018, the PAC supported Scott’s Democratic opponent, Bill Nelson.)

“The comment about cows and planes is not at all an expression of a policy goal to actually eliminate either. It is delivering information that some supporters may not want to hear — that we will not zero out emissions completely, so we need some additional negative emissions — expressed in what I take to be a colloquial tone that unfortunately left it open to misconstrual by critics,” he said. “No serious observer, supporter of the Green New Deal, climate scientist, or other climate advocate would take these statements as expressing a policy aim to eliminate cows or planes.”

Air travel retains a unique role in moving people long distances.

“When people rank the difficulty of finding structural solutions to greenhouse gas emissions in various sectors, air travel is one of the hardest both technologically and practically, and there aren’t serious policy proposals yet that would solve the issue through limiting air travel or changing the energy sources for commercial aircraft on a significant scale,” Hecht said. “So it’s not a priority for policy.”

Serious steps that the United States could take to reduce emissions from air travel emissions would include more efficient planes, more direct routes and alternative bio-based low-carbon fuels.

In the long run, electric planes may be feasible, said Paul Bledsoe, a strategic advisor at the Progressive Policy Institute and a lecturer on environmental policy at American University.

“No serious climate experts advocate ending air travel — that’s simply a red-herring,” said Bledsoe, who was a climate change advisor to the Clinton White House.

Time to bring this fact-check in for a landing.

Scott wrote in an op-ed that the Democrats’ Green New Deal includes “working towards ending air travel.”

The resolution makes no mention of ending air travel. Instead, it calls for “overhauling transportation systems,” which includes “investment in high-speed rail.” Scott seized on a messaging document from Democrats that mentioned, perhaps in jest, getting rid of “farting cows and airplanes.” But we found no evidence that getting rid of airplanes is a serious policy idea from climate advocates.

We rate this statement False.

The Economist is running a series of articles on the potential impact of a no-deal Brexit on everything from trade to the island of Ireland, the economy to immigration, cars to retailing. This piece looks at the aviation industry.

THERE IS NOTHING to fear from a no-deal Brexit, say its advocates, because no such outcome would ever occur. Instead, they say, lots of “mini-deals” covering various industries would be struck. Ask Brexiteers for evidence of this claim and they point to aviation. Despite warnings from some that a no-deal Brexit would result in all flights between Britain and the European Union being grounded, in December the European Commission produced a plan to keep some air links open in that very scenario.

Get our daily newsletter

Upgrade your inbox and get our Daily Dispatch and Editor’s Picks.

The European Commission was forced to come up with a proposal of its own because there is no existing regulatory fall-back option that would allow the continuation of flights between the EU and Britain after a no-deal Brexit. Aviation is one of the few areas explicitly excluded from the remit of the World Trade Organisation, so defaulting to that body’s rules is not an option. Yet the EU’s proposals are much less generous than they first appear, and would result in higher fares and less choice for flyers.

British carriers would continue to be allowed to fly over the EU and to make landings after Brexit, although they cannot pick up or drop off cargo or passengers. These are known as the first and second freedoms of flight. The EU also says it would allow flights between Britain and the EU to continue for 12 months after Brexit day (these are called the third and fourth freedoms). And it would continue to recognise safety certificates issued by aviation regulators in Britain for nine months after Brexit occurred. But British carriers would lose their remaining freedoms of flight in the EU. This means that British airlines would no longer be able to operate freely within the bloc. Nor would European airlines be able to fly passengers between two airports in Britain, unless Britain chooses to let them in.

This is bad news for passengers for several reasons. First, the proposals would keep bilateral links open for only a year after a no-deal exit. There would still be question-marks over what happened thereafter, extending a period of Brexit-related uncertainty that has already tipped Flybmi, a British carrier, into bankruptcy. Second, the proposals would cap the number of bilateral flights between Britain and Europe during that year at 2018 levels. As the number of flights between the two rises at a rate of about 2% a year, that would limit the number of seats available and push up fares. And third, the proposals could reduce competition on air routes, especially within Britain. Without Britain’s explicit permission, European carriers such as Ryanair, the continent’s cheapest and largest airline, would no longer be able to fly within the country, again pushing up fares.

The proposals would ensure that “basic connectivity” between Britain and the EU was maintained. But the terms of the EU’s plans are so limited in nature—and so temporary—that they seem to be designed primarily to put pressure on the British government as air traffic grows. Advocates of a no-deal Brexit are right that in some areas the term is a bit of a misnomer. But in aviation, at least, a mini-deal with Europe would be punitive and likely to force Britain back to the negotiating table for a more comprehensive agreement.

See more Brexit briefs:

What would a no-deal Brexit mean for trade?
What would a no-deal Brexit mean for the island of Ireland?
What would a no-deal Brexit mean for immigration?
What would a no-deal Brexit mean for the economy?
What would a no-deal Brexit mean for the automotive industry?
What would a no-deal Brexit mean for retailing?

HONOLULU, March 1, 2019 /PRNewswire/ — As an innovator for business and personal air travel for over 15 years for corporate executives, international  visitors, entertainers, athletes, “High Rollers” and their families, Pacific Luxury Air LLC is launching a new air travel program designed to address the deficiencies which exist in today’s commercial, charter and travel card offerings. Pacific Luxury Air is expanding access for a tailored air travel product which will meet clients’ specific needs and exceed expectations.

Having provided commercial private jet charter air travel between Las Vegas, San Francisco, Los Angeles, and the Hawaiian Islands for many years, Pacific Luxury Air is expanding its premium personalized service to all of North America (Continental U.S., Canada, Mexico, Hawaiian Islands, Polynesian Caribbean Islands):

✓ ARG/US and Wyvern Quality FAA Certified

NO management fee

✓ Consistent customer service (24/7/365)

NO set hours

✓ Scheduler available 365 days per year

NO reposition cost

✓ Flexibility, convenience and reliability

NO peak time

✓ Same hourly rate in the US (includes tax)

NO blackout days

✓ Well maintained GIV/IV-SP

NO shared seating

✓ A turn-key solution

NO fuel mark-up

✓ Wi-Fi (domestic US – always, International- as available)

NO delayed communications

The company mission is to bring a fresh new approach to personalized air travel. Because clients need to focus on their business and personal priorities, Pacific Luxury Air acts as the client’s private transportation provider, scheduler and flight department. With this new business model, clients will not have to rush to the airport nor pay costly membership fees, hourly costs or irritating penalties. The company uses well-maintained Gulfstream IV/IV-SP model/series aircraft and provides a broad array of selectable customer service offerings.

All flights may be reserved or purchased by visiting www.pacificluxuryair.com or by calling 808.664.1145.

“As a prestige air transportation provider for over 15 years, Pacific Luxury Air is excited to take advantage of new technologies and new global relationships which have allowed us to extend our operating geography, bring affordable air travel to a broader audience and jet travel to almost any city in North America. Utilizing Gulfstream IV/IVSP business jets, which are the most desired form of travel for the most discriminating corporate, professional and high-income travelers, our new service escapes long check-in lines and security delays at regular commercial airports. Your time is valuable, and everyone on our team knows it,” said Pacific Luxury Air CEO Craig Gomez.

Links to Social Media:

https://www.facebook.com/pacificluxuryair

https://www.instagram.com/pacificluxuryair

About Pacific Luxury Air, LLC:
Pacific Luxury Air, LLC has operated corporate and private air charter transportation for its clients for over 15 years. The recent evolution of reservation and operation technologies are now disrupting the traditional commercial air and charter travel market. Because of this, Pacific Luxury Air, LLC can now bring its unique private aircraft product to a much broader travel audience, offering unique pricing, efficient operations, superior and caring customer service, industry-leading safety and security practices and the highest level of regulatory compliance. In addition to operating with U.S. FAA FAR 135 regulatory oversight, Pacific Luxury Air, LLC maintains the highest industry-leading quality and performance certifications (ARG/US-Platinum and Wyvern-Wingman).

Media Contact:
Craig Gomez
craig@pacificluxuryair.com
702.688.5572

Related Files

PDF PLA LLC Press Release Final – Craig Gomez.pdf

Related Links

Website

Facebook

View original content to download multimedia:http://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/pacific-luxury-air-launches-a-new-luxury-jet-offering-with-customized-air-travel-throughout-north-america-300804634.html

SOURCE Pacific Luxury Air, LLC

Related Photos:

As tensions continue to mount in Kashmir, Swiss and other European airlines have been forced to delay and reroute flights because of the disputed airspace.

Pakistan reportedly closed its airspace on Wednesday following military skirmishes with neighbouring India over the long-disputed border region of Kashmir.

The Swiss News Agency also reported that Afghanistan had closed access to its skies.

For Swiss and other European airlines, the disruption has led to delays and the rerouting of some lines. On Wednesday, flight LX146 from Delhi to Zurich took two hours longer than normal on account of the alternative route; flight LX181 from Bangkok to Zurich was forced to make an unscheduled fuel stop in Oman to compensate for the longer route.

As tension continues between Pakistan and India – who both claim Kashmir in full but rule in part – a Swiss International Air Lines spokeswoman said that the plans and potential disruption in the coming days remain unclear.

Lufthansa and Austrian airlines were also reporting delays on flights from Bangkok, Delhi, and Singapore.

+ swissinfo.ch’s in-depth coverage of Indian affairsexternal link

The tension, initially prompted by a suicide bombing in Kashmir by Pakistan-based militants on February 14, escalated on Wednesday when both India and Pakistan said they had shot down each other’s fighter jets. Videos also emerged of a captured Indian pilot.

Both countries have ordered air strikes over the past two days, the first time in history that two nuclear-armed powers have done so, while ground forces have exchanged fire in more than a dozen locations.

Neuer Inhalt

Horizontal Line

International Public Media

International Public Media Live

subscription form

Form for signing up for free newsletter.

Ernest Kao

 

Updated: Thursday, 28 Feb, 2019 6:40pm

Millennials are going crazy for the Green New Deal. Some say it’s more popular than Instagram and more influential than the Top 40, but one thing’s for sure; it has everybody talking. It’s just that those conversations might not be what the Democratic Party was expecting.

Maybe telling people their truck has got to go, air travel should become a thing of the past, nearly all the buildings in the United States need to be remodeled, and cow flatulence is now punishable by the force of law got people’s attention? President Donald Trump’s line “it sounds like a high school term paper” was an accurate description of how many of us view the green tropes of the new progressives.

Championed by Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez of New York and Sen. Ed Markley of Massachusetts, the idea of an earth free from climate change touched the hearts of those on the left and led the majority of Democratic presidential candidates to endorse the idea without reading the fine print…or the second sentence. Never mind the fact that the earth has always been and forever will be susceptible to changes in the climate and our attempts to eliminate this design from Washington, D.C. reflect a supreme arrogance.

The rewards for the supporters of the New Green Deal? Money for those unwilling to work, justice on behalf of the marginalized, no more gasoline and no more pesticides – all for the low cost of a couple trillion dollars. Lucky for those presidential hopefuls and political leaders alike who aspire for the deal, they’ll have a chance to vote on the measure thanks to Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell. No doubt a vote for the New Green Deal will demonstrate to the true believers how committed they are to a green planet and all the social justice attached thereto.

If you listen to much of the mainstream media you’ll often hear that the future of our country rests with the millennials cheering on the Green New Deal, people like Reps. Ocasio-Cortez or Ilhan Omar of Minnesota. “The presidency of Trump and the GOP’s electoral success in recent years is nothing more than a fluke,” Omar insists. According to the young progressives now pushing the New Green Deal, the future belongs to the millennial who is well versed in the merits of socialism, the philosophy of social justice, and environmental activism.

These notions wouldn’t be out of place on NPR or MSNBC. The radical left has been making similar arguments for decades. Now, such progressive policy positions are creeping into the mainstream of a party, which seeks to control the White House.

The Green New Deal is preposterous on its face. However, despite being doomed to fail, it does provide a window into how the highly educated, coastal, liberal elite in America think. Solutions which amount to the complete deconstruction of the American economy in an effort to cure the environment and combat social justice sounds radical to the average American, yet at elite universities, the coffee shops of urban cities, and the newsrooms of media’s upper echelon, the Green Deal  is Avant Garde. It is woke. It is hip. In short, it is the new black.

Despite the mainstream media’s fascination and coronation of AOC and her tribe, polling shows millennials as a whole don’t want a Green New Deal, a 70% marginal tax rate, the recognition of infinite genders, or the abolition of national borders. Despite the Democratic Party moving towards progressivism and the Republican Party moving towards statist cronyism, the people of America still want a representative republic where ideas like individual liberty, free markets, limited government, and personal responsibility reign.

If coastal elitists want to understand how those of us in “fly over country” feel about a world without trucks, grilled meat, or homecoming queens, I suggest they attend a tailgate at an Ole Miss or Mississippi State game day this fall and ask around. It’s a pretty safe bet there will be more than a couple of enthusiastic answers.

If you like what you’re reading from Mississippi Center for Public Policy, make sure you don’t miss anything. Sign up today.

Notice: JavaScript is required for this content.

TSA got back to the basics with some tips on air travel to make checkpoints quick and easy this afternoon at the Gulfport-Biloxi International Airport.

TSA had a table full of items that had been stopped only in the last month with items like knives, wrenches, and other things that could be used as a weapon.

They want to remind people who might be traveling with spring break travels around the corner what’s acceptable and what’s not. Just follow the 3-1-1 rule. Liquids, aerosols, and creams must be less than 3.4 ounces, must be in a one quart-sized plastic bag, and one bag is permitted per passenger.

Guns have also been a problem for the Gulfport-Biloxi International Airport, they have found two this year. TSA Spokesperson Sari Koshetz said, “First and foremost leave your guns at home. People face civil penalties from the TSA from up to $13,000 and possible arrests if you bring your firearm to the checkpoint, but also keep in mind that you can’t have anything that could be considered a bludgeoned for instance a giant hammer or a giant tool. You don’t want anybody sitting next to you on the plane to have these hazardous items. We also want to put this word out so that your time and stress level will be less at the checkpoint.”

If you are in doubt about an item, it is better to just put it with your checked baggage.