Over a decade after the retirement of the Concorde, some companies are working to bring back supersonic air travel.

New Engine Milestone

After the retirement of the Concorde in 2003, supersonic commercial air travel came to an end. With an average speed just above Mach 2 (1,354 mph), the Concorde’s fastest Transatlantic trip between New York and London occurred in 1996, lasting just 2 hours 52 minutes and 59 seconds.

RELATED: NASA SELECTS LOCKHEED MARTIN TO DESIGN AND BUILD A QUIET SUPERSONIC AIRCRAFT

Its retirement was seen by many as a real loss even as there were serious problems with commercial supersonic air travel, primarily the noise. It was prohibited from flying at supersonic speeds over land to spare those down below from the loud sonic boom as it flew. Though a sonic boom seems like a single event, the boom itself is relative to the observer, the boom itself simply being the moment the compressed sound waves of the aircraft finally reaching the observer. Traveling over land, a supersonic aircraft is essentially raking the ground below with its sonic boom.

Thanks to new aircraft designs, there is hope that these booms can be mitigated and supersonic air travel can make a comeback, with several companies betting that it will. UK-based Reaction Engines has been working to produce an engine that they hope will be more than 250 percent faster than the ones used on the Concorde.

Recent tests on the precooler component Reaction Engines has built for its SABRE engine design have achieved air intake cooling of air up to 420 degrees Celsius (~788 degrees Fahrenheit), the air temperature experienced while traveling at Mach 3.3. They hope to get their SABRE engine precooler to the point where it can handle air temperatures in excess of the 1,000 degrees Celsius (~1,800 degrees Fahrenheit) experienced at Mach 5.

“This is a hugely significant milestone which has seen Reaction Engines’ proprietary precooler technology achieve unparalleled heat transfer performance,” said Mark Thomas, CEO of Reaction Engines. “The [test engine] met all test objectives and the successful initial tests highlight how our precooler delivers world-leading heat transfer capabilities at low weight and compact size.

“This provides an important validation of our heat exchanger and thermal management technology portfolio which has application across emerging areas such as very high-speed flight, hybrid electric aviation and integrated vehicle thermal management.”

Testing of the precooler took place in Colorado, but after securing more than £100 million in public and private funding—including investments from BAE Systems, Rolls-Royce, and Boeing HorizonX—Reaction Engines is finishing construction of a test site in Westcott, Buckinghamshire in the UK where it will begin testing the SABRE Engine core.

Boeing’s Hypersonic Aircraft Design

Last year, Boeing unveiled a hypersonic aircraft design concept that they hope can hit Mach 5, capable of traveling around 3,806 mph at sea level. While only in the concept stage at the moment, Kevin Bowcutt, senior technical fellow and chief scientist of hypersonics at Boeing, believes that these aircraft could be in the air in the next 20 to 30 years.

“We’re excited about the potential of hypersonic technology to connect the world faster than ever before,” he said. “Boeing is building upon a foundation of six decades of work designing, developing and flying experimental hypersonic vehicles, which makes us the right company to lead the effort in bringing this technology to market in the future.”

Maybe the skies are getting a little friendlier.

Last year, major airlines in America received the best score ever in the 29-year history of an annual study that tracks consumer complaints, on-time performance and mishaps like mishandled baggage and passengers getting bumped off oversold flights.

The Airline Quality Rating awarded its best overall score ever and noted that industry scores have been improving each year since 2015.

The research found:

• There were 8,865 consumer complaints filed last year with the U.S. Department of Transportation, a 23% decrease from 11,570 complaints filed in 2017.

• Involuntary denied boardings — also known as being bumped from a flight — last year shrank to .14 per 10,000 passengers, compared to .34 per 10,000 passengers in 2017.

• Baggage mix-ups decreased to 2.43 per 1,000 passengers from 2.46 in 2017.

• However, on-time arrivals eked downward, slipping to 79.6% in 2018 compared to 80.2% the year before.

“Improvement in industry performance in three of four areas tracked in the ratings is a positive sign for consumers and airlines alike,” wrote the study authors, Dr. Brent Bowen, a professor and former dean at Embry-Riddle Aeronautical University’s College of Aviation, and Dr. Dean Headley, an emeritus professor at Wichita State University.

The Airline Quality Rating passed the airline industry as a whole with flying colors But some carriers fared better than others.

Delta Airlines

DAL, -0.93%

 flew to the top of the nine ranked airline companies. The airline’s on-time performance edged up, its mishandled baggage rate was essentially the same and customer complaints dropped, according to the study. It placed second in the previous ranking behind Alaska Airlines

ALK, -1.13%

which sunk to fourth in the most recent study.

Frontier Airlines came in last. Its on-time performance was 69% in 2018, compared to 78% in 2017. Its denied boarding climbed, as did its consumer complaint rate even while mishandled baggage became less frequent. A request for comment to the Denver, Colo.-based airline offering “low fares done right” was not immediately returned.

Smoother performance is coinciding with high-altitude airline revenues. Revenue increased from $155 billion to $222 billion between 2009 and 2017, according to a report from Deloitte.

Still, it’s not as if air travel grousing has gone away. Stories about misdaventures in flying sprout up routinely, like a mother and child who were forced off a plane allegedly because of their skin condition or a doctor who was dragged down the aisle of an overbooked flight.

Indeed, the findings arrive with the airlines industry in the news for the wrong reasons.

Weeks ago, an Ethiopian Airlines crash killed all 157 people on a flight using a Boeing 737 Max 8. That was the same aircraft that crashed five months earlier and killed all 189 people in a Lion Airlines flight. Dennis Muilenburg, CEO of Boeing

BA, -1.38%

has apologized for the crashes and pledged to have the aircraft’s software fixed.

Though airline industry scores have been continuously improving in the past several years, Headley, the report’s co-author, said David Dao’s 2017 dragging off a United

UAL, -0.67%

  flight was a key moment. “People became aware it happened and could happen to them. … It made a dramatic improvement,” he said. (A United spokeswoman called the incident a “defining moment” that all of the company’s employees could learn from; the airline later reached an undisclosed settlement with Dao.)

While complaints to the Department of Transportation were down, that doesn’t necessarily mean passenger satisfaction was up, Headley noted. It could be that fed up consumers weren’t even bothering to file complaints in the first place, he said. The carriers didn’t share the number of complaints filed directly with them, he noted.

Paul Hudson, president of FlyersRights.org, a passenger advocacy group,shrugged off the positive-sounding findings. “This is a survey by and for the airline industry and does not represent a true consumer survey,” he told MarketWatch. The survey didn’t get into passenger issues like “price and value for the money, seating and passenger space, boarding, food, frequent flyer programs, reliability, safety, reservation services or any real service comparisons,” he said. The study also only looked at domestic air travel, Hudson said.

Headley defended the results, which, he noted, wasn’t a survey but an analysis of publicly-available facts. Besides, data on punctuality, performance and complaints all have a “decidedly consumer perspective,” he said.

Shares of Delta have been up 15.49% so far this year compared to a 12.76% increase for the Dow Jones Industrial

DJIA, -0.51%

 and a 15.25% increase for the SP 500

SPX, -0.35%

Get a daily roundup of the top reads in personal finance delivered to your inbox. Subscribe to MarketWatch’s free Personal Finance Daily newsletter. Sign up here.

Andrew Keshner is a personal finance reporter based in New York.

We Want to
Hear from You

Join the conversation

Comment

Although everyone in Southeast Asia can fly these days due to the proliferation of low-cost airlines, the experience is not necessarily pleasant with long queues and constantly having to present travel documents to different parties.

Airports are struggling to cope with growing passenger numbers who are also becoming more demanding. This makes them good testbeds for smart technology.

In Southeast Asia, Singapore’s Changi Airport is leading the charge in innovation. This is par for the course in tech-driven Singapore and its quest to form a Smart Nation. Early last year, the Changi Airport Group (CAG) launched Living Lab in collaboration with the Singapore Economic Development Board (EDB).

The Living Lab will use Changi’s year-old Terminal 4 as a live testbed for new technologies. It focuses on several areas, namely automation and robotics, data analytics, the Internet of Things (IoT), security technologies and smart infrastructure management.

A laboratory approach is also being adopted by San Diego International Airport which runs an Innovation Lab program twice annually for companies to pitch and present airport-related products and services. Successful projects are then implemented at the airport. Among the more notable innovations was the first reusable, portable mobile device charging system and an airport-wide mobile delivery app that lets passengers order food and retail items and have them delivered to specific locations within the terminal.

Groupe ADP, which built and manages the Paris-Charles de Gaulle, Paris-Orly and Paris-Le Bourget airports launched an Innovation Hub last year as an incubator for airport-related technologies. Groupe ADP also offers space at its headquarters to host showrooms, workshops and meetings with partners and staff.

The International Air Transport Association (IATA) conducts annual surveys to gain insight into what passengers want. Last year, its Global Passenger Survey reported passengers wanting more technology to make airport processes more efficient.

The IATA’s 2018 Global Passenger Survey found that overall, passengers want real time journey information delivered to their personal devices and biometric identification to facilitate their travel processes.

The survey of 10,408 respondents from 145 countries also found that passengers want more automation of airport processes, wait times of less than 10 minutes at security and immigration and to be able to track their bags throughout their journey.

One ID concept

The IATA is promoting a One ID concept to replace the present repetitive process of showing boarding passes and passports to different parties for different purposes. Each of these stakeholders – airlines, border control, customs and screening authorities – developed their processes independently of each other. With One ID, the use of trusted digital identity, biometric recognition and a shared collaborative identity management platform will simplify the process. This can reduce queue and wait times, and prevent the use of false identification papers, in cases of human trafficking and evading the law.

The IATA is rolling out plans to use radio frequency identification (RFID) in baggage tags starting in 2020. With RFID chips or inlays in tags, baggage can be tracked at virtually any point in all airport processes, minimising the risk of lost bags, theft and fraud.

Airports in London, Tokyo and Singapore, among others, are pushing for autonomous equipment: self-driving vehicles, automated baggage handling and transport systems and even aerobridges that align themselves to aircraft doors.

Tokyo Airport deploys friendly-looking robots to help with airport security, transportation, logistics and translations.

Taiwan’s Songshan and Taoyuan international airports have robots that tell passengers their departure details and weather updates for their destinations by simply scanning boarding passes. They also take the opportunity to plug the latest duty-free special offers and airline promotions.

South Korea’s Incheon Airport also deploys robots to provide information and directions to departure gates. They move autonomously and navigate with cameras, ultrasonic, laser and proximity sensors, recognise voice and can process language and display information on LCD screens.

Changi Airport’s Terminal 4 is testing a remote-controlled vehicle that can transport baggage from a plane to the baggage handling area in 10 minutes. It also uses bots to deliver food to lounges. Its kitchens have assembly lines that work with just nine employees instead of 45. It uses an automated cutlery packing system to improve productivity.

The airport is also testing a system for air traffic controllers to monitor aircraft using digital infrared cameras to improve visibility during hazy or low-visibility conditions.

Self-service is also a major feature. Passengers can collect their boarding passes and print bag tags and drop in their check-in baggage at automated kiosks. Border control is automated: passengers scan their passport, boarding passes and fingerprints at automated immigration gates. To board the plane, passengers scan their boarding passes at automated boarding gates. At all these gates, passengers’ photos are taken for identity verification.

Technologies tested and refined in Changi’s smallest terminal will eventually be used for its biggest. The 1,000-hectare Terminal 5, due to open in 2030, will be able to accommodate 50 million passengers a year.

The future of airports will see more extensive and innovative use of artificial intelligence (AI), robotics, biometrics and automation. Everyone can fly, but they will have to do things for themselves.

This article was first published by The ASEAN Post on 27 September 2018 and has been updated to reflect the latest data.

Related articles:

The future of aviation in Southeast Asia

Is Southeast Asia ready for self-driving taxis?

Singapore opens new, high-tech airport terminal
 

OPINION: I love travel and, in theory, I don’t mind flying at all. They bring you food, you can’t (currently) use the internet and, most of the time, there are movies to watch.

Then, I’m at the airport and one small bottle of water costs $8 and there’s nowhere to plug my phone in. Suddenly, I’m supremely grouchy and that’s before I’ve folded myself into a rock-hard seat next to someone who thinks it’s appropriate to take their shoes and socks off in public.

People complain about babies crying on planes, but I think if we were all a bit more honest, we’d be sobbing too. You’re trapped up there and forced to contemplate your own mortality between episodes of New Girl. It’s all a bit much.

Inspired by those same babies, I’ve got a self-soothing routine I enact on any flight longer than an hour or so. It starts before I even get to the airport, when I download a hundred hours of podcasts (thank god Invisibilia is back) and do a little shopping. On board, steeled and prepared, I’ll put on a fashion documentary and get to work.

READ MORE:
* The beauty routine that maximises duvet time
* Victoria Beckham’s beauty line
* In my beauty bag: YouTube singer Emily Jane Hazell

I tend to start with a sheet mask, like the Karuna Clarifying Face Mask ($14). I know I’m not the only person who tends to break out after a flight. The ginger, honey and salicylic acid on hand here will knock the balance of probability in the right direction. Do this in the bathroom and emerge looking absolutely cursed. Perfect.

Another weapon against breakouts is a spot of hand-sanitiser. I don’t tend to use this stuff in real life because I like to keep my immune system on its toes, but I don’t want to put plane bugs on my face. Dr Bronner’s Lavender Organic Hand Sanitiser ($12) smells significantly better than most and the spray format means you’re unlikely end up with half the bottle on your hands at once.

Similarly, Nivea Creme in the 60ml blue tin ($6) is ideal for flying. It’s not liquid, so the change in air pressure won’t make it go everywhere, and it’s small enough to get through security. Dry air-conditioned skin will drink this classic product.

For a luxurious burst of moisture, try Omorovicza Queen of Hungary Mist ($33) for 30ml. Purifying as well as hydrating, it’s made with orange blossom and rose.

In 1992, the U.S. witnessed the trial of John Gotti, the election of President Bill Clinton and the devastating arrival of Hurricane Andrew on the Florida coastline, causing a then-record $25 billion in damage. Further afield, it was also the year that Prince Charles initiated the world’s most-watched break-up by separating from Princess Diana.

So, it’s only natural that the creation of something as obscure as the European Union’s Internal Market for Aviation went largely unnoticed. But the deal revolutionized travel in Europe and is now getting renewed attention as the era of cheap flights it ushered in begins to fade.

Prior to its creation, European air travel was split into a series of distinct, largely captive, domestic markets, each often dominated by a single state-owned national flag carrier such as British Airways or Air France. The Internal Market rejuvenated this low-competition, high-fare environment by replacing the patchwork of national regulations with a single set of EU rules that removed restrictions on the routes, fares, and flights that airlines could operate. For the first time ever, European airlines could fly in and out of any airport they wished and charge customers any price they wanted

Travel for the masses

The result? Plummeting flight prices as the likes of Ireland’s Ryanair and the U.K.’s easyJet stepped into the newly relaxed—and massively expanded—market with a low-cost business model that eliminated all non-essential services. Its fliers got no complimentary food, no in-flight entertainment, and had no option for business-class seating. What they did get, however, was the opportunity to explore Europe in a way never deemed possible before: a family trip from Milan to Paris now costs 16 times less than in 1992—with the minimum price of a ticket falling from over €400 ($450) to about €25 ($28) today.

The once luxurious experience of air travel was essentially stripped down to the studs; once reserved for the wealthy tourist or the well-looked-after business traveler, it was now downright accessible. And Europeans hopped onboard—by the hoards.

Intra-European air travel has tripled since then, with over a billion passengers marching down jet bridges in 2017 alone. Air travel now accounts for 3.3% of all EU employment and 4.1% of the bloc’s entire GDP, according to the Air Transport Action Group (ATAG). The aviation industry supports 12.2 million jobs and accounts for $823 billion in economic activity.

No wonder Ryanair CEO Michael O’Leary described the Internal Market as “the stand-out achievement of the EU” in celebration of its 25th anniversary back in 2017. Former easyJet CEO Carolyn McCall said the deal “democratized air travel for all” on the same occasion.

Budget airlines go under

Despite the soaring success of low-cost aviation in Europe over the past two decades, ominous clouds have recently started to gather. While Ryanair and easyJet account for 19% of the EU aviation market, other low-cost carriers that sought to capitalize on Europe’s wide-open market have run out of runway.

“[T]here is a very long tail of poorly performing airlines,” says Brian Pearce, chief economist of the International Air Transport Association (IATA).

Since August 2017, the sector has waved goodbye to a string of discount airlines, including Air Berlin, Monarch, Primera, Small Planet, Azur, Cobalt, VLM, PrivatAir and Icelandic carrier WOW, which collapsed last month.

At the same time, British low-cost carrier Flybe—which recently canceled dozens of flights amid talk of jobs cuts—is currently being rebranded as Connect Airways under a consortium involving Virgin Atlantic. The fate of Italy’s bankrupt flag carrier Alitalia hangs in the balance—as does that of Slovenia’s Adria Airways, which was recapitalized to the tune of €4 million ($4.5 million) in December after the Civil Aviation Agency of Slovenia ordered it to provide evidence of its financial stability.

So, why is the dream of accessible air travel in Europe starting to dim?

‘They just get squeezed’

“The reason you’re seeing a series of failures—which are mostly smaller airlines—reflects the fact that Europe has an awful lot of airlines,” says Pearce. “There are something like 200 airlines offering scheduled services within Europe,” he says. “If you look at the North American market, including Canada, it’s less than 100.” Eighty percent of airline seats in the U.S. and Canada are supplied by just seven airlines; in Europe, it takes 28 airlines to supply the same number, according to Pearce.

The relative success of the European air industry—which recorded a 5.7% annual increase in flight traffic across 2018—has encouraged airlines to make more and more seats available through a combination of extra flights and larger aircraft, to the point that they have now run ahead of actual passenger demand.

At the same time, carriers had to budget for higher costs in much of 2018 due to increased wages and a 20.5% rise in global fuel prices. Unlike the U.S., a number of airlines also chose to hedge their fuel contracts, meaning they continue to pay higher prices at a time when fuel costs have actually dropped 3.2% compared to the equivalent period in 2018.

The result is that ticket prices have dropped, and in a period of rising costs, this has proved to be fatal for some low-cost carriers.

“They just get squeezed because the margins are very low, and they just run out of finance in the end, says Dan Elliott, Director in Transport and Water at Frontier Economics

It is for this reason that Europe’s most flown-on airlines are those that combine broad financial shoulders with a laser-like focus on costs. Together, Ryanair, easyJet and the big-three major network airlines Lufthansa, International Consolidated Airlines (Aer Lingus, British Airways, Iberia and Vueling), and Air France-KLM accounted for 50% of all EU air travel in 2018, according to Scope Ratings.

“Ryanair will negotiate on absolutely everything and they can’t afford to sleep for a second because even a minor change in the price of airline fuel, multiplied up over the amount of output they have suddenly becomes enormous,” says aviation expert John Strickland from JLS Consulting.

Secrets for success

Yet it’s not all bleak news for Europe’s smaller low-cost carriers. On Wednesday, Hungarian newcomer Wizz Air, founded in 2004, announced that earnings in the final quarter of the year to March 31 had been in line with expectations and that net profit would be at the upper half of its previous guidance range of €270 million ($303 million) and €300 million ($336 million). Shares of Wizz Air rose by 4.8% on the news, valuing the company at about $2.9 billion. As with Ryanair and easyJet, the airline is able to handle the considerable seasonal troughs by selling winter flights for as little as $12 to drive ancillary revenue, such as bag checking, car hire, and hotel bookings.

“In some ways, the seats are becoming a catalyst to other revenues,” says Strickland. “Ryanair themselves have said that they want to become the Amazon of travel. The idea is that you go to the Ryanair website and book all sorts of things and not just flights.”

Problem is, Wizz is very much an exception to the rule. The IATA estimates that 70% of European operating profits are now being generated by the big-three long-haul network airlines, while much of the remaining 30% comes from Wizz, Ryanair and easyJet, plus medium-sized Turkish Airlines and Aeroflot.

“A significant number of smaller and medium-sized European airlines are loss-making or barely profitable,” states an IATA economics report released in January.

“If you look at the European airline industry in aggregate, it’s actually producing pretty good profits at the moment,” says chief economist Pearce. “The issue is that a large proportion of those profits are being produced by the big guys.”

Instead of protecting rights of passengers, the government has favoured the airlines.

 

The number of domestic air passengers, which stands at about 125 lakhs is likely to double by 2025 growing at double digits annually. Instead of protecting rights and service to passengers, the government has favoured the airlines.Between 2008 to 2010 the airlines regulator Directorate General of Civil Aviation (DGCA) framed few rules for air passenger facilitation under the Civil Aviation Requirement rules. The Air Passengers Charter (APC) announced by the Ministry of Civil Aviation just before the announcement of General Elections is mainly an adaptation of these rules while modifying some of them. In this, APC Ministry has concentrated mainly on five areas of passenger grievances:-

(i) Delay in departure of flights (ii) Compensation on flight cancellation (iii) Compensation on denial of boarding due to over booking (iv) Refund policy on cancellation of booking (v) Compensation on lost and damaged check-in baggage for domestic and international fliers .

It has also provided gateways in the form of force majeure clauses to exempt airlines from paying compensation specified. It has also provided for escalation of grievance redressal through Air Sewa App.

DELAY OF FLIGHTS

The following categories of checked in on time passengers who will suffer delays in their respective flights will be provided hospitality service like free of charge refreshment and meal by the airlines.

(i) When flights are delayed and the passengers have already checked in on time  and delay is 2 hrs or more and having block journey period of 2hr 30 min are eligible for hospitality service like   refreshment and meal free of charge. Bulk of domestic flights are not covered.

(ii) The passengers whose flight is delayed 3hrs or more and having journey block time of more than 2hrs 30 minute and up to 5hrs are eligible for hospitality service. Only long distance flights like those from Delhi to Trivandrum are covered.

(iii) Other passengers not belonging to the above two categories and delay is 4hrs or more are eligible for hospitality service. Passengers should be offered with refreshment and meals free of charge.

(iv) If the delay is expected to be 6 hrs or more, airlines should offer an option of either an alternate flight within this period or full refund of ticket. Airlines shall arrange alternate flight within 6 hours of scheduled departure of the  original flight or refund full fare to the passengers. No
compensation for delay has been prescribed.

(v) Passengers having departure time between 20:00 pm and 03:00 am and delay of more than 6 hrs, airlines shall arrange free hotel accommodation .

The charter has distinguished journey block time as (i) below 2-30 hrs and (ii)  above 2-30 hrs which
account for a small no of flights. No passenger will be provided any hospitality
service if the delay is less than 2 hrs .

FLIGHT CANCELLATION

The cases where flights have been cancelled and intimated/not intimated to the passenger before 2 weeks and up to 24hrs of scheduled departure of the flight are dealt here .

APC has provided compensation in several stages as in the line of CAR Rules 3 Series M part IV dated 6 August 2010 revision on 14 January 2011. The compensation provided are as
follows :

Case I: If passengers are well informed 2 weeks before and up to 24hr of the scheduled departure of the flight–passenger can opt for alternate flight or refund full fare with no compensation.

Case II: If the passengers are not informed as per the above, the airlines shall either provide alternate flight as acceptable to the passengers or refund full fare with compensation. Compensation are computed as follows (i) for passengers having block flight time up to 1 hr Rs. 5000 or travel fare (BF + FC) whichever is less (ii) for passengers having block flight time more than 1 hr and up to 2hrs compensation will be Rs. 7500 or travel fare (BF+FC) whichever is less. (iii) for passengers having block flight time more than 2 hrs , compensation will be Rs. 10000 or fare value (BF+FC) which ever is less. Passengers are requested to be alert in providing their  contact number, email id etc while booking their flight.

COMPENSATION ON DENIAL OF BOARDING

Generally the airlines are at present over-booking about 20% of the total capacity of the flight in order to compensate loss owing to the last moment cancellation of booking and unexpected ‘No Show’ instances. If the flight is over-booked and the left out passengers have confirmed tickets, they should be dealt with in the following manner:

(i) Arranging alternate flight within one hour of scheduled departure of original flight– no compensation is to be provided.

(ii) Failing to provide an alternate flight within one hour and able to arrange within 24 hrs of booked scheduled departure flight a compensation of 200% of (BF+FC) subject to the maximum Rs. 10000 is to be provided.

(iii) If alternate flight is arranged after 24 hrs, a compensation of 400% of (BF+FC) subject to the maximum Rs. 20000 is to be provided.

(iv) If no alternate flight is opted by the passengers, full fare refund and compensation of 400% of (BF+FC) subject to the maximum of Rs. 20000 is to be provided.

Refund policy on cancellation of booked ticket

Airlines are charging cancellation fee according to their will. The refund policy of cancelled tickets of different airlines is still in shadow. In some cases the cancellation charges are more than 50% of the full fare of the ticket. Air Sewa has given guidelines that cancellation charges in any case must not be greater than the sum of basic fare and fuel charges. Perhaps, the cancellation  charges may be collected  equal to the sum of basic fare and fuel surcharges. Moreover, if tickets are purchased through agents, they also charge their own handling  and cancellation fees. This issue has not been addressed. In this Charter, differentall aspects of refund  have not been addressed effectively. An in-depth clarification on this issue is required. Previously, some passenger association have raised the voice against airlines refund policy and suggested that cancellation charges will not be more than 1% of total air fare irrespective of time limit.

Compensation on lost or damage of checked in baggage

(i) For International flight, compensation is limited to  SDR 1131.

(ii) For Domestic flight, compensation is limited to Rs. 20000.

Previously compensation was granted on the basis of weight of the lost baggage at Rs 450-500/kg .

Force majeure clause has been mentioned by which an airline can escape and avoid paying compensation to the passengers when flights are cancelled or delayed. Who will verify what is the cause canacellation or delay due to  technical fault, ATC regulation and control, weather disruption etc. for which no compensation are to be paid? The Minsitry has been more sympathetic to airlines than that of
passengers.

The APC is welcome but it has not paid attention to several areas where passengers are practically deprived of their legitimate claim : A few such problems are described below:

(i) No showcases: Those standing in check-in ‘Q’ are denied boarding with a false claim that the check-in period is over and they are marked as ‘No Show’. Such passengers who are denied refund also.

(ii) Refund of cancelled tickets : The refund policy of cancelled tickets of different airlines are opaque, and a passenger is at mercy of the airline. In some cases the cancellation charges are more than 50% of the full fare of the ticket. Air Sewa has given a guideline that cancellation charges in any case must not be greater than the sum of basic fare and fuel charges. Perhaps, the cancellation charges may be collected equal to the sum of basic fare and fuel surcharges . Moreover, if tickets are purchased through agents , they are also charging  their own handling  and cancellation fees. An in-depth clarification on this issue is required .

(iii) Proper grievance redressal agency: There is no mention about any centralised passengers grievance redressal agency empowered by law, where affected passengers can lodge their complaints for relief. There was a long pending demand of passengers for creation of air passenger ombudsman  but there is no sign of fulfillment of this demand. Much has been left undone and we can hope that the new government after general elections can address the deficiencies in this Charter.

Prof Sri Ram Khanna is managing editor of Consumer Voice and former Dean and head of Commerce, Delhi School of Economics. Consumer Voice is a voluntary consumer organisation that does comparative testing of consumer products in laboratories to educate the consumer: www.consumer-voice.org

 

Will be used in accordance with our User Agreement and Privacy Policy

A grassroots movement calling for Kiwis to stay firmly on the ground is taking flight.

It’s asking everyday travellers to keep out of the skies in a bid to protect the environment.

Auckland physicist Professor Shaun Hendy decided to give up air travel for a year to limit his carbon footprint.

“It was adding up the carbon emissions that I was responsible for,” he told Newshub. “I was about three times the average Kiwi as an academic travelling to conferences.”

• Scientist warns of climate change’s effects on New Zealand
• How NZ must transform to combat climate change
• Opinion: Climate change strike should be celebrated, not ridiculed

He documented his travels along the way, from stormy drama on the Cook Strait ferry to a bus trip through Bulls on his way home from Wellington.

“Lovely trip, it does take a day so you’ve got to commit to it.”

The cost of flying is going down, but the cost to the environment is becoming much clearer.

If you fly the 496km between Auckland and Wellington, you emit around 150kg of carbon dioxide equivalent. A medium-sized car making the same journey emits about a third less, while a bus, train and electric car all have significantly lower emissions – just under 55kg between all three of them.

Air travel is vital to the country’s trade, investment and tourism, and new technology is making it more efficient. But there’s no disputing the boom in air travel is having an impact on climate.

“Per kilometre, flying in a plane puts out more carbon dioxide than pretty much every other form of travel,” Victoria University climate scientist James Renwick said.

Stats NZ data shows New Zealand residents took more than 3 million flights in 2018. One Auckland passenger flew 639,000km – the equivalent of 15 circuits around the Earth.

But if you’re not ready to swap the skies for the roads yet, there are some alternatives.

Both Air New Zealand and Jetstar have a carbon buyback scheme in which travellers pay a small fee to offset the emissions generated by their ticket.

Aviation commentator Irene King said it’s a positive step, but the airlines and manufacturers need to make greener planes.

“It’s supply and demand, and we know the fuel prices will go up, and so there’s massive incentive toward greater engine efficiency.”

If the movement takes off, flying from one location to the other could soon be as frowned upon as using plastic bags.

Newshub.

If you stumbled upon this page, chances are that you are planning a golf trip – and that you are planning to go further than your local golf course. More precisely, you are planning to go on a golfing trip by a plane.

While getting your golfing equipment to your destination is easy if you are driving – just throw it in the trunk of your car and go – it gets a bit more confusing when traveling by air. Especially nowadays when airlines make it sometimes hard to figure out even what the regular luggage allowance is.

Because of that, I looked into the issue and am reporting my findings back to you.

Continue reading to learn what the best golf club cases for air travel are (if you can’t wait, here’s one of them: SKB 2SKB-4814W Deluxe ATA Golf Travel Case), how to pack your golf equipment before heading to the airport in a way that doesn’t get it damaged, and what the airline rules are when flying with golf clubs and other equipment.

 

4 Best Golf Club Cases for (Not Only) Air Travel

First, let’s take a look at some of the golf club cases that are suitable for air travel.

While the one that’s best for your needs will differ, in most cases, the SKB 2SKB-4814W Deluxe ATA Golf Travel Case will be the ideal one to get if you plan to fly with your golf equipment.

Also keep in mind that if you go with the Samsonite and Founders Club cases, the airline might require you to sign a limited release when checking the bags in as one of them is not a “true” hard case, and the other one is soft shell.

Anyways, let’s jump in.

 

SKB 2SKB-4814W Deluxe ATA Golf Travel Case

The SKB 2SKB-4814W Deluxe ATA Golf Travel Case is one of the most popular hard shell golf cases for air travel, and rightfully so. It’s made in the United States out of high-quality polyethylene, and is made to the ATA Spec 300 specifications meaning it’s very durable.

Measuring about 82 linear inches, it is small enough to fit within most airlines’ golf equipment luggage allowance. Yet, it’s large enough to fit most common golf bags. That said, some users found its internal dimensions of 48 x 14 x 11 inches not enough to fit their bags – and so, make sure to measure your regular golf bag before getting this case.

The case weighs about 18 pounds, and is equipped with TSA-approved locks.

While the case comes with a “Million Mile Guaranty” and a 1,500 USD club coverage, many users reported not having had to use it since the bag is sturdy and protects the clubs inside perfectly.

Overall, if you are looking for a hard case for your golf equipment and your bag will fit into this one, then it should certainly be at the top of your list of cases to consider.

Read reviews of the SKB 2SKB-4814W Deluxe ATA Golf Travel Case on Amazon

 

HUNSAKER USA Iron-Locker Hard Sided Golf Travel Case

If your golf bag doesn’t fit into the previous case, make sure to check the HUNSAKER USA Iron-Locker Hard Sided Golf Travel Case which is quite similar. It comes with a lifetime warranty, and is made in the United States.

Its inside dimensions are 50 x 14 x 11.5 inches, and it weighs almost 20 pounds when empty. Because of that – even though it is equipped with three different handles and a pair of wheels – it can get quite heavy to carry around an airport when fully loaded.

While you will need a (ideally TSA-approved) lock to actually secure the bag, the case is equipped with sturdy metal latches that prevent the bag from opening.

Also, unlike some of the other models which split open, the HUNSAKER USA case has a removable top. Depending on your preferences, you might find that easier or more difficult to use.

Overall, though, while the SKB seems to be more popular, I wouldn’t stay away from this bag either – especially if the SKB is a bit too small to fit your golf bag.

Read reviews of the HUNSAKER USA Iron-Locker Hard Sided Golf Travel Case on Amazon

 

Samsonite Hard Sided Golf Travel Case

While the two cases above were “true hard cases,” the Samsonite Hard Sided Golf Travel Case is made out of ABS – and so is more one of those suitcases made out of fairly thin plastic.

Because of that, it will not protect your clubs as well as a true hard case would. At the same time, though, at just 5 pounds, it is considerably lighter than any of those. And so, if your equipment is heavy, this case might present a good compromise between sturdiness and weight.

It can hold clubs up to 46 inches long and fit a golf bag that is up to 10.5 inches wide.

One of the biggest advantages of this bag is the fact that its equipped with 4 spinner wheels, as well as 2 inline wheels – and so, you can either pull it or push it. In other words, it’s much easier to carry around than the SKB or HUNSAKER USA cases.

Overall, though, since it closes with a zipper rather than latches – and is less sturdy than the earlier options – I would only recommend this case if your equipment in combination with the true hard cases would be too heavy.

Read reviews of the Samsonite Hard Sided Golf Travel Case on Amazon

 

Founders Club Golf Travel Bag with Hard Shell Top

At about 10 pounds, the Founders Club Golf Travel Bag with Hard Shell Top is fairly light. The main reason for that is that it’s – for the most part – soft shell. What makes it alright even for air travel, though, is its hard shell top designed to protect your golf club heads.

The bag is made out of 600D polyester, and is equipped with a pair of inline wheels to make carrying it around easy. Just as with the Samsonite above, one of the downsides of this bag is the fact that it uses zippers rather than latches to close.

On the other hand, its advantage is that it can be folded when not in use, and so it takes up very little space in storage.

Overall, though, unless something prevents you from getting one of the first two cases on this list, I would avoid getting this one. And, if you decide to get it, you should consider getting a backbone for extra support to go with it.

In fact, you might find that one useful with the Samsonite bag above as well.

Read reviews of the Founders Club Golf Travel Bag with Hard Shell Top on Amazon

 

How to Pack Golf Equipment for Air Travel

First, let’s take a look at what TSA says about traveling with golf equipment.

In its “What Can I Bring?” database that lists details of what items can be brought onboard, what items can be checked in, and so on, it lists four golf-related items: clubs, divot tools, balls, and tees.

Quite understandably, while it lists the latter three as permitted in both carry-on and checked luggage, golf clubs are only allowed in checked luggage.

With that in mind, how should you pack your equipment so that your golf clubs and other equipment arrives at your destination in one piece, undamaged?

First, you will have to get a travel golf bag which is completely enclosed as opposed to your regular golf bag with open top.

While there are both soft shell bags (like the Athletico Padded Golf Travel Bag) that are fairly low-cost, if you have a nice set of clubs, it’s preferable to get a hard shell case (like the SKB 2SKB-4814W Deluxe ATA Golf Travel Case) that will offer better protection.

As for actually packing the equipment, it’s about as simple as it gets since all these bags are designed to fit your regular golf bag inside. And so, rather than having to reload all your clubs, etc., you will simply place the golf bag into the travel case and close it.

Before closing the bag, though, pad the area at the top around your golf club heads with clothing to prevent them from potentially moving around the case and getting damaged (or at least use head covers). Just keep in mind that some airlines might have policies against including non-golfing items in your golf bag (or charging you extra baggage fees if you do so).

One last thing – make sure not to place any loose items (tees, etc.) into the bag, as they might get lost in case the TSA (or other security agency) decides to open your bag for inspection. And, since these cases tend to attract more attention than regular suitcases, you should try to get one that has a TSA-approved lock – that way, you will not have to leave your bag unlocked or worry about getting it broken by the TSA.

For a more visual demonstration of how to pack for a golfing trip, check the video below.

 

Flying with Golf Clubs and Other Equipment: Policies of Major Airlines

Finally, let’s take a look at the golf equipment baggage policies of some of the major airlines.

If you can’t find your airline in the list below, just search for “[airline] golf clubs” and you should find the policy of your airline easily.

Also, even if your airline is listed below, you might want to check directly with the airline before your travel since the policies change from time to time.

American Airlines

American Airlines permits travel with one golf bag which counts as a standard piece of checked luggage that contains up to 14 clubs, 12 balls, and one pair of shoes. It does not allow swingless golf club Power Strips in the bag, though.

The bag can weigh up to 50 pounds, and officially should not contain anything else other than the items mentioned above – otherwise oversize charges may apply.

In case your itinerary involves Brazil, you will be required to pay a golf equipment fee of 42.50 dollars.

See details on American Airlines’ website

Delta Air Lines

Delta Air Lines allows its passengers to travel with a single golf bag which counts as a standard piece of luggage – and so, depending on your booking class, elite status, and so on, you might have to pay a baggage fee or not.

The bag can weigh up to 50 pounds (if it exceeds that, overweight luggage fees will apply). However, it is not restricted to the standard 62 linear inches (sum of its width, height, and length) size limit. That said, bags larger than 115 linear inches are not allowed on Delta – regardless of whether or not they are golf bags.

The airline is a bit less specific (which is good) in its definition of one item of golfing equipment as it states that it contains: one golf bag with a set of clubs, balls and tees, and a pair of shoes.

It also specifies the type of luggage the equipment can be carried in. It assumes responsibility for your equipment if it’s in a hard shell case. On the other hand, if your equipment is in a soft shell bag, you will be required to sign a limited release.

See details on Delta Air Lines’ website

United Airlines

Similarly to the other two major airlines, United’s passengers can check one item of golf equipment. And, that item counts towards their standard baggage allowance.

The airline defines an item of golf equipment as follows: one golf bag containing one set of clubs, golf balls, and one pair of golf shoes. The golf bag that the equipment is in can be more than the standard 62 linear inches (as long as golf equipment is inside the bag), but standard weight restrictions and overweight fees apply.

United Airlines also mentions on its website that the golf equipment must be in a “suitable container” and that the golf bag must be in a “heavy, rigid carrying case.” Just like Delta Air Lines, while it assumes liability for equipment in a hard shell case, it does not do so for golf equipment in soft shell bags.

The airline also takes the time to inform its passengers that golf equipment – just like any non-standard luggage item – might take more time to appear on the luggage belt than standard luggage items, regardless of whether or not the customer is eligible for priority baggage handling.

See details on United Airlines’ website

Lufthansa

Unlike American Airlines, Delta, and United, Lufthansa charges an extra fee for transporting sports equipment including golf equipment regardless of your standard luggage allowance. The fee is anywhere between 80 USD to 300 USD depending on your route.

That said, the fee is waived for Star Alliance Gold members (routes to/from the US and Canada are excluded) and SWISS Golf Traveller members who are not holding an “Economy Class Light” ticket.

As for what constitutes a piece of golf luggage for Lufthansa, that’s similar to the other airlines: a golf bag with a set of clubs, balls, and tees, and a pair of golf shoes. And, the bag can measure up to 200 linear centimeters (78 inches) which is larger than the allowance on the American airlines.

See details on Lufthansa’s website

 

Summary

While the thought of packing your golf equipment and checking it in at an airline counter – thus losing control of it for a few hours – might seem daunting, it is not as bad as it looks.

The key to ensure that your golf clubs get to your destination undamaged is to get the right case for your golf bag and equipment. Even though there are soft shell cases, I recommend getting a true hard case – like the SKB 2SKB-4814W Deluxe ATA Golf Travel Case or the HUNSAKER USA Iron-Locker Hard Sided Golf Travel Case.

When it comes to airline policies regarding golf equipment, the major US carriers among others let you take a piece of golf equipment as part of your regular luggage allowance. Other carriers – such as Lufthansa – charge separate sports equipment fees.

The Government of Nunavut is just a few months away from signing new agreements it hopes will change air travel for the better.

The GN recently closed its request for proposals for new medical and duty travel contracts .

Following both a study and public consultations, it opted to combine medical and duty travel for its new round of contracts, while allowing companies to bid on up to seven routes throughout the territory.

This new set of contracts also includes air freight for general cargo and a public travel component, which requires bidders to offer a percentage of seats to be made available to the general public at an economy-class fare.

The final register lists four applicants that have filed a total of 20 proposals: 16 from Calm Air, two from Canadian North, one from First Air and one from North Star Air, owned by the Northwest Company.

Now, Nunavut’s Department of Community and Government Services will go through those proposals, with the goal of signing new agreements by the summer.

The new contracts would come into effect on January 2020.

The request for proposals represents a major shift in how the government approaches its own air travel.

This time around, the GN is looking for airlines to bid on seven different geographical regions or routes, including Nunavut’s three main regions plus major southern connections, like Iqaluit−Ottawa and Rankin Inlet−Winnipeg.

The GN plans to award the majority of the business in each region or route to a single carrier.

That sets the territory up for another potential monopoly, as the North’s two largest airlines—First Air and Canadian North—move themselves into position to merge.

With no Nunavut stake in either of those two Nunavik- and Inuvialuit-owned airlines, the GN is hoping to use its own buying power to influence ticket prices, through the contract’s public travel component.

The new contract does not require airlines to operate as many weekly flights to Nunavut communities as the current contract does; in some cases, dropping that requirement from eight to three per week.

But the Nunavut government has said it cannot say what flight schedule changes will be implemented until contracts are signed with the successful carriers.

Nunavut spent more than $60 million on medical travel and about $15 million on duty travel in 2017-18.

New contracts would be for three-year periods, with the option to renew those contracts twice, first for two years and then for one year.