quote:

---

I'M NOT SURE what was the worst thing about my first-ever flight on Tango, Air Canada's new cheapo service.

[...]

But now I think that maybe the real low point came four days earlier when, as the outbound Tango was preparing to push back from the gate in Toronto, a flight attendant asked five people sitting near the front to move to the back of the plane.

If weight wasn't shifted to the back, he explained, the jet might not be able to take off.

This was disconcerting. An Airbus 320 is not a canoe. It is not a sailing dinghy.

One does not expect that shifting five people around on a big airplane (and they weren't particularly large people) will make the difference clearing the runway and crashing.

But the five complied, moving to the back; the plane gathered speed.

As the nose of the Airbus came off the ground, metal struts inside the cabin screamed in protest.

One woman silently began to mouth a prayer.

The plane levelled off, the screaming stopped; the five were allowed to come back to their seats.

A flight attendant explained this unusual procedure by the fact that Tango crams 160 passengers into airplanes that usually hold 120.

Add the luggage; add enough fuel to fly from Toronto to Vancouver; add the extra fuel needed to battle a stiff headwind — and the result is an airplane loaded right to the edge of its regulatory gills.

Safety is our major concern, the attendant said. But he didn't look any more convinced than the woman saying her prayers.

I admit I found it odd that Air Canada seemed so surprised to discover that heavy airplanes loaded with people need a lot of fuel to fly from Toronto to Vancouver.

It's a big country, Canada. The winds are usually from the west. These facts are not unknown.

---

The reason the passengers were asked to move to the back was for balance considerations. The weight of five passengers is not going to unbalance the plane enough to make it unstable, but it could cause it to use a little more fuel in taking off, and fuel is money.

The A320's that Tango flies are hardly creaking old warhorses. In airliner terms, they're practically new. I'd rather fly on one of those than one of the ancient 737's Air Canada picked up off of Canadian. Plus, those planes were not designed for 120 people. Air Canada has simply removed the business class section. Leg room is still higher on Tango than on any other American carrier save American Airlines.

Flying in Canada these days does pose an interesting dilemna, especially for those on the left. The only choices we have left are basically Air Canada and WestJet (and on some routes, i.e. Toronto-Calgary, there is no choice at all. Air Canada or nothing).

Do we support the Air Canada monopoly, and at the same time protect the thousands of union jobs at the airline, and fly with them? Or do we fly the only valid competition, WestJet, which is a non union shop? Many people are predicting that once WestJet gets into Pearson, Air Canada is going to get creamed.

As a frequent business traveller, I depise Air Canada, and can hardly wait for WestJet to start it's new routes. Listening to the conversations in the waiting lounge, I'm not the only one who feels this way.

[ March 20, 2002: Message edited by: sheep ]

[ March 20, 2002: Message edited by: sheep ]

quote:

---

The A320's that Tango flies are hardly creaking old warhorses. In airliner terms, they're practically new. I'd rather fly on one of those than one of the ancient 737's Air Canada picked up off of Canadian. Plus, those planes were not designed for 120 people. Air Canada has simply removed the business class section. Leg room is still higher on Tango than on any other American carrier save American Airlines.

---

I'm not here to shill for them or anything, but in my one experience with Tango, this was true -- I have to tell you, that return trip (yep, Toronto-Calgary), at Christmas, was the easiest set of flights I've had in recent memory. We didn't have to schlep luggage to a connecting flight -- that's bad; and we also had to wait an hour at this end coming back for luggage -- that's standard. But none of Walkom's other horror stories happened to us, and the sandwiches I made for us, which were better than any airplane food I've ever had, were certainly worth the savings. Plus the whole flight seemed quieter and more civilized without clanky, smelly dinner service. Sorry, rasmus, but have you ever flown Canada 3000, or Air Transat? God, those were nightmares. Sardine time. Everything broken. Memories of steerage on the Titanic. Never again.

I flew Air Transat once, in 1989, and I must say I didn't mind it... but it was new, perhaps it was better then? It was no Wardair, mind you, but it was pretty much OK.

My favourite airline is Lufthansa -- quiet, efficient service, and they don't bother you with fake friendliness.

The least competent service I got was on Alitalia from Delhi to Tokyo, where the flight attendant repeatedly made oblique Japanese jokes to the Japanese woman sitting next to me.

quote:

---

My favourite airline is Lufthansa -- quiet, efficient service, and they don't bother you with fake friendliness.

---

Haven't flown them, but I loved QANTAS -- 14-hour flight from LA to Sydney notwithstanding.

In 1973 you could fly from SanFran to Vancouver for, as I hear it, $25. Rolling that forward to today would mean it would cost $125 US (and at then-prevailing exchange rates it should also mean $125 Canadian). It costs more than that today, however.