If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
The Amazing Race and airline codesharing
This column with links:
http://hasbrouck.org/blog/archives/000519.html Complete index of columns on "The Amazing Race": http://hasbrouck.org/amazingrace [There have been some attacks on my Web site that have intemittently rendered it inaccessible. I'm making some changes to make it more reliable. I'm also re-posting my last 2 columns on "The Amazing Race 6"; they should also be available now on my Web site.] ====================================== The Amazing Race 7, Episode 1 (airline codesharing) Long Beach, CA (USA) - Lima (Peru) - Ancon (Peru) - Lima (Peru) - Cusco (Peru) - Huambutio (Peru) - Pisac (Peru) - Cusco (Peru) The Amazing Race began its seventh season with the racers being required by the producers of the reality-TV show -- at the behest, presumably, of the airlines that have bought product placements within the show along with their sponsorships -- to take connecting flights from Los Angeles to Lima via Miami or New York on USA-based airlines, rather than the nonstop flight on LAN Chile, leaving at about the same time, that would have gotten them to Lima almost six hours earlier. That's exactly the same LAX-Lima flight on LAN Chile that would have been part of the fastest route for the contestants in the first leg of The Amazing Race 5 a year ago. Amazing indeed! Even given a free choice, of course, it's often difficult to figure out which airlines fly to where you want to go, especially because so many airlines put their code-share flight numbers on flights actually operated by other airlines, in order to pretend they fly to more places than they actually do. Codesharing is fraud. It gives no benefit to travellers or consumers. Airlines lie about this, but they've had "interline" agreements in place for years that allow them to offer through fares, through ticketing, through baggage checking, and frequent flyer mileage credits between airlines completely independently of which airlines' codes are placed on the flight. No actual airline service or benefit to travellers is actually dependant to the slightest degree on cadesharing. Codesharing is done for the sole purpose of misleading consumers about which airline operates the flight, which destinations the airline "serves", how many flights they actually operate to those places, and what services and amenities will be available on those flights. In a more complex way, by making a set of connections appear to be on the same airline, when it's actually between different airlines, codesharing causes flights to be ranked higher in the responses to flight availability requests provided to travel agencies by Computerized Reservation Systems -- misleading travellers directly by distorting which connections are shown first by travel agency Web sites, and misleading travellers indirectly by misleading offline travel agents who have no easy way, in any of the CRS's I've used, to override the display mis-prioritization of interline connections fraudulaently labeled as online codeshare connections. Quite simply, Airline X puts its shared code on a flight operated by Airline Y because it believes that more people will buy tickets on that flight if it is labelled as a flight by Airline X than if it is truthfully labelled as a flight by Airline Y. There's no "need" for that, no excuse for that, and no reason for the DOT not to exercise its authority to ban codesharing as a deceptive business practice. I've talked about this before in relation to previous seasons of The Amazing Race and, more importantly, the problems it causes for real-life travellers. This time, however, there is something you can do about it: the USA Department of Transportation (DOT) is soliciting public comments through 14 March 2005, for consideration in the DOT's first major review in years of its rules for codesharing. Not surprisingly, there's a catch: the DOT is not proposing to crack down on the deception of codesharing, but to Do The Wrong Thing by reducing the extent to which airlines have to disclose which service labelled with the airline's flight number is actually operated by other airlines. That's an outrage, and deserves the strongest public condemnation. If you've ever gone to the wrong terminal to check in, maybe even missed a flight, because it was really operated from a different terminal by a different airline; if you've ever had to change terminals inconveniently while making connections because your "online" connection between flights "on the same airline" involved a codeshare flight at a different terminal; if you've ever booked a flight you thought would be on one airline, and found yourself on a different one that you wouldn't knowingly have chosen, or wouldn't have paid as much for; if you've ever found yourself on a codeshare flight that lacked the in-flight amenities or service that the airline in whose name you booked advertises that it offers on all its own flights (but doesn't offer on flights with its label that are actually operated by other airlines) -- this is your chance to give the DOT an earful. Read the new rules proposed by the DOT and the sleazy and disingenuous arguments from United Airlines (supported by American Airlines, Delta Air Lines, US Airways, and Orbitz.com) on which they are based. If it isn't obvious what's wrong with the DOT proposal, see the argument against the proposal from Southwest Airlines (self-interested but nonetheless accurate) and my analysis of code-sharing and airline alliances. The DOT Web site also includes the complete docket of comments from airlines and the public: DOT proposal: http://dmses.dot.gov/docimages/pdf91/311330_web.pdf United Airlines petition: http://dmses.dot.gov/docimages/pdf89/295535_web.pdf Southwest Airlines comments: http://dmses.dot.gov/docimages/pdf90/299700_web.pdf My analysis of codesharing: http://hasbrouck.org/articles/alliances.html Complete docket of comments to the DOT: http://dms.dot.gov/search/searchResu...umberValue=190 83&searchType=docket By government standards, it's (relatively) easy to submit your comments: 1. Go to the comment submission Web page: http://dmses.dot.gov/submit/dspSubmission.cfm 2. Enter "19083" in the "Docket ID" box. 3. Choose "OST" [Office of the Secretary of Transportation] from the "Operating Administration" pull-down menu. 4. Click either the "Enter a Comment" or "Attach a File" box next to "Submission Method". 5. Fill in as much of your personal information as you like. (Keep in mind that whatever you fill in will be posted on the Web with your comment.) 6. Click "Continue". Depending on which option you chose, you'll either get a box to type in your comments (4000 characters maximum), or a page to upload a file of comments of any length that you've prepared on your own computer (in text, PDF, RTF,TIFF, Wordperfect, or MS-Word format). To be considered, your comments must be received by 5 p.m. Washington, DC, time on Monday, 14 March 2005. I'll pattach my own comments to this article on my Web site as soon as I've filed them. ---------------- Edward Hasbrouck http://hasbrouck.org "The Practical Nomad: How to Travel Around the World" (3rd edition, 2004) "The Practical Nomad Guide to the Online Travel Marketplace" http://www.practicalnomad.com |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
You make it sound like it is difficult to determine which flights are
codeshares. Anyone with computer skills equivalent to that of my 4-yr old should be able to determine which flights are codeshares or not. For the last several years when I have booked on flights that were codeshares, the booking engine would always give me information telling me that the flight was operated by a different carrier. On Thu, 03 Mar 2005 04:47:55 -0000, Edward Hasbrouck wrote: This column with links: http://hasbrouck.org/blog/archives/000519.html Complete index of columns on "The Amazing Race": http://hasbrouck.org/amazingrace [There have been some attacks on my Web site that have intemittently rendered it inaccessible. I'm making some changes to make it more reliable. I'm also re-posting my last 2 columns on "The Amazing Race 6"; they should also be available now on my Web site.] ====================================== The Amazing Race 7, Episode 1 (airline codesharing) Long Beach, CA (USA) - Lima (Peru) - Ancon (Peru) - Lima (Peru) - Cusco (Peru) - Huambutio (Peru) - Pisac (Peru) - Cusco (Peru) The Amazing Race began its seventh season with the racers being required by the producers of the reality-TV show -- at the behest, presumably, of the airlines that have bought product placements within the show along with their sponsorships -- to take connecting flights from Los Angeles to Lima via Miami or New York on USA-based airlines, rather than the nonstop flight on LAN Chile, leaving at about the same time, that would have gotten them to Lima almost six hours earlier. That's exactly the same LAX-Lima flight on LAN Chile that would have been part of the fastest route for the contestants in the first leg of The Amazing Race 5 a year ago. Amazing indeed! Even given a free choice, of course, it's often difficult to figure out which airlines fly to where you want to go, especially because so many airlines put their code-share flight numbers on flights actually operated by other airlines, in order to pretend they fly to more places than they actually do. Codesharing is fraud. It gives no benefit to travellers or consumers. Airlines lie about this, but they've had "interline" agreements in place for years that allow them to offer through fares, through ticketing, through baggage checking, and frequent flyer mileage credits between airlines completely independently of which airlines' codes are placed on the flight. I disagree, codesharing can be of great benefit to travellers and fraud is a pretty harsh word.. A year ago, I was scheduled on CO from LGW-EWR-MCO. The LGW-EWR segment on CO was cancelled due to weather in EWR. Because CO codeshares with VS, they were able to put me on the CO coded VS operated LGW-MCO flight. No actual airline service or benefit to travellers is actually dependant to the slightest degree on cadesharing. Codesharing is done for the sole purpose of misleading consumers about which airline operates the flight, which destinations the airline "serves", how many flights they actually operate to those places, and what services and amenities will be available on those flights. Wrong again. Last week I flew MCO-ATL-FCO-NAP on all DL coded flights with the FCO-NAP segment operated by AZ. Since the flight had a DL code rather than an AZ code, I was able to earn more miles for my DL skymiles account. DL gives a 50% bonus for flights in Y fare and AZ does not. In a more complex way, by making a set of connections appear to be on the same airline, when it's actually between different airlines, codesharing causes flights to be ranked higher in the responses to flight availability requests provided to travel agencies by Computerized Reservation Systems -- misleading travellers directly by distorting which connections are shown first by travel agency Web sites, and misleading travellers indirectly by misleading offline travel agents who have no easy way, in any of the CRS's I've used, to override the display mis-prioritization of interline connections fraudulaently labeled as online codeshare connections. If a TA cannot determine which flights are codeshares and is unable to sort through which ones are and are not codeshares on a list of available flights, then (s)he needs to find a different line of work. Quite simply, Airline X puts its shared code on a flight operated by Airline Y because it believes that more people will buy tickets on that flight if it is labelled as a flight by Airline X than if it is truthfully labelled as a flight by Airline Y. There's no "need" for that, no excuse for that, and no reason for the DOT not to exercise its authority to ban codesharing as a deceptive business practice. I find codeshares to be useful. I know if I fly DL to NAP that one flight will be operated by AZ. However, if I have a problem, or need to make a change, DL has "ownership" to the entire itinerary since their code is on all of the flights in my reservation. Once I had an itinerary MCO-ATL-FCO-NAP and the first 2 segments were DL coded & operated and the last was AZ coded & operated. On the return, AZ went on strike, DL was willing to change their 2 flights, but not the AZ coded and operated flight. They instructed me to contact AZ to have that flight changed. However, my colleague had the same flights with all DL flight numbers, and DL was able to reaccomodate him with only one call. I've talked about this before in relation to previous seasons of The Amazing Race and, more importantly, the problems it causes for real-life travellers. This time, however, there is something you can do about it: the USA Department of Transportation (DOT) is soliciting public comments through 14 March 2005, for consideration in the DOT's first major review in years of its rules for codesharing. Not surprisingly, there's a catch: the DOT is not proposing to crack down on the deception of codesharing, but to Do The Wrong Thing by reducing the extent to which airlines have to disclose which service labelled with the airline's flight number is actually operated by other airlines. That's an outrage, and deserves the strongest public condemnation. If you've ever gone to the wrong terminal to check in, maybe even missed a flight, because it was really operated from a different terminal by a different airline; if you've ever had to change terminals inconveniently while making connections because your "online" connection between flights "on the same airline" involved a codeshare flight at a different terminal; if you've ever booked a flight you thought would be on one airline, and found yourself on a different one that you wouldn't knowingly have chosen, or wouldn't have paid as much for; if you've ever found yourself on a codeshare flight that lacked the in-flight amenities or service that the airline in whose name you booked advertises that it offers on all its own flights (but doesn't offer on flights with its label that are actually operated by other airlines) -- this is your chance to give the DOT an earful. If you have ever had one of the above issues, then you did not properly research your trip, or you have a terrible TA. Read the new rules proposed by the DOT and the sleazy and disingenuous arguments from United Airlines (supported by American Airlines, Delta Air Lines, US Airways, and Orbitz.com) on which they are based. If it isn't obvious what's wrong with the DOT proposal, see the argument against the proposal from Southwest Airlines (self-interested but nonetheless accurate) and my analysis of code-sharing and airline alliances. The DOT Web site also includes the complete docket of comments from airlines and the public: DOT proposal: http://dmses.dot.gov/docimages/pdf91/311330_web.pdf United Airlines petition: http://dmses.dot.gov/docimages/pdf89/295535_web.pdf Southwest Airlines comments: http://dmses.dot.gov/docimages/pdf90/299700_web.pdf My analysis of codesharing: http://hasbrouck.org/articles/alliances.html Complete docket of comments to the DOT: http://dms.dot.gov/search/searchResu...umberValue=190 83&searchType=docket By government standards, it's (relatively) easy to submit your comments: 1. Go to the comment submission Web page: http://dmses.dot.gov/submit/dspSubmission.cfm 2. Enter "19083" in the "Docket ID" box. 3. Choose "OST" [Office of the Secretary of Transportation] from the "Operating Administration" pull-down menu. 4. Click either the "Enter a Comment" or "Attach a File" box next to "Submission Method". 5. Fill in as much of your personal information as you like. (Keep in mind that whatever you fill in will be posted on the Web with your comment.) 6. Click "Continue". Depending on which option you chose, you'll either get a box to type in your comments (4000 characters maximum), or a page to upload a file of comments of any length that you've prepared on your own computer (in text, PDF, RTF,TIFF, Wordperfect, or MS-Word format). To be considered, your comments must be received by 5 p.m. Washington, DC, time on Monday, 14 March 2005. I'll pattach my own comments to this article on my Web site as soon as I've filed them. ---------------- Edward Hasbrouck http://hasbrouck.org "The Practical Nomad: How to Travel Around the World" (3rd edition, 2004) "The Practical Nomad Guide to the Online Travel Marketplace" http://www.practicalnomad.com |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
"Mike" wrote in message ... You make it sound like it is difficult to determine which flights are codeshares. Anyone with computer skills equivalent to that of my 4-yr old should be able to determine which flights are codeshares or not. For the last several years when I have booked on flights that were codeshares, the booking engine would always give me information telling me that the flight was operated by a different carrier. On Thu, 03 Mar 2005 04:47:55 -0000, Edward Hasbrouck wrote: This column with links: http://hasbrouck.org/blog/archives/000519.html Complete index of columns on "The Amazing Race": http://hasbrouck.org/amazingrace [There have been some attacks on my Web site that have intemittently rendered it inaccessible. I'm making some changes to make it more reliable. I'm also re-posting my last 2 columns on "The Amazing Race 6"; they should also be available now on my Web site.] ====================================== The Amazing Race 7, Episode 1 (airline codesharing) Long Beach, CA (USA) - Lima (Peru) - Ancon (Peru) - Lima (Peru) - Cusco (Peru) - Huambutio (Peru) - Pisac (Peru) - Cusco (Peru) The Amazing Race began its seventh season with the racers being required by the producers of the reality-TV show -- at the behest, presumably, of the airlines that have bought product placements within the show along with their sponsorships -- to take connecting flights from Los Angeles to Lima via Miami or New York on USA-based airlines, rather than the nonstop flight on LAN Chile, leaving at about the same time, that would have gotten them to Lima almost six hours earlier. That's exactly the same LAX-Lima flight on LAN Chile that would have been part of the fastest route for the contestants in the first leg of The Amazing Race 5 a year ago. Amazing indeed! Even given a free choice, of course, it's often difficult to figure out which airlines fly to where you want to go, especially because so many airlines put their code-share flight numbers on flights actually operated by other airlines, in order to pretend they fly to more places than they actually do. Codesharing is fraud. It gives no benefit to travellers or consumers. Airlines lie about this, but they've had "interline" agreements in place for years that allow them to offer through fares, through ticketing, through baggage checking, and frequent flyer mileage credits between airlines completely independently of which airlines' codes are placed on the flight. I disagree, codesharing can be of great benefit to travellers and fraud is a pretty harsh word.. A year ago, I was scheduled on CO from LGW-EWR-MCO. The LGW-EWR segment on CO was cancelled due to weather in EWR. Because CO codeshares with VS, they were able to put me on the CO coded VS operated LGW-MCO flight. They could have done this even without the code-sharing arrangement. CO and VS have interline agreements by which VS will honor a CO ticket (and v.v.) even without the codesharing agreement. No actual airline service or benefit to travellers is actually dependant to the slightest degree on cadesharing. Codesharing is done for the sole purpose of misleading consumers about which airline operates the flight, which destinations the airline "serves", how many flights they actually operate to those places, and what services and amenities will be available on those flights. Wrong again. Last week I flew MCO-ATL-FCO-NAP on all DL coded flights with the FCO-NAP segment operated by AZ. Since the flight had a DL code rather than an AZ code, I was able to earn more miles for my DL skymiles account. DL gives a 50% bonus for flights in Y fare and AZ does not. That's a function of the frequent flyer tie-in between DL and AZ rather than anything else. I can get Northwest miles with my Delta or Continental frequent flyer membership, and get the bonus miles too, whether or not the flight is a code share. In a more complex way, by making a set of connections appear to be on the same airline, when it's actually between different airlines, codesharing causes flights to be ranked higher in the responses to flight availability requests provided to travel agencies by Computerized Reservation Systems -- misleading travellers directly by distorting which connections are shown first by travel agency Web sites, and misleading travellers indirectly by misleading offline travel agents who have no easy way, in any of the CRS's I've used, to override the display mis-prioritization of interline connections fraudulaently labeled as online codeshare connections. If a TA cannot determine which flights are codeshares and is unable to sort through which ones are and are not codeshares on a list of available flights, then (s)he needs to find a different line of work. With this, I agree with you. It quite simply is very easy to see a flight is operated by a code-share partner, and there are several ways to do so (flight numbers being the main one). Quite simply, Airline X puts its shared code on a flight operated by Airline Y because it believes that more people will buy tickets on that flight if it is labelled as a flight by Airline X than if it is truthfully labelled as a flight by Airline Y. There's no "need" for that, no excuse for that, and no reason for the DOT not to exercise its authority to ban codesharing as a deceptive business practice. I find codeshares to be useful. I know if I fly DL to NAP that one flight will be operated by AZ. However, if I have a problem, or need to make a change, DL has "ownership" to the entire itinerary since their code is on all of the flights in my reservation. Once I had an itinerary MCO-ATL-FCO-NAP and the first 2 segments were DL coded & operated and the last was AZ coded & operated. On the return, AZ went on strike, DL was willing to change their 2 flights, but not the AZ coded and operated flight. They instructed me to contact AZ to have that flight changed. However, my colleague had the same flights with all DL flight numbers, and DL was able to reaccomodate him with only one call. I've talked about this before in relation to previous seasons of The Amazing Race and, more importantly, the problems it causes for real-life travellers. This time, however, there is something you can do about it: the USA Department of Transportation (DOT) is soliciting public comments through 14 March 2005, for consideration in the DOT's first major review in years of its rules for codesharing. Not surprisingly, there's a catch: the DOT is not proposing to crack down on the deception of codesharing, but to Do The Wrong Thing by reducing the extent to which airlines have to disclose which service labelled with the airline's flight number is actually operated by other airlines. That's an outrage, and deserves the strongest public condemnation. If you've ever gone to the wrong terminal to check in, maybe even missed a flight, because it was really operated from a different terminal by a different airline; if you've ever had to change terminals inconveniently while making connections because your "online" connection between flights "on the same airline" involved a codeshare flight at a different terminal; if you've ever booked a flight you thought would be on one airline, and found yourself on a different one that you wouldn't knowingly have chosen, or wouldn't have paid as much for; if you've ever found yourself on a codeshare flight that lacked the in-flight amenities or service that the airline in whose name you booked advertises that it offers on all its own flights (but doesn't offer on flights with its label that are actually operated by other airlines) -- this is your chance to give the DOT an earful. If you have ever had one of the above issues, then you did not properly research your trip, or you have a terrible TA. Read the new rules proposed by the DOT and the sleazy and disingenuous arguments from United Airlines (supported by American Airlines, Delta Air Lines, US Airways, and Orbitz.com) on which they are based. If it isn't obvious what's wrong with the DOT proposal, see the argument against the proposal from Southwest Airlines (self-interested but nonetheless accurate) and my analysis of code-sharing and airline alliances. The DOT Web site also includes the complete docket of comments from airlines and the public: DOT proposal: http://dmses.dot.gov/docimages/pdf91/311330_web.pdf United Airlines petition: http://dmses.dot.gov/docimages/pdf89/295535_web.pdf Southwest Airlines comments: http://dmses.dot.gov/docimages/pdf90/299700_web.pdf My analysis of codesharing: http://hasbrouck.org/articles/alliances.html Complete docket of comments to the DOT: http://dms.dot.gov/search/searchResu...umberValue=190 83&searchType=docket By government standards, it's (relatively) easy to submit your comments: 1. Go to the comment submission Web page: http://dmses.dot.gov/submit/dspSubmission.cfm 2. Enter "19083" in the "Docket ID" box. 3. Choose "OST" [Office of the Secretary of Transportation] from the "Operating Administration" pull-down menu. 4. Click either the "Enter a Comment" or "Attach a File" box next to "Submission Method". 5. Fill in as much of your personal information as you like. (Keep in mind that whatever you fill in will be posted on the Web with your comment.) 6. Click "Continue". Depending on which option you chose, you'll either get a box to type in your comments (4000 characters maximum), or a page to upload a file of comments of any length that you've prepared on your own computer (in text, PDF, RTF,TIFF, Wordperfect, or MS-Word format). To be considered, your comments must be received by 5 p.m. Washington, DC, time on Monday, 14 March 2005. I'll pattach my own comments to this article on my Web site as soon as I've filed them. ---------------- Edward Hasbrouck http://hasbrouck.org "The Practical Nomad: How to Travel Around the World" (3rd edition, 2004) "The Practical Nomad Guide to the Online Travel Marketplace" http://www.practicalnomad.com |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
---snip---
Codesharing is fraud. It gives no benefit to travellers or consumers. Airlines lie about this, but they've had "interline" agreements in place for years that allow them to offer through fares, through ticketing, through baggage checking, and frequent flyer mileage credits between airlines completely independently of which airlines' codes are placed on the flight. I disagree, codesharing can be of great benefit to travellers and fraud is a pretty harsh word.. A year ago, I was scheduled on CO from LGW-EWR-MCO. The LGW-EWR segment on CO was cancelled due to weather in EWR. Because CO codeshares with VS, they were able to put me on the CO coded VS operated LGW-MCO flight. They could have done this even without the code-sharing arrangement. CO and VS have interline agreements by which VS will honor a CO ticket (and v.v.) even without the codesharing agreement. This may be true. However, the CO check-in agent was not the sharpest tool in the shed, and I had to suggest to her to put us on the MCO-LGW flight. She originally suggested LGW-IAH-MCO for me. However, since I saw "VS 027/CO 8247" at the Virgin check-in counter and knew about CO and VS codesharing, I knew I had a better option. If they only had the interline agreement and no codeshares, it would not have been as obvious that I could have taken the VS flight. Ironically, the agent commented that my suggestion was great, and she hadn't thought of that. No actual airline service or benefit to travellers is actually dependant to the slightest degree on cadesharing. Codesharing is done for the sole purpose of misleading consumers about which airline operates the flight, which destinations the airline "serves", how many flights they actually operate to those places, and what services and amenities will be available on those flights. Wrong again. Last week I flew MCO-ATL-FCO-NAP on all DL coded flights with the FCO-NAP segment operated by AZ. Since the flight had a DL code rather than an AZ code, I was able to earn more miles for my DL skymiles account. DL gives a 50% bonus for flights in Y fare and AZ does not. That's a function of the frequent flyer tie-in between DL and AZ rather than anything else. I can get Northwest miles with my Delta or Continental frequent flyer membership, and get the bonus miles too, whether or not the flight is a code share. Yes and no. I can certainly earn DL miles on DL and any of their partners. However, DL gives a 50% class of service mileage bonus when booked in coach classes Y, B, and M of a DL coded flight. Refer to http://www.delta.com/skymiles/getmil...iles/index.jsp and http://www.delta.com/skymiles/getmil...ners/index.jsp My ticket was a Y fare with all DL flight numbers. I could have paid the same for the ticket and had the AZ segment, with an AZ flight number, and still earned DL miles. However, I would not have gotten the 50% mileage bonus for the AZ flights. While in this case it was only a 250 mile difference, I have been in on a Y fare on AZ metal with a DL flight number from MIA-MXP. In that case, I would have lost out on almost 2500 miles. The point that I am making with that example is that the codeshare in that case benefits me despite what the OP thinks. Also, you cannot get NW miles with DL or CO FF membership. I think you meant you can earn NW miles when flying NW, CO and DL (among others). Any Worldperks bonus you get is per NW rules. ---snip--- |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
The Amazing Race 5, Episode 1 | Edward Hasbrouck | Air travel | 2 | July 13th, 2004 01:04 PM |
Safety board wants airline passengers weighed | Jean C | Air travel | 49 | March 15th, 2004 08:31 PM |