online check-in

Following up to Frank Slootweg :

Runge wrote:
rec.travel.air and not this group

And "this group" would be?

And *why* wouldn't "this group" be appropriate?

Don't waste time replying to gRunge, he's a complete cretin.

--
Tim C.

"Frank Slootweg" kirjoitti
l...

I haven't done it for Cathay Pacific, but for Singapore Airlines
(Amsterdam-Singapore-Perth):

The online/Internet check-in is kind of a *pre-*check-in, i.e. *not* a
full one, and, as you say, normally allows to allocate a specific seat.

You still have to:

- check-in your bags
- collect your physical boarding pass (if not already printed online)
- show your passport (and have them check your visa)

So the main advantage of online/Internet check-in is to be able to
allocate a *specific* seat 'number' *before* you get to the airport. In
SA's case, upto 48 hours before the flight.

There is another one too: all decent internet check-ins naturally faciliate
printing of boarding passes (otherwise they wouldn't be called check-ins,
would they). In this case there obviously is a luggage drop point somewhere
and you don't have to queue in front of the check-in desks.

On Mon, 20 Nov 2006 16:45:27 +0100, Tim C.
wrote:

Following up to Frank Slootweg :

Runge wrote:
rec.travel.air and not this group

And "this group" would be?

And *why* wouldn't "this group" be appropriate?

Don't waste time replying to gRunge, he's a complete cretin.

There is a prevalent misunderstanding about the travel newsgroups.
They were intended to be created as runge.travel.* but due to a typo
by a news admin, they were created as rec.travel.*.

With that background knowledge, you can more readily understand why
runge feels a sense of ownership.

John Stanton wrote:
On Mon, 20 Nov 2006 16:45:27 +0100, Tim C.
wrote:

Following up to Frank Slootweg :

Runge wrote:
rec.travel.air and not this group

And "this group" would be?

And *why* wouldn't "this group" be appropriate?

Don't waste time replying to gRunge, he's a complete cretin.

There is a prevalent misunderstanding about the travel newsgroups.
They were intended to be created as runge.travel.* but due to a typo
by a news admin, they were created as rec.travel.*.

With that background knowledge, you can more readily understand why
runge feels a sense of ownership.

I was probably one of them there News Admins, so my sincere apologies
to Mr. Runge. Mea culpa. mea culpa, mea maxima culpa!

"Markku Gr?nroos" wrote:

"Frank Slootweg" kirjoitti
l...

I haven't done it for Cathay Pacific, but for Singapore Airlines
(Amsterdam-Singapore-Perth):

The online/Internet check-in is kind of a *pre-*check-in, i.e. *not* a
full one, and, as you say, normally allows to allocate a specific seat.

You still have to:

- check-in your bags
- collect your physical boarding pass (if not already printed online)
- show your passport (and have them check your visa)

So the main advantage of online/Internet check-in is to be able to
allocate a *specific* seat 'number' *before* you get to the airport. In
SA's case, upto 48 hours before the flight.

There is another one too: all decent internet check-ins naturally faciliate
printing of boarding passes (otherwise they wouldn't be called check-ins,
would they). In this case there obviously is a luggage drop point somewhere
and you don't have to queue in front of the check-in desks.

Yes, I already mentioned that and that's why I said "main advantage".

And, in case it wasn't clear, all the "You still have to:" actions are
done at a *single* and *special* counter (i.e. not the normal check-in
counters), which, because the actions are relatively simple/fast,
normally won't have long queues, if any.

"Frank Slootweg" kirjoitti
l...

And, in case it wasn't clear, all the "You still have to:" actions are
done at a *single* and *special* counter (i.e. not the normal check-in
counters), which, because the actions are relatively simple/fast,
normally won't have long queues, if any.

Check in is always proceeded in no more than one counter no matter whether
you have a pre-printed boarding card or not. "Special counters" are those
drop-off terminals. They are typically of special purpose sites or check-in
counters for first class or business class passengers in order to make
things faster. Naturally when one has no hold luggage, he is just as any
traveller who has passed the check in.

"Markku Gr?nroos" wrote:

"Frank Slootweg" kirjoitti
l...

And, in case it wasn't clear, all the "You still have to:" actions are
done at a *single* and *special* counter (i.e. not the normal check-in
counters), which, because the actions are relatively simple/fast,
normally won't have long queues, if any.

Check in is always proceeded in no more than one counter no matter whether
you have a pre-printed boarding card or not.

In this day and age of increased security, that's no longer always the
case.

Sometimes there are seperate drop-off points for luggage (which is
going into the hold), where passengers have to present their luggage for
security screening and subsequent check-in. I.e. in that case,
traditional check-in is two stops/'counters', one for passenger check-in
(seat-assignment/passport+visa-check/boarding-pass) and one for luggage
security-check/check-in.

[deleted]

"Frank Slootweg" kirjoitti
l...
"Markku Gr?nroos" wrote:

"Frank Slootweg" kirjoitti
l...

And, in case it wasn't clear, all the "You still have to:" actions are
done at a *single* and *special* counter (i.e. not the normal check-in
counters), which, because the actions are relatively simple/fast,
normally won't have long queues, if any.

Check in is always proceeded in no more than one counter no matter
whether
you have a pre-printed boarding card or not.

In this day and age of increased security, that's no longer always the
case.

Well, yes it is. Naturally some gadgets can brake down and hence check in
may take place in more than one booth.

Sometimes there are seperate drop-off points for luggage (which is
going into the hold), where passengers have to present their luggage for

The only design for this I have ever seen anywhere is the luggage which
takes unconventional dimensions and therefore requires specific handling
lines.


security screening and subsequent check-in. I.e. in that case,

These are two and different processes even if the latter is dependent on the
first mentioned one.


traditional check-in is two stops/'counters', one for passenger check-in
(seat-assignment/passport+visa-check/boarding-pass) and one for luggage
security-check/check-in.

Passengers are checked in at one counter.

"Markku Gr?nroos" wrote:

"Frank Slootweg" kirjoitti
l...
"Markku Gr?nroos" wrote:

"Frank Slootweg" kirjoitti
l...

And, in case it wasn't clear, all the "You still have to:" actions are
done at a *single* and *special* counter (i.e. not the normal check-in
counters), which, because the actions are relatively simple/fast,
normally won't have long queues, if any.

Check in is always proceeded in no more than one counter no matter
whether you have a pre-printed boarding card or not.

In this day and age of increased security, that's no longer always the
case.

Well, yes it is. Naturally some gadgets can brake down and hence check in
may take place in more than one booth.

That's clearly *not* the scenario I'm talking about. I.e. it's a straw
man.

Sometimes there are seperate drop-off points for luggage (which is
going into the hold), where passengers have to present their luggage for

The only design for this I have ever seen anywhere is the luggage which
takes unconventional dimensions and therefore requires specific handling
lines.

Can you *read* please? I am saying it's for *security screening* of
luggage which goes into the hold (i.e. not cabin luggage). I.e. in the
old/normal process, hold-luggage is screened during transport from the
check-in counter to the aircraft. In this process it's screened at
the (seperate) drop-off point.

security screening and subsequent check-in. I.e. in that case,

These are two and different processes even if the latter is dependent on the
first mentioned one.

Who cares? I said the followup processes of the online/Internet
check-in (*including* baggage drop-off) was at one single counter. You
then said that check-in is always at one single counter. I gave a
scenario where this isn't the case. QED. EOD.

traditional check-in is two stops/'counters', one for passenger check-in
(seat-assignment/passport+visa-check/boarding-pass) and one for luggage
security-check/check-in.

Passengers are checked in at one counter.

But their *luggage* isn't neccessarily checked in at that same counter
and that's the whole/my point.

No offense, but please read what people write and make sure that your
comment is a response to theirs. And if you want to bring up a
*different* point, then don't quote.

"Frank Slootweg" kirjoitti
l...
"Markku Gr?nroos" wrote:

"Frank Slootweg" kirjoitti
l...
"Markku Gr?nroos" wrote:

"Frank Slootweg" kirjoitti
l...

And, in case it wasn't clear, all the "You still have to:" actions
are
done at a *single* and *special* counter (i.e. not the normal
check-in
counters), which, because the actions are relatively simple/fast,
normally won't have long queues, if any.

Check in is always proceeded in no more than one counter no matter
whether you have a pre-printed boarding card or not.

In this day and age of increased security, that's no longer always the
case.

Well, yes it is. Naturally some gadgets can brake down and hence check in
may take place in more than one booth.

That's clearly *not* the scenario I'm talking about. I.e. it's a straw
man.

Sometimes there are seperate drop-off points for luggage (which is
going into the hold), where passengers have to present their luggage
for

The only design for this I have ever seen anywhere is the luggage which
takes unconventional dimensions and therefore requires specific handling
lines.

Can you *read* please? I am saying it's for *security screening* of
luggage which goes into the hold (i.e. not cabin luggage). I.e. in the

My lines aren't anyhow in contradiction with this. Luggage pre-monitoring is
not a check in process and all luggage is subordinated to it. In what way
the check in process is arranged, doesn't matter. The luggage pre-monitoring
process is equally vital and is carried out in the same fashion regardless
of the check in processes.

old/normal process, hold-luggage is screened during transport from the
check-in counter to the aircraft. In this process it's screened at
the (seperate) drop-off point.

What's your point? The check in process takes place at ONE counter in
maximum. I have visited airports were luggage is pre-monitored in a separate
process physically away from the check in counters but all the luggage goes
through it. Whether you already have a boarding card in your hand or not, is
not an issue. Perhaps we should add (those who are dead from their necks up
in mind) that these are not necessarily drop-off points for luggage Actually
they seldom are. I haven't seen such an arrangement anywhere. All the
luggage goes through the inspection in the same fashion. AFTER the
inspection they take different paths: those passengers who haven't checked
in yet has to do so with their luggage which typically means - especially at
busy hours - that they have to queue more or less lengthy period of time
while those who have already checked in just leave their luggage to a drop
of site without much waiting. These terminals are typically ordinary check
in desks but can also be exclusively built for this purpose. It depends and
is not anything very relevant.

security screening and subsequent check-in. I.e. in that case,

These are two and different processes even if the latter is dependent on
the
first mentioned one.

Who cares? I said the followup processes of the online/Internet
check-in (*including* baggage drop-off) was at one single counter. You
then said that check-in is always at one single counter. I gave a
scenario where this isn't the case. QED. EOD.

What the heck is this? Check in takes place at one counter and one counter
only. If you have to visit desks elsewhere at the airport (passport control,
security check and so on, they are not check in processes). As far as
luggage probing is concerned, it is all the same whether one has checked in
for a flight prior to arrival to the airport or at the airport. It doesn't
make any difference at all. This monitoring process is the same for all the
passengers with luggage. Do you feel tangled?

traditional check-in is two stops/'counters', one for passenger
check-in
(seat-assignment/passport+visa-check/boarding-pass) and one for luggage
security-check/check-in.

Passengers are checked in at one counter.

But their *luggage* isn't neccessarily checked in at that same counter
and that's the whole/my point.

99.9% of all the airports are furnished so that all the CHECK IN process
takes place at ONE counter. I have wasted lots of spit to explain that these
security monitoring processes which may take place in dedicated areas apart
from the check in desks, ARE NOT part of check in process. All passengers
and their luggage goes through it. After this process not you nor your
luggage have been checked in yet if you haven't been clear BEFORE the
inspection. After the luggage inspection, you take it along with you to a
CHECK IN counter, ONE CHECK IN COUNTER in which you leave your luggage and
receive a boarding card in the case you don't have it in your possession
already.

No offense, but please read what people write and make sure that your
comment is a response to theirs. And if you want to bring up a
*different* point, then don't quote.


I guess it is you who needs a bit of reading comprehension. Or just say it
in Dutch.