What to do about noshows?

[Cynicor]

Not sure on the bag thing. Many flights are by weight limit, not bag limit, and many people would pack 2x10ish in than 1 even 23kg

 

[jb747]

Back in my early days with the airline, and I was flying with a very no nonsense Captain. He hated people who intentionally held up the aircraft, as they visited duty free, in the knowledge that as their bags were on board, they could afford to be late. You know who you are, and they are not uncommon.

Anyway, as soon as it became evident that there were no shows, he'd start the process of pulling their bags, and would simultaneously have the cabin door closed. If, looking out the window, he saw someone running through the lounge, he'd call down and the door would be opened. But, if they were carrying duty free, and especially if not in a hurry, the door would say closed, and he'd wait for the bags to be removed.

 

[p--and--t]

At least 3 times i have been aboard a plane waiting for departure and the airline is paging failed to board passengers, once the baggage unloading had commenced, and eventually a couple of people board loaded to the hilt with duty free and then spend time dilly dallying around trying to find space in the overhead lockers to put their purchases while the crew are frantically trying to finalise departure process.

You could feel the tension in the air from other passengers, let alone the frustration of the crew.

 

[flyingfan]

Anyway, as soon as it became evident that there were no shows, he'd start the process of pulling their bags, and would simultaneously have the cabin door closed. If, looking out the window, he saw someone running through the lounge, he'd call down and the door would be opened. But, if they were carrying duty free, and especially if not in a hurry, the door would say closed, and he'd wait for the bags to be removed.

IMHO that should be SOP, would learn the stragglers quick smart.

I’m curious to know what these famous ‘offloading procedures’ exactly are. Surely they’re very prescriptive, rather than vague ‘wait if you can’? Something like x minutes before scheduled departure if the haven’t boarded, find the pax within y minutes, while simultaneously finding and offloading the bag in <y minutes, whatever comes first?

 

[p--and--t]

Back in my early days with the airline, and I was flying with a very no nonsense Captain. He hated people who intentionally held up the aircraft, as they visited duty free, in the knowledge that as their bags were on board, they could afford to be late. You know who you are, and they are not uncommon.

Anyway, as soon as it became evident that there were no shows, he'd start the process of pulling their bags, and would simultaneously have the cabin door closed. If, looking out the window, he saw someone running through the lounge, he'd call down and the door would be opened. But, if they were carrying duty free, and especially if not in a hurry, the door would say closed, and he'd wait for the bags to be removed.

I like that captain!!!

 

[Lynda2475]

Passengers failing to board who have loaded checked luggage is IME very common, probably 1 in every 3-4 international flights I've taken, it is very annoying.

Im sure for every genuine medical emergency (even then you'd think they'd let the airline know they were too ill to continue the journey); Im betting there are 99 cases of people being drunk, wandering off and getting lost or falling asleep.

The real question is, is it really essential to offload their luggage? Surely being temporarily separated from your stuff is the penalty you pay for being tardy (or understandable in a medical emergency). Surely the cost to return the bags later is less than the cost of rebooking all the missed connections and possible other penalties of departing without offloading?

I think the reasoning for offloading is that its a security concern i.e. did they check in something dodgy like a bomb and that's why they haven't re-boarded? But then surely this is a matter of trusting security screening, and risk could be minimized with stricter procedures.

Its not like there arent many cases when bags are misrouted or dont get loaded on a tight connection and are then flown on a separate later flights without their owners all the time.

 

[equus]

Its not like there arent many cases when bags are misrouted or dont get loaded on a tight connection and are then flown on a separate later flights without their owners all the time.

The difference in those scenarios is that the passenger is not choosing to avoid flying with their luggage. It is the cases where the passenger is potentially electing to not be on the flight their luggage is on that are the concern. If the passenger was expecting it to be on their flight, then presumably they have no nefarious intent.

 

[Warragul]

The difference in those scenarios is that the passenger is not choosing to avoid flying with their luggage. It is the cases where the passenger is potentially electing to not be on the flight their luggage is on that are the concern. If the passenger was expecting it to be on their flight, then presumably they have no nefarious intent.

There's an element of systemic redundancy as well- one process fails another one addresses the risk, or part of.

Stricter procedures? There's grumbles about the procedures now about whether this or that is needed/ waste of time and effort etc ( right or wing I don't know). Stricter ones would be a hard sell to Joe Public I reckon.

 

[Lynda2475]

The difference in those scenarios is that the passenger is not choosing to avoid flying with their luggage. It is the cases where the passenger is potentially electing to not be on the flight their luggage is on that are the concern. If the passenger was expecting it to be on their flight, then presumably they have no nefarious intent.

Although there are paid services to send luggage as unaccompanied air freight, much of which is actually carried on passenger flights. IS the inspection of those items greater than checked baggage?

Many terrorist acts are the purview of suicide bombers.

I just wonder if someone has re-crunched the risk numbers given the greater prevalence of x-rays and AI since the PanAm bombing which introduced the practice of off-loading no-show luggage.

I would like to think genuine medical incidents aside, a repeat no show offender would end up on an airlines no-fly list.

 

[Pushka]

My boss, who was pregnant, suffered a miscarriage before she was about to board. I never judge anyone fail to board anymore although a connecting international flight makes it very difficult. I think airlines need to allow only a minimum time after closing boarding before offloading baggage.

 

[Lynda2475]

Airside passenger transit from one flight to another will almost always be faster than the transfer of checked baggage between the same flights. Medical episodes aside if your luggage makes the connection, you should also generally have time to make the connection.

If there are no shows and no luggage was loaded for them, then unlikely to be significant delays to departure.

 

[MEL_Traveller]

There's an element of systemic redundancy as well- one process fails another one addresses the risk, or part of.

Stricter procedures? There's grumbles about the procedures now about whether this or that is needed/ waste of time and effort etc ( right or wing I don't know). Stricter ones would be a hard sell to Joe Public I reckon.

I think that’s right… multiple safeguards. A passenger not showing up after they have checked bags should be a flag for risk.

I think the US does have much stronger baggage detection systems… it’s not a requirement for a passenger to be marched with their bags domestically. But internationally bag-matching still applies ex USA (and most other places I suspect)

 

[Sabot]

The airlines have a great deal of information about passengers, it would be easy to penalize the repeat offenders. Pretty easy to provide a medical certificate / stat declaration in the event of genuine medical issues.

 

[DC3]

Maybe the pax was one of those people who saw 15xx and had 5pm in their mind

Thinking that they were departing at 1700 hours? I’d suspect the booze alternative.

 

[Happy Dude]

Here's an example - someone a know fell asleep in the KF lounge in SIN waiting for the midnight fight to SYD (after a very busy week at work). She did not hear her name being paged BUT she was pretty much the last person in the lounge and SQ should have known she was in the lounge as they check (scan?) your boarding pass on entry. (And NO, alcohol was not a factor). When she woke up and realised she had missed the flight the SQ staff were very synthetic - let her sleep overnight in the lounge and put her on the first flight in the morning. I always wondered why the lounge staff did not at least look around the lounge ....

That sorta happened to me in the MEL MH Lounge years ago except the staff woke me and sent me to the gate.

 

[DC3]

… I always wondered why the lounge staff did not at least look around the lounge ....

 

[Townsend]

My elderly mother fell asleep in a lounge in Frankfurt, before flying Singapore Airlines, a few years ago and missed her plane. It upset her so much she never flew alone again. As Luxury Lizard said, the airlines know who is in the lounge and so could make the effort of seeing if someone who fits the demographic of the missing passenger is asleep in their lounge.