Friendlier on Southwest?
 

I just flew several legs on Southwest Airlines for the first time, and it seemed to me that the passengers were much more talkative and social than they are on other airlines that I've flown. Everyone seemed to be talking to their seatmates, and not just folks who were traveling together. Are people happier because they're saving money?

I'd bet Southwest has a bigger percentage of leisure travelers than the others. People are much happier when flying to a location for pleasure than for business.

Hey Lisa:<BR><BR>I've noticed this on Southwest too. I'm not sure why exactly. It might have something to do with the kind of people Southwest attracts. More of the "budget travel" type people. In general, they seem to be more willing to talk to others. <BR><BR>Also, the flight attendants are very talkative and chipper. It might also have something to do with the fact that the flights are usually so short, people are just happy that they're only going to be on the plane for an hour or so. <BR><BR>

Business travelers do not consider flying to be a vacation or to be enjoyable.<BR>Flying is an incinvenience (moreso the past year) and a nuisance and a stressor.<BR><BR>Southwest is much more leisure-clientele dominated and many people are flying for vacation. Most probably travel a lot less than most people on more business oriented carriers.<BR><BR>Most business travelers do not want to be bothered by yakkers in the adjacent seats.

Another reason might be that everybody has been standing in line together for 20 minutes or so waiting to board! By the time you board, you already have long time friends.<BR><BR>It's about their boarding procedure!!!<BR><BR>MOOOOoooooooooooo.<BR><BR>FFSW A

I detest SWA.<BR>I'll pay an extra $50-75 to avoid that piece of crap airline.

I detest that crap line they make you stand in. I'd pay $100 more to avoid the crap line.

They are all poor people. Poor people like to talk about nothing.

I hate it too. You end up having to stand in line what seems like 4 different times just to get on the plane and have everyone sitting on the aisle so you have to crawl all over everyone like some sort of idiot. Ugh I hate that. I thought I read a while back that they were getting rid of those stupid plastic tickets and going to assigned seats. Did that not happen?

Hey Business Traveler you are nothing but a pompous ass. I wouldn't want to talk to you either if you were sitting next to me. As for the rest of you anti-Southwest people-give me a break, you are nothing but a bunch of pretentious, uptight assholes who think you are better than the rest of us. (Or are you Vance the disgruntled ex-SW employee who got fired for not doing his job?) Southwest has the best on time record, is actually making a profit and fares are reasonable. The flight crews are actually nice and not the uptight, frigid FA's on United who would crack their faces if they smiled.

Recent southwest flight:<BR><BR>Wow isn't this great, I've never been on a plane before. Do the pilots sit in the front?<BR><BR>Were going to see my mother she is just getting over the gout. Do you know what the gout is?<BR><BR>Are there bathrooms on here? Cool look at this trash bag in the seat? Can I keep this magazine. I hope we can get drinks. <BR><BR>Blab blab blab.<BR><BR>Give me a major airline anyday.

Dan, while I agree and do not like Southwest because of that stupid line, it is considered one of the majors.

I just took Southwest to Las Vegas from Chicago last weekend and I agree with FFSWA. It's a frenzied cattle call and many people who wait in those darned A,B,C lines just start chatting with one another about the stupid lines and continue to talk on the plane. Also, since there are no seat assignments, there are many people who travel together that sit near one another.<BR>We were fortunate enough to grab the exit rows on both legs of the trip but I felt so sorry for some of the elderly couples that couldn't even find seats together. You could see the disappointment on their faces when they boarded the plane and just saw scattered seating.<BR>Everyone was complaining about the process and I will never take Southwest again because of the long lines and lack of seat assignments. Also, we had the most obnoxious drunken idiots that were screaming for the flight attendant to bring them more beers even when we were 5 minutes from landing. Any other airline would have cut them off early due to their disruptive behavior.<BR>I'm so glad this was posted because I've been thinking about why Southwest continues to do this to passengers. I can't imagine that it's more cost effective or efficient and would think the exact opposite. <BR>Southwest is not cheaper most of the time but it just depends on the routes. I would take ATA, National, American, Midway, etc. anyday over my experience on Southwest.

My major problems with Southwest were the lines to board and the dirty planes. Without seat assignments, there were people lining up 45 minutes before departure time to board, which is ridiculous. Also, because of the quick turnaround, the planes aren't cleaned between flights. There are peanuts, pretzels, etc. on floor, and the bathrooms are dirty. While I did get a cheap internet fair on Southwest, I would rather pay a few dollars more for another airline with assigned seats in the future.

It's quite interesting the number of negative statement that show up regarding Southwest. Yes, the line-up thing is a bit annoying. But they save a lot of money by not assigning seats (passing on the savings in low fares). <BR><BR>Also, even though most of you seem to hate Southwest, they are one of a VERY few US airlines making money right now. It seems even though people hate them, they will suffer them to save money. <BR><BR>Additionally, Southwest is great even if you don't fly them, because their low fares force the other airlines to lower their fares for the same routes. <BR><BR>In my opinion, I believe the days of the full service major airlines are numbered. The very rich (and in the future, even the decently rich) will fly on private jets (or fractional ownership jets). Everyone else will be on Southwest or other similar low-fare airlines (Jetblue, AirTran, Spirit, etc). We all hate the lining up and the lack of service, but we all love the low fares.

Talk about lack of service! 9-18 we flew AA from TPA to Albuquerque. That was over half a day of travel, two legs each way. All we were served in that time was 2 bags of trail mix by less than happy flight attendants. Same on the return flight.<BR><BR>9-11 we flew Southwest TPA--&gt;PVD, about a 2 hour flight. All we got were...two bags of trail mix but at least the FAs were cheery in their delivery! <BR><BR>Flying has changed, corners are being cut any place they can, but if you have to put up with it, my personal preferene would be to at least do it in a congenial atmosphere!<BR><BR>The only difference (our planes were clean and seats wide, perhaps wider than AAs) was that AA had assigned seating. Period. And in my case, that didn't work to my advantage either, as I ended up in the center seat all 4 legs, despite having made the reservation in early August. Oh yes...the only person that was chatty on any of these flights was the guy on the AA flight on our return trip. There was no sleeping or reading next to him.....<BR><BR>There was an intersting article in the Tampa paper this morning about jets hopping to different runways on their approaches and sometimes takeoffs. They are supposed to use one which takes them primarily over the water, but that runway also happens to be a distance from the gates located on the other side of the terminal. There's a shorter runway on that side of the airport, which has more of a land (homeowner) approach and is not supposed to be used as much because of noise complaints. According to the airport who has been tracking this for the past year, pilots are increasingly requesting permission to use the shorter runway on the otherside of the airport, saying they would otherwise be following another plane too closely, and in checking which flights are making this request, they found that something like 90% of them, lo and behold, were airlines whose gates just happened to be on the side of the terminal with that short, over land approach. Cut down on taxi time= money savings for the airline.<BR><BR>James' assessment of what is to come is probably right on, and we'll all be happy just to have a bag of trail mix thown at us! AA certainly could not have given their coach passengers any less service had they tried!

As a business traveler that makes 4-6 business flights monthly on Southwest, all I can say is thank God more people don't. Why would they want to participate in the best frequent flyer program in history? I receive a free flight voucher that is tranferable to anyone I give it to every 3 weeks or so. I have so many free trips that I could not possibly use them all without giving them to friends and family. My parents are seeing more of this country together in the last year than they have in their lifetime, All because of a business traveler that prefers to fly SWA. Yes, they can be corney at times and once they pretty much scared the s*^% out of me when the opened the door and yelled GET OUT !!!! but you take it all in stride and realize that the company is very successful because they let their employees be themselves and think for themselves. Oh yeah, did I mention they are the only airline that I can rely on to be on time.

Bob:<BR><BR>I'm a Southwest booster also. However, their on-time record has been slipping of late. In fact, for the month of July 2002 (the latest on-time report), Southwest had only the 7th best on-time record of the ten largest airlines in the US. <BR><BR>http://airconsumer.ost.dot.gov/reports/atcr02.htm<BR><BR>Also, of the 13 flights in the month of July which arrived late 80% of the time or more, Southwest had 11 of them!!!! For example, flight 1428 from MDW-CLE ran 31 times in July. It was late 27 of those 31 times (87.1%). The median late time for that flight was 32 mins late. And, because they schedule only a 20-30 min turnaround, the next flight is almost guaranteed to be late. In fact, the continuation of flight 1428 from CLE-BWI was also late 27 of 31 times. <BR><BR>Of course, the security regulations have hurt SWA. They expect to turn around their planes in 20-30 mins. They have to get everyone off the previous flight, do the random screens and board the plane all in 20-30 mins. Other airlines usually take about 50-60 mins to do this. Also, passengers complained that if they got chosen for the screening, they lost their place in line for boarding. So, SWA started waiting for the entire boarding to be randomnly screened before boarding the next group (again, taking more time). I really hope they don't slip like this any more, because their on-time record has been one of their strongest points.

Olive I recently returned from a first class RT flight on AA which cost the company (not mine, theirs) over $1000, and what did I get for food on the 2 flights? Nada. Nunc. Zippo.<BR>Free wine and beer, but no food.<BR>Sad.

Maybe the airlines should go back to the OLD days when in coach class you wanted food, you were charged extra. When buying ticket you voiced your preference. Or is everyone on this site to young to remember "the good old days"

I travel for pleasure frequently and have good luck with Southwest. I don't see the big deal if I couldn't sit with my husband I like to but since we are usually flying to the same destination I figure I can make it a few hours without sitting next to him. He is just as happy not to have me blabbing at him anyways. Now air-tram gag, puke!

SWA is a flying bus, no more no less and as such it does a remarkably good job. Thirty years flying with no major accidents isn't too shabby a record either. My only beef is that, living in Dallas area, we suffer from the Wright Amendment(a gift from Washington Democrats) limiting our non-stop destinations.<BR>Their staff are generally helpful & pleasant & there's few surprises. <BR>I wish them the best, they deserve it.<BR>p.

As an ex-Dallasite, and with a son still in that area so Southwest would be nice alternative to Delta and AA when we visit, I've got to say I do not now, nor did I ever, understand the Wright Amendment! It seems like a legislated stiffling of competition and I can't understand how it can be legal.<BR><BR>For those not familiar with it, Southwest is only allowed to fly out of smaller Love Field, not DFW (quickly becoming a plus, actually), and you can only fly one state away without booking an entirely new trip, making flying from Dallas to Los Angeles, for instance, or Dallas to Florida in our case, out of the question. It would require booking two separate trips, two tickets, two baggage claims etc. You can only fly Southwest from Dallas to NM, OK, LA and I guess Arkansas.<BR><BR>What little understanding I have of it was that it was done to protect the other airlines (AA specifically?) at DFW. What it seems to do actually, is ensure that other airlines do not have to be competitive with Southwest's fares, making DFW one of the most expensive airports to fly into or out of. Wouldn't this make the Wright Amendment a form of price-fixing? I honestly don't understand how they got away with it, and why anyone, other than the other major airlines, would want it!

If it wern't for SW, about half their passengers would be on Greyhound. Frankly, these days, most of the coach section on any airline is not a pleasant place to spend an extended amount of time. <BR> <BR>I will admit that I usually take SW on shorter trips, like OKC-MCI and OKC-Dallas, primarily to avoid the commuter planes of the other majors, but prefer Delta when going to LA or NY, as I can usually get an upgrade to FC. <BR><BR>SW's lack of assigned seating is completetly out of touch with today's traveller. They say it would cost too much to implement and they would have to raise fares. BS. JetBlue has assigned seating, fares as low if not lower than SW, and they are quite profitable. SW was considered very innovative 30 years ago, but today they seem like just another airline, with too many dirty airplanes, and antiquated boarding and seating procedures. <BR><BR>But the fares can be quite attractive, and they are convenient on short hops. And I ususlly earn 5-6 free tickets per year - good, except SW doesn't fly to too many interesting destinations - none international, and don't have any airline partners in it's FF program. So, if you want to go to Detroit or Jacksonville, great. But nothing outside the continental US. <BR><BR> I do feel sorry for those who fly them coast-to-coast. I recently heard they started flying LAX-Baltimore nonstop. Getting there would NOT half the fun, in that route. Not on SW..

I would never consider flying Southwest crosscountry. For short hops they are tolerable, but for 4 or 5 hours, no thanks. I can only imagine how early people must line up to board to try to avoid getting stuck in the middle seats on a long flight.

You people who want to talk about the "yakkers" shouldn't be slamming the leisure traveler. I travel often for both business & leisure, and I don't consider travel time, ESPECIALLY after business hours, to be business time. I feel like screaming to groups of guys (it's ALWAYS men), "SHUT UP! IT'S AFTER WORKING HOURS, I PUNCHED OUT AT 5:30! TALK ABOUT SPORTS OR YOUR FAMILIES. STOP TALKING SHOP!"<BR><BR>For those of you who hate Southwest - well that's why there's competition. Fly other airlines and have a ball.

Oh please, what airlines are anything more than flying buses these days? Most American carriers treat the passengers like cattle anyway, you might as well go with the lowest price. The question for all of you bashing Southwest is, have YOU flown a major carrier recently? I doubt it, because if you have, you'd know how abyssmal that experience has been in the past year.<BR><BR>By the way, I'm planning on flying Southwest in the near future with my family. It's interesting to know, that with assets in excess of a million dollars, that I am a poor person.

Southwest's boarding procedures are a lot better than they were just a few months ago. Since now you can get your boarding pass at the ticket counter OR curbside check-in OR the gate, you don't have to stand in line so long (people are better dispersed at the various locations as opposed to one really long line). Also, if you're checking bags at the ticket counter you don't have to then stand in line AGAIN at the gate to get a boarding card -- you can get it at the same time you check your bags.<BR><BR>That said, I still hate having to stand in line, and I hate not having assigned seats, but SWA's fares are low, the employees are friendly, they have the only non-stops in certain markets, and the FF program is unbelievably generous. <BR><BR>For long hauls I would prefer another airline (esp. American, with the extra legroom), but if SWA has a non-stop and the others want to send me through Atlanta or O'Hare or DFW, I'm going to take SWA every time.

Rich, thank you for summing up the entire Southwest argument in one small post. There are pros and cons to travelling on SWA, but overall there is still a reason they are making money when many others are on the verge of bankruptcy. They realize that most people, especially on shorter flights, would rather take the cheapest, easiest option for flying. <BR><BR>I also love their website. It is by FAR the easiest to use airline website. And they don't try and hide the far calculations either, it's all there for you to see (so, you can see which individual flights cost certain prices and determine if moving your flight by an hour or so is worth saving the extra $$). <BR><BR>Yes, it may be flying for the "uninitiated", but they do make it so easy and friendly.