www.CostaRicaTicas.com
https://forum.costaricaticas.com/

Spirit Air ????
https://forum.costaricaticas.com/viewtopic.php?f=4&t=21013		 Page 1 of 2
Author:  LionKing [ Thu Jan 03, 2008 12:32 am ]
Post subject:  Spirit Air ????
I haven't seen any new post pro or con lately about Spirit Air, have they cleaned up there act or are there still some problems? AA is not taking any more miles for my Jan 31st trip so I looking toward giving Spirit a try. Price around $460. for the big seat up front, no food though. Anyone else heading down to San Jose out of Fort lauderdale on 1/30 or 1/31?
Author:  Icemon [ Thu Jan 03, 2008 4:09 pm ]
Post subject: 
In the last four months I have been to CR four times. Twice I flew Spirit out of Ft. Lauderdale with no issues. Twice I flew American out of Miami and both times there was a two hour mechanical delay. Next week I am flying American out of Ft. Lauderdale whichi is a new flight that started about a month ago. This flight is on a 737-800. The Miami flight is on a larger Airbus A-300. I'm convinced that A-300 is jusk after these experiences. I wish someone would offer a 5pm flight out of either Miami or Ft. Lauderdale with a evening departure home. That way I could really maximize my weekends in CR.
Author:  Puro Party [ Thu Jan 03, 2008 11:19 pm ]
Post subject: 
Doesn't AA offer 6PM or 7 PM departures out of MIA and 2/3PM returns back? Would be nice to have 6PM back from SJO though.
Author:  Jdd [ Fri Jan 04, 2008 12:00 am ]
Post subject: 
Yep, 8 PM departures out of MIA & 3 PM return SJO - MIA all for $260 including taxes :!:
Author:  Mia2Ewr [ Fri Jan 04, 2008 1:06 am ]
Post subject: 
That seems too high. I am flying down 2/2 and returning 2/4. AA out of FLL. $199 so with taxes around $260. Was over $100 less than on Spirit. And I want the AA miles for a free domestic ticket. A guy I know (The Bearded Clam) is flying Spirit on 2/1 returning 2/4. Similar times to AA (+/- 3 hours). Was still about $40 more than AA, but he had a Spirit credit. I haven't heard Phoenix way in with any negatives that I can recall, and he (like I) has the Sprit Mastercard and has flown them of late.
I am interested to see how AA will differ from Spirit out of FLL. That terminal 4 has always been a zoo for me flying to SJO so hopefully AA will be less time consuming to check in.
Author:  Orange [ Fri Jan 04, 2008 10:55 am ]
Post subject: 
Icemon440 wrote:
Twice I flew American out of Miami and both times there was a two hour mechanical delay.

I think I read somewhere that American has one of the oldest, if not the oldest, fleets of any US carrier.

I flew AA in April and I had a window over the wing. Thinking back about the condition of the plane, inside and out, it's safe to say that I won't be doing that again. The planes are old, and show the wear and tear.
Author:  Mia2Ewr [ Fri Jan 04, 2008 6:20 pm ]
Post subject: 
O- I can't quote you any statistics but I have heard the same thing. I am sorry Ice had the delays but that I would blame that on the mess that is the Miami International Airport. Of course, there likely is just a significant correlation with the aged fleet and I will experience the same problem flying AA out of FLL. Then I will regret not tolerating those long check in lines for Spirit in exchange for a timely arrival in SJO.
Author:  Irish Drifter [ Fri Jan 04, 2008 7:01 pm ]
Post subject: 
Fleet age is more of an airline marketing tool than an operational or maintenance issue up to a point.

Aircraft maintenance is not like the maintenance you perform on your car. You do not overhaul the engine after a certain amount of miles, you do not change the alternator, fuel pump, water pump, etc after a certain predetermined amount of miles. Airlines do that to their aircraft. The component might be working perfectly but when the alloted number of hours is reached it is pulled and replaced. It is very possible that if you are flying on a 10 year old 737 the 2 engines might have less hours on them then the 2 engines on a 3 year old 737.

After a certain amount of hours the aircraft is basically taken apart and overhauled and then returned to service. If you did the maintenance checks, timed part replacements, major overhaul on your car as the airlines due to their planes you would still be driving your 1980 De Soto :lol:
Author:  Pacifica55 [ Fri Jan 04, 2008 7:15 pm ]
Post subject: 
All true in theory, ID and well said. However...

Airlines are looking for ways to cut costs. Keeping a full staff of A&P certified mechanics is not cheap. More and more carriers are turning to contracted maintenance. This can be good but it can also leave the passenger and the airline at the mercy of an unscrupulous third party.

Another problem that is underreported is the bogus part business. Airworthy parts are big business. A part for an aircraft must be certified and traceable to its origin. All that costs a lot more than making a part that looks identical to the certified part. In some cases, destructive testing is the only way to determine if a part is a forgery except for the fact that the part's documentation is also fraudulent.

Finally, as costs increase and competition remains fierce, the airlines are constantly seeking ways to cut cost without compromising safety. It has been the FAA's mission to "watch dog" the airlines and ensure compliance with airworthiness directives. In the past few years, that role has changed dramatically. The FAA now functions as an enabler to keep airlines operating profitably. This is not necessarily a bad thing but it leaves a void in oversight, in my humble opinion.
Author:  Irish Drifter [ Fri Jan 04, 2008 9:11 pm ]
Post subject: 
I have no argument with any of that Pacifica55.

However, all that is equally true whether the airframe is 12 years old or 5 years old or 9 months old which was the basis of my post.

All I wanted to point out that fleet age is not necessarily a indicator of safety but more a marketing tool. A commitment by executive management to maintenance and training, regardless of cost, is the best tool to ensure the safest operation possible.

I think we are on the same page amigo.
Author:  Devo [ Fri Jan 04, 2008 11:18 pm ]
Post subject: 
Orange wrote:
The planes are old, and show the wear and tear.


Just like their flight attendants :P
Author:  Icemon [ Sat Jan 05, 2008 2:55 am ]
Post subject: 
I don't think it's a fleet age issue, just the A300 is a POS. I don't know any US air carriers that use them other than American. UPS and Fed Ex use them. Airbus actually stopped making them years ago, then UPS went to them and ordered like 80 or them if they would start up the production on them again. I heard this all from a UPS Captain. The Boeing 777 is a far superior plane although it is probably more expensive. American does have 777s in their fleet and I see them flying MIA to DFW all the time. I was talking with the Captain during the delay. I'm in the industry so I am not an idiot when it comes to aviation, it's actually my expertise. American still does use a lot of MD80s which is the reason for the age of their fleet.The MD80s are getting phased out of all fleets recently as stricted noise requirements are making these aircraft cost prohibitive. The same thing happened with the Boeing 727s about 10 years ago. Delta has a lot of MD80s as well.
Author:  Diablo [ Sat Jan 05, 2008 3:20 am ]
Post subject: 
I am not sure if my problems with AA were with an aging fleet or flying thru Miami, but I have refused to use their services any longer due to all of the problems that I endured. Their DTW to SJO schedule fit perfectly with mine, but after 2 years of phucked up flights.....Hola Continental, Spirit, Delta, US Air, etc
Author:  Haywood Jablommi [ Sat Jan 05, 2008 5:02 pm ]
Post subject: 
I bought a ticket for June on martin air out of Miami for 238 including taxes and fees. Cant beat that.
Author:  Pacifica55 [ Sat Jan 05, 2008 5:14 pm ]
Post subject: 
Irish Drifter wrote:
I have no argument with any of that Pacifica55.

However, all that is equally true whether the airframe is 12 years old or 5 years old or 9 months old which was the basis of my post.

All I wanted to point out that fleet age is not necessarily a indicator of safety but more a marketing tool. A commitment by executive management to maintenance and training, regardless of cost, is the best tool to ensure the safest operation possible.

I think we are on the same page amigo.

Correcto, ID. Age in airframes is not the determining factor in airworthiness. We worked DC3s out of PDX until a few years ago hauling boxes. These aircraft had been used extensively to haul salmon in Alaska. When they were first acquired, you could hardly stay in the airplane for the smell. After a complete reconditioning they were returned to the fleet and paid their way for several years.

My point was that everything you mentioned was required to ensure that older airframes were still reliable and airworthy. The current cost cutting and contracting scenario has gone a long way towards removing those safeguards. We need more oversight and independent investigation before someone pays with their lives, IMHO.

Some other points I agree with: The A300 is apiece of crap. I'll take anything Boeing ever made over the latest French offering and be happy. The B727 bought the current fleet of aircraft. Those old birds kept flying long after the bank note that bought them was repaid. Too bad that they were so noisy or they would still be leaving black trails across America.
Page 1 of 2 All times are UTC - 5 hours [ DST ]
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group
https://www.phpbb.com/