Home | « Prev Next »

News Yay, American Airlines!

Posted by Erica C. Barnett on April 12 at 17:10 PM

plane.jpg

I’ve written elsewhere about American Airlines’ misguided attempt to market themselves to women by creating special dumbed-down search page for the ladies. (The search box is pink! And it doesn’t have all those icky “tools”! Tools are for guys.) BUT, I’m extremely excited that American is now offering a once-a-day direct flight from Seattle to Austin. (Or from Austin to Seattle, actually, since the flights are timed for Austin commuters to get here in the morning). I would go to Austin much more if it wasn’t such a hassle (even Texas-based companies like Southwest and Continental make you stop in Dallas or Houston, and don’t even get me started on Delta and United), so this is a really exciting development. Seattle, Austin, you’ve arrived.

Permalink

CommentsRSS icon

1

Doooooon't do it! The only time I flew with AA (and I fly somewhere quite a bit), they actually somehow broke off a wheel on the brand-new luggage I was using for the first time.

And it wasn't even just the wheel, it was the whole bit that the wheel is attached to. It's just a bare nylon stump with two holes now.

Posted by Maggie | April 12, 2007 5:42 PM

2

True, AA has a bad rep on luggage - use carry-on.

Posted by Will in Seattle | April 12, 2007 6:01 PM

3

Nice seats, though. It's nice not to be smooshed for 3 hours.

Posted by wench | April 12, 2007 7:07 PM

4

I flew to Austin ten years ago and got a cab at the airport; when the long-haired, middle-aged chilled-out cabbie asked where I was from and I answered, he let out a big, happy belly laugh and said, "Ah! Austin's evil twin!"

Posted by Grant Cogswell | April 12, 2007 11:33 PM

5

Cute Christen Eagle replica.

I wonder how much of this is due to the tech connection (Dell is in Round Rock, and Intel has a design center there) much like the SEA-SJC direct.

Looks like an MD-80, btw, so try not to get a seat too far back -- unless you like being stuck next to the bathroom and between the engines.

Posted by Pilot Joe | April 13, 2007 1:16 AM

6

Gotta love those old maddogs

Posted by Bran | April 13, 2007 1:40 AM

7

I'd say Portland is more of a backwater twin to Austin. Seattle metro is a bunch of shiny passive-aggressive transplants.

Posted by ))<>(( <-stupid stupid stupid | April 13, 2007 2:59 AM

8

In the spirit of Old Timey Travel, this route needs to have a name. I vote for "The Hipster Rocket." But that kind of sucks.

Posted by The_Pope_Of_Chili_Town | April 13, 2007 9:07 AM

9

How about Nerd Bird 2.0? The original Nerd Bird service is SJC to AUS

Posted by Bran | April 13, 2007 11:30 AM

10

Nice to know you're not nearly so concerned about your carbon footprint as you are about feminist issues.

Posted by jesus | April 13, 2007 3:28 PM

11

Actually, assuming a full airplane her share of the carbon would be no more than if she were driving; if she were flying previously but via a connecting flight, this would defnitely be less. If the convenience of the connection causes her to make more trips than she otherwise would, of course, that's a problem.

I looked into flying vs driving once in terms of carbon load, taking into account the different fuels involved. You can make the numbers come out the way you want if you assume particularly inefficient aircraft models and especially efficient automobiles, but for your typical airliner vs. your typical sedan, over a reasonably long trip, the carbon per seat-mile comes out about even. You just can't fly on a mostly-empty plane (not like that happens these days).

Posted by Joe | April 14, 2007 10:33 PM

Comments Closed

In order to combat spam, we are no longer accepting comments on this post (or any post more than 14 days old).