ssullivan

I've had three stays at aloft locations in the last month, and have been very pleased with all of them. The rooms are very modern and comfortable, and the showers are incredible. I had a few minor complaints; the large compact fluorescent bulbs used in the desk lamps are too big to fit completely inside the lamp, and hang out, creating a blinding glare right at eye level when working at the desk, at first I thought there was no iron and ironing board in the room but then discovered it's just well hidden, and on the last night of my third stay, the housekeepers ignored our room. However, overall the stays were great, and at a great price

Too bad it's crumbling, surprised it hasn't been bulldozed already.

No kidding, especially considering its condition. I consider this building to be a major safety hazard that could easily result in serious injury or death to any passers by who have the misfortune of being next to it on Main Street when it finally collapses. Just the bricks falling out of the walls can be deadly. The City of Houston is negligent in my opinion if anything bad should happen, because they have not taken appropriate action to ensure that the structure is either safely demolished, or is shored up in a way that prevents an uncontrolled collapse.

I've heard this practice is common on airlines in Europe. Can anyone verify this?

Yes it is common practice with the discount airlines in Europe. In fact, some of them, like Ryanair, are so incredibly low-service, that they don't have window shades, jet bridges (you walk across the tarmac

Speaking of legroom... for those of us who have to fly coach, SeatGuru can be a really useful tool. I keep it open in a separate window when I'm booking a flight. Sometimes leaving an hour earlier or later is enough to get 2-3 inches of extra legroom, or a twosie with the wife instead of a threesie with a stranger.

That is a great site. I was a contributor for it when it was first being developed, providing some of the details on the Continental and Northwest fleets. There are a few items on it that are a matter of the site owner's personal opinion but for the most part it's quite accurate.

Also, the Paris CDG flight is being downgraded from a 777 to a 764 this fall. This will be a bigger deal because Continental has already announced that the 777s, 757s, and new 787s will be getting lie-flat new seats in Biz class but the 767s wont. The only int'l routes from IAH on CO on 777s this fall will be Tokyo and London. Paris, Amsterdam, Rio, Sao Paulo, Buenos Aires, and Honolulu all get the 767s.

Where's the love from the hometown airline?

According to the latest timetable, the 777 to 764 switch is only for about six weeks, starting right before Christmas and lasting until early February. At that point the 777 returns. This is probably a reaction to the decreased demand for travel to Europe that always happens in the winter, and the fact that Continental is wrapping up retrofits to the older 777s that involve installing the new on-demand in-flight entertainment system, more BusinessFirst seats, new power ports at every seat, and overhead crew rest areas. They may be taking advantage of the decreased winter demand to speed up the 777 retrofits, and put a 764 on that route, before demand picks back up in the spring. Also this spring Continental has the new Shanghai flight starting which will require a couple of 777s, so it makes sense to get the retrofits wrapped up this winter while there's less demand for those planes.

As for the new BusinessFirst seats, none of the 777s have them now, and none are getting them until next year. It is a small step down from the current 777 BusinessFirst seat to the current 764 BusinessFirst seat, but there are also a lot of frequent fliers who prefer the 767 seat anyway. For economy passengers, Continental's 767s actually have a more comfortable seat than the 777s

IIRC, Northwest is also the airline that charges a fee so you can select your seat preference (aisle/window).

Yes and no. Northwest does charge a fee for certain seats, but the vast majority of aisle and window seats are available to all passengers at the time of ticketing without any additional fee. The seats they charge extra for are some of the exit row seats, and some oddball aisle seats that are just like any other aisle seat but a little closer to the front. Northwest never has implemented a charge for across-the-board seat assignments.

The truth of the matter is very few Northwest passengers pay for a preferred seat assignment, as the seats they charge that fee on amount to an extremely small percentage (most definitely 5% or less) of Northwest's total economy class seat count.

In his defense, I fly domestically a lot and I usually search a lot of sites online to find the cheapest fare. I have yet to get Southwest as the cheapest. And based on that map, they go to almost all of the places I go. For a no frills airline, it seems weird that they're never cheaper to those airports...

Price depends on a lot of variables. Generally I find Southwest to be the same price as other airlines in most markets that I would consider flying them to, which isn't many.

And while Southwest is good about hitting most major metro areas, there are a lot of smaller cities they don't fly to, and there are some pretty big cities (Atlanta, New York, Minneapolis/St. Paul, Boston, Charlotte) that they don't fly to as well.

Lose money to whom? Wasn't Continental the last of the major domestic airlines that didn't charge?

As it stands now, Delta is the only full-service domestic carrier who is not charging for the first bag. However, I doubt that will remain the case. Delta's merger partner Northwest is charging $15 for the first bag, and I'd be very surprised if Delta didn't eventually adopt that policy.

Among some of the smaller airlines, you can still check one free bag with AirTran, Frontier, and JetBlue.

Amazingly, "no thrills" Southwest is not charging for the first bag or the second bag. Alaska Airlines is the only other domestic carrier who is still doing this.

Yes this fee stinks. But it doesn't affect me at this time due to my status at Continental.

I'm far more upset about today's other announcements at Continental

Yes. They will check your bag and swipe your credit card at the gate for the fee. I saw it happen on an American flight recently.

At this time, Continental will not be charging for bags checked at the gate. I have confirmed this with a gate agent I know and she assures me that they have been told that they are not to charge customers for checking a bag at the gate because it will not fit on board. However, this is going off the assumption that passengers will continue to show up at the gate with regulation size carry-on bags that should fit. If enough passengers start showing up hauling enormous bags that would never stand a chance of fitting in an overhead bin, I wouldn't be surprised to see Continental start charging. But for now, the plan is to not collect a fee at the gate for checking a bag after boarding has commenced because it wouldn't fit on the plane.

Transcripts are pointless unless you think the person is lying about the GPA on their resume. Everyone within each degree we recruit for takes the same classes, so we don't really care. I wouldn't expect a person to have to provide that past their first job anyway. After a couple years, experience is all that matters.

Some our best folks had horrendous GPA's, some of our worst had good ones. Depends on the position you are hiring for though.

This is very true. I graduated with my BA in 1996 and haven't had any one inquire about my GPA since around 1999. And I had a GPA that I'm not overly proud of. I went to a very selective private college, and didn't have the maturity at the time to really study

I guess I see the point of how it's confusing, but none of the names that have been thrown out really appeal to me.

I love Terminal A, too. I never think I'm flying out of a small town (I've been in real small town airports, and they're nothing like it). I feel transported to the early 70s. I alway hear the theme from "The Bob Newhart Show" in my head when I walk through it.

And it's got banjos! (The terminal, not the song.)

That would be Terminal B, not Terminal A. The last of Terminal A's "banjos" were torn down over five years ago. Terminal B remains mostly in its original configuration for now, but Continental does have plans for a major reconstruction of it that will eliminate the old gate areas and replace them with more modern linear concourses.

LGW - ditto. One restroom for a terminal building is insane, plus there is insufficient seating. Last time I was there the entire place was grubby (I'll update later this week)

The experience at LGW varies greatly by terminal building. The old south terminal is pretty dumpy, with inadequate restroom facilities in many areas, and hellish security lines. The north terminal, which Continental moved into last year, is a much better experience, with nicer and more modern facilities, shorter lines, and if you're flying in BusinessFirst, access to the Emirates lounge which is incredible. The duty free mall/waiting area at the north terminal is also a lot larger and nicer.

One of the most unusual airports I ever experienced was flying in a 12 seater into Vernal, UT around 1996. The airport terminal or ticket area was the size of a 7 Eleven with a fold out table to check in baggage and one woman at the booth. Twilight Zone it was.

I thought for sure Arnold the Pig (Green Acres) would dart out any moment to hail a taxi cab for me (probably be Mr Haney)

I've encountered several similar airports in my travels. I've actually been to Vernal, but by car, not by plane. But the airport there sounds quite like the one in Worland, WY. The facilities at Del Rio or the temporary terminal in Beaumont aren't much better.

This makes total sense. WestJet really is the Canadian version of Southwest. They're what Southwest would be if Southwest had assigned seats and in-flight entertainment systems on its planes. WestJet does serve a few US cities, but has very little presence in this country. Having Southwest as a partner will greatly expand WestJet's reach into most major US business markets. And Southwest gets access to all of the major Canadian cities, as well as a lot of second- and third-tier Canadian cities.

Here's a quick snapshot while passing by:

Ugh. It's even worse than I feared it would be. I may have to drive by the site later this week when I'm back in Houston for a few days. I still can't believe they're doing this.

I knew this collection existed nearly 20 years ago when it was mentioned one time when we were at his house visiting. Too bad I never got to see it, but I'm thrilled it's made it into the hands of someone who will put it to good use.

From today's Chronicle comes this article about a large collection of documents and photos related to the early years of public transportation in Houston. The collection recently turned up in an estate sale in Missouri City, and has made its way into the hands of the author of the book about Houston's streetcars that was published about 10 years ago, and the city's Preservation Officer.

I find this of personal interest, as the estate sale was that of one of my relatives.

Chronicle article: A ride through our transportation past

Haven't heard a thing about its performance yet, but they still have quite a few billboards up here in Atlanta promoting "Change Is: Going into Africa," with a subtitle about the Lagos service.

DFW's Terminal D isn't that much nicer than Terminal E at IAH, where most of Continental's mainline international flights operate. And overall, IAH's terminals, with the exception of B, are better laid out and nicer than most of DFW's terminals.

And when you get to comparing the secondary airports in both cities, HOU is MUCH nicer than DAL.

WOW. I had no idea that center at the corner of Westheimer and Montrose was that old, and used to look so good. What a disaster the modernization of the center's architecture was. If it still had the original art deco design, I'd be all for restoring it and keeping it as is, with the current parking lot between the center and Westheimer. But now that it's long been a generic, soulless shopping center, I'm all for tearing it down and rebuilding with no parking on the Westheimer and Montrose sides (but parking accessible from Lovett). It is such a great location for a mix of restaurants and shops. Even some of the existing places would be a great mix to fill some of the spaces in a redeveloped center (Half Price Books, 3-6-9, even Spec's and Papa John's), with the rest filled in by better retail than currently exists in the center.

I still believe that the Montrose and Lower Westheimer corridors are primed for street-scape improvements to make the area more pedestrian friendly, considering the concentration of great retail, gallery, and dining options that exists in the area, and the general lack of parking. This is the type of neighborhood that draws a lot of people who live in other parts of the city, and all of the businesses would benefit greatly by making it easier for people to park in one location and walk to a variety of places in the neighborhood. MetroRail entering the area on Richmond, plus the current frequent Westheimer bus service, and hopefully increased Montrose bus service connecting to the Montrose/Richmond MetroRail station, would also enhance the neighborhood, making it easier to just leave the car at home, or use Metro after parking to get around the area.

I've never been to KC, but the secure gate setup seems to work fine at a number of large hubs such as Schiphol, Frankfurt, Gatwick, etc. Actually I think part of the idea is that they want you to spend less time hanging unprofitably around the gate, and more time shopping on the concourses.

I've flown through several of those European airports you mentioned. They are not set up anything like what exists in Kansas City. At Gatwick, for example, passengers still clear central security screening checkpoints for the primary security screening. There are very limited retail services near the gates, but most of the retail is still behind security in the duty-free mall areas. The security at the gate is not really a full security checkpoint (which is what KC has); instead, you're just going through a secondary check of your passport, boarding pass, etc. The only real difference between those European airports and what you see at most airports in the US is that the gate areas are very spartan, and you are not encouraged to head for the gate until shortly before departure. However, the primary waiting areas (the "malls") on the concourse are behind the primary security checkpoints.

I'm looking forward to visiting Discovery Green for the first time in a couple of weeks when I'm back home in Houston for a weekend. I'm thinking the BF and I should take a break from packing my stuff for the Atlanta move mid-day Saturday, hop the MetroRail up to downtown, and have a burger at the Lake House while checking out the new park.

I H-A-T-E the Kansas City airport.

Yeah not a big fan of it either, except when I'm flying to Kansas City as my destination. Then it's perfect

Huh, hadn't noticed that, and I live right around the corner from there. I believe that was the first Residence Inn in Houston.

One thing I've seen at several airports that can help relieve the security queues is that each departure gate is its own "sterile zone" with a metal detector at the door to the departure area. The concourse areas remain unsecured. Not only does it speed up the security process, but if there is a security incident the gate can be closed without necessarily shutting down the entire airport.

Kansas City is one of the few airports that has this type of set up. It was done because there was virtually no other option, due to the terminal design. It works OK for origin/destination traffic, but is a real pain for connections. It's also very inconvenient if your flight in Kansas City is delayed, because you almost always have to leave the secured gate area to get to restaurants and shops, which means having to clear security again to enter the gate area. In fact, before renovations were completed a few years ago, you had to leave the secured gate area at Kansas City to even use the restroom.

Having separate security screening at each gate is not practical for a large hub airport, and it does not even work that well at airports like Kansas City, where there are relatively few connecting passengers.

The new Macy's was a Foley's before.

Yes, the Macy's in Galleria IV (the part South of West Alabama Street) was a Foley's when it was built.

Macy's. I don't know anyone who shops its Galleria location. Its old and worn and smells of suburbia.

You're referring to the Macy's in Galleria III. It is old and worn and was in need of renovation before Macy's took over the Galleria Foley's.

I still don't understand why Macy's insists on keeping both Galleria stores. Not only is the one in Galleria III in dire need of an upgrade, it's a pain to get to. The larger, newer, and MUCH nicer Galleria IV Macy's (the old Foley's) gets a lot more traffic, and is far more visible.

The zoo in Omaha Nebraska is far better than the Houston zoo, in a much smaller market. Almost all of the funding for major updates/rennovations was from private sources. The city shouldn't be to blame, the zoo should be able to raise its own funding.

If you read my post again, you'll see that my comment about the city inadequately funding the zoo was more an issue before the zoo started charging admission -- at a time when it was largely dependent on the city for financial support. Since the changes in how the zoo was managed were put in place, which included charging admission, very large renovation projects have been undertaken. There's a lot more corporate sponsorship of the major projects at the zoo than there was in the past. Improvements take time. But if you look at the areas that have been improved -- things such as the primates exhibit, children's petting zoo, and even the big cats exhibit (one of the older renovations at this point), the improvements are quite evident. A large portion of the zoo has been closed off for several years now for the development of the new African exhibit, which will greatly improve the quality of the zoo's habitats for many animals. But projects like these don't happen overnight. It takes years of planning and fundraising before construction can even start; then it may take several years to build the new habitat areas.

Admission fees at the zoo are quite reasonable -- and there are numerous free admission days every year. And as previously mentioned, the family memberships are a great bargain for families that visit several times a year.