Model Airplanes

The airline that boasts of having invented no frills “bare fares” has started flying daily to Orlando, Florida, out of the Niagara Falls International Airport.

Spirit Airlines recently began offering a daily flight from the airport, with fares that average around $50 one way. The service is offered on some of the newest planes in the industry, according to the airline.

“Among the major airlines, we have the youngest and fittest fleet out there,” said Paul Berry, a spokesman for Spirit Airlines. “We’re bringing in a new plane a month,” he added, noting that in the last three years, the airlines has added more than 30 airplanes. 

Spirit, a former air freight company opened in 1990, Berry said, changed its business model in 2006 when they adopted the “bare fare” passenger model which was having some success in Europe. The concept allows passengers to pay only for the services they require.

“We want to give people the power to choose what they pay for in their inflight experience,” Berry said. “We basically give them a very low price that covers the seat and a personal item.” Everything else, from carry-on luggage to checked bags, to inflight food and drink service is extra. 

“Our average price is just over 50 dollars for one way,” he said. “On average, according to the Dept. of Transportation, Spirit’s fares are 40 percent less than other airlines and even after you pay for bags and seat assignments on Spirit, we’re still 30 percent less,” Berry said. 

The daily schedule will bring “new

Article source: http://www.niagara-gazette.com/news/local_news/bare-fare-spirit-airlines-now-flying-daily-from-falls-airport/article_cc68f09f-2dce-5921-b146-ad34e4cb801f.html

If a drone is on your holiday shopping list, be sure to check your insurance coverage before you crack open that instruction manual and take flight.

Damage from a drone is a bit more complicated than handing your kid a baseball and dealing with the wreckage an errant pitch might cause to a window.

There is no official tally of damage caused by drones, yet the roster of high-profile injuries includes musician Enrique Iglesias and Cleveland Indians pitcher Trevor Bauer. And there are internet lists galore, like a database of known U.S. incidents.

Even the pros can have problems.

A drone operated by Brett Woods, a pilot who co-founded the drone company Aerial Concept Unmanned Systems, was supposed to climb 400 feet but instead flew into the 27th floor of a building. Luckily, the apartment it breached was unoccupied, so the damage was chiefly to the drone and the window.

Business insurance covered the damage. But hobbyists and others who buy consumer-level drones cannot be so sure of what is covered if one of their flying devices goes rogue.

What’s covered

For the person who owns the drone, the prevailing insurance coverage would be your homeowner policy or your renter policy. But not everyone has those. Only about 40 percent of renters in the U.S. have coverage, according to the Insurance Information Institute, a nonprofit trade group.

The drone itself is covered as personal property, but it might not be worth a claim. The average deductible is $500, which is about what the popular DJI

Article source: http://www.stltoday.com/business/local/do-you-need-insurance-for-your-drone/article_02b8f9e3-554a-5fac-9e6b-43c6b1892340.html

From the 1989 April issue of Road Track

When I was taking flying lessons a few years ago, a friend of mine asked me what kind of airplane the instructor and I were using.

“A Cessna 150.” I answered.

He made a face. “Those are kind of like the Chevette of airplanes, aren’t they?”

I thought about that for a minute and then I said. “There’s no such thing as a Chevette of airplanes. Any machine that can fly is, by definitions, quite a bit more exciting than a Chevette.”

At the risk of sounding defensive, I also mentioned that the Cessna 150 is actually a delightful, fun airplane to fly, and its only real crime is popularity. If it were rare enough to generate jealousy and high prices, it would be much more highly regarded. In this respect, it’s probably closer to a Camaro then a Chevette: a good design, seen everywhere.

Even if my friend wasn’t quite on target, I thought it was interesting that he had framed his comparison with a car. It occurred to me then that we nearly always use cars as the standard when we are trying to de­ fine quality, or lack of it, in almost any other product.

Rolls-Royce, of course, is the world’s most common touchstone of craftsmanship and exclusivity. I have heard both Hasselblads and Leicas described as the Rolls-Royce of cameras, the Rolex

Article source: http://www.roadandtrack.com/car-culture/a30133/side-glances-counterparts/