Read
reaction to the ban from Times Online surf blogger Alex Wade
It used to be the surfing world’s favourite airline — but now the crowd just
wanting to get stoked, amped and pumped on foreign shores think British
Airways is a complete bummer.
BA is refusing to reverse a decision to ban surfboards as check-in baggage
from all their flights from next month.
The ban on all surfboards — from traditional longboards to stubby shortboards
weighing just 4kg which can be carried in a bag with shoulder straps — has
stunned the British Surfing Association (BSA) and left many surfers around
the world scrambling to make alternative travelling arrangements.
Karen Walton, national director of the BSA, said the ban was “inexplicable”.
She said: “We’d find it extremely hard to believe that the average Mini Mal
(surfboard) would be more difficult to handle when compared to a double bass
and a full bag of golf clubs.” She added that the ban would be bad news for
the growing numbers of surfers travelling to destinations around the world.
Ms Walton also said that among those who would be disappointed were the
British surfing teams, who have previously chosen BA “mostly as a result of
their generally fair baggage policy”.
Ms Walton continued: “We therefore feel completely let down and angered by the
news that our national airline is banning surfboards rather than following
some other airlines and charging a supplementary fee.” BA restarted its
flights between Gatwick and Newquay, the UK’s premier surfing destination,
in March after a three-year absence.
“We stumbled across the ban by chance when looking at the BA website. They
have agreed to honour bookings made prior to 6th November, when the ban
comes in, and have suggested that we use freight carriers,” Ms Walton told
The Times.
“But I checked one of these companies out and for a weekend trip to southwest
France I was told it would cost £205 each way to ship a board and would take
six days to get there and six to get back.
“BA fly to an awful lot of surf-friendly destinations and their ban is going
to impact upon global surf tourism. Developing countries like Sri Lanka are
tapping into this market. It’s also going to affect surfers who live in
places like Jersey, who are virtually dependent on BA to get on and off the
island.”
BSA has started an online petition, ’Stop the BA Surfboard Ban’, which
includes endorsements from the likes of Mick Fanning, ranked number one in
the world surfing championships who is a BA Platinum Card holder in the
airline’s Frequent Flyer scheme.
“As a World Championship Tour surfer it is the only airline I choose to fly to
and from Europe,” he said in his entry. “If you do not take my surfboards I
will not be able to compete in my World Tour events.” A BA spokeswoman said
it was not a ban on surfboards but added:<WC> “<WC1>We are
not accepting them at check-in to go in the hold. We do accept a lot of
sporting equipment but we have refined the list that we accept.” The ban
includes windsurfing boards and sails, hang-gliders, kayaks and canoes,
vaulting poles and javelins. But golf clubs, bicycles, fishing rods and even
snowboards will still be accepted.
“It won’t affect many of our passengers, we carry only two or three surfboards
a day for 100,000 daily passengers,” the spokeswoman added.
Around half a million people surf in Britain and the sport is growing rapidly.
Prior to this ridiculous incident BA were my first choice, simply because they always treated my friends and I and our boards with the upmost respect. The ban suggested BA didn't have a clue how many surfers travelled with them but now their statement proves it '2 or 3 per 100,000 passengers' this is laughable. They must be looking at figures for their Middle Eastern operations from the 1940s or something. Surifng is far larger than even most surfers believe. As Karen Walton rightly pointed out many developing countries depend upon surf tourism for their income one great example of this is Morocco. The London- Agadir route operated by BA has upwards of 20 surfers on each departure during British winter time and many of the towns North of Agadir depend on the money brought in by surfers to survive. On top of this I read yesterday that surfboards were the second most carried items on flights (golfclubs were the first), but how many golfers do you see venturing into deepest darkest Indo?
Rob B, Cardiff, Wales
It should be pointed out to the likes of Chris in Bangkok that the proposed ban has nothing to do with hand luggage. BA are proposing to ban a seemingly arbitrarily selected list of sporting items from being carried altogether (i.e. in the hold). I can't think of any time that I've attempted to take my kayak into the cabin of the plane with me. Nor have I ever encountered a surfboard that weighed 50 pounds.
I too have difficulty believing the figure of two or three per 100,000 passengers. It should be pointed out that activities such as surfing are a) largely seasonal and b) usually limited to certain localities (one wouldn't go surfing in Chicago). I think BA can look forward to losing a great deal of business on some of their routes.
Richard Repper, High Wycombe, UK
Great idea. I too am not a great fan of BA but this time they have got it right. Most of the time allowed between boarding and aircraft and it taking off is due to people who carry oversize and unmanageable goods as hand luggage.
I was a regular, one return per fortnight, user of the Kuala Lumpur Singapore Shuttle service between 15 and 10 years ago. At check in they had a topless cage. If your hand baggage did not fit in it was moved to the hold.
I believe that the airlines should provide a service that enables sports people to carry their own personal equipment but it should be in the hold and loaded by an expert at the same time the passengers are boarding. I also believe it should be chargeable.
When I took my 4 month old son from Heathrow to Changi I was charged 80 PST. All I got was a sky cot and a bottle warming service. If I have to pay for a 2 feet long 20 pound human why shouldn't another passenger pay for the 6 foot 50 pound surf board.
Chris, Bangkok, Thailand
Two or three per 100,000 daily passengers? I wonder if they realise how many people will boycott them for this even if they aren't travelling with gear on the band list... (and don't think skiis are ok, look at the max lenght incase they decide to start enforceing it after you book your flights!)
And do they really think £75 off my next flight with them is a reasonable compensation when I complained about they're 1970s baggage system which is the real problem with BA and bags.
Michael, Cambridge,
Don't know why you'd want to fly with BA anyway. I've travelled with a large number of airlines, and they're still the worst I've ever experienced. They make Air Asia look first class.
Nick, Christchurch, New Zealand