I detest the dehumanization of airlines; it is all very bureaucratic now, compared to when I was a child.
I flew two cats from oceania to Europe, and the process was jarring; some regulation at the time prevented them even flying together. I remember their panicked howls when I saw them again at the airport, something that hadn't happened with any other mode of transport.
Your chances (as a human) of dying on a flight have also decreased by exponential factors. I’ll take bland and homogenized if it’s safe for situations like flight where I have zero control over the outcome once the plane takes off.
> I detest the dehumanization of airlines; it is all very bureaucratic now, compared to when I was a child.
Not to mention the feeling that you're treated like cattle.
And that many people taking care of luggage clearly hate their job and have absolutely zero respect for people's belongings and shall happily throw luggage instead of handling them with care.
Screw flying. I drive (and, yup, it's a problem if crossing an ocean is required).
The prices you were paying as a child are probably equivalent to first class travel today (or even more). If you pay for it you can still have that same luxury experience.
Sadly, no. If flying first class would have allowed my cats to sit in the cabin, I'd have done so. Nothing short of a private jet allows that though, and perhaps regulations wouldn't allow it even then.
It’s actually better if you view the full-resolution version—looks far less like a prison. Poor choice of on-camera flash, and poor choice of moping dog.
> What does it look like in an commercial airliner?
Depends. Unaccompanied animals are transported in the cargo hold, though I believe some care is taken (they're not just tossed in like luggage). Small animals can be taken with you if they will fit under the seat, on some airlines.
In order to fit under the seat... Would that mean your pets are mice? Or ants? Barely enough room for my feet under some airline seats... I doubt any breed of cat or dog would fit, unless they were <1 year old.
When I had a 12 pound dog he fit easily under the seat. I'd unzip a head sized hole in the top of his container so he could poke his head out, but he mostly slept.
I have the opposite thing. I become more and more frustrated and intolerant towards kids and especially their parents for making the rest of us go through that. I get it that they wanted kids and were ready for the screaming and whining and moaning, but I didn't want that. And yet I have no option, I have to tolerate it, too.
In general you can get closer to this by paying more. For instance with air travel families with children don’t often fly first class or stay at hotels at the upper tier of cost. But it’s not perfect on most cases
You can. Planesense, NetJets, Delta Black, and many others would be happy to take your business.
Far short of that, first class on trans-oceanic tend to be kid-free or well-behaved kids at least. Domestic flights, first-class is less pricey and therefore more prone to having kids in it.
>I get it that they wanted kids and were ready for the screaming and whining and moaning
you should consider as various circumstances arise that maybe they wanted kids without disabilities that cause the screaming, whining, and moaning and while you have to tolerate it they might have to live with it for the rest of their lives.
Maybe I'm just touchy though because I ran into someone with an attitude last week.
no, but a kid might have a disability that makes them loud and obnoxious and be thinking the parent's wanted this particular outcome why is my precious few hours being negatively affected. whine.
You're talking about it as if having children is an act of god, and not a decision people make. "I hate that this person decided to have a child and take it with them on a flight next to me" is a perfectly reasonable thought, I'd say. Whether the child is disabled or not is, I think, completely irrelevant.
used to view it this way also - flipped the script - because - life is too short to raise the blood pressure over things: ultimately beyond ones control - easier on the psyche to lower the ego to zero in these situations - smile - think about this as part of the human experience - use it as a test of my will - empathy & compassion for my fellow humans - brings peace - even joy - for me anyways - :=)
As the parent of a young daughter, I have little sympathy for humans who do not themselves exhibit sympathy and understanding for the behavior of the youngest members of the human race. Children and babies cry and throw tantrums, and many humans reproduce. If they didn't, the human race would end. These are two facts of life that acceptance of, imo, will make your life easier as a fellow member of the human race. Oh, lastly, families need to travel, and bring their youngest members with them. I think you should get noise cancelling headphones, and ear plugs, the former of which I always use on planes and helps take the edge off a baby's screams. I wouldn't have a problem with planes charging more for a section of seats that have improved sound barriers or something like that, however.
It should be abundantly clear that no one is actually blaming the children.
> If they didn't, the human race would end.
> Oh, lastly, families need to travel, and bring their youngest members with them.
My parents reproduced exactly enough to replace themselves, and needed to travel great distances with their children, and still never once used an airplane. This was also very common among my peers growing up. It's ludicrous to suggest that the human race's survival depends on children routinely flying commercial to go on vacations.
> It's ludicrous to suggest that the human race's survival depends on children routinely flying commercial to go on vacations.
True. Its not at all necessary to go on vacations. Required is a strong word, but I would say ability to move freely is somewhat of a basic human right. In the modern world, air travel is important given families are spread out, which necessitates air travel to allow families to see each other. Modern business requirements also often require air travel, and (speaking for myself) I have sometimes brought my daughter on business trips out of necessity or convenience.
I also wasn't saying the human race would end if people didn't go on family vacations, strictly that it would end if people didn't reproduce. so I'm saying, people should try to be ok with reproduction/kids (and therefore kids crying) if they care about the future of the human race.
The right of people with kids to travel with their kids is separate, but I think it follows.
I used to be that way and I still have the same temptation, but I'll say now, for the benefit of yourself, that's it's better to train yourself to handle outside issues like that.
I realize that life has a lot of annoyances. Bad drivers, bad bosses, shit friends, and crying babies on flights. I'll never be able to filter them all out so instead I learn to hone my frustration and drive it away. I try to be stoic.
I'm not perfect and I still often get frustrated, but life has immensely improved because of it. You'll never be able to stop the entire world from annoying you, but you can stop your reactions to it.
Lots of people complain about kids on the plane, but I've had very few problems (and I spent a few years where I was flying 2 - 4 times a week). I've had the occasional problem with the child behind me kicking my seat, but generally asking the parents nicely to not let him do that is sufficient to stop it. Kids cry sometimes, but earplugs or headphones reduces that to a tolerable level. I had one inquisitive 6 year old that was very interested in what I was working on on my computer, I indulged his questions.
I have heard horror stories of people collecting their pets after being transported in the cargo hold of a commercial airliner, and discovering that they've gone deaf, probably because they were left out on the ramp for too long near a running jet engine by some careless worker.
I have a 50-pound dog and am just resigned to taking a road trip with him or leaving him with friends when I have to travel.
I wish at least one commercial airline would adopt a "pet-friendly" policy and just allow people to purchase an extra seat for their dog. My dog would be happy to take the middle seat between me and my girlfriend, would stay out of the way of others, and I'd pay a significant amount of money if this were an option.
Some people are allergic. Some people have phobias. Some people would simply prefer not to be near an animal that may drool, shed, bark or otherwise act unpredictably when stressed on a flight.
None of that is unreasonable. I have nothing against dogs and dog owners but too many owners these days seem oblivious to the fact that many other people would prefer not to be forced to share space with animals.
Yeah, and it's easier for me to deal with that as a result: I can pay extra and get a first class ticket to get (depending on the plane) either some more space or A LOT more space to myself.
Would be nice if airlines would make it just as easy to buy some more space for my pet. Pay more to buy the row out, pay more to get on a limited selection of "pet friendly" flights, probably other ideas could work too...
pet friendly flights seems like the best bet here... I was sort of assuming this was a pet friendly airline, not just a plane that you can put your pet on.
> Yeah, and it's easier for me to deal with that as a result: I can pay extra and get a first class ticket to get (depending on the plane) either some more space or A LOT more space to myself.
I see people bring crying babies into first class all the time. I would dispute that most people really have an option to avoid "nuisance" contact with other people. (Not an option for me either way, I have never had a first class seat.)
Hell, it's honestly untrue of entirely too many adult humans these days, too. Humans have just become plain unpredictable in general (unless you predict "crazy"). :(
Right, but if you just replace "pet" with "baby" in your comment, the argument is still relevant. I'm not saying either way is wrong, but I don't think you can immediately conclude that it's fair to bring a baby on a plane that disturbs the 30+ people in immediate proximity while obviously unfair to bring a small pet on board
It's not still relevant because a baby and a dog are not equivalent. A baby has rights a dog doesn't. A baby might disturb people, so might an adult, but both are humans and you have to take the risk of being disturbed by humans because society is made of humans. Society is not made of or for dogs. Dogs are optional.
The OP was not talking about small pets, which are already allowed. They're talking about buying a separate seat for a large dog. It is utterly insane to expect anyone to spend a cross-country flight with an 80lb Labrador next to them slobbering all over them.
There's an easy solution to this: pet-friendly and pet-unfriendly airlines. The prices shouldn't be much different, because there are benefits to both being allowed to bring your pet and not being around pets, and in most cases the experience is nearly the same. If they are, the pet-friendly airline would be the more expensive one.
And then everyone claims their animal is a service animal so they do not have to pay extra to go on the pet friendly airline per ADA, and we are back to square one.
edit: sorry, I meant claiming their dog is a service animal, not any animal
That’s not how that works. You don’t just “declare” they’re a service animal and all is well. In fact, even real service animals often have issues in spite of the laws supposedly ensuring their access.
It seems like there is nothing stopping someone from claiming their dog is a service animal.
The DOT website says airlines can ask service animal owners to fill out a couple self attestation forms, and while that puts a little bit of skin in the game for the service animal owner, it does not seem easy to prove fraud.
the peacock didn't get to fly, but before they changed their policy it was $125 for a pet or $0 for a comfort animal, and they hadn't been checking if the animal was vaccinated, obedient, or that there was any medical reason for the person to have the animal (so it seems like you could just declare your pet to be a comfort animal and save $125)
That’s exactly how it works. People do just in fact declare their animals to be “service”, and because of how disability accommodation laws work, you cannot do anything about it.
Come out to LA and you'll see "emotional support" dogs/animals that are definitely not trained pooping all over and eating produce in the grocery stores. All it takes is a 100$ and signing a paper and they get the little slip and vest.
No one is making their animal a service animal to save money. They're doing it to avoid putting their animal under the plane. The "saving money by making your dog an ESA or service animal" was just airline propaganda.
I think there could be negative feedback loop here.
If there’s enough demand to justify the change, then it’s going to turn into a barn yard atmosphere when you’re the only airline that does this and every flight has 20 untrained dogs on board.
If there’s not that much demand, then what do you have to gain by risking the loss of profitable business fliers for some occasional pet flyers?
People want to take their pets with them, but will they foot the bill for that cabin space and put up with everyone else’s pet, and do it in large enough numbers to fill planes?
They could offer just a few "pet flights", with different livery, and interiors for easier cleaning, and a premium on the tickets for the pet owner and pet seats -- then also a discount for the excess no-pet travelers who explicitly opt into filling out a pet flight.
It might be a terrible idea, but I've both heard and had worse!
I doubt there is enough demand for them to invest the hundreds of millions per aircraft to provide this service. In addition, each of the routes they would be able to provide would remove gates for other, more profitable flights. Another factor would be turnaround, i.e. cleaning and resetting a ‘pet-friendly’ flight would probably take longer then a regular flight, increasing the at-gate time and thus reducing the number of flights that could use that gate.
Thirded. It also depends quite a bit on the pet itself. Most dogs are very cute and well behaved, but some are quite loud and then there are some people with completely spoiled and possibly aggressive dogs, who are then put under stress in an enclosed space with a lot of other animals (prey and rivals alike). Combined with an owner who is unable or unwilling to control them, this is a recipe for disaster. Sure, there are not too many of those, but it only takes one to ruin a lot of days at once.
There are also many people who would prefer to not sit next to a human that may droll, vomit, start screaming or otherwise act unpredictably when stressed on a flight.
None of that is unreasonable… is it? That's why I don't fly with my dog (in large part out of concern of their well-being), but maybe airlines should also consider not allowing toddlers on the plane if these things are the concern?
Oh, wow... was really not expecting "toddlers". Those descriptions of otherwise unpredictably acting humans is not restricted to merely the toddler aged humans.
I was a frequent air traveler for around 15 years and would sometimes fantasize about an airline or subsidiary that catered only to human people with, say, 500,000 miles in experience as passengers. No kids, no pets, no rookies. But I am even happier now with my unplanned alternative – no air travel at for 2+ years.
What if the back of the plane is pets ok and the front of the plane is for people who don't want to be near them?
Where I live people bring the dogs into the grocery store (carrying them, putting them in the cart, or just walking on a leash.... and no, they aren't all service dogs) and I've never seen a problem.
Personally I think you should be able to get a special collar or jacket for them that says they have passed a test that they are well enough trained for such things etc.
> Personally I think you should be able to get a special collar or jacket for them that says they have passed a test that they are well enough trained for such things etc.
I agree with your overall point - but I doubt this would be effective. Supposedly we already have such a system for service animals, but there's been enough shenanigans around that to make me cautious of this specific plan.
Well it's better than nothing. But as I said, where I live (San Francisco) people bring dogs in stores all the time, and I never see problems. Presumably most of them realize that if their pet is going to poop on the floor or bark or snap at people, they just don't bring them in.
What are the shenanigans you are aware of with service dogs? Badly behaved dogs, or just people that lie about why they need a dog? My suggested plan would make such lying unnecessary since all you need to do is prove the dog can pass a behavior test, it has nothing to do with whether you supposedly need the emotional support animal. (and of course, this doesn't give anyone the right to bring the dog in a store or in a plane or whatever, unless the business wants to allow it)
> What are the shenanigans you are aware of with service dogs? Badly behaved dogs, or just people that lie about why they need a dog?
The problem with "service" dogs is that you can buy a vest on Amazon for $25[0] without that dog having been trained to do anything in particular. Many people (in San Francisco especially; I'm surprised you haven't seen this) just put these on their dog and claim that they can bring the dog into restaurants (where non-service animals are specifically banned by health code).
The whole "emotional support animal" thing has been abused like crazy by people who just feel entitled to bring their pet anywhere they want, regardless of the law, or even just the policy of a particular establishment. Generally it's fairly legally perilous for a business owner to attempt to ascertain if the animal is really a service animal that's been properly trained to do tasks for their human, so they often feel stuck and unable to turn them away.
I like (most) dogs just fine, but I don't want to be seated indoors in a restaurant one table over from one, even if they're well-behaved. I'm fairly allergic to some breeds, and I don't want to spend my meal with itchy eyes and a stuffy nose. And I certainly don't want random pets walking around grocery stores, sniffing the produce and shedding hair on everything. Actual service animals are trained to handle those situations properly and not be a nuisance, but your random pet or "emotional support animal" is not.
Oh I've seen people with service dog vests, but don't have any knowledge of whether they are "real".
But see, I don't care if the person really needs a service dog. Some are for "emotional support", and while I think that is a bit silly, whatever.
What I'm concerned about is badly behaved dogs. I haven't seen that inside stores or restaurants.
I really don't care about whether they are sniffing produce or whatever (not they they seem to do that), if I'm going to get sick from something in a store, most likely it is from a human, since humans tend to host human-infecting germs.
Have you actually ever gotten allergies from a pet in a restaurant? I have cat allergies, but they tend to kick in when I am in someone's home where a cat lives.
I think if pets are only in one part of the plane it should not be a problem. Planes filter the air more than just about any other environment. I have pretty severe cat allergies and don't think it would be a problem for me unless it is in the same row.
I've been on a plane with a dog three or four rows behind me, and was stuffy and sneezing for most of the flight. And my allergies aren't even that severe. Sure, maybe it would have been fine had the dog been 10 rows back, but maybe not, and maybe not for someone with more severe allergies.
Then again, sometimes we just have to suck it up and deal with it, and hope the airline staff can do what they can to separate the animals from the people with allergies as much as possible. While there are certainly some people who bizarrely can't go anywhere without their pet (and I personally don't care if we don't make accommodations for them), but people do legitimately need to travel with their pet sometimes, and we need safe ways to do that. We have two cats, and if we were to move to somewhere far enough away that driving were infeasible, I would want to travel with them in-cabin.
I completely support making flights less comfortable. Less flying means less pollution. Bring in the pets! And let's remove the chairs while we're at it.
FWIW it’s worth (not much, obviously) I’m allergic to cats but I would much rather sit next to someone with a cat on an airplane than the absolutely noxious scents so many people insist in dousing themselves in before flying. The headaches from the latter are excruciating.
While the cases you lay out are valid, cats and dogs are already allowed on flights. They must fit into a cannel that fits under the seat though. If I recall correctly you can take the dog on your lap once in the air as well (might misremember this part. It's been a long time sober I've done this). Still would be a problem for anyone who struggles with allergies.
I used to have a dog and got this feedback from people quite often.
As far as I understand, pet allergies are not like peanut allergies in that they're not actually lethal (correct me if I'm wrong!) As such, I feel like it's just one of those things that people might just need to deal with when they're part of a shared space much like sitting next to someone with bad body oder, someone chewing loudly, or someone laughing out loud when they're watching their tv. If it's too much of an annoyance maybe one can try to get moved to a different seat?
I mean no offense, but this is insane. I have a cat that I love like it's my child, so I sympathize with where you're coming from, but come on. You're basically saying that people with legitimate medical conditions caused by your pet's presence should just suck it up because at least they aren't going to die. All so you can travel with your pet. Talk about a lack of empathy...
No, that's not at all what I'm saying. I'm saying that if someone seated next to me is allergic to my pet (or for whatever reason doesn't want to sit next to it), then they could relocate either me or that person so that we're sufficiently far apart not to cause any issues.
The argument presented to me in the past (and also the argument in comment I was replying to) is that since some people are allergic to pets or otherwise dislike them, we should completely disallow traveling with pets in a blanket fashion. I'm simply saying that I think that's too extreme and that a middle ground can be found.
If we're going to completely ban pets on airplanes, then we should consider also banning flying with a cold because of immunocompromised people (in fact this is perhaps more warranted given the severity of the situation).
Who cares if the allergies are lethal or not? They'll cause the person to be miserable for days, possibly cause hives, possibly cause an asthma attack. That's not comparable to sitting next to someone who's annoying/smelly.
My allergies aren't too bad, but they are still worlds worse than sitting next to someone who smells bad.
I have two cats and love them to death, but if I were to fly with them, I would volunteer to move to a different seat if I found out I was seated near someone with bad allergies.
> it's just one of those things that people might just need to deal with when they're part of a shared space much like sitting next to someone with bad body oder, someone chewing loudly, or someone laughing out loud when they're watching their tv
These are things we accept with extreme annoyance, because the alternative is creating a scene or having to deal with the sort of person who's already shown themselves willing to act with disregard for others. It's not something we treat as normal and right behavior that the victim just needs to "get over". Surely you've encountered someone playing loud music on public transportation or something similar; just because no one says anything doesn't mean that we all think it's okay.
I purchased an extra seat on Virgin from SFO to SAN 6 years ago.
The rules may have changed since, but the flight attendants were loving on my pets...and the 1 hour or so flight time was hugely preferable to farting around on highways.
I once took our dog on a transatlantic flight. The flight attendants loved it and a lot of kids stopped by to pet the dog. But our dog is very well behaved and she sat on my lap quietly for 11 hours.
Seems like the variety of outcomes for allowing pets would make this prohibitive. Imagine the first time a dog bites another passenger or shits on a seat mid flight or starts uncontrollably barking.
Every country has different rules, and so does each airline. So there are some that allow pets in cabin, but then won't allow pets in cabin in a certain country. There are many variables to flying with a pet, but we've reduced the stress in finding those nuances out on Avvinue. You should check it out.
When I moved states, I had to fly with my rabbit. At the time, Alaska Airlines was the only carrier that would allow a rabbit in the cabin. I thought that was odd, considering a rabbit would indubitably make less of a commotion than a cat or dog. My rabbit was shaking the whole flight, poor thing; I can't imagine him being in the cargo area.
I wish for an airline like this. I would pay extra for the extra seat. Maybe tag the flight as pet-friendly to allow passengers the ability to decide not to take a certain flight due to allergies. I regard my pet as a family member
But only small dogs that can fit in an underseat carrier -- most airlines allow this.
I'd pay for a first-class seat for my 40 lb dog if he was allowed on the plane. But no airlines allow that as far as I know so we generally drive anywhere we travel. At least domestically.
> I wish at least one commercial airline would adopt a "pet-friendly" policy and just allow people to purchase an extra seat for their dog. My dog would be happy to take the middle seat between me and my girlfriend, would stay out of the way of others, and I'd pay a significant amount of money if this were an option.
Babies are bad enough, and I'd book in an instant if an airline announced a ban on babies. As for animal? That'd be insane. Keep them on the ground where they belong.
> I wish at least one commercial airline would adopt a "pet-friendly" policy and just allow people to purchase an extra seat for their dog.
Depending on the size, you often can. I do this with my cat. He counts as my carry-on and I don't get any extra carry-on allowance for buying a second seat though. So there are some extra luggage costs involved in addition to the pet fee. But when the flight attendant comes by and says "sir, you need to put the cat underneath", I say "I bought this seat for him and the ticket agent said it would be ok." Hasn't failed me yet.
We pay ~$100 each way to put our small dog under the seat on flights. He just curls up and hangs out. Definitely a little stressed but not panicking or anything.
The one time I put my cat under the seat instead of buying him his own seat he wet himself and got stress cystitis, so I don't put him through that anymore. Obviously YMMV.
Yeah it's definitely possible. There are more than 400 pet-friendly airlines you can book tickets from on avvinue.com. While you can't book a separate seat for them, you can have them fly in cabin with you if they meet the criteria. So it's definitely possible -- that's why we launched Avvinue for this.
I boarded a cross-country flight a while back and watched them loading luggage into the hold, put a dog in a crate up the moving ramp and one guy knock the water bottle upside-down so there was no way the dog could drink. The guy looked at what he'd done and then just ignored it. I alerted the flight attendant to this. She seemed bothered, wandered off and came back later and told me it was fine, she'd told them about it. I had my doubts.
I will note that not every airline has a “United Airlines” approach to animals. (For those not from the States, UA has a bit of a reputation for killing animals, amongst several other things). We took our dog transatlantic with BA and though she was forced into the hold the airline was fairly aware of the conditions that the animals would be subjected to and we actually had to delay her return due to adverse temperature conditions for several weeks.
Not that BA is really great about much else, frankly, I think that their handling of our dog is one of the only nice things I have to say about that airline.
Some airlines do have this option. At last resort you might have to purchase the entire row. But usually you can get it done for a seat or less, especially if you call up beforehand and the flight isn't full.
And don’t put your pets in the overhead bin. People have done this (without the flight attendants even noticing) to find that their pet has suffocated in-flight.
You'd have to be spectacularly stupid to do that. The case I heard where that happened the flight attendant it there, without realizing there was a pet in the container. (the family told her, but somehow she didn't hear or understand)
LOL at the idea of [my pet flying separate from me, in the main cabin of a separate plane just for pets] being a superior option to [my pet being in my hands the entire time and handled literally only ever by myself, which is what happens when you take your pet in-cabin on a normal passenger airline like Southwest].
You do realize that you can only fly in-cabin with your pet if it fits underneath the seat ahead of you, usually < 20 lbs. Many pets don't fit this criteria, but otherwise I agree with you.
may 2016, two pets at once, both feline, extra purchased seat(s).
the dullards at SFO wanted to put them through the Xray conveyor belt, btw, which was corrected by asking for a supervisor, who damn near backhanded the dopes i first interacted with.
looks, from other comments, they've tightened this since, as there was no "service animal" shenanigans. they're just particularly hairy family members.
It's not just under 20lbs, it's the pet plus a hard carrier under 20lbs. Those hard carriers weigh about 5lbs, so your dog needs to be under 15lbs, which means only the smallest of dogs are eligible
If you can fly with your pet in cabin with you, that's certainly the best option, but it's not available everywhere. Some airlines just don't allow it at all, and I believe most/all won't allow it if flying internationally. (Most US airlines won't even let you fly with a pet in cabin from the mainland to Hawaii.)
I'm about to travel from Cali to NYC with my ~10 lbs dog. Got a soft-sided carrier off Amazon for pretty cheap in the required dimensions and plan to have him in the cabin with me.
These are the rules for AlaskaAir (+$100 each way):
For pets traveling in the cabin, hard-sided carriers must have maximum dimensions of 17" x 11" x 7.5" (43 cm x 28 cm x 19 cm) and soft-sided carriers must not exceed 17" x 11" x 9.5" (43 cm x 28 cm x 48 cm). They must be leak-proof, have adequate ventilation, and be lined with absorbent bedding. For pets traveling in the hold, carriers must not exceed the dimensions 30" x 27" x 40" (76 cm x 68 cm x 101 cm). Kennels must be solid, have handles, adequate air ventilation, and a sturdy roof. Pets must be provided with food and water bowls attached to the interior.
I've never dared to fly our pets, but do they really put them right between all the other luggage in the hold like depicted? No separate section? And leave them freezing?
Your best course of action is to bring them as extra size cabin luggage.
Anything short of that would be rolling the dice, and the best outcome would still be a horrible experience for the pet.
Edit: even on companies with “pet friendly” adjustments. Looking at how they treat special luggage and other “no really, I’ll pay for it so treat it nice” cargo, I wouldn’t trust major airline companies to be consistently good with animals.
Looks like the pet shippers put your pet on a commercial airline, as cargo, same as you'd do it. They just deal with the logistics, and transport to/from the airport for you.
First world countries are proposing to fight climate change, while rolling out air carrier services to transport bulk chihuahuas. I feel like this is going to be an excellent target for those in favor of a carbon neutral future.
I have flown with my cat several times. It’s unbelievably annoying and my cat is the by far the least of my worries. Usually, it’s a $100 or so fee one way, so around $200 round trip. But yet, the pet takes up one of your carry on luggage bags, and you have to sign something that they (the airline) will provide absolutely no additional service for anything and they have no liability. Then, they only allow a certain amount of pets on the flight (their discretion?), and so it amounts to a first come, first serve basis. There’s no way to pre-register the pet. You have to do it when you check in. So, what is the ridiculous fee even for?
Oh, and to go through security, you have to take a nervous and scared cat out of their carry case in the middle of the security line, walk through the metal detector, and then they have to test both of your hands for residue while still carrying the cat. They will not let you put the cat back before they’ve tested your hands. It makes no sense.
The whole process and fee is basically security and the airlines saying “we’re annoyed, so we’ll make you pay for it with process and fees”.
I always make it a point to notify the passengers next to me that I have a cat in case they are allergic. This again is something the airline does not care about to do themselves, which again makes no sense because it’s probably the single biggest risk for the flight and passengers (someone having an allergic reaction in the middle of a flight).
At least on Delta, you can. You need to call the airline and arrange it.
> Oh, and to go through security, you have to take a nervous and scared cat out of their carry case in the middle of the security line, walk through the metal detector, and then they have to test both of your hands for residue while still carrying the cat.
I always refuse the normal line and get a private screening. So far I haven't had any issues doing that.
I can't remember Delta's exact policy, but if I recall correctly, you can call ahead of time but when it comes to flight day, they can still refuse you if too many pets have already checked in. Don't quote me on that though.
That's how it was before Avvinue. We just launched the world's first pet travel booking platform so that you can get your pet reserved 100% online and confirms the place on the flight so you don't have sit on hold for hours just to be denied.
People have tried this so many times and it always fails. It's a huge issue for going to/from Puerto Rico, due to 1) weather 2) shitty ground services 3) no land connection. My friend has planes and one of them will be part 135 (charter) compatible, so I've been looking at doing monthly flights with a vet and ~10 animals for 2.5h from South Florida to Puerto Rico (especially for people with animals banned on flights due to size or facial structure, or people who value their pets enough to be less price sensitive generally).
(I fly cats for adoption from PR to ATL, MIA, FLL, TPA sometimes; it's interesting traveling with them in the cabin. Usually they are very young kittens and very quiet the whole time.)
When I used to fly with my dog (~10lbs so they were allowed in the cabin) I had to pay $200 for them which is fine. But then it turns out that the dog also counted toward my carry-on! WTF!? I mean either charge me or have it count toward my carry-on, but both??
I need something like this as I'm going to be moving internationally in a few months and got a pet to bring along but goddamn this site is janky
The flight date goes anywhere from 2021 to 2022 the call to action on mobile goes to a unreachable Dev site with a sketchy wedding/rsvp URL and there's absolutely no useful information about coverage
I'd say the risk of something happening to your pet is far too high to justify such a short flight.
I'd suggest borrowing a car from a friend or renting one for a couple of days; and have one of you stay with the pet in the new place while the other drives the car back.
You can just pay a bit extra and bring your pet in an extra seat in the cabin. I've been doing this for years. Many times I'll often be given 3 seats if there's an empty row, just to make it more comfortable for me and my cat.
you can take the ferry from italy to spain, takes around 24h and the pet can be free in your cabin and they have a special deck for you to walk it around
I didn't consider travel by boat but it does seem the most convenient way for the pet, it also seems somewhat economical compared to the rest. thanks! I'll give it serious thought.
I need to internationally travel with two small anxious dogs (10 lbs) from Austin Texas to Medellin Colombia (in about 3 months). Any recommendations or advice from the world-traveler / dog owners crowd? When the pups are happy, I’m happy!
I suggest you find an airline that will let you purchase seats or allowances to travel with the pets in the normal cabin next to you. After all, they are anxious and will really be quelled by being next to you during something nerve-wracking like a flight.
Super excited to see this. There's plenty of demand for flying with a pet. Especially given the removal of all ESA stuff and the current cost of kennels being so high.
This isn't flying with a pet. This is your pet flying in a pets-only plane. I'd be concerned about the logistics.
The plane they show (presumably their best) is a turboprop. That's shorter range and slower than a jet. If you're flying somewhere and planning to drop your pet off when you get to the airport, even if you align departure times well, you might be waiting a couple hours for your pet to arrive on the other side.
While they appear to have a presence in the airport terminal (or strongly imply they do), I suspect there are still different logistics paths in loading and unloading the pets. Do they have to use cargo terminals?
Are there layovers on the pet's flight? On yours? What happens if one of the planes is delayed or the flight is completely canceled? There's not likely to be another Pet Airways plane sitting there as backup.
I can't imagine this would work at all without frequent traumatic experiences for the pets, where owners are separated for days at a time due to logistics breakdowns.
This site is a scam. They can’t even spell “breathe” properly. Airlines have pressurized, climate controlled cargo areas where a small number of pets can be transported. They have strict rules and regulations about carrier sizes and other things that are there to ensure that your pet is safe. The site is pure FUD - saying that darkness is bad for animals is garbage. Saying that cargo areas can get above 140 or below freezing is not true for the areas where pets are shipped. How are you supposed to drive your pet internationally across an ocean? My money says that if you ship with this company, they will charge you a premium and ship your pet via the same methods available to you directly with the carrier. You should use a pet shipper because they will handle the paperwork for clearing customs, and they know the carriers who will ship your pet properly. I brought two 65 pound dogs from Chile to the US and spent $7k to do it because they are family. I also moved with three cats from the US to Poland and back, and then to 2y later moved with them to Chile. No one died in transit.
I have severe animal allergies. I used to get really frustrated by people bringing their pets onto the plane. There is generally no way to let the airline know ahead of time that I can't be seated next to an animal, and no guarantee that there will be a place they can relocate me to. Now I always have an n95 mask on me, so it's not a huge deal unless the flight is super long (itchy eyes are still a thing). Wish I had thought of that sooner.
Pseudoephedrine helps with some sinus issues but isn't an antihistamine. There are a cocktail of allergy meds that help, but are not fast acting so I need to be on them all the time to account for one-off exposures. They don't stop the allergic reaction entirely but they do make it more bearable and buy me time - with those built up in my system I can generally be around animals for about 4 hours before my allergies become unbearable.
I want to bring my two cats from Tokyo to California. Only possible choose is American airlines where I can bring them beneath seats. I'm interested in another ways.
I suggest you go with that method. If you call AA shortly before the flight, it's possible to get allowance to get you and your pets put in an empty row on the plane. I have this done almost every time for me and my cats. Just have to try to get it done even when you are boarding. Any decent airline with a plane that isn't full, will accommodate the request.
No problem. I have brought a foldable litter box from Sturdi [1, 2] with litter in a ziploc. The cats didn't use it. Yes they cried but a carrier that lets you pet them is a way to help with this. I sometimes took them out of the carrier and got away with it most of the time, but one time got told they had to go back in. YMMV
In any case, them being on the seats (in carrier) rather than under them, helped a ton. The cats aren't as freaked out.
Thank you for sharing your experience. It is really appreciated. I'm glad to know that you can put a litter box under seats and get away with cats. Thank you so much.
No problem. Sturdi's carriers are also really good. I took them to the bathroom to use the litter box. I'm sure you could place it on the floor though if they give you a row to yourself.
Thanks. I checked Sturdi's carriers. It's a little bit over my budget, but looks nice for an in-cabin flight. I see you can bring cats to restroom with a litter box. Now I can imagine better how an in-cabin flight is like. My worries are faded. Thank you so much!
You can double check and confirm which flight your two cats can fly from on avvinue.com, which is our new pet travel startup. Otherwise there are options on charter as well - but many airlines allow two of the same species to travel in the same carrier, so if they get along :)
Hey. I checked your site. It suggests Alaska Airlines, Japan Airlines, All Nippon Airlines and Air Canada. Do they allow cats under seats, or should cats go to a cargo room? It is huge difference. Thanks!
This airline is only trying to solve the issue of pets flying in cargo / excess baggage, and instead putting them in the cabin area; but this doesn't allow any passengers.
So for those of you looking to actually travel with your pets, I actually launched my startup, Avvinue, that helps you search and book pet-friendly flights, hotels and more. It captures IATA airline pet policy data and country pet import requirements so that you book the exact flight that your pet is allowed on. No more calling the airlines, researching for hours only to find out that your pet can't fly.
You can search flights now here: www.avvinue.com and we're expanding our core team after raising a pre-seed round, so feel free to send a message on our website if you're interested.
196 comments
[ 3.1 ms ] story [ 256 ms ] threadhttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pet_Airways
I flew two cats from oceania to Europe, and the process was jarring; some regulation at the time prevented them even flying together. I remember their panicked howls when I saw them again at the airport, something that hadn't happened with any other mode of transport.
Yup, but it's also a heck of a lot cheaper, largely due to mechanization, automation, homogenization, and bureaucratization.
Not to mention the feeling that you're treated like cattle.
And that many people taking care of luggage clearly hate their job and have absolutely zero respect for people's belongings and shall happily throw luggage instead of handling them with care.
Screw flying. I drive (and, yup, it's a problem if crossing an ocean is required).
Edit: Yes I mean what perardi shares below, it’s not far off what I imagine traveling in cargo hold is like for pets.
https://secureservercdn.net/166.62.114.250/tje.5a9.myftpuplo...
It’s actually better if you view the full-resolution version—looks far less like a prison. Poor choice of on-camera flash, and poor choice of moping dog.
Depends. Unaccompanied animals are transported in the cargo hold, though I believe some care is taken (they're not just tossed in like luggage). Small animals can be taken with you if they will fit under the seat, on some airlines.
The cargo hold is too hot on the ground, too cold in the air, pitch-black, and poorly-ventilated. They're also left alone and unmonitored.
If I could pay for child-free transport, I would.
Far short of that, first class on trans-oceanic tend to be kid-free or well-behaved kids at least. Domestic flights, first-class is less pricey and therefore more prone to having kids in it.
It looks like Wheels Up bought them: https://www.deltaprivatejets.com/
you should consider as various circumstances arise that maybe they wanted kids without disabilities that cause the screaming, whining, and moaning and while you have to tolerate it they might have to live with it for the rest of their lives.
Maybe I'm just touchy though because I ran into someone with an attitude last week.
> If they didn't, the human race would end.
> Oh, lastly, families need to travel, and bring their youngest members with them.
My parents reproduced exactly enough to replace themselves, and needed to travel great distances with their children, and still never once used an airplane. This was also very common among my peers growing up. It's ludicrous to suggest that the human race's survival depends on children routinely flying commercial to go on vacations.
True. Its not at all necessary to go on vacations. Required is a strong word, but I would say ability to move freely is somewhat of a basic human right. In the modern world, air travel is important given families are spread out, which necessitates air travel to allow families to see each other. Modern business requirements also often require air travel, and (speaking for myself) I have sometimes brought my daughter on business trips out of necessity or convenience.
I also wasn't saying the human race would end if people didn't go on family vacations, strictly that it would end if people didn't reproduce. so I'm saying, people should try to be ok with reproduction/kids (and therefore kids crying) if they care about the future of the human race.
The right of people with kids to travel with their kids is separate, but I think it follows.
I realize that life has a lot of annoyances. Bad drivers, bad bosses, shit friends, and crying babies on flights. I'll never be able to filter them all out so instead I learn to hone my frustration and drive it away. I try to be stoic.
I'm not perfect and I still often get frustrated, but life has immensely improved because of it. You'll never be able to stop the entire world from annoying you, but you can stop your reactions to it.
I am of the opinion that there are a lot of parents that wanted a baby but didn't really want to raise children.
Like a child that wants a kitten and then gets bored a year later when the kitten has turned into a cat.
I have a 50-pound dog and am just resigned to taking a road trip with him or leaving him with friends when I have to travel.
I wish at least one commercial airline would adopt a "pet-friendly" policy and just allow people to purchase an extra seat for their dog. My dog would be happy to take the middle seat between me and my girlfriend, would stay out of the way of others, and I'd pay a significant amount of money if this were an option.
None of that is unreasonable. I have nothing against dogs and dog owners but too many owners these days seem oblivious to the fact that many other people would prefer not to be forced to share space with animals.
Would be nice if airlines would make it just as easy to buy some more space for my pet. Pay more to buy the row out, pay more to get on a limited selection of "pet friendly" flights, probably other ideas could work too...
I see people bring crying babies into first class all the time. I would dispute that most people really have an option to avoid "nuisance" contact with other people. (Not an option for me either way, I have never had a first class seat.)
if only.
The comfort of other humans is more important than anyone’s selfish desire to drag their pet to each and every place they happen to go.
The OP was not talking about small pets, which are already allowed. They're talking about buying a separate seat for a large dog. It is utterly insane to expect anyone to spend a cross-country flight with an 80lb Labrador next to them slobbering all over them.
Can we at least apply this same standard to the other human passengers on a flight then?
edit: sorry, I meant claiming their dog is a service animal, not any animal
Per this website:
https://www.transportation.gov/individuals/aviation-consumer...
And this one:
https://beta.ada.gov/topics/service-animals/
It seems like there is nothing stopping someone from claiming their dog is a service animal.
The DOT website says airlines can ask service animal owners to fill out a couple self attestation forms, and while that puts a little bit of skin in the game for the service animal owner, it does not seem easy to prove fraud.
https://www.cbsnews.com/news/united-airlines-changes-policy-...
the peacock didn't get to fly, but before they changed their policy it was $125 for a pet or $0 for a comfort animal, and they hadn't been checking if the animal was vaccinated, obedient, or that there was any medical reason for the person to have the animal (so it seems like you could just declare your pet to be a comfort animal and save $125)
If there’s enough demand to justify the change, then it’s going to turn into a barn yard atmosphere when you’re the only airline that does this and every flight has 20 untrained dogs on board.
If there’s not that much demand, then what do you have to gain by risking the loss of profitable business fliers for some occasional pet flyers?
People want to take their pets with them, but will they foot the bill for that cabin space and put up with everyone else’s pet, and do it in large enough numbers to fill planes?
It might be a terrible idea, but I've both heard and had worse!
Hooters tried something similar but arguably more niche back in the 2000s.
I once made the mistake of staying in a 'pet friendly' section of a hotel. The smell alone was enough to make me check for that next time.
None of that is unreasonable… is it? That's why I don't fly with my dog (in large part out of concern of their well-being), but maybe airlines should also consider not allowing toddlers on the plane if these things are the concern?
Where I live people bring the dogs into the grocery store (carrying them, putting them in the cart, or just walking on a leash.... and no, they aren't all service dogs) and I've never seen a problem.
Personally I think you should be able to get a special collar or jacket for them that says they have passed a test that they are well enough trained for such things etc.
I agree with your overall point - but I doubt this would be effective. Supposedly we already have such a system for service animals, but there's been enough shenanigans around that to make me cautious of this specific plan.
What are the shenanigans you are aware of with service dogs? Badly behaved dogs, or just people that lie about why they need a dog? My suggested plan would make such lying unnecessary since all you need to do is prove the dog can pass a behavior test, it has nothing to do with whether you supposedly need the emotional support animal. (and of course, this doesn't give anyone the right to bring the dog in a store or in a plane or whatever, unless the business wants to allow it)
The problem with "service" dogs is that you can buy a vest on Amazon for $25[0] without that dog having been trained to do anything in particular. Many people (in San Francisco especially; I'm surprised you haven't seen this) just put these on their dog and claim that they can bring the dog into restaurants (where non-service animals are specifically banned by health code).
The whole "emotional support animal" thing has been abused like crazy by people who just feel entitled to bring their pet anywhere they want, regardless of the law, or even just the policy of a particular establishment. Generally it's fairly legally perilous for a business owner to attempt to ascertain if the animal is really a service animal that's been properly trained to do tasks for their human, so they often feel stuck and unable to turn them away.
I like (most) dogs just fine, but I don't want to be seated indoors in a restaurant one table over from one, even if they're well-behaved. I'm fairly allergic to some breeds, and I don't want to spend my meal with itchy eyes and a stuffy nose. And I certainly don't want random pets walking around grocery stores, sniffing the produce and shedding hair on everything. Actual service animals are trained to handle those situations properly and not be a nuisance, but your random pet or "emotional support animal" is not.
[0] https://smile.amazon.com/Service-Vest-Hook-Straps-Handle/dp/... for example
But see, I don't care if the person really needs a service dog. Some are for "emotional support", and while I think that is a bit silly, whatever.
What I'm concerned about is badly behaved dogs. I haven't seen that inside stores or restaurants.
I really don't care about whether they are sniffing produce or whatever (not they they seem to do that), if I'm going to get sick from something in a store, most likely it is from a human, since humans tend to host human-infecting germs.
Have you actually ever gotten allergies from a pet in a restaurant? I have cat allergies, but they tend to kick in when I am in someone's home where a cat lives.
Then again, sometimes we just have to suck it up and deal with it, and hope the airline staff can do what they can to separate the animals from the people with allergies as much as possible. While there are certainly some people who bizarrely can't go anywhere without their pet (and I personally don't care if we don't make accommodations for them), but people do legitimately need to travel with their pet sometimes, and we need safe ways to do that. We have two cats, and if we were to move to somewhere far enough away that driving were infeasible, I would want to travel with them in-cabin.
As far as I understand, pet allergies are not like peanut allergies in that they're not actually lethal (correct me if I'm wrong!) As such, I feel like it's just one of those things that people might just need to deal with when they're part of a shared space much like sitting next to someone with bad body oder, someone chewing loudly, or someone laughing out loud when they're watching their tv. If it's too much of an annoyance maybe one can try to get moved to a different seat?
The argument presented to me in the past (and also the argument in comment I was replying to) is that since some people are allergic to pets or otherwise dislike them, we should completely disallow traveling with pets in a blanket fashion. I'm simply saying that I think that's too extreme and that a middle ground can be found.
If we're going to completely ban pets on airplanes, then we should consider also banning flying with a cold because of immunocompromised people (in fact this is perhaps more warranted given the severity of the situation).
I have two cats and love them to death, but if I were to fly with them, I would volunteer to move to a different seat if I found out I was seated near someone with bad allergies.
These are things we accept with extreme annoyance, because the alternative is creating a scene or having to deal with the sort of person who's already shown themselves willing to act with disregard for others. It's not something we treat as normal and right behavior that the victim just needs to "get over". Surely you've encountered someone playing loud music on public transportation or something similar; just because no one says anything doesn't mean that we all think it's okay.
The rules may have changed since, but the flight attendants were loving on my pets...and the 1 hour or so flight time was hugely preferable to farting around on highways.
1) Muzzle 2) Diaper 3) Muzzle
I'd pay for a first-class seat for my 40 lb dog if he was allowed on the plane. But no airlines allow that as far as I know so we generally drive anywhere we travel. At least domestically.
Babies are bad enough, and I'd book in an instant if an airline announced a ban on babies. As for animal? That'd be insane. Keep them on the ground where they belong.
Depending on the size, you often can. I do this with my cat. He counts as my carry-on and I don't get any extra carry-on allowance for buying a second seat though. So there are some extra luggage costs involved in addition to the pet fee. But when the flight attendant comes by and says "sir, you need to put the cat underneath", I say "I bought this seat for him and the ticket agent said it would be ok." Hasn't failed me yet.
edit: On Alaska
Not that BA is really great about much else, frankly, I think that their handling of our dog is one of the only nice things I have to say about that airline.
Southwest certainly your pet has to be in the small crate. There might be exceptions for service animals though.
the dullards at SFO wanted to put them through the Xray conveyor belt, btw, which was corrected by asking for a supervisor, who damn near backhanded the dopes i first interacted with.
looks, from other comments, they've tightened this since, as there was no "service animal" shenanigans. they're just particularly hairy family members.
> We do not allow animals in the main cabin unless they are assistance animals.
https://help.virginatlantic.com/gb/en/how-to-book-your-pet-o...
These are the rules for AlaskaAir (+$100 each way):
For pets traveling in the cabin, hard-sided carriers must have maximum dimensions of 17" x 11" x 7.5" (43 cm x 28 cm x 19 cm) and soft-sided carriers must not exceed 17" x 11" x 9.5" (43 cm x 28 cm x 48 cm). They must be leak-proof, have adequate ventilation, and be lined with absorbent bedding. For pets traveling in the hold, carriers must not exceed the dimensions 30" x 27" x 40" (76 cm x 68 cm x 101 cm). Kennels must be solid, have handles, adequate air ventilation, and a sturdy roof. Pets must be provided with food and water bowls attached to the interior.
https://www.alaskaair.com/content/travel-info/policies/pets-...
He's a super chill dog that sleeps all the time anyway. Did a trial run of him in the carrier and he just fell asleep.
Anything short of that would be rolling the dice, and the best outcome would still be a horrible experience for the pet.
Edit: even on companies with “pet friendly” adjustments. Looking at how they treat special luggage and other “no really, I’ll pay for it so treat it nice” cargo, I wouldn’t trust major airline companies to be consistently good with animals.
Oh, and to go through security, you have to take a nervous and scared cat out of their carry case in the middle of the security line, walk through the metal detector, and then they have to test both of your hands for residue while still carrying the cat. They will not let you put the cat back before they’ve tested your hands. It makes no sense.
The whole process and fee is basically security and the airlines saying “we’re annoyed, so we’ll make you pay for it with process and fees”.
I always make it a point to notify the passengers next to me that I have a cat in case they are allergic. This again is something the airline does not care about to do themselves, which again makes no sense because it’s probably the single biggest risk for the flight and passengers (someone having an allergic reaction in the middle of a flight).
> There’s no way to pre-register the pet.
At least on Delta, you can. You need to call the airline and arrange it.
> Oh, and to go through security, you have to take a nervous and scared cat out of their carry case in the middle of the security line, walk through the metal detector, and then they have to test both of your hands for residue while still carrying the cat.
I always refuse the normal line and get a private screening. So far I haven't had any issues doing that.
Still, it's a huge pain in the ass.
(I fly cats for adoption from PR to ATL, MIA, FLL, TPA sometimes; it's interesting traveling with them in the cabin. Usually they are very young kittens and very quiet the whole time.)
Can you expand on this a bit?
Edit: did a bit of researched and found the answer: https://www.travelandleisure.com/trip-ideas/pet-friendly-tra...
*https://divi.dev/wedding/#rsvp
https://blog.privatefly.com/air-horse-one-a-private-jet-for-...
The flight date goes anywhere from 2021 to 2022 the call to action on mobile goes to a unreachable Dev site with a sketchy wedding/rsvp URL and there's absolutely no useful information about coverage
Also, pawsenger
I'd suggest borrowing a car from a friend or renting one for a couple of days; and have one of you stay with the pet in the new place while the other drives the car back.
Haven't yet shipped my dogs as I'm still doing some research, but that site has helped having a place to start the research.
The plane they show (presumably their best) is a turboprop. That's shorter range and slower than a jet. If you're flying somewhere and planning to drop your pet off when you get to the airport, even if you align departure times well, you might be waiting a couple hours for your pet to arrive on the other side.
While they appear to have a presence in the airport terminal (or strongly imply they do), I suspect there are still different logistics paths in loading and unloading the pets. Do they have to use cargo terminals?
Are there layovers on the pet's flight? On yours? What happens if one of the planes is delayed or the flight is completely canceled? There's not likely to be another Pet Airways plane sitting there as backup.
I can't imagine this would work at all without frequent traumatic experiences for the pets, where owners are separated for days at a time due to logistics breakdowns.
I used Pet Airways years ago before it first shut down and they flew out of regional airports, so it’s unlikely you’d fly out of the same airport.
Back then, you'd drop your pet off at one airport and they’d be at the destination the next day. They only had a few airports they flew in and out of.
Meanwhile, on the other side of anecdote land, people in the last thread were talking about deaths, or hearing of pets going deaf.
In any case, them being on the seats (in carrier) rather than under them, helped a ton. The cats aren't as freaked out.
[1] https://sturdiproducts.com/products/folding-water-tight-boxe...
[2] https://sturdiproducts.com/products/folding-water-tight-boxe...
Glad I could help with the info. Cheers.
So for those of you looking to actually travel with your pets, I actually launched my startup, Avvinue, that helps you search and book pet-friendly flights, hotels and more. It captures IATA airline pet policy data and country pet import requirements so that you book the exact flight that your pet is allowed on. No more calling the airlines, researching for hours only to find out that your pet can't fly.
You can search flights now here: www.avvinue.com and we're expanding our core team after raising a pre-seed round, so feel free to send a message on our website if you're interested.