<?xml version="1.0" encoding="ISO-8859-1"?>
<rss xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom" xmlns:feedburner="http://rssnamespace.org/feedburner/ext/1.0" version="2.0">
   <channel>
      <title>The Economist: Gulliver</title>
      <link>http://www.economist.com/blogs/gulliver/</link>
      <description />
      <language>en</language>
      <copyright>Copyright 2009</copyright>
      <lastBuildDate>Sun, 22 Nov 2009 17:53:08 +0000</lastBuildDate>
      <generator>http://www.sixapart.com/movabletype/</generator>
      <docs>http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/tech/rss</docs> 
      
      <atom:link href="http://www.economist.com/blogs/gulliver/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />

            <atom10:link xmlns:atom10="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom" rel="hub" href="http://pubsubhubbub.appspot.com" /><item>
        <title>Habits you should already have</title>
        <description>&lt;p&gt;Save time, pack it my way&lt;/p&gt;
          
                       &lt;p&gt;THERE are some habits that smart business travellers pick up on their first or second trip. One of those habits is keeping a permanent toiletries bag for business travel. It just makes sense. When you have to repack your toiletries for every trip, you risk forgetting things. And if you don&amp;#39;t have a separate travel toothbrush and travel deodorant, for example, you risk having to make an extra trip to the store when you get home if you leave something in your hotel. Having a bag ready is quicker and easier. And let&amp;#39;s face it: even the toiletries provided at the very nicest hotels aren&amp;#39;t usually as useful (or as comforting) as having your own stuff with you. If you&lt;/p&gt;&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/economist/blogs/gulliver/~4/QGII17jUWaw" height="1" width="1"/&gt;</description>
        <link>http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/economist/blogs/gulliver/~3/QGII17jUWaw/habits_you_should_already_have.cfm</link>
        <guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.economist.com/blogs/gulliver/2009/11/habits_you_should_already_have.cfm</guid>
                  <category domain="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category">Luggage</category>
        
        
        <pubDate>Sun, 22 Nov 2009 17:53:08 +0000</pubDate>
      <feedburner:origLink>http://www.economist.com/blogs/gulliver/2009/11/habits_you_should_already_have.cfm</feedburner:origLink></item>
            <item>
        <title>Good advice for making bad decisions</title>
        <description>&lt;p&gt;Buffets&lt;/p&gt;
          
                       &lt;p&gt;BUSINESS travellers don&amp;#39;t always have the time (and the expense accounts) to eat well. From time to time, we have to get what we can, when we can&amp;mdash;even if that means visiting the local strip-mall buffet. After all, middle-of-nowhere podunkville doesn&amp;#39;t usually have many other options. Thankfully, the blog &amp;quot;Eating the Road&amp;quot; is ready to help, with a truly comprehensive guide to getting your money&amp;#39;s worth from that very American establishment: the all-you-can-eat buffet. Read with care:Disclaimer: This is for instructional purposes only and should not be adhered to by rational human beings. This is compiled from observations by the author and makes no claims of being 100% factual. Any action by the reader to follow suggestions is his or&lt;/p&gt;&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/economist/blogs/gulliver/~4/id2mEJ316qo" height="1" width="1"/&gt;</description>
        <link>http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/economist/blogs/gulliver/~3/id2mEJ316qo/good_advice_for_making_bad_dec.cfm</link>
        <guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.economist.com/blogs/gulliver/2009/11/good_advice_for_making_bad_dec.cfm</guid>
                  <category domain="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category">Etiquette</category>
                  <category domain="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category">Expenses</category>
        
        
        <pubDate>Sat, 21 Nov 2009 22:22:14 +0000</pubDate>
      <feedburner:origLink>http://www.economist.com/blogs/gulliver/2009/11/good_advice_for_making_bad_dec.cfm</feedburner:origLink></item>
            <item>
        <title>Emirates told to charge more</title>
        <description>&lt;p&gt;An unusual order from the German government&lt;/p&gt;
          
                       &lt;p&gt;IN A rather odd-sounding piece of news, Emirates has been forced by the German government to raise the price of some of its business-class fares. The Germans said in a letter to the Dubai-based carrier that under European law it was not allowed &amp;ldquo;to engage in price leadership&amp;rdquo; on routes from Germany to non-EU locations. Emirates, which condemned the decision as&amp;nbsp;&amp;ldquo;commercially nonsensical&amp;rdquo;, responded by raising prices by 20% on some routes.Andrew Parker of Emirates told the Financial Times, &amp;quot;We are adamant this is selective and clearly an attempt by Lufthansa [Germany&amp;#39;s national carrier] to pursue Emirates versus a legitimate policy.&amp;quot;Lufthansa has, apparently, denied all involvement. But even so, if Emirates really has been singled out, then the heady whiff of&lt;/p&gt;&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/economist/blogs/gulliver/~4/MzJ56Cy5pPY" height="1" width="1"/&gt;</description>
        <link>http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/economist/blogs/gulliver/~3/MzJ56Cy5pPY/its_a_rather_oddsounding_but.cfm</link>
        <guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.economist.com/blogs/gulliver/2009/11/its_a_rather_oddsounding_but.cfm</guid>
                  <category domain="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category">Emirates</category>
        
        
        <pubDate>Fri, 20 Nov 2009 20:10:45 +0000</pubDate>
      <feedburner:origLink>http://www.economist.com/blogs/gulliver/2009/11/its_a_rather_oddsounding_but.cfm</feedburner:origLink></item>
            <item>
        <title>Using Twitter to complain</title>
        <description>&lt;p&gt;Some dos and don'ts&lt;/p&gt;
          
                       &lt;p&gt;GADLING&amp;#39;S recent post, &amp;quot;How to effectively complain about your trip via twitter&amp;quot;, does pretty much what it says on the tin. Follow and hook your audience If you&amp;#39;re flying on Virgin America this weekend, start the dialogue early. First, follow them, then include the @VirginAmerica mention in a few of your tweets to put yourself on the radar. If the Virgin folks see you building some momentum, they&amp;#39;ll tune in as well. Abjectly showing up and spewing out insults doesn&amp;#39;t carry the same weight as a concerned, engaged consumer. And remember, Twitter is not some magical salve that will soothe all the traveller&amp;#39;s complaints. If you get a response, be very grateful.If you&amp;#39;re lucky enough to have corporate America reach&lt;/p&gt;&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/economist/blogs/gulliver/~4/RC2C4T6JiVs" height="1" width="1"/&gt;</description>
        <link>http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/economist/blogs/gulliver/~3/RC2C4T6JiVs/using_twitter_to_complain.cfm</link>
        <guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.economist.com/blogs/gulliver/2009/11/using_twitter_to_complain.cfm</guid>
                  <category domain="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category">Twitter</category>
        
        
        <pubDate>Thu, 19 Nov 2009 18:38:52 +0000</pubDate>
      <feedburner:origLink>http://www.economist.com/blogs/gulliver/2009/11/using_twitter_to_complain.cfm</feedburner:origLink></item>
            <item>
        <title>Hotel reviews for business travellers</title>
        <description>&lt;p&gt;An underdeveloped market&lt;/p&gt;
          
                       &lt;p&gt;THIS week it&amp;#39;s ABC News&amp;#39;s turn to tackle the hotel-guide question: in a world of online reviews, guidebooks, star ratings and the rest, how do you find an opinion that you can trust? The article offers familiar advice about the need to ignore the extreme reviews on sites such as Tripadvisor, which one assumes were written by a hotel owner&amp;rsquo;s competitors and/or family members. Gulliver has already written of a personal, possibly lazy, preference for a trusted guidebook.And it throws admiring glances at Oyster.com, which can afford to pay journalists&amp;rsquo; salaries and hotel bills so they can travel incognito and offer unbiased reviews. (The website could do with a redesign, though.)Yet the best suggestion in the article comes from a&lt;/p&gt;&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/economist/blogs/gulliver/~4/i4wb2gWS3dY" height="1" width="1"/&gt;</description>
        <link>http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/economist/blogs/gulliver/~3/i4wb2gWS3dY/abc_news_tackles_the_hotel.cfm</link>
        <guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.economist.com/blogs/gulliver/2009/11/abc_news_tackles_the_hotel.cfm</guid>
                  <category domain="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category">Hotels</category>
                  <category domain="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category">Website reviews</category>
        
        
        <pubDate>Wed, 18 Nov 2009 17:22:26 +0000</pubDate>
      <feedburner:origLink>http://www.economist.com/blogs/gulliver/2009/11/abc_news_tackles_the_hotel.cfm</feedburner:origLink></item>
            <item>
        <title>Gulliver's prize</title>
        <description>&lt;p&gt;An award for our business-travel blog&lt;/p&gt;
          
                       &lt;p&gt;THERE&amp;#39;S no way to put this without sounding self-satisfied, but Gulliver won a prize at last night&amp;#39;s Business Travel Journalism Awards in central London. We were given the new Innovation Award, which is &amp;quot;Presented to the journalist or publication that is most effective in utilising new media, such as a blog or Twitter, or creating news in an innovative way to drive issues and connect the business travel community&amp;quot;.During the dinner it was particularly interesting to hear travel-industry representatives emphasise how much they learn from comments on blogs such as this. So rest assured: your voices are being heard, your opinions noted.At some point my grinning mug will appear on the Awards website; please be gentle if you then decide&lt;/p&gt;&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/economist/blogs/gulliver/~4/oCY5GZi0XvE" height="1" width="1"/&gt;</description>
        <link>http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/economist/blogs/gulliver/~3/oCY5GZi0XvE/gullivers_prize.cfm</link>
        <guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.economist.com/blogs/gulliver/2009/11/gullivers_prize.cfm</guid>
                  <category domain="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category">Rampant self-promotion</category>
        
        
        <pubDate>Wed, 18 Nov 2009 12:24:26 +0000</pubDate>
      <feedburner:origLink>http://www.economist.com/blogs/gulliver/2009/11/gullivers_prize.cfm</feedburner:origLink></item>
            <item>
        <title>Tea with Tony Fernandes</title>
        <description>&lt;p&gt;The boss of AirAsia delivers his credo&lt;/p&gt;
          
                       &lt;p&gt;TONY FERNANDES, the boss of AirAsia, a Malaysia-based budget airline, had tea with The Economist recently and came across as a thoroughly decent man. He told us why he started an airline in the aftermath of 9/11 and expounded the reasons for its success. Though he based his operational model on that of Ryanair, with a 25-minute turnaround at airports, Mr Fernandes says AirAsia places greater emphasis on customer service.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/economist/blogs/gulliver/~4/gSVwRd7hC7I" height="1" width="1"/&gt;</description>
        <link>http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/economist/blogs/gulliver/~3/gSVwRd7hC7I/tea_with_tony_fernandes.cfm</link>
        <guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.economist.com/blogs/gulliver/2009/11/tea_with_tony_fernandes.cfm</guid>
                  <category domain="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category">AirAsia</category>
        
        
        <pubDate>Tue, 17 Nov 2009 18:05:21 +0000</pubDate>
      <feedburner:origLink>http://www.economist.com/blogs/gulliver/2009/11/tea_with_tony_fernandes.cfm</feedburner:origLink></item>
            <item>
        <title>Drunk and drowning, but getting better</title>
        <description>&lt;p&gt;Some views of the BA-Iberia merger&lt;/p&gt;
          
                       &lt;p&gt;THE recently announced merger between British Airways and Iberia has given the metaphor writers a useful work-out. Where my Economist colleague saw &amp;quot;two drowning men&amp;quot; that had &amp;quot;long eyed each other as potential means of mutual buoyancy&amp;quot;, Ryanair spotted &amp;quot;two drunks trying to prop each other up. The merger&amp;rsquo;s outcome is generally expected to be positive. The belief that it will produce annual savings in the region of &amp;euro;400m ($595m) within five years should put some pep into those drowning/drunk legs. But strikes by BA&amp;#39;s cabin crew could cause short-term damage to the airline&amp;#39;s traffic figures and longer-term damage to its reputation at a time when airlines are feeling particularly sensitive. Strike papers are being sent to cabin crew today&lt;/p&gt;&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/economist/blogs/gulliver/~4/ZCcgFj21Vlk" height="1" width="1"/&gt;</description>
        <link>http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/economist/blogs/gulliver/~3/ZCcgFj21Vlk/drunk_and_drowning_but_getting.cfm</link>
        <guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.economist.com/blogs/gulliver/2009/11/drunk_and_drowning_but_getting.cfm</guid>
                  <category domain="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category">British Airways</category>
                  <category domain="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category">Iberia</category>
        
        
        <pubDate>Mon, 16 Nov 2009 18:17:47 +0000</pubDate>
      <feedburner:origLink>http://www.economist.com/blogs/gulliver/2009/11/drunk_and_drowning_but_getting.cfm</feedburner:origLink></item>
            <item>
        <title>No one pays for in-flight Wi-Fi</title>
        <description>&lt;p&gt;Surprised?&lt;/p&gt;
          
                       &lt;p&gt;ON THURSDAY, Gulliver argued that in-flight Wi-Fi might be a better long-term bet than airport Wi-Fi. That doesn&amp;#39;t seem to be the case. Joe Brancatelli reports in a Portfolio.com column that no one wants to pay for in-flight internet, either:Almost 18 months after they first began wiring planes for WiFi, carriers have outfitted around 600 domestic aircraft with one of the two existing flavors of airborne Internet. But they&amp;#39;re right back where Boeing and a passel of international airlines were in 2003: They&amp;#39;ve built it, but no one is coming. Or, to be more precise, very few passengers are putting their money where their Internet appetite is.Passengers &amp;quot;want to be connected, [but] they want it to be free,&amp;quot; Doug Murri,&lt;/p&gt;&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/economist/blogs/gulliver/~4/lcl06e2dBF8" height="1" width="1"/&gt;</description>
        <link>http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/economist/blogs/gulliver/~3/lcl06e2dBF8/no_one_pays_for_inflight_wifi.cfm</link>
        <guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.economist.com/blogs/gulliver/2009/11/no_one_pays_for_inflight_wifi.cfm</guid>
                  <category domain="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category">Airlines</category>
                  <category domain="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category">Internet</category>
        
        
        <pubDate>Sun, 15 Nov 2009 13:24:05 +0000</pubDate>
      <feedburner:origLink>http://www.economist.com/blogs/gulliver/2009/11/no_one_pays_for_inflight_wifi.cfm</feedburner:origLink></item>
            <item>
        <title>Small victories</title>
        <description>&lt;p&gt;TSA screening gets a bit better&lt;/p&gt;
          
                       &lt;p&gt;AMERICA&amp;#39;S Transportation Security Administration has revised its airport security screening procedures in response to a lawsuit filed by the American Civil Liberties Union, the ACLU said last week. The new guidelines make clear that TSA agents can only conduct searches that are aimed at enhancing airline passenger safety and security. The TSA, in other words, is not the FBI, and shouldn&amp;#39;t pretend that it is. The ACLU now plans to drop its lawsuit, which stemmed from a widely publicized incident in St. Louis in March. From the ACLU&amp;#39;s press release:The ACLU filed its lawsuit in June on behalf of Steven Bierfeldt, who was detained on March 29, 2009 in a small room at Lambert-St. Louis International Airport and interrogated by&lt;/p&gt;&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/economist/blogs/gulliver/~4/fqwbeFU4qdI" height="1" width="1"/&gt;</description>
        <link>http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/economist/blogs/gulliver/~3/fqwbeFU4qdI/small_victories.cfm</link>
        <guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.economist.com/blogs/gulliver/2009/11/small_victories.cfm</guid>
                  <category domain="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category">Airports</category>
                  <category domain="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category">Passengers</category>
                  <category domain="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category">Security</category>
        
        
        <pubDate>Sat, 14 Nov 2009 21:06:18 +0000</pubDate>
      <feedburner:origLink>http://www.economist.com/blogs/gulliver/2009/11/small_victories.cfm</feedburner:origLink></item>
            <item>
        <title>The future of security theatre</title>
        <description>&lt;p&gt;What to do about it&lt;/p&gt;
          
                       &lt;p&gt;SECURITY expert Bruce Schneier, a Gulliver regular, has a new essay on security theatre. Mr Schneier offers some suggestions of things that we can do that will improve our actual security instead of simply increasing the appearance of security. The whole thing is worth a read, but these paragraphs from the essay get at the heart of why security theatre is so widespread: Security is both a feeling and a reality. The propensity for security theater comes from the interplay between the public and its leaders. When people are scared, they need something done that will make them feel safe, even if it doesn&amp;#39;t truly make them safer. Politicians naturally want to do something in response to crisis, even if&lt;/p&gt;&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/economist/blogs/gulliver/~4/7BTob1BsYMw" height="1" width="1"/&gt;</description>
        <link>http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/economist/blogs/gulliver/~3/7BTob1BsYMw/the_future_of_security.cfm</link>
        <guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.economist.com/blogs/gulliver/2009/11/the_future_of_security.cfm</guid>
                  <category domain="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category">Safety</category>
                  <category domain="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category">Security</category>
        
        
        <pubDate>Fri, 13 Nov 2009 21:27:49 +0000</pubDate>
      <feedburner:origLink>http://www.economist.com/blogs/gulliver/2009/11/the_future_of_security.cfm</feedburner:origLink></item>
            <item>
        <title>Free airport Wi-Fi</title>
        <description>&lt;p&gt;Courtesy of Google&lt;/p&gt;
          
                       &lt;p&gt;GOOGLE announced last month that it was teaming up with Virgin America to offer travellers free inflight WiFi for the holidays. Now the search giant is getting even more generous. Google will give away free internet at 47 American airports this holiday season, PC World reports. There&amp;#39;s already a website for the campaign, which also includes a program encouraging users to donate (via Google Checkout, of course) to one of three participating non-profits. Google plans to match the donations to the non-profits up to a maximum of $250,000. It gets better: &amp;quot;There doesn&amp;#39;t seem to be much in the way of sneaky catches,&amp;quot; PC World says &amp;quot;&amp;mdash;unless you consider a request for donations a catch.&amp;quot;You can&amp;#39;t please everyone, though. In&lt;/p&gt;&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/economist/blogs/gulliver/~4/SH5-exfKUQ4" height="1" width="1"/&gt;</description>
        <link>http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/economist/blogs/gulliver/~3/SH5-exfKUQ4/free_airport_wifi.cfm</link>
        <guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.economist.com/blogs/gulliver/2009/11/free_airport_wifi.cfm</guid>
                  <category domain="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category">Airports</category>
                  <category domain="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category">Internet</category>
        
        
        <pubDate>Thu, 12 Nov 2009 22:13:51 +0000</pubDate>
      <feedburner:origLink>http://www.economist.com/blogs/gulliver/2009/11/free_airport_wifi.cfm</feedburner:origLink></item>
            <item>
        <title>LA confidential</title>
        <description>&lt;p&gt;How to do business in Los Angeles&lt;/p&gt;
          
                       &lt;p&gt;Our Los Angeles-based correspondent is the latest Economist journalist to offer some local advice to business travellers. He highlights LA&amp;#39;s traffic as the main issue for a visitor to consider. It&amp;rsquo;s worth taking time to familiarise yourself with the city&amp;#39;s traffic patterns: don&amp;rsquo;t, for example, try to drive into Santa Monica in the early morning as it could take two hours. But despite the potential for traffic snarl-ups, a hire car remains the best way for business visitors to get around the city. Most meetings, after all, will be near the 10 Freeway.For more thoughts and advice on hotels, tipping, meetings etiquette and small talk, listen to the full interview, which is part of a larger series on doing business&lt;/p&gt;&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/economist/blogs/gulliver/~4/jPYRB4bY5Rw" height="1" width="1"/&gt;</description>
        <link>http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/economist/blogs/gulliver/~3/jPYRB4bY5Rw/its_all_about_the_traffic.cfm</link>
        <guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.economist.com/blogs/gulliver/2009/11/its_all_about_the_traffic.cfm</guid>
                  <category domain="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category">Etiquette</category>
        
        
        <pubDate>Thu, 12 Nov 2009 19:05:21 +0000</pubDate>
      <feedburner:origLink>http://www.economist.com/blogs/gulliver/2009/11/its_all_about_the_traffic.cfm</feedburner:origLink></item>
            <item>
        <title>The Interstate railway system?</title>
        <description>&lt;p&gt;Repurposing America's highways&lt;/p&gt;
          
                       &lt;p&gt;ON SUNDAY, Gulliver noted Ryan Avent&amp;#39;s thought experiment about what might happen if America diverted some of its defence spending to infrastructure investment. In Wednesday&amp;#39;s New York Times, Karrie Jacobs, a columnist for Metropolis magazine, suggested an innovative way to use some of that money. With the economy in the pits, Ms Jacobs argues that Americans should &amp;quot;look with new eyes at a resource we&amp;rsquo;ve failed to take full advantage of: the Interstate highway system&amp;quot;:The most obvious use for the Interstate&amp;rsquo;s corridors is rail transportation. If we are going to spend billions rehabbing the highways, shouldn&amp;rsquo;t we, at the same time, invest in adjacent rail lines like the 800-mile high-speed rail system voters approved last year in CaliforniaThe corridors are&lt;/p&gt;&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/economist/blogs/gulliver/~4/Vskq4qBtljM" height="1" width="1"/&gt;</description>
        <link>http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/economist/blogs/gulliver/~3/Vskq4qBtljM/the_interstate_railway_system.cfm</link>
        <guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.economist.com/blogs/gulliver/2009/11/the_interstate_railway_system.cfm</guid>
                  <category domain="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category">Green issues</category>
                  <category domain="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category">High-speed rail</category>
                  <category domain="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category">Trains</category>
        
        
        <pubDate>Wed, 11 Nov 2009 21:56:20 +0000</pubDate>
      <feedburner:origLink>http://www.economist.com/blogs/gulliver/2009/11/the_interstate_railway_system.cfm</feedburner:origLink></item>
            <item>
        <title>Off the pilot's back</title>
        <description>&lt;p&gt;A few mishaps do not make a trend&lt;/p&gt;
          
                       &lt;p&gt;A UNITED AIRLINES pilot who was arrested at Heathrow airport on Monday morning just before he was due to fly to Chicago has been charged with being over the legal alcohol limit. He is the third American pilot to be arrested on drink-related charges in the past 13 months. Combine this with other recent pilot mishaps&amp;mdash;such as the Delta flight that landed on a taxiway at Hartfield-Jackson on October 19th or the Northwest flight that overshot Minneapolis airport by 150 miles on the 21st&amp;mdash;and it is tempting to see signs of a wider malaise.An article in the Chicago Tribune, headlined &amp;ldquo;Spate of airline pilot mishaps triggers concerns&amp;rdquo;, pondered:[Mr Washington&amp;rsquo;s] arrest is the latest in a recent spate of pilot mishaps&lt;/p&gt;&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/economist/blogs/gulliver/~4/PrVBpQ_8poU" height="1" width="1"/&gt;</description>
        <link>http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/economist/blogs/gulliver/~3/PrVBpQ_8poU/off_the_pilots_back.cfm</link>
        <guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.economist.com/blogs/gulliver/2009/11/off_the_pilots_back.cfm</guid>
                  <category domain="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category">Pilots</category>
                  <category domain="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category">United Airlines</category>
        
        
        <pubDate>Wed, 11 Nov 2009 18:32:17 +0000</pubDate>
      <feedburner:origLink>http://www.economist.com/blogs/gulliver/2009/11/off_the_pilots_back.cfm</feedburner:origLink></item>
      
   </channel>
</rss>
