Dog Wonder
Veteran
Other airlines are asking for exemptions. It is a useless rule if it doesn't apply to busy airports.
US seeks exemption from delay rule
- Thread starter N965VJ
- Start date
Art at ISP
Veteran
With everyone asking for exemptions, it kind of negates the purpose of the rule in the first place.
We were not fully supportive of this punitive measure, which appears to have been put through just to appease some special interest groups. I do not think that EDUCATED frequent travelers would support this either, knowing the unintended consequences it could trigger.
It seems counterproductive to institute a new rule with penalties for the airlines when the airlines are not responsible for most of the delays they are being held accountable for. The bigger issue is infrastructure at the airports and the lack of updated ATC capabilities.
What should have happened is that Next-gen ATC should have been fast tracked, and the money from our ticket taxes and facility fees should go directly to updating ATC, which would relieve much of the delay scenarios we currently experience.
In order to solve the problem, you should deal with the CAUSE, not the SYMPTOM..punishing airlines for these delays is counter productive, and appears to be a political move to quiet consumers--who will complain even louder if and when they are on a flight which goes back to the gate, cancels and they can't get to their destination for 2-4 days.........
We were not fully supportive of this punitive measure, which appears to have been put through just to appease some special interest groups. I do not think that EDUCATED frequent travelers would support this either, knowing the unintended consequences it could trigger.
It seems counterproductive to institute a new rule with penalties for the airlines when the airlines are not responsible for most of the delays they are being held accountable for. The bigger issue is infrastructure at the airports and the lack of updated ATC capabilities.
What should have happened is that Next-gen ATC should have been fast tracked, and the money from our ticket taxes and facility fees should go directly to updating ATC, which would relieve much of the delay scenarios we currently experience.
In order to solve the problem, you should deal with the CAUSE, not the SYMPTOM..punishing airlines for these delays is counter productive, and appears to be a political move to quiet consumers--who will complain even louder if and when they are on a flight which goes back to the gate, cancels and they can't get to their destination for 2-4 days.........
Dont call me Shirley
Veteran
- Aug 20, 2002
- 3,270
- 306
Real tired
Veteran
Wait. I have an answer.
I know of a underused airport. One of the largest in land mass, and one of the newest in the country.
It has 125 gates and almost 90% unused. It has been voted time and time again one of the nicest in the country according to Conde' Nast Traveler. It is staffed by this company's most experienced, professional work force.
It could be our crown jewel and relieve any congestion.
Nah. Forget about it. I should just let it die..................
nycbusdriver
Veteran
You missed my point ENTIRELY.
The airline should change its policy for flights returning to the gate under this new rule by:
1) canceling the flight
2) refund fares
3) institute an "extra section" and book all "walk ups" at full Y and F fares.
The new rule would be gone in six months if the airlines did that.
Dog Wonder
Veteran
The airlines put 20 pounds of sugar in a ten pound sack, got called on it, and now are complaining it is too full.
Which leads me to wonder for the billionth time (give or take) why it is that we don't have more slot-controlled airports. Seems to me that a simple policy of "scheduled airline service exceeds airport capacity means we institute slots" would make a huge difference.
I'm all in favor of NextGen, but cf. my post a few minutes ago about IT, this stuff isn't as easy as one would expect at first blush. And even if NextGen were implemented tomorrow, the problem of overloaded airports would be deferred, not eliminated, by the new technology.
BoeingBoy
Veteran
- Nov 9, 2003
- 16,512
- 5,865
- Banned
- #24
That's the problem with traditional hub/spoke ops - most of the day an airport will be well below the max arrival rate (if you use 60 minute periods @ PHL the max arrival rate is never exceeded) but when a bunch of arrivals are scheduled in a short period of time the peaks exceed the capacity to handle them.
I agree, and it hasn't helped that the FAA has been operating on budget extensions for the last 2-1/2 years (or that the aviation "trust fund" has been used to pay an ever higher percentage of the FAA's normal ops budget). If the reauthorization bill the Senate passed becomes law there will be a pretty big chunk of money devoted to NextGen.
Jim
Then basically US is shooting themselves in the foot in on-time stats. OK, knock yourselves out.
I would posit that the maximum capacity metric should be based on some large percentage (90%, perhaps?) of the average capacity, rather than the maximum capacity. Naturally, this means that under ideal weather conditions the airport is "underutilized," but it sure would make for happier pax.
It all depends on what's considered to be the most important goal. As a passenger, my goal should be pretty evident. I suspect that the employees locked up in the aluminum tubes with us would have similar desires. Oddly enough, neither the passengers nor the front-line employees get much of a say in the matter.
BoeingBoy
Veteran
- Nov 9, 2003
- 16,512
- 5,865
- Banned
- #26
Not to drag this further off topic, but the maximum arrival rate per hour is determined by runways in use, traffic conflicts from intersecting runways, weather, instrument approaches available, etc, so an airport can have one maximum arrival rate in good weather and quite a bit lower maximum in bad weather. The FAA just takes the applicable maximum and applies it as the situation warrants. The 15 minute maximum is just 1/4 of the hourly maximum.
Specifically at PHL (although it probably applies to any hub airport), that's why at certain times planes may either be slowed down enroute, do a turn or two in holding or the final gets extended even in good weather. It's ATC's way of getting the arrivals down to the maximum. If weather lowers the maximum, ground holds and longer airborne holds are used.
Jim
Another question that I'm curious about is how did they come up with that ridiculous figure of $27,500 per passenger? In a random drawing? For cripes sake, I've seen some maintenence penalties/violations recently that are alot less than that figure when you multiply just one plane load of 150 passengers by $27K. Insane!
SparrowHawk
Veteran
- Nov 30, 2009
- 7,824
- 2,707
To me this is yet another example of Getting the Government We Deserve.
8000+ Earmarks in a Federal Bailout/Stimulus and not a freaking dime for NextGen despite the ATA and individual airlines shelling out MILLIONS in lobbying efforts and we get a tarmac delay rule that the airlines will easily figure out a way around at the expense of the customer. Just watch as the "Rule of Unintended Consequences" take this rule and shoves it all the up the customers assets withouy benefit of lube
8000+ Earmarks in a Federal Bailout/Stimulus and not a freaking dime for NextGen despite the ATA and individual airlines shelling out MILLIONS in lobbying efforts and we get a tarmac delay rule that the airlines will easily figure out a way around at the expense of the customer. Just watch as the "Rule of Unintended Consequences" take this rule and shoves it all the up the customers assets withouy benefit of lube
Similar threads
