U.S. Airlines Can Face Big Fines For Long Delays

[Ken_gone_flying]

The government has stepped in and will now be requiring airlines to let passengers deplane if tarmac delays exceed 3 hours. Failing to do so can cost the airline $27,000 per passenger. This is a good move. I think 3 hours is a reasonable time limit. Thoughts?


http://www.nytimes.com/reuters/2009/12/21/business/business-uk-usa-airlines-rights.html

 

[navy09]

Ya, like the government needs more involvement in private business...

 

[Fog]

Ken Gone Flying:
I agree. This may be the only government-related post on this board this month that doesn't start a political food-fight - although I may be speaking prematurely once again!

 

[exhelodrvr]

Question for the airline pilots - won't sending the aircraft back to the terminal, off-loading and subsequently loading again, actually increase the delays?

 

[navy09]

Hey- who are you agreeing with?

 

[HAL Pilot]

Question for the airline pilots - won't sending the aircraft back to the terminal, off-loading and subsequently loading again, actually increase the delays?

Yes. Especially after you waited 3 hours for a slot, moving your way up the list. Now you go back to the gate and start over.

I'd expect any flight in this situation just to get cancelled. So you will have an even bigger delay/hassle.

When there are delays like this with pax already on the plane, it is rarely the airline's fault. It's usually weather combined with ATC limitations.

 

[webmaster]

I think 3 hours is a reasonable time limit. Thoughts?

NOTE: This limit does not apply to P3C "Orions" pre-flight or plane swaps.

 

[Lawman]

When I was 10 my family flew home from Italy. We spent nearly 6 hours parked on the Tarmac in the Azores during June for no explained reason. During that time they shut the aircraft down meaning you had several hundred people sitting on an airliner cooking in the sun. They passed out drinks after a couple hours when it became apparent they werent going anywhere for a while and ran out of their onboard stores (full aircraft), but I think situations like that warrant a little motivation for the Airlines to put an SOP in place that provides some kind of process to go "yeah this is unacceptable lets take it back to the gate and let these folks off already."

 

[A4sForever]

Question for the airline pilots - won't sending the aircraft back to the terminal, off-loading and subsequently loading again, actually increase the delays?

It's a bad move.

The airlines can't control the WX nor the government run airspace.

And of course it will incrementally increase delays ... and it will cost the airlines (and ultimately the passengers buying ticket$$$$ on those airlines) more in fuel, ground services, catering, and crews. A LOT MORE.

This could have been prevented by more headwork and leadership being evidenced in the terminal and in the cockpit when the more heavily publicized incidents occured -- i.e., those incidents hyped by the media that led to the hysteria represented in this new regulation. Of course, right is right, and wrong is what it is ... you've ALWAYS gotta' take care of your crew and the pax .... but one size does NOT fit all when it comes to flyin' and bending birds.

Judgment ... headwork ... experience ... that's what saves the day.

It's typical, however of yet another government mandate thought up as a 'reaction' to another perceived 'crisis' -- instead of being an 'anticipation' of future problems -- and it's promulgated by bureaucratic fools and demagogic politicians possessed of nary a clue as to how to run an airline ...

 

[FlyBoyd]

It's a bad move.

The airlines can't control the WX nor the government run airspace.

Concur...

ATC lost the bubble when most companies started the code sharing/scope creep crap. CRJs/RJs/Q400s/etc clog up the airspace/runway/ramp and here we are.

Picture being #1-4 at the hold short and, after being in line, having to return to the gate because you hit 3 hours...only to restock on food/beverages, empty the lav, let the pax off who want to get off (+ checked bags), etc......only to get back in line again or most likely cancel.

Aircraft returning to the gate from the departure line will be a huge headache for the ground controllers and will cause more delays. The next time you are in line look at the taxiway runway setup. Not many places have parallel taxiways you can use. The active runway is the only thing around (not full of planes) in a lot of cases.

The good thing about this (assuming it happens) is companies will (should) pass the increased cost onto the ticket price.

Watch companies that operate out of places like JFK and EWR as this sorts out. They will be the first to figure the work arounds out with a PR nightmare to follow.

 

[Ken_gone_flying]

NOTE: This limit does not apply to P3C "Orions" pre-flight or plane swaps.

Noted.

 

[PropAddict]

NOTE: This limit does not apply to P3C "Orions" pre-flight or plane swaps.

Or "unpublished TFRs/airport closures" you get informed of when you call for engine starts.:icon_rage

There's 3 hours of my life I'll never get back. . .

 

[Sly1978]

The good thing about this (assuming it happens) is companies will (should) pass the increased cost onto the ticket price.

I think that we may have very different definitions of the word "good".

 

[HAL Pilot]

I think that we may have very different definitions of the word "good".

It's "good" when the passengers pay the true cost of their transportation.

[rant]

But why should it start being "good" now? Why not continue to expect someone else to subsidize the cost? - Mostly in the form of the company demanding concessions from it's employees to make up the difference instead of raising ticket prices.

Every time the government adds a fee, tax, regulation or potential fine; it raises costs. Yet the flying public screams bloody murder when the airlines try to recoup these costs by adding fees or raising prices. It's only been in the last few years that the prices have started going up but they still do not reflect the true cost of flying. If they did, the airlines would be profitable. When adjusted for inflation, it is still significantly cheaper to fly today than it was in the 1970s & 1980s. You want the convenience of flying over driving or taking the bus? Pay for it.

So next year, the experts say the airlines will return to profitability. What will happen? The public will see profits and demand lower ticket prices. The airlines will be scared of losing pax and will lower the prices. They will then start losing money again and demand pay cuts from their employees.

So yes it is "good".

[/end rant]

 

[A4sForever]

[rant].... So yes it is "good". [/end rant]

This 'HAL-rant' is EXACTLY on the mark.

You boys who are constantly whining about air fares and bleating about the 'outrage' when they incrementally go up $10-20 make me roll my eyes skyward & just walk away shaking my head ...

And some of you want a job in the airlines at some point down the road ??? Truth be told, probably MOST of you want a job in the airlines at some point down the road ... now, how's that gonna' happen again ... ???