Why do delays and cancelations take so long to perpetuate the system? (semi-rant)
So this mornings GSO-IAD was canceled. The plane that was supposed to fly this trip was backed up at CMH last night with an etd to IAD of 11:50p, as of about 7p. However, IAD to GSO (10p departure) showed only an hr delay and this mornings GSO-IAD showed on time.
Predictably at 11:30 or so, when CMH pushed back, both GSO legs canceled.
Now on GSO-EWR this morning, the same thing is happening. The aircraft scheduled to fly the trip is backed up 2hrs and the 2nd and subsequent downline flights (EWR-GSO-EWR) still show on time.
Seems like this is either poor programming or general overconfidence/incompetence of operations. nothing ever gets back on sched out of Newark, it just gets worse and it seems like a lack of transparency to not acknowledge early on that flights are likely to be delayed if not canceled to give customers better grips on the situation and allow them to explore options.
I don't have an answer as to why, but it's a pain. I'm watching an Express flight now: at 9:45am CT the inbound aircraft hasn't left Houston (delayed 1:25) but the turnaround from BHM is still showing an on-time 10:21 departure. Just try to convince a phone agent who sees "on time" that your connection is most certainly blown.
I'd love to blame UA IT, but the same thing happened to me yesterday on DL, but one step worse. A flight from ATL was showing a departure delay of 4.5 hours, but its arrival was still showing on-time.
They can always swap aircraft, especially at hubs. Until they actually decide to use that plane to get to the outstation things are still potentially flexible.
They can always swap aircraft, especially at hubs. Until they actually decide to use that plane to get to the outstation things are still potentially flexible.
It seemed to me that UA (and only anecdotally CO--I didn't fly them nearly as often) was much more adept at this than the new UA.
I don't know if it's overly-optimistic utilization or something else, but it definitely seems like UA these days has a lot tougher time finding a plane to swap in.
Programs: SPG(PLT), Hyatt(Platinum), Hertz(5*), UA(1K), AA (EXP), Amtrak(S+)
Posts: 994
had this issue on sunday. i'm assuming the fact that i was taking UAX made things even worse.
inbound was an E45 coming in from maine for maintenance (didn't know there was an MRO facility there). it was scheduled to arrive at EWR at 6 AM, and we were to fly that out to CVG at 1:30 PM. looked at the delay history and the inbound kept getting further delayed. after about a 90 minute delay to a 3 PM arrival to EWR, it finally switched over to another flight coming in from nashville. we ended up using that plane and leaving around 4 PM.
overall the delay, unfortunately, isn't anything i don't expect from UAX anymore (i hate expressjet with a passion, just as much as i hate terminal A). but i don't get why it took so long. it's not like the original inbound was scheduled to arrive 30 or 60 minutes before our departure and there were last minute issues, they had half a freaking day knowing there was a delay. it was pretty frustrating to see.
UA's practice is very much the industry practice. Better ops and associated software means a better facility at swapping aircraft, adding "flag stops" to other routes and the like. Just because the originally scheduled aircraft is delayed doesn't mean that the later flight will be and even if the later flight is delayed doesn't mean that it will be delayed as much as one would think.
The reverse complaint is made when a carrier delays a flight and then moves the departure time back when an aircraft is located, an ATC hold is removed, WX clears or an MX turns out to be less serious than originally thought.
UA's practice is very much the industry practice. Better ops and associated software means a better facility at swapping aircraft, adding "flag stops" to other routes and the like.
That's not exactly accurate. You're lumping several distinct types of problems into a single statement about fleet management. When you're talking about flying a common aircraft into a major hub, sure. Things can change. When you're talking about delays due to ATC holds, sure. Things can change.
When you're talking about a flight out of a spoke airport with limited flights per day, and the inbound is significantly delayed? No... those things cannot change, based on the laws of physics as we understand them. There is some reason why UA continues to show an outbound as "On Time" up to, and often PAST, the departure time, when the inbound is not even on the ground. And it's not a very good reason.
Compare and contrast... Mrs. Darlox is on a US flight today to PHL. The outbound was ~40 minutes delayed. Her flight pulled a ~30 minute delay pretty much the instant the outbound was delayed (well before the outbound had even left the ground). Compared to, say, about a month ago, when my flight out of YHZ showed "On Time" until ~22 minutes past departure time, with the inbound from EWR still a half hour out. And THEN, the first delay officially posted had us leaving at the exact same time that the inbound was due to land.
UA's practice here is most certainly NOT the industry practice. Delay management certainly is common, but bald-faced denials of reality are just sloppy data management.
At a hub, I can understand why a flight my show as on time when the inbound aircraft is delayed. A swap may happen, etc. At an outstation, however, there's no excuse as there will be no subsitution. Nothing more irritating than seeing your flight from an outstation back to a hub that is being operated by the inbound plane from the hub as inflight with an estimated arrival later than your scheduled departure yet your scheduled departure shows on time.
When you're talking about a flight out of a spoke airport with limited flights per day, and the inbound is significantly delayed? No... those things cannot change, based on the laws of physics as we understand them. There is some reason why UA continues to show an outbound as "On Time" up to, and often PAST, the departure time, when the inbound is not even on the ground. And it's not a very good reason.
Exactly. I've seen delays at IAH disappear after aircraft swaps, but sophisticated planning software and algorithms sometimes need a dose of common sense. The flight I mentioned above is at an outstation and now 1:05 past departure time; it is still showing on time. The inbound (the only UA aircraft on the ground) just landed.
When you're talking about a flight out of a spoke airport with limited flights per day, and the inbound is significantly delayed? No... those things cannot change, based on the laws of physics as we understand them. There is some reason why UA continues to show an outbound as "On Time" up to, and often PAST, the departure time, when the inbound is not even on the ground. And it's not a very good reason.
Compare and contrast... Mrs. Darlox is on a US flight today to PHL. The outbound was ~40 minutes delayed. Her flight pulled a ~30 minute delay pretty much the instant the outbound was delayed (well before the outbound had even left the ground). Compared to, say, about a month ago, when my flight out of YHZ showed "On Time" until ~22 minutes past departure time, with the inbound from EWR still a half hour out. And THEN, the first delay officially posted had us leaving at the exact same time that the inbound was due to land.
UA's practice here is most certainly NOT the industry practice. Delay management certainly is common, but bald-faced denials of reality are just sloppy data management.
This is exactly the problem I'm ranting about.
Last edited by l'etoile; Dec 27, 12 at 6:13 pm..
Reason: Removed now-deleted quotes
Programs: Marriott Silver/Gold, Best Western, Choice, AS, DL, UA, WN
Posts: 967
Quote:
Originally Posted by mbluecpa
Exactly. I've seen delays at IAH disappear after aircraft swaps, but sophisticated planning software and algorithms sometimes need a dose of common sense. The flight I mentioned above is at an outstation and now 1:05 past departure time; it is still showing on time. The inbound (the only UA aircraft on the ground) just landed.
The prblem is with the advancement of computers and the improvement of software they have gotten really good at optimizing the system under normal conditions.
The problem is that when there is a disrruption then chaos happens.
Before they ran 737 <50% full planes and replaced them with 37-75 seat crop dusters. When a bunch of cancellations happen then the recovery time is longer and it forces people to cancel travel plans.
At a hub, I can understand why a flight my show as on time when the inbound aircraft is delayed. A swap may happen, etc. At an outstation, however, there's no excuse as there will be no subsitution. Nothing more irritating than seeing your flight from an outstation back to a hub that is being operated by the inbound plane from the hub as inflight with an estimated arrival later than your scheduled departure yet your scheduled departure shows on time.
It also depends on the outstation. At LGA with flights to IAD/DEN/IAH/ORD, I've had my on time incoming aircraft, swapped out for one with a delay. So that the on time one can accommodate a flight leaving earlier; whose original plane was delayed.
UA's practice is very much the industry practice. Better ops and associated software means a better facility at swapping aircraft, adding "flag stops" to other routes and the like. Just because the originally scheduled aircraft is delayed doesn't mean that the later flight will be and even if the later flight is delayed doesn't mean that it will be delayed as much as one would think.
The reverse complaint is made when a carrier delays a flight and then moves the departure time back when an aircraft is located, an ATC hold is removed, WX clears or an MX turns out to be less serious than originally thought.
There are many cases, though, where at an outstation UA has only the one inbound a/c, which is itself delayed, yet UA doesn't indicate a delay for the departure at the outstation until well after the "on time" departure has come and gone while the inbound a/c is still in the air. UA isn't going to be able to sub in another a/c, and they know they're going to have a delay, yet they don't communicate that delay to the customer or update their systems to reflect it.
This is incredibly frustrating and annoying as often it leads to difficulties in dealing with sure misconnects, when the agents claim, "But your flight still shows on-time," and are less likely to want to help.
I saw it as recently as today at an outstation, where my sister's flight showed "on time" even 10 minutes after scheduled departure--the inbound a/c and UA's sole a/c on-site was delayed and hadn't even landed yet... but UA still claimed her flight was "on time."
Programs: UA Plat, Avis First President's Club, Owner's Circle - Green Bay Packers
Posts: 4,649
This past Sunday I was flying MKE-ORD and the inbound plane was delayed from the DLH-ORD segment. It was showing "on-time" until about 30 minutes before departure when at that time the 10 minute rolling delays began. On some of these shorter segments I have seen the A/C get swapped.
__________________ I can haz upgrade my *A miles/segments? United. Hello?
Last edited by l'etoile; Dec 27, 12 at 6:10 pm..
Reason: Removed now-deleted quote and response thereto
It also depends on the outstation. At LGA with flights to IAD/DEN/IAH/ORD, I've had my on time incoming aircraft, swapped out for one with a delay. So that the on time one can accommodate a flight leaving earlier; whose original plane was delayed.
Totally agree, however I would argue that certain outstations/non-hubs are far, far more likely to be able to handle an aircraft swap. LGA would be one of them. Nonetheless, I think the OP's point - and I agree - is that it takes a ridiculously long time for a flight delay to show as official when it's abundantly clear that the flight will be late.
