Originally Posted by
BearX220
Earlier in this thread it was observed that a couple flying B6 from PWM to JFK to connect to an overseas longhaul had only themselves to blame when the B6 leg was badly delayed, blowing up their connection. They had allowed themselves about a four-hour layover. Given the historical data, what do you think would have been a prudent connection window? Six hours? 12? 24? Should people in that situation not fly JetBlue at all?
That was a fine connection window, but again, the risk is always higher when you book with multiple airlines. Given historical data, I would've booked it, as well. But, I'd also be aware before doing so that
if the B6 flight is somehow delayed outside of historical trends, I'd be SOL.
This isn't a typical scenario, though, and it's hard to assign blame to one entity. It's an absurd suggestion that people in that situation shouldn't fly JetBlue at all, given that
any airline and
any aircraft can fall prey to a MX problem at
any time.
You seem to be saying that it is silly to plan for the worst case scenario when flying JetBlue... but when a customer takes the timetable at face value and things go wrong, it's his or her own fault. Perhaps the truth is somewhere in the middle. I no longer book B6 when I have to be at my destination within 24 hours of schedule. But if that is silly, what margin is not silly? At what point are irrops the airline's fault?
It's not unreasonable to expect to be able to take the timetable at face value, but it would be very prudent to do your homework. Fault can only be assigned for specific incidents -- a WX GDP can't be blamed on B6 or the customer; a MX delay can't be blamed on the customer; and a 45 min international connection on another carrier can't be blamed on B6.
It's always silly to plan for the worst case scenario. It's prudent not only in air travel, but in everyday life, to plan for the
likeliest scenario. This doesn't rule out having backup plans, but it does mean being reasonable in expectations.