Originally Posted by
fastair
Airlines are adding capacity back in now, or at least were this summer. Still down from a few years ago, but look at any of the airline related performance numbers (available on any airline's website under the investor relations links for capacity deltas.) UA shed many planes in Chap 11. Returned to owners, sold to the 3rd world, retired completely...They even are using (check FT for the threads) planes parked in the desert for "seasonal" capacity. ExpressJet has 10 planes that are not part of their perm contract with UA in our fleet for summer needs.
How much addl added block time does one want, and at what expense? At the expense of system capacity when loads are already at critical levels? At the expense of those that claim there is too much schedule padding already (check FT for those threads)? What decision is good for UA, may not be good for each person's individual needs on a situational basis. One can always find fault with a network decision at one time or another, but rarely do we take back the complaint when that same decision helps us ("We need 2 seats to XYZ, and thank God UA added capacity, or else we would have had to pay 2x as much and travel at bad times" vs "they should have lowered capacity so they could have padded times, and I wouldn't have misconnected!")
I understand there are downsides to schedule padding, but sometimes it seems that the air travel system is based far too much on the "best case scenario" of perfect weather everywhere. Three drops of rain or two snow flakes fall on NYC, and airport capacity goes down by 50% and delays stretch for hours.
Airlines like to blame the weather for delays and misconnects, but in fact their pushing the system to capacity contributes to the problem. Although it might seem to UA that it's like leaving money on the table if they don't increase capacity when demand is greater, if the infrastructure is not there to support it (i.e., enough runways and gates), then the outcome is many more delays and a lot more frustration.
And yes, I know we passengers contribute in a way, by providing the demand for flexible and frequent schedules. But nothing irritates customers more than perceiving that they are buying a product (on-time transportation from A to B) and then not getting what they think they paid for. At the very least, it seems that UA should invest in trying to build a highly functional automated system for re-booking passengers during irrops and *informing them of what has happened*, if UA is unwilling to provide more personnel to do this efficiently with real people.