Originally Posted by
jsloan
They didn't know, full-well, that your flight would be delayed, four hours ahead of time, nor how much. Your instinct was correct -- they could have made the decision to swap planes.
They likely did have a pretty good idea prior to 10 minutes before boarding, though. I've definitely noticed that they don't always indicate downline delays as early as it seems like they could.
None of this is evidence. It's pure speculation. For all you know, the weather disruption was local, or they were also delayed but their schedules had even more padding. What's UA's incentive to lie in this case? As you pointed out, it makes no difference to them when the total delay is 10 minutes.
The last thing we need is further to flame the paranoia and conspiracy theories.
I agree it baffles why UA would lie about cause of delay as the delay turned out to be insignificant.
I was on the plane listening/hearing the pilot announce we were delayed due to maintenance inspection of engine indicator. I didn't take a photo with timestamp of the maintenance crew working on the engine after scheduled departure (hindsight 20/20). I also didn't record the audio of the engine start up/stop at the gate after scheduled departure time. Upon take-off pilot announcement smooth weather conditions the entire route and we will make up time in the air. I don't record announcements as don't anticipate necessary or require evidence to FlyerTalk forum/conversation.
This isn't new - I've been on multiple flights UA had operation issues (including awaiting crew) or jetbridge malfunction which was reported at weather related delay.
Originally Posted by
WineCountryUA
If you are reading the UA delay statement as being the original reason for the delay or as the principal reason for the delay or as the only reason for making a compensation claim against --- all those may be wrong. And UA has never claimed this is what the statement is.
The way the system operates is the last / most recent reason is posted -- it may have only been a minor part of the delay but it was the last reason. Understanding this helps one know how best to use the provided information. There is a more detailed history recorded and that is reported to the DOT as required and can be found by agents if needed. While the last reason may not be what some want it is more than what many airlines provide.
And as mentioned, what is the reason for UA to fabricate a weather delay for a 10-minute delay? And 140 miles is plenty of distance in which for a squall line to form (especially in Florida) and require some routing deviation.
For a discussion about the "delay reason" , see
https://www.flyertalk.com/forum/unit...etermined.html
I can easily dispute your commentary - I started screen capture of delay reason immediately prior and post take-off. The delay reason was posted before plane left the gate (after the engine was certified functional by mechanic {announced by pilot not my speculation}). No original MX delay given and later replaced by later weather delay - only delay given/posted was weather. Also, confident no weather condition at all in FL Sunday AM besides sunny skies, no wind (unless we consider 10 mph at arrival airport) and no fog (monitor weather points along the way prior to flight and ATC traffic when time available). As a route I'm familiar with I know the expected flight (in-air) duration southbound vs. northbound and this matched that precise time (slightly faster than normal) so the delay was entirely a result of engine indicator/inspection at the gate and nothing else. As a passenger on the plane and frequent flyer - I wouldn't cause bad-press for UA or conspiracy without facts as we're discussing a 10 minute late arrival not a plane stranded in Canada/Iceland, etc. This is minor in the big picture but it does happen maybe with more frequency (based on OP and myself) vs. we recognize or care to recognize.