Community
Wiki Posts
Search

Never seen this - people bumped off non-oversold flight?

 
Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old Oct 16, 2009, 2:21 pm
  #1  
Original Poster
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: RDU
Programs: A few
Posts: 5,499
Never seen this - people bumped off non-oversold flight?

Truly bizarre. JFK-RDU last night. Not to mention flight is running about an hour late and the gate staff at JFK's Eagle terminal are HORRIBLE PEOPLE. But then we finally get on board. The flight is full but they come on tannoy to say they need 4 volunteers. I assumed there were 4 other priority people outside. They got 3 volunteers, and another guy was then asked to leave. He went without any fuss which was amazing it was darn late I wanted to get home and would have gone ballistic. So then I expect them to replace but no off we go with 4 empty seats on the plane... some people move into the left seats to stretch out

Just bizarre....
ma91pmh is offline  
Old Oct 16, 2009, 2:29 pm
  #2  
 
Join Date: Sep 1999
Location: Los Angeles
Programs: UA 1K, AA 2MM, Bonvoy LT Plt, Mets fan
Posts: 5,073
Since JFK-RDU is well within the range of an RJ, I'd guess that the amount of cargo on the flight was such that the plane was at its weight limit.
CO FF is offline  
Old Oct 16, 2009, 2:31 pm
  #3  
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Miami/Philly
Programs: AA EXP, SPG Plat, HH Gold, Marriott Silver
Posts: 103
Originally Posted by ma91pmh
Truly bizarre. JFK-RDU last night. Not to mention flight is running about an hour late and the gate staff at JFK's Eagle terminal are HORRIBLE PEOPLE. But then we finally get on board. The flight is full but they come on tannoy to say they need 4 volunteers. I assumed there were 4 other priority people outside. They got 3 volunteers, and another guy was then asked to leave. He went without any fuss which was amazing it was darn late I wanted to get home and would have gone ballistic. So then I expect them to replace but no off we go with 4 empty seats on the plane... some people move into the left seats to stretch out

Just bizarre....
Probably not bizarre. Most likely a weight issue.
MiAAmiNice is offline  
Old Oct 16, 2009, 2:32 pm
  #4  
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: MIA
Programs: AA EXP 1.5MM, AC Member, Marriott Platinum, HHonors Diamond, Emerald Club Executive
Posts: 513
Not so bizarre when you consider possible weight issues. If the flight is potentially overweight, then offload some self-loading cargo.
photodave is offline  
Old Oct 16, 2009, 2:33 pm
  #5  
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Oakland, CA
Posts: 463
Only an hour late? That qualifies for record breaking punctuality on that flight.

More importantly - did you get your free cocktail?

As the other poster said, must have been weight restricted for some reason.
platboy is offline  
Old Oct 16, 2009, 2:36 pm
  #6  
Original Poster
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: RDU
Programs: A few
Posts: 5,499
I guess it must have been weight. Makes sense, but still bizarre. It was about an hour late boarding... then another 45 odd minutes before we started taxi, then another 45+ or so crawling along. I actually missed the start of the announcement with I guess the explanation as I knew we'd be hanging around for a while so had my ipod on.

It is is still somewhat crap that an airplane with x seats can actually only take x-4 passengers. something not quite right in the design there.

lesson learned of course. never again jfk. i always say that when i do a late night regional from there! maybe one day i'll remember it....
ma91pmh is offline  
Old Oct 16, 2009, 2:38 pm
  #7  
Original Poster
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: RDU
Programs: A few
Posts: 5,499
oh and no, no free cocktail but i did not ask. it was 12:30ish by time i got served and just wanted water. but fyi last 3 flights on eagle no free cocktail, had to pay each time and fa looked confused when i asked if plt got it free... was having a good success rate until past couple of weeks
ma91pmh is offline  
Old Oct 16, 2009, 2:40 pm
  #8  
brp
FlyerTalk Evangelist
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: SJC
Programs: AA EXP, BA Silver, Hyatt Globalist, Hilton diamond, Marriott Platinum
Posts: 33,533
Originally Posted by ma91pmh

It is is still somewhat crap that an airplane with x seats can actually only take x-4 passengers. something not quite right in the design there.
This is a substantial oversimplification. The plane with x seats can,and has, taken x passengers. No issue with the design. However, there are cases where it won't work. This can have to do with baggage, outside air temperature, weight distribution, as opposed to total weight. Likely other factors as well.

Cheers.
brp is offline  
Old Oct 16, 2009, 2:44 pm
  #9  
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: LAX
Programs: AA EXP 2MM
Posts: 2,080
Originally Posted by brp
Likely other factors as well.
Altitude and runway length are also biggies (though not at JFK).
Ready2Go is offline  
Old Oct 16, 2009, 2:45 pm
  #10  
Original Poster
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: RDU
Programs: A few
Posts: 5,499
you're right brp... still, if it were me kicked off, at midnight at jfk with it peeing down with rain and knowing i had to drag myself to some god-awful queens "hotel" to have to get up at 4am to catch the first flight the next morning.... well i think my simplistic view of it might be at the front of my mind
ma91pmh is offline  
Old Oct 16, 2009, 2:46 pm
  #11  
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Programs: AA EXP, 1 MM, AC, HH Diamond, Marriott Silver, Hertz 5*
Posts: 4,010
Originally Posted by ma91pmh
Just bizarre....
Not really. Weight restrictions affect Eagle more than mainline, IME, but it does happen.
videomaker is offline  
Old Oct 16, 2009, 2:47 pm
  #12  
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Oakland, CA
Posts: 463
I would point out though that it was about 40 degrees in New York last night and runway length at JFK is a non issue - weight restrictions are more typical in the summer.

Maybe they were carrying extra trail mix to RDU for the greedy EXP's that take it all
platboy is offline  
Old Oct 16, 2009, 2:51 pm
  #13  
FlyerTalk Evangelist
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: STL
Programs: AA 2MM, AS MVP Gold, Hilton Diamond
Posts: 12,966
Originally Posted by ma91pmh
It is is still somewhat crap that an airplane with x seats can actually only take x-4 passengers. something not quite right in the design there....
The aircraft is designed to take x passengers under most conditions - say 95% of the time. To make the changes that would convert 95% to 100% would involve operating inefficiencies and higher costs during normal conditions.

Another way of looking at it is this: they could have put 4 fewer seats on the plane. Then it would always be able to take a full load. Would that be smarter, or would it be smarter to have the 4 extra seats, sell them most of the time, and take 4 passengers off under rare circumstances?
gemac is offline  
Old Oct 16, 2009, 2:52 pm
  #14  
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: IAD/DCA
Programs: AAdvantage, HHonors, Amex Platinum
Posts: 184
Originally Posted by ma91pmh
...and the gate staff at JFK's Eagle terminal are HORRIBLE PEOPLE....
Pretty much. I try to avoid JFK AE like it's a black hole. AE JFK flights always seem to run [very] late for me and the gate staff are plain rude.
MM983 is offline  
Old Oct 16, 2009, 2:54 pm
  #15  
FlyerTalk Evangelist
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: STL
Programs: AA 2MM, AS MVP Gold, Hilton Diamond
Posts: 12,966
Originally Posted by ma91pmh
you're right brp... still, if it were me kicked off, at midnight at jfk with it peeing down with rain and knowing i had to drag myself to some god-awful queens "hotel" to have to get up at 4am to catch the first flight the next morning.... well i think my simplistic view of it might be at the front of my mind
Well, 3 passengers did volunteer, and one got Invol compensation.

Just out of curiosity, what was the VDB compensation?
gemac is offline  


Contact Us - Manage Preferences - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service -

This site is owned, operated, and maintained by MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Designated trademarks are the property of their respective owners.