chuck1

I really am a loyal AA flyer and do enjoy e-VIPS and the nice new Flagship Lounge at JFK but I've decided the benefits are simply not worth the hassle.

I live in the Washington DC area and I think it really just makes life more simple to use a non-stop carrier from IAD to Europe.

On my recent trip DCA-JFK-ZRH roundtrip:

-Friday afternoon 9/21 and not a cloud in the sky in DC or NY. I am on Eagle 4776 205p-325p connecting to AA64 to ZRH at 520p.

-AA4776 pushes back early at 159p but doesn't get clearance to take-off until 347p. The flight touches down at JFK at 435p but can't get to the gate until 455p. Fortunately we arrive at 31 and the Zurich flight was 35 so I made it but the vast majority of the plane had international connections that were in jeopardy. Furthermore the Eagle flight attendant was terribly confused about the new JFK setup and told some people they had to use the Airtran to go between Terminal 8 and 9 when in fact the gates were all in the new terminal practically next door to each other.

-I just had carry on bags but I doubt my checked bags would have made the connection. The only reason I did was because the gates were so close.

-The pilot was very frustrated saying there could be no clouds for 2000 miles and JFK would still be gridlocked. He updated us all the time but all they told him was 30 more minutes every 30 minutes. He said he didn't know how long we were going to be but he didn't believe in holding people captive on the airplane and let the passengers vote if they wanted to sit it out on the end of the runway or go back to the gate. The passengers voted to sit it out which was a good thing because the delay at the end of the runway was just shy of 2 hours.

-Today Sep 24 I arrive JFK ontime and get to visit the nice Flagship Lounge. The Eagle flight I was due to take JFK-DCA (4755) normally leaves at 410p but was going to be delayed as the inbound was being held at DCA.

-I spoke to EP and the lounge staff at JFK who told me they knew the flight was late but an updated time would not be made until the aircraft was off and inbound to JFK.

-I explained to them the delay was going to be more than 1 hour and (at my own expense) like to get over to LGA and take the Eagle at 340p. I told them the delay on my original flight was going to be too late for me and also put it's departure in the middle of the JFK rushhour.

-Because AA hadn't updated the system on the new ETD, no one was able to help me change to the LGA flight. Only after insisting and checking with a supervisor was I able to get the flight changed to LGA which didn't leave until 410p but still much better than my original JFK flight which didn't take off until 609p.

Again, I've determined connecting at JFK is simply not worth the hassle. The benefits just aren't strong enough.

I can't imagine what JFK would like in poor weather. I mean both Friday and today (Monday) there was not a cloud in the sky.

I even saw they were running arrivals on 22L and 13L plus departures on 22R and 13R. I think this means they were operating at as high a capapcity as possible though I'm not sure of this.

Has anyone else had poor JFK experiences?

markdkc

Has anyone had a good experience at JFK would be the better question!
Last time that I originated at JFK they changed gates from the old to new terminal which meant checking back through security. The delays on the tarmac are interminable and apparently independent of weather.
Dumping the RJ traffic would certainly help.
I agree that flying from (or to) JFK should only be done as the last resort.

MikeMargolis

I have to drive 2.5 hours to get there, no flights from BDL to JFK. Or fly 2.5 hours on an ERJ to ORD and then fly back over Connecticut on my way to Europe.

vasantn

Cool, dudes. Keep my airport less congested.

chuck1

It sounds like the FAA might do that for you if they for airlines to reduce their JFK schedules.

Some seem to think that B6 and DL will be the targets but I don't know how they will decide who to force to cutback.

ESpen36

The one suggestion I can make is always try to take MORNING flights to/from NYC (JFK/LGA/EWR, and HPN as well) if you really care about the time when you arrive. Usually, though not always, the ATC gridlock doesn't begin until the mid-afternoon or so (unless a special event around the city forces all traffic to be redirected for security reasons, or weather strikes, or....).

When I'm making a connection to an international long-haul afternoon/evening flight, I'd rather take a morning flight up to JFK and arrive with several hours to get some work done in the lounge, instead of cutting it so close in the afternoon.

It's practically guaranteed nowadays that afternoon flights (especially commuter ones) will be delayed because of the gridlocked ATC situation in NYC, especially at LGA where almost every single departure and arrival slot is filled! The airlines are at fault: they have chosen to use lots of tiny aircraft to serve markets out of NYC with high frequency, instead of a few flights a day with a big jet. They claim that it is to provide more flexibility for customers, but the real reason is that the average ticket price increases in a market with fewer seats per flight. In other words, on a 50-seater ERJ, only 1-2 seats need to be sold as super-cheap O fares, and the rest can be sold as more expensive fares because there are only 50 seats total. By contrast, on an AB6 with a couple of hundred seats, AA has to sell many, many of the seats at deep-discount fares just to fill up the seats and make the flight worth flying (setting aside the cargo implications for the moment). So, all other things being equal, if a RJ and an AB6 were to fly the same route, the average fare per passenger would be substantially higher on the flight flown with RJ equipment. (It's all in the lovely Revenue Management!)

Getting back to the original topic, when I choose to take an afternoon flight, I bring lots of work, or a good book, and just wait it out. I NEVER take an afternoon/evening flight if I actually need to be at my destination for some specific reason (other than just getting home in time for dinner/bed).

ijgordon

That's a very one-sided view. If the FAA was using a system from the current century, instead of 1960s technology, they'd probably be able to handle many more flights. Then don't forget about the huge increase in corporate jet travel in the past 10 years. The blame is to be shared, IMHO.

I can't for the life of me figure out how average ticket price has anything to do with it. Airlines are in the business of generating profit and return on capital. Average fare is but a tiny cog in those huge equations.

FWIW, I haven't had a flight delay since mid-August, though I haven't flown DC-NY on a Friday afternoon since early August...

PapiTheWriter

As an EXP flyer I try to avoid JFK at al costs. I would travel via ORD or even DFW rather than JFK just because of the delays, which, in my experience have been worse or greater than the previous two. I could rant with my horror stories but we have all had them. I think until all airline fix schedules the 3 NYC airports will continue to be a mess.

Peace!

BStrauss3

Are you willing to pay the honest costs of a 21st Century ATC system? Not just a bandaid, but the true costs?? Requirements, Design and testing - Hardware and Software?

-----Burton

LAX21

I haven't added JFK to my blacklist yet, however, LHR is definitely a solid #001 on my list.
Also CDG for connecting flights...

Happy travels,
Chris

FWAAA

AA has trimmed its JFK operations substantially in the past five years but at the same time, jetBlue has expanded dramatically. Lately, DL has added a tremendous number of new flights, most of them RJs. Five years ago, JFK was vulnerable to delays but generally worked, especially when the weather cooperated. Now that B6 and DL have added hundreds of daily flights, JFK is dysfunctional, even in good weather.

Teacher49

Been thinking the same thing. For years I have tried to avoid JFK, but now it is the only AA connection to Zurich.

ORD? Gone several years ago. DFW? Last flight to Zurich has happened or will before I go again in early November. JKF is it.

Might be time to rethink the San Francisco - Zurich commute.

RTW4

I actually fly LAX-JFK almost weekly and unless weather is bad rarely have had a significant delay...However I always arrive at 8 PM to 11:30 PM at JFK.. Perhaps that makes a big difference...

krug

I think the issue is more connecting traffic, where timeliness is key to making your next flight, rather than point to point ops.

TBIT at LAX is ina hell of a mess from my recent experience, as it is being extensively renovated. Immigration queues lasted 45mins, and air conditioning hardly functioned.

LHR is genuinely good in my recent experience for Arrivals, sure bag delivery can be a bit slow, but I rarely wait less in major US airports. If you register for IRIS you can be through Immigration in a jiffy and then you have the lovely Elemis Arrivals Massage, Shower Spa, Full English Breakfast and Complimentary Suit Pressing Service to look forward to.

But then I don't connect at LHR. Many of the above delights are denied connecting pax on tight schedules, and FCC queues can be exceptionally horrific, though it really is not routinely as bad as is often made out on here, and of course transfers for everyone will improve dramatically next Summer on BAs brand new Terminal 5 is completed and in operation.

millionmiler

I guess as long as there is one airport in North America worse than LHR then everything is fine. However, very few people would agree with you even about LAX being relatively worse.

LHR is really that bad.

If T5 will fix everything then please pause in your defense of LHR and return next year when order has been restored.