dia1

Had a new AA experience flying PHL-DUB on 5/23. I was in J and was on board and settling in whan I got a text that our gate had changed. Groups 1, 2, 3 had boarded. Asked the FA if I was on the correct flight--answer "yes, of course." I show her the text, she laughs and tells another FA. A few minutes later they make the announcement that we must deplane and that we are being moved to another aircraft because there's a problem with the plane. We deplane and I notice that the gate info already says that the flight from that gate is now going to Munich. People are lined up to board the plane that we were just taken off of. I wait a while and, sure enough, they begin boarding. We are directed to a gate in another terminal where, when we arrive, people who have boarded a flight to BCN are deplaning and being told to go to a different gate. We bound for DUB are told that as soon as the luggage and catering are transferred to that (previously BNC-bound) plane we will board and be on our way. The Munich flight on our original plane in the other terminal takes off. After a long wait, they bring sandwiches and drinks for the DUB and BCN pax. Finally, after almost 2 hrs they tell us that they are testing the new filter and will try the engines soon. Hmm. The BCN group (at a gate nearby) is told that their plane will be there from the hanger soon. We eventually board and take off, hours late. The BCN pax still have no plane. So, AA manages to infuriate at least two more plane loads of people to get the Munich flight off the ground. Infuriating that they lied about why we were taken off the plane. Infuriating in general. No communication from AA about the flight afterwards.

rjw242

There was a mechanical problem with the plane - just not the plane you were on

mvoight

So, in order of priority
1. Munich
2. Dublin
3. Barcelona
Good to know for future planning

donotblink

Too bad it wasn't a flight going in the other direction, you could have received 600 euros from an EU 261 claim.

cedric

On that particular day.
I'm sure the calculus would change based on # of pax booked on each flight, their returns, # of connections, how long the aircraft is on ground at destination, potential crew time outs ...

longhorn11

I just don't understand how this can be the "gateway" to Europe with the traffic tie ups, limited runways, remote gates, etc. Especially so with the pullback at JFK. Just seems like a recipe for total disaster.

This reminds me of my last experience through PHL...we were already delayed and then there were probably 20-25 planes in front of us to take off. After 30 min or so, some weather moved in and they halted all west bound departures supposedly, but an EI jet and several other wide bodies going to Europe were still grounded. After 2 hr 50 min, we finally took off. I've connected in PHL just a handful of times, as all of my flying is through DFW, LAX, ORD, but I was shocked at the total cluster that is PHL.

ElCaminoReal

What's interesting is that all three flights ultimately departed within about 25 minutes of each other very delayed in the following order:

MUC - 11:14PM (6:44 delayed)
DUB - 11:24PM (2:19 delayed)
BCN - 11:37PM (4:47 delayed)

nova08

Any argument about remote gates at PHL is also an argument that LAX isn't fit to be the Pacific gateway because of the prevalence of remote gates there as well.

mvoight

So, they moved people off the original DUB flight just to make room for the already delay MUC crowd, so they could save 10 minutes???
And,if they had left the DUB people on the original plane, they might have been on time? So, possibly the BCN people would have been on time as they were also onboard the flight that later was changed to DUB? AA seems to have disrupted 2 other flights so the MUC people could leave 23 minutes sooner?
Odd. Do they know what they are doing?

longhorn11

Fair point, as I've actually arrived from HKG at a remote gate at LAX. With that said, DFW is on par with LAX on AA Asia flights and has no remote gates (as of now/terminal F site supposedly getting a few), so LAX and Pacific gateway is nothing more than marketing speak for the time being.

AA has nothing else in terms of comparison re secondary Euro cities from PHL, so it seems as if they're doubling down on a flawed piece of the operation. Out of the issues though, remote gates are probably the least of my worries.

JDiver

A friend of mine apparently had a remote gate at DFW a couple of days ago for DFW-MAD.

nova08

PHL is going to be pretty crazy this summer and we can only hope that AA mgmt figures out how to make it work as the summer goes on and in following summers.

In S18 there are not only the 3 new AA TA flights, but also the new EI flight, a QR afternoon arrival, and 3 domestic widebodies arriving between 4:30-5:30.

I've seen SNN-PHL come into any 752 capable gate A to C, but I also believe they end up wasting a sterile gate on occasion, today it came in at A10
EI comes into A6 which I actually believe is a sterile gate as well.

AAway

Wow! I did not know that was happening... I guess I'll quit complaining about the international departures out of A!

Flyer78

I noticed it appears PHL is connecting gate at least A9 to the international arrivals corridors, so perhaps the remote stand will be temporary, or just give extra flexibility. I would also note that those passengers arriving in MUC will almost certainly go to a remote stand, offload via single jetbridge that leads to a bus, and if departing MUC will repeat that process in reverse. I think the people movers PHL will use is a slightly better (if still annoying) option, but I would rather offload the plane than wait for a gate after a TATL flight.

longhorn11

Wow. I heard it was happening soon, but didn't know it already started. Apparently this is going to only get worse until the satellite E/extending B sterile area project is completed. Possibly even after from what I've heard.