Go Back  FlyerTalk Forums > Miles&Points > Airlines and Mileage Programs > Delta Air Lines | SkyMiles
Reload this Page >

Operational issues: only one ground crew at JFK, etc.

Operational issues: only one ground crew at JFK, etc.

Old May 30, 2021, 12:03 pm
  #16  
 
Join Date: Feb 2017
Programs: DL DM, UA Gold, Alaska MVP, Bonvoy (lol) Ambassador
Posts: 2,991
Originally Posted by flyerCO
I haven't flown as much post-COVID so this is anecdotal, but I was on a recent flight that felt very un-Delta like. MX issue out of ATL, fire suppression device not functioning properly. They needed a part, they showed it as in inventory, but.. apparently they didn't actually have the part? Captain was very apologetic (originally it was "apologies folks, we'll be half an hour late leaving the gate, we just need a part installed quickly" to "uh, there is no part available even though it shows as available... we'll probably need to deplane."

In fairness to Delta, they did find a plane to swap out and ended up only 2 hours late. But I can't believe they didn't have one spare part in Atlanta - either they literally only were keeping one in stock (at their main TechOps hub!) or their inventory system was so busted they thought they had more.

Having seen Delta pull miracles out of its rear end pre-COVID to keep flights on time, it was disheartening to see such buffoonery I was more accustomed to seeing by United in the 2-3 years post-merger.
MSPeconomist likes this.
ethernal is offline  
Old May 30, 2021, 12:53 pm
  #17  
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Posts: 1,327
Delta has, without question, taken their eye off the ball when it comes to actually running a top-of-class operation. I've seen a steady decline over the past ~4 months as traffic has come back. More delays, more miscommunications, more poorly handled IRROPS, staffing issues throughout the company.

I wouldn't say they are terrible (with the very notable exception of call center response times, which continue to be abysmal) ... but they are right in the middle of the pack now. In other words, no reason to pay the premium anymore.

If it wasn't for Singapore (which I now have on speed-dial) I would likely not be flying Delta at this time. So Singapore saves the day for this flyer...
cmd320 and strickerj like this.
spongenotbob is offline  
Old May 30, 2021, 5:25 pm
  #18  
 
Join Date: Jun 2020
Programs: Hilton Diamond, Marriott Silver Elite
Posts: 29
Majority of stations are all short staff due to early packages and staffing isnt going to improve anytime soon. I have read that it is easily a 3 hour wait when call reservations.
Seminolefan is offline  
Old May 30, 2021, 7:34 pm
  #19  
 
Join Date: Jun 2013
Programs: DL Diamond, UA Premier Gold
Posts: 2,903
Originally Posted by Seminolefan
Majority of stations businesses in America are all short staffed due to early packages and staffing isnt going to improve anytime soon.
Fixed it for you.
DiverDave and davedeboston like this.
DLASflyer is online now  
Old May 30, 2021, 8:56 pm
  #20  
FlyerTalk Evangelist
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: IND
Programs: DL PM & 2MM™, Lifetime HHonors Diamond
Posts: 20,883
Originally Posted by cmd320
Hmm, this isnt really year to date information and conveniently misses most of Deltas major holiday meltdowns including Easter, Christmas/New Years, and Thanksgiving.
But yet, you have no other facts.
indufan is offline  
Old May 30, 2021, 10:14 pm
  #21  
FlyerTalk Evangelist
 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: MCO
Programs: AA, B6, DL, EK, EY, QR, SQ, UA, Amex Plat, Marriott Tit, HHonors Gold
Posts: 12,809
Originally Posted by indufan
But yet, you have no other facts.
No, I just haven't taken the time to include them. If you are so inclined, head over to the BTS website and you'll easily be able to find the data.

If you look at the calendar year of 3/31/20-3/31/21 you'll find DL mainline flights operated behind schedule more often than AA, F9, HA, UA, and WN flights. Delta had a pretty off year in 2020 and early 2021. Maybe they'll get the clown show back on the road, maybe they won't. Overall, US airline operational performance is pretty piss poor to be honest.
cmd320 is offline  
Old May 31, 2021, 2:58 am
  #22  
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Hilton Contributor Badge
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: San Antonio
Programs: DL DM, Former AA EXP now AY Plat, AC 75K, NW Plat, Former CO Gold, Hilton Diamond, Marriott Titanium
Posts: 26,954
Originally Posted by cmd320
No, I just haven't taken the time to include them. If you are so inclined, head over to the BTS website and you'll easily be able to find the data.

If you look at the calendar year of 3/31/20-3/31/21 you'll find DL mainline flights operated behind schedule more often than AA, F9, HA, UA, and WN flights. Delta had a pretty off year in 2020 and early 2021. Maybe they'll get the clown show back on the road, maybe they won't. Overall, US airline operational performance is pretty piss poor to be honest.
If you include April-July/August of last year any results will be severely skewed.

Also, I'll take DOT reports where airlines get in trouble if they lie, over any thrid party reporting.
flyerCO is online now  
Old Jun 1, 2021, 7:31 am
  #23  
 
Join Date: Feb 2017
Programs: DL DM, UA Gold, Alaska MVP, Bonvoy (lol) Ambassador
Posts: 2,991
Originally Posted by cmd320
Overall, US airline operational performance is pretty piss poor to be honest.
Do you have any data to support this? Pre-COVID, the US was filled with congested airports, jammed up airways (especially East Coast North-South routes), and unpredictable weather. You can certainly find global airlines that have better on-time rates but they are always based in uncongested regions and/or lovely weather (just like how Hawaiian Airlines almost always topped the charts in the US - despite being nowhere near as operationally mature as the majors). In addition, many other famous global airlines are single hub airlines. Constant out and back routes to mega hubs are operationally easier than complex meshed routing that bounces around hubs throughout the day. And if you are international-biased, many times there are long turn times that act as buffers to flight delays that don't work on short turn hauls.

Delta pre-COVID (and United was getting there) were also very good at not cancelling flights, especially when comparing like-for-like operational environments. You can argue about the definition (is a 20+ hour delay a cancel?) but few other airlines were as aggressive and creative at avoiding cancellations and/or started replicating tactics pioneered by US airlines (like enroute fresh crew pickups).

This isn't to say US airlines are great (or not great), but trying to compare them to less operationally complex airlines or those that operate in more favorable environments is silly. You can rag all you want on hard and soft product differences, but I don't think there is much of a leg to stand on when it comes to operational reliability.
flyerCO, DLASflyer and mrcool1122 like this.
ethernal is offline  
Old Jun 1, 2021, 9:06 am
  #24  
 
Join Date: Nov 1999
Location: Tucson, AZ USA
Programs: DL-Platinum / AS-PlatPro / Hyatt - Glob / Hilton-Diamond
Posts: 1,573
Originally Posted by flyerCO
Also, I'll take DOT reports where airlines get in trouble if they lie, over any thrid party reporting.
FYI, BTS (Bureau of Transportation Statistics) is the DoT.
steve64 is offline  
Old Jun 1, 2021, 9:32 am
  #25  
FlyerTalk Evangelist
 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: MCO
Programs: AA, B6, DL, EK, EY, QR, SQ, UA, Amex Plat, Marriott Tit, HHonors Gold
Posts: 12,809
Originally Posted by ethernal
Do you have any data to support this? Pre-COVID, the US was filled with congested airports, jammed up airways (especially East Coast North-South routes), and unpredictable weather. You can certainly find global airlines that have better on-time rates but they are always based in uncongested regions and/or lovely weather (just like how Hawaiian Airlines almost always topped the charts in the US - despite being nowhere near as operationally mature as the majors). In addition, many other famous global airlines are single hub airlines. Constant out and back routes to mega hubs are operationally easier than complex meshed routing that bounces around hubs throughout the day. And if you are international-biased, many times there are long turn times that act as buffers to flight delays that don't work on short turn hauls.

Delta pre-COVID (and United was getting there) were also very good at not cancelling flights, especially when comparing like-for-like operational environments. You can argue about the definition (is a 20+ hour delay a cancel?) but few other airlines were as aggressive and creative at avoiding cancellations and/or started replicating tactics pioneered by US airlines (like enroute fresh crew pickups).

This isn't to say US airlines are great (or not great), but trying to compare them to less operationally complex airlines or those that operate in more favorable environments is silly. You can rag all you want on hard and soft product differences, but I don't think there is much of a leg to stand on when it comes to operational reliability.
The data is right there in the BTS website. In general, on time arrivals for US network carriers is in the upper 70% to right around 80% range. To me, that's a pretty poor number when it comes to reliability. No only that, but only at 15 minutes past schedule does a flight actually become delayed by the US definition so there are plenty more flights that actually operate behind schedule that aren't taken into account, plus there's also the ridiculous amount of schedule padding some airlines (Delta particularly) use on top of that.

The US is filled with congested airports and jammed up airways, partly due to the way airlines schedule their flights, so that really doesn't take them off the hook all that much, and unpredictable weather exists worldwide.

Personally, the whole 'we don't cancel flights' song Delta used to sing was a bit of a red herring. As you mention, rather than canceling a flight they'd just delay it 12-24 hours which is essentially the same thing from the customer's perspective. In most cases there will be multiple other flights in that interim time. No, pre-COVID I could see an argue being made for Delta being more reliable than AA and UA, especially during AA's particularly terrible operational year. Now however, Delta stands out as having more operational meltdowns than most.
cmd320 is offline  
Old Jun 1, 2021, 10:41 am
  #26  
 
Join Date: Feb 2017
Programs: DL DM, UA Gold, Alaska MVP, Bonvoy (lol) Ambassador
Posts: 2,991
Originally Posted by cmd320
The data is right there in the BTS website. In general, on time arrivals for US network carriers is in the upper 70% to right around 80% range. To me, that's a pretty poor number when it comes to reliability. No only that, but only at 15 minutes past schedule does a flight actually become delayed by the US definition so there are plenty more flights that actually operate behind schedule that aren't taken into account, plus there's also the ridiculous amount of schedule padding some airlines (Delta particularly) use on top of that.
First of all, A14 is a pretty universal reference for on-time arrivals used by pretty much every global reporting agency. Second, data without a reference point is absolutely useless. US airlines are/were pre-COVID absolutely comparable to international airlines. Here's the 2019 Cirium Report

The US is filled with congested airports and jammed up airways, partly due to the way airlines schedule their flights, so that really doesn't take them off the hook all that much, and unpredictable weather exists worldwide.
It doesn't change the fact that not all regions have equal congestion. APAC and LATAM for example still have less congested airports on average. I understand banked hubs can drive delays, but for the most part congested airports are an exogenous factor for airlines - especially given that all of the most congested airports in the US are not mega hubs for single airlines (possibly excepting EWR, but that still suffers from NYC airspace congestion spillover). Similarly, not all regions have similarly unpredictable weather (although some regions are even worse than the US as well).


Personally, the whole 'we don't cancel flights' song Delta used to sing was a bit of a red herring. As you mention, rather than canceling a flight they'd just delay it 12-24 hours which is essentially the same thing from the customer's perspective. In most cases there will be multiple other flights in that interim time. No, pre-COVID I could see an argue being made for Delta being more reliable than AA and UA, especially during AA's particularly terrible operational year. Now however, Delta stands out as having more operational meltdowns than most.
You're joking right? There is a reason why Delta doesn't like to cancel flights: it is the single biggest killer of NPS based on their data. A 12 hour or even 20 hour delayed flight is better than a cancel. Why? Because unless you are a top-status member, you're now fighting with 150 other passengers to fill the few other available options to get home. Maybe a quick-fingered Diamond does well on cancellations given that VIPR will rebook you with priority, but for a typical flyer during heavy IRROPS, it means long hold times and/or auto-rebooking on either crazy multi-leg itineraries or a flight multiple days in the future. At best you get home at about the same time - and now with the stress of multiple legs and with a crappier seat than before.

And, regardless of whether you believe it makes a difference, Delta's 99.8% completion factor is a global leader. In 2019, only Emirates - a single hub (which has great weather) airline that flies exclusively widebodies on international flights (which always get priority during WX because of high capacity, better crosswind tolerance, and the fact that for inbound WX they are already in the air before flow control hits) had a similar completion factor.

I agree that Delta may have lost their edge. It is too early to see how they "recover". They are still running lean and prioritizing operating expense over reliability. As things recover, we will have to see if they are able to (or even want to) pivot back to "operational reliability first". And even if they do choose to pivot back, have they lost too much talent that made them operationally effective in the past?
ethernal is offline  
Old Jun 1, 2021, 11:26 am
  #27  
FlyerTalk Evangelist
 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: MCO
Programs: AA, B6, DL, EK, EY, QR, SQ, UA, Amex Plat, Marriott Tit, HHonors Gold
Posts: 12,809
Originally Posted by ethernal
First of all, A14 is a pretty universal reference for on-time arrivals used by pretty much every global reporting agency. Second, data without a reference point is absolutely useless. US airlines are/were pre-COVID absolutely comparable to international airlines. Here's the 2019 Cirium Report
A single US airline, in 2019 when it actually had its act together, was able to claw into third place.


Originally Posted by ethernal
It doesn't change the fact that not all regions have equal congestion. APAC and LATAM for example still have less congested airports on average. I understand banked hubs can drive delays, but for the most part congested airports are an exogenous factor for airlines - especially given that all of the most congested airports in the US are not mega hubs for single airlines (possibly excepting EWR, but that still suffers from NYC airspace congestion spillover). Similarly, not all regions have similarly unpredictable weather (although some regions are even worse than the US as well).
Like I said, the congestion is caused by the way US airlines run their operations. Cut frequency, add capacity, reduce the number of overall flights, and this wouldn't be an issue. Banked hubs don't help the situation, but they're a more micro issue.


Originally Posted by ethernal
You're joking right? There is a reason why Delta doesn't like to cancel flights: it is the single biggest killer of NPS based on their data. A 12 hour or even 20 hour delayed flight is better than a cancel. Why? Because unless you are a top-status member, you're now fighting with 150 other passengers to fill the few other available options to get home. Maybe a quick-fingered Diamond does well on cancellations given that VIPR will rebook you with priority, but for a typical flyer during heavy IRROPS, it means long hold times and/or auto-rebooking on either crazy multi-leg itineraries or a flight multiple days in the future. At best you get home at about the same time - and now with the stress of multiple legs and with a crappier seat than before.
I disagree with this. A massively delayed flight helps no one, not even non-status members. Maybe only Delta who enjoys better than realistic stats and gets off the hook for having to provide accommodations to its customers who will now be living in the terminal for a day.
cmd320 is offline  
Old Jun 1, 2021, 1:30 pm
  #28  
 
Join Date: Feb 2017
Programs: DL DM, UA Gold, Alaska MVP, Bonvoy (lol) Ambassador
Posts: 2,991
Originally Posted by cmd320
A single US airline, in 2019 when it actually had its act together, was able to claw into third place.
Delta was #1 in Cirium's 2018 report. And against airlines that fly similar route networks, US airlines fare perfectly well.

2020 (so year 2019) OAG report for the 20 largest airlines by passenger counts - 4 out of 6 listed US airlines are in the top 10:

2019 (so 2018 performance) OAG report - 5 out of 6 US airlines are in the top 10:

I think you just don't fly international airlines enough to know that the grass isn't greener on the other side.

Like I said, the congestion is caused by the way US airlines run their operations. Cut frequency, add capacity, reduce the number of overall flights, and this wouldn't be an issue. Banked hubs don't help the situation, but they're a more micro issue.
Cut frequency but somehow add capacity? Sounds like a brilliant idea! Places that support larger planes are already served by A321/739s. Widebody economics don't work on short haul - even Japan is backing away from the "load a 747 for a 1.5 hour flight" model. Doubly so at airports mostly served by narrowbodies because it increases spacing requirements. Depending on the exact aircraft and mix at an airport, adding capacity with a bigger plane may actually reduce aggregate airport capacity because of spacing requirements.

I disagree with this. A massively delayed flight helps no one, not even non-status members. Maybe only Delta who enjoys better than realistic stats and gets off the hook for having to provide accommodations to its customers who will now be living in the terminal for a day.
Delta makes it very easy to rebook your flight if it is delayed. If the flight is delayed and you can find a better way home, then take it! You clearly don't understand that - unless you are at a hub, and even then things can go sideways during IRROPS (and at best you will probably have to make a double jump) - there is not magical capacity to redirect a cancelled flight to - especially during peak travel times. Absorbing 190 passengers onto alternative flights when load factors are at 90%+ doesn't just happen without many people losing the game. There is *zero* instance where anyone is made worse off by delaying the flight. If there are better options available, BOOK THEM! Delta makes it easy. If there are not better options? Then at least you have a guaranteed flight home. Rolling delays are annoying, but typically flights delayed 12-16+ hours are called early (they are usually crew timeout issues at outstations) - maybe a couple of hours of rolling delays and then it gets punted to the next day. Again, if you find a better flight, book it. No one is made worse off by the delay.

Anyways, getting off topic here. Point is, Delta used to be pretty good at operational reliability - whether you look globally or domestically only. They are still doing well on BTS reports as of late but they are not as good as they used to be. Time will tell whether they recover or if was a permanent loss of skill and will.
ethernal is offline  
Old Jun 1, 2021, 5:07 pm
  #29  
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Fort Lauderdale, FL
Posts: 3,360
Originally Posted by richarddd
The captain said there was only one ground crew at JFK. Can that be true?
Like many official airline websites, the JFK website only shows limited data. But, for last night, there are the scheduled Delta arrivals/departures between 11:30pm and 1:00am:

Arrivals:
Flight 426 (ATL): 11:56pm
Flight 1726 (SAE): 11:59pm
Flight 9100 (MEX): 12:25am
Flight 789 (SLC): 12:28am
Flight 1089 (SFO): 12:49am

Source: https://www.airport-jfk.com/arrivals...elta-air-lines

Departures:
Flight 156 (ACC): 11:45pm
Flight 234 (TLV): 11:45pm

Source: https://www.airport-jfk.com/departur...elta-air-lines

Personally, I have no knowledge about ground clues, so I won't speculate. Perhaps someone else more knowledgeable can opine about whether a single ground crew can reasonably manage all of those planes.
writerguyfl is offline  
Old Jun 2, 2021, 10:52 am
  #30  
FlyerTalk Evangelist
 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: MCO
Programs: AA, B6, DL, EK, EY, QR, SQ, UA, Amex Plat, Marriott Tit, HHonors Gold
Posts: 12,809
Originally Posted by ethernal
Delta was #1 in Cirium's 2018 report. And against airlines that fly similar route networks, US airlines fare perfectly well.
You can continue to handicap airlines based on some arbitrary qualification of operating similar route networks, but that isn't really a relevant metric. Also I'm not really sure what defines a "mega airline", not familiar with that terminology.

Originally Posted by ethernal
I think you just don't fly international airlines enough to know that the grass isn't greener on the other side.
In a normal year it's about a 50/50 split, but I tend to stick with US airlines only for domestic services. Of course, this past year has been a bit different for obvious reasons. The grass most certainly is greener however.

Originally Posted by ethernal
Cut frequency but somehow add capacity? Sounds like a brilliant idea! Places that support larger planes are already served by A321/739s. Widebody economics don't work on short haul - even Japan is backing away from the "load a 747 for a 1.5 hour flight" model. Doubly so at airports mostly served by narrowbodies because it increases spacing requirements. Depending on the exact aircraft and mix at an airport, adding capacity with a bigger plane may actually reduce aggregate airport capacity because of spacing requirements.
Japan is a completely different market which has arguable one of the best alternatives to air transportation in the world on short haul routes. The reality is reducing the number of flights and the number of regional and smaller single aisle aircraft used will reduce congestion, especially in the aforementioned delay hotspots.

Originally Posted by ethernal
Delta makes it very easy to rebook your flight if it is delayed. If the flight is delayed and you can find a better way home, then take it! You clearly don't understand that - unless you are at a hub, and even then things can go sideways during IRROPS (and at best you will probably have to make a double jump) - there is not magical capacity to redirect a cancelled flight to - especially during peak travel times. Absorbing 190 passengers onto alternative flights when load factors are at 90%+ doesn't just happen without many people losing the game. There is *zero* instance where anyone is made worse off by delaying the flight. If there are better options available, BOOK THEM! Delta makes it easy. If there are not better options? Then at least you have a guaranteed flight home. Rolling delays are annoying, but typically flights delayed 12-16+ hours are called early (they are usually crew timeout issues at outstations) - maybe a couple of hours of rolling delays and then it gets punted to the next day. Again, if you find a better flight, book it. No one is made worse off by the delay.
You're forgetting that then the flight is just delayed rather than being canceled, Delta is no longer on the hook to provide accommodation. That's the big difference. I'd rather get cancelled, put in a hotel, and figure out how I'm getting back later as opposed to being on the hook for a hotel of my own.

Originally Posted by ethernal
Anyways, getting off topic here. Point is, Delta used to be pretty good at operational reliability - whether you look globally or domestically only. They are still doing well on BTS reports as of late but they are not as good as they used to be. Time will tell whether they recover or if was a permanent loss of skill and will.
The first sentence I agree with, and I don't think anyone is disagreeing with. The second, I don't agree with, more like marginal at best. I don't consider any airline with four major operational meltdowns in a year to be doing 'well' by any stretch of the meaning of that word.
cmd320 is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

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.