Operational issues: only one ground crew at JFK, etc.
#16
Join Date: Feb 2017
Programs: DL DM, UA Gold, Alaska MVP, Bonvoy (lol) Ambassador
Posts: 2,991
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.
#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...
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...
#20
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: IND
Programs: DL PM & 2MM™, Lifetime HHonors Diamond
Posts: 20,883
#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
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 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.
#22
FlyerTalk Evangelist
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
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 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.
Also, I'll take DOT reports where airlines get in trouble if they lie, over any thrid party reporting.
#23
Join Date: Feb 2017
Programs: DL DM, UA Gold, Alaska MVP, Bonvoy (lol) Ambassador
Posts: 2,991
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.
#24
Join Date: Nov 1999
Location: Tucson, AZ USA
Programs: DL-Platinum / AS-PlatPro / Hyatt - Glob / Hilton-Diamond
Posts: 1,573
#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
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.
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 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.
#26
Join Date: Feb 2017
Programs: DL DM, UA Gold, Alaska MVP, Bonvoy (lol) Ambassador
Posts: 2,991
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.
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?
#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
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
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).
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.
#28
Join Date: Feb 2017
Programs: DL DM, UA Gold, Alaska MVP, Bonvoy (lol) Ambassador
Posts: 2,991
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.
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.
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.
#29
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Fort Lauderdale, FL
Posts: 3,360
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.
#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
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.
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.