richk_30

When I read the data, it occurred to me that the article might not be accurate as pmUA was leading the way in On Time Performance for about 18 months. It took a bit to go find the historical data.

UA On time Performance
January 2010 = 83.66%
January 2011 = 84.51%

CO On time Performance
January 2010 = 82.34%
January 2011 = 76.52%

UA/CO On time Performance
January 2012 = 82.18%

http://www.transtats.bts.gov/ot_delay/OT_DelayCause1.asp?pn=1


Assuming I'm using this site correctly, the above numbers are what show up for the 3 previous January's.

FlyWorld

Perhaps the truth reads more like this?

COdbaUA has, this month, posted performance data that is better than CO ever posted in the last 10 years, after they padded the schedules so scheduled arrival time is always 20-40 minutes later than actual expected arrival time.

If you data is right, it seems to suggest that COdbaUA is still behind where UA was before they trashed it.

cpyankees25

Flight attendants get it. So I would assume pilots do, too, but I'm not 100% sure.

amejr999

Assuming they're reporting the metrics using the same methodology used for DOT reports, cancelled flights are incorporated. So these are quite good numbers.

SunLover

Pad the schedules 15 minutes on both sides and that is what you get. I wonder how many customers had to suffer misconnects and Trips in Vain to achieve this false paradigm…


SunLover

username

I guess I am one of the victims of this wonderful performance - flight departed without waiting for the 10 of us who were on a delayed inbound. Got to the gate 5 minutes before departure time and it was too late

Many years ago, I was on a CO flight out of EWR. They were missing a meal in F. They closed the door and passed the food in from the cockpit window so they could make the stat look good.

mduell

Isn't OT rate on departures, not arrivals?

Padding helps arrivals, not departures.

cordelli

From the DOT

How are flight delays calculated?

A flight is counted as "on time" if it operated less than 15 minutes later the scheduled time shown in the carriers' Computerized Reservations Systems (CRS). Arrival performance is based on arrival at the gate. Departure performance is based on departure from the gate.

Boghopper

The sooner you leave the sooner you get there.

flyingmusicianlax

+1

spin88

well UA's press release said: "the airline ended the month with an 82.8 percent domestic on-time arrival rate, and an 80.5 percent international on-time rate, resulting in the best combined domestic and international performance for the month in 10 years. The on-time arrival rates are based on flights arriving within 14 minutes of scheduled arrival time." [my bolding]

I find these figures to be hard to reconcile, unless the figures you have from BTS (part of DOT) are something other than OT arrivals. They say "last 10 years" and "combined" so they would have to be merging the CO and UA numbers, but

Note that running a search here for January 2012: http://apps.bts.gov/xml/ontimesummar...ryDataDisp.xml Shows that 16.57% of UAs flights were late.

either way that number, or the number you quoted for January 2012 would appear to be more OT than what UA just reported.

I would be curious what the basis for the claim is (and also curious what UA says about its financial performance in January, now that we know that if 20% of your flights are late in arriving by 15 minutes or longer you are running a GREAT AIRLINE!

But then perhaps this is the new business plan. Invent low thresholds and then hype them. For example "GF food recently voted best in blind taste test against a large institution in Joliette!!!" "UAL Recently ranked higher in customer service then the DMV!!!" "Voted best network by CEOs of Illinois based airlines for two years running!"

Beerman92

That bonus is not new (its been around for a couple of years on the pmUA side at least)

channa

The methodology has changed, though. They used to have to outperform some competitors. Now they just have to be > 80% on time.

Even one of the analysts in the last call picked up on it. CO was hyping meeting their performance target and paying out bonuses, and one analyst questioned whether they thought they had to be better than the competition, or just better than 80%.

ralfp

How does padding the schedule by 15-30 minutes increase the chance of misconnects or trips in vain? Given the same actual timing, a padded schedule would reduce those things, as it would remove some previously legal tight connections.

One thing I still see is insanely short turn-around times. My regular DAY-ORD flight departs at 3:17pm. The inbound aircraft arrives from DEN at 2:47pm. This is hardly an extreme example; I have frequently seen scheduled turn-around times of about 20 minutes. Of course a highly padded flight time can enable an impossibly short turn-around time.

It seems that a good fraction of my flights are "Delayed - Awaiting inbound aircraft" for an on-time inbound aircraft.

entropy

That's a CO specialty. Padding schedules DOES help though, especially for connectors; and I don't have a problem with them doing that, as long as its not egregious.