Darlox

This is a brilliant example of a cognitive fallacy, mapped onto the airline industry... By that line of thinking, it's remarkable that birds aren't sucked into engines on every takeoff, or that tires blow out, or that the planes don't literally fall from the sky, shedding pieces as they go.

Complex systems are not guaranteed to fail. In fact, their very complexity generally means that they have designed-in safeguards to address the zillions of issues, or they could never have become that complex in the first place.

It is not irrational to believe that the generally-poor customer service in today's airline industry is a symptom of anything other than that human beings are terrible at discovering successful differentiators, and very good at reducing things to the lowest common denominator. Classic "tragedy of the commons" type stuff... The fact that the public continues to put up with it is because they manage to stay JUST better than the alternatives. You could also ask the Cable companies about how that game works...

UA doesn't get a pass because of how complex their operations and equipment are. In fact, they should be vilified even more than is happening already for allowing (or possibly forcing) a complex system to get so out-of-whack. The only thing that's surprising here is that nobody has yet really held them to task for it, in comparison to their peers.

REPUBLIC757

Delta is better than United. They have a satisfaction score 10+ points higher than UA.

It's pretty clear that it's not by the grace of God that Delta is posting better operational numbers than UA. They take better care of their planes. The how and why I'm not sure since I'm not a mechanic.

But also keep in mind that while users like to think UA has a "young" fleet, they pretty much don't at this point. Majority of their aircraft were delivered in the mid/late 1990s with only some 737s delivered post 2000s. Those once new CO 738s are now 15+ years old, CO 764s 14+ years old, and the oldest CO 757 is now 21 years old. sUA's fleet is similar in age.

One theory: UA's MX logic was deferrance, CO's was preventative. Unfortunately for both: The sCO fleet is getting up there in age for full-on preventative MX to keep up with high utilization. The sUA fleet with sitting on MX was in the long term a costly move as well. So it's a loose loose for UA in additional to possible contract issues.

wrp96

AA is definitely not doing anywhere near as well as DL in operational performance. But where they are beating UA, at least when I have had issues recently, is that there was communication and at least an on the surface attempt at trying to resolve the issue. With the two big UA diversion stories recently, the communication failure seems to have been the biggest issue of all.

You can argue all you want about mechanics vs pilots vs management vs mother nature, but the true issue isn't the delays themselves. It's how UA handles them once they occur, and on that they seem to be failing miserably.

IAH-OIL-TRASH

Out of Maui, UA is a no-brainer for me. For travel between Maui and Mainland/Europe/Asia, UA's got the most comprehensive network. I care more about getting there than I am how I am treated along the way. Not saying being treated nicely doesn't weigh, but the biggest factor for me is schedule and ease of reaching destination. My problem is UA's come-and-go reliability. 2013 seemed average, 2014 seemed better than average, 2012 and this year suck. UA's schedule and connections out of Maui make me endure it's problems. Luckily, for me, I can go home on Maui if there's a cancellation (or stay at home if there's a lengthy delay). Tourists, on the other hand are not so lucky - they've generally checked out of their rooms in the morning and a lengthy delay or cancellation is (I imagine) much more aggravating.

REPUBLIC757

I cringe on how UA's runs itself these days when it could be done in such a better way. I think that's why so many users comment on these types of threads.

EWR764

Emphasis added. You probably could have concluded your post right there.

I think the argument can be made that United is taking better care of its airplanes now than at any time in the last 15 years or so. The reasons for the operational meltdown are much more complicated than the simple conclusion that the company is no longer maintaining its fleet...

goalie

MODERATOR NOTE

I have deleted several posts which were members discussing each other and not the topic of this thread. If you would like to discuss issues such as why other members continue to fly United, please feel free to do so via pm with those members but kindly refrain from discussing that here

goalie
UA Forum Co-Moderator

REPUBLIC757

Best practices in maintenance in over 15 years which clearly explains the ridiculous amount of cancellations over the last month.

Because you after all, clearly know this better than anyone else right?

EWR764

Maybe in a binary, simple world where everything has an easy cause-and-effect relationship. Again, as noted, this is not just an issue of airplanes breaking down more than they used to.

sgfood

Recent LAX/EWR in int 757 with spouse. Sitting in 1E/F we found both seats had severe recline problems. An FA checked the log and said that both our seats and 4F had been reported on landing at LAX 10 hours before, "should have been fixed" and to report this to a supervisor on landing. Apologies on landing and offered $150 vouchers but as I explained to the supervisor my main point was the aircraft was now a night flight to CDG and if I was in one of those seats I'd be pretty upset.

Thanked me for my concern but I left with the feeling that it didn't seem high priority. As the seat locked in the upright position for take off and landing perhaps this puts this maintenance down the pecking order and had me thinking, as you suggest, they ignore until they inhibit operation or compensation exceeds cost of repair.

FlyWorld

Smisek's goal, as documented in publicly filed documents, is to increase margins to influence math that determines his bonus payment.

If he says that there are diminishing returns after 80% and his goal is to maximize operating margins, then it follows logically that his goal is to not exceed 80% because by his logic, such action would reduce the margins that drive his compensation.

scruffair

There are two separate issues here.

1. Are planes going MX more often?
2. Is it due to intentional actions by labor?

To those of you asking if there "really is lots of MX happening," #1 CAN be answered by real data.

Of the 17 UA cancellations already today, I took just the international widebodies listed as canceled today on FlightAware and plugged them into united.com. Every one says canceled due to maintenance. All of them:

UA957
UA930
UA925
UA125

Then I spot checked 4 random domestic cancellations...

UA1915
UA1645
UA394
UA785

Not to my surprise... All canceled due to maintenance.

I've been looking at these for weeks now and it's the same thing every day. Also, look at the International Cancellations thread and you'll see the data right there as well. There is an abnormally large amount of MX cancellations recently. And it's corroborated by real data.

SFO_FT

OP here. Here's the last 10 of 11 trips (since March) taken on UA -- only 1 trip didn't have a MX:

• delayed 24 hours due to misconnect resulting from inbound MX delayed flight
• delayed 47 min due to MX
• delayed 157 min due to MX
• delayed 46 min for MX + bags delayed for 25 hours
• delayed 103 min for MX
• delayed 76 min for MX
• delayed 113 min for MX
• delayed 21 min for MX
• delayed 27 min for MX
• flight cancelled for MX; delayed for 15 hours

That's atrocious. Probably best not to reserve any flights when I'm booked for it!

johnden

UA can use their superior fare pricing controls to help mask the operational difficulties.

Many studies show that consumers' airline loyalty is worth around ~20 USD or less domestically. Sell fares 20-50 USD less than others and you can fill a plane.

The secret to dynamic pricing is to do this in a way that isn't obvious to the competition(data driven, customized offers, wacky fare rules etc), low opportunity cost(elite gouging) and isn't harmful to the bottom line (more unbundling).

If UA can out-price-control the competition, they can get away with lower quality service.

Globetrotter2015

That must be super unlucky. For a 70% on-time rate and a 97% completion rate, your scenario happens 0.000059% of the time.