New on time initiatives (Reuters article) begin in Jan
Aug 29, 2015, 5:46 pm
#46
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: California
Programs: AA EXP, lowly UA 1K; Hyatt Diamond, SPG Gold, Hilton Gold; National EC, Hertz PC
Posts: 2,215
My read of this article is that next year, UA is planning to get serious about getting to 80% OT systemwide, most of the time, except for wx, mx, and crew availability. 
the examples they gave of how they'll do better sound a bit confused to me. For example, having software that can calculate tight connections and hold an aircraft for late arriving passengers who are racing between gates would actually reduce OT performance, although it could reduce missed connections.
Maybe this is UA's attempt to counter the full page Delta advertising of their reliability?
the examples they gave of how they'll do better sound a bit confused to me. For example, having software that can calculate tight connections and hold an aircraft for late arriving passengers who are racing between gates would actually reduce OT performance, although it could reduce missed connections.
Maybe this is UA's attempt to counter the full page Delta advertising of their reliability?
Aug 29, 2015, 5:59 pm
#47
Original Poster
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: NYC: UA 1K, DL Platinum, AAirpass, Avis PC
Posts: 4,599
Fuel is often purchased in advance, or at least contracted.
The maintenance philosophies of United and Continental were about as polar opposite as you could be while still being fully committed to safety. The differences and aggressive cross fleeting, which Delta also suffered from pre-2012, are a driver in maintenance issues. There are spares and preventative maintenance. I honestly don't know if there's enough, but I do know it takes time for both initiatives to take hold.
The maintenance philosophies of United and Continental were about as polar opposite as you could be while still being fully committed to safety. The differences and aggressive cross fleeting, which Delta also suffered from pre-2012, are a driver in maintenance issues. There are spares and preventative maintenance. I honestly don't know if there's enough, but I do know it takes time for both initiatives to take hold.
Missing from this is any discussion of:
.....
(3) having more spare A/C
(4) increasing down time between flights and for MX to allow delays not to be passed on
.....
(7) not schedualing so that the crew and A/C are both coming in from different places, each with little slack, so that a delay in one causes further delays.
3 is something they already did with the 747s.
Indeed.
It is a very similar playbook (thanks Hausenstein) as was the UA circa 2008 one which read eerily close to the "Go Forward" plan.
Add on NW's best in the business maintenance and the Delta FAs and we get...
Which dates back to a Bethune-era CO practice. Delta, of course just has a lot more profit to share. For all the bashing of CO leadership style that goes on around here, these days you'll find an awful lot of former CO people at Delta, and the similarities between Delta and "old Continental" are no coincidence...
Last edited by WineCountryUA; Aug 29, 2015 at 7:01 pm Reason: merging consecutive posts by same member -- please use multi-quote
Aug 29, 2015, 6:12 pm
#48
Join Date: Feb 2008
Programs: 6 year GS, now 2MM Jeff-ugee, *wood LTPlt, SkyPeso PLT
Posts: 6,526
UA used to do it more like Delta does now, and when Jeff took over, he ended that. Delta (1) leaves slightly more time between flights, (2) tries to keep crew and A/C more together (so a delay does not become two), (3) keeps spare A/C (and more parts) at hubs, and (4) tries to keep an aircraft type in one location, while running of that type only to/from hubs that have capacity to fix that plane. So e.g. at SFO (and also SEA) we don't see many, md 88/90s. At SEA I see almost exclusively 737/757s, almost never a DL airbus (or mad-dogs.
Aug 29, 2015, 7:23 pm
#49
Join Date: May 2013
Posts: 3,361
Well if they do it "like Delta" they will have to do a 180 degree turn... UA used to do it more like Delta does now, and when Jeff took over, he ended that. Delta (1) leaves slightly more time between flights, (2) tries to keep crew and A/C more together (so a delay does not become two), (3) keeps spare A/C (and more parts) at hubs, and (4) tries to keep an aircraft type in one location, while running of that type only to/from hubs that have capacity to fix that plane. So e.g. at SFO (and also SEA) we don't see many, md 88/90s. At SEA I see almost exclusively 737/757s, almost never a DL airbus (or mad-dogs.
UA used to do it more like Delta does now, and when Jeff took over, he ended that. Delta (1) leaves slightly more time between flights, (2) tries to keep crew and A/C more together (so a delay does not become two), (3) keeps spare A/C (and more parts) at hubs, and (4) tries to keep an aircraft type in one location, while running of that type only to/from hubs that have capacity to fix that plane. So e.g. at SFO (and also SEA) we don't see many, md 88/90s. At SEA I see almost exclusively 737/757s, almost never a DL airbus (or mad-dogs.Delta does have a very unique fleet strategy.
Aug 29, 2015, 8:01 pm
#50
Moderator, Omni, Omni/PR, Omni/Games, FlyerTalk Posting Legend
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Between DCA and IAD
Programs: UA 1K MM; Hilton Diamond
Posts: 67,145
I will say my most recent trip that my bag arrived early (and UA even texted me that it had made an earlier flight). Of course, UA's baggage folks then just left it sitting in the middle of the floor at IAD, with no one anywhere nearby. I'm glad it didn't walk off with someone else...
Aug 30, 2015, 8:58 am
#51
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: ORD
Programs: UA Silver, Marriott Platinum/LT Platinum, Hilton Gold
Posts: 5,594
But, if not weather, what's causing the delays and the crew to time out in the first place? Does anyone really believe a contract would result in noticeable improvement? I'm skeptical.
Aug 30, 2015, 12:23 pm
#52
Join Date: Apr 2012
Programs: UA DL AA WN VX AS
Posts: 33
Cheap Trivia to cut down on delays
The last three delayed flights I was on all shared one very simple cause - plane has been sitting at gate for more than an hour (up to 12 hours), passengers all boarded, ten minutes before departure, pilot/co-pilot walk on, discover some warning light, engineer called, resolves issue after 40 minutes. If someone had just looked at that light an hour earlier there would have been no delay.
Aug 30, 2015, 12:39 pm
#53
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Jul 1999
Location: Ewa Beach, Hawaii
Posts: 10,909
The last three delayed flights I was on all shared one very simple cause - plane has been sitting at gate for more than an hour (up to 12 hours), passengers all boarded, ten minutes before departure, pilot/co-pilot walk on, discover some warning light, engineer called, resolves issue after 40 minutes. If someone had just looked at that light an hour earlier there would have been no delay.
Aug 30, 2015, 12:56 pm
#54
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Chicago
Programs: UA 1K, 1MM; former GS
Posts: 303
I spoke with a senior UA FA friend today who was fuming. Although she did not want to give out details she said that management had informed them last week that UA had no interest in being number 1 (on time departures/arrivals) and that 80% was good enough. She thinks the FAs will start to think that an 80% effort should then be good enough for them as well.
Now I know many of you may think that an 80% effort would be a big improvement, but this comes from someone who thinks that most FAs give 100% all the time.
Now I know many of you may think that an 80% effort would be a big improvement, but this comes from someone who thinks that most FAs give 100% all the time.
Aug 30, 2015, 1:06 pm
#55
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Jul 1999
Location: Ewa Beach, Hawaii
Posts: 10,909
I spoke with a senior UA FA friend today who was fuming. Although she did not want to give out details she said that management had informed them last week that UA had no interest in being number 1 (on time departures/arrivals) and that 80% was good enough. She thinks the FAs will start to think that an 80% effort should then be good enough for them as well.
Now I know many of you may think that an 80% effort would be a big improvement, but this comes from someone who thinks that most FAs give 100% all the time.
Now I know many of you may think that an 80% effort would be a big improvement, but this comes from someone who thinks that most FAs give 100% all the time.
Aug 30, 2015, 1:14 pm
#58
Moderator: Budget Travel forum & Credit Card Programs, FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: YYJ/YVR and back on Van Isle ....... for now
Programs: UA lifetime MM / *A Gold
Posts: 14,429
Aug 30, 2015, 2:22 pm
#59
Join Date: Jun 2015
Posts: 342
This is somewhat OT, but within the article, so ...
Jojo said United is taking additional steps to defend against cyber attacks. The airline has not suffered a breach of its data systems, except for isolated cases in which hackers accessed mileage accounts by guessing a customer’s weak password or using passwords leaked elsewhere.
So they consider a MP account number (readily visible on itineraries and BP's) and a 4 digit pin code to be strong security?
Jojo said United is taking additional steps to defend against cyber attacks. The airline has not suffered a breach of its data systems, except for isolated cases in which hackers accessed mileage accounts by guessing a customer’s weak password or using passwords leaked elsewhere.
So they consider a MP account number (readily visible on itineraries and BP's) and a 4 digit pin code to be strong security?
And agreed re the 4 digit pin.
But no longer allowing sign in from a user name (people with bad security have universal user and passwords) was an "additional step" of sorts
Aug 30, 2015, 3:24 pm
#60
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: San Francisco/Tel Aviv/YYZ
Programs: CO 1K-MM
Posts: 10,762
It is interesting that none of the issues we all know about as contributing to UA's woe-begotten operational performance are mentioned in the piece, and what is (slowing down boarding to hold a plane) are very small scale and certainly don't help with OT performance.
Missing from this is any discussion of:
(1) unified labor groups
(2) ending cross fleeting, until there is full integration, leading to equipment being based away from crew and MX resources
(3) having more spare A/C
(4) increasing down time between flights and for MX to allow delays not to be passed on
(5) getting a decent computer system which better allows rebooking
(6) increasing ramp/gate staff, and having more spare crews
(7) not schedualing so that the crew and A/C are both coming in from different places, each with little slack, so that a delay in one causes further delays.
In fact United appears to be going the opposite direction, by e.g. going to 787 flights ex-SFO/LAX, neither of which have the resources (MX or crew) to address issues before they arrise, and then basing sUA equipment out of hubs w/o sUA staff and MX facilities. That is not gonna' help.
This piece just sounds like another of the periodic blasts about all the great "changes you are gonna' like" none of which improve things, and many of which made things worse. A new upgrade system, new meals, new coffee, new banked scheduled, new routes, new 787 "game changes", new seats, now again new meals in international Y. United is the airline that under-performs, under-promises, and then under-delivers.
Missing from this is any discussion of:
(1) unified labor groups
(2) ending cross fleeting, until there is full integration, leading to equipment being based away from crew and MX resources
(3) having more spare A/C
(4) increasing down time between flights and for MX to allow delays not to be passed on
(5) getting a decent computer system which better allows rebooking
(6) increasing ramp/gate staff, and having more spare crews
(7) not schedualing so that the crew and A/C are both coming in from different places, each with little slack, so that a delay in one causes further delays.
In fact United appears to be going the opposite direction, by e.g. going to 787 flights ex-SFO/LAX, neither of which have the resources (MX or crew) to address issues before they arrise, and then basing sUA equipment out of hubs w/o sUA staff and MX facilities. That is not gonna' help.
This piece just sounds like another of the periodic blasts about all the great "changes you are gonna' like" none of which improve things, and many of which made things worse. A new upgrade system, new meals, new coffee, new banked scheduled, new routes, new 787 "game changes", new seats, now again new meals in international Y. United is the airline that under-performs, under-promises, and then under-delivers.
Now if they have mismatches in the same darn type between one that was supposed to use a CO crew and they only have a spare UA crew.. well, they're screwed now. OCtober will mark 5 years since the merged entity was legally created. In October they will still be accepting CO planes and UA planes into separately scheduled and crewed entities.
CO-style is to schedule fast turns such that even a minor 20 minute delay cascades throughout the network. The plane delays one crew, and the crew delays another plane. Remove the ability to easily swap one of those elements out and you get a bigger mess. Throw on top of all that a computer system that makes reroutes and reissues painful and customers get shafted.
I suppose at least now agents will be able to see where inbound connectors are arriving from and determine if they can even make the flight. UA had this pre-shares.