Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

We gotta get out of here: Stranded airline passengers find an advocate
IHT ^ | September 20, 2007 | Jeff Bailey

Posted on 09/20/2007 10:06:08 AM PDT by vietvet67

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-64 next last
To: CitizenUSA
The hubs are overwhelmed. Take O’Hare. That place is nearly always chaotic, and I think it’s simply because they try to cram too many aircraft into a single airport (opening another hub would probably be VERY expensive).

The airspace is at its limit, too. Like real estate on the ground, they're not making any more of it.

41 posted on 09/20/2007 12:45:10 PM PDT by Lil'freeper (Don't taze me, bro!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: GovernmentShrinker

Yes, I’ve heard something about this before. It being an obvious solution, why doesn’t SOMEONE consider it? I know, rhetorical question.


42 posted on 09/20/2007 1:01:34 PM PDT by I_like_good_things_too
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: wildbill

If there’s a shortage of gates at the airport, the plane can pull away from the gate without passengers, in order to free up the gate for another flight. If the airlines weren’t given government-endorsed credit for an “on time departure” just for pulling away from the gate, they wouldn’t put the passengers on the plane and pull away, while some condition existed that was clearly going to cause a significant delay between pull-away and becoming airborne.

We all understand about take-off delays caused by weather conditions, mechanical problems, etc. That’s not the main complaint — the main complaint is long delays between pull-away and take-off. Most of these “imprisonment” situations follow from gate pull-aways in which the pilot (and many other responsible parties) know full well that take-off isn’t likely to follow within a few minutes.

Ever notice how the announcement of a “slight delay” for a mechanical problem usually comes within a couple of minutes of the plane coming to a stop AWAY from the gate? Ever notice how rare it is to hear such an announcement BEFORE the pull-away? Amazing how these mechanical problems are endowed with some sort of magical invisibility cloak while the plane is at the gate, engines running, pilot in the cockpit. A little push-back from the tractor, and a slow taxi away from the gate (just like the preceding slow taxi to the gate), and off goes the invisibility cloak — suddenly the mechanical problems become visible to the powers that be.


43 posted on 09/20/2007 1:24:15 PM PDT by GovernmentShrinker
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]

To: Lil'freeper

The question is when does the clock start and who starts it?


44 posted on 09/20/2007 1:34:40 PM PDT by Boiler Plate ("Why be difficult, when with a little more effort you can be impossible." - Mom)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: vietvet67

The airline business in the U.S. is sick.

There are factors that reduce competition yet, at the same time, profit margins of U.S. airlines are low, even as there is no regulatory issue that limits the price of an airline ticket.

Consequently, airlines overbook and flight-times are significantly bunched (varying by route) as all airlines at one airport seek to obtain as much of the passengers they can at the optimum times that passengers most frequently choose.

You get airports idle in stretches and then massively backed up at other times.

The US airline industry needs an overhaul from the ground up and that needs to extend to the economic and operational relationships between airlines and airports as well.

If it were possible to have a larger number of airports in each of our metropolitan areas (how likely???), and that larger number each owned by a major airline, I wonder if their operations would be more efficient and if the drive-times to those airports would still provide reasonable competition between them. Just total speculation.


45 posted on 09/20/2007 1:38:27 PM PDT by Wuli (u)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: vietvet67

There should be a simple law: No aircraft may embark without immediate clearance for flying their route with pre-takeoff and pre-landing clearance, meaning they will be cleared for takeoff as soon as the other planes in front takeoff and the destination airport is cleared for their landing. If any plane is not able to takeoff and fly its intended route with pre-clearance to land, the plane should be required to immediately return to the terminal.


46 posted on 09/20/2007 1:47:29 PM PDT by CodeToad
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: saganite
The airlines can’t put passengers off on the ramp. Too dangerous.

Fly a commuter airline and it's common.

I've crawled up the rear stairs of a 727 more than once.

47 posted on 09/20/2007 2:07:05 PM PDT by Vinnie (You're Nobody 'Til Somebody Jihads You)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: I_like_good_things_too

***I was trying to encourage the guy next to me to storm the cockpit so that at least we’d be let out while he was arrested.***

Oh, that’s funny.


48 posted on 09/20/2007 3:18:41 PM PDT by kitkat (I refuse to let the DUers chase me off FR.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: CitizenUSA

In addition to all the well-thought-out things you’ve said, it isn’t always possible to cancel a flight and get your money back. About five years or so ago, I cancelled a flight because the concert I was planning to see was cancelled. The airline would not refund my money, but would only give me a ticket for the same flight in the future. I never had cause to take the same flight. Total loss of air fare.

Even if you change your flight, there’s a pretty hefty charge.


49 posted on 09/20/2007 3:29:13 PM PDT by kitkat (I refuse to let the DUers chase me off FR.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: All

My post isn’t about being stranded on the plane (was once, learned to plan for that) but a very silly questions that I’m sure the aviation experts can answer. Ready?

How do I fly with my grandson’s goldfish about 3500 miles, 4 airports? Without buying the fish a seat, and without freeze-drying the fish, of course!


50 posted on 09/20/2007 6:02:44 PM PDT by blu (All grammar and punctuation rules are *OFF* for the "24" thread.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 49 | View Replies]

To: blu

blu wrote: “How do I fly with my grandson’s goldfish about 3500 miles, 4 airports?”

Should be pretty easy. Get a good strong plastic bag. Using water from the fish’s tank, fill the bag a couple inches deep. Dump the fish in and seal the bag, taking care to leave plenty of air. Put the bag in a strong box and ship normally in checked baggage.

As long as the bag contains enough water to cover the fish and there’s plenty of air, the fish will last a long time. I’m talking about 20% water / 80% air in a tightly inflated bag. Make sure the bag don’t leak of course, even if it’s upended. Oh, put the fish in right before you leave home so it has fresh air/water.

This is the same method used to ship exotic fish every day. As long as the box doesn’t freeze or cook in a very hot warehouse along the way, everything should be fine. You should probably also check with the airline to make sure all of the above advice is OK for them as each airline has their own way of dealing with pets.


51 posted on 09/20/2007 7:41:35 PM PDT by CitizenUSA
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 50 | View Replies]

To: lilylangtree

I have to ask. Is this a federal policy? Is this an airline policy based on a federal policy? Or is this simply an airline policy based on nothing else?


52 posted on 09/20/2007 7:44:34 PM PDT by jimfree (Freep and ye shall find.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: I_like_good_things_too
Some guy actually smoked in the bathroom.

Oh the horror!

It's a wonder you are still alive.

53 posted on 09/20/2007 7:52:01 PM PDT by humblegunner (©)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: CitizenUSA

Wow, thanks!!! I was picturing myself, sitting in one of the seats that make you want to scream at the flight attendents “Hey, Greyhound bus company called, they want their vintage seats back” with the tray table in the down position, with Fishy sitting in a plastic cup in the cupholder!! (gawd, is there anything I won’t do for my grandkids???!)

Maybe I’ll go to Petsmart and get one of their boxes...and heat seal the poor thing in.


54 posted on 09/20/2007 7:59:16 PM PDT by blu (All grammar and punctuation rules are *OFF* for the "24" thread.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 51 | View Replies]

To: blu

A lot of people think fish need lots of water, but they really need less water and more air. The more surface area between the water and the air the better. If you filled the bag all the way to the top, you’d likely kill the fish much faster. A shallow aquarium is better than a deep one for the same reasons.


55 posted on 09/20/2007 9:34:15 PM PDT by CitizenUSA
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 54 | View Replies]

To: Vinnie

Yep, in an area set aside for passenger movement and controlled by airline personnel. I’m talking about the ramp/taxiways where most jets sit when they can’t get to a gate. There’s no way the airline or the airport will let passengers walk around in unsupervised areas of the ramp or taxiways.


56 posted on 09/21/2007 3:48:50 AM PDT by saganite
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 47 | View Replies]

To: GovernmentShrinker
The Department of Transportation publishes official reports of “on time departure” rates for the various airlines, and “departure” is defined as pulling away from the gate within 15 minutes of scheduled departure time. The airlines then use these official figures in their advertising. Those passengers imprisoned on the tarmac for several hours are nearly always on flights which had “on time departures”. If the plane goes back to the gate, it no longer counts as an “on time departure”. If it sits on the tarmac for 12 hours, it’s still an “on time departure”.

Only one simple change is needed, but government is notoriously poor at making simple changes that are needed. Report “on time ARRIVALS”, not departures.

Bingo.

Incidently, Wendy's drive-thru service usually ranks as the quickest among nationwide fast food chains for the same reason. The timer that counts seconds from-order-to-handoff resets when each customer advances past the window. Most dt customers are familiar with being asked to park to one side for a special item to be carried out by hand, and that's understandable. But for an item ordered by nearly all customers? Wendy's will do it if they didn't get fries dropped in time to fill orders.
57 posted on 09/21/2007 5:37:22 PM PDT by Titan Magroyne ("Shorn, dumb and bleating is no way to go through life, son." Yeah, close enough.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: wastedyears
The jet blast from an engine at idle RPM has enough force to blow a truck a good distance.

Where'd you hear that?

I'm guessing you've never actually worked on or around aircraft before.

58 posted on 09/30/2007 9:16:22 AM PDT by Jotmo (I Had a Bad Experience With the CIA and Now I'm Gonna Show You My Feminine Side - Swirling Eddies)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: CodeToad
That would be great, but the controllers will not give then clearance to take off until they are on the taxiway, and "in line". Many mechanical problems are found when the engines are started, which takes place after the jet is pushed back.

I've been on many flights that will leave the gate in an attempt to make a certain "wheels up" time either before or after the "scheduled " time. They have to be on the taxiway in order to get in the departure line. Sometime that means waiting on the taxiway through various delays. If you go back to the terminal, you loose you spot in line, and you start the entire vicious cycle over again.

This is a very complex issue, with the airlines caught between pleasing customers, and dealing with government rules in regards to traffic control. So making blanket rules like that will only add complexity to the problem.

I'm not saying there isn't a problem, there certainly is. But as with most things, government is part of the problem. Then their solution to the problem they are at least partially responsible for is always more rules and power for government.

59 posted on 09/30/2007 9:44:16 AM PDT by Jotmo (I Had a Bad Experience With the CIA and Now I'm Gonna Show You My Feminine Side - Swirling Eddies)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 46 | View Replies]

To: Jotmo

My cousin was a mechanic for United, and I watched some of the videos they have to.


60 posted on 09/30/2007 5:23:56 PM PDT by wastedyears (George Orwell was a clairvoyant.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 58 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-64 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson