Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Sun Country NYC To MSP - 6 Hour Wait On Tarmac  
User currently offlineN62NA From United States of America, joined Aug 2003, 4255 posts, RR: 6
Posted (4 years 7 months 4 weeks 1 day 10 hours ago) and read 8146 times:

And here's another one...

http://www.startribune.com/local/540...r=KArks:DCiUHc3E7_V_nDaycUiacyKUUr

They actually had a story about this on our local Miami TV station where they interviewed pax from both the Sun Country flight and a DL/NW flight that was also even more severely delayed (it arrived the next day in MSP).

The passengers interviewed specifically mentioned being "held on the plane" and one even said he was contemplating "storming the cockpit" so the passengers could be let out.

77 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlineAf773atmsp From United States of America, joined Aug 2006, 2633 posts, RR: 1
Reply 1, posted (4 years 7 months 4 weeks 1 day 8 hours ago) and read 7949 times:

Maybe storming the cockpit isn't a good idea. Just open the emergency exit doors.

SY is planning a time limit for holding passengers on the aircraft. If the delay is more than four hours the plane will return to the terminal.

http://www.startribune.com/business/...iD3aPc:_Yyc:aUac8HEaDiaMDCinchO7DU



It ain't no normal MD80 its a Super 80!
User currently offlineUAL757 From United States of America, joined Sep 2006, 806 posts, RR: 4
Reply 2, posted (4 years 7 months 4 weeks 1 day 7 hours ago) and read 7859 times:



Quoting Af773atmsp (Reply 1):



Quoting Af773atmsp (Reply 1):
SY is planning a time limit for holding passengers on the aircraft. If the delay is more than four hours the plane will return to the terminal.

Four is still too much. Imagine being trapped in an SY 737 for four extra hours! Ouch!


User currently offlineSunking737 From United States of America, joined Feb 2005, 2021 posts, RR: 9
Reply 3, posted (4 years 7 months 4 weeks 1 day 6 hours ago) and read 7820 times:

Hey at lest SY is doing something about it. What have the others done..UA,AA, DL & etc?


Just an MSPAVGEEK
User currently offlineMir From United States of America, joined Jan 2004, 21092 posts, RR: 56
Reply 4, posted (4 years 7 months 4 weeks 1 day 6 hours ago) and read 7780 times:



Quoting Af773atmsp (Reply 1):
Maybe storming the cockpit isn't a good idea.

With pilots who might be armed, I'd tend to agree.

-Mir



7 billion, one nation, imagination...it's a beautiful day
User currently offlineJoseKMLB From United States of America, joined May 2008, 493 posts, RR: 0
Reply 5, posted (4 years 7 months 4 weeks 1 day 5 hours ago) and read 7741 times:

Think it might be hard to break in the cockpit doors anyways after they are locked?

User currently offlineNWA320 From United States of America, joined Aug 2007, 70 posts, RR: 0
Reply 6, posted (4 years 7 months 4 weeks 21 hours ago) and read 7506 times:

Almost the exact same thing happened to me in May 2006, I was sitting on the runway on an SY plane in JFK for 5 hours while awaiting storms to pass. Needless to say it wasn't very fun. Cabin was hot most of the time and the plane was mostly full. Lukilly The the FA's did serve free snacks/drinks. Scheduled arrival time in MSP was around 8 PM, I believe, and we didn't land in MSP till around 1 in the morning. I don't really blame Sun Country about this though, not much they can do about storms.

User currently offlineExFATboy From United States of America, joined Jul 2003, 2974 posts, RR: 9
Reply 7, posted (4 years 7 months 4 weeks 20 hours ago) and read 7468 times:

Going to reserve judgment on this one, at least for now - hard to say whether or not SY could have done more without knowing more about the weather situation, the Star-Tribune article mentions "weather over Iowa", and while weather over Iowa doesn't seem at first thought to really be that big a deal if you're flying JFK-MSP, "weather over Iowa" could be a much larger front extending north and south quite a bit. And without knowing that, it's hard to determine whether SY ops should have sent the plane back to the terminal, seeing that the delay was going to be extensive, or if they thought there was a reasonable chance the plane would be able to proceed.

I also don't understand what affect "construction at MSP" could have, unless under severe weather conditions MSP is short a runway right now or something? Can't tell from this quote.

By the way, is it just me or is the Star-Tribune absolute crap at reporting on air travel? They just seem to slap a few quotes together and run it, no actual attempt to find out what happened.


User currently offlineSunking737 From United States of America, joined Feb 2005, 2021 posts, RR: 9
Reply 8, posted (4 years 7 months 4 weeks 20 hours ago) and read 7445 times:



Quoting ExFATboy (Reply 7):
I also don't understand what affect "construction at MSP" could have, unless under severe weather conditions MSP is short a runway right now or something? Can't tell from this quote.

MSP is going through major runway repair on the middle section of the longest runway IIRC it is 30L. That will slow things down alot. That alone will cause problems in normal weather.



Just an MSPAVGEEK
User currently offlineDocLightning From United States of America, joined Nov 2005, 18699 posts, RR: 58
Reply 9, posted (4 years 7 months 4 weeks 20 hours ago) and read 7383 times:



Quote:
In a statement Friday, CEO Stan Gadek said Sun Country regretted the delay and would issue refunds. The delay stemmed from construction at the Minneapolis airport, the statement said, and "was further compounded by the onset of severe storms in New York."

"Our pilots and dispatchers followed procedure and worked with controllers on the ground to get the situation rectified," the statement said. "Our flight crew did everything in their power to make the passengers as comfortable as possible and to keep them informed."

Oh, not good enough, SY. Not good enough at all. If you pulled that crap on me, you'd get a lawsuit and criminal charges for unlawful detainment.

Quoting ExFATboy (Reply 7):
And without knowing that, it's hard to determine whether SY ops should have sent the plane back to the terminal, seeing that the delay was going to be extensive, or if they thought there was a reasonable chance the plane would be able to proceed.

Uh. No.

They knew that aircraft, which was catered and serviced for a block time of around 2 hours, had been sitting on the ground without being serviced for over 3 hours. They knew those passengers had limited food and that the toilets have finite capacity.

There does come a point when keeping your passengers safe and comfortable is the top priority, even if it might further delay a flight.

You do not trap people on an aircraft on the ground for over 3 hours. Ever. I cannot conceive of a reason why these passengers could not have been deplaned and told to stay in the boarding area.

You do ANYTHING, and I mean ANYTHING to avoid that situation. And I cannot believe that anyone would defend such a situation. Yes, they handled it better than XJ, but they are going to be very upset when public outcry for a Bill of Rights gets strong because of these incidents.


User currently offlinePGNCS From United States of America, joined Apr 2007, 2756 posts, RR: 45
Reply 10, posted (4 years 7 months 4 weeks 18 hours ago) and read 7251 times:

For all of you who do not grasp that the ATC system is overtaxed, that airports are extremely congested (especially in NYC), and that severe weather can lead to severe delays, please do us all a favor and take N62NA's suggestion from another boringingly similar thread and take a train. Or drive. Or deal with it like everyone else does.

Quoting DocLightning (Reply 9):
Oh, not good enough, SY. Not good enough at all. If you pulled that crap on me, you'd get a lawsuit and criminal charges for unlawful detainment.

Yes, that would be certain to improve the system.  Yeah sure

Quoting DocLightning (Reply 9):
They knew that aircraft, which was catered and serviced for a block time of around 2 hours, had been sitting on the ground without being serviced for over 3 hours. They knew those passengers had limited food and that the toilets have finite capacity.

Did anyone starve? Did the toilets stop functioning?

Quoting DocLightning (Reply 9):
There does come a point when keeping your passengers safe and comfortable is the top priority, even if it might further delay a flight.

The passengers were safe. Obviously. Were they comfortable? No. Would they have been more comfortable to go back to the gate and start the process all over again or cancel the flight and sleep in the airport? Not my call to make.

Quoting DocLightning (Reply 9):
You do not trap people on an aircraft on the ground for over 3 hours. Ever. I cannot conceive of a reason why these passengers could not have been deplaned and told to stay in the boarding area.

You do realize that once in the middle of a line of aircraft (especially at JFK) there is no way at all to get out of the line, right? That's the biggest reason arbitrary time limits mean nothing, although if enacted flight cancellations will likely go up stranding people overnight more often.

I am not defending the state of the present system. I have to deal with it every day I work, and I spend plenty of time in JFK, and hate every minute of dealing with the operation there, but until the airlines stop overscheduling and start using fewer bigger aircraft to congested airports this is the reality with or without ATC upgrades.


User currently offlineExFATboy From United States of America, joined Jul 2003, 2974 posts, RR: 9
Reply 11, posted (4 years 7 months 4 weeks 18 hours ago) and read 7220 times:



Quoting DocLightning (Reply 9):
I cannot conceive of a reason why these passengers could not have been deplaned and told to stay in the boarding area.

Because the plane wasn't anywhere near the terminal, but most likely out on a taxiway somewhere in the sprawling mess that is JFK. And returning to the terminal would mean giving up their position and, especially if you let the passengers disembark and thus have to allow extra time to round them up and get them back on the plane, possibly making that 6 hour delay even longer.

In principle, I agree with you - these delays are too long. I've been screaming on every thread on this subject since the St. Valentine's Day Massacre that this crap has to stop or we'll get a "Bill Of Rights" that'll make things worse.

But on the other hand, there are practical limits. There's no evidence so far (keeping in mind it's a craptacularly poorly written article) that there were any issues with the toilets, which, since Sun Country flies 737s which are used on 5+ hour flights across the United States every day, you wouldn't expect. There's no evidence that they'd run out of water, just snacks. And there has to be some level of personal responsibility - in the summer, pretty much anywhere east of the Rockies you can get thunderstorms that cause these sort of delays, so you should always carry a couple of snacks with you just in case.

I admit I'm not entirely consistent on my position on this - I'm trying to strike a balance between the various interests of the customer. I generally agree that customer comfort is given a lower priority than it should be given, and I do think that sometimes airlines put getting the metal to where it needs to be later above the passengers.

But there's also the problem of balancing comfort with not wanting to make the total delay worse by giving up your position on the field. At an airport like, say, BTV, or FAT, or SRQ, or even TPA, where space is not an issue and there are never double-digit takeoff queues, there's no excuse not to go back to the terminal, unless there's a thunderstorm right overhead at that very moment and you can't safely get the passengers off, or the delay is expected to be short and if you picked up any additional delay getting everyone back on board you could run into a crew-time issue. But at JFK, where during weather delays (and where you can have weather delays on both ends of the trip at the same time), limited terminal/gate space, and 50-plus aircraft takeoff queues, sometimes it is in the passengers' best interest to just sit it out on the plane.


User currently offlineBennett123 From United Kingdom, joined Aug 2004, 7209 posts, RR: 3
Reply 12, posted (4 years 7 months 4 weeks 18 hours ago) and read 7180 times:

Clearly storming the cockpit is not an option.

However, equally clearly the airlines and airports need to sort out this issue, (there have been previous threads on this issue in the US esp NYC) before the politicians get involved.

I do not know if this is common in the US, however the longest I have ever had to sit on an aircraft was 1hr.


User currently offlineTravatl From United States of America, joined Mar 2001, 2173 posts, RR: 7
Reply 13, posted (4 years 7 months 4 weeks 17 hours ago) and read 7135 times:

I concur with a poster above with a restriction at the most congested airports to aircraft with a minimum of 100 seats. Granted, there could be exemptions for smaller markets. However, there's no reason to be on a CRJ from ATL to ORD.

User currently offlineNIKV69 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 14, posted (4 years 7 months 4 weeks 17 hours ago) and read 7069 times:



Quoting Sunking737 (Reply 3):
Hey at lest SY is doing something about it. What have the others done..UA,AA, DL & etc?

Or the airports? Come on, this is not a hard one. Have a plan in place that gets these poor people off the friggen aircraft in case of. Jesus!


User currently offlineOzark1 From United States of America, joined Mar 2006, 380 posts, RR: 0
Reply 15, posted (4 years 7 months 4 weeks 16 hours ago) and read 6797 times:

Sunking737, obviously you aren't too up to date on airline policies. I know AA has a 4 hour cutoff. I'm sure if you check, most of them do after being trashed through the mud by the media over the past year or two.

User currently offlineSunking737 From United States of America, joined Feb 2005, 2021 posts, RR: 9
Reply 16, posted (4 years 7 months 4 weeks 16 hours ago) and read 6748 times:



Quoting Ozark1 (Reply 15):
Sunking737, obviously you aren't too up to date on airline policies. I know AA has a 4 hour cutoff. I'm sure if you check, most of them do after being trashed through the mud by the media over the past year or two.

Sorry I am out of touch with current policy's as I no longer work at MSP or SY. I currently live in Orlando and do not work for an airline.



Just an MSPAVGEEK
User currently offlineN62NA From United States of America, joined Aug 2003, 4255 posts, RR: 6
Reply 17, posted (4 years 7 months 4 weeks 16 hours ago) and read 6748 times:



Quoting PGNCS (Reply 10):
For all of you who do not grasp that the ATC system is overtaxed, that airports are extremely congested (especially in NYC), and that severe weather can lead to severe delays, please do us all a favor and take N62NA's suggestion from another boringingly similar thread and take a train. Or drive. Or deal with it like everyone else does.

Sorry these threads are boring you. But you are correct in what you point out above. And people are resorting to alternatives to air transportation in the USA more and more each day. Probably due to the bad economy but also probably due to these horrendous delays and hostage situations which are becoming more and more commonplace each year.

Quoting Bennett123 (Reply 12):
the airlines and airports need to sort out this issue, (there have been previous threads on this issue in the US esp NYC) before the politicians get involved.

And the airlines are running out of time. This year it's Healthcare and welfare for banks and car manufacturers. Next year... Social Security and ?

Quoting Bennett123 (Reply 12):
I do not know if this is common in the US, however the longest I have ever had to sit on an aircraft was 1hr.

With all the padding built into schedules in the USA, a 1 hour sit on the tarmac would probably still result in the plane arriving "on time." Just be glad you never have to fly domestically in the USA to NYC, DFW, ORD, PHL, DTW, MSP.


User currently offlineDocLightning From United States of America, joined Nov 2005, 18699 posts, RR: 58
Reply 18, posted (4 years 7 months 4 weeks 15 hours ago) and read 6449 times:



Quoting ExFATboy (Reply 11):

Because the plane wasn't anywhere near the terminal, but most likely out on a taxiway somewhere in the sprawling mess that is JFK. And returning to the terminal would mean giving up their position and, especially if you let the passengers disembark and thus have to allow extra time to round them up and get them back on the plane, possibly making that 6 hour delay even longer.

Not a valid excuse. At that point, unless you have confirmation that you will be permitted to take off within a reasonable amount of time, you take the plane back to the terminal and allow the passengers off, offer refunds to those who do not wish to continue the trip.

Yes, it's possible that as soon as the plane gets to the gate the storm will blow out of the way and now it may delay the flight further, but... THERE IS *NO* -AND I MEAN *ABSOLUTELY NO*- REASON THAT YOU CANNOT DEPLANE PASSENGERS WHEN THEY ARE STUCK ON A GROUNDED AIRCRAFT FOR MORE THAN THREE HOURS. Sorry, ExFATboy, but I refuse to accept otherwise. It simply means that someone at ops needs to strap on a pair and make the call. In other words, there are things more important than getting people there as quickly as possible.

Furthermore, there is no reason (at JFK) why you can't get a catering truck out there with 180 boxed lunches and a lav truck to service the lavs.

Quoting PGNCS (Reply 10):

Did anyone starve? Did the toilets stop functioning?

Not this time, no. But it will happen. Someone is going to die or suffer permanent injury because of one of these delays. It will happen on an aircraft sitting in the sun at MIA with a non-serviceable APU or something and someone will die.

And I hope very much that when that day happens, someone gets First Degree Murder for it.


User currently offlineMir From United States of America, joined Jan 2004, 21092 posts, RR: 56
Reply 19, posted (4 years 7 months 4 weeks 14 hours ago) and read 6246 times:



Quoting DocLightning (Reply 18):
Furthermore, there is no reason (at JFK) why you can't get a catering truck out there with 180 boxed lunches and a lav truck to service the lavs.

Unless the airplane is sitting on a taxiway. Can't really do it there.

-Mir



7 billion, one nation, imagination...it's a beautiful day
User currently offlineExFATboy From United States of America, joined Jul 2003, 2974 posts, RR: 9
Reply 20, posted (4 years 7 months 4 weeks 14 hours ago) and read 6092 times:

Quoting Bennett123 (Reply 12):
I do not know if this is common in the US, however the longest I have ever had to sit on an aircraft was 1hr.

Part of that is just that in summer, we have more severe weather here in the US than you have in Europe - thunderstorms are daily occurrences in some cities. Part of that is that our airport congestion is just worse here than it is in most European cities, a good chunk of that being "regional" flights that in Europe you'd take trains for. And I'd hazard to guess part of it is the compensation policy in place in the EU...I wouldn't be surprised if you have more cancellations than we do.

Quoting N62NA (Reply 17):
And people are resorting to alternatives to air transportation in the USA more and more each day.

True, but part of the problem is that outside of the Northeast Corridor there simply aren't any really viable alternatives, that guy on the other thread going from FL to NY notwithstanding. I just put a trip in Kayak and Amtrak's website for New York (Manhattan) to Tampa, leaving Wed, Sep 23 and returning Wed, Sep 30.

Cheapest airline fare was $173, available on AA, B6, DL, and NW (some of the DL/NW flights are codeshares.) I'm going to presume one checked bag, so that makes JetBlue the cheapest, since the first bag is free. Presuming we're a frugal traveler here, I'll presume $8 each way for the LIRR to Jamaica station and $5 each way for the AirTrain to JFK. That puts total cost on $199 ($181 if I was really cheap and took the subway to Jamaica station), with scheduled travel time 3 hours down, a little less back - let's call it 3 hours.

Amtrak - fare is $234, bags are free - you can check 3 and carry on 2, although you would be expected to tip the redcap - but travel time is a whomping 25 hours down, 27 back if you take the direct train, 24 hours each way if you take the bus to Orlando and the train from there. And you're getting to sleep in your train seat - upgrading to one of the little private rooms pushes the price to $630. (The room can hold two, so if you were traveling with someone else, that'd put the price on $315 each.)

Greyhound - fare is $154 r/t,and that includes one free checked bag (although carry-ons have to be smaller than on the plane or train.) Travel time is anywhere from 27 hours on up, depending on routing. And you get to sleep on the bus.

So unless unless you have a lot of time to kill to save $45 and not have the risk of a "tarmac delay", the bus is out, and Amtrak is actually more expensive as well as much slower. And that's only going from New York to Florida...can you imagine, say, Boston to LA? Oh, and in severe weather you also have the risk on Amtrak of the electric wires blowing down in the Northeast, and both Amtrak and buses are subject to delays if visibility is crap.

Three other considerations (one a little silly...)

* on Amtrak or Greyhound, you'd save one night's hotel bill each way, presuming you weren't staying with family or friends. Of course, with the travel time you'd get to spend two nights less at your destination, and you get to sleep in the bus or train seat. Bus seats are not that much better than coach on planes (some are actually worse), Amtrak coach isn't half-bad, but no one's going to confuse it with a Serta.

* rental car pickup on the Tampa end would probably involve a cab on Amtrak or Greyhound - I found a Hertz office a mile from the Amtrak station in Tampa, other than that you're going to have to go to the airport.

* drinks are cheaper on Amtrak    than on planes, and they have a better selection of beer. And you can buy beer at stations and bring it on board. (You're only supposed to drink your own in a sleeping car, but it's easy to cheat as long as you don't get stupid drunk.) OTOH, you can't drink on Greyhound at all, at least not legally.

But the bottom line is that outside the NE Corridor, or maybe, say, SF-LA or a few city-pairs like that, we Americanos are stuck with flying...you'd have to take a hell of a "tarmac delay" to even begin to justify the travel time difference, although on Amtrak at least you can get up and walk around anytime you want to. I actually love trains, and if Amtrak was just a little bit faster and had Internet onboard, I'd consider it. But as it is, it's just not viable.

Sorry for the off-topic excursion, but I thought it'd be interesting to look at alternatives to air travel in the context of "tarmac delays."

[Edited 2009-08-24 16:04:03]

User currently offlineMir From United States of America, joined Jan 2004, 21092 posts, RR: 56
Reply 21, posted (4 years 7 months 4 weeks 14 hours ago) and read 6074 times:



Quoting ExFATboy (Reply 20):
both Amtrak and buses are subject to delays if visibility is crap.

And let's not forget NYC traffic, which I'd say is more of a sure thing than a NYC airport delay.

-Mir



7 billion, one nation, imagination...it's a beautiful day
User currently offlineBennett123 From United Kingdom, joined Aug 2004, 7209 posts, RR: 3
Reply 22, posted (4 years 7 months 4 weeks 14 hours ago) and read 6060 times:

ExFATBoy

I have only ever one cancellation, (although I only fly a few times a year).

In that instance, the plane went Tech on Sunday Evening at BRU.

So BMI took us to the Sabena desk. They in turn took us over to Virgin Express.

End result was getting back to London a hour late.


User currently offlineOPNLguy From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 23, posted (4 years 7 months 4 weeks 14 hours ago) and read 6025 times:



Quoting DocLightning (Reply 18):
Furthermore, there is no reason (at JFK) why you can't get a catering truck out there with 180 boxed lunches and a lav truck to service the lavs.

Just curious, but how long do you think it takes a caterer to come up with those 180 boxed lunches, like from the time someone calls them until they arrive planeside? How about if there are 9 other aircraft out there also need 180 boxed lunches, for a total of 1,800?

I ask because (eons ago) I used to work catering, and while many things have changed in the last 35 years, I still recall how long it takes to prepare stuff. That's right, I said prepare---it's not like a catering kitchen has 180 spare box lunches (let alone 1,800) sitting around on the off-chance that they "may" be needed.

That said, if this particular "solution" (as well as some others concerning additional gates, ground equipment, and staffing) were as easy to pull out of one's hiney and put into effect as folks think they were, doesn't it stand to reason that airlines would already be doing so?

Some things, check that, many things are nowhere as "simple" as they seem from outside the biz...


User currently offlineAAAL From United States of America, joined Apr 2009, 125 posts, RR: 0
Reply 24, posted (4 years 7 months 4 weeks 14 hours ago) and read 6015 times:



Quoting DocLightning (Reply 18):

You make it sound, oh so easy that anyone could return to the gates like that especially at airports like at JFK. Once in line, it's really hard to get out. It will cause more back ups if you actually try to get out because ATC has put your flight in sequence. Returning back to the gate will at least put your flight back another 5 hours plus. More likely getting the flight into a crew legality issue.

SY is most likely outsourced at JFK. Knowing the conditions that day, the outsourced company probably had no extra personal to handle the ground interrupted flight. Also most flights were delayed on arrival making it really hard to keep up at a terminal 4 which is run by the port.

When a flights has an APU inop during these situations, the pilot and dispatch will determine the necessary amount of fuel the plane to have minimum fuel release for departure. This is not the first time this has happen and most airline like AA have a plan that goes into effect. They have agents that monitor the out to takeoff times and send messages by acars to the aircraft to check on conditions.


25 WNCrew : DocLightning, no matter how much you BOLD and CAPITALIZE the text it doesn't make your solution any more realistic. People want departures every 5 min
26 N62NA : Hehehe... that "guy on the other thread..." was me! Actually, we're doing a lot more video conferencing these days... probably lots of other companie
27 Mir : And sometimes, if things are really bad, once the decision to let the pax off is made, it can be an hour before you can actually do so, due to waitin
28 N62NA : Mir, AAL, WNCrew and others. Usually at this point in a thread like this I ask, "How can this be fixed?" But, we all pretty much know that the answer
29 WNCrew : That's a very good question and if the economy were a bit more stable I'd say the airlines might be willing to take a bit more initiative, but given
30 ExFATboy : Well, I'm presuming our hypothetical New Yorker is leaving from Manhattan and taking the subway to Penn or Port Authority, and the subway/LIRR/AirTra
31 Post contains links ExFATboy : Heh! I didn't realize that, didn't go back and look, sorry if I seemed a bit flippant there! I suspect you're right on the video conferencing, betwee
32 Ordflier : I am not sure what the right scenario is in this situation... On one hand the airline is trying to get the customers to their destination - and at the
33 Mir : The caps might get put in place, but I don't think the political will is there to do it. The only change I see coming is that the airlines will start
34 MCOatc : It has generally been my experience that most if not all flight crews don't just sit idly by as they and their passengers sit out delays such as this.
35 Sunking737 : You sir have hit it on the nail head. When I worked for SY in catering, all but a couple of flights were catered out of MSP. So our JFK flight would
36 Us330 : It's true. In principle, I don't want the government to butt in, but the airlines' actions are starting to give them no choice. In some cases, it's g
37 AAAL : Some airlines have already started to do something. AA came out with policy regarding to long weather delay. I don't remember them off the top of my
38 DocLightning : Great. Have you been sitting on the tarmac for 4 hours (I use 4 because not even at LGA is a 4-hour sit on the ground routine)? Do you have clearance
39 DocLightning : It doesn't matter. There is always a way around the problem. Your job, as an airport ops manager, is to find that way. Whether it's ordering pizza an
40 Post contains links WNCrew : Doclightning I hereby nominate YOU to fix the US Aviation System... You have good suggestions, the problem is that the system has so many layers and i
41 ExFATboy : I still think the airlines will screw it up enough so the "Bill of Rights" gets passed, but this is a viable scenario too - it has precedent, the fir
42 DocLightning : No, the system is not the problem. The failures have been PEOPLE who put rules and regulations ahead of PEOPLE. People who put rules and regulations
43 OPNLguy : Can I ask a question? Maybe you'll reply this time... I see that you're a Pediatrician. If I brought my child to your office, opined what I thought t
44 Bennett123 : I appreciate that there are many rules/regulations etc. However, if the airlines/airports etc tolerate this type of situation, (and this is not the fi
45 Prebennorholm : That is exactly where the system fails. Those miles long take-off queues with dozens of planes sitting with engines (or APU) running, sometimes movin
46 N62NA : A very sensible evaluation and proposal! This is the point I was trying to get across in another thread about the "stuck in line for takeoff / stuck
47 Mir : This is not always the case. -Mir
48 EWRCabincrew : Rot? Really? People were actually rotting? Never saw that in the news. Not trying to get your goat, but it doesn't help with the argument. That, whil
49 Kaiarahi : Not true - departures are often delayed by destination weather, enroute ATC congestion/limitations, etc. Or figure out how to reconfigure in 10 minut
50 Mir : Or just the simple fact that weather is blocking the departure routes but not the arrival routes (or vice versa). Airspace configuration has a lot to
51 DocLightning : That example has so little to do with the case at hand that it isn't worth responding to. You are asking me to do something harmful to your child. If
52 Copter808 : EXACTLY!!!! Correct again!! After spending countless hours reading these discussions regarding excessively delayed flights, a couple of things become
53 DocLightning : Stop. Passengers at RSI were on a plane for 9 hours overnight without food, water, or working toilets. Passengers at JFK were on a plane for 6 hours
54 CalebWilliams : The runway that's closed is 12L/30R. Delays seem to be in departures as one and sometimes two runways are used for landing, but only one for takeoffs
55 Mir : And we've already discussed how several parties dropped the ball on that one, and the numerous ways that sort of thing can be prevented. Which sucks,
56 N62NA : BUT.... on many flights into NYC, the possibility of an excessive delay is not remote at all, especially for flights scheduled to arrive in the late
57 Copter808 : Perhaps...but that has not happened yet. Did that passenger die as a result of the delay, or would he have died anyway? When the situation becomes li
58 Jolau1701 : Why is this usually JFK having problems such as this. SFO has this lovely ATC program of FLOW, Ground stops/holds, and I've yet to see planes sitting
59 L410Turbolet : I do not pretend to know the answer, but for an outsider one of the things that always amaze me at JFK is the huge number of "regional jets" which tr
60 Mir : JFK does, in fact, have the same stuff, because: -Mir
61 DocLightning : Again, bad use of analogy to medicine. Let me give you an analogy to the situation: A woman comes into the hospital for chest pain. She is told to wa
62 Prebennorholm : Of course there is not always a 1:1 relationship between delayed arrivals and departures. That's a separate problem which for sure generates headache
63 ExFATboy : Perhaps, but what do you do with the passengers if the plane returns to the terminal, misses an opportunity to take off, then the flight crew times o
64 Kaiarahi : Which creates its own problems for turning the plane around - the passengers on the next leg being flown still need a designated gate to board the bu
65 AAAL : Wow, really? Do you know the job of an ops manager? They really have no control if a plane was to leave or comeback. Not even dispatch or SOC. It's a
66 Kaiarahi : Which might not be a bad thing. One of the basic principles of business transformation / change management / performance management is that nothing g
67 Kaiarahi : Wow - startling analogy. I didn't realize any of the SY PAX were lying in the aisle vomiting blood. I guess the media missed that one.
68 MSP7378 : Let's say you have been in the plane for 4 hours and you have had something to drink and have been able to go to the bathroom. If your choice is go ba
69 N62NA : If this one problem of pushing back only to sit for 1 to 2 hours in the penalty box could be solved, hundreds of thousands of passengers in the USA w
70 OPNLguy : It goes right back to a premise that I've mentioned in other posts, namely, if it were indeed possible, doesn't it stand to reason that the airlines
71 MSP7378 : I suppose that's true. Do you have suggestions?
72 OPNLguy : Plenty of them, but nobody seems to believe them...
73 ExFATboy : Actually, if you go back through the thread (and the threads on the COEx-Rochester debacle), the idea that a lot of the problem comes from jetways, a
74 Prebennorholm : I know, I tried that last year in January in northern Finland well north of the Polar Circle. Because the airport has no air bridge. Except that our
75 N62NA : In the summer, yes, it's thunderstorms. But, and I'm mainly talking about NYC here, once the summer months are over, we go back to the "other" reason
76 ExFATboy : All too true, which leads us to another problem in trying to devise solutions to the problem outside thunderstorms (and snow in winter, fog at SFO, t
77 Mir : As I mentioned before, this already happens. No. It does, however, force a suboptimal runway configuration, which is where the reduction in capacity
Top Of Page
Forum Index

This topic is archived and can not be replied to any more.

Printer friendly format

Similar topics:More similar topics...
Sun Country, JFK To Palm Beach posted Tue May 27 2008 18:06:57 by Jeffrey1970
Sun Country 8908 VCV-MSP? posted Thu Apr 17 2008 00:26:09 by Iowaman
Why Does Sun Country Fly To Harlingen? posted Wed Nov 14 2007 15:55:39 by USFlyer MSP
Sun Country 737 To Get Winglets posted Thu Apr 20 2006 12:51:40 by Sunking737
Sun Country Airlines To Be Sold? posted Wed Feb 1 2006 23:43:09 by Beefer
Sun Country Back To MIA; New To FLL posted Sat Aug 16 2003 18:38:25 by MAH4546
MSP Officials Trying To Improve Safety On Tarmac posted Sun Sep 10 2006 01:55:52 by KarlB737
DL 19 On 4/2, 777 Diversion To MSP posted Thu Apr 2 2009 11:53:05 by JKJ777
Sun Country To BOS posted Wed Jan 28 2009 15:30:00 by Sunking737
Sun Country Resuming MSP-LAX posted Wed Jan 28 2009 12:29:02 by LAXintl