I imagine a similar situation took place over the weekend at BWI.... but I just wanted to throw it out there as a topic... as I'm curious as to how WN will handle this. Will there be a lot of overflies? That's a large chunk to take out of their network for 24 hours. They've done it proactively, so I imagine that will help.
C5LOAD From United States of America, joined Sep 2008, 917 posts, RR: 0 Reply 1, posted (3 years 3 months 1 week 5 days 22 hours ago) and read 3903 times:
This has to be taking a big hit on their cash reserves. Cancelled flights means no $$$. And I'm pretty sure insurance wouldn't cover it, so how can they afford to take preventative action like this. But to be honest, I do applaud them for taking preventative action.
"But this airplane has 4 engines, it's an entirely different kind of flying! Altogether"
PSU.DTW.SCE From United States of America, joined Jan 2002, 6867 posts, RR: 29 Reply 2, posted (3 years 3 months 1 week 5 days 22 hours ago) and read 3834 times:
Doing to pre-emptive canceling is most likely less costly than attempting to fly in the impending weather and canceling a significant portion of the schedule, stranding crews, planes, and passengers all over the network.
The pre-emptive cancelations enable:
1) Passengers with flexible plans to reschedule before or after the weather event
2) Passengers to cancel their trip if they can't reschedule
3) Reposition aircraft and crews in advance of the weather event out of the storm so they can more quickly and more orderly restart operations once the weather clears
4) Enables those passengers connecting over MDW to be rebooked over unaffected hubs/cities
Keep in mind while the flights may be cancelled and the passengers that can't or don't want to be rebooked will equal lost revenue, many of the variable costs associated with the operation of the affected flights are gone. Particularly fuel and landing fees -> it doesn't cost you anything if you don't fly it. Labor costs aren't necessarily reduced, but it is not a total loss.
Its not as expensive as you think. The pre-cancelations are a lot better than the alternative.
luvfa From United States of America, joined May 2005, 437 posts, RR: 5 Reply 3, posted (3 years 3 months 1 week 5 days 12 hours ago) and read 3186 times:
Add BWI and IAD to the list for Tuesday afternoon through Wednesday afternoon.
RobINDYHP From United States of America, joined Jan 2004, 84 posts, RR: 0 Reply 4, posted (3 years 3 months 1 week 5 days 12 hours ago) and read 3019 times:
There are still some flights in and out of MDW for WN.
RFields5421 From United States of America, joined Jul 2007, 6145 posts, RR: 25 Reply 5, posted (3 years 3 months 1 week 5 days 11 hours ago) and read 2972 times:
Quoting C5LOAD (Reply 1): Cancelled flights means no $$$. And I'm pretty sure insurance wouldn't cover it, so how can they afford to take preventative action like this.
While cancelling flights means no income, it also means no expenses related to those flights.
Bad weather delays and cancellations can often mean expenses exceed income.
bcoz From United States of America, joined Mar 2007, 358 posts, RR: 0 Reply 6, posted (3 years 3 months 1 week 5 days 11 hours ago) and read 2934 times:
Quoting RobINDYHP (Reply 4): There are still some flights in and out of MDW for WN.
GALLEYSTEW From United States of America, joined Dec 2007, 159 posts, RR: 0 Reply 7, posted (3 years 3 months 1 week 5 days 11 hours ago) and read 2908 times:
All airlines are doing this now. Does the new "PASSENGER BILL OF RIGHTS" ring a bell.
WNCrew From United States of America, joined Jun 2006, 1317 posts, RR: 9 Reply 8, posted (3 years 3 months 1 week 5 days 6 hours ago) and read 2502 times:
LOL @ Galleystew....
I don't even think people realize this. But, maybe it's better this way, the airlines just won't even try if things look iffy...
ALL views, opinions expressed are mine ONLY and are NOT representative of those shared by Southwest Airlines Co.
ckfred From United States of America, joined Apr 2001, 4652 posts, RR: 1 Reply 9, posted (3 years 3 months 1 week 5 days 3 hours ago) and read 2239 times:
Based on the weether, I think WN overreacted. There were 3 inches of snow at MDW around noon local time, and it's now snowing that hard. It seems to me that WN could have cancelled fewer flights, so that O&D traffic for MDW would have been less disrupted.
WNCrew From United States of America, joined Jun 2006, 1317 posts, RR: 9 Reply 10, posted (3 years 3 months 1 week 5 days 3 hours ago) and read 2213 times:
Quoting ckfred (Reply 9): Based on the weether, I think WN overreacted. There were 3 inches of snow at MDW around noon local time, and it's now snowing that hard. It seems to me that WN could have cancelled fewer flights, so that O&D traffic for MDW would have been less disrupted.
Of course it's easy to say that AFTER the fact, but you don't want to get planes and crews stuck where they can't be better utilized elsewhere. If WN hadn't CXL'd flights and the weather had gotten worse (or DOES get worse) then people would be saying "WN wasn't proactive enough."
ALL views, opinions expressed are mine ONLY and are NOT representative of those shared by Southwest Airlines Co.
GALLEYSTEW From United States of America, joined Dec 2007, 159 posts, RR: 0 Reply 11, posted (3 years 3 months 1 week 4 days 6 hours ago) and read 1880 times:
Quoting WNCrew (Reply 10): Of course it's easy to say that AFTER the fact, but you don't want to get planes and crews stuck where they can't be better utilized elsewhere. If WN hadn't CXL'd flights and the weather had gotten worse (or DOES get worse) then people would be saying "WN wasn't proactive enough."
DXing From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 12, posted (3 years 3 months 1 week 4 days 4 hours ago) and read 1732 times:
Quoting ckfred (Reply 9): Based on the weether, I think WN overreacted. There were 3 inches of snow at MDW around noon local time, and it's now snowing that hard. It seems to me that WN could have cancelled fewer flights, so that O&D traffic for MDW would have been less disrupted.
What was the weather like 10am to noon? What was the ceiling? Visibility? Braking action on the runway? A lot more goes into it than just how many inches are on the ground. Also, was the groundstop instituted by the FAA? If so then WN is obligated to follow it unless they can appeal and get exemptions.
bcoz From United States of America, joined Mar 2007, 358 posts, RR: 0 Reply 13, posted (3 years 3 months 1 week 4 days 4 hours ago) and read 1711 times:
Quoting DXing (Reply 12): Also, was the groundstop instituted by the FAA? If so then WN is obligated to follow it unless they can appeal and get exemptions.
It was a company decision. There was an interesting story about it on NPR this morning.
Sponsor Message: 
From United States of America, joined Mar 2007, 358 posts, 
Printer friendly format 
