The first flight listed is UA686, with an A320, which operates on two Sundays over the four-week period (6:00a-12:06p). The next flight is UA1635, a 737-800 departing at the same time, arriving two minutes later(12:08p), operating just once during that same period. Then there are five more listings of UA686, with varying operating days during that period:
The rest of the flights are just as mixed. My first question is, what's with the one-minute difference in flight schedule time on what would otherwise be exactly the same flight?
I recognize trying to match capacity to demand (and equipment availability) on each day of a schedule, but it seems rather excessive to have 38 different flight listings for a route that, essentially, has 4 flights per day.
jsnww81 From United States of America, joined Jan 2002, 2248 posts, RR: 14
Reply 1, posted (3 years 1 month 2 weeks 1 day 6 hours ago) and read 7593 times:
Quoting homSar (Thread starter): I recognize trying to match capacity to demand (and equipment availability) on each day of a schedule, but it seems rather excessive to have 38 different flight listings for a route that, essentially, has 4 flights per day.
Don't even get me started with the SFO-ORD page.
You mean SFO-ORD page(s) - last time I checked there were several pages for each hub-to-hub listing, all of them barely comprehensible.
As a timetable aficionado I was pretty bummed ten years ago when printed schedules vanished. PDF schedules were better than nothing, but now the US airlines have found a way to ruin even this small pleasure. There are so many equipment swaps, daily exceptions and irregularities nowadays that I get a headache when I look at a PDF timetable. It's good business practice for the airlines, no doubt about that - but yet another nice thing about the industry that's gone. I sometimes wonder if they have a full-time employee who sits around dreaming up ways to make aviation enthusiasts unhappy. Evolve or perish, I guess!
ikramerica From United States of America, joined May 2005, 21973 posts, RR: 59
Reply 2, posted (3 years 1 month 2 weeks 1 day 5 hours ago) and read 7491 times:
Lax-yvr first flight of the day was the same way last time I checked. We took that for our honeymoon and checking on time performance was useless because times kept changing, flight numbers too, from day to day.
Of all the things to worry about... the Wookie has no pants.
This isn't independent of UA. DL's schedules are the same way.
Take ATL-AGS for example. There are about 26 different flight listings for the month of September. All due to variations in times for the same flight number on different days. Some flights operating only on certain days, etc.
Let's not even get into stations like TYS, GSP, or HPN that has 9E and EV on the route. Ex. HPN: 29 (to ATL alone).
N62NA From United States of America, joined Aug 2003, 4958 posts, RR: 8
Reply 5, posted (3 years 1 month 2 weeks 19 hours ago) and read 4071 times:
Quoting jsnww81 (Reply 1): As a timetable aficionado I was pretty bummed ten years ago when printed schedules vanished. PDF schedules were better than nothing, but now the US airlines have found a way to ruin even this small pleasure.
Fortunately, the Star Alliance downloadable timetable is still somewhat "traditional" - I don't even bother downloading the ridiculous PDF schedules anymore.
ABQopsHP From United States of America, joined May 2006, 879 posts, RR: 3
Reply 6, posted (3 years 1 month 2 weeks 18 hours ago) and read 3837 times:
This is only my guess. But since the DOT requires airlines to show on-time performance stats on regular schedules.I am guessing they are making constant changes to the times or flight numbers, in order to keep historical data down to a minimum on any one given flight that may have constant on-time issues. Do I make sense? Not sure I put it in the right words but, Im guessing you guys get the idea.