Page 2 of 3

Re: SFO Runway 28L closure - How Bad?

Posted: Tue Sep 10, 2019 12:20 am
by skydiver76
CATIIIevery5yrs wrote:
skydiver76 wrote:
Thanks everyone for posting updates .. I am scheduled to fly from Bozeman, MT (bzn) to SFO on Sept 20th on United 623 after staying in Yellowstone. For the last 2 days the flight would change to 2.5 hours delay during the day than depart with a 5 hours actual delay. It woukd really help if United would just change the schedule to 4 or 5 hours later departure since it seems consistent day to day.. But no everyone needs to sit in the airport 3 to 5 extra hours for 2 hour flight :(
And SFO just did this kind of work only 2 years ago. Whan can ordinary people do ?? Just pay the money than sit and take it, or if you voice displeasure - denied boarding, removal or beat down are coming :(


If they do that, the way the system works, it will just depart late from the rescheduled time.


I see what you mean but could it really be worse than a rolling 5 hour delay for a domestic 2 hr 10 min flight ? Plus with a schedule change to a 4 or 5 hour later departure until Sept 28th, it would make UA 623 arrive close to or a bit after 11 pm - surely the traffic flow at that hour is less to allow those 27 arrivals with no ground stops ?
Because as of today, day 3, the flight appears on time until maybe noon, changes to 2.5 hours delay the closer it gets to 5 pm Montana time (original dep time), than rolls later and later until it departs about 5 hours late. Now for someone going through Yellowstone on the way to Bozeman on the last day of the trip, with no phone service in most areas,
should i plan to get to the airport :

A) around 4 pm - and expect to sit at LEAST until 7:30 but 90% likely until ~ 10 pm
B) around 6 pm and have a slight risk of missing an on time departure but very likely still sit 4 hours with my 70 y/o Mom
C) around 8:30 pm and have much more risk to miss the flight and NOT get compensated since its now my fault that i dared not wait for 5-6 hours like a good slave
OR
D) Loudly complain that all of the above shoved into my face for my own money or miles is BS and get removed, beaten or arrested.

Thankfully this forum exists so one can vent a little for free without any risk of # D happening ;)

Re: SFO Runway 28L closure - How Bad?

Posted: Tue Sep 10, 2019 12:56 am
by 77H
zuckie13 wrote:
ucdtim17 wrote:
People can opt to fly to the other convenient, reliable airports in the region. Doing so during this period means one would avoid the specific delays, and doing so other times would encourage airlines to offer more service there. Everyone wants to fly to SFO though, regardless of whether or not SJC/OAK might be similarly or more convenient, so 80% of the region's air service is crammed into one location.


And if airlines were more honest up front, people would have. UA would have had to know about this months and months ago (I think I found an article from March mentioning it), but didn't warn customers when booking. I had booked a month and a half before they sent the message that caused me to start this thread. Imagine if a message like that popped up when you went to book a ticket. It's just a business doing whatever they want to make the most money they can.

While UA waived the change fee if I wanted to change, they did not offer to refund my non-refundable ticket. If they did, I might have changed to a WN flight to OAK or SJC or something.


I’m a bit confused. Hoping you can clarify some points in the above post.
You mentioned you saw a 3rd party article about a runway closure at SFO for maintenance around March. You then mention you bought a ticket a month before UA sent a message to you about possible delays resulting from the runway maintenance closure.

Currently it reads like you, presumably a person with an interest in civil aviation read an article prior to buying a ticket to SFO that detailed plans to close a runway for maintenance. Understanding that SFO has on-time performance issues with all 4 runways operable you chose to buy a ticket to SFO anyway after reading that article. Months later UA sends you a message formally advising of possible delays. And you are seemingly blaming UA for this now?

I may be wrong but that’s how it reads, at least to me based on your post.

If that’s the case, sounds like you had the information at hand, prior to booking the ticket and decided to do so anyways. Not sure how that’s anyone’s fault but your own? To the average passenger I could understand and sympathize as they likely had no warning, but someone involved enough in the aviation world as to be a contributing member of A.Net, not so much.

77H

Re: SFO Runway 28L closure - How Bad?

Posted: Tue Sep 10, 2019 1:09 am
by CATIIIevery5yrs
skydiver76 wrote:
CATIIIevery5yrs wrote:
skydiver76 wrote:
Thanks everyone for posting updates .. I am scheduled to fly from Bozeman, MT (bzn) to SFO on Sept 20th on United 623 after staying in Yellowstone. For the last 2 days the flight would change to 2.5 hours delay during the day than depart with a 5 hours actual delay. It woukd really help if United would just change the schedule to 4 or 5 hours later departure since it seems consistent day to day.. But no everyone needs to sit in the airport 3 to 5 extra hours for 2 hour flight :(
And SFO just did this kind of work only 2 years ago. Whan can ordinary people do ?? Just pay the money than sit and take it, or if you voice displeasure - denied boarding, removal or beat down are coming :(


If they do that, the way the system works, it will just depart late from the rescheduled time.


I see what you mean but could it really be worse than a rolling 5 hour delay for a domestic 2 hr 10 min flight ? Plus with a schedule change to a 4 or 5 hour later departure until Sept 28th, it would make UA 623 arrive close to or a bit after 11 pm - surely the traffic flow at that hour is less to allow those 27 arrivals with no ground stops ?
Because as of today, day 3, the flight appears on time until maybe noon, changes to 2.5 hours delay the closer it gets to 5 pm Montana time (original dep time), than rolls later and later until it departs about 5 hours late. Now for someone going through Yellowstone on the way to Bozeman on the last day of the trip, with no phone service in most areas,
should i plan to get to the airport :

A) around 4 pm - and expect to sit at LEAST until 7:30 but 90% likely until ~ 10 pm
B) around 6 pm and have a slight risk of missing an on time departure but very likely still sit 4 hours with my 70 y/o Mom
C) around 8:30 pm and have much more risk to miss the flight and NOT get compensated since its now my fault that i dared not wait for 5-6 hours like a good slave
OR
D) Loudly complain that all of the above shoved into my face for my own money or miles is BS and get removed, beaten or arrested.

Thankfully this forum exists so one can vent a little for free without any risk of # D happening ;)


Drive down to SLC and go from there. Problem solved.

Re: SFO Runway 28L closure - How Bad?

Posted: Tue Sep 10, 2019 1:10 am
by 77H
skydiver76 wrote:
CATIIIevery5yrs wrote:
skydiver76 wrote:
Thanks everyone for posting updates .. I am scheduled to fly from Bozeman, MT (bzn) to SFO on Sept 20th on United 623 after staying in Yellowstone. For the last 2 days the flight would change to 2.5 hours delay during the day than depart with a 5 hours actual delay. It woukd really help if United would just change the schedule to 4 or 5 hours later departure since it seems consistent day to day.. But no everyone needs to sit in the airport 3 to 5 extra hours for 2 hour flight :(
And SFO just did this kind of work only 2 years ago. Whan can ordinary people do ?? Just pay the money than sit and take it, or if you voice displeasure - denied boarding, removal or beat down are coming :(


If they do that, the way the system works, it will just depart late from the rescheduled time.


I see what you mean but could it really be worse than a rolling 5 hour delay for a domestic 2 hr 10 min flight ? Plus with a schedule change to a 4 or 5 hour later departure until Sept 28th, it would make UA 623 arrive close to or a bit after 11 pm - surely the traffic flow at that hour is less to allow those 27 arrivals with no ground stops ?
Because as of today, day 3, the flight appears on time until maybe noon, changes to 2.5 hours delay the closer it gets to 5 pm Montana time (original dep time), than rolls later and later until it departs about 5 hours late. Now for someone going through Yellowstone on the way to Bozeman on the last day of the trip, with no phone service in most areas,
should i plan to get to the airport :

A) around 4 pm - and expect to sit at LEAST until 7:30 but 90% likely until ~ 10 pm
B) around 6 pm and have a slight risk of missing an on time departure but very likely still sit 4 hours with my 70 y/o Mom
C) around 8:30 pm and have much more risk to miss the flight and NOT get compensated since its now my fault that i dared not wait for 5-6 hours like a good slave
OR
D) Loudly complain that all of the above shoved into my face for my own money or miles is BS and get removed, beaten or arrested.

Thankfully this forum exists so one can vent a little for free without any risk of # D happening ;)


How about....

Option E) call the Airline and ask them for their opinion regarding Options A-C.

Option F) go to the counter at BZN and ask a ticket counter agent for their opinion on Options A-C

Option G) go on FlightAware or FlightRadar24 and look at the departure times for the flight you intend to take since the runway closure started. You should be able to get a pretty good idea of how that specific flight has been impacted over a 7-10 day span seeing as you are not set to depart until the 20th. Based on your findings, you can make a more informed decision as to which option, A-C makes the most sense.

Best part about Option E-G is you avoid Option D which risks you being denied boarding, contacted by police or at a minimum, making yourself look like a fool in front of your mother and other passengers.

FYI.. I have used free 3rd party flight trackers numerous times to make decisions on when I should arrive at the airport or whether I’m likely to make or miss a connection. If I see that a flight routinely arrives early into an airport I’m set to connect out of, I may take my chances and book a short connection. Although there is still some risk associated with that.

77H

Re: SFO Runway 28L closure - How Bad?

Posted: Tue Sep 10, 2019 2:34 am
by zuckie13
77H wrote:
zuckie13 wrote:
ucdtim17 wrote:
People can opt to fly to the other convenient, reliable airports in the region. Doing so during this period means one would avoid the specific delays, and doing so other times would encourage airlines to offer more service there. Everyone wants to fly to SFO though, regardless of whether or not SJC/OAK might be similarly or more convenient, so 80% of the region's air service is crammed into one location.


And if airlines were more honest up front, people would have. UA would have had to know about this months and months ago (I think I found an article from March mentioning it), but didn't warn customers when booking. I had booked a month and a half before they sent the message that caused me to start this thread. Imagine if a message like that popped up when you went to book a ticket. It's just a business doing whatever they want to make the most money they can.

While UA waived the change fee if I wanted to change, they did not offer to refund my non-refundable ticket. If they did, I might have changed to a WN flight to OAK or SJC or something.


I’m a bit confused. Hoping you can clarify some points in the above post.
You mentioned you saw a 3rd party article about a runway closure at SFO for maintenance around March. You then mention you bought a ticket a month before UA sent a message to you about possible delays resulting from the runway maintenance closure.

Currently it reads like you, presumably a person with an interest in civil aviation read an article prior to buying a ticket to SFO that detailed plans to close a runway for maintenance. Understanding that SFO has on-time performance issues with all 4 runways operable you chose to buy a ticket to SFO anyway after reading that article. Months later UA sends you a message formally advising of possible delays. And you are seemingly blaming UA for this now?

I may be wrong but that’s how it reads, at least to me based on your post.

If that’s the case, sounds like you had the information at hand, prior to booking the ticket and decided to do so anyways. Not sure how that’s anyone’s fault but your own? To the average passenger I could understand and sympathize as they likely had no warning, but someone involved enough in the aviation world as to be a contributing member of A.Net, not so much.

77H


Me, an aviation fan, but only fly when I need to, not because I've got uber status and miles with any airline) decided to buy the flights that was most convenient for me for the event I'm traveling for - A Friday morning non-stop flight from east coast to SFO. I did not read that article until after getting the note from UA that there were risks of extra delays. I knew there were normal risks for delays there, so I booked a flight out that landed hours before I needed to (land around noon when I need to be there for a 6pm thing), and a return trip with a nearly two hour connection coming home. My point was not that I personally am in trouble because of this, just that the airline should be more upfront for a traveler that may not know every planned impact at every airport in the country.

Re: SFO Runway 28L closure - How Bad?

Posted: Tue Sep 10, 2019 2:39 am
by KLMatSJC
zuckie13 wrote:
While UA waived the change fee if I wanted to change, they did not offer to refund my non-refundable ticket. If they did, I might have changed to a WN flight to OAK or SJC or something.


Could you try to get a BZN-DEN-SJC with the waiver? I'm sure they'd do that.

Re: SFO Runway 28L closure - How Bad?

Posted: Tue Sep 10, 2019 5:47 pm
by UPlog
Day 4 = mere 215min average delays


CTL ELEMENT: SFO
ELEMENT TYPE: APT
ADL TIME: 1206Z
DELAY ASSIGNMENT MODE: UDP
ARRIVALS ESTIMATED FOR: 10/1400Z - 11/0759Z
CUMULATIVE PROGRAM PERIOD: 10/1400Z - 11/0759Z
PROGRAM RATE: 25/25/25/25/27/27/27/27/27/27/27/27/27/27/27/27/26/54
FLT INCL: ALL CONTIGUOUS US DEP
DEP SCOPE: (ALL+CZV_AP) ZLA ZAU ZLC ZTL ZDC ZNY ZHU ZJX ZFW ZOB ZDV
ZOA ZSE ZBW ZMA ZKC ZME ZID ZAB ZMP
CANADIAN DEP ARPTS INCLUDED: CYEG CYVR CYYC
DELAY ASSIGNMENT TABLE APPLIES TO: ZOA
MAXIMUM DELAY: 339
AVERAGE DELAY: 215
IMPACTING CONDITION: RWY-TAXI / CONSTRUCTION

Re: SFO Runway 28L closure - How Bad?

Posted: Tue Sep 10, 2019 5:52 pm
by LAXintl
Delta getting in the travel waiver game.

Issued waiver through Sept 26th giving customers rebooking flexibility.

https://pro.delta.com/content/agency/us ... tin-1.html

Customers can make ontime change for free or may refund if their flight cancelled or delayed more than 90mins

Re: SFO Runway 28L closure - How Bad?

Posted: Tue Sep 10, 2019 6:49 pm
by LAXintl
Monday had 124 flights cancellations with 292 delays >60min out of about 1,100 operations.

Re: SFO Runway 28L closure - How Bad?

Posted: Tue Sep 10, 2019 7:10 pm
by Scarebus34
UPlog wrote:
Day 4 = mere 215min average delays


CTL ELEMENT: SFO
ELEMENT TYPE: APT
ADL TIME: 1206Z
DELAY ASSIGNMENT MODE: UDP
ARRIVALS ESTIMATED FOR: 10/1400Z - 11/0759Z
CUMULATIVE PROGRAM PERIOD: 10/1400Z - 11/0759Z
PROGRAM RATE: 25/25/25/25/27/27/27/27/27/27/27/27/27/27/27/27/26/54
FLT INCL: ALL CONTIGUOUS US DEP
DEP SCOPE: (ALL+CZV_AP) ZLA ZAU ZLC ZTL ZDC ZNY ZHU ZJX ZFW ZOB ZDV
ZOA ZSE ZBW ZMA ZKC ZME ZID ZAB ZMP
CANADIAN DEP ARPTS INCLUDED: CYEG CYVR CYYC
DELAY ASSIGNMENT TABLE APPLIES TO: ZOA
MAXIMUM DELAY: 339
AVERAGE DELAY: 215
IMPACTING CONDITION: RWY-TAXI / CONSTRUCTION

We get it. Thanks.

Re: SFO Runway 28L closure - How Bad?

Posted: Tue Sep 10, 2019 10:52 pm
by mercure1
Out of curiosity where does SFO rank in the U.S. for ontime performance normally? I know many U.S eastcoast airports have miserable performance also.

Re: SFO Runway 28L closure - How Bad?

Posted: Tue Sep 10, 2019 11:01 pm
by LAXintl
For the first 6-months of 2019, SFO had the 3rd worst on-time rate among nations top-30 airports.

26. Boston, MA (BOS) 72.63
27. Chicago, IL (ORD) 71.85
28. San Francisco, CA (SFO) 69.91
29. New York, NY (LGA) 69.07
30. Newark, NJ (EWR) 64.93

Re: SFO Runway 28L closure - How Bad?

Posted: Wed Sep 11, 2019 12:08 am
by FSDan
LAXintl wrote:
For the first 6-months of 2019, SFO had the 3rd worst on-time rate among nations top-30 airports.

26. Boston, MA (BOS) 72.63
27. Chicago, IL (ORD) 71.85
28. San Francisco, CA (SFO) 69.91
29. New York, NY (LGA) 69.07
30. Newark, NJ (EWR) 64.93


Is this combined arrivals/departures?

Re: SFO Runway 28L closure - How Bad?

Posted: Wed Sep 11, 2019 12:47 am
by KFTG
UA257 DENSFO B777 yesterday 9/9, no delay. Landed on time.

Re: SFO Runway 28L closure - How Bad?

Posted: Wed Sep 11, 2019 1:11 am
by MO11
KFTG wrote:
UA257 DENSFO B777 yesterday 9/9, no delay. Landed on time.


Did United swap an EDCT with another one of its flights? Or cancel another flight in this time slot to make this flight on time?

Re: SFO Runway 28L closure - How Bad?

Posted: Wed Sep 11, 2019 2:02 pm
by LAXintl
Story about how smaller communities are being hit hard.
For example, San Luis Obispo saw 2 of its 4 SFO flights canceled on Monday and 3 of 4 inbounds canceled on Tuesday.
https://www.sanluisobispo.com/news/loca ... 31072.html

Another one about how Alaska has rerouted some flights that normally operate at SFO to OAK and SJC instead to avoid the massive delays.
https://abc7news.com/travel/sfo-delays- ... e/5525069/

Re: SFO Runway 28L closure - How Bad?

Posted: Wed Sep 11, 2019 3:16 pm
by UPlog
Day 5 = much improved 181min average delays


CTL ELEMENT: SFO
ELEMENT TYPE: APT
ADL TIME: 1207Z
DELAY ASSIGNMENT MODE: UDP
ARRIVALS ESTIMATED FOR: 11/1400Z - 12/0759Z
CUMULATIVE PROGRAM PERIOD: 11/1400Z - 12/0759Z
PROGRAM RATE: 27/27/27/27/27/27/27/27/27/27/27/27/27/27/27/27/27/50
FLT INCL: ALL CONTIGUOUS US DEP
DEP SCOPE: (MANUAL) ZLA ZAU ZLC ZTL ZDC ZNY ZHU ZJX ZFW ZOB ZDV ZOA
ZSE ZBW ZMA ZKC ZME ZID ZAB ZMP
CANADIAN DEP ARPTS INCLUDED: CYEG CYVR CYYC CYYZ CYTZ CYOW CYUL CYQB
CYHZ CYLW CYYJ
DELAY ASSIGNMENT TABLE APPLIES TO: ZOA
MAXIMUM DELAY: 317
AVERAGE DELAY: 181
IMPACTING CONDITION: RWY-TAXI / CONSTRUCTION

Re: SFO Runway 28L closure - How Bad?

Posted: Wed Sep 11, 2019 3:31 pm
by Scarebus34
UPlog wrote:
Day 5 = much improved 181min average delays


CTL ELEMENT: SFO
ELEMENT TYPE: APT
ADL TIME: 1207Z
DELAY ASSIGNMENT MODE: UDP
ARRIVALS ESTIMATED FOR: 11/1400Z - 12/0759Z
CUMULATIVE PROGRAM PERIOD: 11/1400Z - 12/0759Z
PROGRAM RATE: 27/27/27/27/27/27/27/27/27/27/27/27/27/27/27/27/27/50
FLT INCL: ALL CONTIGUOUS US DEP
DEP SCOPE: (MANUAL) ZLA ZAU ZLC ZTL ZDC ZNY ZHU ZJX ZFW ZOB ZDV ZOA
ZSE ZBW ZMA ZKC ZME ZID ZAB ZMP
CANADIAN DEP ARPTS INCLUDED: CYEG CYVR CYYC CYYZ CYTZ CYOW CYUL CYQB
CYHZ CYLW CYYJ
DELAY ASSIGNMENT TABLE APPLIES TO: ZOA
MAXIMUM DELAY: 317
AVERAGE DELAY: 181
IMPACTING CONDITION: RWY-TAXI / CONSTRUCTION

Reduced number of flights, same arrival rate.

Re: SFO Runway 28L closure - How Bad?

Posted: Wed Sep 11, 2019 3:35 pm
by ScottB
StinkyPinky wrote:
9/9/2019 B6 Flight 2136 LGB-SFO @13:00 is delayed 12 hours, ETD 23:59.


Looks like that ended up being cancelled anyway. It would have obviously busted the curfew at LGB by quite a bit. At least they were proactive and dropped one of the two daily flights during the runway construction.

Re: SFO Runway 28L closure - How Bad?

Posted: Wed Sep 11, 2019 4:04 pm
by janders
LAXintl wrote:
Story about how smaller communities are being hit hard.
For example, San Luis Obispo saw 2 of its 4 SFO flights canceled on Monday and 3 of 4 inbounds canceled on Tuesday.
https://www.sanluisobispo.com/news/loca ... 31072.html


When things go bad, the express partner airports really get hit hard.
Unlike normal hub weather event which come and go within hours normally, this 20 day project will really kill connectivity from SFO to communities that are only linked via regional partners.
Feel bad for the thousands of passengers that will miss their onward flights. This must really be costing United some big money in lost business and accommodation cost.

Re: SFO Runway 28L closure - How Bad?

Posted: Wed Sep 11, 2019 5:39 pm
by KFTG
There is an idle BA A380 at SFO. Is this aircraft AOG or is BA altering their schedule due to the runway construction? It was there yesterday too.

Re: SFO Runway 28L closure - How Bad?

Posted: Wed Sep 11, 2019 5:47 pm
by KFTG
Nevermind. They just moved it. :)

Re: SFO Runway 28L closure - How Bad?

Posted: Wed Sep 11, 2019 5:49 pm
by zuckie13
KFTG wrote:
There is an idle BA A380 at SFO. Is this aircraft AOG or is BA altering their schedule due to the runway construction? It was there yesterday too.


Yeah, that was just temporary storage during the BA pilot strike.

Re: SFO Runway 28L closure - How Bad?

Posted: Wed Sep 11, 2019 5:56 pm
by UALifer
KFTG wrote:
There is an idle BA A380 at SFO. Is this aircraft AOG or is BA altering their schedule due to the runway construction? It was there yesterday too.


They actually flew it over to OAK for two days because there was no place to park it at SFO.
BA9154 SFO-OAK 8SEP: https://flightaware.com/live/flight/BAW ... /KSFO/KOAK
BA9155 OAK-SFO 10SEP: https://flightaware.com/live/flight/BAW ... /KOAK/KSFO

Re: SFO Runway 28L closure - How Bad?

Posted: Wed Sep 11, 2019 10:14 pm
by alasizon
Scarebus34 wrote:
UPlog wrote:
Day 5 = much improved 181min average delays


CTL ELEMENT: SFO
ELEMENT TYPE: APT
ADL TIME: 1207Z
DELAY ASSIGNMENT MODE: UDP
ARRIVALS ESTIMATED FOR: 11/1400Z - 12/0759Z
CUMULATIVE PROGRAM PERIOD: 11/1400Z - 12/0759Z
PROGRAM RATE: 27/27/27/27/27/27/27/27/27/27/27/27/27/27/27/27/27/50
FLT INCL: ALL CONTIGUOUS US DEP
DEP SCOPE: (MANUAL) ZLA ZAU ZLC ZTL ZDC ZNY ZHU ZJX ZFW ZOB ZDV ZOA
ZSE ZBW ZMA ZKC ZME ZID ZAB ZMP
CANADIAN DEP ARPTS INCLUDED: CYEG CYVR CYYC CYYZ CYTZ CYOW CYUL CYQB
CYHZ CYLW CYYJ
DELAY ASSIGNMENT TABLE APPLIES TO: ZOA
MAXIMUM DELAY: 317
AVERAGE DELAY: 181
IMPACTING CONDITION: RWY-TAXI / CONSTRUCTION

Reduced number of flights, same arrival rate.


Not to nitpick but the slightly increased rates at the beginning of the program should help slightly, even though it is only eight flights. A Wednesday shouldn't have a less arrival flights than a Tuesday though so that doesn't quite make sense why they changed the arrival rates.

Re: SFO Runway 28L closure - How Bad?

Posted: Wed Sep 11, 2019 10:24 pm
by Chemist
I'm sure it's bad. After all, SFO is bad even when all runways are open.

Re: SFO Runway 28L closure - How Bad?

Posted: Thu Sep 12, 2019 3:09 pm
by Scarebus34
alasizon wrote:
Scarebus34 wrote:
UPlog wrote:
Day 5 = much improved 181min average delays


CTL ELEMENT: SFO
ELEMENT TYPE: APT
ADL TIME: 1207Z
DELAY ASSIGNMENT MODE: UDP
ARRIVALS ESTIMATED FOR: 11/1400Z - 12/0759Z
CUMULATIVE PROGRAM PERIOD: 11/1400Z - 12/0759Z
PROGRAM RATE: 27/27/27/27/27/27/27/27/27/27/27/27/27/27/27/27/27/50
FLT INCL: ALL CONTIGUOUS US DEP
DEP SCOPE: (MANUAL) ZLA ZAU ZLC ZTL ZDC ZNY ZHU ZJX ZFW ZOB ZDV ZOA
ZSE ZBW ZMA ZKC ZME ZID ZAB ZMP
CANADIAN DEP ARPTS INCLUDED: CYEG CYVR CYYC CYYZ CYTZ CYOW CYUL CYQB
CYHZ CYLW CYYJ
DELAY ASSIGNMENT TABLE APPLIES TO: ZOA
MAXIMUM DELAY: 317
AVERAGE DELAY: 181
IMPACTING CONDITION: RWY-TAXI / CONSTRUCTION

Reduced number of flights, same arrival rate.


Not to nitpick but the slightly increased rates at the beginning of the program should help slightly, even though it is only eight flights. A Wednesday shouldn't have a less arrival flights than a Tuesday though so that doesn't quite make sense why they changed the arrival rates.

Program was a straight 27 rate and yes there were less scheduled flights which drive a reduced delay. Today, they are running a 28 rate. They’re getting more confident in being able to land more per hour. The reason the rate is only high 20s rather than maybe a 34 is to accomodate departures off of 28R that can’t take 1L for performance reasons.

Re: SFO Runway 28L closure - How Bad?

Posted: Thu Sep 12, 2019 3:13 pm
by jumbojet
janders wrote:
This must really be costing United some big money in lost business and accommodation cost.


doubt United is picking up the tab for accommodations, Most likely they are blaming SFO construction and will largely avoid having to pay.,

Re: SFO Runway 28L closure - How Bad?

Posted: Thu Sep 12, 2019 4:10 pm
by Alias1024
Only 154 minute average delays today. Yay progress?

Re: SFO Runway 28L closure - How Bad?

Posted: Thu Sep 12, 2019 5:23 pm
by phatfarmlines
Any reason the circle-to-land to the 1's are not available for landing to increase throughput?

Re: SFO Runway 28L closure - How Bad?

Posted: Thu Sep 12, 2019 7:33 pm
by timz
How would that help? Still one landing at a time.

Re: SFO Runway 28L closure - How Bad?

Posted: Thu Sep 12, 2019 7:48 pm
by Judge1310
jumbojet wrote:
janders wrote:
This must really be costing United some big money in lost business and accommodation cost.


doubt United is picking up the tab for accommodations, Most likely they are blaming SFO construction and will largely avoid having to pay.,


And why should they? The carriers serving SFO have very little to do with runway refurbishing. The Airport Authority chose the *best* time of the year to get needed repairs done as,

a) It's the start of summer in the SF Bay Area (driest and warmest conditions of the year),
b) right after school holidays have ended and before the beginning of autumn holidays, thus reduced flight schedules,
c) they're currently running about a day ahead of schedule on the construction.

The moaning and groaning of this board knows no bounds, it seems. Almost all (I can't speak for *every* carrier) carriers that are operating out of SFO are offering free waivers and itinerary modifications. United (from what I've seen) has done things like operate 777-300s between SFO and LAX or between SFO and LAS to consolidate and allow for pax connections. Alerts have been made known for ***months***.

Self-reliance and proactivity, folks, can be beautiful things...

Re: SFO Runway 28L closure - How Bad?

Posted: Thu Sep 12, 2019 8:52 pm
by GalaxyFlyer
phatfarmlines wrote:
Any reason the circle-to-land to the 1's are not available for landing to increase throughput?


Airlines are authorized to circle except as a visual pattern and it wouldn’t help.

Again, KSFO needs real parallel runways but the SFO NIMBYs and eco crazies refuses to join the 21st century

GF

Re: SFO Runway 28L closure - How Bad?

Posted: Thu Sep 12, 2019 9:05 pm
by ScottB
Judge1310 wrote:
The moaning and groaning of this board knows no bounds, it seems. Almost all (I can't speak for *every* carrier) carriers that are operating out of SFO are offering free waivers and itinerary modifications. United (from what I've seen) has done things like operate 777-300s between SFO and LAX or between SFO and LAS to consolidate and allow for pax connections. Alerts have been made known for ***months***.

Self-reliance and proactivity, folks, can be beautiful things...


Seriously? It took me a few minutes of poking around on UA's website to find the SFO travel advisory and I knew I should be looking for it. It's not under "Travel Information" at the top which would seem logical but rather "Important Notices" which is way down in the page footer, past a crapton of advertising. I couldn't find any reference to the runway construction in the United app at all. If I try to book a flight to SFO next week, either on the web or in the United app, during the construction period, UA provides no advisory during the booking process that the schedule they're publishing is very likely to see a severe impact due to that construction.

And frankly, the waiver UA is providing is near-worthless. They don't let you refund your ticket -- only change it -- and they also won't let you rebook to a different city. But when you're talking about a multi-week operational impact due to runway construction (rather than something like a day of thunderstorms), just changing the ticket is little help unless you can change to flights outside the construction period. Otherwise you're really just choosing between a five-hour delay on Monday or a five-hour delay on Wednesday. Oh, and if you had booked fewer than 12 days before the start of runway construction, they only waive the change fee. You might still get socked with a substantial fare difference.

The "moaning and groaning of this board" is well-warranted. It's not reasonable to expect travelers to research potential runway construction at every single airport they might traverse, and a hub carrier like United absolutely could do a far better job of informing customers of the impact to travel (and offer a more generous waiver policy).

Re: SFO Runway 28L closure - How Bad?

Posted: Thu Sep 12, 2019 9:28 pm
by Judge1310
ScottB wrote:
Judge1310 wrote:
The moaning and groaning of this board knows no bounds, it seems. Almost all (I can't speak for *every* carrier) carriers that are operating out of SFO are offering free waivers and itinerary modifications. United (from what I've seen) has done things like operate 777-300s between SFO and LAX or between SFO and LAS to consolidate and allow for pax connections. Alerts have been made known for ***months***.

Self-reliance and proactivity, folks, can be beautiful things...


Seriously? It took me a few minutes of poking around on UA's website to find the SFO travel advisory and I knew I should be looking for it. It's not under "Travel Information" at the top which would seem logical but rather "Important Notices" which is way down in the page footer, past a crapton of advertising. I couldn't find any reference to the runway construction in the United app at all. If I try to book a flight to SFO next week, either on the web or in the United app, during the construction period, UA provides no advisory during the booking process that the schedule they're publishing is very likely to see a severe impact due to that construction.

And frankly, the waiver UA is providing is near-worthless. They don't let you refund your ticket -- only change it -- and they also won't let you rebook to a different city. But when you're talking about a multi-week operational impact due to runway construction (rather than something like a day of thunderstorms), just changing the ticket is little help unless you can change to flights outside the construction period. Otherwise you're really just choosing between a five-hour delay on Monday or a five-hour delay on Wednesday. Oh, and if you had booked fewer than 12 days before the start of runway construction, they only waive the change fee. You might still get socked with a substantial fare difference.

The "moaning and groaning of this board" is well-warranted. It's not reasonable to expect travelers to research potential runway construction at every single airport they might traverse, and a hub carrier like United absolutely could do a far better job of informing customers of the impact to travel (and offer a more generous waiver policy).



Woe. Is. You.

Just for kicks and giggles, I did just as you did, and made dummy-bookings on other carriers out of SFO, leaving tomorrow and returning next week -- right in the thick of runway reconstruction. And, gee, let's take a walk with what I found:

SFO-SEA-SEA, dep 13SEP ret 16SEP:
1) DL: Got all the way to the "Review and Pay" screen with.. *gasp* no notice of SFO runway reconstruction... oh and the only alerts up top (the bell icon with the number 3 next to it) were regarding Hurricane Dorian (twice) and Typhoon Faxai.... interesting...
2) AS: Added the itinerary to Cart and ended up at the screen at 'Checkout: Passenger Information'...and...guess...what.... not a SINGLE mention or runway reconstruction!! No alerts to be seen...hmm, they must surely have forgotten to share the info with an unsuspecting passenger. So sneaky....
3) AA: Made a dummy booking (even under my AA OneWorld account number), but this route warranted a connection via LAX. Wanna take another guess about where I encountered SFO runway reconstruction...go ahead, take a wild guess.... no. where. *GASP* These airlines are SO SNEAKY!!!!!

One would think that if one were to be traveling somewhere, one would maybe take a look at local news/weather/travel guides just to orient oneself with their destination, maybe? You specifically cited UA however, I presented a field study with the main carriers out of the SFO airport and not a single one mentions runway reconstruction. So, as I initially said, it is not *necessarily* the responsibility of an airline to inform folks of various goings-on at airports served, just as it's not *necessarily* the responsibility of an airline to inform one of travel docs needed based on one's citizenship -- those responsibilities lie squarely on the traveller who is, wait for it, *choosing* to travel during such times. Of course, there are times when extenuating circumstances hit, but, guess what...that's what flexible fares and/or travel insurance are for.

To close, I'm not touting one carrier over the other or a "fanboy/girl" for any one in particular; just like in real life, one can't fault just one member of the group if all the group members are in the same boat -- you fault all of them. Otherwise that would be patently unfair, one-sided, unobjective, and subject to dismissal.

Re: SFO Runway 28L closure - How Bad?

Posted: Thu Sep 12, 2019 9:33 pm
by Wingtips56
Interesting. AA does have the situation in a Travel Alert, accessed from a tab on the home page. It allows changes to OAK, SJC and SMF, within one day. Once I found UA's buried Important Notices, it appears they are only allowing a change of connecting cities, but doesn't indicate you could O/D at one of the other airports.

Re: SFO Runway 28L closure - How Bad?

Posted: Thu Sep 12, 2019 9:35 pm
by RWA380
Day two into the closure, my ex bosses got a notice from AS that their SFO departure was operating from OAK & they were bussing people over there from SFO, so check in time was much earlier than expected. The are cruising from Anchorage to Japan via the Aleutian Chain & the Kamchatsky peninsula. So their arrival was important as they are the hosts for the 18 days.

Re: SFO Runway 28L closure - How Bad?

Posted: Thu Sep 12, 2019 10:07 pm
by Judge1310
Also, on a side note, for those who don't live here in SFO...unless someone lives or has reason to be in the Silicon Valley/South Bay region, let me assure you that SJC is barely on the radar to even consider using for folks in SF, the North Bay, and even parts of the upper East Bay. As the traffic is generally terrible on the 101 and CalTrain connections take long enough as it is, it's better to take a delayed arrival into SFO than add on the logistics of South Bay to XYZ travel.

Re: SFO Runway 28L closure - How Bad?

Posted: Thu Sep 12, 2019 10:16 pm
by ScottB
Judge1310 wrote:
You specifically cited UA however, I presented a field study with the main carriers out of the SFO airport and not a single one mentions runway reconstruction. So, as I initially said, it is not *necessarily* the responsibility of an airline to inform folks of various goings-on at airports served, just as it's not *necessarily* the responsibility of an airline to inform one of travel docs needed based on one's citizenship -- those responsibilities lie squarely on the traveller who is, wait for it, *choosing* to travel during such times.


I specifically cited UA (1) because you specifically lauded them for consolidating flights and (2) they're the largest carrier by far at SFO. One would think they would have a greater interest in keeping their customers informed given that they flow the largest number of customers over SFO on a daily basis. You are correct that AA/DL/AS all drop the ball on informing their customers regarding the SFO construction. Interestingly, however, you fail to note that "San Francisco Runway Construction" is prominently noted on WN's home page -- but then WN doesn't charge change fees so cancelling a ticket doesn't entail eating a $200 fee, either.

AA specifically deserves a bit of praise in that they explicitly allow customers to rebook to SMF/OAK/SJC in order to avoid the impacts to SFO. (FWIW WN will also allow a change to OAK or SJC without additional charge.)

And no, this situation isn't analogous to reviewing the required documentation for international travel. One expects to need some amount of documentation for international travel as a routine matter -- whether that is a passport alone or potentially a visa/ESTA in addition to that (as well as supporting documentation in some cases). Severe impacts due to runway construction are not a routine matter and one really only expects frequent strikes in France.

Re: SFO Runway 28L closure - How Bad?

Posted: Thu Sep 12, 2019 10:28 pm
by HOOB747
janders wrote:
The UA hub operation and connections must be a mess.

I saw they are offering voluntary waivers to customers, but thousands still must transit SFO daily especially to many Pacific markets.


I got the same e-mail couple weeks ago, and UA offered me the same free waiver to change my flight Sept 9 (PEK-SFO-CMH). I eagerly scooped up an Air China 787-9 (PEK-LAX) with a domestic widebody 777(LAX-DEN) to avoid SFO. Looks like that was the best decision ever!

Re: SFO Runway 28L closure - How Bad?

Posted: Thu Sep 12, 2019 10:36 pm
by HOOB747
ScottB wrote:
[quote="Judge1310"
And frankly, the waiver UA is providing is near-worthless. They don't let you refund your ticket -- only change it -- and they also won't let you rebook to a different city.



They let me rebook for free through a different city. Their e-mail even encouraged me to avoid SFO.
PEK-SFO-CMH changed for free to PEK-LAX-DEN-CMH with Air China doing the heavy lifting. I could browse through 60 free options before selecting my new itinerary back to the states.

Re: SFO Runway 28L closure - How Bad?

Posted: Thu Sep 12, 2019 11:12 pm
by Judge1310
ScottB wrote:
Judge1310 wrote:
You specifically cited UA however, I presented a field study with the main carriers out of the SFO airport and not a single one mentions runway reconstruction. So, as I initially said, it is not *necessarily* the responsibility of an airline to inform folks of various goings-on at airports served, just as it's not *necessarily* the responsibility of an airline to inform one of travel docs needed based on one's citizenship -- those responsibilities lie squarely on the traveller who is, wait for it, *choosing* to travel during such times.


I specifically cited UA (1) because you specifically lauded them for consolidating flights and (2) they're the largest carrier by far at SFO. One would think they would have a greater interest in keeping their customers informed given that they flow the largest number of customers over SFO on a daily basis. You are correct that AA/DL/AS all drop the ball on informing their customers regarding the SFO construction. Interestingly, however, you fail to note that "San Francisco Runway Construction" is prominently noted on WN's home page -- but then WN doesn't charge change fees so cancelling a ticket doesn't entail eating a $200 fee, either.

AA specifically deserves a bit of praise in that they explicitly allow customers to rebook to SMF/OAK/SJC in order to avoid the impacts to SFO. (FWIW WN will also allow a change to OAK or SJC without additional charge.)

And no, this situation isn't analogous to reviewing the required documentation for international travel. One expects to need some amount of documentation for international travel as a routine matter -- whether that is a passport alone or potentially a visa/ESTA in addition to that (as well as supporting documentation in some cases). Severe impacts due to runway construction are not a routine matter and one really only expects frequent strikes in France.


Here's some raw data:
Today's Ops (as of 1540L)
Mainline Operations: 190 scheduled deps, 62 delayed due to runways/flow control, 1 xcld due to MX, 1 xlcd due to runways/flow control
Express Operations: 87 Scheduled deps, 10 delayed due to runways/flow control, 22 pre-xcld deps

Current runway ops/flow control allows an arrival rate of 25/hr; if winds gust from the west above 20mph, potential arrival rate decreases to 22/hr due to single runway ops.

I think the crux of the issue is that each airline that operates out of SFO have completely different operational paradigms here.
1) WN is solely an O&D operator and operate a minor presence at SFO (thus no reason to include it in my initial comparisons),
2) AA is mostly O&D, allows for connections on its oneWorld partners,
3) DL is mostly O&D, allows for minimal connections on its SkyTeam partners
4) AS feebly serves SFO as a hub, but can funnel folks over other West Coast stations,
5) UA has a massive hub at SFO. A customer who needs to get to CTU/SIN/HKG/AKL etc, and whose initial inbound connecting flight(s) have been affected by the runway ops can modify their reservation with no problem. The same goes for someone who's starting at SFO and needs to get to EWR, BOS, etc. By and large, however, those folks will experience little to no issues. The most affected customers are those who are transiting SFO to other, more local, stations. So, yes, a customer doing LAX-SFO-BZN is probably going to be affected. However, said customer could just as easily rebook LAX-DEN-BZN should they choose the option when they check in for their flight(s). Basically put, there is no need to be a "Chicken Little" proclaiming the proverbial sky is falling, unless one is particularly affected by the situation at hand. Furthermore, if I have tens of thousands of people flying out of a hub, then I don't need tens of thousands of customers having anxiety about something that will affect a small minority of them as that would engender further chaos in the operation.

Re: SFO Runway 28L closure - How Bad?

Posted: Thu Sep 12, 2019 11:16 pm
by Judge1310
HOOB747 wrote:
ScottB wrote:
[quote="Judge1310"
And frankly, the waiver UA is providing is near-worthless. They don't let you refund your ticket -- only change it -- and they also won't let you rebook to a different city.



They let me rebook for free through a different city. Their e-mail even encouraged me to avoid SFO.
PEK-SFO-CMH changed for free to PEK-LAX-DEN-CMH with Air China doing the heavy lifting. I could browse through 60 free options before selecting my new itinerary back to the states.


Thank you, Sir/Ma'am, for providing an actual case here. Your itinerary needed to be between PEK and CMH and you were afforded the opportunity to choose various options for your travel (and the one you chose looks great, btw!).

And to the poster ScottB...you can always purchase a fare with flexible rebooking terms if you value flexibility, because, you know, they truly do exist! ;)

Re: SFO Runway 28L closure - How Bad?

Posted: Thu Sep 12, 2019 11:43 pm
by aeromoe
Wingtips56 wrote:
Two weeks ago, I was on a UA 739 departing MFR (who'd a thought a 739 at Medford?!?!), which was scheduled for arrival at SFO around 09:00. We departed the gate and then sat in a penalty box with a one-hour wheels-up time. So we arrived after 10:00. So I don't think their suggestion of early arrivals to avoid delays in going to pan out. It will suck.


I read that SFO advisory of 9am as referring to departures...pick a departure before 9am to minimize chances you're stuck in a bad delay situation. Just my 2cents.

Re: SFO Runway 28L closure - How Bad?

Posted: Fri Sep 13, 2019 1:24 am
by ScottB
Judge1310 wrote:
And to the poster ScottB...you can always purchase a fare with flexible rebooking terms if you value flexibility, because, you know, they truly do exist! ;)


Or one can choose to reward carriers with more customer-friendly policies with one's business. Seems like a far better plan.

Judge1310 wrote:
1) WN is solely an O&D operator and operate a minor presence at SFO (thus no reason to include it in my initial comparisons)


I suppose... they're about 3/4 the size of AA at SFO and still carry about 3MM passengers annually at SFO. You can call that a minor presence if it makes you feel better.

Judge1310 wrote:
Furthermore, if I have tens of thousands of people flying out of a hub, then I don't need tens of thousands of customers having anxiety about something that will affect a small minority of them as that would engender further chaos in the operation.


It's not clear to me how relatively inflexible rebooking policies alleviates the anxiety of "tens of thousands of customers." And your advice of "buy a refundable ticket" is of little help to them.

Re: SFO Runway 28L closure - How Bad?

Posted: Fri Sep 13, 2019 1:51 am
by Judge1310
ScottB wrote:
Judge1310 wrote:
And to the poster ScottB...you can always purchase a fare with flexible rebooking terms if you value flexibility, because, you know, they truly do exist! ;)


Or one can choose to reward carriers with more customer-friendly policies with one's business. Seems like a far better plan.

Judge1310 wrote:
1) WN is solely an O&D operator and operate a minor presence at SFO (thus no reason to include it in my initial comparisons)


I suppose... they're about 3/4 the size of AA at SFO and still carry about 3MM passengers annually at SFO. You can call that a minor presence if it makes you feel better.

Judge1310 wrote:
Furthermore, if I have tens of thousands of people flying out of a hub, then I don't need tens of thousands of customers having anxiety about something that will affect a small minority of them as that would engender further chaos in the operation.


It's not clear to me how relatively inflexible rebooking policies alleviates the anxiety of "tens of thousands of customers." And your advice of "buy a refundable ticket" is of little help to them.


'Wanna Get Away', 'Anytime', and 'Business Select' fares exist in similar fashion.

3MM pax/annum out of how many total? Again, minor presence at SFO. OAK is WN's hub in the area and that's fine for them. I have nothing against WN (I know them very well, actually) but, again, operational paradigms are different for each carrier at SFO.

And your last statement:
It's not clear to me how relatively inflexible rebooking policies alleviates the anxiety of "tens of thousands of customers." And your advice of "buy a refundable ticket" is of little help to them
sounds like your grasping at straws here and have placed blinders on. If a customer needs flexibility then they purchase the appropriate fare. I've also said that the affected customers are far less than total served during this period of IRROPS. I'm done.

On a lovely side note, local news outlets here in SFO (yeah, commentary from someone who's *actually* experiencing SFO ops day in and day out) are now publicly reporting that the reconstruction project is moving along ahead of schedule. The only thing is that potential (and abnormal!) rains may affect us for a little bit in a couple of days -- hopefully keeping the project ahead. :)

Re: SFO Runway 28L closure - How Bad?

Posted: Fri Sep 13, 2019 4:52 am
by LH707330
Judge1310 wrote:
ScottB wrote:
Judge1310 wrote:
The moaning and groaning of this board knows no bounds, it seems. Almost all (I can't speak for *every* carrier) carriers that are operating out of SFO are offering free waivers and itinerary modifications. United (from what I've seen) has done things like operate 777-300s between SFO and LAX or between SFO and LAS to consolidate and allow for pax connections. Alerts have been made known for ***months***.

Self-reliance and proactivity, folks, can be beautiful things...


Seriously? It took me a few minutes of poking around on UA's website to find the SFO travel advisory and I knew I should be looking for it. It's not under "Travel Information" at the top which would seem logical but rather "Important Notices" which is way down in the page footer, past a crapton of advertising. I couldn't find any reference to the runway construction in the United app at all. If I try to book a flight to SFO next week, either on the web or in the United app, during the construction period, UA provides no advisory during the booking process that the schedule they're publishing is very likely to see a severe impact due to that construction.

And frankly, the waiver UA is providing is near-worthless. They don't let you refund your ticket -- only change it -- and they also won't let you rebook to a different city. But when you're talking about a multi-week operational impact due to runway construction (rather than something like a day of thunderstorms), just changing the ticket is little help unless you can change to flights outside the construction period. Otherwise you're really just choosing between a five-hour delay on Monday or a five-hour delay on Wednesday. Oh, and if you had booked fewer than 12 days before the start of runway construction, they only waive the change fee. You might still get socked with a substantial fare difference.

The "moaning and groaning of this board" is well-warranted. It's not reasonable to expect travelers to research potential runway construction at every single airport they might traverse, and a hub carrier like United absolutely could do a far better job of informing customers of the impact to travel (and offer a more generous waiver policy).



Woe. Is. You.

Just for kicks and giggles, I did just as you did, and made dummy-bookings on other carriers out of SFO, leaving tomorrow and returning next week -- right in the thick of runway reconstruction. And, gee, let's take a walk with what I found:

SFO-SEA-SEA, dep 13SEP ret 16SEP:
1) DL: Got all the way to the "Review and Pay" screen with.. *gasp* no notice of SFO runway reconstruction... oh and the only alerts up top (the bell icon with the number 3 next to it) were regarding Hurricane Dorian (twice) and Typhoon Faxai.... interesting...
2) AS: Added the itinerary to Cart and ended up at the screen at 'Checkout: Passenger Information'...and...guess...what.... not a SINGLE mention or runway reconstruction!! No alerts to be seen...hmm, they must surely have forgotten to share the info with an unsuspecting passenger. So sneaky....
3) AA: Made a dummy booking (even under my AA OneWorld account number), but this route warranted a connection via LAX. Wanna take another guess about where I encountered SFO runway reconstruction...go ahead, take a wild guess.... no. where. *GASP* These airlines are SO SNEAKY!!!!!

One would think that if one were to be traveling somewhere, one would maybe take a look at local news/weather/travel guides just to orient oneself with their destination, maybe? You specifically cited UA however, I presented a field study with the main carriers out of the SFO airport and not a single one mentions runway reconstruction. So, as I initially said, it is not *necessarily* the responsibility of an airline to inform folks of various goings-on at airports served, just as it's not *necessarily* the responsibility of an airline to inform one of travel docs needed based on one's citizenship -- those responsibilities lie squarely on the traveller who is, wait for it, *choosing* to travel during such times. Of course, there are times when extenuating circumstances hit, but, guess what...that's what flexible fares and/or travel insurance are for.

To close, I'm not touting one carrier over the other or a "fanboy/girl" for any one in particular; just like in real life, one can't fault just one member of the group if all the group members are in the same boat -- you fault all of them. Otherwise that would be patently unfair, one-sided, unobjective, and subject to dismissal.


As you've pointed out, most airlines seem to have been done a poor job of keeping people informed, which in my opinion is poor customer service. If a company requires certain resources (e.g. runways) to provide a service (a flight from A to B at a specific time), and those resources won't be available, then they should not sell that service without a good-faith effort at warning customers or nudging them to alternatives, in this case OAK or SJC. I booked a flight into SFO during this time frame, and at no point did I see a warning in the booking flow, which the airline should have well known about. Expecting an average passenger to go read airport construction NOTAMs and interpret the effect of them (Delays? How long? Did the airline bake this into their planning? How can I know for sure? When will they tell me?) without any further information is unreasonable.

Here's what should have happened IMO:

1. The airport defines the window several months ahead of time and forces airlines to reduce frequencies to avoid overcapacity
2. Airlines cut their schedule or upgauge accordingly
3. Airlines proactively deal with anybody affected who booked before the construction alert went live
4. Flights come and go as normal

Any time a vendor signs a contract to deliver a service, it's their responsibility to provide that service, and manage any subcontractors or infrastructure providers accordingly. If, as in this scenario, they have a reasonable expectation that they can't provide the service as advertised due to an infrastructure provider constraint, they shouldn't pretend otherwise. If my flight gets disrupted by this, I full well plan to make noise about it.

Re: SFO Runway 28L closure - How Bad?

Posted: Fri Sep 13, 2019 1:33 pm
by DL717
Maybe these complainers would like to land on a runway that needs repair.

If I were SFO I’d shut it down and done concrete. Then watch the complaints. This is just dumb.

Re: SFO Runway 28L closure - How Bad?

Posted: Fri Sep 13, 2019 2:25 pm
by jumbojet
and this is why I, and many others, prefer to connect in say, ICN, then SFO when going TPAC. After reading this thread, even on a normal day, your likely to miss your connection due to delayed/cancelled flights. Throw in a bit of bad weather and/or construction and your doomed. This by the way isnt necessarily aimed at UA, although they are the dominant carrier at SFO.

Re: SFO Runway 28L closure - How Bad?

Posted: Fri Sep 13, 2019 2:40 pm
by SonaSounds
At least it will be over soon. I rerouted my connecting flight to Australia next week away from SFO, but keeping the return through SFO as it looks like they will be done ahead of schedule.

https://www.aviationpros.com/airports/p ... f-schedule

Runway 28L Reconstruction Reaches Halfway Point Ahead of Schedule
Crews to complete first section 48 hours ahead of schedule.


San Francisco International Airport (SFO) SEPTEMBER 12, 2019 Tweet Share
Sep. 13, crews will transition from the first phase, where Runway 28L intersects with Runway 1R, to the second phase, where Runway 28L intersects with Runway 1L. This transition will be complete by the morning of Sep. 14, at which time Runway 1R will reopen for aircraft use.

Since the closure began at Sep. 7, crews have been working continuously 24 hours per day. Because the previous base layer dates back to the early 1960s, the project team built time into the schedule to allow for unknown conditions below the base layer, which could have required additional digging and material installation. These contingencies were not required, as the soil below was found to be stable, allowing crews to move immediately to the installation of a new base layer.

The transition to the second phase of the project is expected to improve the efficiency of the two runways which remain open for arrivals and departures. Runway 1R, expected to open on Saturday morning, is 1,000 feet longer than 1L, allowing more aircraft to use this for takeoff. This in turn is expected to allow Runway 28R to handle more arriving flights than during the first phase of construction.

Flight delays during the first phase were hampered by high winds, which led to more aircraft using 28R for takeoff as well as landing. Although wind conditions are expected to improve, SFO still advises travelers to continue to expect delays and potential cancellations, and recommends that travelers contact their airline directly for updates.

As with the first phase, SFO recommends that travelers opt for early morning flights before 9:00 a.m. PDT during this period, as delays are expected to begin after 9:00 a.m. PDT each day during the closure, and continue for the remainder of the day. Both domestic and international flights may be affected by this activity, with short-haul flights being most affected.

The total length of Runway 28L is 11,381 feet. The project will reconstruct a 1,900-foot section of Runway 28L, replace lighting and drainage infrastructure, and overlay a 600-foot section of Runway 1L.