Quoting OPNLguy (Reply 48): SWA has cancelled over 300 flights to/from various NE airports, and the night isn't over yet...

OPNL, just out of curiousity, when WN has an IROP of this magnitude, how long does it take on average to recalibrate the airline so it is back to normal? I presume that, because there's so little "hub" flying, that it doesn't take that long.

Quoting Positiverate (Reply 50): OPNL, just out of curiousity, when WN has an IROP of this magnitude, how long does it take on average to recalibrate the airline so it is back to normal? I presume that, because there's so little "hub" flying, that it doesn't take that long.

Airplane-wise it won't take that long (a single fleet type is a big help here), but the bigger impact is on crew scheduling. Having multiple crew bases helps alot.

Just to show everyone how much one is at the mercy of the weather, BWI went to light ice pellets (-PL, permissible for departures) and we started de-icing. After that was started, it went to moderate ice pellets (PL) again, and de-icing ceased. So, we're waiting, again, until the damn pellets changeover to snow...

I dont think anyone that works for B6 should even waste your time replying to this thread. Theres to many B6 bashers here and most of them are ignorant. There airline probaly cancelled flights to but when B6 cancels were horrible....

Here is a piece from the Hartford Courant about ops @ BDL today which is a airport that usually never closes down .


"Between 60 and 70 arriving and departing flights had been canceled as of noon today, said John Wallace, spokesman for Bradley International Airport. He said the number of canceled flights is expected to rise.

"The best advice we can people is to call your airlines, don't call the airport, to check on the status of flights," Wallace said."



So what is it everyone thinks jetBlue should do? Fly planes in bad weather? Give me a break! I think people who fly legacy carriers and get 31'' pitch, hard seats, and no in-flight entertainment just need a reason to piss on jetBlue. This is coming from a ex Northwest Gold elite who nows ops for jetBlue flights instead of free first class upgrades and crappy food.

My mom is suppose to come tomorrow from JFK-MCO on B6. Shes going to pissed when I tell her that her flight will probably be canceled.

Quoting JetJock22 (Reply 2): Here we go again? If we didn't cancel, people would complain. We proactively cancel and people complain. Don't you have anything better to do than badmouth B6?

The original post was a link to an article. Not badmouthing at all.

I think a lot of this has to do with the number of flights cancelled compared to the the total number of flights the airline has. JetBlue cancelled 215 +/- out of about 500. Yes, Southwest has cancelled 300 +/- but they have something like 4000 flights daily.

Quoting OPNLguy (Reply 51): Airplane-wise it won't take that long (a single fleet type is a big help here), but the bigger impact is on crew scheduling. Having multiple crew bases helps alot.

Thanks much. At WN, are the pilots and f/a's on the same plane for their entire rotation?

Quoting Propilotjw (Reply 55): Yes, Southwest has cancelled 300 +/- but they have something like 4000 flights daily.

We have about 3,300 a day, and today, about 400 have been cancelled.

Quoting Positiverate (Reply 56): Thanks much. At WN, are the pilots and f/a's on the same plane for their entire rotation?

They were in the early days (1971-), but starting in about the mid-1980s they started getting separate pairings. As we've open more crew bases over the years, the two groups don't usually link up for any more than 2-3 flights, maybe a few more if they're short-haul..

Out of Boston JetBlue has still managed to get flights airborne while all other airlines have cancelled thier entire schedule for the evning and monring. Then again its JETBLUE thats gets flamed!

[Edited 2007-03-17 02:57:29]

Also .......Logan is now CLOSED! Internationals have been diverting!

VS 11 diverted to JFK
AF 332 Diverted to Halifax to then take off...fly to Boston and get Diverted to CYUL
BA 215 Diverted

My friend was flying United down to Key west for Spring Break...his flight today got cancelled and they can now not re-accomodate him until Monday afternoon with an arrival in Miami scheduled for after midnight!


Then again.....I forgot ........its only JETBLUE that has these issues! Atleast they are PROACTIVE!

Quoting MEACEDAR (Reply 54): My mom is suppose to come tomorrow from JFK-MCO on B6. Shes going to pissed when I tell her that her flight will probably be canceled.

Why would she be pissed? If anything, she should be disappointed that the weather chose to be such a bitch. Today I was walking in the city and found myself being victim to the hardest ice pellets I have ever felt; I actually had to take cover at a Starbucks because they hurt so much! Talk about crappy weather...I've never seen something like this.

And for the record, none of the JFK-MCO flights are cancelled tomorrow. I'd take a gander that unless she is on one of the two first flights out in the morning, her flight will operate.

JetBluefan1

Quoting JetBluefan1 (Reply 60): And for the record, none of the JFK-MCO flights are cancelled tomorrow. I'd take a gander that unless she is on one of the two first flights out in the morning, her flight will operate.

Weather-wise, the snow should end at JFK around 6:00am local time..

AMD KJFK 170228Z 170224 02020G30KT 4SM -FZRAPL BR BKN007
OVC010 TEMPO 0204 3SM -SNPL BKN015
FM1000 35015G25KT 6SM -SN BR OVC025
FM1200 32015G22KT P6SM OVC035
FM1500 30015G22KT P6SM BKN050

Quoting Tu154 (Reply 20): People love to pick on US, UA, AA, DL , and now B6. Its the nature of this forum. The only airline not really picked on is CO.

My mom was supposed to fly from EWR to CMH at 3PM today. She tried to call to find out what was going on with her flight (It was cancelled) and the automated message said that the average hold time was 113 minutes! They are basically telling people Sunday is the earliest they can get anyone out of EWR.

I was flying CMH-CLT-PHX today on US (east) and our crew for CLT-PHX got stuck in DCA. The poor gate agents kept saying they had no information and people were getting pissed (I talked to them and they said OPS was not calling them back and they had tried to call 2 times to find out where the crew was).

The Flifo kept adding 30 minutes to the departure time and finally after 4 hours the flight was cancelled (No reserve crews to spare for a 321 tonight). I have been on hold to US reservations (Calling on an elite line) for 2 hours and 25 minutes so far. I actually saw a huge line of about 450 people in the B concourse at about 8:30 PM as I was walking out to get a cab and go to a hotel away from that mess, I asked an elderly couple about 10 people from the front of the line how long they had been waiting in line and they said "Over 6 hours now". The main check-in desk had 1000 + people at 8:40 PM trying to get rebooked. The Shares saga continues in CLT.

If US had cancelled flights they would not have this mess tonight and over 1000 people would not be yelling about why they don't get a hotel voucher  

In any event, all airlines these days ask the reduced number of employees to do more with less and it's not just a B6 issue, But those 49 dollar tickets to Florida have nothing to do with it  

Quoting Itsnotfinals (Reply 62): I was flying CMH-CLT-PHX today on US (east) and our crew for CLT-PHX got stuck in DCA. The poor gate agents kept saying they had no information and people were getting pissed (I talked to them and they said OPS was not calling them back and they had tried to call 2 times to find out where the crew was).

Quoting Itsnotfinals (Reply 62): The Flifo kept adding 30 minutes to the departure time and finally after 4 hours the flight was cancelled (No reserve crews to spare for a 321 tonight)

BWI was in the same shape Friday afternoon/evening, and the main driver for the delays was the precise type of frozen precip that was falling at any one moment. The weather at DCA (or BWI) never got below landing minimums, and airplanes could land in just about any type of frozen precip (except for moderate or heavy freezing drizzle/freezing rain). What happened was that certain types of freezing precip were falling that prohibited takeoffs, as mentioned in reply #27. That creates other problems, namely that if you can't get flights out, incoming flights won't have any gates available to use, and they'll have to sit and wait for long periods of time. If too many flights land without available gates, you can even "gridlock" the airport.

To prevent this scenario (which many of us call the "Roach Motel" mode--i.e. planes get in but they don't get out), the usual solution is to delay other flights from leaving for the impacted airport. I had to delay several of my flights headed to BWI, and mine were also done :30 minutes at a time out of necessity--we never knew exactly when the frozen precip was going to changeover from moderate ice pellets (no-go) to snow (OK to de-ice and go). Just 20 miles of BWI, it was all snow, and that eventually happened at IAD. DCA, being further east than IAD, would take additional time for the changeover to snow to occur.

The customer service and operations folks at the station-level typically are not versed in these kinds of things, and in any event, they were stuck waiting for the same changes we were. I can fully understand the Ops person not being able to call the other agent back--I'm sure they were getting bombarded with similar calls. At some point, once the delays get to a certain point, crews start "timing out" with respect to duty time (different from flight time), and if other crews can't be swapped around to cover the delayed flight, a cancellation often results.

On the bright side, I hope this is winter's last hurrah--I've had ENOUGH of it for one season...  

Several flight were sent up to Maine.

To PWM:

B6 1294 PIT-BOS -E190 diverts to PWM

B6 1264 AUS-BOS-E190 diverts to PWM

B6 482 LGB-BOS-A320



And at BGR:

B6 422 PBI-BOS

[Edited 2007-03-17 07:44:59]

U.S. airlines cancel more than 2,000 flights . Can not blame anybody. Mother Nature

Delta Air Lines canceled 600 flights, most in the New York area and US Airways Group Inc. said it canceled more than 1,000 flights, much of it feeder service from New England.
Operations at United Airlines, American Airlines, Continental Airlines, Northwest Airlines, and Southwest Airlines also were affected by the storm.

Airlines waived fees and offered passengers affected by storm-related cancellations options for rebooking and future travel.

full story: http://www.reuters.com/article/newsOne/idUSN1643179020070317

When you have a meltdown the scale of jetBlue's the last go round you are going to be heavily scrutinized by the media and everyone else. Just the nature of the beast. Best thing you can do is get the media on your side by proving you fixed the problems that caused the meltdown last time. Then there is no story. The customer service issues are born of a rapid expansion that far outpaces the infastructre and employees. The bubble was bound to burst on jetBlue and the media infauation with the carrier has certainly evaporated.

I think B6 has done the right thing to proactively cancel their flights. In the long run it will probably allow them to ramp up to full service faster and avoid another melt down.

As has been stated here many times their challenges are different because they have only one hub.

Will they be paying free tickets or vouchers for all these cancelled flights according to their bill of rights??

The media loves airline stories so I am not surprised they jumped all over this.

AJMIA

ah people gonna complain about JetBlue, but in the end of the day, JetBlue aint going n e where   After all, the other airlines flying in wind speeds of 40-45 knots are risky. U cant blame JetBlue for putting customer safety first. U.S airways did the same thing, and entire LGA was almost suspended yesterday afternoon. 50knots is the FAA limit anyway

ah people gonna complain about JetBlue, but in the end of the day, JetBlue aint going n e where   After all, the other airlines flying in wind speeds of 40-45 knots are risky. U cant blame JetBlue for putting customer safety first. U.S airways did the same thing, and entire LGA was almost suspended yesterday afternoon. 50knots is the FAA limit anyway

Quoting JETBLUEATASW (Reply 68): After all, the other airlines flying in wind speeds of 40-45 knots are risky.

Huuh?

Quoting JETBLUEATASW (Reply 69): U cant blame JetBlue for putting customer safety first.

C'mon now, don't be soo naive to think that's the reason they cancelled the flights.

Quoting JETBLUEATASW (Reply 69): ah people gonna complain about JetBlue, but in the end of the day, JetBlue aint going n e where   After all, the other airlines flying in wind speeds of 40-45 knots are risky. U cant blame JetBlue for putting customer safety first. U.S airways did the same thing, and entire LGA was almost suspended yesterday afternoon. 50knots is the FAA limit anyway

As a quick aside, it'd be nice if you used some correct punctuation and spelling.....it's the standard here on a.net, and you'll automatically lose respect if you don't follow the same standards.

Just giving you a heads up!   

Today JetBlue is operating over 90% of its flights, though just about everything is operating late.

Hey, this is certainly much better than the day after Valentine's Day. It looks like JetBlue has rectified the problem!

JetBluefan1

Quoting JETBLUEATASW (Reply 69): After all, the other airlines flying in wind speeds of 40-45 knots are risky.

Quoting JETBLUEATASW (Reply 69): 50knots is the FAA limit anyway

Airline aircraft fly in winds that can run as high as 200 knots, if you catch the jetstream just right.

Now, if it''s CROSSwinds you're talking about, that's a different story. Most aircraft have a max demonstrated crosswind limit of 30-35 knots, and that's set by the manufacturer, not FAA.

Quoting JetBluefan1 (Reply 72): Today JetBlue is operating over 90% of its flights, though just about everything is operating late.

SWA has also recovered well, with only about 14 cancelled today so far. Almost all of those were originating flights at places where the aircraft couldn't get in and were cancelled the night before.

Hopefully, we're now done with the winter season....   

[Edited 2007-03-17 17:18:35]

Quoting JetBluefan1 (Reply 72): Today JetBlue is operating over 90% of its flights, though just about everything is operating late. Hey, this is certainly much better than the day after Valentine's Day. It looks like JetBlue has rectified the problem! JetBluefan1

Will they get ANY good press for that? I DOUBT IT! Thats the problem with the media and the traveling public!

[Edited 2007-03-17 18:06:31]

Quoting ADiZzy (Reply 75): Will they get ANY good press for that? I DOUBT IT! Thats the problem with the media and the traveling public!

the media are great on the way "up", but the same media are bad on the way "down"...that's just how things happen..especially in the New York metropolitan area....

After reading more horror stories about passengers being held captive (yes that is what it amounts to) for hours on end on jets at JFK it seems the unthinkable must be done and that is close JFK until they can fix their horrible problems. There is ABSOLUTELY NO excuse for this. None in the world. I'd love to see a bill passed that requires airlines to offload passengers from a jet if they have been stranded for 2 hours. Honestly how it negatively impacts an airline or an airport is of no concern to me. The only concern is to that of the passengers. Maybe this will encourage the airlines and airports to have realistic plans in place to deal with delays. As for me I am getting off the plane one way or another. They can either let me off or the police can escort me off. There is just no excuse for this. This really bad press seems to focus around JFK all the time. Only way you get them to fix the problem is to make the prospect of another such event very unpleasant for the airline and the airport (financially).

Quoting Indy (Reply 77): After reading more horror stories about passengers being held captive (yes that is what it amounts to) for hours on end on jets at JFK it seems the unthinkable must be done and that is close JFK until they can fix their horrible problems. There is ABSOLUTELY NO excuse for this. None in the world.

With all due respect, the reality is that this isn't going to happen, nor is it a good idea, nor is it going to solve anything. The flights in the air will need to go somewhere and they further complicate the situation at other area airports that are experiencing the same general weather conditions.

Quoting Indy (Reply 77): 'd love to see a bill passed that requires airlines to offload passengers from a jet if they have been stranded for 2 hours.

That would actually make things worse in many cases, and an example of the law of untended consequences. If you push the gate at XYZ headed to PHL, and before you can takeoff ATC puts in a groundstop in for PHL for an hour, you're going to sit there for an hour. ATC later extends the groundstop for another 30 minutes, and another 30 minutes after that. You've now will have been out there for 2 hours, and then ATC sez they can get you airborne in 10 minutes. That would put you out there for 2:10, so, to comply with a new max 2:00 rule, the flight has to come back so everyone has a chance a deplane, tinkle, and get some grub before getting back onboard and being 3-4 hours late when they would have only been 2:10 late. ATC delays work like this all the time, and while I don't like it or agree with it, that's the way it works.

Quoting Indy (Reply 77): Honestly how it negatively impacts an airline or an airport is of no concern to me. The only concern is to that of the passengers.

Of course not, not to you, but it is of concern to those that have to deal with the ramifications in real-life. When it came time to pay-off all those additional capital expenditures for new "extra" gates and pass along those additional airline costs, we already know who'll be raising Cain about the spike in airline ticket prices.

Quoting Indy (Reply 77): Maybe this will encourage the airlines and airports to have realistic plans in place to deal with delays.

By having airports build 2x-3x the number of gates they currently have to handle the non-routine events that back-up flights? Should PHX or LAS equip their airports with the same number of snowplows as does ANC, "just in case"? If the roads get really icy, should the highway departed be expected to wave a magic wand and conjure up another couple hundred snad trucks/crews? If the traffic on the freeway is backed up, should they be expected to use some really quick-drying concrete so some additional land capacity can be added? The bottom line here is that stings go fairly rountinely about 85% of the time, and the other 15% sees varying degree of hassles, and people have to expect some problems on occasions, and deal with them. It's a fact of life.

Quoting Indy (Reply 77): As for me I am getting off the plane one way or another. They can either let me off or the police can escort me off. There is just no excuse for this.

Good luck with that, since not complying with the FAs will likely get to a Federal charge of interfering with a flightcrew.

Quoting Indy (Reply 77): This really bad press seems to focus around JFK all the time. Only way you get them to fix the problem is to make the prospect of another such event very unpleasant for the airline and the airport (financially).

What the press, and people in general need to do is have some patience and common sense. The speed of any form of transit is dependent on the weather. People seem to understand that the crosstown car trip that takes 30 minutes in dry weather will take longer when it's raining, and longer still when there's snow or ice out, but can't seem to fathom the idea of aircraft operations also being slowed down, especially in the case of ice/snow. Maybe if people were required to de-ice their cars before they could legally drive them would get the point across. Probably not.

Wire service stories tell of passengers on planes for nine hours on the "tarmac" at JFK..pilot blaming problems with deicing..including a lack of deicing fluid..and an airport spokesperson saying that supplying the fluid is the responsibility of the airlines.....as the OP said..here we go again.
TPAnx  

Quoting OPNLguy (Reply 78): some patience and common sense

Patience is 2 hours. 9 hours is false imprisonment. That would by the way be my defense in any criminal case. Interfering with a flight crew might be a crime but so is false imprisonment.

Maybe I'm not reading your response correctly but it seems your points are all geared to the benefit of the airline. What about the people who are being held captive? Perhaps airports that have schedules so tightly packed should be required to keep equipment on site to offload passengers when the plane is away from the gate. Of course a passenger could fake chest pains. Wonder how fast they find a way to get people off the plane.

Just remember this is the airline's and airport's problem. Not the passenger's problem. You can't forcibly hold someone. I'd like to see a court ruling involving a case where a passenger has demanded to be removed after being held in a jet beyond a reasonable period of time. At some point holding a person against their will should be a crime.

This is what will probably be in your Sunday paper:
http://dailynews.att.net/cgi-bin/new...8&cat=news&st=newsd8nubeo01&src=ap
TPAnx

Quoting Indy (Reply 80): Patience is 2 hours.

Yes, it is, but you previously said that 2 hours is a requirement. In any event, it doesn't change the scenario I gave you where there are creeping ATC delays that put you over the limit. Like I said, you could have been only 2:10 late, but now you'll be 3 or 4. Be careful for you ask for as you may surely receive it.

Quoting Indy (Reply 80): 9 hours is false imprisonment.

Quoting Indy (Reply 80): That would by the way be my defense in any criminal case. Interfering with a flight crew might be a crime but so is false imprisonment.

I'm not a lawyer, but I think the prosecution would have a much easier case to make than someone making a false imprisonment claim case.

Quoting Indy (Reply 80): Maybe I'm not reading your response correctly

You're reading it correctly alright...

Quoting Indy (Reply 80): but it seems your points are all geared to the benefit of the airline.

...but it's not because I'm airline-employed--it's because most of the general public has no idea whatsoever what goes on behind the scenes on the operational side of an airline. As a 27-year dispatcher, I deal with his kind of stuff every day, and the realities I see are different than those outside the industry can comprehend. Do people ever misunderstand things related to whatever industry you happen to be in?

Quoting Indy (Reply 80): What about the people who are being held captive?

You think the airline likes to have them couped up on the aircraft? I know it's no fun, speaking from personal experience, on my own airline, and others. That said, I also know that in most cases, it's unavoidable, and the lesser of multiple evils. What about the people who are "held captive" in a long dead-stop traffic jam caused by a wreck up miles ahead? Is it reasonable to expect the highway department to come out and bulldoze/pave new lanes so you don't have to wait for hours? The more realistic and pragmatic view would be that the freeway runs just fine most of the time, has traffic slowdowns or brief stops during peak AM/PM periods, and will occasionally be a complete parking lot if something really out of the ordinary occurs. Who should the delayed motorists charge with false imprisonment? The driver(s) the accident vehicle(s)? The highway department? My position isn't an arbitrary pro-airline stance, it's basic common sense.

Quoting Indy (Reply 80): Perhaps airports that have schedules so tightly packed should be required to keep equipment on site to offload passengers when the plane is away from the gate.

Yes, there such things as external stairs. They're also made out of metal, and when you throw in freezing precip that's falling, plus that precip on an oily ramp and toss in some glycol-based de-icing fluid here and there, it's an environment that's conducive to unexpected falls and resultant lawsuits. Covered stairs and buses? They're possible, sure, but it goes back to the PHX/LAS snowplow analogy--can any airport operating entity justify the expense of a fleet of stairs/buses sufficient to handle multiple extra aircraft? Try running that past City Hall.

Quoting Indy (Reply 80): Of course a passenger could fake chest pains. Wonder how fast they find a way to get people off the plane.

It's been tried before, and once in awhile it even works, but the paramedics usually see through the ruse. They have a tendency to get rather testy about being called out on false alarms, especially when they were anything but accidental.

Quoting Indy (Reply 80): Just remember this is the airline's and airport's problem. Not the passenger's problem. You can't forcibly hold someone. I'd like to see a court ruling involving a case where a passenger has demanded to be removed after being held in a jet beyond a reasonable period of time. At some point holding a person against their will should be a crime.

It is the passenger's problem, in the sense that it's a deregulated industry, and that expenses have to be justified. If a 100-gate airport wants to go out and spend a few zillion for enough stairs/buses to replicate 40 or 50 extra gates "just in case", that's great, but those costs will be passed on, and they'll eventually be reflected in increased ticket prices, and people will then complain about that. (I figured 40-50 buses, since anything less at a 100-gate airport might result in a planeload of folks having to (gasp!) wait for an available set of stairs and bus.) Once all these extra planeloads of folks are inside the terminal, I suppose we'll then hear how crowded it is...)

Quoting OPNLguy (Reply 82): What about the people who are "held captive" in a long dead-stop traffic jam caused by a wreck up miles ahead?

When is it ever for 9 hours? And if it was that bad you could pull into the emergency land and get out of your car and walk if you wanted without being thrown in prison for it.

I'm curious as to what these airlines do to keep their passengers comfortable that they are holding for 9 hours? Serve them lunch or dinner? After 9 hours lunch and dinner? Do they have enough refreshments on the flight for a 9 hour hold plus the flight? I find it highly unlikely that a judge would side with an airline in a interference with flight crew case where the passenger was held against his will for 9 hours. To expect someone to sit there for 9 hours is excessive and unreasonable. I also find it hard to believe that ATC had no clue about departures for that long. Why does this problem seem unique to JFK? What this tells me as a customer is to avoid JFK. More people should do it. Speak with their pocketbooks. Perhaps that would motivate JFK and the airlines that use it to plan a little better.

Quoting Indy (Reply 83): I also find it hard to believe that ATC had no clue about departures for that long.

So it's ATC's fault that there are no available gates?

Quoting Indy (Reply 83): What this tells me as a customer is to avoid JFK. More people should do it. Speak with their pocketbooks.

Sure, people could do that. But they won't, for the most part, because they'd rather have cheaper fares. If there were a market for an airport that could guarantee that even though the apocalypse may be going on outside, you will not spend more than two hours waiting onboard your plane, somebody would build it. But there isn't.

-Mir

Quoting OPNLguy (Reply 82): It is the passenger's problem, in the sense that it's a deregulated industry, and that expenses have to be justified.

So the passengers - who pay all of an airline's bills - just take all the crap, shrug and say, oh, well, the airline is doing its best?

But - in the case of the Jetblue meltdown - Mr. Neeleman has admitted that the airline wasn't doing its best.

mariner

Quoting Mariner (Reply 85): So the passengers - who pay all of an airline's bills - just take all the crap, shrug and say, oh, well, the airline is doing its best?

None of what I wrote should have been construed as acceptance of a lengthy delay like the jetBlue folks endured. I'd mentioned that in previous threads, but didn't specifically do so in this one.

My comments were specifically directed towards Indy's, who felt there should be a hard two hour limit, and seemed to be under the impression that airlines and airport operating entities could simply break out their magic wands and instantly conjure up dozens of new gates, stairs, buses and other infrastructure in the blink of an eye to mitigate te effects of the delays.

My huge issue is this idea that the airline had no idea that this delay could somehow be extremely lengthy. I can't imagine them having absolutely no idea of what is going on around them. At some point you have to realize what you are doing isn't going to work and you have to do something about it. Are there no provisions for getting passengers off of a plane at JFK away from the gate other than opening the emergency exits? If there was a medical emergency you can bet there would have been a set of stairs over to that jet in a hurry. Which of course makes me ask then why were these people held for 9 hours? For extremely delay prone airports I think stairs and buses should be required. If you are going to use the law to try and protect the flight crew the there should be something in place to protect the passengers from nonsense like this. There is no excuse for this. At some point you go from being a passenger to being a hostage.

Quoting OPNLguy (Reply 86): and seemed to be under the impression that airlines and airport operating entities could simply break out their magic wands and instantly conjure up dozens of new gates, stairs, buses

I could be wrong here, but in the case of the original JetBlue meltdown, did they not eventually call for buses, which were available?

???

mariner

Quoting Mariner (Reply 88): I could be wrong here, but in the case of the original JetBlue meltdown, did they not eventually call for buses, which were available?

I have no idea. Maybe the jetBlue VP can tackle that one...

Quoting OPNLguy (Reply 89): Maybe the jetBlue VP can tackle that one...

Funny. That's funny.  

cheers

mariner

Quoting Indy (Reply 87): If there was a medical emergency you can bet there would have been a set of stairs over to that jet in a hurry.

Yeah, but one person's emergency is completely different from unloading an entire plane away from the gate.

Quoting Indy (Reply 87): My huge issue is this idea that the airline had no idea that this delay could somehow be extremely lengthy. I can't imagine them having absolutely no idea of what is going on around them.

Well, when the weather is going from freezing rain with ice pellets (can't depart) to just freezing rain (can depart after de-ice) and back again, it can look like you can get a few flights out, but then they have to come back in when the weather changes.

-Mir

Quoting Mir (Reply 91): Well, when the weather is going from freezing rain with ice pellets (can't depart) to just freezing rain (can depart after de-ice) and back again, it can look like you can get a few flights out, but then they have to come back in when the weather changes.

I've explained this aspect of the problem (that's new for this past season) several times now, but people just don't seem to get it.

Quoting OPNLguy (Reply 92): but people just don't seem to get it.

A net does have a fair number of people that only want to think their reality is correct when it comes to airline OPS. Since most everyone knows you are a professional in the industry you would think they would listen!

The media seems to have caught on (2nd paragraph).....

http://apnews.myway.com/article/20070318/D8NU8VAG0.html