European Delays Getting Worse?

[billybedeveril]

I've been flying low cost airlines to and from the UK, probably 20 times per year, for the last 10 years or so, mainly to/from Stansted, Gatwick and Luton. I just can't pass up some of the prices, and I accept the inevitable stress of travelling with low cost airlines from these airports. Generally my experience had been ok, neither good nor bad. I've come to expect later flights to be delayed and I understand the baggage policies so I'm not surprised when my bag sometimes gets checked at the gate. There are many things I utterly loathe about these airlines, but, you get what you pay for and once I'm actually at my destination I appreciate the money not spent travelling with a proper carrier.
However, the last 5 evening flights I've taken from European destinations to London have had delays in excess of 90 minutes, and up to 2 hours in some cases. This, to me, is something new in the last year or so, and my long and generally pain-free relationship with low cost carriers is most definitely over. The latest was a 2 hour delay from Bilbao which the pilot blamed on the late arrival of the inbound aircraft. To me, that is not an acceptable excuse. It is saying the flight is late because the flight is late.
It seems to have become accepted and expected that there will be significant flight delays late in the day. But what way is that to run a service? And what is the penalty for the airline for a 90 minute delay? If the compensation only kicks in at 2 hours, then there is no incentive to run realistically scheduled services, so everyone runs late with no comeback.
What I would do is bring in legislation which penalises airlines which cannot meet their scheduled departure/arrival times within a certain margin. Otherwise I believe it is false advertising. So, for example, a flight must have to meet its scheduled arrival times within, say, 15 minutes, 75% of the time. It's like the laws preventing credit card companies from advertising a deal which only 5% of people would actually get. That was banned, and likewise unrealistic flight scheduling should be banned.
Just an idea.. Obviously there would be difficulties, e.g., ATC restrictions outside the airline's control, however, these known unknowns could be planned and catered for with some integrated planning with ATC and airlines to come up with realistic schedules.

[DaveReidUK]

The latest was a 2 hour delay from Bilbao which the pilot blamed on the late arrival of the inbound aircraft. To me, that is not an acceptable excuse. It is saying the flight is late because the flight is late.

Whether you accept it or not, it's a fact of life. Long gone are the days when any airline can afford to have spare aircraft sitting around, or have sufficient fat built into its schedules to absorb delays without having a knock-on effect.

I've been flying low cost airlines to and from the UK, probably 20 times per year, for the last 10 years or so, mainly to/from Stansted, Gatwick and Luton. I just can't pass up some of the prices, and I accept the inevitable stress of travelling with low cost airlines from these airports.

Exactly. One of the main reasons prices are low is that airlines sweat their assets (aircraft) as described above. You can't have it both ways.

[boeing_eng]

I can accept the delays but I wish certain airlines would be far more up-front about them! As normal, I've recently had delays of well over an hour flying back from Europe to the UK. In all cases at around departure time the flights were still showing on-time so the normal tedious queuing process started. In fact, the aircraft were just departing the UK on the outbound leg and it was hit and miss how the delays were reported (but in one case at Bremen with RYR people were queuing for around 70 mins)...bonkers!

[Jarvy]

Myself and Mrs J fly often (Mrs J 55 flights in 18 months) all over the world and I can count on one hand the number of flights that have flown to the schedule.
None of the flights have been with any of the low cost airlines. Worst was a recent BA flight that was 2 hours late because a tug wasn't available so take off slot
missed and next one was 90 mins later!
Just a sign of the time I'm afraid and only going to get worse. No changes to the rules regarding time keep will make any difference.

[Heathrow Harry]

It is definitely getting worse - to the point that traveling on business I often get the flight before the one I'd have taken 20 years ago just to be reasonably certain. On long -haul if there is a critical time and place I have to be it's often getting the flight the day before. You cannot count on the timetables anymore - especially in E USA and Europe... and it's spreading to places like Dubai

[Beavis_]

After six months of weekly travel I've gave up on EasyJet, it seems that around a third of the time their last flight was delayed. Problem for me was I needed to catch the last train* after the flight otherwise I was stuck. RyanAir always seem to be on time, but I was on their early flight.
Noticed that on my (old) route the prices increased for the summer schedule, so its just easier and not much more expensive to use a charter airway (KLM). Only had one slight delay in the last three months.

*often the train was also delayed, which will surprise nobody in the UK!

[Alsacienne]

If you are flying with an airline that provides a 4 sector day (or more) for any given hull, you can realistically expect a 'knock-on' delay by the time the aircraft starts its penultimate sector. It could be due to many things, and the reason given 'late arrival of the inbound aircraft' is often exactly what it is. It would be too easy to condemn any one factor (for example ATC working to rule (or not working at all!) ... hello Marseilles, I'm referring to you!!!!) when the delay can be caused by a variety of factors, all impinging on the flight at the same time.

Might it not be more reasonable to give yourself some extra margin and be kind to yourself when taking a flight? If all goes according to plan (or the published timetable) you have cause for rejoicing and if not, well you're more prepared and hopefully less stressed. If I know where my flight is arriving from, I do tend to use the internet to check the departures board at that aircraft to pre-warn ME of a likely delay ... and then accept that I have more time to fill. Airlines do not tend to warn passengers of late arrivals until the ETA is confirmed - usually once the plane is well down route, and certainly it's rare to be advised landside that a plane will be arriving late and therefore your outgoing flight will be late departing ... they want to get you through security and to the gate on time, regardless of whether you enjoy retail therapy en-route or not!

Both legacy and low-cost companies seem to experience delays. Whilst unpleasant, they cannot necessarily be avoided, and it's probably good to acquire some coping mechanisms to minimise stress. Another cup of coffee anyone?

[Saintsman]

I suppose the conspiracy theorists would say that delays are planned, so that people will spend more in the airport shops whilst they are killing time...

[wiggy]

If you are flying with an airline that provides a 4 sector day (or more) for any given hull, you can realistically expect a 'knock-on' delay by the time the aircraft starts its penultimate sector. It could be due to many things,

+1

Airlines want tighter and tighter turns, both for reasons of aircraft utilisation and crew utilisation. A whole day’s trip, of say 4 sectors is predicated on minimum time on the ground (anything other than that is seen as being inefficient)...it is also not uncommon in some outfits to plan crew right up to the limits of maximum flight duty periods...there is no “fat” in the system.

Now in reality once the day start you get hit by slots, baggage offload, slow push backs, and almost right from the start of sector one the timings of the final sector of the day are a work of fiction...if it gets really bad you can be looking at replacing crew on the final sector because of duty limitations, and that in itself can build in a further delay.

The answer is to build in more fat (extra aircraft extra crew) ..but that costs....

[Reverserbucket]

The truth is that from an en-route perspective, delays in the EU are getting worse. A few stats show that (based on the EC max delay target of 0.5 min/flight), to the end of May 2017, delay per flight in the EU network was 0.46 min (less than target so although not good for pax, falls within acceptable network performance tolerances). Compare that figure with end of May 2018 where delay per flight had increased to 1.05 min and the scale of the problem becomes apparent. Total delay for the whole of 2017 was 9.3 Million minutes but for the period Jan - May 2018 the figure is already 4.3 M (and we've not yet reach the summer season proper), which leads to a projected total delay for 2018 of 14.3M or 53% more delay than 2017 and this is forecast to increase year on year with no additional capacity available within the network, almost no additional runways planned (LHR 3 is not going to mitigate this problem), increased traffic flow through the SW corridor and a huge increase in capacity by the Loco's with no real ability to accommodate. Look at the Boeing and Airbus order books for RYR and U2 alone (then consider the other lowcost operators that didn't exist 5 or 10 years ago) and the number of new routes each opens almost each week and you quickly understand how this level of growth is simply not sustainable. There's also apparently a shortage of experienced pilots, definitely a shortage of air traffic controllers and severe constraints within the system but everyone wants more and the bottom line is that you can only sweat the assets so much before something breaks or else there's a sizable downturn in demand which as history has shown us, tends to happen in cycles in this industry.

[PAXboy]

The good news is that there is a sizeable downturn in demand just around the corner! Since the crash of 2008, no significant structural changes have been made in the financial world or government. Throughout these ten years, most govts (UK in particular have been printing money) Consequently, we have never really climbed out of that trench and the next crash is looming. Problem solved.

[Heathrow Harry]

Good God!! A Monetarist!!!!

I thought they were all extinct... send for Sir David Attenborough................

[billybedeveril]

+1

Airlines want tighter and tighter turns, both for reasons of aircraft utilisation and crew utilisation. A whole day’s trip, of say 4 sectors is predicated on minimum time on the ground (anything other than that is seen as being inefficient)...it is also not uncommon in some outfits to plan crew right up to the limits of maximum flight duty periods...there is no “fat” in the system.

Now in reality once the day start you get hit by slots, baggage offload, slow push backs, and almost right from the start of sector one the timings of the final sector of the day are a work of fiction...if it gets really bad you can be looking at replacing crew on the final sector because of duty limitations, and that in itself can build in a further delay.

The answer is to build in more fat (extra aircraft extra crew) ..but that costs....



Wiggy, in response to building more fat into the timetables, isn't that fat already there within the airline/atc/airport system? I.e., the destination airport of the final sector is not normally closed even if the flight is 1-2 hours late, so why not just schedule the flights to depart at a realistic time so people can plan their onward journeys? I suppose that the risk with that is you have an aircraft sitting on the ground, but if the flight departs, on average, say 30 minutes late, why not schedule the departure time 30 minutes later? That's what I don't understand.

I also agree with this being applicable to most airlines, and long-haul, but to me its exacerbated when short haul flights are delayed.

[PAXboy]

Labels can be changed so I don't take any, all I base my opinions on is watching the world. I am now 61 and have seen enough Booms and Busts to last a lifetime. I do think there are times when govt should support vital aspects of the country but politicians usually can't resist getting carrieed away. Even so called 'independent' banks do so - as they are run by the same thinking people. (The conincidence of thinking by those who have taken PPL at university ...)

Sadly, the next crash is likely to be bigger than the last since, as mentioned, nothing has changed and there is still a vast pile of Soverign debt and other systemic problems.

[rationalfunctions]

Sadly, the next crash is likely to be bigger than the last since, as mentioned, nothing has changed and there is still a vast pile of Soverign debt and other systemic problems.

IATA produced a great brief on this http://www.iata.org/publications/economics/Reports/chart-of-the-week/chart-of-the-week-27-apr-2018.pdf

[wiggy]

Wiggy, in response to building more fat into the timetables, isn't that fat already there within the airline/atc/airport system? I.e., the destination airport of the final sector is not normally closed even if the flight is 1-2 hours late,.

Errr..don’t bet on it. Heathrow has late night landing restrictions and limitations that apply to even the local operators. Some airports (certainly on mainland Europe) are well known to shut up shop at a fixed time late late evening, regardless of late arrivals...or will stay open but charge an absolute fortune (and I mean serious money) because you have breached whatever the local night hours noise regulations are........

so why not just schedule the flights to depart at a realistic time so people can plan their onward journeys? suppose that the risk with that is you have an aircraft sitting on the ground, but if the flight departs, on average, say 30 minutes late, why not schedule the departure time 30 minutes later? That's what I don't understand..

Money....Money ....Money ..aircraft and crew on the ground cost money, lots of it, even for 30 minutes. APU fuel burn, charges for ground air or ground power if you don’t use the APU, ramp/parking charges can often be hundreds of pound/euros an hour.....planning to build extra buffers in on every turnaround and costs go up. If you average (define?) delay is 30 minutes then 50% of flights are actually delayed less than that.....so do you really want to deliberately roll every departure back 30 minutes because of the 50% (and BTW having moved the STD and the whole associated process back 30 minutes you will get further creep e. g. ..at some airports a lack of pushback tugs can cause delays, and changing timings still won’t get you a tug before STD -5, regardless of how long the aircraft has been on the ground...similar will apply for a lot of the support functions..)?

As for crew implications -one example... In the event of an unforeseen long working day with delays resulting in a crew being slightly beyond the duty hours limit the operation might get held together (and people get to destination) because of captain’s discretion to extend working hours...but only he/she can do that at the time, on the day ( I’d add the authority might start to take an interest if it happens on the same trip every day).

OTOH the company can’t plan on using that self same discretion ahead of time, so if the company starts to build “delays” into their rosters/timetables unless their current rate of crew utilisation (in terms of duty hours on an average day) is relatively low they will find they need more crew.

[billybedeveril]

So.. No solution, people resigned to the fact?

Seems like it's destined to get even worse.

[Heathrow Harry]

Only resigned to the practicalities. If you want cheap flights you pay in potential delays

at the top end you want to be CERTAIN Of your flight you hire a private jet... simple...

[redsnail]

Private jets are not immune to ATC delays. We can be "flexible" but ATC issues still dick us around.
This summer has been pretty bad with strikes (Yes, that's France mainly) and ATC shortages around Europe plus capacity issues.

[Hotel Tango]

My regular LCC commute is with Eurowings from DUS to BHX. I average around 20 sectors per year with them alone. Since January 2017 to this day more than 60% of my flights have been delayed in excess of 30 minutes and anything up to 3hrs. It has become a major source of frustration. I'm of the opinion that it is quite simply because of their very tight planned turnaround times in order to maximise aircraft utilisation. There are no longer sufficient buffers incorporated in an aircraft's daily scheduled rotations to recover from any delays which may be picked up during the day.

[billybedeveril]

So how about, legislation which forces airlines to publish historical on-time rates alongside their departure times? I strongly believe its false advertising otherwise. The at least people can make a more informed decision. People will vote with their feet, airlines will be forced to improve.

[PAXboy]

The last 25 years have shown that price tops everything. One simple example. In the UK about 7 years ago, one petrol station chain responded to the customer request about the good old days when you could request the attendant to dispense the fuel. This was introduced with a small fee. How long did the experiment last?

I won't start discussion on how the regulators tend not to be always on the side of pax, suffice to say the the Tombstone Imperative still holds sway.

[DaveReidUK]

There are no longer sufficient buffers incorporated in an aircraft's daily scheduled rotations to recover from any delays which may be picked up during the day.

The question is - how much more would you, and the rest of the travelling public, be prepared to pay in higher fares for the privilege of flying in an aircraft that has spent longer on the ground and less time in the air, and therefore has significantly less revenue-earning potential ?

[Hotel Tango]

The question is - how much more would you, and the rest of the travelling public, be prepared to pay in higher fares for the privilege of flying in an aircraft that has spent longer on the ground and less time in the air, and therefore has significantly less revenue-earning potential ?


There's the problem. Unlike most of today's younger (than me) generation, I don't focus purely on price. I always believe in a fair price for a fair deal. In my life time fares have gone from one extreme (extortionate) to the other extreme (ridiculous) and consequently standards have followed suit. Never mind no free booze/food/checked bags, sardine-like seat pitch and all that, but at the very least be on bloody time! If I take Eurowings as mentioned above, what's the point of me forking out for their €1100-1400 so-called "Business Class" fare to BHX only to suffer the same outrageous delays as the €120-250 fares at the back? Punctuality is not a standard to be ignored!

[Heathrow Harry]

It's worse than we think - even if I , as CEO of Harry Airways, decree that my airline will build in more recovery time it doesn't make much difference if Birdseed, O'Leary and Squeezzy continue their bad habits - the whole airline business is now really an LCO model and EVERYONE is pushing turnaround times and utilisation to the limits - all airports are clogged and schedules disrupted all the time

[Piltdown Man]

The system that currently exists is clogged. There are too many flights, insufficient controllers, strange national ATC boundaries, restrictive rules and precious little investment in modernisation. Couple that to rapacious management who flog their employees to death and you end up with what we have today. Only a fraction of flights will arrive on time, most will be delayed on departure and at times enroute. The problem has been getting gradually worse for years yet the marvellous Eurocrats who are responsible have done nothing to fix it. And if they do try, who pays? Squeezing and extra pound out of a LoCo passenger to fund ATC when they have only paid 99p might be difficult, especially if another quid is required to ensure they have a pilot.

PM

[zed3]

Piltdown, One begs to differ with your generalisation. The system is not clogged 'per se'. In central Europe I would think that there are 'enough' controllers, although there could be more. The problem to my mind is that 'managers' and HR have taken over the situation, leading to the 'optimum solution' result. In the ATC world this is never a problem solver as there are too many variables. The so-called Eurocrats you mention are not the problem, one presumes you are meaning Brussels... ie. the EU. The ATC management involved within Europe (39 +/- countries) is tasked to Eurocontrol, also headquartered in Brussels but also responsible for the Maastricht UAC in The Netherlands. This ATC centre was the first multi-national unit opened in 1972 and since then has been a forerunner for ATC in Europe. Direct routings were started there when the Brussels upper airspace was active under Eurocontrol before moving to Maastricht. I know as I was there and part of it until 2013. Telephone calls to 'France control' for direct Pontoise and EVX were the norm... and we later built on that in all directions. This is the basis if the modern European flexible airspace model.
As an aside, I remember in 1971, I believe, a Caledonian B707 out of Gatwick to Singapore and that was the first time I had seen WSSS on a flight plan. He requested a 'direct anywhere as we are trying for the record'. I called Rhine to ask direct KRH (Karlsruhr) and asked them to coordinate further. We eventually received direct Klagenfurt and he was sent on his way. Two days later I read in the Daily Telegraph that a Caledonian B707 had broken the record for a non-stop flight to Singapore. Nice feeling that and it was just the beginning.

[Heathrow Harry]

It's not Europe that is the problem, it's 30nations and their unions all trying to retain autonomy when a 5 yr old can see we need europe wide organised ATC

[Bergerie1]

HH,

It's not just the unions, it's the DGCAs too. But you are right about the need for a total European solution.

[Porky Speedpig]

It is still possible to be punctual within Europe - last year and the year before Iberia was the most punctual network carrier in the world and Iberia Express the most punctual LCC.
I worked tangentially with Iberia on their initiatives to build this position and they took a forensic approach, invested heavily to "fix" their problems and then applied intelligent cost cutting. See also the IAG annual report for major improvements at BA, VY and EI. A former colleague of mine always opined "you can't be profitable and punctual". Willie may be proving him wrong.

[rationalfunctions]

Porky, are you able to share some of the initiatives that have been most successful? And what exactly do you mean a forensic approach - was this a six sigma-esque analysis into the cause of delay, or a different approach?

[Porky Speedpig]

Porky, are you able to share some of the initiatives that have been most successful? And what exactly do you mean a forensic approach - was this a six sigma-esque analysis into the cause of delay, or a different approach?

Yes it was and yes I would be happy to (for a fee of course!). I note your location HKG, I fly through there regularly and they could use my help!

[rationalfunctions]

Thanks! I'm personally not quite your target market though, just curious if there was any best practice learnings...
But yes, as a regular item of SLF through HKG if you can reduce some of the delays here it would be much appreciated :ok:

[WHBM]

Poor punctuality has various implications. One is that carriers, in trying for the same number of rotations per day, have pushed first wave start times forward from the old 0730 to nearer 0600, while at the other end scheduled arrival times close to midnight, with regular late arrivals of 0100 etc, are increasingly common. One knock-on is that such times make public transport to/from the airport increasingly impossible, the opposite of general policy, although if it drives up airport revenue from increased car parking that must be, secretly of course, pleasing them.

[PAXboy]

Not to mention the taxi drivers who, apart fdrom charging us a late night supplement, also have to pay a high levy to the airport.

[GEB74]

Couple of personal comments...

Local airport is MAN. Due to security delays, most first wave flights leave 30-45 minutes late. With tight turnarounds a 4/6 sector aircraft on tight turnaround never recovers during the day.

Airlines such as RYR with 25 minute turnarounds frequently fail to achieve this at all but the quietest / most organised stations. On RYR I normally book the central overwing exit seats - from there it’s often a 10-15 wait to exit the aircraft, there’s no way they can achieve 25 minute turns. The delays build despite their schedule padding.

Some airlines pad their schedules like crazy to compensate. Example - was on an EK flight from DEL to DXB yesterday.
Left 25 late due to ‘late arrival of aircraft from DXB’ -
we actually arrived into DXB 15 early despite arriving into the busiest flight wave bank and once round the hold on approach. So on a schedule 3 hour flight we ‘made up’ 40 minutes despite a 10 minute hold. How is that ‘possible’? Airlines will just pad their published schedules further if enough people complain. Nothing ‘real’ will change!.....

[Hotel Tango]

Bear in mind that it's not just padding that contributes to an early arrival on long hauls but tail winds too. I'm no scheduler but I would assume that scheds are calculated on known upper wind averages and known airport congestion at certain peak times etc. It's not unusual to leave the gate at JFK 30 mins behind schedule, taxi for 45 mins before taking off and, thanks to a particularly powerful jet stream, arrive at your European destination 30-60 mins ahead of schedule! It is much more difficult to make up time on short sectors.