“Delayed due to operational reasons”
Paxing All Over The World
Reminds me of a LTN-EDI arond 2001. I was commuting to a contract there and it was a Sunday, last out. As we taxied in, the CC started the standard 'Welcome' announcement. But one can only have sympathy for the crew member who was on the last of 6 rotations that day and started, "Ladies & Gentlemen, welcome to ..." and stopped. I imagine they were then looking out of the window to see what looked familiar. As one, a chorus arose from the pax, "Edinburgh!" It was a really cheering moment.
Hmm, perhaps I should have put this in the 'Cheer up SoS' thread.
Hmm, perhaps I should have put this in the 'Cheer up SoS' thread.
PPRuNe Handmaiden
A flight I did yesterday had a CTOT allocated because of French ATC constraints but we also had 30 minutes in the hold on arrival into Switzerland because of the runways in use. 2 separate causes for the delayed arrival.
CTOT. Calculated Take Off Time. Essentially when you can join the airways (motorway).
Different to airport slot, when you can taxi off.
CTOT. Calculated Take Off Time. Essentially when you can join the airways (motorway).
Different to airport slot, when you can taxi off.
Son of Slot
Super Senior Moderator
Super Senior Moderator
Many thanks redsnail. That's one piece of the jigsaw not normally known about. We can only imagine the arguments as to whose fault the delay was.
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Beyond the Blue Horizon
Age: 63
Posts: 1,257
Received 152 Likes
on
95 Posts
I have to say I must be lucky as I have not experienced that many delays, and the ones I have experienced are in the 50 min category and are often caught up in flight by the airline especially on long haul. What I can say having flown around this planet Man and Boy my memory of the delays say pre 1980 was that they were often longer, indeed not uncommon to have a hole day even when at an airlines hub. BCAL from Gatwick for instance took me to Santiago 3 times and New York once via Brighton that I clearly remember, but somehow you did not seem to complain so much. BEA ,TWA , PAN AM also left me stuck in Edinburgh, JFK, St Louis all over night before I was 18 and travelling too and from home to school. The service side and space were better, but I do not think the A/C were as reliable as now, and weather played a bigger part than currently is the case. It just seems we have become a species especially in the developed world where slight hold up and snags get blown out of all proportion to the event involved and of course we have a very driven compensation culture now in certain countries (thanks USA).
Kind regards
Mr Mac (getting older SLF)
Kind regards
Mr Mac (getting older SLF)
It just seems we have become a species especially in the developed world where slight hold up and snags get blown out of all proportion
I had booked a cruise to the South Pacific for myself and 3 children (1 is at uni in Adelaide) so booked the flights giving about 24 hours before boarding the ship.
SMS message at 10:50 flight delayed due engineering requirements departure 16:35.
SMS message at 10.56 flight delayed due engineering requirements departure 16:55.
SMS message at 11:55 flight delayed due engineering requirements departure 19:35.
During the last 2 SMS's I tried to get some more detail on back up plan if aircraft stays U/S or crew run out of duty time and flight need to be cancelled.
Basically weighing up all options to get to the port in time to make the cruise.
I got no info from the airline and was simply told I could get a refund on my tickets, the only other flights for the 3 of us to get to port in time was the following morning business class on another airline. This gave us around 1 hour to get to the port - not ideal.
I contacted my travel insurance company to see if the cost of the business class tickets would be covered as they were cheaper than the cruise - you can put in a claim but it is not really covered, you might get lucky. Also turns out the cruise is not covered by insurance because I could not make it because of engineering requirements. A bit shocked at this stage.
I some how found out the inbound flight was delayed (think I rang the local airport) and from memory it was weather. I got on to flight tracker and found it still had not left that airport. After about 15 mins I saw it take off and was somewhat relieved, we had a chance to make the cruise.
* Delays are fine and will happen just don't report it until you have information and plans to tell the SLF so they can make plans accordingly.
In this case they jumped the gun by an hour in delaying the flight.
They would have been better saying the inbound flight #xxx has been delayed (has departed/ is expected to depart).
If your flight can not depart by xx:xx time it will need to be cancelled/delayed due to crew duty hour limits set by law.
If the delay is at the airport then the cause of the delay should be known by the captain and in his absence the rest of crew in seniority.
The SMS could be sent to pax
Delayed due to
sick crew
late catering
weather
need more fuel
ground service equipment failure
paperwork discrepancies
or what ever is most relevant and give a realistic delay time.
SMS message at 10:50 flight delayed due engineering requirements departure 16:35.
SMS message at 10.56 flight delayed due engineering requirements departure 16:55.
SMS message at 11:55 flight delayed due engineering requirements departure 19:35.
During the last 2 SMS's I tried to get some more detail on back up plan if aircraft stays U/S or crew run out of duty time and flight need to be cancelled.
Basically weighing up all options to get to the port in time to make the cruise.
I got no info from the airline and was simply told I could get a refund on my tickets, the only other flights for the 3 of us to get to port in time was the following morning business class on another airline. This gave us around 1 hour to get to the port - not ideal.
I contacted my travel insurance company to see if the cost of the business class tickets would be covered as they were cheaper than the cruise - you can put in a claim but it is not really covered, you might get lucky. Also turns out the cruise is not covered by insurance because I could not make it because of engineering requirements. A bit shocked at this stage.
I some how found out the inbound flight was delayed (think I rang the local airport) and from memory it was weather. I got on to flight tracker and found it still had not left that airport. After about 15 mins I saw it take off and was somewhat relieved, we had a chance to make the cruise.
* Delays are fine and will happen just don't report it until you have information and plans to tell the SLF so they can make plans accordingly.
In this case they jumped the gun by an hour in delaying the flight.
They would have been better saying the inbound flight #xxx has been delayed (has departed/ is expected to depart).
If your flight can not depart by xx:xx time it will need to be cancelled/delayed due to crew duty hour limits set by law.
If the delay is at the airport then the cause of the delay should be known by the captain and in his absence the rest of crew in seniority.
The SMS could be sent to pax
Delayed due to
sick crew
late catering
weather
need more fuel
ground service equipment failure
paperwork discrepancies
or what ever is most relevant and give a realistic delay time.
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: moraira,spain-Norfolk, UK
Age: 82
Posts: 389
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Taking 2 long cruises next year ending in Rome. Was going to take a couple
of days there, visit with il Papa, would mean back in UK 29th March.
I think the Italians will let me leave, what about entry to UK ?
Maybe the airlines will not fly that day ?
Maybe I should play it safe.
John
of days there, visit with il Papa, would mean back in UK 29th March.
I think the Italians will let me leave, what about entry to UK ?
Maybe the airlines will not fly that day ?
Maybe I should play it safe.
John
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Wherever I go, there I am
Age: 43
Posts: 804
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Bend Alot,
Let me add some context of why what you suggest is often impossible:
Unfortunately, there are many times where we know the flight will be delayed, but we don't know by how long.
Take a maintenance issue discovered as the crew gets onto the airplane. Is this a 5-minute delay or a flight cancellation? We won't necessarily know until maintenance can diagnose the issue, go through their repair strategy in a logical manner, identify the need for spares, search for spares, obtain spares, install spares, test systems, and then complete the paperwork. Maybe the spare parts are not available and the system cannot be deferred. Or maybe there are spares, but what normally takes 10-minutes to drive, do the proper sign-out paperwork, and drive back will take 50-minutes today because the airport is doing construction on the vehicle access road, they are down to a single runway due to winds, and the maintenance guys have to cross the runway to get to the shop - otherwise it'll be closer to 120 minutes to drive the long way around (I'd like to say I am kidding about this, but a similar situation happened to me last year).
As an example, I once had an identical radio issue with two airplanes in about two days. In the first instance, the repair was completed in 10-minutes and we departed five minutes ahead of schedule. In the second instance, we had to swap to another airplane after maintenance attempted the most common fixes, including the one that had worked for me previously. We really did not know how long the delay would be, with every subsequent fix attempt just as likely to work as the one before or after, so we swapped once an airplane that would be sitting for a couple hours came in. But that airplane needed to be fueled (out of sequence), a new flight plan filed, all the applicable system checks completed, and up to 15 minutes given for the fluorescent floor lighting on the new airplane to energize because the lighting had been off for just too long. All of this might result in a 20-minute delay on a good day or a 3-hour delay on a bad day. Add in an ATC slot time, and you might find the flight now needs to be cancelled due to crew restrictions. A lot of this information builds on one another, so we often cannot give an accurate time for passengers to make their plans.
So, what starts as an engineering problem morphs into a fuel issue, which morphs into an ATC issue, and culminates in a crewing issue. If the airline were to let passengers know the actual reason for a delay, outside of "operational issues," that airline would look incompetent to the untrained eye. While you frequent a forum where line pilots share their experiences, the vast majority of passengers do not. They really do see flying as jumping on a bus. I've had passengers ask me on landing after a diversion why we couldn't have just refuelled the airplane in the air because they "saw it on the Discovery Channel." They're not stupid or incompetent, they're just out of their element, and too much information (detailed delayed codes) will often make the situation worse. They don't know a 737 cannot refuel in flight, but they know they saw an airplane do it on Channel 804.
Alright, as for telling you what time the crew will duty out...it's not for you to know. Sorry that comes off a little short, but it's true. If you're dealing in the short-haul or medium-haul environment, not all the crew may duty out at the same time. Also, crew scheduling might be working on a plan that will negate any crewing issues, especially where a base is concerned. Also, the last thing I need when I am dealing with an issue that is delaying a flight is a passenger yelling in the terminal or in the airplane for me to hurry up and "do my job." That's an added level of stress I just don't need as a Captain. It's also a level of stress the average passenger does not need, as they'll just end up looking at their watch and begin to harass the gate agents as the time creeps nearer to that deadline.
As for the crew knowing of a delay...yep, I wish that happened. But as people above me have said, poop flows downhill, and the pilots are often the last to know because there is no sense in telling them anything until there are solid facts. As you can see from above, there are often no solid facts for quite some time, so the crew often finds out just before the passengers. Heck, in my airline the operations department will tell the gate agents of issues through text at the same time they tell the dispatcher. As the dispatcher tells me, the passengers often find out a couple of minutes before I do! So it really does depend on where the delay is coming from, and who finds out first.
Let me add some context of why what you suggest is often impossible:
* Delays are fine and will happen just don't report it until you have information and plans to tell the SLF so they can make plans accordingly.
In this case they jumped the gun by an hour in delaying the flight.
They would have been better saying the inbound flight #xxx has been delayed (has departed/ is expected to depart).
If your flight can not depart by xx:xx time it will need to be cancelled/delayed due to crew duty hour limits set by law.
If the delay is at the airport then the cause of the delay should be known by the captain and in his absence the rest of crew in seniority.
The SMS could be sent to pax
Delayed due to
sick crew
late catering
weather
need more fuel
ground service equipment failure
paperwork discrepancies
or what ever is most relevant and give a realistic delay time.
In this case they jumped the gun by an hour in delaying the flight.
They would have been better saying the inbound flight #xxx has been delayed (has departed/ is expected to depart).
If your flight can not depart by xx:xx time it will need to be cancelled/delayed due to crew duty hour limits set by law.
If the delay is at the airport then the cause of the delay should be known by the captain and in his absence the rest of crew in seniority.
The SMS could be sent to pax
Delayed due to
sick crew
late catering
weather
need more fuel
ground service equipment failure
paperwork discrepancies
or what ever is most relevant and give a realistic delay time.
Take a maintenance issue discovered as the crew gets onto the airplane. Is this a 5-minute delay or a flight cancellation? We won't necessarily know until maintenance can diagnose the issue, go through their repair strategy in a logical manner, identify the need for spares, search for spares, obtain spares, install spares, test systems, and then complete the paperwork. Maybe the spare parts are not available and the system cannot be deferred. Or maybe there are spares, but what normally takes 10-minutes to drive, do the proper sign-out paperwork, and drive back will take 50-minutes today because the airport is doing construction on the vehicle access road, they are down to a single runway due to winds, and the maintenance guys have to cross the runway to get to the shop - otherwise it'll be closer to 120 minutes to drive the long way around (I'd like to say I am kidding about this, but a similar situation happened to me last year).
As an example, I once had an identical radio issue with two airplanes in about two days. In the first instance, the repair was completed in 10-minutes and we departed five minutes ahead of schedule. In the second instance, we had to swap to another airplane after maintenance attempted the most common fixes, including the one that had worked for me previously. We really did not know how long the delay would be, with every subsequent fix attempt just as likely to work as the one before or after, so we swapped once an airplane that would be sitting for a couple hours came in. But that airplane needed to be fueled (out of sequence), a new flight plan filed, all the applicable system checks completed, and up to 15 minutes given for the fluorescent floor lighting on the new airplane to energize because the lighting had been off for just too long. All of this might result in a 20-minute delay on a good day or a 3-hour delay on a bad day. Add in an ATC slot time, and you might find the flight now needs to be cancelled due to crew restrictions. A lot of this information builds on one another, so we often cannot give an accurate time for passengers to make their plans.
So, what starts as an engineering problem morphs into a fuel issue, which morphs into an ATC issue, and culminates in a crewing issue. If the airline were to let passengers know the actual reason for a delay, outside of "operational issues," that airline would look incompetent to the untrained eye. While you frequent a forum where line pilots share their experiences, the vast majority of passengers do not. They really do see flying as jumping on a bus. I've had passengers ask me on landing after a diversion why we couldn't have just refuelled the airplane in the air because they "saw it on the Discovery Channel." They're not stupid or incompetent, they're just out of their element, and too much information (detailed delayed codes) will often make the situation worse. They don't know a 737 cannot refuel in flight, but they know they saw an airplane do it on Channel 804.
Alright, as for telling you what time the crew will duty out...it's not for you to know. Sorry that comes off a little short, but it's true. If you're dealing in the short-haul or medium-haul environment, not all the crew may duty out at the same time. Also, crew scheduling might be working on a plan that will negate any crewing issues, especially where a base is concerned. Also, the last thing I need when I am dealing with an issue that is delaying a flight is a passenger yelling in the terminal or in the airplane for me to hurry up and "do my job." That's an added level of stress I just don't need as a Captain. It's also a level of stress the average passenger does not need, as they'll just end up looking at their watch and begin to harass the gate agents as the time creeps nearer to that deadline.
As for the crew knowing of a delay...yep, I wish that happened. But as people above me have said, poop flows downhill, and the pilots are often the last to know because there is no sense in telling them anything until there are solid facts. As you can see from above, there are often no solid facts for quite some time, so the crew often finds out just before the passengers. Heck, in my airline the operations department will tell the gate agents of issues through text at the same time they tell the dispatcher. As the dispatcher tells me, the passengers often find out a couple of minutes before I do! So it really does depend on where the delay is coming from, and who finds out first.
Son of Slot
Super Senior Moderator
Super Senior Moderator
+TSRA Thank you very much for taking time to give us such a detailed breakdown and the way in which a fault can progress for five minutes to canx. The sequence of problems to collect a part is highly instructive. Sadly, I think there is no possible way to elucidate the overall picture to the pax, when it changes so rapidly.
It might help if people knew the difference between pushback time (which is the one airlines advertise because it is the time when all pax need to be boarded and sat strapped in) and take off time. I hear soooo many people sitting on aeroplanes saying "well this is bad, we are late already, we'll never take off at 16.35, we are at least 20 minutes late" when in fact it's 16.30 and we're ready to push, TOBT is 16.35, for a TTOT of 17.05 and an arrival in Malaga (i.e. EIBT) at 19.40 with the actual airborne time 2 hrs 15 mins, so it'll probably actually arrive 15 mins early.
[all times in Z rather than L to make my point]
[all times in Z rather than L to make my point]
Join Date: Jun 1999
Location: world
Posts: 3,424
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
All interesting and valid points without question (most of which the majority of educated passengers are well aware of). However, in my opinion at least, I think, arguably, that we have now moved a long way from the original point of the thread. In respect of +TSRA's post I am reminded of a couple of relatively recent experiences with a German operator where the length of the delay was undetermined due to technical reasons. We were however kept well and factually informed by the ground staff and, in one case, the Captain. It was very well handled and consequently no pax got agitated or felt the need to vent their frustrations at the gate staff or (later) the crew.
Paxing All Over The World
It is my hunch that pax are now understanding that the listed 'Departure Time' is 'Time To Be Onboard'! Whilst all carriers now build in large amounts of 'padding' to their schedules, they also make a real show of arrival times. (Some more than others ..)
I certainly agree with +TSRA that customers are all too ready to consider the supplier (not just airlines but ALL companies) as incompetent and the availability of 'electronic lynching' can only be met by the carrier being on the ball to respond online to those twit messages. However, to do that requires more staff and, ever since money was invented, people have shown that they want to spend as little as possible to get the maximum.
Which is why I think this is more of a transitory problem. New generations of pax are learning this from Day One, the older pax have to re-learn what they understood of airline timetables being like railway timetables. New generations growing up with the LCC 'everything is an optional extra' understand better and will, I trust, be more understanding. Meanwhile, the ground and air crews have to put up with the ill informed and those quick to judge.
I certainly agree with +TSRA that customers are all too ready to consider the supplier (not just airlines but ALL companies) as incompetent and the availability of 'electronic lynching' can only be met by the carrier being on the ball to respond online to those twit messages. However, to do that requires more staff and, ever since money was invented, people have shown that they want to spend as little as possible to get the maximum.
Which is why I think this is more of a transitory problem. New generations of pax are learning this from Day One, the older pax have to re-learn what they understood of airline timetables being like railway timetables. New generations growing up with the LCC 'everything is an optional extra' understand better and will, I trust, be more understanding. Meanwhile, the ground and air crews have to put up with the ill informed and those quick to judge.
Bend Alot,
Let me add some context of why what you suggest is often impossible:
Unfortunately, there are many times where we know the flight will be delayed, but we don't know by how long.
Take a maintenance issue discovered as the crew gets onto the airplane. Is this a 5-minute delay or a flight cancellation? We won't necessarily know until maintenance can diagnose the issue, go through their repair strategy in a logical manner, identify the need for spares, search for spares, obtain spares, install spares, test systems, and then complete the paperwork. Maybe the spare parts are not available and the system cannot be deferred. Or maybe there are spares, but what normally takes 10-minutes to drive, do the proper sign-out paperwork, and drive back will take 50-minutes today because the airport is doing construction on the vehicle access road, they are down to a single runway due to winds, and the maintenance guys have to cross the runway to get to the shop - otherwise it'll be closer to 120 minutes to drive the long way around (I'd like to say I am kidding about this, but a similar situation happened to me last year).
As an example, I once had an identical radio issue with two airplanes in about two days. In the first instance, the repair was completed in 10-minutes and we departed five minutes ahead of schedule. In the second instance, we had to swap to another airplane after maintenance attempted the most common fixes, including the one that had worked for me previously. We really did not know how long the delay would be, with every subsequent fix attempt just as likely to work as the one before or after, so we swapped once an airplane that would be sitting for a couple hours came in. But that airplane needed to be fueled (out of sequence), a new flight plan filed, all the applicable system checks completed, and up to 15 minutes given for the fluorescent floor lighting on the new airplane to energize because the lighting had been off for just too long. All of this might result in a 20-minute delay on a good day or a 3-hour delay on a bad day. Add in an ATC slot time, and you might find the flight now needs to be cancelled due to crew restrictions. A lot of this information builds on one another, so we often cannot give an accurate time for passengers to make their plans.
So, what starts as an engineering problem morphs into a fuel issue, which morphs into an ATC issue, and culminates in a crewing issue. If the airline were to let passengers know the actual reason for a delay, outside of "operational issues," that airline would look incompetent to the untrained eye. While you frequent a forum where line pilots share their experiences, the vast majority of passengers do not. They really do see flying as jumping on a bus. I've had passengers ask me on landing after a diversion why we couldn't have just refuelled the airplane in the air because they "saw it on the Discovery Channel." They're not stupid or incompetent, they're just out of their element, and too much information (detailed delayed codes) will often make the situation worse. They don't know a 737 cannot refuel in flight, but they know they saw an airplane do it on Channel 804.
Alright, as for telling you what time the crew will duty out...it's not for you to know. Sorry that comes off a little short, but it's true. If you're dealing in the short-haul or medium-haul environment, not all the crew may duty out at the same time. Also, crew scheduling might be working on a plan that will negate any crewing issues, especially where a base is concerned. Also, the last thing I need when I am dealing with an issue that is delaying a flight is a passenger yelling in the terminal or in the airplane for me to hurry up and "do my job." That's an added level of stress I just don't need as a Captain. It's also a level of stress the average passenger does not need, as they'll just end up looking at their watch and begin to harass the gate agents as the time creeps nearer to that deadline.
As for the crew knowing of a delay...yep, I wish that happened. But as people above me have said, poop flows downhill, and the pilots are often the last to know because there is no sense in telling them anything until there are solid facts. As you can see from above, there are often no solid facts for quite some time, so the crew often finds out just before the passengers. Heck, in my airline the operations department will tell the gate agents of issues through text at the same time they tell the dispatcher. As the dispatcher tells me, the passengers often find out a couple of minutes before I do! So it really does depend on where the delay is coming from, and who finds out first.
Let me add some context of why what you suggest is often impossible:
Unfortunately, there are many times where we know the flight will be delayed, but we don't know by how long.
Take a maintenance issue discovered as the crew gets onto the airplane. Is this a 5-minute delay or a flight cancellation? We won't necessarily know until maintenance can diagnose the issue, go through their repair strategy in a logical manner, identify the need for spares, search for spares, obtain spares, install spares, test systems, and then complete the paperwork. Maybe the spare parts are not available and the system cannot be deferred. Or maybe there are spares, but what normally takes 10-minutes to drive, do the proper sign-out paperwork, and drive back will take 50-minutes today because the airport is doing construction on the vehicle access road, they are down to a single runway due to winds, and the maintenance guys have to cross the runway to get to the shop - otherwise it'll be closer to 120 minutes to drive the long way around (I'd like to say I am kidding about this, but a similar situation happened to me last year).
As an example, I once had an identical radio issue with two airplanes in about two days. In the first instance, the repair was completed in 10-minutes and we departed five minutes ahead of schedule. In the second instance, we had to swap to another airplane after maintenance attempted the most common fixes, including the one that had worked for me previously. We really did not know how long the delay would be, with every subsequent fix attempt just as likely to work as the one before or after, so we swapped once an airplane that would be sitting for a couple hours came in. But that airplane needed to be fueled (out of sequence), a new flight plan filed, all the applicable system checks completed, and up to 15 minutes given for the fluorescent floor lighting on the new airplane to energize because the lighting had been off for just too long. All of this might result in a 20-minute delay on a good day or a 3-hour delay on a bad day. Add in an ATC slot time, and you might find the flight now needs to be cancelled due to crew restrictions. A lot of this information builds on one another, so we often cannot give an accurate time for passengers to make their plans.
So, what starts as an engineering problem morphs into a fuel issue, which morphs into an ATC issue, and culminates in a crewing issue. If the airline were to let passengers know the actual reason for a delay, outside of "operational issues," that airline would look incompetent to the untrained eye. While you frequent a forum where line pilots share their experiences, the vast majority of passengers do not. They really do see flying as jumping on a bus. I've had passengers ask me on landing after a diversion why we couldn't have just refuelled the airplane in the air because they "saw it on the Discovery Channel." They're not stupid or incompetent, they're just out of their element, and too much information (detailed delayed codes) will often make the situation worse. They don't know a 737 cannot refuel in flight, but they know they saw an airplane do it on Channel 804.
Alright, as for telling you what time the crew will duty out...it's not for you to know. Sorry that comes off a little short, but it's true. If you're dealing in the short-haul or medium-haul environment, not all the crew may duty out at the same time. Also, crew scheduling might be working on a plan that will negate any crewing issues, especially where a base is concerned. Also, the last thing I need when I am dealing with an issue that is delaying a flight is a passenger yelling in the terminal or in the airplane for me to hurry up and "do my job." That's an added level of stress I just don't need as a Captain. It's also a level of stress the average passenger does not need, as they'll just end up looking at their watch and begin to harass the gate agents as the time creeps nearer to that deadline.
As for the crew knowing of a delay...yep, I wish that happened. But as people above me have said, poop flows downhill, and the pilots are often the last to know because there is no sense in telling them anything until there are solid facts. As you can see from above, there are often no solid facts for quite some time, so the crew often finds out just before the passengers. Heck, in my airline the operations department will tell the gate agents of issues through text at the same time they tell the dispatcher. As the dispatcher tells me, the passengers often find out a couple of minutes before I do! So it really does depend on where the delay is coming from, and who finds out first.
A senior or chief for many years since 1990.
Never had to deal with a delay in my life!
But the pilot or A/C owner was always informed and with a deal of accuracy as not just to the delay but also the cost/s.
Paxing All Over The World
Another example of how modern companies deal with time: Have you noticed that an item to be delivered by post/courier, generally gives a date anything up to 14 days in advance of when it arrives? Naturally, they have to allow for delays beyond their control in non-time dependent postal services but I had an item arrive today where (at purchase) they stated " Estimated delivery Wed, 24 Oct - Thu, 22 Nov " so that's a week early by any measure and they can claim extra 'stars' for things arriving promptly.
It's called 'Managing Expectations'.
It's called 'Managing Expectations'.
What's annoying about "operational reasons"?
Alternatives are "technical reasons" or "weather".
It is then up to the speaker to decide whether to amplify on these and risk offering too much information, an easy trap to fall into as the travelling public are equally as eager to read things into what you didn't actually say as they are ignorant about the complexity of airline operations. Say "For technical reasons, actually they had a hydraulic leak" and a proportion of the pax will freak out thinking they're shortly going to die and another few will be spreading alarm and despondency by loudly suggestin the engineers will just bodge the repair until it gets back to base because everyone knows that's what airline mechanics do, if they even actually found out what's really wrong. "Are you telling us there's something wrong with the x/y/z and you still expect us to get on that plane and fly on it?" or "How do we know they fixed it properly?" is the sort of nonsense all too commonly heard. Sometimes the less said the better. Otherwise you'll get in a converssation with some smart alec keen to demonstrate his superior knowledge of the subject in question and he's out to make a point. Believe me, this really happens!
Equally fudging the issue and especially not telling the truth is hazardous too. It's a skill that takes some learning, like filling in reports; generally the less said the less there is to hang you with but don't hide significant information.
If staff don't ahve the skill, information or ability to say the right thing it's best they say s little as possible, annoying as it may be to those who want to know more.
The thing pax so often seem to forget is that the airline isn't doing a delay for fun, to annoy them or (usually) because of their incompetence. They hate delays as much as the pax and the slow turning of the wheels is a sign of the complexity of an airline/airport operation, not sloth or disinterest.
Alternatives are "technical reasons" or "weather".
It is then up to the speaker to decide whether to amplify on these and risk offering too much information, an easy trap to fall into as the travelling public are equally as eager to read things into what you didn't actually say as they are ignorant about the complexity of airline operations. Say "For technical reasons, actually they had a hydraulic leak" and a proportion of the pax will freak out thinking they're shortly going to die and another few will be spreading alarm and despondency by loudly suggestin the engineers will just bodge the repair until it gets back to base because everyone knows that's what airline mechanics do, if they even actually found out what's really wrong. "Are you telling us there's something wrong with the x/y/z and you still expect us to get on that plane and fly on it?" or "How do we know they fixed it properly?" is the sort of nonsense all too commonly heard. Sometimes the less said the better. Otherwise you'll get in a converssation with some smart alec keen to demonstrate his superior knowledge of the subject in question and he's out to make a point. Believe me, this really happens!
Equally fudging the issue and especially not telling the truth is hazardous too. It's a skill that takes some learning, like filling in reports; generally the less said the less there is to hang you with but don't hide significant information.
If staff don't ahve the skill, information or ability to say the right thing it's best they say s little as possible, annoying as it may be to those who want to know more.
The thing pax so often seem to forget is that the airline isn't doing a delay for fun, to annoy them or (usually) because of their incompetence. They hate delays as much as the pax and the slow turning of the wheels is a sign of the complexity of an airline/airport operation, not sloth or disinterest.
Just be honest, straight forward, truthful and "up front".
They hate delays as much as the pax and the slow turning of the wheels is a sign of the complexity of an airline/airport operation, not sloth or disinterest.
Last edited by Planemike; 18th Oct 2018 at 19:38.
Paxing All Over The World
Equally fudging the issue and especially not telling the truth is hazardous too.
<edit>
The thing pax so often seem to forget is that the airline isn't doing a delay for fun, to annoy them or (usually) because of their incompetence. They hate delays as much as the pax and the slow turning of the wheels is a sign of the complexity of an airline/airport operation, not sloth or disinterest.
<edit>
The thing pax so often seem to forget is that the airline isn't doing a delay for fun, to annoy them or (usually) because of their incompetence. They hate delays as much as the pax and the slow turning of the wheels is a sign of the complexity of an airline/airport operation, not sloth or disinterest.
Join Date: Nov 2017
Location: UK
Posts: 47
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
However this is what happens.
Do you want us to detail the reasons? 'Well at 6am today Mickey the baggage holder was a bit slow and then I couldn't find the headset guy to confirm good to push so got stuck behind a bloody BA Nigel... coupled with London airport traffic never gonna get that time back so there is your first 10 minutes and oh ya the French gave us a 1 hour slot which screwed us for the day'
Flying in Europe these days - which is generally operating at 105% of capacity - just gives us so many opportunities to be screwed if we listed them all to you we would need to generate a new delay code for that!
Do you want us to detail the reasons? 'Well at 6am today Mickey the baggage holder was a bit slow and then I couldn't find the headset guy to confirm good to push so got stuck behind a bloody BA Nigel... coupled with London airport traffic never gonna get that time back so there is your first 10 minutes and oh ya the French gave us a 1 hour slot which screwed us for the day'
Flying in Europe these days - which is generally operating at 105% of capacity - just gives us so many opportunities to be screwed if we listed them all to you we would need to generate a new delay code for that!
As pax, we really don't care how your company messed up, unless it gets beyond three hours, in which case 'operational reasons; is insufficient and we need to know the actual reasons, to put in a claim for statutory compensation or to learn it was (genuine) extraordinary circumstances. Pretending it was an ATC delay, when that component of the delay was only 11 minutes, is not advised.
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Edinburgh
Age: 39
Posts: 642
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
What's annoying about "operational reasons"?
Alternatives are "technical reasons" or "weather".
It is then up to the speaker to decide whether to amplify on these and risk offering too much information, an easy trap to fall into as the travelling public are equally as eager to read things into what you didn't actually say as they are ignorant about the complexity of airline operations. Say "For technical reasons, actually they had a hydraulic leak" and a proportion of the pax will freak out thinking they're shortly going to die and another few will be spreading alarm and despondency by loudly suggestin the engineers will just bodge the repair until it gets back to base because everyone knows that's what airline mechanics do, if they even actually found out what's really wrong. "Are you telling us there's something wrong with the x/y/z and you still expect us to get on that plane and fly on it?" or "How do we know they fixed it properly?" is the sort of nonsense all too commonly heard. Sometimes the less said the better. Otherwise you'll get in a converssation with some smart alec keen to demonstrate his superior knowledge of the subject in question and he's out to make a point. Believe me, this really happens!
Equally fudging the issue and especially not telling the truth is hazardous too. It's a skill that takes some learning, like filling in reports; generally the less said the less there is to hang you with but don't hide significant information.
If staff don't ahve the skill, information or ability to say the right thing it's best they say s little as possible, annoying as it may be to those who want to know more.
The thing pax so often seem to forget is that the airline isn't doing a delay for fun, to annoy them or (usually) because of their incompetence. They hate delays as much as the pax and the slow turning of the wheels is a sign of the complexity of an airline/airport operation, not sloth or disinterest.
Alternatives are "technical reasons" or "weather".
It is then up to the speaker to decide whether to amplify on these and risk offering too much information, an easy trap to fall into as the travelling public are equally as eager to read things into what you didn't actually say as they are ignorant about the complexity of airline operations. Say "For technical reasons, actually they had a hydraulic leak" and a proportion of the pax will freak out thinking they're shortly going to die and another few will be spreading alarm and despondency by loudly suggestin the engineers will just bodge the repair until it gets back to base because everyone knows that's what airline mechanics do, if they even actually found out what's really wrong. "Are you telling us there's something wrong with the x/y/z and you still expect us to get on that plane and fly on it?" or "How do we know they fixed it properly?" is the sort of nonsense all too commonly heard. Sometimes the less said the better. Otherwise you'll get in a converssation with some smart alec keen to demonstrate his superior knowledge of the subject in question and he's out to make a point. Believe me, this really happens!
Equally fudging the issue and especially not telling the truth is hazardous too. It's a skill that takes some learning, like filling in reports; generally the less said the less there is to hang you with but don't hide significant information.
If staff don't ahve the skill, information or ability to say the right thing it's best they say s little as possible, annoying as it may be to those who want to know more.
The thing pax so often seem to forget is that the airline isn't doing a delay for fun, to annoy them or (usually) because of their incompetence. They hate delays as much as the pax and the slow turning of the wheels is a sign of the complexity of an airline/airport operation, not sloth or disinterest.
To expand on the smart alec types,l these days you get the camera phones coming out and some idiot thinking they're big and clever filming the whole thing (usually shouting "you can't stop me") hoping to make the agent say something that get's them in trouble as if they are personally to blame.
So due, in part, to passenger reaction, less is more. "Operational Reasons" will be used and rightly so. You don't need to know the ins and outs right away. Long delays change as they go on. Short delays are not even worth mentioning half the time because odds are you'll still arrive on time or even early. If you feel the need to claim your EU compo later then do so. The airline will have records of why your plane was delayed. They won't fight the claim any more or any less if you're told the exact, in depth reason on the day of travel. Nine times out of ten the person making the gate announcement has been fed the bare minimum information from a rep, engineer or office occupying superior and isn't privy to what's actually going on, so at least don't direct all your anger at them.
Thread Starter
As I said in the OP, 'Operational Reasons' is meaningless, you are as well just saying 'Your flight is delayed'. The anodyne (often prerecorded) 'This is due to - pause - operational reasons' just grates.
I've been unlucky this year as I've had three flights cancelled (all returns), one due to the severe weather in March, the one I wrote the Op whilst waiting for (Which was because the delay led to the crew being out of hours) then most recently one caused by a late running service due to an earlier medical emergency then a weather cancellation due to strong crosswinds at BRS. In 18 previous years of regular airline travel, I've probably had no more than that in total. These things happen, 6 out of circa 1K isn't bad (and number of severe delays >2hrs probably in low teens at most)
That does bring up another area - the amount of info the airport gives you - in the latter case, I was able to see exactly how delayed our flight was on the easyjet app/website, whilst the boards at BRS were either saying on time or giving a ridiculously low delayed time, right up until it suddenly jumped 2 hours (I knew that already form the App) and yet if you question the airports, they say they take it directly from the Airline feed! The app even gave a full explanation as to why the delay!
I've been unlucky this year as I've had three flights cancelled (all returns), one due to the severe weather in March, the one I wrote the Op whilst waiting for (Which was because the delay led to the crew being out of hours) then most recently one caused by a late running service due to an earlier medical emergency then a weather cancellation due to strong crosswinds at BRS. In 18 previous years of regular airline travel, I've probably had no more than that in total. These things happen, 6 out of circa 1K isn't bad (and number of severe delays >2hrs probably in low teens at most)
That does bring up another area - the amount of info the airport gives you - in the latter case, I was able to see exactly how delayed our flight was on the easyjet app/website, whilst the boards at BRS were either saying on time or giving a ridiculously low delayed time, right up until it suddenly jumped 2 hours (I knew that already form the App) and yet if you question the airports, they say they take it directly from the Airline feed! The app even gave a full explanation as to why the delay!