Flight cancellations up 41% in US (article)
 

Study: Consumers pay hefty price for tarmac rules - chicagotribune.com (Click link to read full article)

chicagotribune.com

Flight cancellations climb under new tarmac rules

Canceled flights have soared 41 percent and diversions have risen 26 percent following enactment of three-hour limit, study finds

By Julie Johnsson, Tribune reporter

July 20, 2010


Lengthy tarmac delays are down sharply since the Obama administration threatened airlines with stiff fines for stranding passengers. But the harm to passengers far outweighs any benefits consumers derive from the new rule, according to a study to be released Tuesday.

Faced with the prospect of multimillion-dollar fines for every seriously delayed plane, airlines are taking no chances, researchers said.

Canceled flights have soared 41 percent and diversions have risen 26 percent since the rule took effect in late April. Carriers are returning planes to airport gates by the 2 1/2-hour mark as a precaution, even though the fines apply to aircraft that sit on the tarmac for more than three hours, according to Darryl Jenkins and Joshua Marks, aviation consultants and researchers at the George Washington University School of Business.
[email protected]

Report: 3-hour rule creates more problems - Travel - News - msnbc.com

It is interesting to note that an 18 hour delay is the average to customers returned to the terminal by airlines who choose to cancel to avoid getting fined.

I am curious as to the origin of this rule: how did the Department of Transportation come up with this rule? Anyone know?

It was in response to consumer group complaints which occurred after years of very high profile on aircraft delays. There were several in JFK for example where passengers were stranded on board for over 7 hours with no food, and full toilets etc...