Airline fines and delays: The world didn’t end

by Tom Johansmeyer on

How many planes were stuck on the tarmac for more than three hours in May? You can count ’em on one hand: five. This is the second lowest result since the feds began monitoring this metric back in October 2008. A year earlier, 34 planes sat on the ground loaded with passengers for more than three hours, according to data from the Department of Transportation’s Bureau of Transportation Statistics.

May 2010 was the first full month in which the airlines faced stiff fines for keeping passengers out on the tarmac too long. Staying out there for more than three hours exposes carriers to fines of up to $27,500 per passenger.

Four of the five delays in May went to United Airlines on the same day and to the same destination: May 26, 2010 to Denver. They were diverted to Colorado Springs for weather-related reasons. The other delay belonged to Delta. There have been no fines yet, because the matters are still being investigated.The Air Transportation Association, which represents many of the top airlines in the country, says the positive results for May are the result of airline efforts to improve and good weather – not the threat of fines. The association says that declines in waits of more than three hours have been “in decline for over a year,” according to a USA Today report.

While the association claims these factors had a greater impact than the threat of fines, the steep year-over-year drop, the fact that there were only four in April and the plunge to current levels from 25 in March all suggest that the hefty costs associated with stranding passengers have all played a role.

Airline concerns that the new rule would lead to high rates of cancellation seem unfounded, as only 1.2 percent of flights were canceled in May 2010, a slight up-tick from 0.9 percent in May 2009.

Says Kate Hanni, director of FlyersRights.org, which advocated for the stricter rule: “I hate to say I told you so, but I told you so.”

Airline fees: Please don’t lie, don’t be moronic

by Tom Johansmeyer on

As much as you may hate ancillary fees on airlines, they’re clearly making a difference. The nickel-and-diming of the average passenger was good for a whopping $7.8 billion last year … up 42 percent from 2008. Airlines are making serious cash on inconvenient fees, which means they aren’t going away. The coming travel market recovery (look for it in 2011) will put more asses in seats and, of course, more bucks in the airline industry till. What was $7.8 billion last year only has the potential to become much, much larger.

And that could be the problem.

It might not be easy to sympathize with the airlines, companies with well-entrenched reputations for being among the most poorly run enterprises since the dawn of capitalism. But, at least when they were on the ropes (for real this time … right?), we could stomach that the ancillary fees were a survival mechanism. When revenue per available seat-mile starts to come back, passengers will become increasingly offended by the price tags popped on blankets and baggage and everything in between.Fortunately, there is a silver lining in all this: anything we feel is totally irrelevant. Airlines will charge what they can charge. Since ancillary fees are a market-wide trend, we’ll have to get used to them. Some airlines aren’t heading down this road with zeal, but they may not go to your desired destination, making the offer of goodwill moot.

And, if the extra charges were slashed, ticket prices would just increase for no apparent underlying reason, and we’d all have to share in the cost of the blanket that the gump in seat 11D feels he needs to stay warm.

The real issue, it seems, isn’t prices – they are what they are. Instead, passengers would be happier less pissed if the airlines were a bit more transparent. Notes Tim Winship of SmartTraveler.com:

The word “sneaky” appears prominently and often in consumers’ grumbling about fee-for-all pricing. And more substantively, adding injury to insult, consumers can’t make meaningful price comparisons if they don’t have ready access to all-inclusive prices from all airlines, whether it’s on the carriers’ own websites or on the site of an online travel agent.

Full fee disclosure is something the airlines should have done proactively, from the beginning. Soon, they may have no choice-as mentioned above, the DOT has included language in its proposed passenger-protection legislation that would mandate up-front disclosure of all fees associated with a particular ticket price.

The winning (or at least non-losing) formula for airline pricing seems to be simple: don’t be stupid, don’t lie and don’t charge people for the lav.

Solar-powered plane flies at night

by Sean McLachlan on


An airplane that relies entirely on solar energy has flown for 24 hours straight, cruising along happily through the darkness and emerging into the dawn with three hours left in its batteries. Once the sun rose, of course, the batteries immediately began to recharge.

The Solar Impulse is the product of the same great minds that brought you the cuckoo clock–the Swiss! The entire wingspan is covered with 12,000 solar cells that power four electric engines. Average cruising speed is 70 km/hr (43.5 mph). You can see complete stats on the plane here.

The next step for the engineers is to make the next generation of the plane, one that will fly around the world by 2013. The Solar Impulse is not the first solar-powered airplane, only the first to complete a manned night flight. Scientists and engineers have been experimenting with solar-powered planes since the 1970s and manned flights since the 1980s. This new leap forward will add impetus to a field of study that has so far received little attention from the press.

While this technology is still in the experimental stage, the potential impact for the airline industry and the environment is obvious. Airline emissions pose a major environmental threat, and G8 leaders have called for a 50 percent reduction in airline emissions by 2050. That’s a tall order, but it looks like the Swiss have shown the way forward. Of course the Solar Impulse’s slow speed and small cockpit mean the age of solar-powered 747s is a long way off, think of it as the modern equivalent of the Wright Brothers plane. It was only a generation after Kitty Hawk that passengers started flying to international destinations.

Airlines do one thing ahead of schedule: profits

by Tom Johansmeyer on

It seems as though flight times aren’t the only things being padded. The original estimate by the International Air Transport Association that the global airline industry wouldn’t be profitable for three years following the financial crisis gave a little bit of elbow room – something you won’t find on the planes themselves – as indicated by the recent announcement of a predicted aggregate profit of at least $2.5 billion. Back in April, IATA forecasted a $2.8 billion loss for the year.

Demand for seats is on the rise, as people just don’t want to stay home any more. Notes, Giovanni Bisignani, director general of IATA, according to a report in USA Today, “The global economy is recovering from the depths of the financial crisis much more quickly than could have been anticipated.”

In 2009, the global airline industry suffered an $81 billion loss of revenue – a drop of 14.3 percent from 2008. While that did make seats a bit cheaper, it also led to the slashing of routes and what few amenities were left … not to mention all those additional fees. This year, IATA expects revenues to be up $62 billion relative to 2009, but that still leaves a lot of ground for the airlines to make up. While $2.5 billion sounds like a lot of cash, it only amounts to 0.5 percent of total industry revenue, according to Bisignani.

The industry remains “fragile,” he adds, with a slow economic recovery, vulnerability to Icelandic ashes and other disruptions, Europe’s debt crisis and oil prices threatening what gains have been made.

Airline law ends long Tarmac delays, fine threat improves performance

by Tom Johansmeyer on

The world didn’t end. No logistical disasters emerged. In fact, everything got a hell of a lot better.

Several months ago, the prospect of a maximum three-hour tarmac delay had the airline industry proclaiming the arrival of the four horsemen. They claimed that it would severely disrupt the industry to have to give passengers the option of getting off the plane would lead to chaos. People would be furious by a lone passenger wanting to bring the plane back to the gate, and crews would be forced to operate within the constraints of customer demands (you know … like other businesses).

Well, the airline industry doesn’t appear to be any worse off than it was. In fact, it looks like the new three-hour rule is having a positive effect. Three-hour tarmac delays have effectively disappeared, and on-time arrivals have improved overall. Everything seems to be running better than it was before the airlines faced fines of up to $27,500 per passenger.

How big a different did it make?Well, only four planes sat on the tarmac for more than three hours in April. In March, 25 hit that mark, and April 2009 had an astounding 81 planes on the tarmac for that long.

So, you’re probably wondering if the airlines stacked the deck, canceling flights to protect their stats and mitigate the risk of having to yank planes back to the gate or shell out big bucks fines. Year over year, the DOT reports that cancelations fell approximately 50 percent, with only 3,637 of 529,330 flights getting chopped.

Overall, on-time performance for the 18 airlines that report to the U.S. Department of Transportation climbed to 85.3 percent in April – up from 79.1 percent in April 2009 (and better than March’s 80 percent. Most of the late arrivals were caused by aviation system delays (e.g., bad weather or heavy traffic).

Efficient use of New York airspace and generally calm weather contributed to the improvement. LaGuardia‘s on-time rate surged to 87.4 percent from 67.4 percent. JFK showed a similar improvement – from 67.3 percent to 83.5 percent.

U.S. Airways led the pack in on-time performance among major airlines and followed Hawaiian and Alaska Airlines in the total market. American Airlines was the bottom of the barrel for the large carriers, with its sister carrier, American Eagle, sucking most among all airlines.

Let’s do the math on this. Holding airlines accountable and offering up the threat of hefty fines for mistreating passengers didn’t jeopardize their ability to operate. If anything, it led to improved results. For once, it seems, the government got it right. If that sounds weird, think of an airline that takes off and lands on time. Weird, right?