Comments on: Tarmac delay http://regulationroom.org/airline-passenger-rights/tarmac-delay/ From June 2 – September 23, the Department of Transportation took public comments on a proposed new set of airline passenger rights. DOT partnered with Regulation Room to offer people an easy way to learn about and have their say on this proposal. More than Regulation Room 19,000 visitors posted over 900 comments. The Regulation Room team summarized these comments and submitted the <a href="http://regulationroom.org/airline-passenger-rights/final-summary/">final summary</a> to DOT. On April 21, DOT announced its decision. Regulation Room comments played an important part in shaping the <a href="http://regulationroom.org/airline-passenger-rights/agency-documents/final-rule/">final rule</a> that gives airline passengers significant new protections. Tue, 21 Dec 2010 07:54:56 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.2.1 By: openreels http://regulationroom.org/airline-passenger-rights/tarmac-delay/#comment-1291 openreels Sat, 04 Sep 2010 17:43:03 +0000 http://mirror.regulationroomdevelopment.info/airline/tarmac-delay/#comment-1291 We are talking about departing flights so, in theory, the people on the plane have not yet passed through Customs & Immigration since they are not in the new country yet. Except for some places where Customs is done at the departing airport (Canada, for example). So, yes, if it's that big a deal I would support some kind of holding area. We are talking about departing flights so, in theory, the people on the plane have not yet passed through Customs & Immigration since they are not in the new country yet. Except for some places where Customs is done at the departing airport (Canada, for example).

So, yes, if it’s that big a deal I would support some kind of holding area.

]]> By: jmor123 http://regulationroom.org/airline-passenger-rights/tarmac-delay/#comment-1279 jmor123 Thu, 02 Sep 2010 03:56:11 +0000 http://mirror.regulationroomdevelopment.info/airline/tarmac-delay/#comment-1279 I agree with some of the others, they should not be telling people they cannot get off the plane. I am tall with back problems, flying is already a pain in the neck, sitting more time on the tarmac just makes matters worse. Their should be a place where passengers are allowed off, but are not allowed to associate with ground crew for security reasons. Being trapped in a plane even for an hour on the ground is not fun, nor is it necessary most of the time. Three hours is way too long! An hour is already difficult. The size of the airport does not matter, as stated before by others, the feeling is the same. The time limit should be no more than 30 minutes. People have health problems or muscle and bone issues cannot stay seated that long. One recent youtube video I saw there was no A/C, no water, could not get up, etc. That is ridiculous. 30 minutes! If it is over 30 minutes the plane goes back to the terminal and everyone who wants to get off can, they just have to stay in the confines of the terminal and not to be late to reboard the flight. The airline also needs to stay on top of things and let people know how long they will need to wait at the gate. A flight many years ago, the airline was smart, they told us to wait in the terminal, for 2 more hours due to where we were flying to was too crowded, I was much happier in the terminal than having to sit in the plane for two hours. Kudos to them! To answer your questions what DOT particular wants us to know. 1. 30 minutes as stated earlier. Period, no excuses. 2. No, because 30 minutes or back to the gate. 3. No idea what you mean by this. So many regulations? 4. may be possible? Why is it only may be possible? Either it is or it is not. Put everyone in a separate place that they cannot leave the terminal or gate area, it is not that difficult, it is not rocket science here.. 5. If there is going to be that much of a delay why are we even allowed to board?! Passengers should be allowed off anytime with out anyone having to tell us we can, period. We should not be mandated to sit for hours and hours. All airports should have places for this, go back to the gate and let us get off and wait in the terminal at the gate so that security is not compromised. I agree with some of the others, they should not be telling people they cannot get off the plane. I am tall with back problems, flying is already a pain in the neck, sitting more time on the tarmac just makes matters worse. Their should be a place where passengers are allowed off, but are not allowed to associate with ground crew for security reasons. Being trapped in a plane even for an hour on the ground is not fun, nor is it necessary most of the time. Three hours is way too long! An hour is already difficult.

The size of the airport does not matter, as stated before by others, the feeling is the same.

The time limit should be no more than 30 minutes. People have health problems or muscle and bone issues cannot stay seated that long. One recent youtube video I saw there was no A/C, no water, could not get up, etc. That is ridiculous. 30 minutes! If it is over 30 minutes the plane goes back to the terminal and everyone who wants to get off can, they just have to stay in the confines of the terminal and not to be late to reboard the flight. The airline also needs to stay on top of things and let people know how long they will need to wait at the gate.

A flight many years ago, the airline was smart, they told us to wait in the terminal, for 2 more hours due to where we were flying to was too crowded, I was much happier in the terminal than having to sit in the plane for two hours. Kudos to them!

To answer your questions what DOT particular wants us to know.

1. 30 minutes as stated earlier. Period, no excuses.

2. No, because 30 minutes or back to the gate.

3. No idea what you mean by this. So many regulations?

4. may be possible? Why is it only may be possible? Either it is or it is not. Put everyone in a separate place that they cannot leave the terminal or gate area, it is not that difficult, it is not rocket science here..

5. If there is going to be that much of a delay why are we even allowed to board?! Passengers should be allowed off anytime with out anyone having to tell us we can, period. We should not be mandated to sit for hours and hours. All airports should have places for this, go back to the gate and let us get off and wait in the terminal at the gate so that security is not compromised.

]]> By: PatDances http://regulationroom.org/airline-passenger-rights/tarmac-delay/#comment-1252 PatDances Mon, 30 Aug 2010 15:06:59 +0000 http://mirror.regulationroomdevelopment.info/airline/tarmac-delay/#comment-1252 I agree with JDwyer. There should be ONE rule (re time in the plane on the tarmac) for ALL FLIGHTS - and that should be a maximum of 3 hours with food, water, bathroom available after 2 hours - and airlines should be financially penalized for every passenger on the flight if they disregard the rule - and the penalty should be stiff and evenly applied. Instead of the current penalty, why not make it an even $50,000 per passenger per hour or fraction thereof? Might get their attention and some results. I agree with JDwyer. There should be ONE rule (re time in the plane on the tarmac) for ALL FLIGHTS – and that should be a maximum of 3 hours with food, water, bathroom available after 2 hours – and airlines should be financially penalized for every passenger on the flight if they disregard the rule – and the penalty should be stiff and evenly applied. Instead of the current penalty, why not make it an even $50,000 per passenger per hour or fraction thereof? Might get their attention and some results.

]]> By: DC-ite http://regulationroom.org/airline-passenger-rights/tarmac-delay/#comment-1244 DC-ite Mon, 30 Aug 2010 11:39:36 +0000 http://mirror.regulationroomdevelopment.info/airline/tarmac-delay/#comment-1244 I don't think that flights of less than 60 should be covered: in general passengers on these smaller aircraft get more personal service and it would be less cumbersome to deplane passengers if needed. The 3-hour rule should apply to international carriers as well as US carriers. Small hub and non hub airports should also be subject to the 3-hour limit for domestic flights. Where a plane is at the gate and the aircraft door has not yet been closed, passengers should be permitted to deplane after, say, 1 hour. In addition, passengers should be able to deplane if the plane has returned to the gate and the delay is over 1 hour. In relation to deplaning delayed or diverted international passengers, I recall (admittedly a number of years ago) facing exactly the same issue when traveling trans-Pacific and transiting Hawaii. We were always able to deplane in Hawaii as long as we remained within a certain area of the airport. At least we were able to stretch our legs and use the bathroom facilities in the airport. I don’t think that flights of less than 60 should be covered: in general passengers on these smaller aircraft get more personal service and it would be less cumbersome to deplane passengers if needed. The 3-hour rule should apply to international carriers as well as US carriers. Small hub and non hub airports should also be subject to the 3-hour limit for domestic flights. Where a plane is at the gate and the aircraft door has not yet been closed, passengers should be permitted to deplane after, say, 1 hour. In addition, passengers should be able to deplane if the plane has returned to the gate and the delay is over 1 hour. In relation to deplaning delayed or diverted international passengers, I recall (admittedly a number of years ago) facing exactly the same issue when traveling trans-Pacific and transiting Hawaii. We were always able to deplane in Hawaii as long as we remained within a certain area of the airport. At least we were able to stretch our legs and use the bathroom facilities in the airport.

]]> By: koratkid http://regulationroom.org/airline-passenger-rights/tarmac-delay/#comment-1241 koratkid Sun, 29 Aug 2010 21:51:16 +0000 http://mirror.regulationroomdevelopment.info/airline/tarmac-delay/#comment-1241 Travelers who must wait more than 90 min on the tarmac for takeoff should be allowed to deplane. Passengers on arriving aircraft who must wait for more than 90 min to deplane should be provided with a complimentary free class upgrade on their next flight. Travelers who must wait more than 90 min on the tarmac for takeoff should be allowed to deplane.
Passengers on arriving aircraft who must wait for more than 90 min to deplane should be provided with a complimentary free class upgrade on their next flight.

]]> By: wkemp http://regulationroom.org/airline-passenger-rights/tarmac-delay/#comment-1239 wkemp Sun, 29 Aug 2010 18:00:33 +0000 http://mirror.regulationroomdevelopment.info/airline/tarmac-delay/#comment-1239 1. The tarmac delay limit should apply to all commercial passenger flights. Being stuck on a hot, stinking plane is what is no matter the size of the plane, no matter who owns it. 2. The tarmac delay rule should apply to airports as well as airlines. 3. Making the delay interval part of the rules of carriage is less important than making sure excessive tarmac delays don't happen. Both airports and airlines should return delayed planes to the terminal as a matter of course. 4. Three hours is still too long. As it happens, I have arthritis which is sometimes aggravated when I sit with my knees sharply bent. In three hours I might well be in intense pain (so I avoid long flights anyway). If I were writing this rule, I'd say one hour is the maximum permissible delay. 1. The tarmac delay limit should apply to all commercial passenger flights. Being stuck on a hot, stinking plane is what is no matter the size of the plane, no matter who owns it.

2. The tarmac delay rule should apply to airports as well as airlines.

3. Making the delay interval part of the rules of carriage is less important than making sure excessive tarmac delays don’t happen. Both airports and airlines should return delayed planes to the terminal as a matter of course.

4. Three hours is still too long. As it happens, I have arthritis which is sometimes aggravated when I sit with my knees sharply bent. In three hours I might well be in intense pain (so I avoid long flights anyway). If I were writing this rule, I’d say one hour is the maximum permissible delay.

]]> By: sdm1146 http://regulationroom.org/airline-passenger-rights/tarmac-delay/#comment-1232 sdm1146 Sun, 29 Aug 2010 16:21:52 +0000 http://mirror.regulationroomdevelopment.info/airline/tarmac-delay/#comment-1232 On a recent flight, we were delayed about 2 hours on the tarmac. The crew did a good job of keeping us updated every 15 - 20 minutes, if only to say they didn't know anything new. [the issue was weather elsewhere] I was concerned when the pilot announced we would return to the gate if anyone wanted to deplane - losing our place in line, disrupting connections even more, etc. I realize there are medical issues which are emergencies - I'm not talking about those. I agree with the 3 hour rule in principle and think it's reasonable to extend it to more airports and all airlines - I actually think passengers should have less control than we apparently had in this setting. On a recent flight, we were delayed about 2 hours on the tarmac. The crew did a good job of keeping us updated every 15 – 20 minutes, if only to say they didn’t know anything new. [the issue was weather elsewhere] I was concerned when the pilot announced we would return to the gate if anyone wanted to deplane – losing our place in line, disrupting connections even more, etc. I realize there are medical issues which are emergencies – I’m not talking about those. I agree with the 3 hour rule in principle and think it’s reasonable to extend it to more airports and all airlines – I actually think passengers should have less control than we apparently had in this setting.

]]> By: Catherine http://regulationroom.org/airline-passenger-rights/tarmac-delay/#comment-1228 Catherine Sun, 29 Aug 2010 14:58:31 +0000 http://mirror.regulationroomdevelopment.info/airline/tarmac-delay/#comment-1228 I think it's essential to have functioning restrooms for us old people and sufficient food and water. Any delay is annoying, but information is critical. I haven't seen many posts on that. Tell us WHY we are being held and WHEN we expect a change. That info should be updated at least every 30 min. But does that require a regulation or is it good common sense customer service? I think it’s essential to have functioning restrooms for us old people and sufficient food and water. Any delay is annoying, but information is critical. I haven’t seen many posts on that. Tell us WHY we are being held and WHEN we expect a change. That info should be updated at least every 30 min. But does that require a regulation or is it good common sense customer service?

]]> By: vacalgal http://regulationroom.org/airline-passenger-rights/tarmac-delay/#comment-1225 vacalgal Sun, 29 Aug 2010 14:11:29 +0000 http://mirror.regulationroomdevelopment.info/airline/tarmac-delay/#comment-1225 TWO hours should be the maximum delay on a tramac. Health issues as well as overuse of restroom facilities before the trip is finally completed are major issues. Water should always be available to waiting passengars. If the delay is weather related it is out of the carriers control, but IF it is MAINTENANCE related, then all passengars should be given compensation. Without having to pay compensation (a cost) the carriers have no incentative to ado their best. TWO hours should be the maximum delay on a tramac. Health issues as well as overuse of restroom facilities before the trip is finally completed are major issues. Water should always be available to waiting passengars. If the delay is weather related it is out of the carriers control, but IF it is MAINTENANCE related, then all passengars should be given compensation. Without having to pay compensation (a cost) the carriers have no incentative to ado their best.

]]> By: tsaware http://regulationroom.org/airline-passenger-rights/tarmac-delay/#comment-1221 tsaware Sun, 29 Aug 2010 13:58:45 +0000 http://mirror.regulationroomdevelopment.info/airline/tarmac-delay/#comment-1221 Being confined in an airplane is too long. I think the maximum confinement period should be 1 hour at most and after 20 minutes, passengers should have access to water, lavatories, and standing/moving about. This should apply to all airlines/airports, any size plane, domestic and international. Being confined in an airplane is too long. I think the maximum confinement period should be 1 hour at most and after 20 minutes, passengers should have access to water, lavatories, and standing/moving about. This should apply to all airlines/airports, any size plane, domestic and international.

]]>