This is your Profile page. Use it to check replies to your comments, keep track of comments
you've made or endorsed, and manage your regulation room account.
Would there be a way to have the carriers themselves report on it? Sort of like the NCAA requires colleges to self-investigate and self-report rules violations. I guess this would require the carriers to maintain logs of all communications by their drivers, but I would assume most fleets are being closely tracked anyway.
The hiway money and license incentives relate to people who are actually caught texting. But how do you catch them, realistically? That’s why the idea of having the carriers self-investigate and self-report occurred to me.
I think most tarmac delays are either weather related or traffic related. At some airports, there are simply so many flights in an out that they can never keep up. Or, when the weather is bad, taking off simply isn’t viable so flights back up. I think the suggestion of having the airlines and airports create “holding” areas for delays is very interesting. It would be like a remote terminal for planes that had already boarded and left the official gate areas. These remote terminals would allow deplaning and have restrooms, emergency and other important facilities. Obviously, there are logistics issues involved, but some serious thought about this might pay off. There would of course be costs involved, but if they’re spread across the industry, I can’t imagine that the ultimate cost to the consumer would be very much, and the availability of such facilities would be a great benefit. Such a plan would probably only work at large airports that experience frequent delays, so there would need to be a separate set of rules for the smaller airports, which couldn’t really be expected to build remote terminal facilities.
I’m not sure about this, but I assume that all or most of this data collection is totally automated for the large carriers. In other words, this data isn’t being collected by some human accountant type with a green visor and a pad and pencil. It’s simply being pulled out of databases that already contain the information. If so, why would it be so hard for the smaller or foreign carriers to implement the same solution. Just digitally collect the information and transmit it to the authorities for analysis. It would involve some up front programming, but what else?
Policies on all of these issues should be uniform and transparent. Nothing is worse that trying to “negotiate” a situation with a peeved ticket agent in a crowded and stress-filled airport. I recently took a Delta flight into JFK with a fairly tight connection. We actually arrived a bit ahead of the scheduled time, but there was no gate available so Delta parked our incoming flight on their tarmac and bussed us to the gate in a Delta bus. Unfortunately, it took the bus so long to pick us up from the flight that virtually no one on the flight was able to make their connections. Then, when I learned that the next flight was six hours later, the agent refused even a meal voucher for the delay. Their position? the delay wasn’t Delta’s fault (of course, whether something is the airline’s fault is, you guessed it, defined by the airline itself . . . great) At one point, I asked whether I could cancel the trip and get a refund. The agent gave me a dirty look and pointed me to a phone line across the lobby. With clear and balanced rules, I could have read them, known my rights, and dealt with things efficiently rather than having to be at an information disadvantage.
Would there be a way to have the carriers themselves report on it? Sort of like the NCAA requires colleges to self-investigate and self-report rules violations. I guess this would require the carriers to maintain logs of all communications by their drivers, but I would assume most fleets are being closely tracked anyway.
The hiway money and license incentives relate to people who are actually caught texting. But how do you catch them, realistically? That’s why the idea of having the carriers self-investigate and self-report occurred to me.
I think most tarmac delays are either weather related or traffic related. At some airports, there are simply so many flights in an out that they can never keep up. Or, when the weather is bad, taking off simply isn’t viable so flights back up. I think the suggestion of having the airlines and airports create “holding” areas for delays is very interesting. It would be like a remote terminal for planes that had already boarded and left the official gate areas. These remote terminals would allow deplaning and have restrooms, emergency and other important facilities. Obviously, there are logistics issues involved, but some serious thought about this might pay off. There would of course be costs involved, but if they’re spread across the industry, I can’t imagine that the ultimate cost to the consumer would be very much, and the availability of such facilities would be a great benefit. Such a plan would probably only work at large airports that experience frequent delays, so there would need to be a separate set of rules for the smaller airports, which couldn’t really be expected to build remote terminal facilities.
I’m not sure about this, but I assume that all or most of this data collection is totally automated for the large carriers. In other words, this data isn’t being collected by some human accountant type with a green visor and a pad and pencil. It’s simply being pulled out of databases that already contain the information. If so, why would it be so hard for the smaller or foreign carriers to implement the same solution. Just digitally collect the information and transmit it to the authorities for analysis. It would involve some up front programming, but what else?
Policies on all of these issues should be uniform and transparent. Nothing is worse that trying to “negotiate” a situation with a peeved ticket agent in a crowded and stress-filled airport. I recently took a Delta flight into JFK with a fairly tight connection. We actually arrived a bit ahead of the scheduled time, but there was no gate available so Delta parked our incoming flight on their tarmac and bussed us to the gate in a Delta bus. Unfortunately, it took the bus so long to pick us up from the flight that virtually no one on the flight was able to make their connections. Then, when I learned that the next flight was six hours later, the agent refused even a meal voucher for the delay. Their position? the delay wasn’t Delta’s fault (of course, whether something is the airline’s fault is, you guessed it, defined by the airline itself . . . great) At one point, I asked whether I could cancel the trip and get a refund. The agent gave me a dirty look and pointed me to a phone line across the lobby. With clear and balanced rules, I could have read them, known my rights, and dealt with things efficiently rather than having to be at an information disadvantage.