Surprise!WN Ontime Rating Takes a Hit

[Busdrvr]

[blockquote]
----------------
On 9/25/2002 2:41:07 PM wannabe CRJ driver wrote:

How come no one every posts our completion factor.....I think we complete 99% of our flights....like I tell our passengers....we may get you there a little late,butwe will get you there.
----------------
[/blockquote]

Percentage of flights cancelled in July
SWA 1.2%
UAL 1.0%
DAL 0.9%
CAL 0.8%

 

[wannabe CRJ driver]

[BR][BR]
[BLOCKQUOTE][BR]----------------[BR]On 9/25/2002 7:08:45 PM kkcwd wrote:[BR][BR]Ive have read these boards for some time and have noticed anytime someone posts something that is the least bit negative concernign WN its always someone elses fault.  I have been in the airline business many yrs and have seen all airlines have growing pains or shrinking pains. Its ok to no be perfect[BR][BR]----------[BR][BR][BR][BR]I guess for me it is somewhat of a pride issue....I use to pride myself on turning my plane in 20 mins and if it was late 10 mins....now with all the stupid security issues, if you get a 30 min turn your lucky. The employees of SWA have done Whatever it takes to get our flghts out on time....and will continue to do so...it just takes more effort now. Scheduling has made most of the turns 25 mins now (Thank You!) but for a lot of people (including me) feel that we have failed...so if we come off a little pissy,I apologize.[/BLOCKQUOTE][BR][BR]

 

[wannabe CRJ driver]

Just when I think you are gonna mellow out Busdriver...I think I'm gonna have to fly for UA just to bust chops!

 

[Busdrvr]

[blockquote]
----------------
On 9/26/2002 110 AM wannabe CRJ driver wrote:

Just when I think you are gonna mellow out Busdriver...I think I'm gonna have to fly for UA just to bust chops!
----------------
[/blockquote]

Nothing would make me happier than to have you below me on my seniority list. That would mean #1 UAL solvent, #2 UAL hiring. COULD YOU PLEASE HURRY?![img src='http://www.usaviation.com/idealbb/images/smilies/2.gif'] [img src='http://www.usaviation.com/idealbb/images/smilies/3.gif'] [img src='http://www.usaviation.com/idealbb/images/smilies/9.gif']

 

[wannabe CRJ driver]

Who knows....maybe I'll end up flying for UA....there are worse jobs in the world! Here's a ??? for you busdriver....where do the rookies end up(based)? and on what airplane?

 

[KCFlyer]

[BR]Bus....observing planes at MCI, I can watch 3 Southwest flights go in and out of a single gate in the time it takes UAL to get a single plane turned out of one of their gates. Now...lets assume that a particular SWA flight was flying (not scheduled, but the aircraft flew from)FLL- MCO-STL-MCI- OKC. Let's also assume that our pilot is not that lying Joe Isuzu b*astard and he dutifully reports pulling into the gate 16 minutes late. Let's say that weather in MCO delayed the flight out of there by 35 minutes. Each city gets 25 minutes to catch up on the on time rating. So he was about 27 minutes late into STL (try as they might, headwinds were just too much to allow them to make up time in the air. He heads for MCI, and is still, unfortunatly running about 21 minutes behind schedule. There's two stops where they are late. So, our SWA flight has 25 minutes in STL to catch up to being on time. But he gets into MCI about 22 minutes late. The crew in MCI kicks some booty and turns the plane in 20 minutes, he taxis out to 19R and off he goes to OKC...but despite the best efforts of the ground crew, he arrives at the gate 16 minutes late. [BR][BR]Now, we've got UAL flight 123 that is running 25 minutes behind out of ORD. Well, ACARS shows him late getting into MCI, but not to worry, he's got a full 90 minutes ground time to make it up in KC. His return to ORD is right on time. Operationally, I've gotta say that the SWA guys did pretty good to narrow the gap with such a small timeframe to work with. But please don't feel like I am picking on UAL...when my daughter and I two stepped down to DAL last year, we had a 2 hour layover in OKC. During that entire time, there was a lone AA jet at the gate who was there when we pulled in and still there when we finally boarded our flight. It could have been a mechanical problem, but I took my mom back to MCI to fly home to DFW on AA, and noticed that the flight next to hers (sitting at the gate) was not scheduled to depart for another hour and a half. [BR][BR]If your employer is serious about reducing costs and maximizing productivity by keeping their assets in the air more than they are on the ground, then you may too find yourself with a slew of ACARS reported flights running late. Kind of the nature of the beast.

 

[Busdrvr]

[blockquote]
----------------
On 9/26/2002 2:35:36 AM wannabe CRJ driver wrote:

Who knows....maybe I'll end up flying for UA....there are worse jobs in the world! Here's a ??? for you busdriver....where do the rookies end up(based)? and on what airplane?
----------------
[/blockquote]

Currently SFO 737 is the bottom. ORD used to be the consistant bottom, but when we parked ALL the 737-200 and 727s, it hit ORD disportionately hard, so it is a little more senior than it should be. If you put a base in H***, and made it small enough, I'm convinced it would go senior

 

[wannabe CRJ driver]

[P]I know this is way off topic...but will UA bring back the -200s...I think I heard they sold off the 727s to PanAm a couple months ago but I haven't heard anything about the 737s. I guess I have to put UA back on my list![/P]

 

[Farley]

Alright, we can all be big enough to admit that Southwest can turn a plane a lot faster than everyone else. I personally have seen them turn a 737 faster than we could turn our J-32 in Baltimore (of course that was a United ground crew, and they did not have much luv for the mighty 32).

As for the ACARS issue, is that really worth arguing about now? Remember the summer of discontent when certain pilots were clogging up taxiways with the slow taxi, and purposely delaying flights? And now they want to call someone a liar for calling out a little early? I don't think that those same guys can be questioning anyone's integrity.

 

[BillLumbergh]

OK, boys and girls, enough of the back and forth.

 

[Tango-Bravo]

[blockquote]
----------------
On 9/25/2002 7:08:45 PM kkcwd wrote:

Ive have read these boards for some time and have noticed anytime someone posts something that is the least bit negative concernign WN its always someone elses fault. I have been in the airline business many yrs and have seen all airlines have growing pains or shrinking pains. Its ok to no be perfect
----------------
[/blockquote]


Au contraire!!!

It is the advocates for the full-service major airlines on these boards who never lack for lame, spurious excuses and scapegoats for the consequences of inept management and employees who go along, without challenging the never-ending follies of their non-leaders.

One of their scapegoats of choice is Southwest. Seems they will go to any length to grasp at straws in their never-ending quest to somehow discredit the airline who, according to the smart money, is worth more than all of the full-service cartel members combined.

What I see in response to all the grasping at straws by the Southwest bashers is reasoned replies from LUV employees or proponents who take the approach, we are aware of the causes for this problem and are working to resolve these issues in a win-win manner. It is quite the opposite of what I find in the replies of those who try to defend the (indefensible) business models of the full-service airlines--that is where one finds the blame someone else game to be most active.

 

[Busdrvr]

[blockquote]
----------------
On 9/26/2002 836 AM wannabe CRJ driver wrote:


I know this is way off topic...but will UA bring back the -200s...I think I heard they sold off the 727s to PanAm a couple months ago but I haven't heard anything about the 737s. I guess I have to put UA back on my list![/P]
----------------
[/blockquote]

Nope, bringing back the 20 737-220 would require re-openning the training program for the jet and spinning up all the spares, ect. If UAL was to need more jets, AFTER bringing up the utilization rate of the current fleets (I've put jets to bed at 4:00 in the afternoon), it would be 319/320s, they are just too efficient, too cheap, and interest rates are too low to do otherwise. as for the 727's, it'd prob require some fancy contract work with respect to the 300 or so ROPEs that were retired, not gonna happen. The truth is I don't think anybody wants the 200s. there is a website (speed something) that has well over 300 737-300 for sale or lease..CHEAP, the days of the 200 are definately numbered everywhere.

 

[Busdrvr]

Farley, KC,
You're missing the point. NOBODY can turn a 737 faster than SWA. The employees bust their chops daily to make it happen. the point is NOT about employees. If I'm a businessman who has a meeting in CLE at a certain time, it does not matter to me if ground delays in DET or monsoons in PHX made my flight late, what matters is I'M LATE. SWA IS reacting to the situation. they ARE adding a little more turn time. If they find that after they start reporting times electronically that they are late even more often, they will likely need to add MORE turn time. That will likely have costs. The hub and spoke airlines have longer turns to support the banks. I've sat in the bus and watched 3, YES 3! SWA jets come and go between when I got there and when I left. Efficient on our part? No, not if utilization is my primary driver. What good does leaving an hour earlier do a business traveler, if it results in a 2 hour layover in DEN? He'd rather get to the DET airport later, and leave later for a shorter turn. The hub and spoke model yields more Revenue, the point to point model yields lower costs. If that lower cost advantage is taken away, you have a source of potential problems

 

[KCFlyer]

[P]
[BLOCKQUOTE][BR]----------------[BR]On 9/26/2002 3:49:30 PM Busdrvr wrote:
[P] What good does leaving an hour earlier do a business traveler, if it results in a 2 hour layover in DEN?  He'd rather get to the DET airport later, and leave later for a shorter turn.  The hub and spoke model yields more Revenue, the point to point model yields lower costs.  If that lower cost advantage is taken away, you have a source of potential problems[/P]----------------[/BLOCKQUOTE]
[P]Lower your fares and you can increase the frequency out of DEN to DET. It's called demand for supply. But why would a UAL aircraft sit on the ground at MCI for 90 minutes, waiting to go back to ORD...why not scheduled less time, then send the plane to DEN and the DEN-MCI plane on to ORD? At least they'd be in the air making some money rather than parked at a gate waiting for it's slot to open up in Chicago. [/P]

 

[KCFlyer]

YOu know, the funny thing about ACARS and the lyin' b*stard Southwest pilots is that even with all the pencil whipping, Southwest's on time rating has slipped. So I ask you, are they slipping up on the lying? After all, the difference between a DOT on time arrival period of 15 minutes and a late arrival is only a minute...seems the liars ought to be doing a better job of lying. Because right now, I think that even with ACARS, Southwest would still rank where they rank...good or bad.