Rage against the airlines

[saab2000]

So here I am after a planned 18-hour layover (an absurdly long layover - productive? I don't think so!) in Newburgh, NY and we get to the airport and find that the airplane I am supposed to fly out is still somewhere in North Carolina. And they don't come here direct. So we will be 3-4 hours delayed. Minimum.

What is it about the airlines that let them get by with this level of service and yet they act like nothing is wrong? I walk into the gate area and everyone looks at me but I have no answers. I get my information from the station and they are just as out of the loop as anyone else.

If a leaf falls in California the ripple effect is everywhere. Chaos theory in action. Of course, usually that leaf falls on the east coast, near New York and ripples westward. But I digress.

The US airline business is failing the customers miserably. Yet there seems to be no interest to fix it. Or if there is it is reactive not proactive.

The only company that seems to have a clue is Southwest Airlines. And of course UPS and FedEx, but they are not really standard airlines in the tradiaional operational sense.

Can some business exec who frequents this forum please tell me how an industry as poorly run as the airline business can be allowed to be propped up by the federal bailouts and the bankruptcy laws?

The level of service at these companies is now how we used to mock the Soviet system. It's a sham IMHO. Let's stop propping up companies that can't deliver what they sell. This isn't just once in a while now. These kinds of delays and failures of reliability are the norm now, not the exception.

Rant over.

Biking content. I wished all day that I could have been biking instead of watching Mythbusters. :crap:

Also, thank God for the passengers with iPhones! Now we can skirt weather right away 'cuz none of use had access to that technology before the iPhone showed the yahoos how to tell the pilots about weather down the road! :rolleyes:

[J.Greene]

Can some business exec who frequents this forum please tell me how an industry as poorly run as the airline business can be allowed to be propped up by the federal bailouts and the bankruptcy laws?


I'd not call myself a business executive, but......as long as there is capital to invest into the current model, the current model will remain. I suspect the temptation to lose really large amounts of money is too great for some people.

Keep in mind that since orvile and wilbur made those trips to Kitty Hawk far more money has been lost than made. Nothing is new, we just do it on a bigger scale.

JG

[gone]

Here's the problem:

1. Passengers want the absolute cheapest air fare.
2. Airlines don't make money while providing the absolute cheapest air fare unless the plane is more than 85% full.
3. Airports schedule the maximum number of inbound/outbound flights they can handle, this is especially true of the large hubs (New York, Chicago, SFO, etc)
4. If every large hub is scheduled to the max and every plane is 85% full that means there are about 10-15 empty seats per plane.
5. In the event of even the briefest of interruptions anywhere in the system, especially at one of the hubs, delays cascade, flights are canceled which leaves 150-200 per canceled flight people fighting for those 10-15 seats.

Root problem: see (1).

I was flying through Dallas. There was (I am not making this up) a thundershower that lasted 10 minutes. I stood at the arriving/departing flight display and watched the "delayed" updates cascade down the board followed in about 30 minutes by "cancelled" updates cascading down the board.

The system is overloaded, the consumer has said that's how they want it.

[saab2000]

I'd not call myself a business executive, but......as long as there is capital to invest into the current model, the current model will remain. I suspect the temptation to lose really large amounts of money is too great for some people.

Keep in mind that since orvile and wilbur made those trips to Kitty Hawk far more money has been lost than made. Nothing is new, we just do it on a bigger scale.

JG

Don't think for a second that folks aren't making money in this business. Fancy accounting and the shady bankruptcy laws allow losses to be showed.

I once saw a graph showing that American Airlines had lost money for something like 60 of their 70 years of existence.

Riiiiiiight....... :cool:

[J.Greene]

Don't think for a second that folks aren't making money in this business. Fancy accounting and the shady bankruptcy laws allow losses to be showed.

which group of owners in a publicly held business that goes bankrupt makes money? Just askin'

JG

[saab2000]

which group of owners in a publicly held business that goes bankrupt makes money? Just askin'

JG

Well, Steenland at Northwest and Glenn Tilton at United have done pretty darn well.

[J.Greene]

Well, Steenland at Northwest and Glenn Tilton at United have done pretty darn well.

you are in the mood to rage! Hope you get back to the bike soon man.

JG

[dbrk]

Now this is a rant. I'm all the way in on this one. I travel almost every weekend nowadays and it's a complete shambles out there.

As I see it, the _whole_ system is broken. Well, not if you are rich enough. I have extremely wealthy friends who saw it coming and fly only on private jets now but for the rest of us? What's happening now at the airports is that everyone is coming to _expect_ that the system is broken. That's the hallmark of having arrived at a Soviet system: it's normal that nothing works. But I want you to know that I feel much, much safer now that every little old lady has to remove her shoes.

dbrk

[Fixed]

it's the only game in town .. better in europe ?
cheers :beer:

[saab2000]

it's the only game in town .. better in europe ?
cheers :beer:

When I was there flying it was. Delays of this magnitude and frequency simply never happened. At least not at SWISS/Swissair/Crossair. And the people who worked in operations, behind the scenes were expected to be accountable.

Anyway.......

There is no perfect job or situation.

But yeah, I really do need to get back on the bike! This job is fun when it works, but it prevents me from doing what I wan to do. And I got into it because at the time the schedules were such that I would actually have time to ride. No longer.

Yeah, the system is broken.

FWIW, I do think Southwest does a pretty good job. Not fancy or butt kissing nice, but they are pretty reliable from what I understand.

[chuckroast]

Saab, even though today was a bad day, since you fly way more than most of us, would you conceed that the system works more often than not?

Here's my minority view. I flew probably 25 or 30 times on business in 2007 and another half dozen or so times for personal reasons. I know that I probably had a delay or two during the year but nothing that comes to mind at the moment. Even worse, I check a bag almost every flight and never lost a thing this year. So by and large, my flying experiences aren't going to cause me to quit flying

I think most of the flying public has mostly the same experience. If airlines are really running at such a high percentage of capacity, then the buying public has made the market decision that, aggrevating or not, flying is worth the money and time. Airlines have made the market decision that enough folks are buying tickets that additional investments in convenience and customer service are not required.

I read a lot that air traffic control is a bottleneck in the current system and that migration to GPS tracking will help over time. Could you elaborate?

Hope you get home soon....best wishes.

[1centaur]

Not a business exec but a professional investor who has analyzed airlines in and out of bankruptcy.

First, bankruptcy laws do not prop up airlines anymore than any other business. The question in bankruptcy is whether it's more valuable to stakeholders (banks and bondholders usually) to reorganize or liquidate. Liquidation makes no sense (who needs those 300 planes at a high price?), so they reorganize, discharge debts (including some pensions) and start again, just like most other large US businesses. Shareholders lose all their money, bondholders lose much of theirs, most of the time. Execs make money but that's true across businesses, not just in airlines.

As for why we are where we are: deregulation combined with unions that sprang up pre-regulation, in combination with the need to grow EPS to make public shareholders happy. LUV worked because it flew point-to-point on profitable city pairs and had very simple working conditions, thanks to its 737 fleet. City pairs could continue to be added for a long time and that provided EPS. In general, the business model is that a new airline starts up with lower labor costs and no legacy liabilities and gets financial backing to buy some planes. Cool service, low prices, fly to Vegas at midnight with video screens, etc. Fast forward a couple of years and the strain to keep adding earnings mean less profitable routes are tried and start to fail. Pilots get more experienced and want more money. Jet Blue, Air Tran, etc. UAL et. al. get their labor costs down in bankruptcy but still struggle to fly the profitable routes as new capacity comes on line from cheaper airlines. Majors must cheapen service to compete, then suddenly everybody's just a Greyhound in the sky. Nobody cares about the customers who don't expect caring or service or even competence. What can break the cycle? Re-regulation and high prices. Most of us really don't enjoy flying anyway, so we'll take the low prices and the more frequent scheduling, no thank you for the $5 snack box. Buy stock in the new airlines, ride it for 2 years and get out. Play the rebounds on ex-bankrupt majors and get out. Someday, video conferences and Star Trek transporters mean we don't have to play this game. Not in my lifetime.

[GregL]

I left commercial aviation a dozen years ago. I could not understand an industry where the business model is "we're all going bankrupt, but the one going bankrupt last wins..."

A few thoughts (but sadly no answers...):

- It's a half-assed, half-regulated mess. We let the airlines schedule airports beyond their functional capacity, yet the bankruptcy laws (backed up by special interests) allow horribly managed companies to persist.

- The unions escalate the salaries, benefits, and and work rules during the "good times" by playing the airline contracts against one another.

- Management in most carriers is absurd. Take big bonuses and jack up the stock price, but damn the employees...

- Since the "product" of the industry is by and large identical, the public picks the cheapest fare. Since there are so many carriers providing the product, they have cut to the bone to survive on the low margins.

How to fix this mess? Heck if I know! For starters, limit airport operations (takeoffs and landings) to their IFR capacity as it is done in most of the rest of the world. If the public wants more flights, then they should pay to build more runways! Let the poorly managed carriers die. The industry needs to mature and neck down to a more robust financial base. Once there are fewer carriers, the ticket prices will rise and the financial health of the remaining carriers will improve. The traveling public needs to know that you can't have bargain basement fares and perfect service. In the meantime, I will continue to plan my trips mid-week, mid-day, and avoid ORD, PHL, and LGA as much as I can!

Rant over!

Regards,
Greg

[rounder]

Now this is a rant. I'm all the way in on this one. I travel almost every weekend nowadays and it's a complete shambles out there.

As I see it, the _whole_ system is broken. Well, not if you are rich enough. I have extremely wealthy friends who saw it coming and fly only on private jets now but for the rest of us? What's happening now at the airports is that everyone is coming to _expect_ that the system is broken. That's the hallmark of having arrived at a Soviet system: it's normal that nothing works. But I want you to know that I feel much, much safer now that every little old lady has to remove her shoes.

dbrk

Really...i was changing planes in St. Louis two years ago and watched TSA hassle a lady with silver/blue hair, red pants and brand new white sneakers for a security search in the passenger area (felt much safer after that). I travel about 20 percent and expect to be delayed, mainly on the return trips. Last year, we were returning from Houston and our last flight of the day was not posted on the board (no announcement of on time, delay, etc.). I was bored and walked around and talked to folks at the gates. Someone told me that our flight was cancelled, even though there was no bad weather, but there were several seats left on the next-to-last flight and we were lucky to get two. People who fly a lot have been through all this and more more lots of times. I understand that unforseen problems will happen...my main peeve is that all the customer service people are either clueless or don't want to be bothered...so that you are left in the dark and can not make other arrangements if there are any.

I went on vacation last summer and was gonna fly, but figured that with the drive to Philadelphia and flight delays might as well drive for 12 hours, which i did. (end of rant.)

[Cinci Jim]

I'm actually waiting for a Delta flight to leave LGA so I have an idea when I need to leave my house to pick them up at CVG. Scheduled departure time - 8:30 PM... actual departure time (according to Delta.com) 10:30 PM. The flight was supposed to land at 10:50 PM.

All the tracking web sites shot it has not yet departed, so I guess they are waiting to take off.

You're totally correct about the soviet era thing.

[sg8357]

..

[onekgguy]

I was flying through Dallas. There was (I am not making this up) a thundershower that lasted 10 minutes. I stood at the arriving/departing flight display and watched the "delayed" updates cascade down the board followed in about 30 minutes by "cancelled" updates cascading down the board.

It may seem like a small storm from your vantage point as you watch it pass by but if it were actually a squall line hundreds of miles long but only 20 miles wide for which flights had to deviate great distances to get around the backside there could easily have been lengthy delays. (sorry for the run-on sentence)

I read a lot that air traffic control is a bottleneck in the current system and that migration to GPS tracking will help over time. Could you elaborate?

GPS has its place and will no doubt help us especially in areas where there is spotty radar coverage but when you're talking higher altitudes it's really not an answer to any of the current problems. The current problems aren't with the amount of airspace but with the amount of tarmac space once the planes arrive at their destination. Airports can only handle a specific amount of traffic per hour but airlines routinely schedule more than capacity allows.

We're at the point now where I think the public would welcome some sort of government intervention to help establish a more realistic flow at some of the major hubs. How they equitably do that is the million dollar question.

Kevin g

[Viper]

My perspective.

1). I for one am shocked when I fly that I take off and land without getting killed. I view air travel as the most dangerous thing I do that day (blah blah yada yada to the stats of driving a car, walking, using a toaster or slipping in the shower).

2). The complexity of an actual airplane, the people it takes to support the machine...air travel is astounding...people take it for granted and think they should get from point 'A' to point 'B' seamlessly, without any glitches...LOL.

3). The results of the 9/11 attacks took a system that was overloaded and made it even worse.

Overall, I view flying as amazingly complex, the opposite of walking. Human flight is really a brand new thing; flying was just invented, the Wright brothers were just seen near Kitty Hawk. That said, flying planes within gravity's reach is boring, it's time we go upwards, past the clouds. If you have a layover, eat some bacon, you'll feel better.

Five bucks to anyone who knows what the photo is, it helps offer some perspective.

[1happygirl]

Don't pretend to know all the ins and outs of the biz in particular. A friend just got back from Greenland & Denmark very unhappy with the Scandinavian Airlines. From what I heard about schedules etc., the pastures aren't any greener over there. My friend travels alot for pleasure and in decades of travel hasn't had a bag misplaced or plane missed until now. There wasn't a whole lot of info or helpfulness given at the time to connect flights and the info that was given was incorrect. Apparently, it's bad all over. When I shipped my Dad to his reunion, I shipped him Southwest. Awesome service although it did sux having to change planes. If you have a lot of time, SW is cool, plus parking is better where they fly from.

Going on holiday in January, we'll see.

[gt6267a]

flying home over thanksgiving, i offered the airline reps at the gate $500 to cancel the flight. with all their inability to take off you would think that would push them over the edge. what good is a failing system if one can't have it fail when desired? i ended up flying, arriving on time, and having to spend days freezing my buns off.

viper ... i think that is either the first transister or a child's art project gone wrong.

[Climb01742]

What can break the cycle? Re-regulation and high prices.

bingo. everything in life can't be cheap. figure out what the landing/take-off capacity is for each airport. auction off the slots. let the airlines charge what they can.

but this is a symptom of a larger issue. everything has limits. but we as citizens, and our politicians, aren't willing to grapple yet with the consequence of limits.

i often wonder if a politician said, look, we as a nation can't have everything we want. so let's decide what we REALLY want, make some hard choices and then pay the price to get it. each of us does this in our daily life with work and family. yet as a nation, we buy the promise of endless tax cuts with endless spending. weird.

[1centaur]

i often wonder if a politician said, look, we as a nation can't have everything we want. so let's decide what we REALLY want, make some hard choices and then pay the price to get it.

The greater the difference between those who pay and those who receive, the more removed that kind of decision is from our own personal budgeting. And that's before we consider the selfish gatekeeper mentality of politicians.

The way I look at it, it's immoral to take someone's money away by force, so when it's done it must either carry greater morality or be for the common good. Without belaboring which budget line items qualify, it would be fairly easy to pick out a lot that don't.

[staggerwing]

Viper,

The first transistor. 1947.

[gt6267a]

Viper,

The first transistor. 1947.




Five bucks to anyone who knows what the photo is, it helps offer some perspective

stag,

i just realized viper didn't say **the first person** he said "five bucks to anyone" ... it looks like we are both in the money!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

viper,

i am with you on being impressed everytime a plane takes off ... i grew up near bell labs and my best friend's dad worked there as a r&d engineer. the brain power in the building was bad azz. he has great stories about the first unix machines, crays, strange but brilliant co workers ...

[velotel]

Unfortunately one real solution to the flying problem is no longer realistically available to usaers, the train, specifically high speed trains. If someday you have the opportunity to ride a TGV (high speed train in french) here in France, you'll discover how enjoyable traveling can be. Super fast, super smooth, amazingly quiet, from city center to city center, easy access, no early check-in/waiting around for hours to leave, and most of the time (in fact with rather astounding frequency) on-time to the minute. If the schedule says it leaves at 10:23, you'd better be on board at 10:22:30 or you're out of luck. Unless of course the head conductor sees you running for the train and waits long enough for you to get on board, which they do up to a point. If there was a TGV to the states, I wouldn't even dream of getting on a plane to go.

To give you an idea of what the TGV does, flying from Lyon to Paris is about a one-hour flight. Getting from where I live to the airport is another hour or so what with the check-in time, etc. (that time is by the way way shorter here than stateside). Then from the airport in, or rather outside of, Paris into town is easily another hour plus between exiting the plane, exiting the terminal, hopping the metro or bus or whatever. All in all terminus to terminus three and a half hours easy, or more. Same trip by train, three hours, no hassle, total comfort.

But as said, that option is no longer realistically available in the states. They tried down in Texas, as perfect a place for a TGV as you'll find, to set up a TGV between Houston, Austin, and Dallas. From what I understand the project got killed by Southwest airlines and their political buddies. Trains are of course openly subsidized and as has been clear for a long time, certain people in DC hate all government subsidies and especially subsidies for trains, except for those that profit their personal employees, the corporations and lobbies who fund their lifestyles. Naturally they totally overlook the enormous subsidies that the airline industry receives, like airports, air control, weapons systems built by the companies that build commercial planes, etc., etc.

Individual airlines may lose money on a permanent basis but if one looks behind the airlines at the huge infrastructure that supports flying, from the plane builders to fuel suppliers to the food suppliers to the politicians fronting for all these people, you're talking about a gigantic industry that generates one heck of a money flow and consequent profits.

Since trains aren't on the horizon for statesiders, about the only remaining solution is pretty simple really, stop flying. The only time I fly anymore is when I fly back to the states to see my son because that's the only real option I have; going by boat is too long round trip. Outside of that trip, which is only once maybe every two years or so, we no longer go anywhere that requires flying. And that's here in europe where life in the flying lane is vastly more relaxed than in the over-policed world that is now the usofa.

[gt6267a]

velotel,

isn't the acela a tgv? it runs between boston and DC. it is quick and nice. i used to take it from boston to nyc and used the same calculus of train time + city to airport travel time and found it much better than flying by time, comfort, and fun. it would be great to see train travel grow in the states. i much prefer it to driving.

[sg8357]

velotel,

isn't the acela a tgv? .

Not really, the TGV run on hi-speed tracks, the US tracks are built for freight
and nobody is interested in building hi-speed track, just like nobody wants to build more airports. Amtrak passenger trains have lower priority than freight trains so the passenger trains are often delayed. IIRC Acela is an exception.

Auctioning off airline slots seems like a good idea, the airlines say it will keep the new little airlines out of the markets, bad for competition. Nimbyism keeps
most airports from expanding, even if they got the slot auction money.

Me, I'm investing in Zeppelins, low noise and no airports. :)

[stevep]

velotel,

isn't the acela a tgv? it runs between boston and DC. it is quick and nice. i used to take it from boston to nyc and used the same calculus of train time + city to airport travel time and found it much better than flying by time, comfort, and fun. it would be great to see train travel grow in the states. i much prefer it to driving.

its not that high speed. the tracks are not adequate ..
i thk it gets close to 100mph in a few spots.
it is supposed to be a nice ride ( i have not been on it )
i thk its 3 hrs boston to nyc. as fast as flying if you were going downtown and faster these days w/ all the bs at the airport.

[Tom]

They spent something in excess of $400 grand to cut down all the trees in the median along the Northway a few years back. The Northway's the local 12 mile parking lot southbound in the morning, northbound in the afternoon. Everybody wants to live up around Clifton Park and Saratoga, so they drive and drive.

A few years back there was to be a study of the feasibility to install light rail up that corridor. $250,000. The ex-congressman Sweeney had it quashed.

I wonder if he wished there was rail service this year, the night he was busted DWI on the Northway with an unidentified young lady in her twenties sitting, uh, shall we say, right next to him. Sort of next to him, if you know what I mean.

Probably not, now that I think about it, considering they'd have had to wait until they got to his house.

[gt6267a]

i see there are some haters ... first, irrespective of the tracks, the train is the tgv ... nice seats, quiet, quick (for the states), even leans on the turns ... it is much nicer than the old metroliner.

per the tracks and speed, i remember the conductor telling me they were rev limited to 125mph and spent most of their time around 100mph=160kph. in france, i believe there are a few sections where they hit 300kph = 187.8mph, but spend most of their time in the mid-200s. it would be nice to see nice tracks in the states and to let them open it up. especially in the northeast where the non-flight time is such a large portion of the total trip time.

[stevep]

i see there are some haters ... first, irrespective of the tracks, the train is the tgv ... nice seats, quiet, quick (for the states), even leans on the turns ... it is much nicer than the old metroliner.

per the tracks and speed, i remember the conductor telling me they were rev limited to 125mph and spent most of their time around 100mph=160kph. in france, i believe there are a few sections where they hit 300kph = 187.8mph, but spend most of their time in the mid-200s. it would be nice to see nice tracks in the states and to let them open it up. especially in the northeast where the non-flight time is such a large portion of the total trip time.

no hater here.
just does not hit the speeds like in europe.
i wish we had way more use of this.
we are 50 years behind europe now on transportation and getting further behind.
it is a 220+/- mile trip and it takes 3 hrs. so i cant figure out how fast it goes.
ill leave that to someone with a slide rule.

[saab2000]

Just woke up in Raleigh.... Got to the hotel about 2 AM along with 50 other exhausted, crabby passengers.

Some thoughts.

1. The unions get blamed for a lot. They are not blameless but it is far deeper than that. The union is the first one to say that an 18-hour layover is absurd. The FAA requires 8. My union requires 8 'behind the door' at the hotel. Hardly unreasonable in an industry where fatigue is a big factor. But the company schedules us for 18 hours! I am an asset, not a liability. And if the company cannot schedule us efficiently it is not my union's problem or fault.

We can legally be scheduled to fly up to 100 hours per month. We are paid for a minimum of 75 hours. There are schedules in our system which fly us less than 75. Do the math. Not productive.

Also, unions have very little leverage anymore. The companies will say otherwise and use them as an excuse, but the reality is that unions are truly a shadow of what they once were. They are for the most part, not to blame for the problems that exist today.

2. GPS is in use and has been for a long time. It's great, but doesn't help with delays. It is just another system to back up an already very accurate system of ground based navigational aids. GPS doesn't help if there are already 40 airplanes in line for T/O and landing and ATC is holding airplanes in the arrival routes.

3. The US trains, from what I know, don't hold a candle to European trains. It would cost hundreds of billions of dollars to create a comparable system and would probably stretch only from south of Washington to Boston. I will admit to never having ridden on an Acela train, but I find it hard to believe that they are comparable to the European trains. That said, I don't doubt that they are far better than flying for getting from one city center to another in a reasonable amount of time. I would like to try one sometime.



I guess I have been over this stuff all before....

BTW, whoever asked if the system basically works? Sort of. But lately I have been working only afternoon shifts and in the afternoon the flights are delayed. For the last month my days have been finishing hours late on a regular basis.

We'll keep flying. Today I am the La Guardia shuttle from RDU and then to Charleston, SC and back to LGA and the to Charlotte for the night.

[PaulE]

It is not a God-given right to fly to Orlando or Las Vegas for $299 or $399 or whatever relative bargain, in your pajamas or dirty sweatsuit, with two gigantic pieces of wheeled carry-on luggage that barely fit in an empty overhead compartment.

Airlines should be required to pay the full cost of air travel. This includes all of the cost of airports - construction, operations, maintenance, security and baggage handling.

Airlines should have to prove they have the financial wherewithall to pay these costs and adequately maintain their planes - both so they don't crash and so that toilets don't overflow when planes are stuck on tarmac for several hours.

Airlines should be able to charge what they need to pay all of these costs and make a profit.

It seems like at least once a month there is a news story about how obese Americans are becoming. Each generation is becoming taller generally too. Coach airline seats need to be wider with the rows spaced farther apart so that there is adequate leg room. This will decrease an airplane's capacity, but that will be reflected in the cost. If airlines refuse to change their seating, they can at least bolt the seats upright so that no passenger can recline his seatback into the lap of the person behind him. Ever sit with a rear bulkhead behind you so your seat didn't recline with the guy in front of you insisting on his right to fully recline his?

Limit carry on luggage to purses, small items and essential medical supplies. Fix the baggage handling systems so that passengers will not be afraid that their luggage will either be lost or damaged beyond recognition if they check their luggage. This will cost money, but it will become part of the cost passed on to the passenger.

We don't need airplanes that can fly from point A to point B faster, or farther without landing to refuel. We need to fix the process of getting into the airport, on the plane and off the plane and out of the airport.

Anyone old enough to remember air travel in the 50's or 60's will remember that it was glamorous. People actually got dressed up to fly. Of course it was all regulated and more expensive then.

If the resorts in Orlando, Las Vegas, wherever start hurting, they can put together package deals that include airfare.

[ss-jimbo]

i see there are some haters ... first, irrespective of the tracks, the train is the tgv ... nice seats, quiet, quick (for the states), even leans on the turns ... it is much nicer than the old metroliner.

I took a train from Rhode Island to DC last December and the time for the Acela was only about an hour less than the regular train. There was no way I was going to pay the premium (~$100 I think) to save an hour.

[Viper]

stag,

i just realized viper didn't say **the first person** he said "five bucks to anyone" ... it looks like we are both in the money!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

viper,

i am with you on being impressed everytime a plane takes off ... i grew up near bell labs and my best friend's dad worked there as a r&d engineer. the brain power in the building was bad azz. he has great stories about the first unix machines, crays, strange but brilliant co workers ...


Indeed, it's the first transistor. I owe you a beer. I displayed that photo to show how far we've come in such a short time; organized air travel was an invention of the 1960's (along with James Bond movies). It was just yesterday we were traveling by horse/carriage with a notion the Hindenburg and Led Zeppelin were the ticket. Arrive on time? Heck I take the LIRR (train in NY) and it's technology has barely changed in 75 years. I also think ancient Egyptians etc. might look at what we've created, shrug and say, "Yeah, big deal."

My three nephews all were in awe of planes in the sky, "LOOK" they'd say at age 3, 4, 5 and on..."LOOK at the plane in the sky!" I laugh and so does their Grandmother, my Mom as that was my first complete sentence as a kid. Apparently I didn't speak as a baby/young Jedi, then one day I said to Mom, "Look, look at the plane in the sky" and she admits she nearly cried as I finally spoke. Now you can't shut me up, lol. I'm with my nephews, still in awe of a plane in the sky.

I watch 'The Right Stuff' once every few years just to keep perspective. Great movie. I wanted the Omega moon watch as a kid, still do.

[saab2000]

1. Aviation wasn't invented yesterday, even though it is recent.

2. Those pictures of the Star Wars things are cool! Same with the Kirk poster! :beer:

[Viper]

1. Aviation wasn't invented yesterday, even though it is recent.


Agreed, as I offered, many 'ancient' civilizations would get a chuckle or two of what we think a modern technology. I think they would find penicillin and Lucky Charms to be cool though.

http://www.ueet.nasa.gov/StudentSite/historyofflight.html

[velotel]

In april of the last year a new TGV train (a double decker at that) set a new speed record of, are you ready for this, 574,8 kpg. That's 359,4 mph for those of you who still measure distances by the presumably smelly foot of some long dead british king. And no, the regular trains don't run that fast but they do run regularly up in the 300's.

But what really makes the TGV an incredible system is that while they require special rail lines for the high speed runs, the same train runs just fine on normal tracks. For example the TGV between Grenoble and Paris runs on normal tracks at fairly normal speeds between Grenoble and somewhere out towards Lyon where it joins the main TGV track. SNCF also runs TGV's up into the Alps during the ski season to Bourg St Maurice (great place for riding with some beautiful cols above town, like the Petite St Bernard, l'Izeran, Cormet de Roselend) and for a good long percentage of the run they're on normal tracks. Something like a thousand people per train and they run huge numbers up a day during the peak season.

So yea it's a great system but the cost of building it is pretty intensive as they require a special track system with long, long turns and either no tunnels or really big tunnels or else they have to slow way down due to the wave of air expanding off the nose of the train. Before the bushman and clinton bankrupted the government the usofa could have built similar systems (though no doubt there's no way they'd ever buy the trains from France) pretty economically but unfortunately trains are not in the political lexicon so that was never an option. Plus for whatever reason the so-called 'thinkers' are entranced by magnetic trains and every other wild idea that comes along. But as already said, one of the great aspects of the TGV is that it runs on normal tracks too which makes it seriously flexible. Like no new tracks are necessary to get to the stations for example. Big advantage.

But outside of all that, the TGV is a great way to travel. And if your bike is in a box of some sort, and believe me the interpretation of what constitutes a box can be quite loose, you can take it on the train with you. If you've got a coupled bike, it's even easier. And you really can schedule trips with tight connections between trains with no worries. Unless of course there's a strike but if there is a strike, SNCF and the unions also provide lots of information on when the strikes will be and how long they 'think' they'll last.

And speaking of strikes, a few, very few, comments on the comments regarding unions in the states. It's pretty amazing how the repubbers in the us, and the demos too for that matter though that was often more a matter of me too out of fear, have succeeded in demonizing unions. To read where people are laying the blame on unions is laughable because if it weren't for the efforts of unions over so many years, there wouldn't be any middle class in america. And rather ironically, today the middle class is disappearing right when the unions have been reduced to vague shadows of their old selves. Which isn't to say that there weren't all kinds of abuses in the union world but no more so, and probably less so, than there were in the normal political world. Especially today with the rich becoming richer and richer and everyone else, middle class included, destined to the life rafts full of holes.

So before all those who are so down on unions start blaming the airline mess on the unions, perhaps you ought to take a long look at who really profited out of all this and who in fact took it in the shorts big time. Gotta love this pres who likes to come across as just one of good ol boys while shoveling more and more of the american wealth to his buddies. My guess is that the us would be in way better condition today if the unions were still a force to be reckoned with. And I suspect that in the near future they will in fact come back because the only way the general public is going to change anything is united and that means unionizing in various ways.

[Viper]

Voltel, in 1992 a dude from 'Singles' had an awesome train system and he was shot down. Great movie and Mother Love Bone rocked.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yQ44MDnliPw

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k7CPIXnaeeQ

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dkPE2ovrxp0

[benb]

I took the Acela from Boston -> NYC -> Boston a few months ago.

It's nicer then the regular trains but it's almost as expensive as the airplanes, and it only shaves about 30 minutes off the travel time for the regular train. All in all not a good deal/value at all until they can open the Acela up. I think it really only goes about 20mph faster then the normal trains. (90mph vs. 70mph)

The train is more comfortable then an airplane, but the airport is more comfortable then the train. I'd rather spend 2 hours in the airport and one hour on the plane then 3 hours on the train. Overall I wish there were more trains.. I wish we'd get it over with already and extend Boston commuter rail into southern NH.. that would have been far more cost effective then the big dig and other stupid highway projects.

Airlines are amazing.. people do not have realistic expectations at all. Take a flying lesson sometime. Heck go fly a model airplane. Get some perspective on how amazing the entire thing is. They've done such a good job people have actually been able to build up unrealistic expectations as opposed to just thanking God they didn't die in a fireball.

Don't forget air travel is going to get just as hard if not harder then automotive travel as gas prices rise. And alternative fuel airplanes are going to be way way harder to solve then cars. Enjoy air travel while we've got it in it's current cheap form.

High speed rail could be even more effective in the US then it is in Europe if we actually cared. Trains like the TGV would be far more efficient in the big wide open areas of many parts of the US as they'd be able to travel faster for greater percentages of the trips and the time savings would just get larger as travel distances increase.

[Pete Serotta]

They might not be called owners at the time of bankruptcy but there are plenty of business groups that make money when they go bankrupt. (yes some lose also - but the BIG boys do make money (from lawyers, exec, wall street, bank, etc....

WHo pays? you and I via bailouts, guarantees, pension acceptance for the workers, etc.......

which group of owners in a publicly held business that goes bankrupt makes money? Just askin'

JG

[velotel]

nice pics of the zeppelins. Unfortunately the Hindenburg accident doomed them. But a few years ago this company, I think out of Germany, proposed to Airbus the use of these freight zeppelins they build to carry these huge parts for their (monstrous in my opinion but what do I know) new plane, the 380 I think it's called. Seemed like a great idea to me because transporting the pieces on the ground required rebuilding roads (seriously heavy stuff to transport) and basically closing all the roads to all traffic during the movement. But of course everyone was scared to death that the damn thing would blow up so that was that. Great idea though to my thinking. And yea I remember when seeing a plane in the air was an occasion. My dad flew in the first commercial jet between Brasil and the US in fact. Before that we flew once between Brasil and New York in the long distance sea planes that were used for awhile. Nevertheless I still believe that if airplanes and all their genre had never been invented, the world would be a vastly safer, cleaner, and saner place.

[Viper]

Airlines are amazing.. people do not have realistic expectations at all. Take a flying lesson sometime. Heck go fly a model airplane. Get some perspective on how amazing the entire thing is. They've done such a good job people have actually been able to build up unrealistic expectations as opposed to just thanking God they didn't die in a fireball.

I took one flying lesson. I was nervous. Give me a parachute and I'm fine. We take off in a Piper Cherokee. My car's engine was in perfect shape, I'd have felt better with wings on my car. We take off, it was a really hot summer day. We fly over the ocean, it was hazy and we nearly collided with another small plane.

We attempt to land...it took three times to get it down (the hot air wouldn't let the plane land, so we had to go down hard). No fun. I was deaf, ears shot and some dude is telling me about a plane crash, couldn't hear a word he said. I returned home, turned on the tv and found out that JFK Jr.'s plane had been officially reported 'missing' while I was in the air. No more lessons for me.

[Blue Jays]

Thanks for the TGV insights as it relates to travel overseas. Clarified version of earlier post:

"...In April of the last year a new TGV train (a double-decker at that) set a new speed record of, are you ready for this, 574 kph. That's the equivalent of 359 mph. The regular trains don't run that fast but they do run regularly up in the 300's.

But what really makes the TGV an incredible system is that while they require special rail lines for the high speed runs, the same train runs just fine on normal tracks. For example the TGV between Grenoble and Paris runs on normal tracks at fairly normal speeds between Grenoble and somewhere out towards Lyon where it joins the main TGV track. SNCF also runs TGV's up into the Alps during the ski season to Bourg St Maurice (great place for riding with some beautiful cols above town, like the Petite St Bernard, l'Izeran, Cormet de Roselend) and for a good long percentage of the run they're on normal tracks. Something like a thousand people per train and they run huge numbers up a day during the peak season.

So yeah, it's a great system but the cost of building it is pretty intensive as they require a special track system with long, long turns and either no tunnels or really big tunnels or else they have to slow way down due to the wave of air expanding off the nose of the train. The United States should explore building similar infrastructure. One of the great aspects of the TGV is that it runs on normal tracks too which makes it seriously flexible, unlike magnetic trains. Like no new tracks are necessary to get to the stations for example. Big advantage.

Outside of all that, the TGV is a great way to travel. If your bike is in a box of some sort, and believe me the interpretation of what constitutes a box can be quite loose, you can take it on the train with you. If you've got a coupled bike, it's even easier. One can schedule trips with tight connections between trains with no worries..."

[WadePatton]

At 6:00am with 217 passengers, a Southwest flight leaves Phoenix traveling Eastward at 440 mph average speed.

At 7:00am with 129 passengers, a high-speed rail system departs Chicago traveling Westward at 200 mph average speed.

At 8:00am I leave the house with 16 oz of water on two wheels and a bit of a caffeine buzz, contemplating a snappy average speed.

Question-Where did I leave my sunglasses? :confused: :cool:

[rounder]

I took a train from Rhode Island to DC last December and the time for the Acela was only about an hour less than the regular train. There was no way I was going to pay the premium (~$100 I think) to save an hour.

I ride the train nearly every day (75 miles each way). I used to ride the AMTRAK in the morning, which was comfortable and made fewer stops, but gave it up for the MARC commuter train because it was more dependable at arriving on time. Both trains are pretty reliable at getting you there and both run on the same set of tracks.

Both AMTRAK and MARC trains are reasonably fast (capable of going about 110-120 mph) but must go much slower because of speed limits between Baltimore and D.C. for my trips. The ACELA trains are capable of going much faster but only in certain areas of the country. Speeds for all the trains are restricted by their schedules and trains in front of them...there are only so many places available to pass a slower train.

I think the biggest problem with trains is budget funding. The tracks and equipment are expensive to buy and maintain. Ticket prices are already expensive and and only contribute a portion of what it costs to run the system. I believe that most of the money comes from the federal government. It seems that every year, AMTRAK has to go begging before congress for more funding. A lot of that process becomes really political...We must have AMTRAK come to my state!! I worked on a job at an AMTRAK station in El Paso and the train only came to the station several times per week and there would only be about 25 passengers there to get on. Who knows how far the train had to go to El Paso or where it was going from there, but the trips had to be really expensive considering the number of passengers.

[93legendti]

http://www.usatoday.com/travel/flights/2007-12-20-flight-delays_N.htm?se=yahoorefer

[Viper]

At 6:00am with 217 passengers, a Southwest flight leaves Phoenix traveling Eastward at 440 mph average speed.

At 7:00am with 129 passengers, a high-speed rail system departs Chicago traveling Westward at 200 mph average speed.

At 8:00am I leave the house with 16 oz of water on two wheels and a bit of a caffeine buzz, contemplating a snappy average speed.

Question-Where did I leave my sunglasses? :confused: :cool:

LOL. :D

[1centaur]

On unions: they came into existence for darn good reasons and, like all large human institutions, they came to have significant downsides that gradually became well recognized. For the major airlines, their work rules and wage rates helped make CASM (cost per available seat mile) uncompetitive vs. start-ups without the same work rules, less seniority, lower pensions costs, etc. but the same ticket prices (RASM - revenue per available seat mile). RASM minus CASM is profit, broadly speaking. Bankruptcy allowed majors to get their CASM almost in line...for a while. This is not a referendum on unions (which are in decline mostly because the manufacturing base fled for cheaper locales), it's just a fact.

On bankruptcy: there is is no big conspiracy of fat cats. This is capitalism and bankruptcy is a business like any other. With millions of dollars at stake, high priced lawyers and investment bankers can make a difference to creditor recoveries - it's a very specialized area and so few have that kind of knowledge. Whether it's airlines or shoe stores it costs money to go through bankruptcy, and plenty of fat cats lose hundreds of millions of (fat cat client) dollars in airline securities when that happens. The one issue raised with merit is the bailout issue - for whatever reason the US government views airlines as strategically important to the country, so liquidation is viewed as a bad thing. The PBGC tries very hard to minimize its costs re: pensions from the airlines because the dollar size is huge, thanks to length of operations, etc. The airlines lobby hard for bailouts pre-bankruptcy and various concessions in bankruptcy, and for whatever reason they get some success (though not complete by a long shot).

Acela: A lot of extra money for not a lot of time saved, but a much better experience overall. I love trains. Congress has studied train subsidies forever, which are expensive and highly local, and can't get consensus. I bet there are some meaty studies on cost/benefit in the archives for those who don't assume corruption as a first choice.

Airports: Studies show they add local revenues, plus there are significant public safety concerns. It's not surprising they're not funded by the airlines, nor are train stations by the railroad.

Politicians killing rail lines for the airlines: Here in Massachusetts, we think getting Federal dollars for local transportation projects is a winnah! If you wanted to please the voters, and you could bring in those dollars for the construction work on a rail line, you'd make a lot more friends than if you sopped a nervous airline.

[M.Sommers]

Hundreds of planes are grounded. What's going on? They told us all the planes are safe, nothing can happen bro. Flying is dangerous and many planes are trainwrecks waiting to fly atmo.

[saab2000]

Hundreds of planes are grounded. What's going on? They told us all the planes are safe, nothing can happen bro. Flying is dangerous and many planes are trainwrecks waiting to fly atmo.

I disagree that they are unsafe. This is a kneejerk reaction by the FAA and airlines and the media has a field day writing about something they don't really understand. I would fly on any significant airline in the US skies.

I might not like the experience, but I don't think it is unsafe.

But there is no doubt that the airline business is a huge mess. Some form of re-regulation will be required to bring back some semblence of order and service. Yes, that will also include $$$ spend in FAA infrastructure (Air Traffic Control).

[Ginger]

Hundreds of planes are grounded. What's going on? They told us all the planes are safe, nothing can happen bro. Flying is dangerous and many planes are trainwrecks waiting to fly atmo.

The planes are safe, the owners are dangerous.

[sg8357]

The planes are safe, the owners are dangerous.

The owners are just holding down costs to show good quarterly numbers.
Once pilots are paid like greyhound drivers and pensions are fobbed off
on the tax payers, service will not improve, but the share holders will be
happy. Airline travel is bad for the environment right ?, so lets make it
as unpleasant as possible, a market solution to making airlines green.

The airlines are also moving major maintenance to China, far away
from the meddling FAA.

Good news, pilots will be missing from the next generation airliners,
airliners will be drones.

Scott G.

[saab2000]

Once pilots are paid like greyhound drivers and pensions are fobbed off
on the tax payers, service will not improve, but the share holders will be
happy.

Good news, pilots will be missing from the next generation airliners,
airliners will be drones.

Scott G.

I have no idea how much the bus drivers are paid, but I doubt they are allowed to work 16 hour days.

Also, pilots won't be missing. Are you going to climb aboard a pilotless airplane controlled by someone on the ground? Rog-O!! :D

[1centaur]

The owners are just holding down costs to show good quarterly numbers.
Once pilots are paid like greyhound drivers and pensions are fobbed off
on the tax payers, service will not improve, but the share holders will be
happy. Scott G.

May I suggest that the stock market will not be made particularly happy by a quarter's good cost control at an airline facing recession? Too much supply for too little demand (or they would raise their prices, because that's easier than controlling costs) and wildly unpredictable fuel prices driven up by commodity speculators - it's a hellish business that from a stockholder's perspective can only ever be a trade, not an investment.

And I certainly hope the FAA does not need to live in Dubai, El Salvador or Canada to carry out its safety inspections effectively.

[MarleyMon]

Well they won't have ATA to kick around anymore! Nearly 600 out of work here in Indy, 2200 nationwide. How many passengers and crew stranded? My sympathy to the workers, as I have experienced that "Thanks, see ya." day at the office.
On the bright side, Indy will open a shiny new international terminal soon.