Replies

A weather system could cause a disruption like that for several reasons:

The entire system is groaning at the seams at certain hours. Every airline overbooks the runways, that is, you can only launch a plane every 2-3 minutes max (and recover planes at the same pace) but if there are 15 lines at an airport every one of them has seven flight departing within five minutes of 8 AM... five minutes of noon... etc.
Just because the weather is fine where YOU are doesn't mean it's fine at the destination airport. Air Traffic Control now issues ground holds, rather than air holds, when that's the case. (Ground holds are safer and more economical). And because the system's so tightly packed, if a field is closed for a couple hours (rare) or has to slow down its operating tempo due to weather (common), everybody going there has to wait... and that's not all.
Ground holds ripple through the system. A ground hold at, say, SFO, due to morning fog, has second and third order effects, and somebody is on hold at JFK because he can't get into DFW or ORD (O'Hare), because the ramps are all backed up with holding SFO traffic.
The bad weather doesn't even have to be at an airport. This time of year the midwest is full of big, convective weather -- thunderstorms in their birthing, prime or dying stages. You can't fly into a thunderstorm (well, you can't count on doing it more than once, so prudent pilots give them lots of room, and FAA regs and airline ops manuals forbid flying there, where common sense already says don't go). So everybody diverts to hell and gone around the thunderbumpers. This means the controllers have their hands full with planes off the usual tracks, and the controllers' primary mission is always to keep two planes from occupying the same space at the same time (which I why I personally appreciate them) and to keep the planes from merging with the terrain (ditto). This time of year everybody will also be asking the controllers for a higher or lower altitude because there's plenty of bumps. So they are some busy, busy, busy guys and girls. And that slows 'em down -- when they start getting antsy about safety, they slow things down to keep a handle on.
Plus, all this diverting takes time and makes planes more late at their destinations than they would be otherwise. (No choice in the matter: if you didn't go around the storm, you would never arrive at your destination. You can't win the Guinness Book record for lateness, you can only tie). That compounds the problem because you now have planes on the ramp when they are supposed to be turned around and gone, while there are waiting pax in the terminals, frutrated, and planes scattered willy-nilly around the ramp waiting for this and that. There may be no gate open for your airline... so now you sit in the plane for another half hour or forty minutes which feels like forever when you are already late.

So, even though you feel like you were gang-raped by United Airlines, rest assured that the aircrew and the gate agents (low-paid people who take way more abuse than I would ever consider doing) are pretty beat up too. The senior management of the airline (which is bankrupt, and is likely to move into liquidation before 2004 is out) may be responsible for some of this, but the people you see on the planes and in the terminals are getting beat up by the same circumstances as you.

The airline isn't doing this (making you wait) of its own volition, and the 4+ hours you were stuck on the ground are a nightmare for everybody on their side of the deal, too. In fact, if your flight had any chance to make money, that hold erased it just for what the extra cost of wages was (pilots and FAs are hourly employees -- most travellers assume they're salaried). I don't know what equipment you were on (it wasn't a 707 -- those antiques are hauling cargo around the third world, or being converted into pots and pans by scrap dealers). But assuming the usual domestic 737 with two pilots and four FAs the airline probably ate $12,000 in salary and bennies on your flight. You know what you paid for a ticket and how many people were on the plane -- now you see why United is financially paws up?

If the hold had been longer, it would have been worse (for you and the airline) because they would have had to call in another crew. Since fatigue has been cited as a causal factor in accidents, strict crew rest and duty hours rules have come into effect. If they call in a reserve crew, they wind up paying two crews... plus you have to wait while the reserve crew briefs-in on the flight. FAs can pretty much step into the position cold, but pilots have to know certain facts about the plane, the weather and the route before they go.

One thing the lines have done to make better on time stats, as these holds become longer and more frequent, is increase the "official" length of legs by anywhere from 15 minutes to an hour. People are more concerned about arriving when they are promised, than about how much time it takes to fly.

The one thing the captain might have done to make your long stay on the tarmac more palatable is to permit a beverage service. The problem with that is, if the controllers tell him "OK, roll" when the service is ongoing, he has to say, "stand by" while the FAs put the carts away, winkle out any pax who have gone into the lavatories, and get everybody (including the FAs) belted in again. If he's not ready to roll when the controller green-lights him, he may have to say, "unable," and then somebody else goes and he winds up, if he's unlucky, at the back of the queue again.

The bottom line is: more people flying, and paying less, means that flying will be more congested and more hassle. Most people buying airline tickets are bottom feeders price wise. Most people will not spend $50 extra for a direct flight, but they will bitch forever about the airline that "forces" them to change planes. Therefore, very few airlines try to sell service and those that do (Midwest Express, for one) usually go blooey.

The way I see this shaking out is with two or three big bankruptcies, and then the market settling on higher prices. I'm not suggesting airline execs are blameless for the bankruptcies, the majors (especially American and United) have been run by inept kleptocracies for years.

But a nightmare like you had could happen to pax on any line -- even the best run (in the USA, probably Southwest, still).

d.o.l.

Criminal Number 18F

You mention the ticket price; in this case we paid more than $500 for round trip from San Jose to Scranton PA. I don't call that a cheap price. And another thing, UA had NO FOOD on these flights. Well, they had some scummy looking "box lunch" on the flight from San Jose, at the price of $7.00. Not cheap. Crappy looking food. Fortunately I had anticipated that and brought sandwiches for us to eat. Coming back from O'Hare to SJO, NO FOOD available. Period. $500 round trip? For THAT kind of non-service, this was NOT a cheap flight.

All that, and service with a sneer. Lovely. Hell of a way to run an airline (run it out of existence, that is.)

Thank you for the very thorough reply, Criminal Number 18F. It boggles my mind when I consider the logistics of all the different airports, air crews, ground crews and employees, security, air traffic control and the hundred of thousands of passengers that fly daily--on a good weather day. Throw in bad weather in any part of the country and it's a nightmare. My husband flies with one of the airlines that some here wish a quick demise. Flippant comments by clueless people get to me sometimes. The last thing you (I) would want my pilot husband to do, is carry a plane-load of passengers into an unsafe sky. Yes, I get frustrated with delays when I fly and I do think communication is the key to happier passengers, however, some people will not be happy, no matter the reasons for delays.