I've been reading about the mess our airlines have been thrust into due an unprecedented winter storm.  But none as bad as Southwest.

Have they been expanding too rapidly beyond their capabilities?  From what I have read it surely seems that way.  They cannot account for the whereabouts of most of their crews who, like their passengers, are lost in the labyrinth of the system. 

Beyond the time it will take to sort everything out visa-viz their passengers and crews it's going to take a heap of their money.  

For many years I have avoided air travel.  The airport messes, security gates, surly counter people, and cancelled and late flights soured me on air travel long ago.  Instead, I opted for Amtrack.  

Amtrack takes longer but is relaxing...especially if you book first class sleeping car arrangements.  Dining cars with good menus and usually good company at your table are usually a joy.  One of the things I looked forward to when riding on Amtrack was the dining car experience where I have a deep-sea diver who repaired underwater pipe leaks, a writer of children's books, a couple from Sweden where the husband was a retired Range Rover engineer, and many other interesting people.  It's a perk you don't get travelling by air.

But expect to be late and never try to make same day connections at their terminals.  I always stayed overnight in Chicago when I was going to change trains there.  Same at Los Angeles and Seattle.

Noel

I'm not surprised about Southwest.  It's a low cost, poor quality, cattle-car airline focused on quantity rather than quality.  Unfortunately, many airlines have become this way since deregulation.

I'm with you on the train experience.  When I was stationed in Europe I took a lot of trains and liked using them.  There used to be a lot more passenger trains in the USA, but automobiles came to dominate travel and many places ended train service.

Dave

Dave, we are last in the modern world when it comes to rail travel.  Even in the northeast corridor the Acelas run at lower speeds than they were designed for for most of the route.

Amtrack trains run on freight lines on cross country routes and are supposed to have priority over freight trains and usually do unless they are delayed for some reason.  Then freights have priority and Amtrack trains can run hours late.  

Betty and I took Amtrack from Seattle to Chicago and were over 7 hours late arriving in Chicago.  But that's small potatoes compared to days late and sleeping in airline terminals.

Airlines treat people like cattle.  Railroads treat people like human beings.

Noel

Edited December 28, 20223 yr by birdguy

On 12/28/2022 at 9:43 AM, birdguy said:

Have they been expanding too rapidly beyond their capabilities?  From what I have read it surely seems that way.  They cannot account for the whereabouts of most of their crews who, like their passengers, are lost in the labyrinth of the system.

I've read that Southwest's issues are the result of a common theme - over-optimization for efficiency and obsolete internal systems.

To an MBA, safety margins are wasteful - until they are needed. Southwest has been lauded for its continual profitability over the years, obtained in part through squeezing away its margins in such areas as standby crews, aircraft turnaround times and internal technology systems. All make the balance sheet look better until you have a cascading event, like a winter storm, staff sick with the flu/RSV/etc and systems that are designed to call people in the same time another, more modern technology can send out 1000+ mobile messages in the same time.

Those nice quick turnarounds that make your return on each aircraft look better just kill you - you have no slack time to make up delays and you might as well just start canceling everything I hope Secretary Buttigieg makes an example of them. This is the logical outcome when consumer protection takes a back seat to other considerations.

On 12/28/2022 at 9:43 AM, birdguy said:

For many years I have avoided air travel.  ... cancelled and late flights soured me on air travel long ago.  Instead, I opted for Amtrack.  

Amtrack takes longer ... But expect to be late and never try to make same day connections at their terminals.

From your statement, delays and cancellations do not appear to bother you unless they are incredibly inconveniencing to the passenger. Perhaps you would prefer Southwest? 😄

Cheers!

 

1 hour ago, Luke said:

From your statement, delays and cancellations do not appear to bother you unless they are incredibly inconveniencing to the passenger. Perhaps you would prefer Southwest?

Delays on an Amtrack train where I have comfortable seat in a compartment or bedroom to relax in and perhaps served an extra meal in the dining car are acceptable.  I have never experienced a cancellation.  When I board an Amtrack train I expect it to arrive at my destination late because that has been my experience.  So when I have a connection to make in Chicago or Los Angeles or Seattle or New Orleans I have a hotel reservation so I can make my connection the following day.

That's an order of magnitude better than sleeping in an airport chair and then standing in line trying to make another connection only to be loaded on another airplane, seated in seat elbow to elbow with fellow passengers and served a cup of coffee and a bag of peanuts.

On an Amtrack train I have a comfortable space to stretch out in.  At the center of the car is the porter's station where there is a pot of hot coffee and a bowl of fruit.  Refreshment at the time of your own choosing.  Or go back a couple of cars to the observation lounge and buy a beer and sit behind one of those big windows and watch America go by.

Noel

Noel, the one time I actually traveled via Amtrack was from NW Indiana to Baltimore, MD. The train was already 20 minutes late leaving Chicago, so by the time my late brother and I boarded and travelled almost to the point of entering Ohio, the train had already lost its priority and was relegated now to waiting for the freight consists to have the track.

While the view from the observation lounge was mostly enjoyable, the sidetracks were not so lovely, being in the most run-down places on earth. Filthy and trash filled industrial areas dominated our view for the most part.

What with the delays from being "second class" traffic, we wound up nearly fifteen hours late arriving in Baltimore. Both my brother and I jointly rated the trip as 4.5 on a scale of 10... 🥴

Fr Bill, 

I've enjoyed every Amtrack trip I've taken, and there have been quite a few.

When I lived in Denver I took two trips a year.  Every summer my wife and I rode from Denver to Chicago and then from Chicago to Washington to visit friends.  And every fall I rode from Denver to San Francisco to visit my brother.  Fall is a great time to cross the Rockies and Sierras by rail because the aspens turn gold.

Our last Amtrack vacation Betty and I took the train from Albuquerque to Los Angeles and stayed overnight in LA and caught the Coast Starlight the following morning and rode from LA to Seattle.  We stayed a couple days in Seattle.  Then we rode the Empire Builder from Seattle to Chicago.  Spectacular scenery crossing the Cascades and riding along the southern boundary of Glacier National Park.  The train was almost 8 hours late getting into Chicago but we had hotel reservations at a Best Western just a couple of blocks from the Museum of Natural History.  We visited that museum and the Museum of Science and Industry i the afternoon.  Our train to New Orleans left the next morning and we spent three days in New Orleans.  Then we took the train from New Orleans to El Paso where I rented a car for the drive back home to Roswell.

Most of those trains ran late anywhere from 30 minutes to over 7 hours.  But it doesn't bother me because I plan for it and enjoy the extra time on the train.

When I was in the Colorado Air Guard and had to go back to Chanute AFB in Illinois I always rode the train and stayed overnight in Chicago before getting the train to Rantoul Illinois.

I'm a big fan of travel by rail.  

BTW...15 hours late isn't near as bad as what airline passengers are experiencing this week.

Noel

4 hours ago, birdguy said:

That's an order of magnitude better than sleeping in an airport chair and then standing in line trying to make another connection only to be loaded on another airplane, seated in seat elbow to elbow with fellow passengers and served a cup of coffee and a bag of peanuts.

I was travelling with my daughter from YYZ (grandma's 90th) to ATL in September - about half the time I take a multi-leg flight through New York where I can stop for an hour or so, load up on free food and drinks at the Delta Sky Club and get an extra 500 or status qualification miles. This time we were taking a 9:45pm flight from LGA to ATL, and it got delayed... then the crew timed out at around midnight.

Within 60 seconds of the announcement at the gate area, I received a text message on my phone from Delta asking me to pick my hotel for the evening, then another text to arrange my Lyft to the hotel. Within 30 minutes we were there, and I noticed that we were right next door to Aqueduct racetrack. I called Delta, got rebooked on the 810am out of JFK. When we were at the airport the following morning, the nice folks at the Sky Club where we were having breakfast tracked down my bags and sent them over on the next flight from LGA to ATL. They arrived 45 minutes after we did.

As a bonus, instead of an A321 we got one of the very few 757-200s in Delta's fleet with lie-flat seats in first. Win, win win!

I challenge Amtrak to equal this experience. Yes, I have status with Delta, but it's not top tier.

1 hour ago, birdguy said:

...15 hours late isn't near as bad as what airline passengers are experiencing this week.

The fact that it is news suggests how unusual it is. I don't recall reading reading news stories about Amtrak being delayed, probably because it falls into the dog bites man category. I do, however, know about this: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2021_Montana_train_derailment A former colleague of mine always travels by train for lower carbon footprint, and was on this train and posted pictures right after it happened.

From a safety and convenience perspective, I'll take air travel every time.

Cheers!

1 hour ago, Luke said:

From a safety and convenience perspective, I'll take air travel every time.

Good for you Luke.  Ditto for me except substitute rail travel for air travel.

I enjoy riding on trains.  I like watching the scenery go by.  I like the dining cars.  I enjoy the food.  I like talking to people I share a table with in the dining car or sitting next to me in the lounge car.  I like being able to get up and walk around.  I like sleeping on the train.

There's an old saying, Luke, that getting there is half the fun.  I've never had fun flying in airplanes since they went to jet propelled cattle cars.  I have always had fun riding the rails.  I gotta mention an exception to not enjoying flying.  I had a lot of fun when I was flying general aviation like a Cessna or a Piper or a Mooney myself.

As for the safety factor there were over 200 people on that train that derailed.  3 killed and 50 injures.  70% of the people survived.  What would the survival rate be for B737 be if it derailed at 30,000 feet. 

In the past 20 years 706 people have been killed in commercial aircraft accidents.  In the same period 63 people have been killed in passenger train accidents. 

It could be I might be moreamenable to air travel if I could afford first class and belong to the airline clubs like you do.  But I don't.  So I'll stick to trains.

Noel

 

Edited December 30, 20223 yr by birdguy

I took Amtrak once, a short trip from St. Louis to Springfield IL -- very enjoyable.

In Europe I have ridden the ICE trains in Switzerland and Germany.  I wish we had that here in the USA.  They scared me at first with the speeds...took some getting used to.  Speaking of speed -- have any of you ridden the Shin-Kansen trains in Japan?

No, Rhett.  The Shinkansen was after my time there.  But I rode on a lot of trains in Japan from chugging steam engines and coal cinders to modern electric trains for the time.

Noel

11 hours ago, Luke said:

To an MBA, safety margins are wasteful - until they are needed. Southwest has been lauded for its continual profitability over the years, obtained in part through squeezing away its margins in such areas as standby crews, aircraft turnaround times and internal technology systems. All make the balance sheet look better until you have a cascading event, like a winter storm, staff sick with the flu/RSV/etc and systems that are designed to call people in the same time another, more modern technology can send out 1000+ mobile messages in the same time.

Those nice quick turnarounds that make your return on each aircraft look better just kill you - you have no slack time to make up delays and you might as well just start canceling everything I hope Secretary Buttigieg makes an example of them. This is the logical outcome when consumer protection takes a back seat to other considerations.

I'm right with you up until the last 2 sentences.

I don't expect the govt. to protect me from poor service, incompetence, or companies who put the bottom line above all else, unless safety, fraud, or some other crime is involved. 

Folks should do like me and vote with their wallets.  I had a pretty bad experience with that outfit about 10 years ago and will never fly that airline again.

Dave

14 hours ago, birdguy said:

I like sleeping on the train.

If you say this, I assume you get a sleeper car - which is priced comparably to first class on an airline. When I was pricing out Amtrak to LAS, it was $410 for regular ticket, and around $1750 for a sleeper car, which is broadly similar to airlines. The only gotcha is that for me to get to LAS from ATL involves four days instead of four hours, routing me through DC and Chicago and seemingly every major city except where I wanted to go. (There's a bus connection from Kingman - the drive is nice though). You and I place different premiums on our time, but you seem to pay as much as I do. 

(The lounges, FWIW, average around $15 a visit for me, which when you factor in food and drink costs means it's cheaper for me than mingling with everyone at airport restaurants.)

14 hours ago, birdguy said:

In the past 20 years 706 people have been killed in commercial aircraft accidents.  In the same period 63 people have been killed in passenger train accidents. 

You're doing the math wrong. While 10x as many people have been killed, you need to normalize based on number of passenger miles travelled. In 2019, Amtrack travelled just over 6.4 billion passenger miles, which is a surprisingly large number. During that time, US airlines travelled over 760 billion passenger miles, or almost 120 times as much. Air traffic is much, much safer.

And for what it's worth, looking here suggests only 208, which includes cargo, ferry and charter flights.

10 hours ago, dave2013 said:

I'm right with you up until the last 2 sentences. I don't expect the govt. to protect me from poor service, incompetence, or companies who put the bottom line above all else, unless safety, fraud, or some other crime is involved. Folks should do like me and vote with their wallets.  I had a pretty bad experience with that outfit about 10 years ago and will never fly that airline again.

The challenge with this thinking is that it is based on a fundamentally invalid principle, that all economic actors have equal leverage. It's approaching the economics version of spherical cows in a vacuum.

Depending on where you live, you may not have a lot of choices. In Alabama, I expect you're mostly down to Southwest and Delta, and over a ten year period or less you may have a bad experience on each - what do you do? The airlines don't really care about your individual business, and they understand their structural advantages in markets (more of them, each year) where consumers simply have to take it. Starting an airline isn't like a lemonade stand - there are tremendous barriers to entry and competitors who engage in fundamentally anti-competitive actions regularly when threatened. It's not as bad as dealing with AT&T or Comcast, but it's getting there.

I like Delta, I by and large have good experiences with them, but I am under no illusions as to my leverage with them and have no intentions of going back to the Gilded Age era of consumer-business relations.

Cheers

 

1 hour ago, Luke said:

You and I place different premiums on our time, but you seem to pay as much as I do.

And we place different premiums on comfort.  I prefer to trade saving time in a seat elbow to elbow with other passengers for relaxing in a room with seats I can stretch out in and a door to close to give me privacy if I desire it.

I also value looking out the window at the scenery...especially west of the Rocky Mountains.  The California Zephyr crosses the Rockies in Colorado during daylight hours and the Sierras in California the following day.  I never got tired of it.

This nation has some beautiful geography as well as interesting urban areas.  I have travelled every long distance route both east and west of Denver and Albuquerque more than once and always with a map handy.  I've enjoyed every minute of it.  As they used to say before everyone started flying...getting there is half the fun.  I never had fun flying commercial.  It's always been a nuisance.

I have never wished a trip on Amtrack to end.  I have always wished my flight on a commercial airliner was over.  Especially when crossing the Pacific.

Your lounge is only available at airports between flights.  My lounge travels with me from city to city.

Noel

Edited December 30, 20223 yr by birdguy

1 hour ago, Luke said:

The challenge with this thinking is that it is based on a fundamentally invalid principle, that all economic actors have equal leverage.

Yes, you make a valid point.  Southwest has a huge domestic presence.  I'm not sure they have a lot of leverage over other airlines like Delta, United, and American, though.  There does exist a fair amount of competition in the airline industry.  Despite the mergers over the past 20 years, we still have quite a few airlines to choose from.

I'm not saying that the extraordinary failures on the part of Southwest lately should not be looked into by the govt.  In this particular case the govt.'s role should be simply to ensure that the passengers whose plans were ruined are fairly compensated.  I believe that the Secretary of Transportation is doing just that, and I agree with him.

What I don't want is for the govt., which routinely sets a poor example for efficiency, competence, and responsibility in many areas, to start stepping in and trying to "fix" problems with private companies.

Dave