The Transportation Department said airlines will be required to provide automatic cash refunds within a few days for canceled flights and “significant” delays.
On the plus side, the US is catching up to the rest of the world. But as happened in the EU when they did the same thing, prices did go up. Not only to cover these expenses, but limiting routes and canceling city pairs because the liability is too high.
For a real world example, one such city pair I fly between often is generally an hour or so delayed every time. The air space is near 100% capacity so you can’t just squeeze in an extra takeoff and landing. The winds are often hurricane level from many directions. Snow in May and June and August happens. Daily hail storms. Daily downpours and thunderstorms. This is normal for a mountainous town. There are 20 flights a day, but they are all whenever and all delayed. Sometimes when the weather clears in the afternoon, the 1pm, 2pm, and 3pm flights all leave at the same time because it’s a break.
This compensation rule makes that flight impossible. In the future my bet is there will be 3 scheduled flights a day when there won’t be weather issues as likely. Huge number of seats dropped. Ticket prices way up. This will happen everywhere just like it did in Europe.
Someone somewhere has to pay for your constant complaining. And it won’t be the airlines themselves. It will be you with ticket prices.
It would be good if we could find a way to distinguish between weather or airspace delays vs airline operation delays… Like we currently do with existing rules.
Do you have economic data to show that the EU rules caused, or likely caused, the price increases?
But the airlines have adapted by now. Many of the short haul routes became unprofitable because 1 delay worth of compensation was almost 300% total profit for that flight. Meaning if you had 1 delay, you had to fly 3 more planes to just break even. Many routes were adjusted to trains and buses.
Also because of the timeline, when you fly a European carrier you’ll notice they just cancel the entire flight right before 24hrs notice period if they think there’ll be issues. Anyone who flies often knows flying through Europe with European carriers is a crapshoot for multiday delays. Flying through the US is a crapshoot for multi hour to multiday delays.
And yes I fly around the world 10x times in a slow year. I’m very much aware of how the routes, carriers, and laws work globally. It’s easy to see the differences after decades of being engulfed in it.
Not quite sure what you’re asking but EU261 is the European regulation. You can find lots of articles about it and research papers. This has been around longer than some current pilots have been alive.
I wonder if there’s not some caveat that either is in the rule or that can be added to select flights like this flight from the depths of frozen hell to which you’re referring. I fly out of Newark Airport, and shits generally just fine, but you can still see delays an cancellations due to weather. I’ve flown many times out of Denver and have had weather cancellations when there’s nothing but blue skies.
I think it’d be totally fair to be able to select routes, like this one, and add some sort of caveat saying hey, this route is notorious for being difficult, and so we don’t have airlines forcing flights up and down for the sake of avoiding having to refund people, and at the risk of personal safety, this route may have loosened conditions or whatever.
As for losing flights in general, I think it’s honestly for the best. Will flying get more expensive? Yep, and it sucks. Might it force the airline industry in general to adapt somehow? I certainly hope so. The standards for flying in the US have truly bottomed out.
And it’s a bit tangential, but if this forces some airlines into failure, I hope we just let them fail, no repeats on bailout bullshit.
As of now, there’s no exception for that except if it is an act of god type event like a named storm. Hurricane, no payout. Denver random Thursday blizzard? Payout.
The US has no high speed rail, flying is the only way around.
On the plus side, the US is catching up to the rest of the world. But as happened in the EU when they did the same thing, prices did go up. Not only to cover these expenses, but limiting routes and canceling city pairs because the liability is too high.
For a real world example, one such city pair I fly between often is generally an hour or so delayed every time. The air space is near 100% capacity so you can’t just squeeze in an extra takeoff and landing. The winds are often hurricane level from many directions. Snow in May and June and August happens. Daily hail storms. Daily downpours and thunderstorms. This is normal for a mountainous town. There are 20 flights a day, but they are all whenever and all delayed. Sometimes when the weather clears in the afternoon, the 1pm, 2pm, and 3pm flights all leave at the same time because it’s a break.
This compensation rule makes that flight impossible. In the future my bet is there will be 3 scheduled flights a day when there won’t be weather issues as likely. Huge number of seats dropped. Ticket prices way up. This will happen everywhere just like it did in Europe.
Someone somewhere has to pay for your constant complaining. And it won’t be the airlines themselves. It will be you with ticket prices.
It would be good if we could find a way to distinguish between weather or airspace delays vs airline operation delays… Like we currently do with existing rules.
Do you have economic data to show that the EU rules caused, or likely caused, the price increases?
Yes you can find many articles about EU261.
But the airlines have adapted by now. Many of the short haul routes became unprofitable because 1 delay worth of compensation was almost 300% total profit for that flight. Meaning if you had 1 delay, you had to fly 3 more planes to just break even. Many routes were adjusted to trains and buses.
Also because of the timeline, when you fly a European carrier you’ll notice they just cancel the entire flight right before 24hrs notice period if they think there’ll be issues. Anyone who flies often knows flying through Europe with European carriers is a crapshoot for multiday delays. Flying through the US is a crapshoot for multi hour to multiday delays.
And yes I fly around the world 10x times in a slow year. I’m very much aware of how the routes, carriers, and laws work globally. It’s easy to see the differences after decades of being engulfed in it.
Any evidence that this actually happened in Europe?
They don’t have any because it’s not true
Yes you can looking many research articles and papers written about EU261
Google Scholared it. Nothing on the first page. Link or it didn’t happen.
Maybe they should build some trains that don’t rely on good weather.
I agree. But usually you build the infrastructure replacement before exploding the current solution.
That would require planning ahead. We don’t think about the future.
Super super interesting. Read this anywhere I could check out or more general knowledge you’ve picked up?
Not quite sure what you’re asking but EU261 is the European regulation. You can find lots of articles about it and research papers. This has been around longer than some current pilots have been alive.
https://www.eraa.org/sites/default/files/era_eu261_study_brochure_final_version_26sep.pdf
One such example. Written by a airline group, so heavily biased. But if you take some time to google, you’ll see the data.
I wonder if there’s not some caveat that either is in the rule or that can be added to select flights like this flight from the depths of frozen hell to which you’re referring. I fly out of Newark Airport, and shits generally just fine, but you can still see delays an cancellations due to weather. I’ve flown many times out of Denver and have had weather cancellations when there’s nothing but blue skies.
I think it’d be totally fair to be able to select routes, like this one, and add some sort of caveat saying hey, this route is notorious for being difficult, and so we don’t have airlines forcing flights up and down for the sake of avoiding having to refund people, and at the risk of personal safety, this route may have loosened conditions or whatever.
As for losing flights in general, I think it’s honestly for the best. Will flying get more expensive? Yep, and it sucks. Might it force the airline industry in general to adapt somehow? I certainly hope so. The standards for flying in the US have truly bottomed out.
And it’s a bit tangential, but if this forces some airlines into failure, I hope we just let them fail, no repeats on bailout bullshit.
As of now, there’s no exception for that except if it is an act of god type event like a named storm. Hurricane, no payout. Denver random Thursday blizzard? Payout.
The US has no high speed rail, flying is the only way around.