jfklganyc wrote:

http://nypost.com/2017/09/06/delta-flig ... -and-wins/

when you make the New York Post, a tabloid rag, for being voluntarily "gutzy" and it involves your pilot certificate and an airliner with people on it...you're doing something risky and questionable.

Again I will ask what if there was a maintenance thing on the ground ? if it was the standard sign off that took an hour? Then what?

what if one of the pilots felt ill? what if one of the flight attendants was injured by a bag falling on her hand during deplaning? what if you go to start the engine and you have low oil pressure or high oil temperature? what if you have a bleed leak or duct overheat?

somebody else said these are things that don't happen often ... but when you take a look at the overall picture something does happen frequently.

anyone of those things could've happened and delayed their departure.

I understand that many of the readers on here are not pilots. I also understand that many people that are pilots are not airline pilots. I mean no offense to these people.

as an airline pilot in 2017, in the United States of America,for one of the world's safest airlines, you do not take unnecessary risks without a way out or a backup plan.

this was an incredibly gutsy move but had to work the first time. that makes it an incredibly stupid move.

this isnt a military operation, where you go back to evacuate guys that are surrounded by the enemy. you simply cannot run an airline with that mentality .

if Delta felt the need to evacuate passengers and/or crew from San Juan: you do it earlier, you do it off of a shorter flight with more predictability (from Florida or Atlanta) and you close up shop well before you're anywhere near this thing .

I think this pretty much sums it up:

[quote] Our meteorology team is the best in the business,” said Erik Snell, vice president for Delta operations and customer center. “They took a hard look at the weather data and the track of the storm and worked with the flight crew and dispatcher to agree it was safe to operate the flight. And our flight and ground crews were incredible in their effort to turn the aircraft quickly and safely so the flight could depart well before the hurricane threat.” [/quote}

GalaxyFlyer wrote:

D L X wrote:

GalaxyFlyer wrote:

You don't know much about airline ops, do you, DLX?

I wrote my masters thesis on airline ops. So yes, I know a little.

One thing I know is that even Delta's operation has slack designed into it because of the regularly occurring adventures of the day.

This wasn't a last minute decision. How many days ago did you learn of Irma? Why would anyone think that Delta just learned of a need to lift people from SJU four hours before they flew a plane down from New York?

Also, this wasn't an extra section. DL302 flies daily. I really don't understand a lot of the comments on here suggesting otherwise.

Fair enough, you wrote a master's thesis, care to quote your experience flying and/or actually managing/ commanding flight operations? Me? 14,000 hours, AF commander, 5 years at EAL flying in SJU often and chief pilot for OEM.

GF

is this a pissing contest? I do not recall challenging your bona fides.

Our meteorology team is the best in the business,” said Erik Snell, vice president for Delta operations and customer center. “They took a hard look at the weather data and the track of the storm and worked with the flight crew and dispatcher to agree it was safe to operate the flight. And our flight and ground crews were incredible in their effort to turn the aircraft quickly and safely so the flight could depart well before the hurricane threat.”

And that statement is pretty disturbing too. is Delta actually saying that they could make the flight because their meteorology teams is better than AA's?

D L X wrote:

Our meteorology team is the best in the business,” said Erik Snell, vice president for Delta operations and customer center. “They took a hard look at the weather data and the track of the storm and worked with the flight crew and dispatcher to agree it was safe to operate the flight. And our flight and ground crews were incredible in their effort to turn the aircraft quickly and safely so the flight could depart well before the hurricane threat.”

And that statement is pretty disturbing too. is Delta actually saying that they could make the flight because their meteorology teams is better than AA's?

You know as well as anyone else on here -- it's a press release.

Should they say "we have an average meteorology department so we thought this was okay..." and let the media run with that?

Don't play dumb.

No, but I do think some actual flight experience might be in order when challenging flight decision and calling an airline operation "risky". It most likely want much different than flying in/out of ATL on a spring day with a cold front approaching.

GF

I watched this flight go to SJU yesterday from the safety of an app on my phone. Amazing. I echo the sentiments others have given regarding the skill of the pilots and the dedication of the SJU ground and airport crew that allowed this flight to happen.

I don't think operating this turn had anything to do with "Delta's meteorologists"...they have access to the same weather data as every other airline out there. The reality is DL ventured where at least two other airlines didn't, so this was by and large a business decision. As this flight got closer and closer to SJU, with Irma bearing down over the Lesser Antilles islands just a hundred or so miles away, it seemed to me that there was a small publicity-stunt element to this flight. While I am sure it was operated safely, as others have pointed out it was a slightly risky operation to get the plane in and out just as parts of the storm began moving over the city. A delay of any kind would have meant an expensive airplane was potentially sitting on the ground left to ride out a very dangerous and damaging hurricane. Not lost on me are the DL fanboys who, if the situation were reversed and AA or B6 had ventured to SJU while DL safely turned back, would have been the first to call foul here.

It certainly was a fascinating flight to follow, and I'm glad it all went perfectly so that we can discuss the what-ifs hypothetically.

There is always a risk, even if they had flown 3 hours before, an engine or any failure could have happened.

If I was an employee or anyone that paid to get out, I would have been very great fully and happy to Delta to get me the heck out before hell broke loose. Pretty sure there was someone there banging their head for not choosing Delta to JFK yesterday,
To an employee it tells them that Delta really care for them, and that is why their services are better than the average airline. "Happy employees happy guess",

Is ironic to hear about people willingly wanting to stay in a disaster pathway and then after being stroked hard asking for heroes to rescue them,
In the other hand you have people willingly wanting to get out before the disaster happens, and people bashing the heroes that safely rescue them.

D L X wrote:

Our meteorology team is the best in the business,” said Erik Snell, vice president for Delta operations and customer center. “They took a hard look at the weather data and the track of the storm and worked with the flight crew and dispatcher to agree it was safe to operate the flight. And our flight and ground crews were incredible in their effort to turn the aircraft quickly and safely so the flight could depart well before the hurricane threat.”

And that statement is pretty disturbing too. is Delta actually saying that they could make the flight because their meteorology teams is better than AA's?

Based on my understanding, NW was known in the industry as having the best meteorology department. Assuming that the NW meteorologists stayed with DL after the merger, their knowledge, experience, and technology will have passed on to DL. Perhaps someone else here can go into further detail regarding NW's history in weather forecasting.

Yeah, this is a whole lot of hype about nothing. The flight wasn't "racing the storm", unless by "racing" one means "turning back as soon as it became apparent that it would no longer be safe to continue" (an eventuality which wasn't realized in this case).

I dispatched a flight into IAH the day Hurricane Harvey made landfall. They held for over an hour NE of IAH, at which time we received a report of extreme turbulence by a CRJ on final. At that point, we agreed it was no longer safe to continue and went somewhere else instead. These flights are monitored at every minute; dispatchers and pilots work together to determine the safety of the operation and the movement of the weather. I have no doubt whatsoever that a flight like 431 was dispatched legally and flown safely. There was rain and wind at the airport. That's the case for a lot of flights, and no one gets excited. Move along.

https://flightaware.com/live/flight/AIJ ... /MMMX/MMSD

Interjet 2801 flew into Cabo during the height Lidia last week, when everyone else canceled. They timed it for landing during the storm's center passing over SJD. VIP flight with federal disaster coordinators to be on the ground. Landed on the 3rd attempt, when winds dropped to under 45 knots for the window of opportunity.

The biggest risk I see with this flight is lightening shutting down the ramp while the airplane was on the ground. They probably were tankering quite a bit of fuel since they probably had enough fuel to get back to the mainland, but still probably required some fuel. Lightening could stop the loading and fueling process. If the bands persisted, the hurricane could be approaching closer and weather deteriorating more to the point where thunderstorms and crosswinds would have prevented the plane from departing. The best meteorologists can't predict when and where lightening will occur and if the edges of the outer bands had lightening, that could keep the plane on the ground.

When Hurricane Harvey hit Texas, EVA and Korean Air flew in to Houston on Saturday morning. All the other long haul international airlines decided to divert. Korean got their flight out. EVA did not and ended up with a 777 stuck in Houston for 5 days, which certainly is not where they would want a 777. There is risk that an airplane can get stuck when it is known that weather will deteriorate quickly in the form of a hurricane or blizzard.

This is anecdotal, but in winter storms I've noticed Delta push on and keep running flights beyond the point where other airlines give up in storms. UA and AA seem to take a more cautious approach in my opinion. Delta is not unsafe. Let that be clear, I don't believe that at all. This is mostly snow conditions in the Northeast that can grind an airport to a halt but not entirely close it. For example UA might cancel the entire day of flights at EWR during a noreaster whereas DL waits until 10am or noon before they cancel the whole days schedule and run a few flights in the morning. Like 747-600X said, I have no doubt that the flights are dispatched legally and flown safely, but they do increase the possibility of events like Delta 1086 at LGA happening. I've also seen Spirit flying when others aren't.

goboeing wrote:

You know as well as anyone else on here -- it's a press release.

Should they say "we have an average meteorology department so we thought this was okay..." and let the media run with that?

Don't play dumb.

No, they shouldn't say anything at all comparing their meteorological department to others. If you want to talk about dumb, that was dumb.

max999 wrote:

Based on my understanding, NW was known in the industry as having the best meteorology department.

NW had developed some technology in the late 90s and early 2000s to predict turbulence, and they were in fact better at it than other airlines. Then they shared it with other airlines. I do not believe that it is wise to suggest that their meteorologists are "better" than the rest of the industry.

GalaxyFlyer wrote:

No, but I do think some actual flight experience might be in order when challenging flight decision and calling an airline operation "risky". It most likely want much different than flying in/out of ATL on a spring day with a cold front approaching.

Does that help you know where the extra planes and crews that can fly a mission are? My work did.

Again, I'm not making this a johnson measuring contest, and I don't understand why you are trying so hard to make it one. One only challenges someone's credentials when they don't have a counter to their argument.

goboeing wrote:

I'm a pilot and I'm not cringing.

Sure, a 1-in-10000 maintenance scenario where you have a sudden non-deferrable issue arise a few minutes before departure time on a jet that just flew in with everything working is possible.

But that's about it, and that's probably about the probability of that happening: 1 in thousands.

Someone gets sick? Well then they're not going. Does that answer this question?

What if, what else?

Multiple runways at the airport, and they face different directions. Wind well within limits.

It's 2017 -- TAF wind forecasts are very accurate and this storm can be seen coming on the radar/satellite at a predictable speed.

In my experience the angry mob doesn't deal well with facts that don't support their failed position...

DL operated two flights that were well within operating limits. I really don't even see why this is a thread... Fake thread?

D L X wrote:

Our meteorology team is the best in the business,” said Erik Snell, vice president for Delta operations and customer center. “They took a hard look at the weather data and the track of the storm and worked with the flight crew and dispatcher to agree it was safe to operate the flight. And our flight and ground crews were incredible in their effort to turn the aircraft quickly and safely so the flight could depart well before the hurricane threat.”

And that statement is pretty disturbing too. is Delta actually saying that they could make the flight because their meteorology teams is better than AA's?

It's called SPIN.
They have the same WX everyone else has (ok they have an app) so do we. Delta has an outstanding PR department and that is what this is. It's not the landing that is an issue it was the flying out part. Where would he turn (between then wx bands) if he lost an engine or if anything went wrong. This is not the East Coast with a bunch of airports all over the place. I'm sorry it seemed like a risk they didn't need to take. But again Delta and some on here are acting like it was the last flight out of Saigon. I am not sure about their meteorologist team but their PR people should get a bonus for this. Oh and for the record I can see what the turbulence is on our wx app as well and look for better altitudes and routes. I love how they act like it's a big secret. Again I don't hate Delta but please spare me the heroic nature of what they are saying. Now if something did go wrong every single person would be saying why were they flying down there.

fastmover wrote:

D L X wrote:

Our meteorology team is the best in the business,” said Erik Snell, vice president for Delta operations and customer center. “They took a hard look at the weather data and the track of the storm and worked with the flight crew and dispatcher to agree it was safe to operate the flight. And our flight and ground crews were incredible in their effort to turn the aircraft quickly and safely so the flight could depart well before the hurricane threat.”

And that statement is pretty disturbing too. is Delta actually saying that they could make the flight because their meteorology teams is better than AA's?

It's called SPIN.
They have the same WX everyone else has (ok they have an app) so do we. Delta has an outstanding PR department and that is what this is. It's not the landing that is an issue it was the flying out part. Where would he turn (between then wx bands) if he lost an engine or if anything went wrong. This is not the East Coast with a bunch of airports all over the place. I'm sorry it seemed like a risk they didn't need to take. But again Delta and some on here are acting like it was the last flight out of Saigon. I am not sure about their meteorologist team but their PR people should get a bonus for this. Oh and for the record I can see what the turbulence is on our wx app as well and look for better altitudes and routes. I love how they act like it's a big secret. Again I don't hate Delta but please spare me the heroic nature of what they are saying. Now if something did go wrong every single person would be saying why were they flying down there.

So, I posted two links that explains in depth how Delta manages flying in adverse weather conditions by using the industries best meteorological team which consists of 24 professionals and a ground breaking program that helps distinguish the location of nearby turbulence. For purposes of this thread, does anyone know what AA and B6 have at their disposal? Everyone is assuming that the man power and technology is spread equally.

For B6, I did a Google search. Apparently, JetBlue has a guy named Tom who helps monitor and manage the weather for B6 flights. Can that be right? Only one guy, named Tom?

We have an in-house meteorologist (Tom) who monitors weather systems in the air space throughout our network

More here:

http://blog.jetblue.com/unpacked-how-we ... er-events/

Haven't googled AA yet.

Did anyone consider that B6 and AA turned back because their arrivals coincided with an outer band of Irma that was battering the area. The outer band passed and Delta made it in.
It wasn't stupid, or unsafe. I am by no means a DLfan boy, much the opposite rather, but those guys are professional and would not have operated outside of limitations.
It truly amazes me when people on this site feel like they make better decisions than airlines that have been around for 80+years and second guess every decision they make.

Absolutely. Well said.

Aptivaboy wrote:

Did anyone consider that B6 and AA turned back because their arrivals coincided with an outer band of Irma that was battering the area. The outer band passed and Delta made it in.
It wasn't stupid, or unsafe. I am by no means a DLfan boy, much the opposite rather, but those guys are professional and would not have operated outside of limitations.
It truly amazes me when people on this site feel like they make better decisions than airlines that have been around for 80+years and second guess every decision they make.

Absolutely. Well said.

And countered with, did anyone consider that a little better flight planning and working more closely with the airlines meteorology department could've helped get the flight in, like DL's team did? Its entirely possible and since we simply don't know all the facts, no one on here can say for sure why B6 and AA turned back but we can speculate and based on what we know about DL's weather folks, it seems that the DL pilots simply had more information available to them than the other flights. Its entirely possible. Someone posted that all airlines have the same weather info available to them. While that might be true, its also how you execute and decipher that information and get it to the pilots. DL just seems to have an advantage over most others. If everything was so equal, AA and B6 would've made it in.

It could be that Delta saw Irma's outerbands way before the flight got into the region and was able to modify the flight plan so that it could make it in to SJU. If thats the case, and it seems to be the case, than Delta has a better system in place to manage flying through bad weather. All airlines have distinct advantages over its competitors. B6 has certain advantages over Delta and AA just as AA has some over DL and B6. This is advantage DL.

DL 's hubris never fails to reach new heights. Now they have the "best meteorological team"? What was this flight for, PR? The way they're making it hit the airwaves makes you wonder. And if their meteorological team is so good, why did they fail so spectacularly at their jobs back in April? A disturbing level of pride permeates that airline.

Glad they made it out, but getting out =/= a wise decision. There's no way I could put my air crew, ground crew, and airplane into harm's way like that where one unforeseen problem easily could turn into destruction and/or tragedy. Kudos to those who bailed out and played it safe. That's who we should be applauding and rewarding with business.

[code][/code]ONLY POSSIBLE in a Boeing

jumbojet wrote:

fastmover wrote:

D L X wrote:

And that statement is pretty disturbing too. is Delta actually saying that they could make the flight because their meteorology teams is better than AA's?

It's called SPIN.
They have the same WX everyone else has (ok they have an app) so do we. Delta has an outstanding PR department and that is what this is. It's not the landing that is an issue it was the flying out part. Where would he turn (between then wx bands) if he lost an engine or if anything went wrong. This is not the East Coast with a bunch of airports all over the place. I'm sorry it seemed like a risk they didn't need to take. But again Delta and some on here are acting like it was the last flight out of Saigon. I am not sure about their meteorologist team but their PR people should get a bonus for this. Oh and for the record I can see what the turbulence is on our wx app as well and look for better altitudes and routes. I love how they act like it's a big secret. Again I don't hate Delta but please spare me the heroic nature of what they are saying. Now if something did go wrong every single person would be saying why were they flying down there.

So, I posted two links that explains in depth how Delta manages flying in adverse weather conditions by using the industries best meteorological team which consists of 24 professionals and a ground breaking program that helps distinguish the location of nearby turbulence. For purposes of this thread, does anyone know what AA and B6 have at their disposal? Everyone is assuming that the man power and technology is spread equally.

For B6, I did a Google search. Apparently, JetBlue has a guy named Tom who helps monitor and manage the weather for B6 flights. Can that be right? Only one guy, named Tom?

We have an in-house meteorologist (Tom) who monitors weather systems in the air space throughout our network

More here:

http://blog.jetblue.com/unpacked-how-we ... er-events/

Haven't googled AA yet.

No there isn't just one guy at Tom. There is someone in the operations center 24/7 at the weather desk. That is true for virtually every airline and JetBlue has a team of people who monitor weather. I assume Tom would be the chief meteorologist. I don't believe for one second that any one airline is better than the others when it comes to weather, although due to their operations some airlines are more capable.

I have never been in Delta's operations center but I have been in it for other airlines. The bigger airlines have multiple people in dispatch monitoring weather. It isn't just storms. It is also monitoring which airports are requiring ILS approaches, what ETOPS alternates are available, what alternates can be used, which airports and what airspace might begin flow control due to IFR, avoiding turbulence, avoiding thunderstorms, coming up with alternate routes with dispatchers, checking SIGMETS, etc. At one airline, the people on the weather desks have five computer monitors surrounding them.

Manpower is certainly not equal. United, Delta, American, and FedEx have much bigger staffs than other airlines since they have to break down the entire world. You will have one person on the Pacific Desk, another on the Atlantic and the Americas broken up as needed. Airlines without vast international networks like JetBlue, Alaska, Southwest, etc have smaller staffs. Everyone is using pretty similar technology. The airlines work together and share technology and have conferences. Weather is not an area where airlines are particularly competitive with each other. They are very cooperative since everyone benefits working with ATC and Weather together.

Couple of points...

1.Most of the "retail" sources of radar images have the sensitivity turned up for dramatic effect. What looks like a solid band of thunderstorms is probably SCT-BKN thunderstorms embedded in lower rain clouds.

2.The new multi-scan radars are awesome...information is available to the pilots on the radar display that pilots 10 years ago could only have dreamed.

3. The airplane icons on the flight tracker apps are not to scale. A 737 does not have a 10 mile wide wing span.

The airplane did not get anywhere near any thunderstorms.

This again is much ado about nothing. The greatest RISK didn't have anything to do with the flight, it was the risk that they were going to get an airplane stuck on the ground.

Nothing to see here...really.

For those unaware of the process of how to dispatch a flight, this is a really good presentation from an American Airlines dispatcher shared at a recent conference

https://www.faa.gov/about/office_org/he ... rocess.pdf

MSPNWA wrote:

DL 's hubris never fails to reach new heights. Now they have the "best meteorological team"?

Maybe... maybe not. But somebody has to have the "best meteorological team"...if it isn't Delta, can you tell us who does?

We can wait...

MSPNWA wrote:

A disturbing level of pride permeates that airline..

Are you still bitter because you lost your cush union role? Maybe it is time to get over it and move on...

MSPNWA wrote:

There's no way I could put my air crew, ground crew, and airplane into harm's way like that where one unforeseen problem easily could turn into destruction and/or tragedy.

That might explain why you aren't in charge of running an airline... or anything else dedicated to customer service.

MSPNWA wrote:

Kudos to those who bailed out and played it safe. That's who we should be applauding and rewarding with business.

Try to sell that to the people who were stranded there.

NYCAdvantage wrote:

There is always a risk, even if they had flown 3 hours before, an engine or any failure could have happened. If I was an employee or anyone that paid to get out, I would have been very great fully and happy to Delta to get me the heck out before hell broke loose. Pretty sure there was someone there banging their head for not choosing Delta to JFK yesterday, To an employee it tells them that Delta really care for them, and that is why their services are better than the average airline. "Happy employees happy guess", Is ironic to hear about people willingly wanting to stay in a disaster pathway and then after being stroked hard asking for heroes to rescue them, In the other hand you have people willingly wanting to get out before the disaster happens, and people bashing the heroes that safely rescue them.

I think you nailed it.

In my opinion it was a risky move that paid off......but the risk was high and appeared somewhat reckless and shows how arrogant DL can be at times as a company. A corporate culture of arrogance is not very admirable. DL is great at positive marketing and PR, but this flight was an example of arrogance......luckily it all worked out well for everyone.... If you look at the fact that this was a Catagory 5 hurricane and had unprecedented sustained winds of over 180 mph, It was very, very risky, especially if it took an unexpected turn to the south.

coairman wrote:

It was very, very risky, especially if it took an unexpected turn to the south.

Can you please explain how an "unexpected turn" would go unnoticed? I guess maybe if all the weather satellites died, the land based radars died, ships radars nearby died, and all communication in the caribbean was lost in might be possible.

coairman wrote:

In my opinion it was a risky move that paid off......but the risk was high and appeared somewhat reckless and shows how arrogant DL can be at times as a company. A corporate culture of arrogance is not very admirable. DL is great at positive marketing and PR, but this flight was an example of arrogance......luckily it all worked out well for everyone.... If you look at the fact that this was a Catagory 5 hurricane and had unprecedented sustained winds of over 180 mph, It was very, very risky, especially if it took an unexpected turn to the south.

Are you an Airline Captain? Were you there? Have you watched the takeoff video (which certainly doesn't look "reckless" or "very, very risky" to this observer)?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QDo2eq8 ... e=youtu.be

Perhaps you and the previous poster with an anti-Delta agenda should get together and form a better airline. We will all look forward to seeing how you take care of your passengers and employees when the chips are down.

MSPNWA wrote:

DL 's hubris never fails to reach new heights. Now they have the "best meteorological team"? What was this flight for, PR? The way they're making it hit the airwaves makes you wonder. And if their meteorological team is so good, why did they fail so spectacularly at their jobs back in April? A disturbing level of pride permeates that airline.

Glad they made it out, but getting out =/= a wise decision. There's no way I could put my air crew, ground crew, and airplane into harm's way like that where one unforeseen problem easily could turn into destruction and/or tragedy. Kudos to those who bailed out and played it safe. That's who we should be applauding and rewarding with business.

Excellent point! The amount of positive media coverage is very suspect......and how DL avoided very little scrutiny in the media of last April's operational mess was astouding. Should have it happened to another airline like United, it would have been covered endlessly with a negative tone by the national media like CNN.

dupe... sorry

airtechy wrote:

coairman wrote:

It was very, very risky, especially if it took an unexpected turn to the south.

Can you please explain how an "unexpected turn" would go unnoticed? I guess maybe if all the weather satellites died, the land based radars died, ships radars nearby died, and all communication in the caribbean was lost in might be possible.

So many armchair experts here know more than the airlines' operations centers, the meteorologists, and the dedicated pilots... I don't know why nobody takes their advice... [/quote]

airtechy wrote:

coairman wrote:

It was very, very risky, especially if it took an unexpected turn to the south.

Can you please explain how an "unexpected turn" would go unnoticed? I guess maybe if all the weather satellites died, the land based radars died, ships radars nearby died, and all communication in the caribbean was lost in might be possible.

I am referring to the fact that weather storms such as hurricanes can be unpredictable, even with the world's "best" meterorolgists and forecast models, that's all. Look what happened to Houston when the focus originally was on the Corpus Christi region during Hurricane Harvey.

This kinda reminds me of flying into Taiwan as typhoon Megi was leaving the island. It made the 13 hour flight from LAX freaking stressful. We circled for at least 30 minutes on approach into TPE but once cleared to land the approach was as smooth as silk. I am assuming anxiety on this DL flight must have been at an all time high.

alfa164 wrote:

coairman wrote:

In my opinion it was a risky move that paid off......but the risk was high and appeared somewhat reckless and shows how arrogant DL can be at times as a company. A corporate culture of arrogance is not very admirable. DL is great at positive marketing and PR, but this flight was an example of arrogance......luckily it all worked out well for everyone.... If you look at the fact that this was a Catagory 5 hurricane and had unprecedented sustained winds of over 180 mph, It was very, very risky, especially if it took an unexpected turn to the south.

Are you an Airline Captain? Were you there? Have you watched the takeoff video (which certainly doesn't look "reckless" or "very, very risky" to this observer)?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QDo2eq8 ... e=youtu.be

Perhaps you and the previous poster with an anti-Delta agenda should get together and form a better airline. We will all look forward to seeing how you take care of your passengers and employees when the chips are down.

I am not an airline captain, but I have an extensive experience in the airline business, including working with operations and customer service......over 25 years of it........... I think there would be many "professional" pilots that would turn the trip down, and that would be an understandable and reasonable choice....being an overconfident, "macho" pilot is not exactly always a great trait in my opinion... confidence is good though...

coairman wrote:

alfa164 wrote:

coairman wrote:

In my opinion it was a risky move that paid off......but the risk was high and appeared somewhat reckless and shows how arrogant DL can be at times as a company. A corporate culture of arrogance is not very admirable. DL is great at positive marketing and PR, but this flight was an example of arrogance......luckily it all worked out well for everyone.... If you look at the fact that this was a Catagory 5 hurricane and had unprecedented sustained winds of over 180 mph, It was very, very risky, especially if it took an unexpected turn to the south.

Are you an Airline Captain? Were you there? Have you watched the takeoff video (which certainly doesn't look "reckless" or "very, very risky" to this observer)?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QDo2eq8 ... e=youtu.be

Perhaps you and the previous poster with an anti-Delta agenda should get together and form a better airline. We will all look forward to seeing how you take care of your passengers and employees when the chips are down.

I am not an airline captain, but I have an extensive experience in the airline business, including working with operations and customer service......over 25 years of it...........

Which airline? Maybe that will give us a clue as to whose agenda you are pushing.

coairman wrote:

In my opinion it was a risky move that paid off......but the risk was high and appeared somewhat reckless and shows how arrogant DL can be at times as a company. A corporate culture of arrogance is not very admirable. DL is great at positive marketing and PR, but this flight was an example of arrogance......luckily it all worked out well for everyone.... If you look at the fact that this was a Catagory 5 hurricane and had unprecedented sustained winds of over 180 mph, It was very, very risky, especially if it took an unexpected turn to the south.

AA 1511 is currently en route MIA-SDQ. Miami - and Santo Domingo! Do you find that equally "reckless" and "arrogant"? Or is your feigned indignation limited to which airline is doing the flying?

PSU.DTW.SCE wrote:

This is another hall of shame thread on a.net that shows just how many people refuse to understand how this industry operates, the technicalities of airline operations, or listening to people who have experience in this area. To put things in perspective, estimates where there were 25 mph sustained winds at the time of departure. That is well within the safe operating limits of aircraft, and frankly a regular occurrence in daily operations. Despite the view on the radar image, this is nothing unprecedented or unsafe.

All I am saying is safety, is always number one no matter what, and taking unnecessary risks is not a good choice...

coairman wrote:

All I am saying is safety, is always number one no matter what, and taking unnecessary risks is not a good choice...

Then no one should ever fly. And never drive a car... never...

alfa164 wrote:

coairman wrote:

In my opinion it was a risky move that paid off......but the risk was high and appeared somewhat reckless and shows how arrogant DL can be at times as a company. A corporate culture of arrogance is not very admirable. DL is great at positive marketing and PR, but this flight was an example of arrogance......luckily it all worked out well for everyone.... If you look at the fact that this was a Catagory 5 hurricane and had unprecedented sustained winds of over 180 mph, It was very, very risky, especially if it took an unexpected turn to the south.

AA 1511 is currently en route MIA-SDQ. Miami - and Santo Domingo! Do you find that equally "reckless" and "arrogant"? Or is your feigned indignation limited to which airline is doing the flying?

PSU.DTW.SCE wrote:

This is another hall of shame thread on a.net that shows just how many people refuse to understand how this industry operates, the technicalities of airline operations, or listening to people who have experience in this area. To put things in perspective, estimates where there were 25 mph sustained winds at the time of departure. That is well within the safe operating limits of aircraft, and frankly a regular occurrence in daily operations. Despite the view on the radar image, this is nothing unprecedented or unsafe.

SDQ's weather is perfectly fine for flying, especially since the eye is quite a bit north near PLS and SDQ is on the southern side of the Dominican Republic.....it's not the same situation.........I am not an expert in weather and airline operations , just sharing my opinion.....no need to be defensive about it.

coairman wrote:

..I am not an expert in weather and airline operations , just sharing my opinion.....no need to be defensive about it.

Not being defensive; just reminding you that people who are experts in weather and airline operations made the decision that everything would be fine... and it was.


The role of a.net seems to have become a forum for people with no experience or expertise can second-guess those who do have those attributes...

PSU.DTW.SCE wrote:

This is another hall of shame thread on a.net that shows just how many people refuse to understand how this industry operates, the technicalities of airline operations, or listening to people who have experience in this area.

To put things in perspective, estimates where there were 25 mph sustained winds at the time of departure. That is well within the safe operating limits of aircraft, and frankly a regular occurrence in daily operations. Despite the view on the radar image, this is nothing unprecedented or unsafe.

You should have seen it yesterday before the mods deleted half the thread.

coairman wrote:

[SDQ's weather is perfectly fine for flying, especially since the eye is quite a bit north near PLS and SDQ is on the southern side of the Dominican Republic.....it's not the same situation.........I am not an expert in weather and airline operations , just sharing my opinion.....no need to be defensive about it.

so then why did B6, UA and AA cancel all their flights into and out of SDQ and other DR airports yesterday, yet DL did not? Just sayin.....

Jumbo--- I think maybe people would take you a bit more seriously if you just toned it down a bit... or maybe a lot. I'm going to guess you work for delta in some capacity, but whatever.

Moving on, as a pilot with years of experience, I don't think Delta did anything risky in taking off. I think they exceeded some threshold for risk on their property, but it's theirs to take the risk with. The unsafe part of it is enroute alternates being largely in the path of the storm had something forced a diversion. Again though, that's an assessment of risk and I don't blame them for taking it.

And jumbo, before you blast me with Delta's elite weather folks... let me tell you where they swung and missed big time. I flew one of the very last departures this week out of SXM. As I left the crew hotel, I saw a gaggle of delta bashed employees in the lobby that appeared to be stranded by Delta cancelling their departure out. My guess is that crew are still huddled in the ballroom of the hotel. So, just realize Delta, jetblue, AA all have their moments. I think Delta is a very well run airline, but like many they too make mistakes and aren't infallible.

I didn't mean to say delta bashed. The lack of ability to edit on their board is bothersome.

N757ST wrote:

Jumbo--- I think maybe people would take you a bit more seriously if you just toned it down a bit... or maybe a lot. I'm going to guess you work for delta in some capacity, but whatever.

Moving on, as a pilot with years of experience, I don't think Delta did anything risky in taking off. I think they exceeded some threshold for risk on their property, but it's theirs to take the risk with. The unsafe part of it is enroute alternates being largely in the path of the storm had something forced a diversion. Again though, that's an assessment of risk and I don't blame them for taking it.

And jumbo, before you blast me with Delta's elite weather folks... let me tell you where they swung and missed big time. I flew one of the very last departures this week out of SXM. As I left the crew hotel, I saw a gaggle of delta bashed employees in the lobby that appeared to be stranded by Delta cancelling their departure out. My guess is that crew are still huddled in the ballroom of the hotel. So, just realize Delta, jetblue, AA all have their moments. I think Delta is a very well run airline, but like many they too make mistakes and aren't infallible.

How do you know they were DL employees ? DL crews don't spend the night at SXM. The entire crew, pilots, FA's, fly in and fly out the same day. I have taken that flight countless times. In fact, they don't even leave the airport. So unless they were there from a cancelled flight from the day before (which they weren't) I don't see how you knew they were DL employees. I seriously doubt they were wearing DL uniforms on their vacation time.

what do you want me to tone down, because I used the word elite? if I choose to use the word elite, what's the big deal? In my eyes, they are. They do a fantastic job as witnessed just the other day with flight 431. Where others turned around and diverted their flights, DL made it in and out. Should I use the word superior? Average? Mediocre?

PSU.DTW.SCE wrote:

This is another hall of shame thread on a.net that shows just how many people refuse to understand how this industry operates, the technicalities of airline operations, or listening to people who have experience in this area.

To put things in perspective, estimates where there were 25 mph sustained winds at the time of departure. That is well within the safe operating limits of aircraft, and frankly a regular occurrence in daily operations. Despite the view on the radar image, this is nothing unprecedented or unsafe.

Yup. This flight was operated as safely as any other, perhaps even more so with all of the extra scrutiny of the wx. If the flight was deemed unsafe, it would've been turned down by pilot, dispatcher, or both before departure. En route was monitored closely and if anything changed that would affect the safety of the flight it would be turned around and headed back the U.S.

Cessna 172 Flying 101:

-never put yourself in a situation when you have no way out.

nobody has been able to answer this: if the flight took a delay?

you do realize that flights take delays all the time despite the best efforts and intentions of all parties involved.

May I remind everyone talking about industry best practices: The airline with the best meteorology department in the industry pressed on into a snow-covered runway at LaGuardia, landed with a tailwind on said short runway, and exited the runway resulting in an accident. 1.5 years ago.

I sat at gate at JFK for 3 hours that day until snow and wind abated. Refusing to push despite pressure from Ops, CPO, and passengers.

Sometimes the gutzy move is to be prudent when everything and everyone around you is pushing you to get it done.

jumbojet wrote:

N757ST wrote:

Jumbo--- I think maybe people would take you a bit more seriously if you just toned it down a bit... or maybe a lot. I'm going to guess you work for delta in some capacity, but whatever.

Moving on, as a pilot with years of experience, I don't think Delta did anything risky in taking off. I think they exceeded some threshold for risk on their property, but it's theirs to take the risk with. The unsafe part of it is enroute alternates being largely in the path of the storm had something forced a diversion. Again though, that's an assessment of risk and I don't blame them for taking it.

And jumbo, before you blast me with Delta's elite weather folks... let me tell you where they swung and missed big time. I flew one of the very last departures this week out of SXM. As I left the crew hotel, I saw a gaggle of delta bashed employees in the lobby that appeared to be stranded by Delta cancelling their departure out. My guess is that crew are still huddled in the ballroom of the hotel. So, just realize Delta, jetblue, AA all have their moments. I think Delta is a very well run airline, but like many they too make mistakes and aren't infallible.

How do you know they were DL employees ? DL crews don't spend the night at SXM. The entire crew, pilots, FA's, fly in and fly out the same day. I have taken that flight countless times. In fact, they don't even leave the airport. So unless they were there from a cancelled flight from the day before (which they weren't) I don't see how you knew they were DL employees. I seriously doubt they were wearing DL uniforms on their vacation time.

what do you want me to tone down, because I used the word elite? if I choose to use the word elite, what's the big deal? In my eyes, they are. They do a fantastic job as witnessed just the other day with flight 431. Where others turned around and diverted their flights, DL made it in and out. Should I use the word superior? Average? Mediocre?

I thought Delta limited schedules to 8 hours of flying time for non augmented crews. Maybe I'm wrong. I know the regulations allow up to 9 hours of flight time. JFK-SXM-JFK is 8 hours 39 minutes. A 22 minute taxi delay at JFK could make the crew illegal for the return flight, so that is cutting it a bit close.

Here's the pilot scheduling handbook

http://www.pbshelp.info/delta/Schedulin ... ndbook.pdf

JFK-SJU-JFK can be done on a turn. It's a few minutes short of 8 hours flight time.

In an unrelated note it looks like Delta is pressing on with Florida operations today whereas Spirit is mostly cancelling and AA is significantly scaling back. Looks like UA and DL have the fewest cancellations today from Flordia. Delta was the last out of Key West and had their station manager doing interviews about it last night. Delta is pushing on beyond others with this storm and also getting publicity for doing it.

jfklganyc wrote:

Cessna 172 Flying 101:

-never put yourself in a situation when you have no way out.

nobody has been able to answer this: if the flight took a delay?

you do realize that flights take delays all the time despite the best efforts and intentions of all parties involved.

May I remind everyone talking about industry best practices: The airline with the best meteorology department in the industry pressed on into a snow-covered runway at LaGuardia, landed with a tailwind on said short runway, and exited the runway resulting in an accident. 1.5 years ago.

I sat at gate at JFK for 3 hours that day until snow and wind abated. Refusing to push despite pressure from Ops, CPO, and passengers.

Sometimes the gutzy move is to be prudent when everything and everyone around you is pushing you to get it done.

The regulations are rather black and white on whether it is safe or not. The gutzy move is like you say what happens if there is a delay. What happens if the person in the fuel truck decided that he wanted to get back to his family due to the storm and went home rather than waiting for hours for Delta? Same thing with the mechanic to sign off the logbook or the TSA agents. It takes a lot of people, some of whom are relatively low paid and don't even work for Delta to get that plane turned around and out of there. What if lightening shuts down the ramp for an extended period of time and then winds pick up? That is where I consider it a gutzy decision. I have no doubt the flight was safe, but there was risk that the plane could have got stuck.

jumbojet wrote:

How do you know they were DL employees ? DL crews don't spend the night at SXM. The entire crew, pilots, FA's, fly in and fly out the same day. I have taken that flight countless times. In fact, they don't even leave the airport. So unless they were there from a cancelled flight from the day before (which they weren't) I don't see how you knew they were DL employees. I seriously doubt they were wearing DL uniforms on their vacation time.

You are so wrong on so many things in this thread it's tough to keep track. This one is too glaring too ignore.

There are regularly layovers at SXM, STT, etc.

Just because the flight that YOU have taken into SXM usually operated as a turn for the flight crew, does not mean that there isn't another flight that operates as a 24 hour layover almost every day of the year.

Again for you: there are layovers in SXM constantly.

Newbiepilot wrote:

jumbojet wrote:

N757ST wrote:

Jumbo--- I think maybe people would take you a bit more seriously if you just toned it down a bit... or maybe a lot. I'm going to guess you work for delta in some capacity, but whatever.

Moving on, as a pilot with years of experience, I don't think Delta did anything risky in taking off. I think they exceeded some threshold for risk on their property, but it's theirs to take the risk with. The unsafe part of it is enroute alternates being largely in the path of the storm had something forced a diversion. Again though, that's an assessment of risk and I don't blame them for taking it.

And jumbo, before you blast me with Delta's elite weather folks... let me tell you where they swung and missed big time. I flew one of the very last departures this week out of SXM. As I left the crew hotel, I saw a gaggle of delta bashed employees in the lobby that appeared to be stranded by Delta cancelling their departure out. My guess is that crew are still huddled in the ballroom of the hotel. So, just realize Delta, jetblue, AA all have their moments. I think Delta is a very well run airline, but like many they too make mistakes and aren't infallible.

How do you know they were DL employees ? DL crews don't spend the night at SXM. The entire crew, pilots, FA's, fly in and fly out the same day. I have taken that flight countless times. In fact, they don't even leave the airport. So unless they were there from a cancelled flight from the day before (which they weren't) I don't see how you knew they were DL employees. I seriously doubt they were wearing DL uniforms on their vacation time.

what do you want me to tone down, because I used the word elite? if I choose to use the word elite, what's the big deal? In my eyes, they are. They do a fantastic job as witnessed just the other day with flight 431. Where others turned around and diverted their flights, DL made it in and out. Should I use the word superior? Average? Mediocre?

I thought Delta limited schedules to 8 hours of flying time for non augmented crews. Maybe I'm wrong. I know the regulations allow up to 9 hours of flight time. JFK-SXM-JFK is 8 hours 39 minutes. A 22 minute taxi delay at JFK could make the crew illegal for the return flight, so that is cutting it a bit close.

Here's the pilot scheduling handbook

http://www.pbshelp.info/delta/Schedulin ... ndbook.pdf

JFK-SJU-JFK can be done on a turn. It's a few minutes short of 8 hours flight time.

Unless I've completely lost my mind, the pilots flying the plane down from JFK fly it right back up. Its a relatively quick turn. In fact, sometimes the pilots don't even leave the plane. Its off with the arriving pax and on with the departing pax. Have I in fact lost my mind?