Thanks Deez ... a quick buzz through here because I want you to know I read and appreciate the opportunity. But my time right now is brief (VW TDI return day) ... and I shant attempt a phone keyboard reply. I think you warrant more than that.
the federal government does have the right to regulate the airlines because they operate in interstate commerce and on federally-funded property
not only that, but in public airspace.
Second, the airline industry is politically well-connected enough to have tremendous influence over the regulations that govern it.
and this isn't unique to airlines. As you mentioned, most legislation is written by the lobbyists. The airlines aren't exclusive to K Street Lobbyists.
Finally, you've criticized the tarmac rule because you state that airlines are forced to cancel a flight rather than sit on the tarmac for three hours.
Forced out of necessity for the business, not by rule.
What part of it is unreasonable?
The part where 4 million is risked in fines for the dastardly act of having to overcome/otherwise contend-with the delay unwinding of the Federal Government's traffic management ... that is ... the Federal Government decides whether 250 flights will be rerouted where and when those reroutes will be issued during taxi-out. When pilots determine the "revised routing" is unacceptable (because TM is often 45 minutes to 1 hour behind what's meterologically current "we're not flying through that line of thunderstorms which our new clearance directs") When the log jam begins, you're STUCK. We cannot simply "jump the median" in a hurry to return to the gate ... which is the only legitimate means of "offering to deplane." Can't dump 160 people on a taxiway without an aircraft emergency.
I've addressed this "take the delay in the terminal." When it's a single flight/single destination, that's what is typically done to a large extent of the delay ... but what folks simply do not understand (out of ability or decision therein) ... when the delay is systemic and because of duty day limitations on pilots ... cancellations happen.
NOW ... without the DOT rule ... the carrier can "hang-on" to the notion of completing the flight because there's no 4+ million dollar fine hanging over it. No one LIKES the 3 hour delays, but they happen. Again, due in large part to the operation of the Federal Government and the so called market demand for frequency of flights.
So, the 3 hour max delay is actually less than 3 hours because no carrier is going to risk getting hit with that fine ... so the delay is actually 1.5 hours - 2 hours MAX. Not a welcome turn of event, but when faced with spending a night at DFW or EWR or JFK ... or (hub) ... what would you REALLY choose? Be 2.5 hours late even if that time was spent on the airplane ... or not go at all?
So ... in light of this knee-jerk rule to an agreed obscene act ... my caution to inviting more regulation on the business aspect of the company is based in the law of unintended consequences ... more delays and more cancelled flights if the Fed starts dictating the process of how to determine who is going to be boarded.
For ... it cannot be overstated ... we wouldn't have had this thread if Dao had complied and didn't renege ... twice.
It's not a hard and fast rule with no flexibility. In the situation in which the rule is inflexible
But ... not the FAA's traffic management inefficiency. That counts ... and is the single greatest determinant of the systemic delay following weather system passage.
Third, is it known whether there will be an extensive tarmac delay before passengers board?
Not one which would risk application of the $4+ million fine. We'll have "controlled departure times" assigned in advance of boarding. This is where traffic management is metering the "wheels-up" times based upon their forecast of available routes and the number of flights filed for departure in the area, not just the departure airport. This was referenced earlier ... almost all of us will coordinate with local operations to "absorb" as much of that delay as possible with the aircraft at the gate, passengers in the terminal. We'll "slip" boarding time. This will meet with resistance. I've had to intervene with the attempts of a station manager trying to board the aircraft before my declared boarding time ... to give sufficient time to close-up and push back before the gate has to receive its next inbound flight.
This is a bad posture and one worthy of critique ... but the folks "buttoned-up" in that tube with you have no more desire to "sit" on the airplane than do you.
The extensive delays which result from "unwinding" are of slipping EDCT (est departure control time; "wheel's up"). The problem is ... the congo line is already formed and there are insufficient opportunities to simply "turn around."
Fuel onboard becomes a factor, too. This will require a return to the gate because of the excessive delay which becomes manifest after pushback.
So ... again ... government interference in the BUSINESS of the companies is never good for anyone but the government (justify the job). Regulation a necessary function as a part of being in public airspace for regulating OPERATIONS. Let the market decide on the business part ... whether upgrade rules and frequent flier programs will be fielded/how/etc. When/how carry ons are allowed, checked bags, etc. whether to reserve a seat assignment What's for supper ... available entertainment. The market shouldn't decide on the number of crew required to operate because that's a safety function.
Again ... thanks for the opportunity. Yes, we DO often agree on a great many things. I think we'd agree on most of this, too. I'll do better in the future in communicating.