tsquare

If this "influential" person was judging Delta's financial competence based on the condition of the terminal... he is an idiot.

If you step back for a moment and think logically about it, nobody bases their ticket purchase based on a terminal or facilities. If they do, they don't EVER think about the cost of said ticket anyway. I'm not defending the situation at JFK at all.. believe me since I am based there, but it really isn't a basis for buying tickets. And.. all things being equal, I'd rather have a bunch of new metal rather than a new terminal.

KC10 FATboy

Actually, I think this is very short sighted. I know several people who consider the facilities before they purchase a ticket. I have friends who refuse to connect through ATL or JFK due to the mess there. Even if you give yourself a safe pad on connection time, wth JFK, anything can happen.

KC10 FATboy

I think is safe to say that the drought in the south is over.

I would do anything to be at work in ATL right now. NOT !

forgot to bid

Dude think twice about whatever you are planning on doing, serioulsy, unless you're planning on YouTubeing it, if so, DO IT!

And if you get hurt make sure you title the video as: Southwest Pilot...

forgot to bid

Tsquare, I understand what you're saying but like KC10 says there are probably people that make decisions based on airport facilities. Pre-Delta employee days I made ticket purchases based on price and then if that was equal aircraft. If it came between a DCI CRJ-200 and AirTran 717, I picked the 717 because it was more comfortable and both airlines were just regionals with a propensity to be late. But if it was Delta vs AirTran then Delta, they'd be more likely to be on time. That was just me and I'm sure we could go threw a laundry list of things you make a decision on. I think once I heard people would chose a connection flight over a direct if the connection was $2 cheaper. To each his own.

But it was just an observation and like you Tsquare I didn't like seeing it and I get ****ed when Clark Howard and company redicule Delta. But then again I can picture what this particular guy was seeing and it was probably a rundown LGA terminal, hot, understaffed and over crowded and no matter what we offer in airplanes and flight crews can overcome that experience. And if they leave guess what, they'll get to go experience a crappy terminal where AirTran is too, so they're stuck with us but thats not a good way to look at it.

I think it underscores that if someone goes to Delta.com to buy a ticket everything they experience thereafter is to them a reflection of Delta Air Lines and I trust the smart people at Delta know it and are doing something about it. I'm excited about the new terminal even though I've never seen it because USAir always seems to have a nice terminal. I hope the DTW and CVG terminals become the norm for Delta in the years and years to come, next up LGA, JFK, ATL, MEM and I guess LAX.

Hell when it comes to JFK I wish they could build a big spacious facility on top of the current terminal, kind of like a glass dome or something and then you just go down an escalator to get to the current jetways and then board... that was my bright idea but an architect budy of mine shot it down pretty quickly. Oh well.

I also think that perception battle is another good reason to reign in scope on the bottom AND top end too. If DCI sucks or a codeshare partner sucks they'll make us look bad and if anyone is going to make us look bad it should be us. Everything comes back to scope.

KC10 FATboy

747-200 Retirement

tsquare

Maybe you and I are talking about a little different perspective here. The facilities at JFK are old.. decrepit... no doubt. They are waaaay too small for the operations there.. no doubt. That being said, if those facilities were adequate in their capability to handle the traffic (and BTW, aircraft traffic SNAFUs are due to the inefficiencies of the AIRPORT facilities.. not DAL) would those same friends of yours still book away from it because DAL has pigeons flying around? You would really want me to believe that? I am talking about what is called the physical plant... I think you are talking about the overall experience, and guess what.. if we build the Taj Mahal there it won't change all that much. You will still have 2 hour taxi times there because ATC is still living in 1960. (Can you say .. do away with the 250 below 10,000 foot rule?)

acl65pilot

Alright I will respond to a few of these points as I see it.

JFK:
DAL is working on a few plans for the issues of JFK. The AMR terminal many not be the cheapest option, but it is the easiest so naturally it is the first choice. If they cannot get that they move in to plans B, C, and D. With regard to the tear down of three, moving in to four and making a bridge from 4 to 2, that requires a lot of money. DAL is smart and does not want to pay for something and then have to pay the Port Authority rent for what they just paid to have build. They much prefer to have the Port Authority underwrite the bonds for this. We are dragging our feet to get them to totally commit to that. If they do, then we will proceed. The company knows this is one of the biggest issues for us and is addressing it accordingly. RA made the board members travel out of JFK after the meeting this last summer so they all knew how bad it is.

LGA:
Ugly fact is that when the number guys crunch all of the numbers, blowing a half a billion dollars on metal and glass in LGA just will not pay for it self. Passengers will complain about anything when they are living it, but 99%+ of them will not give the quality of the terminal a second thought when purchasing the ticket. What is at the for front is time, price and loyalty programs. DAL sees this in their data and will spend money accordingly. If does not mean that LGA will not get a face lift, but a new terminal is not where we need to spend money. Simply put the ROI is just not there.
Better schedules, another terminal with closer proximity to ours are the thing that will make the LGA experience better. Those things are being done, and will greatly improve the LGA experience.
The type of capital outlay that you are talking about is planned but not for some time.

LAX:
We have many issue in LAX. The biggest on is that our Code Share with Alaska is just plain inconvenient. They know this. Our two terminals there are a mess, and they are looking at a move. When and if it is a possibility are being looked at. If it does happen it will be a huge improvement. There are a few locations that are in fact being looked at. The Alaska code is working well for connecting to our flights.
I know people want more details, but for now that is all that can be given. Things are overall fairly vague, except the fact that the locations are being identified and a time line is being created.


They see the infrastructure as an issue. They recognize it, but we cannot make capital outlays of billions and billion of dollars when the economy is this way. DAL is looking for short to medium term fixes that will make the experience better for the passenger. They know the issues, and hopefully we will see the results of years and years of planning start to unfold.

tsquare

I agree with most of your post.. particularly the part about the punk Clark Howard. My wife loves listening to him. I want to run over him in my truck.

80ktsClamp

I believe my signature says it all.

"AirTran pilot practices approach into EYW in hurrican conditions...."