VS Performance isnt looking too rosy!

I was just having a quick scoot about on t'internet and came across this webpage http://www.flightontime.info/scheduled/scheduled.html and it seems what a lot of people on here have been mentioning is quite true re increased delays on VS services.

Not exactly encouraging. Could be down to quite a few things i guess but i would say having a fleet stretched to capacity doesnt help the issue.

Forgive my uninformed standpoint on this, but surely VS are going to lose more money by keeping the fleet at its current size and incurring delays etc, than adding an extra one or two aircraft to ease the strain?!

I found this website some time ago and was shocked to see VS standing in the rankings. Not wanting to sound like I am defending VS in any way but there are a number of factors one must take into account when looking at ontime departure stats.

1. VS operates from the heavily slot restricted LHR, this means if it misses a slot, the a/c has to wait, a sometimes considerable length of time in order to get a new slot.

2. VS operates into LHR which in itself can often be subject to massive holding patterns prior to landing which can lead to delays.

3. The stats do not compare like with like. BMI Regional is top of the list, it operates small planes to/from small unrestricted regional airports. This means it is quicker and easier to get planes away on time.

4. Smaller airlines are of course going to be higher up the rankings because they have less flights from which to draw on average departure time. I am guessing the European airlines such as LH, KLM etc that are towards the top, the stats are just taken from flights departing the UK to Germany and Holland.

5. SH carriers such as BD are high up the list because they operate short sectors in which it is easy to make up a delay by not getting the plane cleaned at the destination airport, by cutting down on boarding time etc. They also tend to timetable in for delays, for example they say it take 1hr15mins to fly LHR-BRU when in reality it takes about 35-40mins.


I have said it before, stats are not always the best indicator to how well an airline is performing. The stat will not show the truth for the delayed flight.


Clarkey, I would have to disagree with you. An airplane can only make money when it is in the air. Therefore what VS want to do is have the smallest amount of planes and maximise the amount of time they are in the air. Off the top of my head I think a LH plane has to be in the air for some 20 hours in a day in order to make a profit. The way VS, and other airlines, operate their fleets is a fine art. Of course when a slight delay happens the whole timetable can go up the swany. But as far as the industry is concerned it is better to have one 4 hour delay than have an aircraft sat idle on the ground waiting to be substituted in for a defective plane that could well be on the other side of the world.

[Neil]

I have to agree with Will. You can manipulate statistics to suit whatever you want in most cases and without knowing all the reasons behind the delays it is impossible to make an arguement based on fact. I would love to know what % of the delays where due to something out of VS's control, weather? Pax arriving late at the a/c? JFK queues? etc etc.

It is all too easy to be negative and get on the back of VS for a delay/cancellation etc, but you have to be careful not to talk something up to be bigger than it is. A lot of your average Joe pax will read it, take it the wrong way and then post it on another site potentially cause huge negativity based on some so so facts and figures, which cannot be good for anyone.

Neil

Will and Neil make good points.

Take a look however at the more detailed data based on routes / airlines - which is much better like for like than comparing VS with BMI Regional ... this shows that VS is behind BA but no where near as bad as Air India, for Miami the average BA delay is twice that of VS whereas for others it is reversed.

Here's one point though - it matters less to me whether a plane leaves on time than whether it arrives on or before time. With all long haul routes I'd wager that an average departure delay of 27 minutes can almost always be made up ...

[Neil]

Originally posted by slinky09
With all long haul routes I'd wager that an average departure delay of 27 minutes can almost always be made up ...

That is an excellent point slinky. The amount of flight I have been on that have left late but arrived on time or even early is probably uncountable. The advertised flight times, especially from the East Coast are very generous and I remember reading very recently about a flight were the captain delayed take off due to the short flight time meaning they would have arrived at LHR too early.

Again, these sort of things are never taken into account with statistics, and really do help give a distorted picture.

[Darren Wheeler]

I do wonder how much of the delays are caused by pax waiting until the 'get your butt on board or we off-load you' call. It can take longer to off-load than find their baggage and remove it.

Slinky & Neil, your correct in that delays can be made up for by increasing the speed on flights, but due to economics it doesn't happen often. More frequently done by airlines that rely on multiple connecting flights (EK in DXB). The difference in fuel burn can be anything from 3,000 to 5,000Kg on a 6 & 1/2 hour flight.

Originally posted by Darren Wheeler
I do wonder how much of the delays are caused by pax waiting until the 'get your butt on board or we off-load you' call. It can take longer to off-load than find their baggage and remove it.

Slightly O/T, but isn't this one of the reasons why some of the LCC won't adopt a pre-allcoated seating policy but instead adopt a first come, first served model (enhanced by Speedy Boarding and the like) so as to encourage people to be at the gate rather dawdling in the terminal.

Paul

Originally posted by Neil
It is all too easy to be negative and get on the back of VS for a delay/cancellation etc, but you have to be careful not to talk something up to be bigger than it is. A lot of your average Joe pax will read it, take it the wrong way and then post it on another site potentially cause huge negativity based on some so so facts and figures, which cannot be good for anyone.

I certainly hope we're not all coming down on the OP here. Poor man simply points to a set of stats and not with any OTT language or 'huge negativity.' And one cannot deny there are stories of delays and such here with some frequency (of course, people tend to trumpet what goes wrong...).

I worry we run people off by reacting to their posts without carefully choosing the words in responses.

That said, Willd's reply was very educational to me and I thank him for it!

[Neil]

Originally posted by GrinningJackanapes
I certainly hope we're not all coming down on the OP here.

I certainly am not. My reply wasn't directed at the OP at all but was more a general worry I have that some of the misplaced/misinformed negativity and VS calling cannot be a good thing.

There was a similar situation last year when a thread on here reported about some problems with some of the Nova IFE not working at some of the seats on some of the aircraft. This was then read and posted by someone on a different forum, the rumour and problem seemed to double and then some overnight causing a lot of pax to worry unnecessarily and also brings bad forum publicity to VS.

As you rightly say, people are quick to moan when things go wrong but not so when things go right/to schedule.

Hate to say it but a large reason why they could be so low is the LGW operation. If you compare BA like for like on the MCO route there is a significant difference. Plus I've only glanced at the stats at the moment but do they account for the fleet size/ pax availability because VS is still only a small airline.

The figures certainly make poor reading but as they cover the period to september 07 the next set will be more interesting of course.

Admittedly statistics can be made to suit anyones agenda but there is no way anyone can get away from the fact that recently there has been a definite undercurrent of disappointment shall we say at the way things are going with VS as a whole on here. Some will challenge this, its just how I perceive it maybe.

VS has branded itself 'Britain's Flag Carrier', tongue in cheek I know after all the fun with BA but with an ageing LGW fleet, which is where a sizeable percentage of people get their impressions of VS from when they take their holidays and no signs of refurbishment in the near future this monika is getting a little stretched so you can understand why some do complain rather vociferously.

I would rather fly VS than any other airline, provided VS fly the route I am going on, basically because of the service but when that service is undermined by constant delays on certain routes, your belief in VS does start to wane a little.

There is nothing worse in this world than blind faith and while on the whole VS is a good airline there are certainly more than a few things that need ironing out sharpish, management cant keep turning a blind eye even if it does make a difference on the bottom line of the balance sheet, people will start to walk eventually if some concerns aren't addressed and the last thing we need is to see VS struggling.

[Neil]

Everyone is entitled to their opinion and you make some good points. Just to say though that the LGW fleet is anything but ageing. They are the newest 744's that VS have and are only 6/7 years old which in a/c life terms is nothing. Granted the seats and IFE are not the newest/best available on the fleet but that is a whole other discussion (which has been done many times before)

Neil

Originally posted by wanderingmariner
Admittedly statistics can be made to suit anyones agenda but there is no way anyone can get away from the fact that recently there has been a definite undercurrent of disappointment shall we say at the way things are going with VS as a whole on here. Some will challenge this, its just how I perceive it maybe.

VS has branded itself 'Britain's Flag Carrier', tongue in cheek I know after all the fun with BA but with an ageing LGW fleet, which is where a sizeable percentage of people get their impressions of VS from when they take their holidays and no signs of refurbishment in the near future this monika is getting a little stretched so you can understand why some do complain rather vociferously.

I would rather fly VS than any other airline, provided VS fly the route I am going on, basically because of the service but when that service is undermined by constant delays on certain routes, your belief in VS does start to wane a little.

There is nothing worse in this world than blind faith and while on the whole VS is a good airline there are certainly more than a few things that need ironing out sharpish, management cant keep turning a blind eye even if it does make a difference on the bottom line of the balance sheet, people will start to walk eventually if some concerns aren't addressed and the last thing we need is to see VS struggling.

I would echo Neil's comments entirely.

I think it is also important to remember that airlines make a profit on high yield routes, by this I mean routes that will bring in a lot of UC customers. Profit cannot be made out of economy. Without wishing to open a can of worms, VS will only really sit up and take note if they see a massive drop in demand for their premium cabins. At the moment, as this website often illustrates, this is not happening.

Delays do happen and to the average Jo on the street they will not know if the plane suffered a 2 hour delay the day before.

IMHO, what we are 'seeing' at VS currently is no more than murphys law and the power of the internet combining. If FlyGlobespan can manage still to be in business after axing half its routes, operating 20 year old plus 757's across the pond and being criticised on Watchdog and in the national press, then I think we are a long way off from VS being in any trouble.

I think it's also worth pointing out that the majority of people almost expect a delay of some sort when they fly from Heathrow. And although it's an average, 27 minutes isn't THAT long when you weigh it up against the flight time of a long haul route.

Originally posted by pontig
I think it's also worth pointing out that the majority of people almost expect a delay of some sort when they fly from Heathrow. And although it's an average, 27 minutes isn't THAT long when you weigh it up against the flight time of a long haul route.

Exactly- on a trip with VS last year I had a five hour delay. On the face of it, it seems shocking but when you look a little deeper two hours was due to a medical divert on the inbound and the other 3 was due to strong headwinds and being diverted due to a lack of fuel. So even the worst delay isn't really that bad.

I don't think I'd even notice if the plane was 27 minutes late - however, over an hour and even the joys of the CH start fading.

Not great really.

Just looked up my next trip which is to Vegas in a couple of weeks and the average delay is 52 minutes!!!

VS has branded itself 'Britain's Flag Carrier', tongue in cheek I know after all the fun with BA but with an ageing LGW fleet, which is where a sizeable percentage of people get their impressions of VS from when they take their holidays and no signs of refurbishment in the near future this monika is getting a little stretched so you can understand why some do complain rather vociferously.

I would hardly call LGW an ageing fleet the aircraft are on average 7 years old this year. The LHR 747 and A340 are nearly twice as old.

The LGW aircraft have now got the updated seat covers and cushioning in Y. Upper Class is fine and its only PE which is lagging behind.

I think LGW will now get PE facelift and a few other surprises when the Leisure config A343 arrivives in LGW at the end of the year start of 2009.

How old is the average BA 747?? Did not even have air vents above the seats when I flew them and the toilets were something from the 1980's!!!!