[stacheman101]

I sent this to AA's Customer Relations today, June 6 2010:

I seriously doubt that I'll fly AA again, given the choice. Today in particular put me over the top:
Immediately before leaving for the airport, I checked my flight status, which said "on time." Arriving at the airport 1 hr 30 mins prior to departure time, I discovered that my flight from STL to DCA had been canceled. The only reason given to me or anyone else was "air traffic control." What does this even mean? I'm now booked on a morning flight to DCA tomorrow, June 7. However, I needed to BE in DC tomorrow morning. The cancelation was a huge inconvenience for me and my partner. I need a reliable airline. When making travel plans can I not count on AA to get me where I want to go? Can an airline of this magnitude be taken seriously if it can cancel flights at the last minute with no backup plan other than "we'll get you out when we can?" And when cancelations do occur, can no explanation be offered other than a vague phrase?
When I last flew AA, in March 2010, both my friend's and my bags were lost, although our connecting flight from Miami to the ultimate destination of Ft. Myers was seriously delayed. I was amazed that there wasn't enough time to get our bags onto the delayed flight. When my brother last flew AA, in winter 2010, his flight originated in Miami (also to Ft Myers), and his luggage was lost too.
The baggage issues sent up a yellow flag. Today's cancelation sent up a big red flag. I'll be sharing this email with family and friends.

[jimworcs]

Air traffic control is an utterly meaningless explanation. Yet another reason why airlines should be required to give a specific explanation for a delay and these should be monitored by the DOT.

[stacheman101]

Agreed. Some friends have suggested it may mean that the flight wasn't full enough.

And an update to my original posting: it turns out I was put on an AA flight to DC at 7:40 PM on June 7th, not 7:40 AM, as I had heard. The error may well have been mine, but nonetheless the fact that AA couldn't get me out until more than 24 hours after my original flight at 12:20 pm on June 6 is even worse.

I canceled the entire thing. I'm not one to get too ticked off too easily when dealing with companies, but this really inconvenienced not just me, but my partner as well. Not to mention every other passenger on the flight!

[jimworcs]

I am no fan of the airlines and think that they often lie and mislead passengers to avoid paying compensation for cancelled flights. The rate of cancelled flights is significantly lower in Europe.. could this be because airlines have to pay compensation, even if the reason for the cancellation is not their fault? Unless the airlines are suggesting that Europe has less weather, less technical difficulties or less congested airspace...the only reason for the big difference is that in the US they can do it with impunity.

On the issue of cancelling flights due to low passenger numbers the airlines will never admit to doing this. I think it is rare to be honest... cancelling one segment can have horrendous knock on effects throughout the system as it puts aircraft and crews in the "wrong" place. That is not to say is doesn't happen however, particularly when one AC goes tech and there is no ready replacement. The problem is trying to get someone to admit it... airline staff routinely lie to customers and it is now so endemic I don't think any of them think there is anything wrong with it.

The lack of regulation is the primary problem, until that is fixed, nothing will happen.