Less Turbulence on Delta Flights? | Hacker News Reader

Less Turbulence on Delta Flights?

thepointsguy.com

170 pointsjsiminoff61 comments

General aviation pilot here. I fly a bonanza in the flight levels regularly. There are plenty more data sources than just PIREPS, even in general aviation. Foreflight on an iPad, combined with and ADS-B receiver and a SirrusXM WX subscription are all in active use in my little 40 year old airplane. I say this as an avid Delta frequent flyer, but I highly doubt Delta's competitors are only using PIREPS to navigate turbulence.

Little airplane, PSSSSH--you try to put 4 people in Mooney.

Barn doors!! Love em. But you got a few knots on me

You certainly may be correct that Delta’s competitors may be using additional or different sources. However, there definitely is not any access to SiriusXM WX or ADS-B weather onboard FAR 121 aircraft. Many airlines are just now getting around to ADS-B out for compliance. When I worked for one of the regional airlines we had just been approved for EFBs (iPads) in 2017. Point is simply that GA is typically significantly further ahead in a lot of technologies these days because 121 air travel has become so incredibly safe that the FAA is very careful and methodical in approving new technology use. That costs money and it’s only been the last 3-4 years or so that airlines have had money to spend.

Great point. It really does amaze me that I likely use tools like precision GPS approaches and live access to weather data more than the typical part 121 airliner. However, I do think the FAA's strategy to slowly and methodically make changes to part 121 is valid given the safety record you cite.

It does excite me to see these things come to GA though. If you chose to use them properly, tools like ADS-B in and inflight weather at least gives you the option of making more informed safety decisions. But I still see too many young CFIs teaching "buttonolgy" before good old stick and rudder. Priorities should still be what is in the Airplane Flying Handbook: 1. Aviate, 2. Navigate, 3. Communicate. Safety, even with all this tech, still comes down to sound aeronautical decision making and cockpit management.

Dumb question, but what does 121 mean in this context?

14 CFR FAR 121 is the FAA regulations governing scheduled air carriers in the United States.

This article sounds like an ad, but in any case cutting cost and achieving higher customer satisfaction are all good things so props to Delta for that.

However, I have to wonder why the article makes it seem like only Delta is using data for turbulence avoidance and not other big players. Is this a relatively new thing when it comes to Big Data in airlines?

Edit: This is an ad after all

> This post contains references to products from one or more of our advertisers

That doesn’t mean it’s an ad. It’s not sponsored content.

It means Delta buys ads on the site.

You’re right. It’s a declaration of a conflict of interest, not a statement that the article was sponsored content.

The notice about affiliate links may not have anything to do with Delta. The Points Guy has an affiliate-driven revenue model, so that notice might appear before all of his posts.

The article doesn't really mention that many other companies/services besides Delta. So while while there's not a 100% chance it's a Delta ad, there's a >0% chance it is.

If Delta is really serious about customer satisfaction, they’ll hurry up with the retirement of their old MD-80s (and MD-88s).

I’m hardly an aviation buff, but I’ve learned to identify these things by their sound from inside my house, which is 20 miles from the nearest airport (occasional departures fly over at roughly 10,000 feet).

Those old low-bypass JT8D engines make so much damn low-frequency noise. Every time I hear and feel that infrasonic rumble I think “must be an MD80”, and sure enough, if I check Flightradar24 it’s always one of those loud suckers, and always operated by Delta.

If you look at the photos they actually track pilot efficiency on the MD-88 in a separate metric than the rest of the pilots. I thought that was pretty funny.

Which photo? Are you confusing MD-88/90 with Delta Connection perhaps?

Agree that the md80s are noisy monsters, but really has very little overlap with customer satisfaction. <1% of Delta's customers are going to live close enough to an airport with Delta mad dog departures and even fewer of them will take noise at home into consideration for their satisfaction.

True— I was sort of venting and neglected to note that it wasn’t really related— but at the very least, I personally avoid flying Delta because it bugs me so much. It’s perhaps a silly reason, but it’s the truth.

Just a sample size n=1 though.

It’s coming... https://www.ainonline.com/aviation-news/air-transport/2018-1...

Customers actually like the Mad Dogs because the average cabin noise is lower; with aft-mounted engines it's only the last few rows that are loud. Everyone ahead of that gets to ride first-class-cabin-quiet even in economy.

Now near-airport-resident satisfaction is another, unrelated issue.

Company culture has a lot to do with it! I work with some airlines and Delta are definitely among the most innovative and open minded. Delta also do quite a lot of their systems in-house as custom development, instead of relying on packaged turnkey garbage from oldschool integrators.

As someone who holds a commercial pilots license but works in software development, I'd love to find a hybrid job solving problems I'm aviation with tech.

I've gotten close to this as a software developer with a paramedic certification working for an EMR company. It's definitely nice...

Any particular area you’re interested in? Hacking on a side project right now with frequent flier miles and points.

Boeing must hire software devs?

They definitely do. They usually end up leaving because of the culture and the pay.

Reading about X is very different from working in X professionally.

Yeah, I don’t understand why companies like Boeing don’t pay competitively.

Their revenue is pretty good.

Also, they seem to hire a lot of people.

What am I missing? Why do they hire so many people at less than awesome comp?

I've found the pay to be decent. The culture on the other hand is horrific.

CS people are not the main revenue driver for an aerospace company. Aircraft have been built without software engineers for over a hundred years, and they still are being made that way in some places. Software devs are still often seen as branch from the IT department. Most of the work is in supporting the actual aerospace/mechanical engineers, and is stuff like internal tool development, data engineering/warehousing. You're not doing any physical testing or generating drawings for parts, which constitute the actual IP worth billions that is used for manufacturing planes. For mechanical engineers the salaries are quite competitive and in line/better than other companies. These are generally much lower than FANG salaries for software engineers.

Southwest is hiring all sorts of software people here in Dallas.

uAvionix?

You probably don't. Aerospace is horribly conservative and slow, both in the work itself and in office culture. Imagine spending an entire week checking every calculation in a 50 page technical report. It must be correct, and it has to be that way.

I mean, I hope people would want to do that. Otherwise the people doing it are the ones who don't.

Although I agree aerospace is slow, it's not that bad. Yes there is a lot of verification, paperwork, etc. however, safety is number one so it's understandable. Also if you get into early TRL projects, you don't even have to deal with such restrictions.

I got to tour Delta's OCC (and met the same weather dude with all the screens—nice setup). I didn't know whether their approach was unique among airlines but I did learn that their weather modeling is indeed more accurate than The Weather Company.

Since I was there on a calm day so the big wall screens (shown on the header of the article) were showing a Basketball game... :)

Delta is infamous for reporting “light chop” and seeking other flight levels. It doesn’t just make for a more comfortable flight, it’s good for airframe maintenance to boot.

Why is an advertorial with a lot of hyperbole and very little content on the frontpage? I am an aviation enthusiast and I'm sure we could find better sources about this subject.

Now if Delta could only keep their systems online to avoid ground stops. I think it's been two of the last three Autumns that they've experienced major outages.

This reads like an ad for Delta more than anything else.

yup, they lost me at "The reason for the increase in avoidance? Lines of code, iPads onboard and a willingness to ditch a century-old way of doing things."

I don't think there were airliners in 1918.

The first one were started in the twenties iirc, but that is close enough.

It _is_ an ad by The Points Guy.

Where does it say that?

It only says Delta advertises on the site.

It DOES NOT say this is sponsored content or otherwise a promotion of some sort by Delta.

It's inherent in the functionality of The Points Guy's business model. Write pieces to bolster the various vendor's image. On the positive side, TPG isn't tied to any one particular vendor and does a good job of highlighting the merits of a variety of vendors.

It doesn't say it isn't sponsored or otherwise a promotion. I mean, there is a grey area, and it seems plausible someone would deliberately be in that area.

ThePointsGuy is a blog aimed at sharing credit card travel points tips, and all of the offers they share use a referral link so that TPG gets paid for everyone who signs up for a credit card. The entire website is one big advertisement (albeit one with useful advertisements if you're in to churning)

I have no idea what they're referring to in terms of app or model, but Foreflight (most common EFB app on the market at the moment) has had this feature for maybe a year and is IPad only... So is this just a huge Delta ad there they're basically saying "yay, we use Foreflight"?

It does look like they built their own app. But yes, Foreflight has had this for a while. yawn

Do you know what airlines use Foreflight?

In the US I’ve only ever heard of anyone using Jeppesen FliteDeck Pro or LIDO by Lufthansa Systems.

Pity - turbulence is one of my favorite parts of flying!

A friend told me once when he was flying that the jet hit some severe turbulence. Everyone was white-knuckling the armrests, until some texan towards the front started waving his hat and yelling yee-haw! Which went a long way towards relieving everyone's anxiety.

When I hit turbulence, I just try to keep in mind that airplanes are extremely robust and can handle considerably more turbulence than a typical person might imagine. For example, see how much airplane wings can bend without breaking: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=--LTYRTKV_A

My father, AF pilot, was once flying a DC-3 over New Mexico, when he encountered clear air turbulence. The airplane shook violently. The airspeed indicator just ping-ponged around. He said there was nothing he could do but pull the airspeed back to the minimum (to reduce stress on the airframe), radio the controller to warn other aircraft, and ride it out.

After he landed, the mechanics showed him where rivets had been pulled out of the wings.

Edit: one of the reasons the DC-3 was such a robust airplane was nobody had any experience with an airplane of that size and type, so it was overdesigned. It's the same reason the B-17 was a tough bird.

It seems to me that there is less turbulence in the last 10-15 years. Does anyone know off hand whether this is the case?

Maybe? PIREPS are not as useless as the article makes them out and systems for in cockpit weather/PIREPS and wind conditions have become much more commonplace in that time period.

I'm not sure if there is less turbulance, or if I've just grown accustom to it. I rarely notice bumps/jostles when riding in a car or bus, but that doesn't mean they aren't there.

Global warming!?

Newer aircraft seem to have higher wing loading. (See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wing_loading#Range_of_wing_loa..., especially 767 vs newer aircraft.) Higher wing loading makes for a more stable flight. If your perception is correct, it could be changes in aircraft design rather than actual turbulence.

Personally, I think it may have more to do with pilots more liberally adjusting course to avoid turbulence. High-profile incidents related to turbulence, newer tech, and the padding of flight schedules to game on-time metrics would make it an easier decision for a pilot to avoid turbulence.

Not on all routes/airlines - on Hawaiian Airlines, we had 2 turbulent flights back to back. But maybe airlines other than Delta have better data tracking!

I like to tell people with a straight face that turbulence was actually introduced as a cost saving measure in the ‘70s.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com