Seventy minutes extra on Rome-Miami, 50 for Buenos Aires and Taipei--why do airlines extend flight times?

The consumer protection organization Codacons presented A complaint to the Antitrust Authority and Enac asking them to open an investigation. "in the interest of air transport users" On flight times 'inflated' by airlines.

Codacons, in its complaint, cites. some of the routes that would be most affected by the phenomenon: the Rome Fiumicino-Miami has a claimed duration of 11 hours and 55 minutes, compared with an actual duration of 10 hours and 45 minutes, a difference of about 70 minutes; followed by the Rome Fiumicino-Buenos Aires and the Rome Fiumicino-Taipei, given by the companies at 14 and 12 hours and twenty minutes, respectively, compared with actual durations of 13 hours and 10 minutes and 11 hours and 30 minutes.

The list cited in the complaint by the consumer association also includes the Milan Malpensa-Reykjavík, the Rome Fiumicino-New York, the Milan Malpensa-New York, the Rome Fiumicino-San Francisco and the Rome Fiumicino-Tokyo.

Now, That airlines 'inflate' flight times is an indisputable fact and that anyone traveling by air can experience with their own ears: every time you board an airplane., whether to a European or long-haul destination, the pilot declares a flight time that is a few minutes to several tens of minutes less than that stated on the ticket, with the result that today when a plane leaves on time it regularly arrives several minutes before the scheduled time, and often when it leaves as late as 20-30 minutes it ends up arriving on time.

Which was not the case at least until the late 1990s, when (just consult a paper timetable from those days), flight times on all routes were significantly less than those stated today by those same airlines. For example, Milan Malpensa-New York was regularly given between 8 hours 15 minutes and 8 hours 30 minutes, whereas today it goes up to 9 hours.

Codacons' contention is that the airlines behave this way to escape the consequences of any delays in arrivals at the destination of more than three hours, which automatically result in compensation to passengers varying depending on the duration of the flight itself, between 250 and 600 euros per person. And that, in doing so, they escape penalties that would range, for each, at a figure of between 170 and 200 million euros a year.

It may be that this is the case: effectively, by lengthening the duration of an intercontinental flight by 60 minutes, a company actually extends from three to four hours the time (in terms of delay) after which it will have to pay the penalty to the passenger.

However, at least a couple of points need to be made on that artificial lengthening of flight times, which mind you is not an Italian phenomenon but a global one. The first concerns airport congestion, which in the 1990s was nowhere near what it is today, especially when it comes to airports located in the United States. As many readers of The Flight Club will have (unfortunately for them) experienced, at JFK in New York it can take up to more than an hour from when the plane leaves the gate to when it actually takes off to its destination.

The other is related to congestion in the skies., especially European and American, which can lead to detour from the most direct routes between two cities and the 'looping' of incoming flights at major, busy hubs.

Under these conditions of uncertainty Consideration should be given to whether or not it is preferable for the passenger to see an arrival time for his or her flight listed on his or her ticket that involves a 'margin of safety' that takes into account the factors we reported above.

And to some extent this may be preferable, because the passenger will set a time for booking a car, arriving at a hotel, or, more importantly, a business appointment at a time that somehow already takes into account unpredictable factors. And that therefore, in a sense, protects their interests.