Pinpointing American’s Biggest Operational Issues


It seems like a time-honored tradition for me to write about American’s operational problems. I suppose when an airline has them so consistently, that’s just how it goes. But today is different. If you listen to American, they’ll say things are going great. In fact, I was given a lengthy statement with all their accomplishments, which includes:

  • May 2026 ​was our second-best May ​for arrival ​performance (A-0) in the ​past ​decade.
  • The only ​stronger ​May ​was May ​2023, but May 2026 ​had 23% ​more departures ​than 2023.
  • May 29 was our best single ​day ​summer ​performance in the ​history ​of our ​airline.
  • Our ​May ​[Net Promoter Score] was better ​than ​the ​past two years.
  • May ​was our best May ​for [Mishandled Baggage Rate (MBR)]. DOT reporting ​for April MBR ​(the latest ​reporting) ​has ​American in 6th place ​(Page 35) with ​a YTD ranking also ​showing ​improvement.

But not all is well in reality. Today I want to zoom in on some of the painpoints that came out of my digging through Anuvu operational performance data. I have four charts to help drive this discussion.

Overall, American has been doing ok compared to the other big airlines. No, it isn’t going to win any gold medals, but it was at least doing better than JetBlue in most months even if it was trailing the other big airlines. But now, it’s summer, and things have not been going well. For June through the 24th of the month, American had 70.0 percent of flights arrive within 14 minutes of schedule. Only Southwest was lower at a dismal 64.6 percent, but Southwest made a tradeoff of canceling less. It completed 99.3 percent of flights while American only completed 96.2 percent.

You’ll remember American made noise by rescheduling Dallas/Fort Worth and Philly to improve the operation, but I don’t see much of that in the high-level data. Maybe the storms are snarling too much, but you’d have hoped to see something look better here despite American apparently being pleased with its progress.

There has been plenty of focus on DFW and, of course, O’Hare which is bursting at the seams, but the biggest problem child may very well be a dark horse… Washington/National (DCA).

American DCA Departures vs AA System

data via Anuvu

This chart shows B0 and A14 for American’s DCA departures compared to the whole system. Let’s talk about exactly what you’re seeing.

A14 means arrivals within 14 minutes of schedule, and as you can see, it has been on a steady downward slope compared to the system for years now. That huge downward spike you see in early 2025 is after the accident of American 5342 and the airport remained in operational flux for awhile, which I’d expect. But it has remained well below the rest of the system since then.

Part of the issue may be B0, which means the percent of time that flights operate within their scheduled block time. So, it could depart 10 hours late, but if the flight is supposed to take 94 minutes from gate to gate and it completes the flight within that time, it counts in B0. What we see here is that American has not met system B0 average from DCA since 2024 except for a brief stint earlier this year. With some of the retiming the airline did recently, you’d think DCA could get up to system level this summer, but it’s not looking good.

DCA is a problem child right now. And then there’s Chicago/O’Hare (ORD).

American ORD Departures vs United

data via Anuvu

With the dramatic ramp-up of service at ORD between United and American, I’ve been watching this market quite closely. And I sliced and diced this a bunch of different ways. In the end, I decided to go with a more zoomed-in look going back only to April 1 of this year.

This chart shows A14, arrivals within 14 minutes of schedule, for all ORD departures. What we see is that up until the FAA restrictions on capacity went into place, American was actually outperforming United. But then, June arrived, and American has had a very ugly month. It is consistently worse than United right now, and sometimes by a lot. The real takeaway here seems to be that at least recently, United is much better at recovering from a mass weather disruption than American is. You can see it in here clearly that often when the A14 rates tank, United is quicker to get back to where it was.

Now, we have to look at DFW, don’t we? After all, it’s DFW that has received the bulk of the focus from American when the new structure went into place in April… along with the bulk of the weather lately.

American DFW Operational Stats

data via Anuvu

Here I decided to use a different metric, D0 which is departures that leave the gate on-time or earlier. I figure that with this new bank structure, things should run more smoothly with less traffic throughout the day, so D0 should rise. It did not. Remember, the new structure went into place in April, and it has been only downhill from there. Maybe it’s weather, and things actually are better will all else being equal… or maybe not. Here’s how American talks about the weather lately:

June ​has been challenging with ​weather, but ​even with ​that, the progress ​is clear. For ​some perspective, ​we’ve had more ​of our ​most ​severe ​events at our hubs ​so far this June than any ​other full month ​in our history. Despite ​very challenging ​weather at our largest ​hubs, ​we ​are seeing improved arrival ​performance ​year-over-year.

I also have B0 in here so you can see that these new block times may have improved performance versus last spring, but it’s not better than it had been in winter.

Lastly, I put TXO which is taxi-out time. This is how long it takes for planes to get from the gate to the runway. This is no different compared to last year, and it’s slightly higher than in the winter. This is somewhat puzzling to me. If you have fewer airplanes in concentrated banks, you would think your taxi-out times would drop. But that wasn’t the case.

Lastly, let’s move on to the land where weather disruptions almost never happen… Los Angeles (LAX).

American LAX Ops vs Delta/United

data via Anuvu

Once again I took A14 rates here, but I’m comparing the big three at the airport, American, Delta, and United. Right up until the end of 2024, American was right in the mix on performance, but then something changed. It has now fallen well below both Delta and United. What is going on?

Yes, there is construction at the airport and that has been particularly focused on American’s terminals. But that isn’t a good excuse. It’s not like American didn’t know it had construction going on. It needs to schedule differently if this is a construction issue. Or perhaps this is a problem with how the rest of the system is impacting the airline in LAX. That dip in June would suggest that might be the case to some extent. That could be due to too many aircraft routing through too many hubs and impacting the entire operation. I haven’t done that deep analysis.

Overall what this looks like is an airline that isn’t preparing itself as well for disruptions as others are, and then it’s also not as good at recovering when things do go wrong. This doesn’t even take into account tech and customer service and all of that. This is just me looking for themes in the data.

Like I said, American isn’t running a terrible operation, and it seems almost giddy with how things are going. But after all these years, there is still a lot it should do better.

Get Cranky in Your Inbox!

The airline industry moves fast. Sign up and get every Cranky post in your inbox for free.

Brett Avatar

29 responses to “Pinpointing American’s Biggest Operational Issues”

  1. Kilroy Avatar
    Kilroy

    Given the above, the fact that AA still encourages domestic itineraries with connections of ~40-45 minutes at ORD is suspect at best.

    When AA changed the flight timings on a friend’s upcoming trip to make for a super tight connection in ORD to the last flight of the day home, she (very rightly, IMHO) got nervous about being stuck in ORD overnight, called AA, and got a rep to reschedule her at no cost for an earlier inbound flight and a longer, less stressful layover.

  2. NedsKid Avatar
    NedsKid

    We used a metric at AirTran that I think was a good tell of a hub… throughput. Difference from A:0 to D:0. Positive number means hub is healthy and the concentration of resources and what-not is helping put flights back to on time (or using levers like reserve crews, spare aircraft, etc). Negative/decrease and flights are losing time in the hub meaning every touch of that hub has negative operational impact. Would be interested to see where this falls among the AA hubs.

    1. Kilroy Avatar
      Kilroy

      I’m not in the industry, but that is an interesting metric. Makes sense, you want your hub to help you recover to the schedule, not make it worse.

    2. Mary Avatar
      Mary

      Knowing AA, the retiming was probably accompanied by a healthy dose of headcount trimming vs. before.

      That would explain increase in taxi out time, as well as the anecdotally reported increase od arrivals into ghost gates, with wing walkers and gate agent (no longer plural?) showing up much later than at the long-known ETA.

    3. Brett Avatar

      NedsKid – Well, if we do D0% minus A0% by hub for June to date, here’s what we get:
      LGA +8.57%
      JFK +8.11%
      DCA +2.94%
      LAX -1.69%
      PHL -4.75%
      ORD -6.12%
      PHX -6.34%
      MIA -7.72%
      DFW -12.34%
      CLT -12.54%

      That’s not great when your two biggest hubs are bad performers.

      1. NedsKid Avatar
        NedsKid

        Ouch….. that’s horrible over a period of 4 weeks. It is an interesting story though. As you highlighted, DCA trails the system in on time, but the station is performing well with turning late airplanes quickly (probably since lots of RJs, not as many crew changes as well, constrained facility so need to keep it going to not have planes hold on the upline station).

        CLT and DFW…. weather has something to do with it, but what I like about throughput is that unless the storm happens to hit exactly between a bank of planes parking and a bank leaving, arrival and departure metrics are both equally handicapped by weather. Something is going very wrong in both of those airplanes while aircraft are at the gate. I believe American counts D:0 as door close or brake release in which case ramp congestion doesn’t really tell the tale. Block can be padded all they want, but fixing their clear ground problem at hubs is probably a more cost effective solution in the long run so they don’t have to make up in the air what they’re losing on the ground.

  3. SEAN Avatar
    SEAN

    What about PHX, MIA, PHL & JFK? How do they fit into this methodology.

    1. Brett Avatar

      SEAN – I looked at every hub, but those just didn’t stand out. I decided to focus on the problems.

  4. David C Avatar
    David C

    1. I don’t even dare book less than a 2 hour cnnxn in DFW because of poor regional carrier ability to get things done.

    2. Amazing how many times, at DFW, rampers are not in position at the gates.

    3. AA does not have good IRROPS recovery.

    4. Look at boarding times at outstations. They are often scheduled for the arrival time of the inbound aircraft ….good grief

    5. Their gate configuration at ORD is not as taxiway friendly as Uniteds.

  5. Michael B Avatar
    Michael B

    One issue the AA planners didn’t seem to account for at ORD when they ramped up the schedule was the physical layout of the terminal. The Y layout makes it very difficult to push multiple aircraft simultaneously and accommodate inbounds. Currently, the central deicing facility on the far west side of the airport is used to hold aircraft when there is no space on the ramp, regardless of gate status. If you look at the CDF ramp on any given day AA aircraft make up the vast majority of aircraft in wait. United’s island terminal without dead-ends allows them to flow aircraft much more efficiently without creating bottlenecks on the taxiways. If you land and inform ground that access to your gate is blocked, the majority of the time it’s a “go directly to the CDF and do not pass go.” Once released from the CDF it’s about a 10 minute taxi minimum to the gate. Add in irregular ops and AA just can’t recover.

  6. Mary Avatar
    Mary

    Knowing AA, the retiming was probably accompanied by a healthy dose of headcount trimming vs. before.

    That would explain the increase in taxi out time, as well as the anecdotally reported increase od arrivals into ghost gates, with wing walkers and gate agent (no longer plural?) showing up much later than at the long-known ETA.

    1. Mike Avatar
      Mike

      The abysmal eagles nest remote terminal at LAX certainly doesn’t help.

  7. Eric R Avatar
    Eric R

    Out of curiosity, how does PHX look?

    Do the ops in Phoenix look more like LA or some of the other hubs you’ve mentioned in this article?

    1. Brett Avatar

      Eric – Phoenix is usually one of the better performers, though in June it’s down to the middle of the pack. I imagine DFW has bled over.

  8. Bgriff Avatar
    Bgriff

    At ORD, AA and UA were forced to operate something similar to last year’s schedules, but UA picked up some gates in the reallocation while AA lost them. So UA has a bit more breathing room and AA has less when things go wrong.

  9. shoeguy Avatar
    shoeguy

    American used to be more reliable, and it plainly isn’t any longer. My experience in the past 12 months has been with delays on long haul international flights, largely due to either delays or storms in DFW, maintenance issues (an increasingly regular feature of the aging 77E fleet) and similarly, on short haul, the A319s.

    I have moved away from flying AA too often, even if it meant giving up EP. To Europe, I will take a European carrier any day over a US one, and to Asia, the same is true.

    American has a long way to go to create the illusion it has improved.

  10. Jason Avatar
    Jason

    Remember all airlines had to reduce some B0 reliability as it’s extremely expensive in the pilot contracts. No one seems to realize how much pilots are driving huge costs to the airlines and airfares and reliability. Executives will never say it because they don’t want to upset the unions

    1. Michael B Avatar
      Michael B

      Please provide your proof. There is no evidence for what you state. The number one cost per block hour is fuel followed by engine maintenance/aircraft operating/capital costs. You can be sure that if pilot costs were an issue you would hear about it from the C suite. There is no fear in talking about costs and it certainly isn’t avoided in an effort to please any union on property.

      1. NedsKid Avatar
        NedsKid

        While it isn’t the biggest driver, it is a driver. From the looks of the inbound versus outbound numbers, AA probably has a few minutes of block they probably could add but did not. They are still within the margin of being able to make the A:14 enough to reach their goal. Given that pilot contracts almost always include block or better, and if you add a minute of block time you MUST add the associated payroll expense with it to the financial forecast.

        Using an average pilot wage for a narrowbody, middle of the scale for CA and a couple years less junior on the FO, plus the impact on 401k/benefits/etc, adding one minute of block time to every flight is about $23million a year that has to be added to the cost forecast just for pilots. I’m sure F/As are probably an additional 2/3 of that amount to account for lower hourly plus additional headcount. It isn’t a big number, but can add up.

        Sure, they will blow block times…. but if they do it as actual costs versus forecast, they can make the future financials look good and find ways to make up for it before the financial periods close. It is nowhere near fuel… but fuel is a wag anyway. Crew costs when you add block means you guarantee you’ll have those expenses. It’s all about forecasting a good picture for Wall Street and each part of a percent can matter to some analyst. Will fuel overpower any of that? Absolutely. So will power by the hour and other costs. But those can be blamed in a retrospective analysis on weather, ATC, the Middle East, etc.

      2. Jason Avatar
        Jason

        A flight from AAA to BBB… the cost of fuel is based on actual costs for the flight, not now long it was scheduled for. If you add extra block time to the schedule, or take extra block time from the schedule, the fuel cost doesn’t change, but the pilot cost does change. Pilots get paid, the higher of actual or scheduled. The more block time you add to the schedule, the better your on-time performance, but higher pilot costs you have. The less block time you add to the schedule, the lower your on-time performance, the lower pilot costs you have.
        Scheduled block time impacts crew costs. Actual block time impacts both crew costs and fuel costs.

        1. Michael B Avatar
          Michael B

          Yes, but pilot costs aren’t what is the overall driver of block time decisions. Of course it adds to cost, but the savings in being on-time and passengers making connections, reliability numbers that drive bookings, etc…theoretically are more than made up for in the increase in block hour costs. What managers don’t want to do is unnecessarily increase block times, which is expensive, if the customer would have made their connection and the plane would be on-time A14 without the increase. One of the real costs of increased block hours is how it impacts aircraft utilization. AA uses (as do all airlines) standard turn times in their hubs and outstations. If 5 minutes is added to every turn and most aircraft fly 4-5 legs per day, it eliminates the ability to run the last flight of the day or the first one out in the morning. For example, If they have to run the last flight of the night 30 minutes later, being able to use the same crew in the morning is often times eliminated due to rest requirements. Now a second crew is needed.

          This is a complicated business. Adding minutes to avoid crew costs is definitely part of the equation but it is significantly smaller than you believe. Talk with the network planners and aircraft routers – they will confirm. Increased block times reduce the availability of the asset to be used to generate revenue – that is the real cost.

  11. emac Avatar
    emac

    Can you look at the reliability of AA’s 10:00-11:30 PM bank out of ORD? Do any flights arrive on time ever? Then for fun compare it to United’s 9:00-10:00 bank.

    1. Brett Avatar

      emac – It just gets bad after noon across the board. For June, A14 is 50.1% in the 8pm hour and 54.7% in the 9pm hour. It gets better after that. For United is at 58.3% in the 8pm hour and 57.1% in the 9pm hour and then it jumps up.

      1. Kilroy Avatar
        Kilroy

        Sounds like you have yet another datapoint to use to reinforce the message of “Fly earlier in the day for better reliability” when you get quoted in the usual local news reports on busy summer travel.

        /Not trying to disparage those types of reports, and I love seeing you quoted in them, it’s just interesting to see how sometimes conventional wisdom is valid for a good reason.

        1. emac Avatar
          emac

          Cranky — 50% is better than I’d expect, I was expecting even lower. The fact that AA can get half these flights in on time after so many flights through the day is rather impressive.

          @kilroy the data is quite clear, 14% delayed/canceled before noon, 32% and 42% in the afternoon and evening. https://6525516.fs1.hubspotusercontent-na2.net/hubfs/6525516/AmTrav%20Summer%202026%20travel%20guide.pdf

  12. Bill from DC Avatar
    Bill from DC

    This certainly reflects my anecdotal experiences that AmericAAn’t is still running a trash operation at my beloved DCA!

    It’s quite concerning that they think this is something worth celebrating. “Good news, we suck less than before!*”

    Then in a very small font the text after the asterisk reads, “But we’re still worse than our competition.” D’oh!

    1. 1990 Avatar
      1990

      Yup, instead of sucking, they just blow.

  13. LRK Avatar
    LRK

    Anecdotally, I feel like my AA flights have been more likely to have a *large* delay than on others. For example, I feel like I’ve had (or seen on airport monitors) an outsized amount of American flights delayed by multiple hours, vs more manageable (~1h) delays for, for example, my UA flights.

    Is there anything to this? Does AA perform differently here?

    A14 is probably what I care about most as a passenger, but I’m also really curious about the equivalent of A30, 60, 120, etc.

    1. Brett Avatar

      LRK – To do that, it takes a lot more digging and compiling the way the data is structured, so I won’t be able to get to it. (I’m on a plane for work as I write this…)

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.