Flight delays get a lot of attention, and certainly mechanical and staffing issues are the fault of the airline. There’s also air traffic control which creates congestion – it isn’t just responsible for delays but also for longer flight times that get built into schedules. We don’t talk enough about that.
Maybe the biggest failure in air travel is something we don’t talk about at all. How is it possible that people are being told to show up at the airport 2.5 to 3 hours before their flight, and that isn’t considered a failure of massive proportions?
We know you just came back from the track, but the airport is not the place to race. Stay ahead of the curve by giving yourself extra time to get through the airport!
✈️ For domestic flights: Arrive 2.5 hours early
For international flights: Arrive 3 hours early pic.twitter.com/KyFc802rnc— Austin-Bergstrom International Airport (@AustinAirport) March 27, 2025
The lengthened times for showing up at the airport mean that it no longer even makes sense for many people to take shorter flights, but aircraft technology (electric, short and vertical takeoff) is changing and becoming far more viable in the coming years so we should be thinking about that. The FAA is considering standards for vertiports but are we thinking creatively enough or will that conversation be too status quo-focused either because of regulator bias or because it’s entrenched interests most involved?
These are really important conversations and not just about convenience, although convenience matters more than we often give it credit for.
- In 2024, U.S. airlines carried around 862.8 million passengers million passengers on domestic flights across the United States.
- Airline passengers skew higher income, so let’s conservatively assume a $100,000 average income or $48.08 hourly wage.
Taking an extra two hours per passenger on average, that’s 1.725 billion hours, or $83 billion cost to the economy just for extra time wasted for domestic passengers.
And that’s only the extra cost of time wasted on departure. It doesn’t count delays on arrival,
- airlines forcing passengers to gate check bags, which sends them to baggage claim
- poor processes for baggage claim, that can delay bags for 45 minutes or longer
- buses to rideshare and rental car lots
Why do we simply accept showing up 3 hours before a flight, and taking an hour to get out of the airport, turning a two hour trip into 6 hours without even considering the time it takes to get to and from the airport?
We’ve turned airports into shopping malls, because airline passengers aren’t an airport customer they’re the product to be sold to. Longer dwell times to fill with shopping, therefore, have become a feature not a bug. Airlines frequently share in that revenue, either directly or through lower airport costs. Passengers alone can’t push for this – things won’t change until the airlines see it as in their interest.
More and smaller airports are needed. Streamlined security, that doesn’t wait for nationwide universal rollout, is needed. We need runways and taxiways and air traffic capacity to increase throughput without stacking delays. Most of all, we need to avoid complacency that accepts the status quo as given.
Let it go Elsa….I mean, Gary.
Respectfully, I don’t get the argument that people would otherwise be earning their base rate of pay instead of waiting at the airport. In fact, plenty of people do in fact work from the airport before flights, and even during flights. The average American wastes plenty of time at work, at home, ect on their phones or netflix. What’s the difference if they do it at the airport? You also have to consider the economic impact of people purchasing food, drinks, goods, ect at the airport, which may offset that.
When will our politicians tackle gridlock on our roads? Why do we citizens tolerate that. They love to preen in front of tv cameras about unfixable matters like “climate change” and ignore the real stuff.
What we need is high velocity trains from one big city to the next–downtown to downtown at 200 mph, get there faster than by flying.
this is heading the other direction… by design. hub airports are growing in physical size/capacity and offerings. the restaurants are getting more comfortable and better. hub airports are becoming destinations in and of themselves. 3 hrs before? try 5. logistically it’s becoming impractical to cut things close anymore (again by design). the scale’s tipped the other direction.
hubs suck… tiny airports are the future/game.
If it gets all of the people who need extra time to travel, isnt it really is in all other travelers best interest to have this guideline? And what solo traveler ever follows these guidelines? 1 hour domestic before, 1.5 hours intl before always works for me.
Your arbitrary numbers are ridiculous. The majority of businesses travelers are on salary, not hourly wage, so they are still getting paid for any time spent in an airport while traveling for business. Most of them are also still working on laptops and phones. Leisure travelers are in the airport mostly on vacation days and weekends so you can also eliminate all of them from your made up numbers because they are not getting paid for that time whether or not they spend it in an airport.
Yes, shorter flights, like Detroit to Chicago, end up taking the same amount of time as driving – 4.5 to 5 hours – if you include all the time spent driving to and waiting at the airport.
I remember in the mid 80s, when Southwest first started serving the Detroit market out of City Airport, with cheap, fun fares ($29/RT) to Chicago, St Louis and Indy. I had a Saturday morning flight to St Louis and it took me 10 MINUTES from the time I left my house until I was ON THE PLANE! (Lived about 5 miles from the airport, got dropped off at the terminal, walked upstairs to the gate, through the metal detector, fight was boarding so right onto the plane.)
Joe – it’s clear you don’t understand how numbers work. Whether salary or hourly, the cost is still the same. People on vacation are still wasting their time at the airport. Maybe you haven’t heard, but time = money. It seems you have a stake in the scam being run at the airports. Nice how you try calling out Gary for being ridiculous, while presenting your 5th grade argument. Good luck out there Joey.
@Oscar M. I agree in a general sense. Of course Gary has quoted a high-end estimate by assuming productive use of saved time at airports by arriving later. It is often a feature of such claims. But, certainly, unnecessary time at airports does come at a cost to society.
@all of you calling for re-regulation. I will notvrepeat all I sais in another thread. But, your call for regulation seems designed to make your life better at a significant cost to others. The argument is selfish andvelitist.
@Joe. As is common in such analysis, an hourly price is assigned to lost time. It is irrelevant if the person is an hourly or salaried worker. The idea is that an individual who loses a hour could have used that hour to be more productive even if salaried. We are not talking about the cost a worker might experience through less pay, but the societal loss.
But, of course, the assumption that every “lost hour” would be replaced with productive activity is extreme.
@This comes to mind — Those fellows mean well, but they are indeed unrealistic, namely because this Congress is unlikely to do anything beneficial for most consumers. As I’ve advocated for many times on here, I’d settle for reasonable air passenger rights legislation, like EU261 or Canada’s APPR, which would ensure passengers receive a baseline of compensation (like $200-600) for significant delays and cancellations under the airlines’ control (think, staffing issues, maintenance, etc.)
Yes, this is a reasonable estimate of the time lost and cost to society. Whether the time is lost being productive or whether it is time lost with family should not matter. Why incompetent people on here are arguing about cost rather than discussing how to address this should bother everyone. Involve Congress TSA, Airlines, Government local and state and federal, we worry about lost money to Medicaid and social security but they should worry about these endless delays and costs as well.
Only about 1/5th of US workers make $100,000+. The median income is way, way lower. Airline passengers might be higher income on average but removing 4/5ths of the income pool to get to your numbers is goofy.
@BoomerToons — ‘Goofy,’ you say? …garsh!
I just came back from a trip to Europe. Rail in Italy is amazing. Non-high speed trains go 150 mph once they are out of the city and you can show up 15-20 minutes before your train. Plus, there’s an incentive for airports to get us there early. We’re stuck behind security overpaying for food and drinks.
How much would someone have to pay you to make you sit in an airport chair for an extra unnecessary 2 hours?
$50-$100 sounds like a good ballpark. Just because I’m not on the clock at my day job doesn’t mean my time suddenly becomes worthless.
“Those fellows mean well, but they are indeed unrealistic, namely because this Congress is unlikely to do anything beneficial for most consumers.” But, you miss my point: re-regulation in the way they seem to want will be bad for most consumers. Issue one is prices will be higher. EU261-type rules here would cost us pax. Airlines payout more, so fares will ge higher. One can look at it as forced insurance: you pay a slightly higher fare as “premiums” and get a payout in certain cases. A EU261-like U.S. law might not be so terrible. But, moving us back to regulations of 50 years ago would be bad for most travelers.
SAD LOSERS TALKING ABOUT SAD LOSER CRAP!
Or you could do what I do – don’t fly. They’ve made it such a hassle I haven’t flown purely for leisure since 2014.
With as many people traveling by air, I doubt that the average income per passenger is $100,000. Maybe $100,000 average household income would be appropriate. Full-time wage and salary workers average about $60,000 a year in 2024 per the Bureau of Labor Statistics. In a smaller city or a more rural area, a $60,000 a year job can be ok because the cost of housing can be much lower. Things like auto insurance are also lower. The marginal taxes due on a marginally higher income also help to offset the perceived extra dollars in the pocket for spending. Ultra low cost carriers also allow lower income people to travel by air. Personally when my income hit around $20,000 a year almost 40 years ago, I started traveling by air and when it hit $30,000 a year I started traveling by air more. The cost of tickets has not gone up that much compared to income since that time.
Regardless of the actual numbers, the long waits are nuts, but are driven by the traveler’s desire for a cheap ticket. 30+ years in aviation management, and it comes down to airline decision-making driven by the push to lower costs and fares yet to remain profitable and capture more passengers. You can argue if it’s the passengers, shareholders, management, or whatever driving the decisions, but it’s an issue of money. Most often, slow bags to baggage claim is due to a shortage of ramp agents. Long lines at the ticket counters are due to a shortage of ticket agents. Overcrowded checkpoints, gates and restaurants are due to larger aircraft and more compressed peak hour schedules as airlines work to squeeze one more turn per aircraft. Not to mention the TSA. Compared with the 70s and 80s, it’s not a career, it’s a job and McDonald’s feeds their workers. Benefits are gone, pay is low, morale is bad and the airlines have raced to the bottom to give travelers what they want – $29 to Ft. Lauderdale. Small airports are nowhere near as crowded, so fly local and skip the lines.
What Thomas Murphy said-
“What we need is high velocity trains from one big city to the next–downtown to downtown at 200 mph, get there faster than by flying.”
@This comes to mind — Wrong. EU261 does not cost passengers more; European carriers, some ULCC like Ryanair, even under EU261, offer very affordable fares, and such regulations do not bankrupt airlines. Instead, it creates the incentive for airlines to operate more reliably, avoid those penalties, and increase customer satisfaction. You’re just ‘plane’ wrong. We deserve better in the USA.