SEA-KOA Refueling Stop?
Jan 29, 2019, 7:56 pm
#16
Join Date: Sep 2017
Location: Between SFO and STS
Programs: Alaska MVP Gold, United Serf, Delta Gold
Posts: 731
Jan 29, 2019, 11:28 pm
#17
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: SEA (the REAL Washington); occasionally in the other Washington (DCA area)
Programs: DL PM 1.57MM; AS MVPG 100K
Posts: 21,371
my DAL-SEA flight last year had to put down in SLC for fuel; the captain had announced the technical stop while we were waiting for the line of thunderstorms across the departure track to dissipate ... c’mon, people, this stuff happens; the thought of complaining in hopes of getting “some consideration” never crossed my mind
Jan 29, 2019, 11:51 pm
#18
Join Date: Apr 2017
Programs: AS 100k, DL PM, New Sagaya
Posts: 1,291
** oh the regret **
my DAL-SEA flight last year had to put down in SLC for fuel; the captain had announced the technical stop while we were waiting for the line of thunderstorms across the departure track to dissipate ... c’mon, people, this stuff happens; the thought of complaining in hopes of getting “some consideration” never crossed my mind
Jan 30, 2019, 12:36 am
#19
Join Date: Jun 2005
Programs: AS MVPG
Posts: 2,206
One can debate if the airline should be able to manage the advertised route or not. But in this case it was clear to my friend that the flight crew was recalculating fuel and weight at departure and even still couldn’t load more fuel on. Her point was if the E175 can’t make the route, maybe chose another aircraft.
Last edited by alphaeagle; Jan 30, 2019 at 7:18 pm
Jan 30, 2019, 1:21 am
#20
Original Poster
Join Date: Feb 2007
Programs: AS Million Miler, Marriott Lifetime Platinum, Nexus / Global Entry
Posts: 844
There really are not many options and it is rarely planned significantly in advance because it is a matter of wind intensity.
Options are:
1. Crash into the Pacific (not really likely because there are likely reserves sufficient to make it).
2. Cancel flight.
3. Lease / purchase new aircraft (likely takes more than 4 hours).
You are 100% due compensation from whoever caused the headwinds. Seriously.
Options are:
1. Crash into the Pacific (not really likely because there are likely reserves sufficient to make it).
2. Cancel flight.
3. Lease / purchase new aircraft (likely takes more than 4 hours).
You are 100% due compensation from whoever caused the headwinds. Seriously.
Jan 30, 2019, 6:09 am
#21
Join Date: Sep 2012
Posts: 1,331
Last edited by spongenotbob; Jan 30, 2019 at 6:33 am
Jan 30, 2019, 8:24 am
#22
Join Date: May 2013
Location: SEA
Programs: AS MVP Gold 100K
Posts: 2,030
I have been having the same issue with my car. 99% of the time I get around all week fine on a tank of gas, however I have noticed when I take really long trips I need to stop for gas. I was thinking maybe I should just buy a tanker truck? Perhaps AS should make a deal with the Air Force so they could do in flight re-fueling.
Or to be a bit political, we could do what they do in DC, simply declare that Hawaii is now 500 miles closer and plan accordingly.
Or to be a bit political, we could do what they do in DC, simply declare that Hawaii is now 500 miles closer and plan accordingly.
Feb 1, 2019, 3:00 pm
#24
A FlyerTalk Posting Legend
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: MCI
Programs: AA Gold 1MM, AS MVP, UA Silver, WN A-List, Marriott LT Titanium, HH Diamond
Posts: 52,570
Feb 1, 2019, 7:56 pm
#25
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Seattle, WA
Programs: DL Diamond 1.7MM, Starlux Insighter, Bonvoy Titanium, Hilton Gold, Hertz PC
Posts: 3,947
To be fair to OP, Alaska's decision to fly under-ranged 737-800s on this route is a purely business decision. It's no surprise that, this time of year, headwinds get in the way and cause these problems. Alaska has decided it's cheaper to take the tech stop in these cases rather than buy aircraft that are better suited for operating the route year round.
So compensation isn't quite as ridiculous as it might sound at first glance; operating this flight on time *was* possible and within Alaska's control, and they chose not to for business reasons. DL 1096 on the 17th arrived in KOA on time, as it was operated by a 757-200...
Not saying AS is making the wrong decision overall. But being annoyed that your chosen airline has decided not to buy airplanes that are appropriate for the flight they sold you isn't crazy, IMHO.
So compensation isn't quite as ridiculous as it might sound at first glance; operating this flight on time *was* possible and within Alaska's control, and they chose not to for business reasons. DL 1096 on the 17th arrived in KOA on time, as it was operated by a 757-200...
Not saying AS is making the wrong decision overall. But being annoyed that your chosen airline has decided not to buy airplanes that are appropriate for the flight they sold you isn't crazy, IMHO.
Feb 1, 2019, 8:31 pm
#26
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: SEA (the REAL Washington); occasionally in the other Washington (DCA area)
Programs: DL PM 1.57MM; AS MVPG 100K
Posts: 21,371
To be fair to OP, Alaska's decision to fly under-ranged 737-800s on this route is a purely business decision. It's no surprise that, this time of year, headwinds get in the way and cause these problems. Alaska has decided it's cheaper to take the tech stop in these cases rather than buy aircraft that are better suited for operating the route year round.
So compensation isn't quite as ridiculous as it might sound at first glance; operating this flight on time *was* possible and within Alaska's control, and they chose not to for business reasons. DL 1096 on the 17th arrived in KOA on time, as it was operated by a 757-200...
Not saying AS is making the wrong decision overall. But being annoyed that your chosen airline has decided not to buy airplanes that are appropriate for the flight they sold you isn't crazy, IMHO.
So compensation isn't quite as ridiculous as it might sound at first glance; operating this flight on time *was* possible and within Alaska's control, and they chose not to for business reasons. DL 1096 on the 17th arrived in KOA on time, as it was operated by a 757-200...
Not saying AS is making the wrong decision overall. But being annoyed that your chosen airline has decided not to buy airplanes that are appropriate for the flight they sold you isn't crazy, IMHO.
yes it sucks when you’re on that flight, but it’s definitely a business decision (the alternative being to offload pax and baggage to where they can indeed complete the flight while remaining legal on fuel; I can certainly imagine the commentary in a thread titled something like “Alaska bumps 18 pax from SEA-OGG because of wind”) ... I don’t think it’s appropriate to label the aircraft as “under-ranged” or not “appropriate for the flight” when the airline can build a schedule with expectation of completing 99.5% of the flights
Feb 2, 2019, 9:44 am
#27
A FlyerTalk Posting Legend
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: MCI
Programs: AA Gold 1MM, AS MVP, UA Silver, WN A-List, Marriott LT Titanium, HH Diamond
Posts: 52,570
if we just randomly say AS operates ~10 daily flights from WA/OR to HI with 738s (maybe 3500/year), even a single tech stop diversion a month is less than one-half of one per cent of those operations
yes it sucks when you’re on that flight, but it’s definitely a business decision (the alternative being to offload pax and baggage to where they can indeed complete the flight while remaining legal on fuel; I can certainly imagine the commentary in a thread titled something like “Alaska bumps 18 pax from SEA-OGG because of wind”) ... I don’t think it’s appropriate to label the aircraft as “under-ranged” or not “appropriate for the flight” when the airline can build a schedule with expectation of completing 99.5% of the flights
This one seems easy. AS should at least make good with the people on those rare flights. Clearly that's a better business decision than buying a bunch of other aircraft.
Feb 2, 2019, 11:48 am
#28
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: San Francisco, CA
Programs: AA (PPro/3MM/Admirals Club), AS, UA, Marriott (Gold), HHonors (Gold), Accor (Plat)
Posts: 2,602
I had to take a tech stop in SLC and a BOS-SFO airbus flight a little over a year ago. It definitely made for a loooonnnnng day and I was glad I had sprung for an F seat. But I don't think I'm due anything for those situations. In well over 2 million lifetime flying miles, I've had four diversions. One was for a pregnant woman, one was a flag stop to pick up stranded passengers (that Horizon flag stop should have been comped for those of us who booked a nonstop and arrived at a small airport after the rental car agencies closed), and two were for weather issues.
Feb 2, 2019, 12:47 pm
#30
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Bay Area, CA
Programs: UA Plat 2MM; AS MVP Gold 75K
Posts: 35,068
To be fair to OP, Alaska's decision to fly under-ranged 737-800s on this route is a purely business decision. It's no surprise that, this time of year, headwinds get in the way and cause these problems. Alaska has decided it's cheaper to take the tech stop in these cases rather than buy aircraft that are better suited for operating the route year round.
So compensation isn't quite as ridiculous as it might sound at first glance; operating this flight on time *was* possible and within Alaska's control, and they chose not to for business reasons. DL 1096 on the 17th arrived in KOA on time, as it was operated by a 757-200...
Not saying AS is making the wrong decision overall. But being annoyed that your chosen airline has decided not to buy airplanes that are appropriate for the flight they sold you isn't crazy, IMHO.
So compensation isn't quite as ridiculous as it might sound at first glance; operating this flight on time *was* possible and within Alaska's control, and they chose not to for business reasons. DL 1096 on the 17th arrived in KOA on time, as it was operated by a 757-200...
Not saying AS is making the wrong decision overall. But being annoyed that your chosen airline has decided not to buy airplanes that are appropriate for the flight they sold you isn't crazy, IMHO.
AS used to compensate in these situations. And no reason they can't bump people either. If they go high enough in the comp, people will bump, and it will be voluntary.