Go Back  FlyerTalk Forums > Miles&Points > Airlines and Mileage Programs > American Airlines | AAdvantage
Reload this Page >

Another day, another AA 125 (DFW-HKG 26 Apr) issue (ICN diversion)

Another day, another AA 125 (DFW-HKG 26 Apr) issue (ICN diversion)

Old Apr 27, 2019, 1:36 pm
  #16  
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: WAS/TYO
Programs: UA 1K, AA EXP (3MM), DL PM, BONVOY TITANIUM, HYATT GLOBALIST, HILTON DIAMOND, IHG DIAMOND AMB, et al
Posts: 5,912
Originally Posted by SamOF
But at a planned point they can easily have a crew ready to swap in—just land at SEA, refuel, and swap out the crew for one that's at 0.
Again, it's not that simple. So AA should always have a pre-staged 777 crew of 4 pilots sitting at SEA or ANC just in case AA125 needs to divert? Also, frequently on this route (and other ULH routes) the necessity for a fuel diversion due to winds wouldn't be certain until much later enroute.

-FlyerBeek
FlyerBeek is offline  
Old Apr 27, 2019, 3:00 pm
  #17  
Moderator: American AAdvantage
 
Join Date: May 2000
Location: NorCal - SMF area
Programs: AA LT Plat; HH LT Diamond, Maître-plongeur des Muccis
Posts: 62,948
Originally Posted by x1234
Also if they KNOW AHEAD OF TIME their going to divert, why not gas & go in SEA or ANC!?

Originally Posted by wolfpacktrojan


Wouldn't it have made more sense to divert to NRT, which would probably have a 777 crew and could still avoid visa issues?
The flight track shows diverting to ICN was considerably more practical, iirc, and it shows this wasn’t planned in advance. I suspect the winds aloft varied from expected.

Originally Posted by SamOF
But at a planned point they can easily have a crew ready to swap in—just land at SEA, refuel, and swap out the crew for one that's at 0.
At what cost? With what spares (77W and crew)? Besides, this was unforeseen.
JDiver is offline  
Old Apr 27, 2019, 3:05 pm
  #18  
 
Join Date: Jun 2017
Location: SAN
Programs: AS MVPG100K, UA Gold, IHG Diamond, Hyatt Globalist, National Exec
Posts: 320
Originally Posted by JDiver
The flight track shows diverting to ICN was considerably more practical, iirc, and it shows this wasn’t planned in advance. I suspect the winds aloft varied from expected.
Ah I see, thanks for the insight!
wolfpacktrojan is offline  
Old Apr 27, 2019, 3:19 pm
  #19  
FlyerTalk Evangelist
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: KHOU/KIAH
Programs: AA EXP | Marriott Bonvoy Titanium| Hyatt Globalist
Posts: 11,212
Originally Posted by 3Cforme
Oh yes - there are planned diversion points. Those are mandatory in creation of the flight plan. As for having hotel rooms and staff to deal with passengers in all of those airports - that's not part of the plan.
bingo.

Beyond that, knowing that this is more than a one-time issue, they should have a contingency plan in place.
Antarius is offline  
Old Apr 27, 2019, 3:23 pm
  #20  
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Posts: 1,697
Their routing wasn’t over NRT. They came down via China and then made a left into ICN

Originally Posted by wolfpacktrojan


Wouldn't it have made more sense to divert to NRT, which would probably have a 777 crew and could still avoid visa issues?
777lover is offline  
Old Apr 27, 2019, 5:49 pm
  #21  
Suspended
 
Join Date: May 2013
Location: NYC
Programs: DL Diamond, AAdvantage EXP, Hyatt Explorist, HHonors Diamond, Avis First
Posts: 7,344
Try getting diverted to TPE of all airports on this flight.....quite the ordeal we went through.

Last edited by AANYC1981; Apr 27, 2019 at 6:05 pm
AANYC1981 is offline  
Old Apr 27, 2019, 5:50 pm
  #22  
 
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: New York City
Programs: AA EXP, DL DM, SPG Plat, Hilton Gold
Posts: 2,127
Originally Posted by SamOF
But at a planned point they can easily have a crew ready to swap in—just land at SEA, refuel, and swap out the crew for one that's at 0.
Except that AA does not have 777 crew at SEA or ANC etc.. And positioning them in advance is very very complicated - and would likely waste valuable crew resources (and $$) if the winds changed and allowed AA to operate nonstop...
JDiver likes this.
mizzou miles is offline  
Old Apr 27, 2019, 7:18 pm
  #23  
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Programs: EXPLT
Posts: 142
The crew and dispatchers won’t know typically that there might be a fuel issue until well well into the flights. In the case of winds aloft stronger than forecasted, it wudnt be until we’ll over China/Russia/Japan (depending on the route that day) that there might be an issue as the effects of a wind bust are slow to accumulate. So diverting back won’t ever happen in these rare cases.

Add to this heavy weather/tstms at HKG (as has been the case lately) and consuming more fuel than planned enroute due to a wind bust—dispatchers and crew might not consider proceeding to HKG the best choice. No doubt it’s a tough call to make but rest assured safety is numero uno!
b74l is offline  
Old Apr 27, 2019, 8:45 pm
  #24  
 
Join Date: Jul 2017
Location: California
Programs: AA EXP; Hyatt Globalist; Marriott Bonvoy Titanium Elite
Posts: 1,967
5ICN/FLT 0125 STUB ORIG PLN DEP ICN ETD 1100 -- ICN .RMKS WX DIVERSION FTWDP T.SHELTON *1548
4ICN/OUT1116 *2116
5HKG/INTMD LNDG OVER HKG TO ICN DUE TO WEATHER *0211*FTWMG3
2HKG/PRE1348 *2116
Weather diversion
seigex is offline  
Old Apr 27, 2019, 10:15 pm
  #25  
 
Join Date: Apr 2017
Location: PVD, BOS
Programs: AA EXP
Posts: 1,664
I’m curious why AA has issues with this while CX seemingly does not (specifically with regard to crew time outs on diversions). CX812 HKG-BOS had a medical diversion to ANC a couple weeks ago and then continued onward to BOS without issue. Ground stop at ANC of about an hour.

Is the crew timing issue contractual or legal? I do know that CX has 4 flight crew and 14 cabin crew on their 77W. Not sure if AA staffing is the same.
scolbath likes this.
swingaling is offline  
Old Apr 28, 2019, 2:30 am
  #26  
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Programs: former MD-88 jumpseat Medallion. DL FO, AA PLT PRO. Marriott LT Plat.
Posts: 752
Originally Posted by b74l
The crew and dispatchers won’t know typically that there might be a fuel issue until well well into the flights. In the case of winds aloft stronger than forecasted, it wudnt be until we’ll over China/Russia/Japan (depending on the route that day) that there might be an issue as the effects of a wind bust are slow to accumulate. So diverting back won’t ever happen in these rare cases.

Add to this heavy weather/tstms at HKG (as has been the case lately) and consuming more fuel than planned enroute due to a wind bust—dispatchers and crew might not consider proceeding to HKG the best choice. No doubt it’s a tough call to make but rest assured safety is numero uno!
Exactly, people forget about the "lag" factor in flight planning for these ULH flights.

Most government-issued TAFs (terminal area forecast) are issued every 6 hours. HKG TAFs come out at 0500z and 1100z (UTC time). the DFW-HKG flight leaves at 1535z, and arrives at 0810z the next day, so whichever dispatcher gets to plan that beast is using a HKG destination weather forecast issued at 1100z that will be about 21 hours old when the flight actually gets there. Its one thing to say it'll be sunny and 85F in San Diego tomorrow, and quite another to forecast surface wind speed, direction, and convective coverage nearly a day away. If you throw in a bad wind package into your flight planning software, and get held down at lower altitudes on very crowded airways over Russia and China, your fuel situation can get pretty tight in a hurry with still quite a bit of flying still to go.
JDiver, teemuflyer, wrp96 and 2 others like this.
PurdueFlyer is offline  
Old Apr 28, 2019, 3:00 am
  #27  
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Austin
Programs: AA EXP +2MM- LT PLT! HH Diamond
Posts: 6,086
Originally Posted by PurdueFlyer
Exactly, people forget about the "lag" factor in flight planning for these ULH flights.

Most government-issued TAFs (terminal area forecast) are issued every 6 hours. HKG TAFs come out at 0500z and 1100z (UTC time). the DFW-HKG flight leaves at 1535z, and arrives at 0810z the next day, so whichever dispatcher gets to plan that beast is using a HKG destination weather forecast issued at 1100z that will be about 21 hours old when the flight actually gets there. Its one thing to say it'll be sunny and 85F in San Diego tomorrow, and quite another to forecast surface wind speed, direction, and convective coverage nearly a day away. If you throw in a bad wind package into your flight planning software, and get held down at lower altitudes on very crowded airways over Russia and China, your fuel situation can get pretty tight in a hurry with still quite a bit of flying still to go.
Although somewhat overwhelmed by the detail, I appreciate you sharing these type of specific details on the complexities involved in UHL flight planning. But I agree with others on this thread that AA has not put their best foot forward in passenger experience planning given the known challenges for the route.
wrp96 likes this.
teemuflyer is offline  
Old Apr 28, 2019, 6:15 am
  #28  
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Posts: 691
Originally Posted by FlyerBeek
Again, it's not that simple. So AA should always have a pre-staged 777 crew of 4 pilots sitting at SEA or ANC just in case AA125 needs to divert? Also, frequently on this route (and other ULH routes) the necessity for a fuel diversion due to winds wouldn't be certain until much later enroute.

-FlyerBeek
exactly — aa won’t have anyone certified to fly a 777 sitting around at sea
footballfanatic is offline  
Old Apr 28, 2019, 11:13 am
  #29  
 
Join Date: Aug 2018
Location: Ohio
Programs: AA Exec Plat, Hyatt Explorist, Marriott Gold, Hilton Gold
Posts: 32
Looks like the ICN-HKG flight arrived a few hours ago, getting them in about 24 hours late if my math is right.
Grsdo is offline  
Old Apr 28, 2019, 1:44 pm
  #30  
Moderator: American AAdvantage
 
Join Date: May 2000
Location: NorCal - SMF area
Programs: AA LT Plat; HH LT Diamond, Maître-plongeur des Muccis
Posts: 62,948
Originally Posted by Grsdo
Looks like the ICN-HKG flight arrived a few hours ago, getting them in about 24 hours late if my math is right.
~24 hours plus one, I think. AA gave them a rather spare snack kit for their efforts, and all alcoholic beverages were removed (and not replaced) at ICN. Going for... uh, I can’t remember.
Spiff, GTITAN, wrp96 and 1 others like this.
JDiver is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Manage Preferences - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service -

This site is owned, operated, and maintained by MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Designated trademarks are the property of their respective owners.