787 SJC Cancellations
Jan 28, 2019, 8:24 am
#107
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: May 2014
Location: UK
Programs: BA Gold
Posts: 12,257
Which cabin does the seating not look good? I don't think I'd reject this rebooking - have you found a rebook option that is better you can suggest in place? They'll be very accommodating
Jan 28, 2019, 9:09 am
#108
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 4,966
WTP - replacement from bulkhead side seats to middle seats in middle of cabin. Either in old 777 or 747. I wouldn’t want either of those unless they move us into club world.
Jan 28, 2019, 1:15 pm
#109
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: KSA
Programs: BA LTG, UA Gold, EK Silver, Hilton LT Diamond, Marriott LT Titanium, IHG Plat
Posts: 1,242
SJC is getting a load of canx. Was due to be flying Sat 9th Feb which was canx along with all other SJC flights until resumption on the 14th. Hope it stays that way as due to be flying back from SJC on the 16th.
Re your re -seat - If a 747 then will probably be a hi-J so nice seats in WTP (but not as nice as a WTP bulkhead on the 787). No idea re which 777 you'd get
Re your re -seat - If a 747 then will probably be a hi-J so nice seats in WTP (but not as nice as a WTP bulkhead on the 787). No idea re which 777 you'd get
Jan 28, 2019, 1:30 pm
#110
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: May 2014
Location: UK
Programs: BA Gold
Posts: 12,257
Unfortunaly Expert Flyer confirms both services on Friday have only the single blocked bulkhead seat otherwise some mid row seats..
Jan 28, 2019, 2:06 pm
#111
Join Date: Feb 2016
Location: London
Programs: BA Silver
Posts: 47
My partner is on BA278 this Friday as well. Just tried the 8.25pm from SFO, it is full, now waiting for the information on 4.10pm.
Can someone please post the cancellation reason? Would it be subject to EC261?
Can someone please post the cancellation reason? Would it be subject to EC261?
Jan 28, 2019, 3:39 pm
#112
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 4,966
Should be if they cannot get you there with less than a 2 hour delay and not departing more than 1 hour early.
Jan 28, 2019, 4:08 pm
#113
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 4,966
SJC is getting a load of canx. Was due to be flying Sat 9th Feb which was canx along with all other SJC flights until resumption on the 14th. Hope it stays that way as due to be flying back from SJC on the 16th.
Re your re -seat - If a 747 then will probably be a hi-J so nice seats in WTP (but not as nice as a WTP bulkhead on the 787). No idea re which 777 you'd get
Re your re -seat - If a 747 then will probably be a hi-J so nice seats in WTP (but not as nice as a WTP bulkhead on the 787). No idea re which 777 you'd get
Jan 28, 2019, 4:45 pm
#114
Join Date: Jul 2018
Posts: 1,281
How might a different gateway airport affect this? If the proposed SFO flight departs less than 1 hour before than the old SJC flight, then you might want to be difficult and insist on leaving from SJC (even if that means BA putting on a taxi to take you to SFO) so that you can trigger EC261.
Jan 28, 2019, 4:46 pm
#115
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Gatwick, UK
Programs: UA *G, BA Silver
Posts: 1,673
However, somewhere on here is the more definitive thread on that (the EC-261 thread I think) and the fact that the adjudicators have ruled that BA cannot claim exceptional circumstances on something they have known about for over 12 months
Jan 28, 2019, 4:54 pm
#116
Join Date: Jul 2018
Posts: 1,281
The reason will presumably be the RR engine issues, which BA seem to be claiming are not liable to 261 compensation.
However, somewhere on here is the more definitive thread on that (the EC-261 thread I think) and the fact that the adjudicators have ruled that BA cannot claim exceptional circumstances on something they have known about for over 12 months
However, somewhere on here is the more definitive thread on that (the EC-261 thread I think) and the fact that the adjudicators have ruled that BA cannot claim exceptional circumstances on something they have known about for over 12 months
Jan 28, 2019, 5:26 pm
#117
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 4,966
The reason will presumably be the RR engine issues, which BA seem to be claiming are not liable to 261 compensation.
However, somewhere on here is the more definitive thread on that (the EC-261 thread I think) and the fact that the adjudicators have ruled that BA cannot claim exceptional circumstances on something they have known about for over 12 months
However, somewhere on here is the more definitive thread on that (the EC-261 thread I think) and the fact that the adjudicators have ruled that BA cannot claim exceptional circumstances on something they have known about for over 12 months
Jan 28, 2019, 6:54 pm
#118
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: San Francisco, CA, USA
Programs: Hyatt LT Globalist, Marriot LT Titanium, UA 2.4MM, HH Gold, AS MVPG
Posts: 3,400
I raised this in another thread but with this I’m wondering again - how many of these have been fixed and/or still need to be fixed? And therefore potential time frame these cancellations continue to be a risk?
Jan 29, 2019, 1:17 am
#119
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 5,596
Still ongoing. Still 1 B787 sat with no engines, like that for more than 1 year, some others minus 1 engine and continuing inspections on others causing down time. Help is on the way with A350 deliveries commencing later this year and some retirements of older aircraft being held back.
Jan 29, 2019, 2:06 am
#120
Join Date: Jun 2018
Location: Newcastle-upon-Tyne
Programs: BAEC Gold
Posts: 177
Indeed, it must be getting to the point where every booking on these flights has been made *after* BA became aware of the engine problem. Indeed, these flights would have been loaded into the booking system despite the engine problems being known. Moreover, BA has launched new routes and added flights with these 787s (e.g. Durban) knowing about the constraints, so it's hard to see why they should be let off.