CX879 Redirected...
Jan 15, 2012 | 11:25 pm
#4
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Hong Kong
Programs: CX, UA, Shangri-La, Hyatt, Starwood
Posts: 8,245
Don't know...but I've only had it happen when the plane was completely full. Also stopped in TPE. I suspect the cargo load also plays a big factor. If facing unusually strong winds, plus a full flight and a heavy cargo load, I think that = tech stop.
Jan 16, 2012 | 1:59 am
#5
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: SF Bay Area
Programs: CX
Posts: 87
Actually the flight would have carried no cargo at all. 744 during winter time is payload restricted from North america. They got full pax and not enough people is willing to give up so a tech stop is required.
Jan 16, 2012 | 2:06 am
#6
Suspended
Join Date: May 2006
Location: HKG
Programs: A3, TK *G; JL JGC; SPG,Hilton Gold
Posts: 9,952
but if they had known its a full flight and is payload restricted to HKG, couldnt they get in some cargo and techstop at ICN instead?
Jan 16, 2012 | 4:45 am
#8
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: SF Bay Area
Programs: CX
Posts: 87
Any airlines will try to avoid techstop at all cost. It is way too costly than denied boarding. By the time the check in counter closes (40mins before ETD), it will be too late for any cargo to be loaded to the plane.
Jan 16, 2012 | 4:48 am
#9
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: SF Bay Area
Programs: CX
Posts: 87
Jan 16, 2012 | 3:39 pm
#10
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: LAX
Posts: 435
Jan 16, 2012 | 7:06 pm
#11
Suspended
Join Date: May 2006
Location: HKG
Programs: A3, TK *G; JL JGC; SPG,Hilton Gold
Posts: 9,952
deal: i was just thinking if they had to stop anyway, they might as well take the cargo. but yea. USA-asia has limited cargo and they still have their freighters.
Jan 16, 2012 | 7:20 pm
#12
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Hong Kong
Programs: CX, UA, Shangri-La, Hyatt, Starwood
Posts: 8,245
That's impressive then, I didn't realize how close to the edge of their range the 747s were flying on the SFO-HKG leg. If there isn't a full belly of cargo, then it means just the full compliment of pax/baggage alone + strong winds are enough to force a fuel stop. LAX must've been even worse. No wonder they want to switch those to 777s.
Jan 16, 2012 | 10:54 pm
#15
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: SF Bay Area
Programs: CX
Posts: 87
That's impressive then, I didn't realize how close to the edge of their range the 747s were flying on the SFO-HKG leg. If there isn't a full belly of cargo, then it means just the full compliment of pax/baggage alone + strong winds are enough to force a fuel stop. LAX must've been even worse. No wonder they want to switch those to 777s.