Diversion of B6 669 JFK-SJC on 07/16/17
Jul 17, 2017, 3:06 pm
#1
Original Poster
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Fremont, CA USA UA 1P
Programs: United Platinum
Posts: 20
Diversion of B6 669 JFK-SJC on 07/16/17
A friend of mine was on JetBlue 669 on 07/16/17 from JFK to SJC. Two hours into the flight, the pilot announced that they didn't have enough fuel to make it to San Jose and so were returning to JFK. After another two hours of flying the plane arrived at JFK, and the passengers were put on a different plane that landed in SJC ~6 hours late.
It seems odd that running low on fuel would be handled by turning around and flying back to JFK when they could have refueled at ORD, IAD, or SLC before continuing on to SJC.
Another unusual thing is that the plane's altitude varied a lot. It climbed to 34,000 ft after takeoff, then descended to 32,000 ft, then 26,000 ft, and finally 20,000 ft. After the diversion it returned to 31,000 where it stayed until descending for landing at JFK.
The flight track log is here: <http://flightaware.com/live/flight/JBU669/history/20170716/2235Z/KJFK/KJFK/tracklog>.
I understand looking for more favorable winds by changing altitude, but 20,000 seems pretty low for an Airbus 321. In any case it doesn't appear that the jetstream at that latitude was very strong on that day (assuming I am correctly interpreting <http://virga.sfsu.edu/archive/jetstream/jetstream/big/1707/17071700_jetstream_anal.gif>). Note that the replacement aircraft climbed to 32,000 feet and stayed there until descending into SJC.
I've looked at AV Herald but they don't show anything for this flight.
Anyone have any insight into what happened?
marcos
It seems odd that running low on fuel would be handled by turning around and flying back to JFK when they could have refueled at ORD, IAD, or SLC before continuing on to SJC.
Another unusual thing is that the plane's altitude varied a lot. It climbed to 34,000 ft after takeoff, then descended to 32,000 ft, then 26,000 ft, and finally 20,000 ft. After the diversion it returned to 31,000 where it stayed until descending for landing at JFK.
The flight track log is here: <http://flightaware.com/live/flight/JBU669/history/20170716/2235Z/KJFK/KJFK/tracklog>.
I understand looking for more favorable winds by changing altitude, but 20,000 seems pretty low for an Airbus 321. In any case it doesn't appear that the jetstream at that latitude was very strong on that day (assuming I am correctly interpreting <http://virga.sfsu.edu/archive/jetstream/jetstream/big/1707/17071700_jetstream_anal.gif>). Note that the replacement aircraft climbed to 32,000 feet and stayed there until descending into SJC.
I've looked at AV Herald but they don't show anything for this flight.
Anyone have any insight into what happened?
marcos
Jul 17, 2017, 6:13 pm
#2
Suspended
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: DCA
Programs: UA US CO AA DL FL
Posts: 50,262
Could easily have been headwinds requiring more fuel than predicted. But, it's crazy that the Captain chose to return to JFK rather than to divert. While he could have diverted to any field which can handle the aircraft, there are plenty of B6 stations along the way.
Only think I can think of is that after a diversion, the crew would not have had time to fly on to SJC, thus better to return to JFK and start out again.
Only think I can think of is that after a diversion, the crew would not have had time to fly on to SJC, thus better to return to JFK and start out again.
Jul 17, 2017, 6:28 pm
#3
A FlyerTalk Posting Legend
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: PSM
Posts: 69,232
Mechanical issue.
If they thought there was potential for pressurization issues as they worked with the AC units that could explain descending to a lower altitude.
Code:
JFK 635P 1 19 SJC 1011P 2JFK/ON 2246 IN 2251 *2154*HDQFTP 5JFK/ETD 0005 - GATERETURN - AC GATE RETURN TECH ISSUE THAT COULDNT B *2303*HDQFTP 4JFK/OUT 0010 OFF 0034- GATERETURN - AC GATE RETURN TECH ISSUE THAT COULDNT B *2334*HDQFTP 2SJC/ON 0252 IN 0257 *0459*HDQFTP
Jul 18, 2017, 3:53 pm
#5
Join Date: Aug 2015
Location: NYC
Programs: Marriott Platinum, JetBlue Mosaic, Hilton Silver
Posts: 711
Most of their focus cities are on the East Coast so even if they diverted, the flight likely would have to be cancelled due to lack of replacement equipment. Only bad thing here is they couldn't figure out the problem sooner into the flight.