FlyerTalk Forums

FlyerTalk Forums (https://www.flyertalk.com/forum/index.php)
-   JetBlue | TrueBlue (https://www.flyertalk.com/forum/jetblue-trueblue-492/)
-   -   2/17: Winds cause almost all westbound transcons to technical stop (https://www.flyertalk.com/forum/jetblue-trueblue/527763-2-17-winds-cause-almost-all-westbound-transcons-technical-stop.html)

hamburgler Feb 18, 2006 12:21 am

2/17: Winds cause almost all westbound transcons to technical stop
 
With the impressive winds today, there's a lot of technical stopping going on (at least 37 flights by my count had to stop and gas up today). Every westbound transcon from JFK technical stopped today, as did most of the IAD and BOS flights (only BOS-SEA and the morning IAD-OAK appear to have made it without stopping).

ex-JFK flights
  • 83 (JFK-SEA) stopped in MSP today (duration=1h2m).
  • 89 (JFK-ONT) is stopping in PHX today. This flight also stopped in LAS on the 15th.
  • 91 (JFK-OAK) stopped in SLC today (appears this was originally planned to stop in LAS - duration=1h10m). This flight has tech stopped the last four days - three times in SLC and once in PHX.
  • 93 (JFK-OAK) stopped in DEN today (duration=1h9m). This flight has tech stopped the last three days - once in DEN, once in LAS, and once in SLC.
  • 95 (JFK-OAK) is stopping in ABQ today.This flight has tech stopped the last four days - once in ABQ, twice in LAS and once in DEN.
  • 101 (JFK-OAK) stopped in SLC today (duration=1h2m). This flight has tech stopped the last three days - twice in SLC and once in DEN.
  • 107 (JFK-OAK) stopped in MSP today (duration=0h57m). This flight has tech stopped the last four days: once in DEN, once in LAS, once in SLC, and now in MSP.
  • 165 (JFK-PDX) stopped in MSP today (duration=0h44m).
  • 169 (JFK-SJC) stopped in DEN today (duration=1h13m). This flight has tech stopped the last three days: twice in DEN and once in LAS.
  • 171 (JFK-SMF) is stopping in SLC today. This flight also stopped two of the last three days in SLC.
  • 173 (JFK-SJC) stopped in MSP today (duration=0h42m). This flight has tech stopped the last three days: once in DEN, once in SLC, and once in MSP.
  • 181 (JFK-SAN) is stopped in PHX today (duration=1h5m). This flight also stopped yesterday at PHX.
  • 185 (JFK-SAN) is stopping in PHX today. This flight has tech stopped the last three days - twice in PHX and once in SLC.
  • 191 (JFK-LAS) stopped in SLC today (duration=1h19m).
  • 193 (JFK-LAS) stopped in SLC today (duration=0h58m).
  • 195 (JFK-LAS) is stopping in ABQ today.
  • 197 (JFK-LAS) stopped in SLC today (duration=0h38m).
  • 205 (JFK-LGB) stopped in PHX today (duration=1h8m). This flight also stopped yesterday at LAS.
  • 209 (JFK-LGB) stopped in SLC today (duration=1h14m). This flight also stopped yesterday at SLC.
  • 215 (JFK-LGB) stopped in SLC today (appears this was originally planned to stop in LAS - duration=0h44m). This flight has tech stopped the last three days - twice in SLC and once in PHX.
  • 217 (JFK-LGB) stopped in ABQ today (duration=1h2m). This flight also stopped yesterday at DEN.
  • 219 (JFK-LGB) stopped in MSP today (appears this was originally planned to stop in MKE - duration=1h15m). This flight has tech stopped the last three days - once in LAS, once in PHX and once in MSP.
  • 221 (JFK-LGB) stopped in DEN today (appears this was originally planned to stop in SLC - duration=1h36m). This flight has tech stopped the last three days - once in DEN, once in PHX and once in LAS.
  • 309 (JFK-SAN) stopped in PHX today (duration = 1h0m).
  • 351 (JFK-BUR) stopped in DEN today (appears this was originally planned to stop in PHX - duration 2h22m). This flight also stopped yesterday at LAS.
  • 355 (JFK-BUR) stopped in SLC today (duration 1h0m). This flight has tech stopped the last three days - once in SLC, once in LAS, and once in PHX. It also diverted on the 13th to DTW, but that doesn't appear to be fuel-related.
  • 357 (JFK-BUR) stopped in DEN today (appears this was originally planned to stop in ABQ - duration unknown due to the change).
  • 359 (JFK-BUR) stopped in ABQ today (duration 0h52m). This flight has tech stopped the last three days - once in ABQ, once in LAS, and once in PHX.

ex-IAD flights
  • 306 (IAD-LGB) stopped in ABQ today (duration=1h0m).
  • 308 (IAD-LGB) stopped in PHX today (duration=1h12m).
  • 309 (IAD-SAN) stopped in PHX today (duration=1h0m).
  • 321 (IAD-OAK) is stopping in ABQ today. This flight tech stopped yesterday in DEN.

ex-BOS flights
  • 475 (BOS-OAK) stopped in SLC today (duration=0h47m). This flight has tech stopped the last four days -- twice in DEN and twice in SLC.
  • 477 (BOS-OAK) stopped in MSP today (duration=0h49m). This flight has tech stopped the last four days -- once in DEN, once in OKC, once in SLC, and once in MSP.
  • 481 (BOS-LGB) stopped in PHX today (duration=0h46m). This flight has tech stopped the last three days -- once in PHX, once in SLC, and once in DEN.
  • 483 (BOS-LAS) is stopping in DEN today. This flight also stopped yesterday in DEN.
  • 489 (BOS-LGB) stopped in SLC today (duration=0h56m). This flight has tech stopped the last four days -- once in SLC, twice in LAS, and once in OKC.

Needless to say, this isn't going to do much for B6's ontime rating for February.

DanJ Feb 18, 2006 8:41 am

Geez, the locals in PHX, DEN and SLC are going to start thinking Jetblue is setting up hubs in those cities LOL.

N830MH Feb 18, 2006 3:50 pm

I don't believe this with B6 has lot of aircraft came to PHX due to winds over midwest. Does B6 will ever resume nonstop from BOS, IAD, JFK all the way to SAN, OAK, LGB, BUR, LAS and etc?

justageek Feb 18, 2006 6:42 pm

I know JetBlue got the A320's on the cheap, but you have to wonder about the wisdom of setting up a transcon-focused airline using aircraft you know cannot do transcons when there are strong headwinds. Exactly the same thing happened fairly frequently last winter as well.

FWIW the winds--and refueling stops--continue today, 2/18.

flyinggolfer Feb 19, 2006 12:26 pm


Originally Posted by justageek
FWIW the winds--and refueling stops--continue today, 2/18.

And today, 2/19 as well. My wife is waiting in SAN waiting for #182 to JFK. #181 is currently in ABQ refueling.

justageek Feb 19, 2006 1:05 pm


Originally Posted by flyinggolfer
And today, 2/19 as well. My wife is waiting in SAN waiting for #182 to JFK. #181 is currently in ABQ refueling.

If I had time, I'd drop by the airport and send her your regards! :D

j3823x Feb 19, 2006 1:19 pm


Originally Posted by flyinggolfer
And today, 2/19 as well. My wife is waiting in SAN waiting for #182 to JFK. #181 is currently in ABQ refueling.

Hopefully some of the delay can be made up with a reduced turnaround time and very favorable tailwinds going back.

silverthief2 Feb 19, 2006 3:13 pm


Originally Posted by DanJ
Geez, the locals in PHX, DEN and SLC are going to start thinking Jetblue is setting up hubs in those cities LOL.

I wouldn't mind at all if B6 set up a hub in ABQ. It's almost all the way across the continent, I swear! :D

IceTrojan Feb 19, 2006 3:17 pm


Originally Posted by DanJ
Geez, the locals in PHX, DEN and SLC are going to start thinking Jetblue is setting up hubs in those cities LOL.

Imagine the poor schlub who falls asleep, wakes up expecting to be in sunny SAN and see a desert... or rainy SEA/plain OAK and sees snowy DEN :D

flyinggolfer Feb 20, 2006 9:59 am


Originally Posted by j3823x
Hopefully some of the delay can be made up with a reduced turnaround time and very favorable tailwinds going back.

I think their return flying time was something like 4:20. Not too bad. Even though they were late, she came away with a very positive impression. In her words, "Everyone was so nice. They kept us updated and passed out drinks and snacks at the gate area while we were waiting." They also comped movies to the entire flight. Seems like the B6 people were trying to make the best of a bad situation. These refueling stops must be killing them.

hockeyguy Feb 20, 2006 10:59 am


Originally Posted by flyinggolfer
Seems like the B6 people were trying to make the best of a bad situation. These refueling stops must be killing them.

I'm surprised the refueling stops aren't putting some of the crews over their legal limits. Unless the stops are going really quick, with no arrival/departure delays, B6 must be leaving a decent margin in their crew scheduling.

Buster CT1K Feb 20, 2006 2:59 pm


Originally Posted by flyinggolfer
I think their return flying time was something like 4:20. Not too bad. Even though they were late, she came away with a very positive impression. In her words, "Everyone was so nice. They kept us updated and passed out drinks and snacks at the gate area while we were waiting." They also comped movies to the entire flight. Seems like the B6 people were trying to make the best of a bad situation. These refueling stops must be killing them.

I'm surprised the pax were required to disembark during refueling. I was once diverted SYD-LAX to HNL for refueling on UA and the pax stayed aboard.

justageek Feb 20, 2006 3:23 pm


Originally Posted by flyinggolfer
I think their return flying time was something like 4:20. Not too bad. Even though they were late, she came away with a very positive impression. In her words, "Everyone was so nice. They kept us updated and passed out drinks and snacks at the gate area while we were waiting." They also comped movies to the entire flight. Seems like the B6 people were trying to make the best of a bad situation. These refueling stops must be killing them.

The part I find vaguely disturbing is that this bad situation was completely foreseen by JetBlue when they purchased the A320's (unless nobody at the company did any fuel/range calculations, which I find hard to believe). They're making quite a gamble that the passengers are going to be understanding about fuel stops and not take their business elsewhere based on a fuel stop delay. They should perhaps put something up on their web page advising their passengers that during the winter, aircraft on westbound transcon flights may need to stop to refuel. The airline (presumably) knew about this from day one, whereas the pax don't find out until it's too late to choose a different airline.

hockeyguy Feb 20, 2006 3:23 pm


Originally Posted by Buster CT1K
I'm surprised the pax were required to disembark during refueling. I was once diverted SYD-LAX to HNL for refueling on UA and the pax stayed aboard.

It's probably a lot easier to allow pax to deplane on a domestic flight (and on something smaller than a 747). For an international diversion, you'd need a secure transit area for international pax in order to avoid having to go through immigration & customs. While this is common abroad, I'm not aware of any airports in the U.S. that currently have this kind of facility. Of course, I've never been to HNL :( , so I don't know what the setup is like there.

justageek Feb 20, 2006 3:25 pm


Originally Posted by hockeyguy
I'm surprised the refueling stops aren't putting some of the crews over their legal limits. Unless the stops are going really quick, with no arrival/departure delays, B6 must be leaving a decent margin in their crew scheduling.

I think the stops take about an hour.


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 11:54 pm.


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.