Ditto

Well, if you go to it, you can see that it tracks the aircraft position and you can 'replay' and see it's exact GPOSposition/altitude etc., Flight Aware also agrees on the landing time of 22:41, hence the question about a potential delay in taxi time/holding for a gate etc.

https://www.flightradar24.com/data/f...dy7015#e09d0b4

You could use public transport, but it will probably still take you around 15-20 hours if not more and probably need to change several times.

CC1E

Unfortunately, I didn't make note of the landing time. We did taxi for quite some time. I did make note of when we got to the gate because I had been researching EU delay compensation laws while we sat at LGW for over 3 hours. So, I knew gate arrival time was all that mattered.


I was going to take a pic of the flight status screen on the aircraft when we got to the gate, but it cycled to showing info for the next flight while we were taxiing. I did take a pic of it before we took off, showing we were going 0mph over 3 hours after we were supposed to have taken off, but that doesn't help much.

irishguy28

I'm not sure what wormhole the discussion has disappeared down, as that is a completely different issue.

If you are involuntarily denied boarding, you are to be accommodated by the airline in question until such time as they can transport you to your destination. Therefore, hotel, meals, etc will be taken care of until you can be brought home.

(To suggest that taking surface transport from Italy to the UK or from Spain to Ireland, to use the earlier examples, is somehow easier/cheaper than simply booking another LCC flight is simply not the case. The logistics of booking train travel [and ferry segments, where required!] on such routes would be far more daunting than simply booking a flight! The cost for last minute train and ferry travel is likely to be far higher than the walk-up rate for even a last-minute LCC flight, and the time required to undertake those surface segments would also compare unfavourably with flying.

And, besides, the traveller is not the one that has to book/pay for alternate transport - if they fall within the scope of EC261/2004, they are to be rebooked by the airline that failed them, and to be provided with accommodation and meals while waiting for the new travel, where required).

I don't see what risk you would run, or what risk you ran in your scenario. You had no out of pocket expenses, and had you been involuntarily denied boarding, you would either have had hotels paid upfront by the airline until your alternate transport, or they would have been obliged to refund you after the fact.

CC1E

I think we got here through a discussion of regional LCCs thriving, vs the ability of long-haul LCCs to thrive. I contend that the risks are too high for an LCC to make sense for a long-haul flight. But, yes, it seems we've wondered quite a bit in this thread.


With a TATL LCC flight the risk seems to be that you'll get stuck abroad for possibly several days. Yes, the airline must pay for accommodations. But, you're still stuck with limited options. Those of us in the US don't get enough vacation time to just stay in Europe an extra 3-5 days while an LCC tries to rebook us. Odds are many would lose their job if they even attempted that. So, we'd likely be forced to buy an expensive last minute TATL ticket on another carrier to get us home.


At least with a mainline carrier there are interline agreements in place. So, they could get you onto another carrier, likely within 24 hours.

klmml

I'm not sure I'd call them the gold standard. I don't know where they get all their data. Furthermore, entries in italics (like your gate arrival time) are, according to their FAQ, estimates. So, I'm afraid I'm going to concur with the other posters that you really don't have a claim here at all.

I still don't see that your experience was all that bad. I've had plenty of bad experiences on legacy carriers. Three hours is, at the end of the day, just three hours.

HEL-LHR is, for example, a 3-4 day trip (see here). I've done this journey. Several times. (Realising how much time I was wasting was what got me over my fear of flying). You might as well say you could take the Queen Mary rather than a TATL.

Or, if you have suitable travel insurance, your insurer will pay for you to rebook yourself.

I'm sorry you had a bad experience, and I understand that you won't fly Norwegian long haul again. There are plenty of alternatives out there for you.

duvin

Ever heard of this? https://www.eurotunnel.com/uk/travel...vehicles/cars/

irishguy28

So you actually want to take a rental car from the continent to the UK on a one way rental? [Are there any rental companies that allow one ways from the continent to the UK? None that I can find!!!]

If you have that kind of money, you should have just chartered a helicopter to start with!!!

duvin

Maybe should've added a smiley face

My point was that you CAN drive. I won't say that I WOULD drive or that anyone SHOULD drive.

AFAIK there was no requirement of a one-way rental. Just drive it back once you're done with your business in the UK or Ireland.

irishguy28

That was never in doubt. The issue is that OP seemed to assume that European ground transport options are cheap, plentiful, and easily arranged - so that being "stranded" in Europe was less of a worry than being "stranded" across the Atlantic.

In the context of being "stranded" overseas when wishing to return home after a vacation, that does not seem to be an acceptable solution - particularly when this option was proferred as being better/easier/cheaper than booking an alternate flight at one's own expense.

(The only time I have ever heard of people booking such surface sectors to get across large distances in Europe was when the Eyjafjallajökull eruption shut down European airspace for several days, and there really was no other alternative but to seek surface transport options. A friend of mine recently drove, with a number of other friends, from Oslo to Berlin (12-14 hours each way, including ferries) in their own car. Just for a weekend and just on a whim. They swore they would never do it again....particularly when last-minute flights would have been no more expensive).

DoTheBartMan

This part of the article confuses me: "After reading positive reviews about the carrier, he decided to go for its Premium product"

Really? Where were those "positive reviews"?
Reading the various Norwegian threads here on FT, it should be clear that Norwegian is known for swapping to inferior aircraft and they are notorious for long delays.

CC1E

At the end of the day, I can't absolutely prove that we arrived at the gate over 3 hours late. I know we did, and Flight Aware agreed, so I thought Norwegian would honor the claim. The UK CAA responded that they're looking into my claim. If that goes nowhere, I probably won't waste more time arguing with Norwegian.


As for not seeing that my Norwegian experience was that bad. I had a plane swap, downgrade at check-in, and 2 hour delay outbound. Then I had a 3+ hour delay on the return. Delays both caused by Norwegian, not weather or ATC. So, I do consider the overall experience to have been notably poor.

CC1E

This Points Guy write-up of Norwegian Premium is what pushed me over the edge to book them.


https://thepointsguy.com/2016/01/nor...w-york-review/


It's also the reason I contacted them with my bad experience. I wanted to counter-balance it somehow.

Ditto

On the bright side, you didn't get 'stranded' on the other side of the atlantic for days...

CC1E

That's true!


I was quite concerned when the captain told us that Boeing had to look at pics and sign-off on the aircraft's worthiness. It seemed unlikely we were getting home and I was ready to book a BA flight for the next day if I had to.

DoTheBartMan

That explains it. Go to the United forum and look at the thread about the hack job that the TPG reviewer did for his UA business class review ("I'd rather fly economy class on Lufthansa", etc.), and you'll understand what I mean.
Taking advice from TPG is like getting your news from The Onion.