Adam Smith

My wife and I were flying FAO-LIS-OPO today (I know, huge mistake, should have just driven, but let's set that aside). FAO-LIS was massively delayed due to weather in LIS (well, not really, but again, set that aside). As a result, we were re-booked to a later LIS-OPO. We were booked in C, and were correctly re-booked in C.

When we finally got to LIS, there were still lots of seats in C (6 available, according to ExpertFlyer) on an earlier LIS-OPO flight, so I thought we should be able to switch to that flight, provided we could get to the gate in time. Plus TP advertises flexibility as a benefit on this route.

We did get there in reasonable time, but the gate agent informed me it was impossible to re-book us in C on that flight because no meals had been loaded for us, and the system would not allow him to re-book in C if there was no meal loaded.

I understand there not being any meals loaded, and frankly I didn't expect one on a flight with a 60-minute block time, but is this for real? I would have happily waived my right to a meal and to any compensation for not getting one, but I was told this wasn't even an option.

I was told that ultimately we could stay on the later flight in C, or get on the earlier flight in Y. Nothing else. The GA told me that he was also frustrated, that it wasn't the first time this had come up (even on this flight, where he had re-booked another guy in Y already for the same reason), but that there was nothing he could do.

If this is true, it's one of the most asinine airline rules I've ever heard of, and I've come across plenty of those in my time. Especially considering TP advertises the easiness of changing flights on the LIS<>OPO route on their website as part of the Ponte Aérea service.

Can anyone shed any light on this?

cfischer

A number of airlines have these limitations and I guess they make some sense ... just that the solution here seems stupid.
On my last AC flight I got a 'C' BP with a hand-written note 'no meal' ... since they didn't have one loaded for me. I was perfectly fine with that and got one anyway in the end since 2 other pax declined food. This is IMO a policy that TP should adopt instead of refusing to allow taking earlier flights in C.

Often1

It is a no win proposition for carriers. People routinely post on FT regarding the lack of a meal on a return-catered aircraft after IRROPS and then there is your situation. It is down to TAP having made th judgment that it is better not to engage in the manual process of offering C without a C benefit.

Stranger

I had kind of a reverse experience with LH a while back. Flight from YYC was late, but we made it to our connecting gate while our flight to HAM was still boarding. To be told that we had been offloaded, that they could put us back but there would be no food for us...

Stranger

It's the weather everyday, or has been for the last two weeks, maybe the last three months... Or daughter and her family flew LIS-AGP and back recently, and we flew the latter earlier this week. I was monitoring these flights, everyday the flight out of LIS would be about 90 minutes late, then for the returning flight, after boarding plane had to wait for 45 minutes before with everione on board before starting the engines.

International flights seem to do better. But it seems to me that the real situation is that TP as grown very quick and the airport capacity has not followed. Their lounge, which looks OK, is a huge battle zone by virtue of being overcrowded. But my real horror story, I'll keep for a specific article.

Adam Smith

I disagree wholeheartedly. There's an easy solution - warn the pax there's no meal available, and let them make the choice. On a 60-minute flight, I doubt that even entitled FTers are going to care about not getting fed. And the people who are annoyed at having to wait for a later flight, or get downgraded to Y to take the earlier flight, are likely going to be far more unhappy than people who didn't get some crappy airplane food. And even if the pax really wanted that ever-so-mediocre food in the sky, they're the ones who made the decision to decline the food in order to go earlier.

That's strange. Had they given J seats away to someone else? Did you end up getting a meal?

My point about it not really being the weather is that FlightAware was showing delays around 30-45 minutes on average, with many flights leaving on time or only slightly delayed. TP evidently made an operational decision that FAO was low priority and therefore would eat a massive delay in order to improve OTP for a bunch of other flights. But that's why I say at that point it's not really about the weather. It did strike me as kind of odd given that pretty much everyone on FAO-LIS seemed to be connecting and got bumped to the next morning, with hotels on TP's dime, but I'm sure someone at TP must have crunched those numbers.

Palal

Meh, TP is not flexible, period. On such a short flight, I wouldn't care that there were no meals loaded.

Next time, take the FR nonstop.

tff

FR has axed the route.

Palal

FAO-OPO still shows up on their site 6x weekly (x3).

EDIT: x3 = except Wed.

tff

I meant LIS-OPO. You're right indeed!

Palal

I don't know why they even bothered with LIS-OPO, given tight slot availability. I've taken that flight a few times and it was always full, but I never paid more than 10-15€ for it. They had 3 daily frequencies, and, if I recall, started before the TP shuttle started.

Adam Smith

Which is not what I expect from a legacy carrier when flying in business class. Especially on a route where they pitch flexibility as a benefit.

I didn't care. Especially after I flew the return a few days later and saw what a pathetic excuse for a meal it was.

I considered it, but my wife wanted to get to OPO earlier in the day. Plus when you're my height (about 1.93m for you Europeans ), flying FR is an even more miserable experience than it is for most people. And when you factor in choosing seats, fees for baggage, etc, it doesn't end up being all that cheap.

I actually wish I had planned to just drive. Over five hours on the road, sure, but we could have saved some time in not coming back to FAO and had a lot more flexibility in our timing.

Palal

FR has at least 30" pitch, so same as the E190 that's routinely on LIS-OPO.

Adam Smith

But 1" narrower seats, 6 across vs 4 across, and seats that are extremely uncomfortable to sit in regardless of the pitch and width.

Palal

It's less than a 90-min nonstop vs. a at least a 3-hr 1-stop.