rmorenc

Pretty much this. My experience two days ago at the new BOM terminal was "more of the same" just with a nicer-looking (and slightly more air-conditioned) building:

* Gate-checked items are sent directly to the baggage carousel, unless said item is a baby stroller. In that case you will wait in several locations at the end of the jetway until all pax and flight crew are off the plane before they get around to calling the baggage staff on the radio and having it brought up.

* Only one immigration officer for the entire Business / First line, which of course moves at a glacial speed. I counted five counters open for general economy (which was filled with UA48 and the SQ flight passengers). Two counters open for OCI/PIO, one counter open for families / elderly. Medical / elderly / wheelchair / small children counters are at the far end of immigration, which in the new terminal is quite a hike.

* The baggage carousels are a little more spacious, but you still run into the issue of folks parking their baggage carts right at the side of the carousel, turning the area into a jungle gym trying to actually leave with your bags

* Only one elevator was functional at the parking garage, which made things interesting as everyone was rushing the doors at once with their fully loaded baggage carts.

On an interesting note, baggage carousels 7 and 8 do not exist. The numbering just completely skips them. The signs appear to be electronic, so perhaps this isn't a big deal. I suspect the numbering is such that bags go to the same place they did in the old terminal, as UA48 bags were still being sent to carousel 6.

Just part of the "fun" of arriving in BOM. Luckily this will be my last time for a while.

mduell

In my experience a random local shop likely would need parts from the dealership unless it was an extremely generic item like a fuse or a tire.

I don't know if they would trust a part from AI being genuine given their lack of effective regulatory oversight.

kale73

Wingtip cameras? I find it absolutely amazing that there is not a single photograph of the "major damage" available online even after the aircraft has been sitting on the ground for a couple of days.

It isn't hard to find pix of the Qantas A380 that suffered "major damage" to an engine a few years ago. Why the media blackout on this one?

planemechanic

Probably because the description of the damage is inflated, and orders of magnitude different than what happened to the Qantas A380.

frequentjohn

Skidooman,

It sounds like you were in the same group as me in BOM where they kept taking us in circles around the terminal while trying to figure out how to get us out. I am glad you made it home. I had to go through Europe on Air France.

You got a better response from 1KVoice than I did. My response actually told me to contact [email protected] to get compensation....

I have had similar luck the last two times with UA49. This one was cancelled and the previous time in November, we were diverted to Canada and I missed my connection by the time we finally made it to EWR. This was one of the worse IRROPS handling by United I have ever been involved in.

TravelingPeanut

A UA flight scheduled to leave Mumbai for New York was cancelled following a mechanical issue and all 275 passengers were transported by the airline to 2 local hotels. The passengers were also given meal vouchers.

The (would-be) replacement flight was also cancelled since the maintenance work couldn't be completed before the crew exceeded their legally permitted duty hours increasing the length of the delay.

The passengers claim that the airline stopped communicating any updates to the for a good part of the weekend leaving them feeling abandoned.

The flight was finally rescheduled and departed yesterday.

http://www.ndtv.com/article/cities/2...3-hours-490561

NJFlyer_HOHO

Wait, is this the same UA48 that was grounded because of the engine cowl damage? Or is it another one?

Confused because the article quoted "United Airlines flight UA49 from Mumbai to New York/Newark on February 28, 2014, a Boeing 777 aircraft, was cancelled following a mechanical issue. Unfortunately, the replacement flight on March 1 was also cancelled, as the necessary maintenance work could not be completed before the crew exceeded their legally permitted duty hours."

But the original post on FT was on Feb 22. So which is which?

kranabargar

This is a really unfortunate situation / I really feel for the folks stuck in Mumbai for extra days. It is really shocking that United can't handle situations like these better (in terms of logistics, communications, and cycle time to resolve the delay). I had a similar experience last year on a UA flight from LHR to LAX - got stranded in Ireland for two nights. I realize you can't have widebody aircraft just sitting around as back-ups, but 48+ hour delays really are unacceptable. I don't fly UA for international trips any more as a result.

Hopefully everyone got good compensation (unfortunately this flight isn't covered bu EU261!) from United...

cerealmarketer

Was on a DEL-EWR last month that was delayed overnight due to a pending snowstorm in NYC.

The delay didn't post until about 2 hrs prior to departure so many passengers were already at the airport, checked in, and past security.

Fortunately this one was much more efficiently handled.

Agents at the gate sent each passenger to an **airside** hotel where rooms were blocked and waiting. Business First passengers in the lounge were notified and had rooms held (I was one of them, but was already by the gate).

Next morning, a wake up call and quick walk to the gate. We board...wait on the ground about 2 hours while crew figures out if the storm will beat us. Crew officially times out, but negotiates with Chicago to get an exception and we fly on.

Delay of 15 hours rather than 2 days had the crew timed out.

So it is possible to handle well, the key difference being a large airside hotel on premises so we didn't have to deal with immigration issues.

These 15 hour flights are tough because the slightest delay will time out the crew.

aindfan

Amazing. I know that at that point, all I would have wanted was to get home (and I bet the crew did too), and I applaud your crew for fighting for this (to a safe degree).

worldtrav

Different issue, different airplane.

brg

Most of the issues are due to location and not UA
The part about passengers not being able to get on to LH is due to Indian regulations
Air India had a recent misadventure recently

airmotive

I used to be responsible for this exact issue for a different major American airline.

Certain parts, tools and equipment are indeed staged throughout the world...often at tremendous expense. Entire engines are staged at some locations that see a lot of traffic of a particular airframe. (In the 777's case, you can bet there are a few GE90s and Trent 800s staged in Dubai, Hong Kong, London etc...but Mumbai? No.)

The staged parts would be those parts which would typically be needed on a regular basis. Filters, starter motors, tubing, kevlar wrap etc. However, you can't simply have an entire warehouse of every imaginable part stored indefinitely at every airport. So you have to hedge your bets as to what you'll likely need, and know where you can find everything else. But an engine cowling? Rare to replace one of those in the field. More likely to get permission to conduct a temporary repair and ferry permit to a proper repair station.

Also, engine cowlings are an airframe part, not an engine part. Depending on UA's contract with GE (UA flies GEs on their 777s), if it was an engine problem, GE would be responsible for getting a replacement engine to the aircraft within a set period of time. Typically 24-48 hours. 5 years ago, Rolls-Royce chartered a AN-124 to deliver a Trent 800 to Delta in Mumbai. That was pretty standard procedure for them...they were contracted to have an engine anywhere in the world within 24 hours, expenses be damned.

planemechanic

The nose cowling on this engine weighs 1500 pounds. It must be shipped on a cargo plane, in a specially manufactured crate (from specially treated wood). It requires a crane with a special lift sling to remove and install. Shipping and swapping one of these at a remote (remote for you, as you don't have all of the mechanics, tooling, lift equipment, etc...) airfield is not simple. If you have never been on an emergency field trip to install something like this you have no idea of the issues that can, and do, arise.

PushingTin

And the moving walkways are too narrow to pass anyone... and someone is eventually going to design an international terminal where the longest part of the trip isn't from the plane to the customs area..

They had 3-4 agents working for the 1st cabin and there was no other flight arriving- we were early- BUT there were more mosquitoes than agents in the waiting line. Sweet mother of Dengue fever!