United747

Pretty quickly... Now cancelled.

nikib

Apparently issue with spoilers/avionics; flight has been rescheduled for some 25hours later the next day. Crew did am ok job but pretty awful management/communication by Changi ground staff in trying to pick up the pieces. Overnighting pax offered hotels: BF in Capri and E in Furama Riverfront including a SGD 21 dinner allowance (good luck with that at a hotel restaurant in SG) - while UA is not legally required to provide anything, the latter property (and specifically the rooms allocated) is probably in the worst hotel category just above hostels/"hourly" stay hotels in SG. Oh well.

katan

What a train wreck. I got the Capri out of the mess. I was in BF. I've never seen such an unorganized mess. They wanted us all to collect for buses to the hotel so that we can go together. The scenario: a 2 hour wait to collect pax and then another 2 hour wait while we check in like a mob. Needless to say I grabbed a cab and paid my own way.

The Capri is alright. I'm now appreciative I'm not at the other location.

Now to fuss a little because my domestic first connection turned into economy middle seat. Yay.

nikib

Agreed, they should have just gone down the massive line that formed all the way down the jet way and told each person which hotel they are allocated with quick explanation on next steps over the PA - would have cleared out the gate within 20 minutes. Might be wishful thinking but if UA is following this, they could really improve on ground staff training for such situations at Changi in the future. Looked like the UA uniformed agents were completely out of their element.

I'm fortunate to have other accommodation options in SG so I walked right out of the Furama Hotel when I counted three different types of stains on the bed sheets (I'd rather not venture to guess what they were). Hope the other guests had better rooms there.

nikib

The retimed flight (retagged as UA2092) has been canceled today AGAIN. This 789 doesn't seem to want to leave Changi... Looking at a 48hour delay here on their flagship international route. Would be interested to see if this is an animality or a sign of what's to be expected in the winter when winds really stretch the envelope for UA1/2.

katan

The pax were going to form a mob. Today it is the M Hotel. Hope it is nice.

They said tomorrow they will give us the inbound 787 and poor saps on UA2 tomorrow get to ride on the lemon.

nikib

Thanks for this feedback - I had rebooked on another sub-optimal flight but if I can avoid the lemon, I'll give this one more chance. M Hotel is basic but functional and in a central part of town - will be a lot better than Furama. It's walking distance from a lot of bars/restaurants in Tanjong Pagar/Duxton Hill.

luckypierre

Yikes! The delays sound painful..Look at the bright side-get to explore some of the more charming hostels in SIN.

The winter should be interesting for the operational reliability of the new route.

Flying Machine

Wow. I'm taking UA 1 and 2 end of November and begining December. The return connects in SF0 to EWR. Timing is important for me as I depart on anothe Star Carrier the following day (non UA booking).. I'm reading about issues with the Winter, is this a real issue or the current MX is causing speculation. How has the reliability of this route been until the current MX? Thanks and Safe Travels..

bosman

Looks like UA 16 EWR-LHR 9/1 departure was a mess: 7 hour delay, left EWR at around 4 am, got 2 hrs into the flight and then turned around to head back to EWR. Landed like 8 am. Wow, I would have pretty upset to say the least.

cfischer

yup, was at LHR today and the only cancelled flight was of course United

UA921 LHR-EWR 764 cancelled due to operations

also

UA933 FRA-IAD 772 cancelled due to aircraft maintenance

PV_Premier

it is speculation, but the route is so long that (like the AU flights), any minor issue is going to result in the crew timing out. if it is on the SIN end where the issue comes up, that is gonna create almost a guaranteed 24 hour delay since UA doesn't have reserves on hand in SIN.

UA ops are generally less reliable than their competition to begin with, so this is a potential double whammy situation.

i'm flying UA LAX-MEL with onward travel to NZ in two weeks and I am nervous about it...even though the MEL flight has been modestly more reliable of late.

transportprof

I always give myself at least 48 hours in MEL before any onward flights when arriving on UA98. I've never missed a connection yet (with this window).

PV_Premier

well i have about 2 1/4 hours and i wasn't about to sacrifice 2 days in MEL in exchange for 2 days in NZ just to account for UA's possible (likely?) incompetence. if they are in danger of screwing the pooch with a long delay, they can find a way to get me to CHC from LAX or MEL...that is their problem.

transportprof

I've actually never needed the 48 hour window in three years, although I've come within one day of having a UA98 go CX for MX on the day after I flew once. I love Melbourne so don't mind hanging there for a couple of days or more as I walk off my jet lag. But if you're all on a single UA ticket, definitely let them accommodate you somehow (they could just switch you to NZ nonstop LAX-AKL, or their own AKL flight from SFO and then on to CHC.