Go Back  FlyerTalk Forums > Miles&Points > Airlines and Mileage Programs > United Airlines | MileagePlus
Reload this Page >

Consolidated "Delayed/Cancelled" International Flights (2017)

Community
Wiki Posts
Search

Consolidated "Delayed/Cancelled" International Flights (2017)

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old Jan 2, 2017, 5:58 pm
  #31  
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Houston
Programs: UA GS 2.6MM & Lifetime UC, Qantas Platinum, Hilton Lifetime Diamond, Bonvoy Platinum, HawaiianMiles
Posts: 8,691
So distressing that already well into page 2 already, although thankfully most posts are 'fluff', with all due respect...
kirkwoodj is offline  
Old Jan 2, 2017, 7:49 pm
  #32  
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: San Diego
Programs: IHG Spire Amb, HH Diamond, DL Diamond and 1MM
Posts: 3,610
Here's some links about the Auckland diversion:

http://sfist.com/2017/01/02/sfo-boun...rom_sydney.php

http://www.newshub.co.nz/home/new-ze...-auckland.html

http://www.stuff.co.nz/travel/travel...take-off-again

Really can't blame United for diverting considering the man's behavior.
I'm also tired of hearing about these idiots. It would be nice if airlines would share "ban" lists so that these people just don't move onto to some other airline.
Bowgie is offline  
Old Jan 2, 2017, 8:13 pm
  #33  
 
Join Date: Dec 2014
Location: BOS/SIN
Programs: DL PM, OZ Diamond Plus, BA Silver
Posts: 1,803
Originally Posted by kirkwoodj
So distressing that already well into page 2 already, although thankfully most posts are 'fluff', with all due respect...
And you just brought the thread to page 3

Originally Posted by cfischer
UA870 SYD-SFO 789 diverted to AKL then cancelled

extra section tomorrow

UA2052 AKL-SFO
And according to .bomb
UA2052 1/2 AKL-SFO 789 delayed 3 hours due to catering difficulties
truncated is offline  
Old Jan 2, 2017, 8:40 pm
  #34  
TA
 
Join Date: Nov 1999
Location: if it's Thursday, this must be Belgium
Programs: UA 1K MM
Posts: 6,484
Originally Posted by truncated
...


And according to .bomb
UA2052 1/2 AKL-SFO 789 delayed 3 hours due to catering difficulties
Oh my god, those passengers are probably about to riot.

By the way, you know that you are able to change your settings to display 40 posts per page, instead of the default 15? ("Quick Links -> edit options -> thread display options") This is only page 1 for me...
TA is offline  
Old Jan 2, 2017, 9:24 pm
  #35  
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Sydney, NSW Australia
Posts: 895
Originally Posted by Bowgie
Here's some links about the Auckland diversion:

http://sfist.com/2017/01/02/sfo-boun...rom_sydney.php

http://www.newshub.co.nz/home/new-ze...-auckland.html

http://www.stuff.co.nz/travel/travel...take-off-again

Really can't blame United for diverting considering the man's behavior.
I'm also tired of hearing about these idiots. It would be nice if airlines would share "ban" lists so that these people just don't move onto to some other airline.
Would it be possible for individual passengers to sue the individual responsible? I would not be looking for a big pay out but say $500 (x each passenger on board) Does anyone want to speculate on UAL's expenditure? 200 x hotel rooms, 4-6 hours worth of fuel from the diversion and return trip backtracking, AKL Aerodrome fees, having an aeroplane out of use for an additional 24 hours. $100,000 perhaps all up ?
Aspen is offline  
Old Jan 3, 2017, 6:47 am
  #36  
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: ORD
Programs: UA GS 4MM
Posts: 583
Originally Posted by Aspen
Would it be possible for individual passengers to sue the individual responsible? I would not be looking for a big pay out but say $500 (x each passenger on board) Does anyone want to speculate on UAL's expenditure? 200 x hotel rooms, 4-6 hours worth of fuel from the diversion and return trip backtracking, AKL Aerodrome fees, having an aeroplane out of use for an additional 24 hours. $100,000 perhaps all up ?
Not to defend this guy at all (I would use choice terminology, but FT has standards!), but I just wonder if there wasn't another way this could have been handled, avoiding the massive disruption of the diversion. Watching the video, he was clearly being a massive jerk, but wasn't (yet) physically abusive. Sometimes it's possible to talk these guys down: give him some minimal validation for his feelings (perhaps swap seats so the two guys talking over him were next to each other), explain in no uncertain terms that if the plane diverts he will be arrested, charged with a felony, and subject to multihundred K civil penalties, etc. I have no problem with having some of SF's finest meet him upon arrival, charging him appropriately, and placing him on a no-fly list, but it just seemed a very fast decision to go from insults to a diversion without some intervention to try to defuse the situation.

OK, flak jacket in place, flame away!
JDT1955 is offline  
Old Jan 3, 2017, 8:33 am
  #37  
A FlyerTalk Posting Legend
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: PHX
Programs: AS 75K; UA 1MM; Hyatt Globalist; Marriott LTP; Hilton Diamond (Aspire)
Posts: 56,446
Originally Posted by JDT1955
OK, flak jacket in place, flame away!
I kind of had the same reaction. But that's just based on the video, don't know what else may have been said, so not really in a position to second-guess.

OTOH, it would not have been the first time UA FAs grossly overreacted. Passenger Kicked Off UA Flight for Taking Photos.
Kacee is offline  
Old Jan 3, 2017, 8:52 am
  #38  
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Houston
Programs: UA GS 2.6MM & Lifetime UC, Qantas Platinum, Hilton Lifetime Diamond, Bonvoy Platinum, HawaiianMiles
Posts: 8,691
I'm sure part of his criminal punishment will be a massive fine for airline compensation. This has happened many times in similar cases.
kirkwoodj is offline  
Old Jan 3, 2017, 8:55 am
  #39  
A FlyerTalk Posting Legend
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: PHX
Programs: AS 75K; UA 1MM; Hyatt Globalist; Marriott LTP; Hilton Diamond (Aspire)
Posts: 56,446
Originally Posted by kirkwoodj
I'm sure part of his criminal punishment will be a massive fine for airline compensation. This has happened many times in similar cases.
The FAA action will be a civil proceeding, and that's where fines would be imposed. It's a much lower standard of proof than a criminal proceeding. He may not even be criminally charged.
Kacee is offline  
Old Jan 3, 2017, 8:59 am
  #40  
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: BOS
Programs: UA 1K 1.45MM, Marriott+SPG Plat, Clear, Nexus, Global Entry and MEX Viajero Confiable
Posts: 1,777
Originally Posted by JDT1955
Not to defend this guy at all (I would use choice terminology, but FT has standards!), but I just wonder if there wasn't another way this could have been handled, avoiding the massive disruption of the diversion. Watching the video, he was clearly being a massive jerk, but wasn't (yet) physically abusive. Sometimes it's possible to talk these guys down: give him some minimal validation for his feelings (perhaps swap seats so the two guys talking over him were next to each other), explain in no uncertain terms that if the plane diverts he will be arrested, charged with a felony, and subject to multihundred K civil penalties, etc. I have no problem with having some of SF's finest meet him upon arrival, charging him appropriately, and placing him on a no-fly list, but it just seemed a very fast decision to go from insults to a diversion without some intervention to try to defuse the situation.

OK, flak jacket in place, flame away!
I agree.. feels like it could have been handled differently, but this is only based on a snippet of video. We're not seeing the entirety of the incident and interactions.
NH_Clark is offline  
Old Jan 3, 2017, 9:14 am
  #41  
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Here today gone tomorrow
Programs: *G, ow Saph
Posts: 2,865
Originally Posted by truncated
they seem to be holding today's UA895 HKG-SIN, currently posting a 40 min delay due to flight preparation
My "favorite" thing about flying United--they'll gladly misconnect passengers all over the system, but will always hold the HKG-SIN flight for however long it takes to get everybody from ORD, SFO, and EWR on board...I think the HKG-SIN flight has to be the worst-performing international flight in the system.

Such garbage.
MKE-MR is offline  
Old Jan 3, 2017, 9:39 am
  #42  
 
Join Date: Dec 2014
Location: BOS/SIN
Programs: DL PM, OZ Diamond Plus, BA Silver
Posts: 1,803
Originally Posted by MKE-MR
My "favorite" thing about flying United--they'll gladly misconnect passengers all over the system, but will always hold the HKG-SIN flight for however long it takes to get everybody from ORD, SFO, and EWR on board...I think the HKG-SIN flight has to be the worst-performing international flight in the system.

Such garbage.
HKG-SIN is the continuation of ORD-HKG so I hope they'd hold the plane for ORD pax :P

But on a serious note when 895 arrives in SIN at 1am it sits on the ground until 6am to operate 896 SIN-HKG-ORD so holding it won't have an impact on the subsequent legs (I've seen 895 arrive in SIN at 4am before and 896 still gets out on time).

Also even though (according to google) there are 21 daily flights HKG-SIN (8x CX and 7x SQ) UA895 is the second-to-last flight of the day (there's a CX "redeye" departing 0150) so if they don't hold the flight then it's hotel rooms for everyone...

And would also disagree with you on the worst-performing international flight in the system - can think of many better candidates e.g. PVG-ORD/SFO (back when it was the 744), MEL-LAX, the daytime EWR/IAD-LHR flights that often turn into redeyes. 895 usually isn't that delayed IME.
truncated is offline  
Old Jan 3, 2017, 5:41 pm
  #43  
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Programs: 6 year GS, now 2MM Jeff-ugee, *wood LTPlt, SkyPeso PLT
Posts: 6,526
Originally Posted by Bowgie
Here's some links about the Auckland diversion:

http://sfist.com/2017/01/02/sfo-boun...rom_sydney.php

http://www.newshub.co.nz/home/new-ze...-auckland.html

http://www.stuff.co.nz/travel/travel...take-off-again

Really can't blame United for diverting considering the man's behavior.
I'm also tired of hearing about these idiots. It would be nice if airlines would share "ban" lists so that these people just don't move onto to some other airline.
Originally Posted by Kacee
I kind of had the same reaction. But that's just based on the video, don't know what else may have been said, so not really in a position to second-guess.

OTOH, it would not have been the first time UA FAs grossly overreacted. Passenger Kicked Off UA Flight for Taking Photos.
Post up with a piece on this saying (a) he was mad about being in a middle seat between a couple who had booked isle and window and kept talking over him, and (b) UA would not give him a drink. https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/...=.809862ea748c

This guy will love the UA 777-300ER with 10 across!
spin88 is offline  
Old Jan 3, 2017, 5:53 pm
  #44  
A FlyerTalk Posting Legend
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: PHX
Programs: AS 75K; UA 1MM; Hyatt Globalist; Marriott LTP; Hilton Diamond (Aspire)
Posts: 56,446
Originally Posted by spin88
Post up with a piece on this saying (a) he was mad about being in a middle seat between a couple who had booked isle and window and kept talking over him, and (b) UA would not give him a drink. https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/...=.809862ea748c
I'm really hoping that as soon as he gets access to an internet connection, he posts his trip report/anti-UA rant here on FT.
Kacee is offline  
Old Jan 3, 2017, 6:15 pm
  #45  
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: ORD
Programs: UA GS 4MM
Posts: 583
Originally Posted by Kacee
I'm really hoping that as soon as he gets access to an internet connection, he posts his trip report/anti-UA rant here on FT.


It really does seem that more could have been done to talk him off the ledge... I sure hope this didn't go straight from “Do you know how cool it would be to have the airplane turned around because of me?” to actually turning it around!
JDT1955 is offline  


Contact Us - Manage Preferences - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service -

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.