brenc3

Last night's (6/12) UA956 EWR-GVA looks like it was diverted back to EWR about an hour after takeoff, landing at 8:55pm.

It then looks like there was an aircraft swap for the flight, and that aircraft took off at 11:38pm. That flight returned to EWR less than an hour later, landing 12:18am 6/13.

Am I reading this correctly? Did the same flight get diverted twice in one night?

cfischer

wow, yeah. Absolutely pathetic showing from UA once again. I hope all pax got a substantial compensation for this screw up.

br2k

http://avherald.com/h?article=4aa49798

Loss of pressure, turned back. Replacement aircraft had a problem and turned back too. Fun day.

cfischer

this sounds lovely too

UA179 EWR-HKG 772

delayed 3 hours --> divert to SFO --> left gate in EWR --> returned to gate in EWR --> cancelled

Also

UA170 EWR-VCE 763 returned to gate and cancelled due to aircraft maintenance

therefor on Wednesday

UA169 VCE-EWR 763 cancelled due to aircraft maintenance

solma

UA 90 EWR to TLV on June 13th delayed 5 hours.

UA 85 TLV to EWR on June 16th estimated dep. 5:45 minutes late.

cfischer

UA179 EWR-HKG 772 left 1 hr late due to aircraft maintenance
UA901 SFO-LHR 772 90 mins late due to aircraft preparation

username

Saw this in the Taiwanese newspaper (which got it from its sister paper World Journal in the US): https://udn.com/news/story/6813/2528139 about UA 86 8 June.

I will translate later it sounds UA really screwed up on this one.

laxmillenial

Using google translate in the meantime:

https://translate.google.com/transla...139&edit-text=

Sounds like a lengthy delay and passengers upset over being called back and forth to the gate 4 times in the course of several hours. The fact that passengers couldn't speak or understand English impacted their ability to receive/use food vouchers and some had diabetes?

Not sure why UA didn't bring translators. I wouldn't say "UA really screwed up" (unless I'm missing something in the translation) but more of a "this was a bad delay handled poorly due to language barriers issues". It does sound like UA offered food vouchers.

username

Yes. Basically, according to the article:

1 - Original departure 10:45 AM. Half way into boarding at Gate 108, it was suspended due to "food storage door broken"
2 - Moved to 102
3 - Moved back to 108
4 - Finally boarded at 3 PM
5 - Crew problem started ("not enough crew")
6 - Took off around 9:30 PM

Passenger complaints:

1 - Gate changed 4 times
2 - Crew changed 3 times
3 - Food voucher ($10) was not offered until passengers complained
4 - Arrogant attitude from agents, did not provide food/drink, manager refused to appear at the gate to talk to the passengers
5 - Promised transport upon arrival to PVG (since public transit would be closed) not delivered

There were elderly and sick passengers that suffered.

Compensation offered was US$1000 voucher or 50,000 miles. Passengers are forming their own Internet e-mail group to get a lawyer to get more compensation.

***********

Here is another article with more details: http://dailynews.sina.com/bg/news/in...497908770.html

According to this one:

1 - boarding at 3 PM was sudden, many had no time to use their voucher yet (and frankly, what can you get with $10 at OTG EWR)?
2 - missing a crew member - waited another 1/2 hour
3 - started taxi-ing and then realized 5 crew members were timing out - returned to gate
4 - while they were replacing the 5 members, they realized another 4 were timing out
5 - they were stuck on the plane from the 3:00 PM boarding until the plane finally departed at 9:30 PM
6 - no food or drink offered while they were on the plane
7 - passengers were not allowed to deplane - 1 non-Chinese and 1 Chinese person insisted and got off
8 - departed 9:30P, took off 10:00P

At the end of this one, it talks about the lawyer writing to Elaine Chao (who is from Taiwan and the Secretary of Transportation) the Dr. Dao incident.

N104UA

I think 50,000 miles are a $1000 travel credit is more than enough for an 11 hours delay. UA fulfilled their end of the CoC
-Delay was not overnight so no hotel is required
-UA provided a meal voucher.

I also will wait for judgement on UA if they had pax sit on the plan for 6 hours, if they did they would be on violation of the tarmac delay rules. Also if people start suing UA for delays then what is next, you were stuck in a middle seat all the way to PVG and want money??

mrswirl

I was recently delayed 11 hours EWR-HKG and was given $400 ETC or 20,000 miles so this was rather generous.

HkCaGu

Having remaining currency and extra medication should be the responsibility of the passengers. However, if people with diabetes or whatever else are prevented from reasonable opportunity to obtain or be served food, that's a severe violation.

N104UA

Did anyone request to deplane to get food? I also find it extremely hard to believe that the FAs would not provide any drink on the plane during a 6 hour delay, and that if someone had diabetes and asked for food the FA would say no, UA FAs can sometimes be indifferent to pax but I doubt all 10+ on the plane would be heartless.

Also, I am still questioning the timeline because UA by law can't board with out the minimum required crew onboard. It is either (a) pax are exaggerating timelines of (b) UA really screwed up. As there has been no news coverage of this would tens to lean towards (a) but will reserve judgement until all the facts come out.

HkCaGu

You'll notice in the timeline that there was probably something "happening soon" all through the 10 hours of delay and each of those "soon" events could definitely lead to "we can't do anything now". Adding to the lack of information (esp. in Chinese), it could easily lead to big fines and/or big lawsuits.

You can have adequate crew on board, but they can't go with the plane when it departs due to time-out. They're not beyond duty time to stay on board on the ground.

cfischer

UA55 CDG-EWR 752 cancelled due to aircraft maintenance
UA127 DUB-IAD 752 cancelled due to aircraft maintenance
UA1171 AUA-IAH 738 cancelled due to aircraft maintenance