FSUnole03

I'm not saying you're right or wrong, but based upon what's been published this isn't true for all passengers. UA apparently only put up some. Unless you have a source to share that disputes this? I'd be curious to see it as it would give me more faith in UA.

Ber2dca

To be fair, there's so many airline stories out there these days where an individual or two tell a reporter a story, the reporter runs with it (and maybe simplifies the story a bit for the required contrast between 'good passengers' and 'bad airline') and the next day it's all over the news.

In the age of 'blog-style' journalism and online content mills, there often isn't a whole lot of in-depth research going on in news organizations regarding such stories. At the end of the day we often just go by what some people claim happened and seldom get a full picture.

With regard to the incident itself, avherald shows a number of fuel leak or suspected fuel leak incidents just for this year involving airlines such as Lufthansa, Cathay Pacific and Air France. All of which were discovered in flight and ended in a safe landing.

altbg

That Concorde flight crashed right after takeoff. There is no way a flight attendant or captain would have been up and walking around in the cabin at that point in the flight.

oldmonster

Typical of UA. I recalled two year ago a huge MX delay in ORD-NRT leading to many passengers misconnected at NRT. They quickly ran out the hotel voucher (luckily as a 1k MM, I scored one although the hotel is an hour away (literally) from the airport). Instead of attempting to finding more rooms, they issued a piece of paper to passengers claiming that passengers would be reimbursed for their room (up to a max value) but they could not help in finding a room. How can UA expect some random international travelers could do a better job in scoring a hotel room than UA ground staffs with established hotel connections?

EWR764

It actually was a separate event out of IAD in 1979. There was a passenger on the flight that tells a story of calling for a crewmember crewmember who, upon observing the damage, turned ghost-white, went back to the flight deck, and moments later the airplane was returning to Dulles.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/archive/politics/1979/06/15/concorde-scare/ff7c6f1d-e2d2-43c7-981e-9402789c43c5/

You're right about Gonesse, the crew knew there was a problem immediately and had barely any more time to deal with the situation than to attempt a last-ditch turn to Le Bourget.

DCA writer

The passenger demanding the crew's attention isn't in that 1979 piece--I first read about it in 2006, when the Post's Don Phillips wrote an overview of the Concorde's safety history right after the crash. His story also recounts a couple of disturbing incidents of that SST losing large chunks of its rudder in-flight.

(And yet I still regret never flying the Concorde.)

osxanalyst

UA makes themselves look bad. lol

spin88

Lets review here, UA plane is spilling fuel (gushing it out) passengers on their honeymoon alert the crew, who finally, after paying attention, return to gate, flight cancelled. Passengers (according to multiple press reports) are given a $7 food voucher, no hotel, and flights the next day. They are expected to sleep on the floor at the airport. This is an example of United "can't afford to make exceptional gestures during the course of normal business" and you think it was "friendly, reliable, and respectful service"

The pilot got it right, United, not so much....

fly18725

I was responding to the following general statement, not the specific scenario allegeded in the press report.

RatherBeOnATrain

That's not correct, according to this article published on the website of Delta's hometown newspaper:Link to full story: AJC.com - Honeymooners say they slept on airport floor after alerting United Airlines to massive fuel leak (4:37 p.m Wednesday, June 21, 2017)

spin88

Just say "flyer friendly, flyer friendly, flyer friendly" (preferably sounding like a macaw) and realize that United has to be run like a business, too many people trying to rip them off.

WineCountryUA

It would be interesting to understand why this one couple did not get a hotel room while many of the other passengers did. Something is missing. It is fairly standard for connecting passengers to be covered in the case of overnight MX. Were they on separate, non-connecting tickets (appears the reside in Chicago)? Had they stopped in NY area?
Obviously bad optics here.

spin88

On a personal note, back in 2013, when I was GS, I was told no hotel when my flight was late due to an upstream (flight before) MX and then United sending us to an occupied gate when we landed (late) at LAX, causing me to miss my connection to SFO. I argued the point, and after escalating, got a voucher.

I suspect what I experienced matches what others have seen, its why any UA flier knows HUCA. What likely happened?

(1) I have never seen United proactive make an announcement either (1) before deboarding, or (2) as people are leaving the gate that "hotels will be provided" The initial response is usually very poor. The goal appears to be to give nothing to anyone unless they ask...

(2) United typically understaffs the gate when these type of events happen, so there is no one to talk to, and people get frustrated and drift off or give up.

(3) even if hotel is authorized, other agents will say NO when asked. Then "Hell no" with a dirty look if you push the point. The Honeymoon couple appear to have gotten that answer, since they did get an agent to rebook them.

(4) It is Newark, with its three-card Monte approach to customer service. Do you really expect something better there?

Until United includes customer service metrics into its bonus program (rather than focusing on "return on invested capital") and makes it what executives get paid on, United will continue to suffer these types of very public fails.

fumje

It's possible that they did not know to ask and it was not volunteered. I doubt they'd have been denied, but when I've had cancelled flights, I have in some instances needed to specifically request the hotel, as the agent appears to be at full capacity figuring out the flight rebooking.

spin88

Why would you assume this? Hundreads, if not thousands of reports on FT of UA trying to avoid paying for a hotel. Its in UA's DNA. Here is what the original post article (linked to above) said:

"After finally securing a spot on a Wednesday night Delta flight, the airline gave them a food voucher but nowhere to sleep for the evening, she said. The pair slept on the floor of the baggage claim until 7:30 a.m., when another passenger who did score a hotel voucher spotted them and offered the two heroes the room."

or as the AJC piece says:

"“We’re supposed to be in Venice right now, starting a romantic day,” he wrote. “But, luckily, several united airlines employees have been super rude to us, so at least there’s that!!”

I seriously doubt that this couple turned down a hotel room and now are mad they did not take it, and are making up stuff, the likely explanation is that UA denied them a room, which is the typical CS response from United.... This is not exactly an unexpected CS fail.