UA 179 EWR-HKG delayed / diverted to SFO and then cancelled - 7 March 2018
Mar 9, 2018, 8:35 am
#31
Join Date: Nov 2012
Posts: 208
you got it
it's nice to have some transparency, when appropriate
I try to pick and choose operational insights that aren't sensitive, again to help with some transparency.
@LarryJ;29504225 - feel free to PM me your contact info if you want to chat off the FT record.
That is information that is available internally. I've never reposted any of that information as it wasn't clear to me that we were authorized to do so though it doesn't have the usual warning about it being confidential. Runner450 apparently works in Willis and knows more about that that I do. It is interesting to see more details about these notable flights and how the disruptions are handled behind the scenes.
@LarryJ;29504225 - feel free to PM me your contact info if you want to chat off the FT record.
Mar 9, 2018, 8:49 am
#32
Join Date: May 2001
Posts: 4,771
Mar 9, 2018, 5:10 pm
#33
Join Date: Dec 2012
Location: IAH, SGN, BKK
Programs: UA 1K
Posts: 396
I was on this flight, too, having departed IAH @ 7:40 that morning. Leaving EWR at 22:00 wasn't much fun & we were expecting an hour in SFO to refuel & recrew. I never tried to sleep EWR-SFO and was irritated to learn at SFO that the flight was canceled. The agents were still in a scrum as we deplaned. They had no hotel vouchers available though within about 20 min that had changed.
The wait to talk with an agent wasn't too bad & she was very helpful. I had used a GPU on this flight and was exceedingly pleased to have been rebooked in C on CX the next morning. It's like buying a Chevrolet & getting a Mercedes. But because of connection complications in HKG I declined & returned to IAH departing a few hours later. There were 20+ who returned home, at least 3 to IAH.
My last flight HKG-EWR departed 4 hours late & had to make a tech stop in SFO.
I have always liked the EWR-HKG flight because it's usually smooth & I sleep well in the CO seats. But I'm done with the EWR crew. It seems they are always surly. I've rebooked out of ORD in April. I'd rather sit in those blasted 2-4-2 biz seats than put up with disinterested EWR crew.
One interesting side note. During the 2 hour wait from original boarding to the aborted take off I watched a movie. The replacement bird had a substantially different (& better) movie selection.
The wait to talk with an agent wasn't too bad & she was very helpful. I had used a GPU on this flight and was exceedingly pleased to have been rebooked in C on CX the next morning. It's like buying a Chevrolet & getting a Mercedes. But because of connection complications in HKG I declined & returned to IAH departing a few hours later. There were 20+ who returned home, at least 3 to IAH.
My last flight HKG-EWR departed 4 hours late & had to make a tech stop in SFO.
I have always liked the EWR-HKG flight because it's usually smooth & I sleep well in the CO seats. But I'm done with the EWR crew. It seems they are always surly. I've rebooked out of ORD in April. I'd rather sit in those blasted 2-4-2 biz seats than put up with disinterested EWR crew.
One interesting side note. During the 2 hour wait from original boarding to the aborted take off I watched a movie. The replacement bird had a substantially different (& better) movie selection.
Mar 9, 2018, 5:14 pm
#34
Join Date: May 2001
Posts: 4,771
@AndyInSaigon: Thanks for the additional info. Can you share the reason the SFO-HKG continuation segment was canceled?
Mar 9, 2018, 5:55 pm
#35
Join Date: Dec 2012
Location: IAH, SGN, BKK
Programs: UA 1K
Posts: 396
@AndyInSaigon: Thanks for the additional info. Can you share the reason the SFO-HKG continuation segment was canceled?
To give some credence to the possibility: the agents had been called to work only a short while earlier & were frantically trying to prepare for rebooking efforts: they were still standing in a scrum while some supervisor gave instructions. As we started our descent into SFO I checked the flight status. It was still on schedule & I stayed in my PJs & frantically had to change after landing.
It was my first EWR-SFO flight however so I have that in my log book.
Mar 9, 2018, 6:47 pm
#36
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: PHL
Programs: UA Plat, 2MM
Posts: 1,860
It is incredible to believe, but totally believable, that UA did not prepare SFO for the ongoing flight. They had TONS of hours to get it all set, but no. Very UA. Can u imagine SQ being so unprepared?
Mar 9, 2018, 7:56 pm
#37
Join Date: Oct 2009
Programs: All of them, UA-Plat, 1MM*G
Posts: 881
While I know I shouldn't presume, let me suggest that PAX 38/73 might have something to do with why the flight was cancelled at SFO. This flight was very lightly loaded. sCO 772s carry PAX 50/217, so only a bit more than 40% full -- which means that running the flight is not so profitable, and rebooking the 111 total PAX to HKG is not so hard -- especially at SFO. While this may not have been the reason, it doesn't seem completely far-fetched.
Mar 9, 2018, 8:03 pm
#38
Join Date: Dec 2012
Location: IAH, SGN, BKK
Programs: UA 1K
Posts: 396
In the end those around me decided that given the conditions in EWR/JFK that day that it was easier for them to rebook pax to HKG from SFO than EWR & the tech stop in SFO was all a ruse. I think it was just incompetence.
Also no meal vouchers at EWR.
Mar 10, 2018, 1:15 am
#39
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: TOA
Programs: HH Diamond, Marriott LTPP/Platinum Premier, Hyatt Lame-ist, UA !K
Posts: 20,061
We were to board the replacement at 19:00. This went on to 22:00 in slow 15 min increments. So we departed more than 5 hours after the aborted take off. A group of us talking figured it was give time for gathering a crew.
In the end those around me decided that given the conditions in EWR/JFK that day that it was easier for them to rebook pax to HKG from SFO than EWR & the tech stop in SFO was all a ruse. I think it was just incompetence.
Also no meal vouchers at EWR.
In the end those around me decided that given the conditions in EWR/JFK that day that it was easier for them to rebook pax to HKG from SFO than EWR & the tech stop in SFO was all a ruse. I think it was just incompetence.
Also no meal vouchers at EWR.
15 kinds of not awesome - wow.
David
Mar 10, 2018, 6:19 am
#41
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 843
While I know I shouldn't presume, let me suggest that PAX 38/73 might have something to do with why the flight was cancelled at SFO. This flight was very lightly loaded. sCO 772s carry PAX 50/217, so only a bit more than 40% full -- which means that running the flight is not so profitable, and rebooking the 111 total PAX to HKG is not so hard -- especially at SFO. While this may not have been the reason, it doesn't seem completely far-fetched.
Airlines don’t cancel flights specifically for loads (except where other operational reasons require them to cancel *something*, then they typically start with flights with the least overall impact which typically are flights with fewer passengers, but even then, the long hauls are typically at the very bottom of the list).
Mar 10, 2018, 7:03 am
#42
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: NYC
Programs: UA MileagePlus 2MM
Posts: 1,567
As a 'kid' I worked part-time for Swissair at JFK and one of my jobs was handling irrops and cancellations - I found it amazing how little pre-prep was done in scenarios of well know inbound delays and after some time on the job I was enabled to use my acuity and lessons learned from past experiences to have all my hotels vouchers and rebooking options sorted prior to the late plane arriving into JFK. We were a small group at SR JFK and many functions were handled by DL, my colleagues who on the whole I have to say were great. This was back in 1998-2000.
Not to applaud how UA handled this but I am guessing that EWR operations were pretty busted and many employees had trouble getting to the airport that day with the snow/wind.Maybe the comms from EWR to SFO was sent out 3 or 4 hours after the initial 179 departure to SFO, which ma seem unbelievable but I would guess a possibility? Not sure when the cancelation of SFO-HKG decision was made but sometimes these are last minute scenarios - i.e. perhaps UA wasn't able to to raise the number of FA's in SFO who could fly the the flight that they thought they would?
Agree with an earlier poster that you would think the 6 hour trip to SFO would be enough time to accomplish this task. But if it turns out you can't get the right number and the flight has to be cancelled 1 hour before the first sector landing then yes it is a scramble for the airline to deal with. And I can tell you after being asked to work shifts which extended over 18 hours as ground staff your ability to deal with late night last minute changes involving int'l wide-body situations is never optimal.
Adam
Not to applaud how UA handled this but I am guessing that EWR operations were pretty busted and many employees had trouble getting to the airport that day with the snow/wind.Maybe the comms from EWR to SFO was sent out 3 or 4 hours after the initial 179 departure to SFO, which ma seem unbelievable but I would guess a possibility? Not sure when the cancelation of SFO-HKG decision was made but sometimes these are last minute scenarios - i.e. perhaps UA wasn't able to to raise the number of FA's in SFO who could fly the the flight that they thought they would?
Agree with an earlier poster that you would think the 6 hour trip to SFO would be enough time to accomplish this task. But if it turns out you can't get the right number and the flight has to be cancelled 1 hour before the first sector landing then yes it is a scramble for the airline to deal with. And I can tell you after being asked to work shifts which extended over 18 hours as ground staff your ability to deal with late night last minute changes involving int'l wide-body situations is never optimal.
Adam
Mar 10, 2018, 9:07 am
#43
Join Date: Dec 2012
Location: IAH, SGN, BKK
Programs: UA 1K
Posts: 396
Not to applaud how UA handled this but I am guessing that EWR operations were pretty busted and many employees had trouble getting to the airport that day with the snow/wind.Maybe the comms from EWR to SFO was sent out 3 or 4 hours after the initial 179 departure to SFO, which ma seem unbelievable but I would guess a possibility? Not sure when the cancelation of SFO-HKG decision was made but sometimes these are last minute scenarios - i.e. perhaps UA wasn't able to to raise the number of FA's in SFO who could fly the the flight that they thought they would?
Mar 10, 2018, 10:04 am
#44
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: NYC
Programs: UA MileagePlus 2MM
Posts: 1,567
I have never been @ EWR when so few were in the terminal. There were few staff & I have no real complaint (other than we should have gotten meal vouchers) with the ground staff. In the end UA treated me fairly. I just wish I could have used that biz seat on CX! It's my favorite airline.
Mar 10, 2018, 4:25 pm
#45
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 843
Not to applaud how UA handled this but I am guessing that EWR operations were pretty busted and many employees had trouble getting to the airport that day with the snow/wind.Maybe the comms from EWR to SFO was sent out 3 or 4 hours after the initial 179 departure to SFO, which ma seem unbelievable but I would guess a possibility?