Adventures on UA895 [ORD-HKG]

 
Old May 20, 09, 3:52 pm
  #1  
Original Poster
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Programs: United 1K GS, USAIR, Delta
Posts: 175
Adventures on UA895 [ORD-HKG]

On Tuesday the 19th 895 to HKG was delayed for Aircraft Servicing for 5 hours. Finally loaded and took off around 6:00. Flight was uneventful but a couple hours out of HKG the Purser announced that we would be landing a Narita as there were Storms in HKG, We didn't have enough Fuel and that the Crew was timing out.

Needless to say there was a near riot in Economy. (I was in 2K so it was mostly hearsay for the FA's ;-)

Landed at Narita and went through the Temp scan and questioner. I must commend the flight crew for holding it together ad keeping us informed. Also the ground crew was great. Very organized with reassignments and hotels even for the Y passengers.

Overall a big pain but United handled it very well.
jhcapps3 is offline  
Old May 20, 09, 4:02 pm
  #2  
 
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Upcountry Maui, HI
Posts: 12,356
hmm, did they reschedule the plane with the same or different crew to go on to HKG?

Or did they rebook you onto a different carrier, since UA doesn't fly NRT - HKG? or both?

Landing a plane destined for HKG in NRT seems to present a dilema for UAs scheduling, etc.

-David
LIH Prem is offline  
Old May 20, 09, 4:07 pm
  #3  
Original Poster
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Programs: United 1K GS, USAIR, Delta
Posts: 175
You are correct that the plane is now out of position. Dont know about the crew but just saw the captain downstairs. Everyone is rebooked onto different carriers. As a matter of fact anyone who's final destination was HKG had to grab their checked luggage as they are going Cathay and there is no interline here.
jhcapps3 is offline  
Old May 20, 09, 4:08 pm
  #4  
Original Poster
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Programs: United 1K GS, USAIR, Delta
Posts: 175
Also forgot to mention that they were holding 895 HKG to SIN for us. Later learned that they waited to late so they had to cancel that flight also. 2 747's out of position.
jhcapps3 is offline  
Old May 20, 09, 4:18 pm
  #5  
FlyerTalk Evangelist
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Los Angeles / Basel
Programs: UA 1K MM, AA EXP, Hyatt Globalist
Posts: 24,965
Originally Posted by jhcapps3 View Post
Also forgot to mention that they were holding 895 HKG to SIN for us. Later learned that they waited to late so they had to cancel that flight also. 2 747's out of position.
Sounds like great planning...
MatthewLAX is online now  
Old May 20, 09, 4:38 pm
  #6  
A FlyerTalk Posting Legend
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Programs: UA 1K .97MM, IHG AMB-Spire, HH Diamond
Posts: 53,630
Originally Posted by jhcapps3 View Post
Landed at Narita and went through the Temp scan and questioner. (,,,) Also the ground crew was great. Very organized with reassignments and hotels even for the Y passengers.
Best ground crew systemwide IMO, by a healthy margin.

Overall a big pain but United handled it very well.
This I don't agree. To earn that they should have made different decisions in ORD itself. And they compounded it by hosing the HKG-SIN passengers (and SIN-HKG the next morning).
uastarflyer is offline  
Old May 20, 09, 5:42 pm
  #7  
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 3,123
Originally Posted by uastarflyer View Post


This I don't agree. To earn that they should have made different decisions in ORD itself. And they compounded it by hosing the HKG-SIN passengers (and SIN-HKG the next morning).
What different decision should United have made in ORD?
aluminumdriver is offline  
Old May 20, 09, 6:14 pm
  #8  
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: BOS and any place close to a lav
Programs: UA 1.6MM
Posts: 5,416
Originally Posted by aluminumdriver View Post
What different decision should United have made in ORD?
I think that uastarflyer means that UA should have just canceled the flight out of ORD. If UA knew that the crew would time out (if a fuel stop was needed) and that they needed to refuel, they probably should have canceled at ORD.

The local Chicago folks would just go home. And they'd only need to put the connecting passengers into hotels.
warreng24 is offline  
Old May 20, 09, 6:44 pm
  #9  
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Mississippi
Programs: Hyatt Diamond
Posts: 151
Originally Posted by warreng24 View Post
The local Chicago folks would just go home. And they'd only need to put the connecting passengers into hotels.
This makes total sense.

But to time out in the air...I've never heard of this while actually being in the air. If they told me weather... ok I believe it, but this...absurd.
OregonTransplant is offline  
Old May 20, 09, 8:11 pm
  #10  
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: ORD
Programs: UA 1K
Posts: 242
Originally Posted by OregonTransplant View Post
This makes total sense.

But to time out in the air...I've never heard of this while actually being in the air. If they told me weather... ok I believe it, but this...absurd.
They didn't time out in the air, they timed out when after arrived in NRT when there was not enough time available to continue the flight after the WX delay would clear up.
danielb6752 is offline  
Old May 20, 09, 8:19 pm
  #11  
 
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Upcountry Maui, HI
Posts: 12,356
Originally Posted by jhcapps3 View Post
As a matter of fact anyone who's final destination was HKG had to grab their checked luggage as they are going Cathay and there is no interline here.
thanks for the update. have fun. I was in HKG last week. Love that town.

-David
LIH Prem is offline  
Old May 20, 09, 8:34 pm
  #12  
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 3,123
Originally Posted by warreng24 View Post
I think that uastarflyer means that UA should have just canceled the flight out of ORD. If UA knew that the crew would time out (if a fuel stop was needed) and that they needed to refuel, they probably should have canceled at ORD.

The local Chicago folks would just go home. And they'd only need to put the connecting passengers into hotels.
That's kinda ridiculous. United doesn't plan a flight based on the fact that they may have to divert, nor does any airline. Many pilots fly days that would time them out if there were any lengthy weather delays or a divert late in the day. Does United now have to have hundreds of pilots just sitting at airports all around the country just in case there is a delay somewhere?

When that flight departed, the crew was legal and if all had gone according to schedule, the folks would have made it to their destination. Weather caused the delay, not the crew. Could you imagine the uproar and the griping here on FT, if United had announced "Sorry, but your flight to HKG is cancelled since the crew is legal now, but if they had to MAYBE divert 16 hours from now, they'd be illegal, so we're going to just leave you stranded here in ORD??

Last edited by aluminumdriver; May 20, 09 at 9:36 pm
aluminumdriver is offline  
Old May 20, 09, 10:16 pm
  #13  
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Programs: UA 1K, LH SEN
Posts: 621
895 was 4 hrs late again on Wednesday. The curse continues...
Nicholas is offline  
Old May 20, 09, 10:24 pm
  #14  
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Central Virginia
Programs: UA 2MM
Posts: 1,231
Originally Posted by MatthewLAX View Post
Sounds like great planning...
I believe it is quite difficult for any airlines to "plan" weather issures.
Doug 1029 is offline  
Old May 20, 09, 10:49 pm
  #15  
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: San Francisco
Programs: Underentitled UA 1k, various hotel progs
Posts: 345
Originally Posted by aluminumdriver View Post
Could you imagine the uproar and the griping here on FT, if United had announced "Sorry, but your flight to HKG is cancelled since the crew is legal now, but if they had to MAYBE divert 16 hours from now, they'd be illegal, so we're going to just leave you stranded here in ORD??
Actually I can imagine it quite easily!! Might even be another New Low.
ccharles is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread
Search Engine: