TonyBurr From United States of America, joined Mar 2001, 982 posts, RR: 0 Posted (1 year 5 months 4 days 2 hours ago) and read 2360 times:
If I am reading Radar24.com correctly, the Friday 16 December CO 91 (UA91) TLV-EWR has diverted to Gatwick near London. It looks like the flight was almost over Scotland when it turned south to LGW. It seems to have landed at LGW around 3:25 AM local time. Does anyone have any information on this?
LGWflyer From United Kingdom, joined Mar 2011, 2348 posts, RR: 1 Reply 1, posted (1 year 5 months 4 days 2 hours ago) and read 2327 times:
Sorry I don't have any info but I would be surprised they would choose to land here at LGW rather than LHR. Oh well would love to see some pics of the aircraft at LGW!!!
ltbewr From United States of America, joined Jan 2004, 12329 posts, RR: 12 Reply 2, posted (1 year 5 months 4 days 1 hour ago) and read 2201 times:
Apparently per CO's website, indeed this flight has diverged to LGW, landing there about 3:20 AM. Problem is that apparently for security reasons, you cannot use tracking programs at CO's website for it. It is a 777, ship # 6. I would suspect it is a medical diversion.
UAL747 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 3, posted (1 year 5 months 4 days 1 hour ago) and read 2161 times:
Quoting LGWflyer (Reply 1): Sorry I don't have any info but I would be surprised they would choose to land here at LGW rather than LHR. Oh well would love to see some pics of the aircraft at LGW!!!
LGW or LHR, wouldn't really matter much. I'm assuming that landing fees are a bit less for LGW? LGW is perfectly capable of handling GE-90 equipped 777's. May also make more sense traffic wise than LHR. Overall, seems a better option being the easier airport to get into.
2travel2know2 From Panama, joined Apr 2010, 1995 posts, RR: 1 Reply 5, posted (1 year 5 months 4 days 1 hour ago) and read 2125 times:
If the flight is almost over Scotland and UA/CO has such a massive presence in northern UK: BFS, GLA, EDI, MAN... plus there are other major airports around like PIK. NCL, LBA, DUB.. why turn south and land in LGW?
B.T.W. LGW (or STN) would have been obvious at that time of the night since LHR it kind of close at those times.
Depends why it diverted...UA may have spare PMCO crew available in London, I think UA still has UA MTC at LHR so spare parts are more readily available, onward connections may be easier if UA cancels the flight...
LGWflyer From United Kingdom, joined Mar 2011, 2348 posts, RR: 1 Reply 7, posted (1 year 5 months 3 days 5 hours ago) and read 1968 times:
Quoting UAL747 (Reply 3):
LGW or LHR, wouldn't really matter much. I'm assuming that landing fees are a bit less for LGW? LGW is perfectly capable of handling GE-90 equipped 777's. May also make more sense traffic wise than LHR. Overall, seems a better option being the easier airport to get into.
I think landing fees are more or less the same here at LGW than at LHR. Yes of course LGW can handle the 777's, the UA aircraft which diverted was N77006, and after a quick search here on A.net this aircraft was here plenty of times when CO was at LGW.
Another reason maybe for landing at LGW is how serious the medical problem was, a big hospital is nearish to here so maybe it was quicker getting them off the plane and straight into the ambulance and off to hospital. But then again if it was that serious, I suppose they could have landed anywhere. Anyway nice to see an ex CO 777 back here at LGW after all these years!
Sponsor Message: 
From United States of America, joined Mar 2001, 982 posts, 
From United Kingdom, joined Mar 2011, 2348 posts, 
From Panama, joined Apr 2010, 1995 posts, 
Printer friendly format 
