krisyyz From Canada, joined Nov 2004, 1588 posts, RR: 0 Posted (1 year 2 months 2 weeks 5 days 12 hours ago) and read 3387 times:
My friends booked their honeymoon flight to BCN on AC. They were scheduled for AC 814 September 15th, departing at 1755. A day before their flight, AC called them and offered $500 to switch to TS. The only catch was that they probably wouldn't be able to sit together on the TS flight so they rejected the offer. They checked ACs website to ensure their seats were the same and discovered that the a/c was change from the non-xm'd 763 (44 rows) to a xm'd 763 (39 rows). I would imagine this change of equipment meant AC had to bump a few pax.
They got to the airport 3 hrs prior to AC 814 departing and were notified that the flight was delayed from 1755 to 2100 due to mechanical issues with their 763. They tweeted AC and AC replied saying there was some engine cowling damage and it was in the process of being repaired. The gate agent told them that a replacement 763 was coming from HKG. This sounded rather suspicious to me as AC operated 77Ls to HKG. The AC gate agent apparently told them “I don't get paid enough to deal with this”
Around 7pm the flight was delayed again to 2230 because the flight crew reached their maximum duty hours and a new flight crew had to be found to operate 814. Then the flight was delayed again to 0030. At this point a group of passengers who were booked on a cruise the next day got irate and the police had be called to the gate. The flight was delayed for the 4th time, now scheduled to depart at 0130hrs.
Would AC and other carriers put less of an effort into finding a replacement aircraft for a low yielding flight like AC 814? Since AC flies non-xm'd 763s to BCN and a handful of other tourist destinations, without the executive first cabin, would AC be reluctant to pull a 763 from other flights like LHR or FRA due to the higher yielding fares on those TATLs? Are all fights dealt with fairly when it comes to delays or does the destination and executive first bookings affect what AC ops would do?
I checked this morning and they ended up taking off around 0120hrs. But AC814 was operated by a non-xm'd 763 after all, C-GHPD. I know this situation could have occurred on any major airline. AC's 767 fleet is highly utilized, I believe AC returned one of the non-xm'd 767 to the lessor recently leaving the fleet even more stretched. I still think that even if AC had extra planes sitting at YYZ overnight, they would be less than willing to pull a 767 from LHR to service BCN, am I correct in that assumption?
I was also under the impression the curfew at YYZ is 0030hrs, so if AC rescheduled the flight to past the curfew they would have to pay extra fees. I remember reading that YYZ charges 16x the regular rates for flights operating past the curfew, is that accurate?
Viscount724 From Switzerland, joined Oct 2006, 23154 posts, RR: 23 Reply 1, posted (1 year 2 months 2 weeks 5 days 7 hours ago) and read 3228 times:
Quoting krisyyz (Thread starter): I was also under the impression the curfew at YYZ is 0030hrs, so if AC rescheduled the flight to past the curfew they would have to pay extra fees. I remember reading that YYZ charges 16x the regular rates for flights operating past the curfew, is that accurate?
As far as I know, scheduled flights delayed due to weather, mechanical or ATC reasons etc. don't have to pay the surcharge. The 16 times sucharge only applies to flights that do not request and receive advance approval to operate during the night hours, which mainly refers to non-scheduled flights and charters etc.
Roseflyer From United States of America, joined Feb 2004, 9132 posts, RR: 52 Reply 2, posted (1 year 2 months 2 weeks 5 days 6 hours ago) and read 3218 times:
Quoting krisyyz (Thread starter):
Would AC and other carriers put less of an effort into finding a replacement aircraft for a low yielding flight like AC 814? Since AC flies non-xm'd 763s to BCN and a handful of other tourist destinations, without the executive first cabin, would AC be reluctant to pull a 763 from other flights like LHR or FRA due to the higher yielding fares on those TATLs?
Airlines typically don't handle irregular operations based on yield or load factor. Airlines will sometimes have sacrificial domestic turns of internationally equipped airplanes to protect international routes. Airlines also may have some routes that they put extra effort in to protect. However LHR or FRA would never be those types of routes. LHR and FRA are easy to reroute passengers to so airlines are actually more likely to cancel a LHR or FRA flight since there is so much capacity flexibility. Routes like LIM that are less than daily are more likely to get extra protection in the schedule.
Airlines try to minimize the impact of irregular operations. They will severely impact a select few passengers on a single flight by trying to fix the problem rather than let it spread like contagion across the network. They will do the best they can to get the BCN flight out, but aren't going to hurt the entire schedule because that will cascade. If they can swap airplanes they will, but they won't swap airplanes if it is going to result in cascading long delays (delays over 120 minutes). When airlines constantly swap planes, it leads to delays since it takes time to do a tail swap. Airlines will do what they can but swapping delays the overall network since it results in change dispatch paperwork, switch gates, switch catering, crew swap, seat assignment changes, etc. Swapping also puts airplanes out of the rotation for scheduled maintenance which can hurt schedule integrity. With such high summer utilization and tight turns, there isn't much room to cover for mechanical problems. Every airline will get in a situation where their out of service airplane count exceeds the spare airplane count and the schedule starts degrading.
Quoting krisyyz (Thread starter): The gate agent told them that a replacement 763 was coming from HKG. This sounded rather suspicious to me as AC operated 77Ls to HKG.
Air Canada has some maintenance done by HAECO in Hong Kong. It is possible it could be coming from there. Also the agent could have misread where the plane was coming from.
If you have never designed an airplane part before, let the real designers do the work!
canadianpylon From Canada, joined May 2003, 285 posts, RR: 0 Reply 4, posted (1 year 2 months 4 days 8 hours ago) and read 2750 times:
Quoting krisyyz (Thread starter): At this point a group of passengers who were booked on a cruise the next day got irate and the police had be called to the gate.
And that is why any travel agent (worth their weight in salt) will always book you to arrive at the start of your cruise at least 1 night before the cruise. 'Just-in-time' arrival doesn't leave a lot of margin of error for the floating hotel to wait for you (which they won't.)
Always looking for the longest route with the most transfers.
NWADTWE16 From United States of America, joined Jun 2012, 242 posts, RR: 0 Reply 5, posted (1 year 2 months 4 days ago) and read 2696 times:
It sounds like a typical delay scenario to me. Maintenance leading to a plane swap which then ended up arriving later than the ops agent (that switched aircraft) expected thus leading to Crew timeout( probably already limited due to the length of flight), at that point your problem was the crew/replacement crew more than the plane. I have to say AC handled this as expected and ive personally worked a hundred flights with the same scenario, many with the end result as CANCELLED after the lengthy fiasco...and cops involved, yep..people need to remain calm and try to understand reality regardless of how frustrating it can be, or its jail and no flight if you cross the line. Atleast news crews cant bring camera's into a situation anymore LOL