YYZRTW From Canada, joined May 2007, 16 posts, RR: 0 Posted (5 years 8 months 2 weeks 3 days 20 hours ago) and read 1872 times:
I was just checking Flight Aware and noticed that on September 5th, Air Canada 01 to Narita was listed as landing in Kansai Int. Is this a normal diversion if there are problems at Narita? I am not familiar with the options on Trans-Pacific flights.
Any information will further my ongoing aviation education.
Thanks in advance.
Sh0rtybr0wn From United States of America, joined Aug 2007, 528 posts, RR: 0 Reply 3, posted (5 years 8 months 2 weeks 3 days 19 hours ago) and read 1770 times:
Haha... nice. But KIX is not actually in Osaka , its only close to Osaka... its about half hour by train. Did they fly them back to NRT , or did they make them take a train to ShinOsaka / Kyoto to get shinkansen to Tokyo? Getting from NRT to where you have to be Tokyo is difficult enough as it is.
That would be a fun surprise for someone who was going to Japan for the first time.
ZBBYLW From Canada, joined Nov 2006, 1923 posts, RR: 7 Reply 5, posted (5 years 8 months 2 weeks 3 days 17 hours ago) and read 1628 times:
Yes AC has flights to KIX. Not sure from YYZ but they do have flights from YVR. I would say this would be a great place for AC to send a flight, as they have their own staffing there, unless if its contracted but nonetheless deal with flights on a regular basis.
FLYACYYZ From Canada, joined Jan 2004, 1914 posts, RR: 12 Reply 8, posted (5 years 8 months 2 weeks 3 days 17 hours ago) and read 1611 times:
AC35/36 operates YVR/KIX/YVR. If there was a diversion, KIX would be the preferred airport as there is an AC Manager and staff at that airport. AC001/05 Sep shows a non-stop routing YYZ/NRT/YYZ - no signs of an actual landing at KIX.
Having said that, had a mechanical diversion several years ago at Sapporo-New Chitose Airport. That was an interesting one. Star A staff ANA came through with flying colours for us.
Accargo From Canada, joined Sep 2004, 610 posts, RR: 8 Reply 9, posted (5 years 8 months 2 weeks 3 days 5 hours ago) and read 1409 times:
AC001 diverted to KIX due to typhoon approaching NRT. The decision was made to operate to KIX prior to departure from YYZ based on forecast at original destination rather than cancel the flight completely.
Ktachiya From Japan, joined Sep 2004, 1729 posts, RR: 2 Reply 11, posted (5 years 8 months 2 weeks 3 days 4 hours ago) and read 1300 times:
They could have landed in CTS but the typhoon would eventually head to CTS after it hit NRT. KIX was the correct choice. If they had that flight (AC10/9) YVR-NGO, they would have tried landing at NGO. They did have KIX-YYZ I think when the airport opened up, but was it dropped after 9-11 or way before that? I think Canadian had the rights flying YVR-NRT and any other NRT flights so AC chose KIX, but I am not sure when KIX-YYZ ceased to exist.
Ktachiya From Japan, joined Sep 2004, 1729 posts, RR: 2 Reply 13, posted (5 years 8 months 2 weeks 3 days 3 hours ago) and read 1268 times:
Quoting Jetset (Reply 12): AC001/05Sept was planned to operate via KIX due to Typhoon Fitow but operated non-stop YYZ-NRT
departing YYZ 1332 local and arriving NRT 1553 local
OK, makes sense. There were a lot of flights that left NRT earlier than their scheduled time on that day (happy for pax) due to the typhoon hitting the region over-night. I see that the AF twilight flight left about 1 hour earlier than scheduled. I also think the YVR-NRT flight landed in NRT a bit earlier than scheduled and left on time.
Speaking of which, don't they usually do an aircraft swap at NRT between the YYZ and YVR flights? But I don't know since one is an A340 and the other is a B777 now. But the YVR flight arrives at around 3 pm and leaves at 7 pm. Isn't that quite a long time on the ground in such an expensive airport? Or it doesn't matter since YYZ is super expensive as well.