Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
BA 777 JFK-->Bangor-->London  
User currently offlineChrisNH From United States of America, joined Jun 1999, 4086 posts, RR: 2
Posted (4 years 7 months 1 week 2 days 12 hours ago) and read 11980 times:

I noticed on FlightAware that British Airways flight '11J' (a 777) from JFK to
London abruptly diverted to Bangor on Christmas night.

After roughly 2.5 hours on the ground, the plane continued on to
London...operating this time as Flight 174.

Anyone know the circumstances?

25 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlineTrucker From United States of America, joined Nov 2009, 190 posts, RR: 1
Reply 1, posted (4 years 7 months 1 week 2 days 11 hours ago) and read 11776 times:

They had to peel Santa off the airplane's nose.



My thanx to KGAlflyer for lending me his photo.

[Edited 2009-12-26 08:36:53]

User currently offline413x3 From United States of America, joined Jul 2008, 1983 posts, RR: 0
Reply 2, posted (4 years 7 months 1 week 2 days 11 hours ago) and read 11750 times:

I am guessing a medical diversion

User currently offlinePar13del From Bahamas, joined Dec 2005, 7075 posts, RR: 8
Reply 3, posted (4 years 7 months 1 week 2 days 11 hours ago) and read 11697 times:



Quoting Trucker (Reply 1):
They had to peel Santa off the airplane's nose.

Good one, now we know how the grinch spoiled xmas  Smile

Quoting 413x3 (Reply 2):
I am guessing a medical diversion

I would have said the same thing except why the flight number change?

Quoting ChrisNH (Thread starter):
After roughly 2.5 hours on the ground, the plane continued on to
London...operating this time as Flight 174.

I'm liking the Santa Claus argument more and more.


User currently offlineApodino From United States of America, joined Apr 2005, 4236 posts, RR: 6
Reply 4, posted (4 years 7 months 1 week 2 days 10 hours ago) and read 11505 times:

According to BA.com, 174 is the actual flight number for the diverted flight for ticketing and marketing purposes. Why it was filed as flight 11J initially is a mystery. Often times in the US, airlines will use a different flight number for filing purposes to avoid having two flights airborne at the same time in the same airspace with the same flight number. But I don't see how that would happen with a British Airways flight in US airspace.

User currently offlineCloudyapple From Hong Kong, joined Jul 2005, 2454 posts, RR: 10
Reply 5, posted (4 years 7 months 1 week 2 days 9 hours ago) and read 11368 times:



Quoting Apodino (Reply 4):
But I don't see how that would happen with a British Airways flight in US airspace.

London is in the UK and you cannot get there by staying inside US airspace. You need to transit Gander, Shanwick, Prestwick and London FIRs enroute to London. Plenty of opportunities to have Speedbird 74, 774, 1774, 1744, 1174 etc or even Air France 174, American 174 etc in similar timespace.

It has nothing to do with same flight numbers being airbourne at the same time (why would it matter if there's another BAW174 airbourne in Australia for example?) It has all to do with callsign confusion on frequency.

BA has a whole pile of alphanumeric callsigns that bear no resemblance to the corresponding IATA flight numbers to avoid the callsign confusion issue. It's a safety issue and is pretty well dealt with in Europe. No need to loose sleep over this.



A310/A319/20/21/A332/3/A343/6/A388/B732/5/7/8/B742/S/4/B752/B763/B772/3/W/E145/J41/MD11/83/90
User currently offlineFreeze3192 From United States of America, joined Oct 2006, 164 posts, RR: 0
Reply 6, posted (4 years 7 months 1 week 2 days 3 hours ago) and read 9814 times:



Quoting Cloudyapple (Reply 5):
London is in the UK and you cannot get there by staying inside US airspace. You need to transit Gander, Shanwick, Prestwick and London FIRs enroute to London. Plenty of opportunities to have Speedbird 74, 774, 1774, 1744, 1174 etc or even Air France 174, American 174 etc in similar timespace.

It has nothing to do with same flight numbers being airbourne at the same time (why would it matter if there's another BAW174 airbourne in Australia for example?) It has all to do with callsign confusion on frequency.

BA has a whole pile of alphanumeric callsigns that bear no resemblance to the corresponding IATA flight numbers to avoid the callsign confusion issue. It's a safety issue and is pretty well dealt with in Europe. No need to loose sleep over this.

I believe what he was trying to say is this: Here in the USA, some carriers will have routes with the same flight number. For example (fictional), AMT576 flies HNL-PHX and another flight in the system on the same day as AMT576 is PIE-MDW. Due to a delay of some sort, the flights end up in the air at the same time. To avoid confusion for the NAS computers, one is filed as AMT576 (Say, HNL-PHX) and one is filed as AMT576A (PIE-MDW).

This is mainly to do with the FAA computers not being able to handle two active flight plans under the same callsign at the same time.



"A passenger bets his life that his pilot is a worthy heir to an ancient tradition of excellence and professionalism."
User currently offlineThenoflyzone From Canada, joined Jan 2001, 2391 posts, RR: 12
Reply 7, posted (4 years 7 months 1 week 1 day 19 hours ago) and read 7541 times:

Quoting Freeze3192 (Reply 6):
Here in the USA, some carriers will have routes with the same flight number.

I have noticed this as well. Why does this happen? Why does an airline use the same flight number for two different flights in the same day? Doesn't make any sense. Avoiding the issue is a better measure of safety than letting it happen and then developing a procedure against it.

Thenoflyzone

[Edited 2009-12-27 00:19:26 by thenoflyzone]


us Air Traffic Controllers have a good record, we haven't left one up there yet !!
User currently offlineBMI727 From United States of America, joined Feb 2009, 15719 posts, RR: 26
Reply 8, posted (4 years 7 months 1 week 1 day 19 hours ago) and read 7467 times:



Quoting Thenoflyzone (Reply 7):
I have noticed this as well. Why does this happen? Why does an airline use the same flight number for two different flights in the same day?

The will sell the flight as a through flight with a stop, rather than a connection. Such a flight will show up before connections, even though for a customer it is really no different.



Why do Aerospace Engineering students have to turn things in on time?
User currently offlineHa763 From United States of America, joined Jan 2003, 3636 posts, RR: 5
Reply 9, posted (4 years 7 months 1 week 1 day 18 hours ago) and read 7348 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!



Quoting Thenoflyzone (Reply 7):

I have noticed this as well. Why does this happen? Why does an airline use the same flight number for two different flights in the same day?

Most of the time it will be a direct flight with an aircraft change at some point. UA does this with several flights out of HNL.

Now, lets take UA934, which is a 763 from HNL-LAX and continues to LHR on a 777. This flight has an ETA in LAX of 1430 and an ETD of 1701 for the flight on to LHR at 1701. Say this flight is delayed out of HNL for 5 hours giving it an ETA in LAX of 1930. However, there are a couple or no pax continuing on to LHR from HNL. It makes no sense to delay the flight to LHR for 2.5 hours. You could FIM the pax to another carrier in LAX or see if you could re-route them via another UA flight.


User currently offlineCloudyapple From Hong Kong, joined Jul 2005, 2454 posts, RR: 10
Reply 10, posted (4 years 7 months 1 week 1 day 18 hours ago) and read 7125 times:



Quoting Freeze3192 (Reply 6):
To avoid confusion for the NAS computers, one is filed as AMT576 (Say, HNL-PHX) and one is filed as AMT576A (PIE-MDW).

That's fine if NAS is 20 years out of date but that's not the reason some BAW flights are given alphanumeric callsigns.

Quoting BMI727 (Reply 8):
The will sell the flight as a through flight with a stop, rather than a connection. Such a flight will show up before connections, even though for a customer it is really no different.

This is a trick they employ to fool the GDS into giving these connections a higher ranking than they really deserve. It's like in the old days when web developers tag their webpages with absolutely every keywords to fool the old search engines.

If they do indeed sell these as "direct", I think this is a form of deception that should be punished and stopped.

Quoting Ha763 (Reply 9):
Most of the time it will be a direct flight with an aircraft change at some point.

This sentence has a logical error in it. A direct flight is one that you travel through from origin to destination in the same aircraft. Short tech/fuel stops are allowed, hence the difference from a non-stop flight. If you have to change planes, it's not a direct flight.



A310/A319/20/21/A332/3/A343/6/A388/B732/5/7/8/B742/S/4/B752/B763/B772/3/W/E145/J41/MD11/83/90
User currently offlineBMI727 From United States of America, joined Feb 2009, 15719 posts, RR: 26
Reply 11, posted (4 years 7 months 1 week 1 day 17 hours ago) and read 7029 times:



Quoting Cloudyapple (Reply 10):
If they do indeed sell these as "direct", I think this is a form of deception that should be punished and stopped.

I looked at the UA website and did a dummy booking of UA 934. It shows the flight above connections, since it is one flight number. It is denoted as 1 stop, and below that it says "plane change" and has a details button.

Pressing the details button brings up a dialog box that shows the equipment used on each segment and at the bottom says "For at least one of your flights, you must change planes en route, even though your ticket may show only one flight number." Based on this I would say that the website is not misleading.



Why do Aerospace Engineering students have to turn things in on time?
User currently offlineAirNz From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 12, posted (4 years 7 months 1 week 1 day 16 hours ago) and read 6464 times:



Quoting BMI727 (Reply 11):
I looked at the UA website and did a dummy booking of UA 934. It shows the flight above connections, since it is one flight number. It is denoted as 1 stop, and below that it says "plane change" and has a details button.

Pressing the details button brings up a dialog box that shows the equipment used on each segment and at the bottom says "For at least one of your flights, you must change planes en route, even though your ticket may show only one flight number." Based on this I would say that the website is not misleading.

As you describe it the website is very much misleading. As Cloudyapple correctly states, if there is a change of aircraft at any point en route then it cannot be classed as a direct flight, and it becomes a connecting flight.


User currently offlineBMI727 From United States of America, joined Feb 2009, 15719 posts, RR: 26
Reply 13, posted (4 years 7 months 1 week 1 day 9 hours ago) and read 4913 times:



Quoting AirNz (Reply 12):
As you describe it the website is very much misleading. As Cloudyapple correctly states, if there is a change of aircraft at any point en route then it cannot be classed as a direct flight, and it becomes a connecting flight.

The website points out in two places that there is an aircraft change involved and that it is just a connection. If the website did not state this fact it would be misleading, but the airline is not concealing the actual routing from the passenger. The only difference between this and the other connections listed below is the fact that it is one flight number. Also, nowhere on the website does it say "direct flight."



Why do Aerospace Engineering students have to turn things in on time?
User currently offlineAirNz From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 14, posted (4 years 7 months 1 week 1 day 8 hours ago) and read 4835 times:



Quoting BMI727 (Reply 13):
The website points out in two places that there is an aircraft change involved and that it is just a connection. If the website did not state this fact it would be misleading, but the airline is not concealing the actual routing from the passenger. The only difference between this and the other connections listed below is the fact that it is one flight number. Also, nowhere on the website does it say "direct flight."

Ah! my apologies then. I was taking it from your post #8 where you claimed that such can be sold as a through flight, and not a connecting flight. At that point you didn't mention that actually the opposite was shown on the website.


User currently offlineHaggis79 From Germany, joined Jun 2006, 1096 posts, RR: 1
Reply 15, posted (4 years 7 months 1 week 1 day 8 hours ago) and read 4819 times:



Quoting Cloudyapple (Reply 10):
If they do indeed sell these as "direct", I think this is a form of deception that should be punished and stopped.

they absolutely do - and what's worse, if you happen so be on such a flight you only get the frequent flyer miles as if the flight would indeed have been a nonstop Sad



300 310 319/20/21 332/3 343 AT4/7 143 B19 732/3/4/5/G/8/9 742/4 752/3 763/4 77E/W CR2/7/9 D95 E45/70 F50 F70 100 M11 M90
User currently offlineTrucker From United States of America, joined Nov 2009, 190 posts, RR: 1
Reply 16, posted (4 years 7 months 1 week 1 day 8 hours ago) and read 4751 times:



Quoting Par13del (Reply 3):
I'm liking the Santa Clause argument more and more.

Yea....I'm not seeing any other reasons posted why this BA flight diverted to Bangor. Definitely must have been a collision with Santa's sleigh. The BA pilots were probably flying on the wrong side of the sky.

Quoting 413x3 (Reply 2):
I am guessing a medical diversion



Well duh! Yea it was a medical diversion. Santa got run over by a freakin' T7. You think all he got was a scratch? Talk about stating the obvious.

But not to worry. It was kind of touch and go for awhile with Santa in intensive care but he's now in a Bangor hospital recuperating nicely and he's expected to make a full recovery by next Christmas.

Big version: Width: 325 Height: 400 File size: 64kb


As for the reindeer. Luckily they're also gonna be OK although Rudolph is looking for a new light bulb for his nose. However they all would appreciate it if some BA pilot would give them a new sleigh.

And speeking of BA pilots, Santa and Rudolph would like to remind y'all that when you come flying over the US you gotta fly on the right side of the sky....else you could get in another wreck. Save the left side flying for when you're at home over the UK.


User currently offlineViscount724 From Switzerland, joined Oct 2006, 24922 posts, RR: 22
Reply 17, posted (4 years 7 months 1 week 1 day 8 hours ago) and read 4723 times:



Quoting Cloudyapple (Reply 10):
If they do indeed sell these as "direct", I think this is a form of deception that should be punished and stopped.

Airlines have been offering "change-of-gauge" services with a change of aircraft but using a single flight number for decades. Regulatory authorities have tolderated this up to now. It would be difficult for them suddenly to say that it's no longer permitted. If you encounter this practice and don't like it, don't fly that airline the next time. Many airlines do not do this. In my experience, only U.S. carriers do this on a widespread basis. Offhand, I can't think of any current examples of this involving non-U.S. airlines.


User currently offlineBMI727 From United States of America, joined Feb 2009, 15719 posts, RR: 26
Reply 18, posted (4 years 7 months 1 week 1 day 3 hours ago) and read 4498 times:



Quoting Haggis79 (Reply 15):
they absolutely do

United's website does not describe the flight as "direct", says on the booking page that a change of plane is required and the info dialog box says the following:

Quote:
For at least one of your flights, you must change planes en route, even though your ticket may show only one flight number




Why do Aerospace Engineering students have to turn things in on time?
User currently offlineLUPOR1D From Ireland, joined Feb 2008, 316 posts, RR: 0
Reply 19, posted (4 years 7 months 1 week 1 day 3 hours ago) and read 4458 times:



Quoting Cloudyapple (Reply 5):
London is in the UK and you cannot get there by staying inside US airspace. You need to transit Gander, Shanwick, Prestwick and London FIRs enroute to London. Plenty of opportunities to have Speedbird 74, 774, 1774, 1744, 1174 etc or even Air France 174, American 174 etc in similar timespace.

Almost- Gander Oceanic, Shanwick Oceanic, Shannon/Scottish/Rejkavik (Depending on how far north) then London  Wink



Always lurking.
User currently offlineChrisNH From United States of America, joined Jun 1999, 4086 posts, RR: 2
Reply 20, posted (4 years 7 months 1 week 12 hours ago) and read 4106 times:

A woman who was aboard the flight (the one I started the topic with) e-mailed me to say that a passenger died while the plane was aloft. These are tragedies whenever and wherever they occur, but it is almost incomprehensibly sad coming on Christmas Day.

User currently offlineTrucker From United States of America, joined Nov 2009, 190 posts, RR: 1
Reply 21, posted (4 years 7 months 1 week 11 hours ago) and read 3958 times:



Quoting ChrisNH (Reply 20):
A woman who was aboard the flight (the one I started the topic with) e-mailed me to say that a passenger died while the plane was aloft. These are tragedies whenever and wherever they occur, but it is almost incomprehensibly sad coming on Christmas Day

Oops!  ashamed 

Given this new information I would ask the mods to please delete my 2 posts on this thread since they are now very inappropriate. Good chance this woman was taking a trip to visit friends and/or family over the holidays so basically the worst thing that could happen.


User currently offlineChrisNH From United States of America, joined Jun 1999, 4086 posts, RR: 2
Reply 22, posted (4 years 7 months 1 week 11 hours ago) and read 3912 times:

Further, I would like to add text from the e-mailer, who applauds the BA crew and the people at Bangor (who were, likely, not fully staffed at the time):

It was very surreal. I didn't see the man collapse as I was on a different aisle but the BA crew was amazing and this on the verge of the strike due to corporate wanting to reduce cabin crew size. I do hope that this can be used as an example of the advantage of cabin crews as they are. And the folks at Bangor were very helpful though it seemed at that point to be too late. The crew had done CPR for 30 minutes before we could finally land.


User currently offlineDavid_itl From United Kingdom, joined Jun 2001, 7363 posts, RR: 14
Reply 23, posted (4 years 7 months 1 week 7 hours ago) and read 3743 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!



Quoting anon e-mailer (Reply 22):
but the BA crew was amazing and this on the verge of the strike due to corporate wanting to reduce cabin crew size.do hope that this can be used as an example of the advantage of cabin crews as they are

I hardly think having 1 less cabin crew member on board would have made a significant bearing on the outcome i.e BA LHR long-haul going to what BA LGW long-haul is already used to. Pity that has not been more well established. And if the crew on board had not done their best endeavours, we might have questioned their motives for not helping.


User currently offlineChrisNH From United States of America, joined Jun 1999, 4086 posts, RR: 2
Reply 24, posted (4 years 7 months 5 days 16 hours ago) and read 3409 times:

AA 120, JFK-Paris, turned around over Nova Scotia and headed back to Bangor last night. It's a 757.

According to FlightAware, another 757 is heading from JFK to Bangor this morning. It would seem that the first plane had some sort of mechanical issue.


User currently offlineViscount724 From Switzerland, joined Oct 2006, 24922 posts, RR: 22
Reply 25, posted (4 years 7 months 4 days 2 hours ago) and read 3062 times:



Quoting ChrisNH (Reply 24):
AA 120, JFK-Paris, turned around over Nova Scotia and headed back to Bangor last night. It's a 757.

According to FlightAware, another 757 is heading from JFK to Bangor this morning. It would seem that the first plane had some sort of mechanical issue.

From Transport Canada incident report:

Approximately 190 nautical miles west of Gander (CYQX), AAL120, Boeing 757-200, enroute from New York (KJFK) to Paris (LFPG), declared an emergency due to a severe vibration in #2 engine. The flight crew initially requested to divert to Gander but later diverted to Bangor (KBGR).


Top Of Page
Forum Index

This topic is archived and can not be replied to any more.

Printer friendly format

Similar topics:More similar topics...
Arik Air > Abuja-London Heathrow From Nov 26 posted Wed Nov 18 2009 22:19:56 by AsoRock
DL Downsizing JFK->Europe posted Sat Oct 20 2007 12:36:39 by Hush-Kit
UA: JFK->LHR posted Wed Jan 31 2007 02:33:34 by Dmanmtl
DL JFK -> MAN posted Wed Sep 13 2000 01:31:01 by Ezra
BA LCY JFK A318 posted Thu Dec 3 2009 01:37:54 by LMML 14/32
Profit Margin On BA's LCY-JFK Service posted Wed Nov 4 2009 09:54:37 by BAfan
How Many Flight Attendants Work On BA LCY-JFK? posted Tue Sep 29 2009 11:38:11 by FilLPA
BA - LCY - JFK - Inaugural Flight posted Mon Sep 28 2009 14:51:23 by Captainsimon
BA 777 And Hainan A346 Accident. posted Mon Jun 29 2009 09:57:38 by Fxramper
BA LCY - JFK On Sale... Apparently. posted Thu Jun 25 2009 01:17:33 by ClubWorld1986