N62NA
Topic Author
Posts: 4011
Joined: Sun Aug 10, 2003 1:05 am

What Happened With AA 435 / 1520 Today?

Fri Jun 15, 2007 1:27 pm

Just checked and saw that the usual 8:30am departure of flight 435 MIA-LAX was delayed to 4:00pm, which of course caused the turnaround flight 1520 to be horrendously late as well (scheduled departure of LAX back to MIA at 12:15pm Pacific time, actual departure 8:06pm Pacific time).

Didn't they have a spare 772 at MIA to substitute (or at least a 763)?

Also, gasp, did the passengers at MIA have to sit on the plane from 8am all the way up until the 4pm departure?

Anyone at AA have some info please?
 
AAR90
Posts: 3140
Joined: Fri Jan 21, 2000 11:51 am

RE: What Happened With AA 435 / 1520 Today?

Fri Jun 15, 2007 3:50 pm

Quote:
Didn't they have a spare 772 at MIA to substitute (or at least a 763)?

Nope. Acft had right engine generator fail on the inbound flight. Took that long to remove/replace the IDG. The daily flight (sked arrival 10:35PDT) is flown to provide a backup plane for the LAX-NRT flight (sked depart 12:40PDT). All other 777 flights departing MIA are more valuable than a repositioning flight. And trading to a different type (767 or 757) would not serve the primary purpose of providing a backup 777 at LAX. Once the IDG was replace the AA ETOPS Maint. program requires a flight (or at least minimum flight time) operating the new IDG prior to allowing the plane to leave benign (domestic USA) airspace --at least that's how I remember how things worked. So flying the flight late -even very late- provided the necessary In-Flight Evaluation period to allow the plane to return to international ETOPS routings.
*NO CARRIER* -- A Naval Aviator's worst nightmare!
 
777fan
Posts: 2256
Joined: Wed Jan 04, 2006 12:09 pm

RE: What Happened With AA 435 / 1520 Today?

Fri Jun 15, 2007 7:27 pm

Funny you mentioned AA flights sitting on the tarmac. I was going to post this as a separate article but this should suffice. What's interesting, is that AA apparently doesn't rate as the worst for sitting around (according to the stats in the article itself!).

http://www.chicagotribune.com/travel....story?coll=chi-homepagetravel-hed


777fan
DC-8 61/63/71 DC-9-30/50 MD-80/82/83 DC-10-10/30 MD-11 717 721/2 732/3/4/5/G/8/9 741/2/4 752 762/3 777 A306/319/20/33 AT
 
N62NA
Topic Author
Posts: 4011
Joined: Sun Aug 10, 2003 1:05 am

RE: What Happened With AA 435 / 1520 Today?

Sat Jun 16, 2007 1:11 am

Thanks AAR90, that's the kind of detailed information I was looking for. Plus, I learned a bit about airline operations in the process!

I do have one other question. Yes, I understand why they didn't swap in a smaller aircraft because:

Quoting AAR90 (Reply 1):
And trading to a different type (767 or 757) would not serve the primary purpose of providing a backup 777 at LAX.

And, from an operations point of view (having to do a flight in benign airspace), that makes sense. But does that mean that they flew a pretty much empty 777 MIA-LAX and then back to MIA? Or did they make most of the passengers wait the 8+ hours?

[Edited 2007-06-15 18:25:43]
 
AAR90
Posts: 3140
Joined: Fri Jan 21, 2000 11:51 am

RE: What Happened With AA 435 / 1520 Today?

Sat Jun 16, 2007 4:24 am

Quoting N62NA (Reply 3):
But does that mean that they flew a pretty much empty 777 MIA-LAX and then back to MIA? Or did they make most of the passengers wait the 8+ hours?

147 pax listed MIA-LAX; 200 pax listed LAX-MIA. No idea how many were "original" pax, how many were re-routed, etc. Only one other morning non-stop flight so alternatives might have been limited. All MIA-DFW/ORD/LAX and FLL-LAX flights operated full (only one empty seat on the last MIA-DFW flight) on 14th so I'd guess Passenger Service tried to accomodate everybody on other flights. Didn't bother looking at the LAX-MIA stuff.
*NO CARRIER* -- A Naval Aviator's worst nightmare!
 
N62NA
Topic Author
Posts: 4011
Joined: Sun Aug 10, 2003 1:05 am

RE: What Happened With AA 435 / 1520 Today?

Sat Jun 16, 2007 5:05 am

Thanks again for the follow up AAR90.

Much appreciated!