pwm2txlhopper wrote:

Some of the first media reports from passengers on the diverted flights are coming out.

I found this one particularly amusing. Although, I probably won't be so amused if I were a passenger. I defintely pitty the fool on the Qantas flight that diverted to DTW and is now going back to LAX.


'Winter Storm Diverts Flights From Northeast Cities to Dulles, Causing Major Backlog'
https://www.nbcwashington.com/news/loca ... 97803.html


"Passengers on a flight from Buenos Aires to JFK that was diverted to Dulles sat on the runway for more than four hours Thursday night.

Some passengers told News4 there was confusion about what was happening and why they were sitting for so long.

“It just wasn’t right. The pilot wasn’t making the proper decisions. The flight was already delayed three hours. We were in the air for 11 and-a-half hours. We were on the ground for four hours, then he was gonna turn the plane around and fly to JFK?” passenger Jeff Bey, of New Jersey, said. “People were scared. They said if the plane was going to take off, everybody was going to stand up, so they couldn’t take off.”

I love the exaggerated outrage that seems standard with delayed/cancelled flights.

'The pilot wasn't making the proper decisions.' And that is based on what honey? Your uneducated opinion

Delays happen. They're not ideal, but the conspiracy theories don't help.

flyPIT wrote:

Flaps wrote:

Prior A380 diversions have been gas and go. No offloading. With the equipment available on the field (all operators) realistically a 747/77W is the largest that can be handled without advance arrangements. Equipment was brought in specifically for the G20. AF1 carries its own handling equipment. Without a towbar it would have to be remote parked and deplaned via stairs. No busses available to bus to terminal from remote parking. Todays diversions (B6 in particular) have sucked up most every bus available for hire. The airport has none. With some lead time possibly some parking shuttle busses could be commandeered but again there is lead time needed even for that. With everything stretched as thin as it is with the existing diversions there arent enough resources to go around.

Well that's a whole lot of dramatic speculation. And why would PIT need busses? We only had a bit over a dozen diversions over the course of the day which is not that many. If this article is to be believed then every diversion has a gate available to them:
http://www.post-gazette.com/news/transportation/2018/01/04/Flights-diverted-Pittsburgh-International-Airport-northeast-storm-bomb-cyclone-New-York/stories/201801040211
JetBlue used busses to bus their passengers from PIT to NYC (idiotic move), not to get them from airplane to terminal.
The only thing preventing the proper handling, including deplaning, of an A380 is customs staffing. That issue however is still an embarrassment to PIT considering how hard they brag about their ability to handle situations like this.

Irehdna wrote:

Runway28L wrote:

Now that I think of it, they are more than likely stopping at PIT for fuel then continuing to DFW to try and get the pax reaccomadated.

That's an odd move IMO. Why DFW? Couldn't they divert to YYZ or IAD?

This flight was already diverting to IAD before coming to PIT so it is a double diversion. The ONLY plausible explanation for going to DFW is to get the airplane in to position to operate a regularly scheduled DFW-DXB flight later in the week. Unfortunately for the passengers, lack of customs staffing at PIT means they most likely will be going to Dallas with the airplane; I'm sure we'll know tomorrow if they were able to deplane or not. In a sane world, they would deplane at PIT and go to a hotel, the crew would go in to proper rest, and by the time they are out of rest an A380 tow bar could be trucked in from somewhere (if that is even a real issue or just urban legend). The only thing that makes sense is the outbound JFK-DXB flight is cancelled and they will use the plane elsewhere (DFW).

Wait though...wouldn't this flight likely have 4 pilots and some pilots would still have time?

Ukraine International first time at EWR I believe. Hope to see it in the morning!

aemoreira1981 wrote:

Wait though...wouldn't this flight likely have 4 pilots and some pilots would still have time?

Presumably yes, that's why they are able to get out of here and go on to Dallas. I was mainly addressing the point of "Why DFW" instead of waiting it out in PIT and fly to JFK tomorrow (in which the crew gets to rest now in Pittsburgh) or why not go to a closer EK station such as ORD, YYZ, etc if PIT really can't handle this? The only reason I can think of for going all the way to DFW is EK already has plans for that airplane.

flyPIT wrote:

I'm sure we'll know tomorrow if they were able to deplane or not.

Friends that are currently at the airport said that EK parked at Atlantic and they pulled up airstairs next to the aircraft while refueling. No deplane or processing at the terminal.

Runway28L wrote:

flyPIT wrote:

I'm sure we'll know tomorrow if they were able to deplane or not.

Friends that are currently at the airport said that EK parked at Atlantic and they pulled up airstairs next to the aircraft while refueling. No deplane or processing at the terminal.

Those poor passengers going along for a ride.

atcsundevil wrote:

RDU gets a daily 772 from LHR. As far as I know, neither CLT nor PHL see AA 772s. I doubt that it's an equipment or ground handing issue, but maybe more of a logistical decision.

We did get one today, AA67 from Barcelona to JFK diverted to CLT this afternoon.

pwm2txlhopper wrote:

“It just wasn’t right. The pilot wasn’t making the proper decisions. The flight was already delayed three hours. We were in the air for 11 and-a-half hours. We were on the ground for four hours, then he was gonna turn the plane around and fly to JFK?” passenger Jeff Bey, of New Jersey, said. “People were scared. They said if the plane was going to take off, everybody was going to stand up, so they couldn’t take off.”

I think I literally just got dumber reading that quote. Their flight almost certainly had no business trying to land at JFK, so that sounds like a pretty damn proper decision to me to divert.

JFK - heavy snow accumulation, poor visibility, high winds
vs.
IAD - light accumulation, VFR and a million, moderate winds

I swear, some people just complain to hear themselves speak. Too many passengers look out the window and see sunshine, therefore, the weather must be great at their destination

shaneam12 wrote:

IAD just closed 01L/19R to park aircraft. !IAD 01/029 IAD RWY 01L/19R CLSD 1801050153-1801060200

I believe it. I was watching the steady stream of arrivals going into IAD all afternoon, but it looked like there wasn't much coming out. They finally put a 20 miles-in-trail restriction on IAD arrivals going to Potomac around 1700 (which is unusual outside of SWAP season). I assumed they were getting backlogged on the ground since they weren't really getting enough traffic to need the spacing. Looks like that was indeed the case.

Funny enough, I called ORF to find out why they were so quiet today. They got about 10", which apparently they managed to clear fairly quickly, but the ice layer underneath was a different story. Some guy taxied out and very nearly slid off turning onto the runway, said "nope!", and taxied back in. I guess nobody had the stones to give it another go!

Moose135 wrote:

We did get one today, AA67 from Barcelona to JFK diverted to CLT this afternoon.

Nice! Certainly not a typical visit for you guys. CLT was a smarter place to send it than going over to ORD. PHL wouldn't have been much of an option...they didn't really start taking anybody until about 1630.

readytotaxi wrote:

See SIA26 is diverting to SWF, didn't know they could handle the A380.

SWF runway is over 11,000 feet long and can handle an A380, but the jetbridges are a different story.

https://www.cnbc.com/2018/01/04/a-singa ... yptr=yahoo

brucetiki wrote:

pwm2txlhopper wrote:

Some of the first media reports from passengers on the diverted flights are coming out.

I found this one particularly amusing. Although, I probably won't be so amused if I were a passenger. I defintely pitty the fool on the Qantas flight that diverted to DTW and is now going back to LAX.


'Winter Storm Diverts Flights From Northeast Cities to Dulles, Causing Major Backlog'
https://www.nbcwashington.com/news/loca ... 97803.html


"Passengers on a flight from Buenos Aires to JFK that was diverted to Dulles sat on the runway for more than four hours Thursday night.

Some passengers told News4 there was confusion about what was happening and why they were sitting for so long.

“It just wasn’t right. The pilot wasn’t making the proper decisions. The flight was already delayed three hours. We were in the air for 11 and-a-half hours. We were on the ground for four hours, then he was gonna turn the plane around and fly to JFK?” passenger Jeff Bey, of New Jersey, said. “People were scared. They said if the plane was going to take off, everybody was going to stand up, so they couldn’t take off.”

I love the exaggerated outrage that seems standard with delayed/cancelled flights.

'The pilot wasn't making the proper decisions.' And that is based on what honey? Your uneducated opinion

Delays happen. They're not ideal, but the conspiracy theories don't help.

I agree with you totally. Uneducated idiots speaking out their ass.

EVA 32 departing on 1/5 from TPE has been cancelled.

BR29 that was supposed to depart on 1/4 was cancelled and is stuck on the tarmac at JFK.

Funny enough, I called ORF to find out why they were so quiet today. They got about 10", which apparently they managed to clear fairly quickly, but the ice layer underneath was a different story. Some guy taxied out and very nearly slid off turning onto the runway, said "nope!", and taxied back in. I guess nobody had the stones to give it another go!

I hope they get that taken care of. My itineraries so far:
1/4:
AUS-CLT-ORF (CLT-ORF cancelled)
1/5:
AUS-PHL-PHF (AUS-PHL cancelled)
AUS-DFW-PHL-PHF (need to get to ORF, saw a seat available)
AUS-DFW-PHL-ORF

I’m shocked CLE didn’t see any widebody diversions, there is customs, plenty of space and ability to offload widebodies. The only towbar they wouldn’t have is for the whale.

Did Qantas unload in DTW or was it a gas-and-go only? If so then that’s a long day for te passengers!

From an operational perspective it’s lucky that Qantas operate JFK as a turnaround from LAX with three crew, as it means they can get the aircraft back to LAX to operate the flight to BNE, as presumably the crew would have timed out otherwise.

Polar Vortex to follow Bombogenesis

https://qz.com/1171475/weather-tracking ... northeast/




It will feel like this

DIRECTFLT wrote:

Polar Vortex to follow Bombogenesis

https://qz.com/1171475/weather-tracking ... northeast/




It will feel like this

I love how Florida is completely untouched as if payback for Irma.

atcsundevil wrote:

Funny enough, I called ORF to find out why they were so quiet today. They got about 10", which apparently they managed to clear fairly quickly, but the ice layer underneath was a different story. Some guy taxied out and very nearly slid off turning onto the runway, said "nope!", and taxied back in. I guess nobody had the stones to give it another go!

I believe this is what is referred to as "black ice."

Of the 13 flights from LHR-JFK with BA/AA 8 have been cancelled this morning, 5th Jan, gonna upset a lot of weekend plans. All flights to BOS and EWR operating as normal.

Thursday night and into early Friday saw strong winds in the NYC metro area that blew snow around, it may limit some operations into Friday AM due to blown around snow needing to be cleared from runways, taxiways, gate areas. Then there will be severe cold, with temps in the NYC metro area as low as -1 F /-15C Friday evening and into Saturday with wind chill feel temps even lower (-15F) that will hamper ground operations. Then you have all the re-positioning of diverted aircraft, crew staffing issues, rebooking of pax and freight, that will add even more of a mess of things. It will all work out in a day or two, and this severe weather will happen a couple of times a year in the NE USA. Can't wait until Tuesday when 'normal' temps (high of 40F/8C) return.

Last night Long Island MacArthur Airport was supposed to open at midnight, it didn't. News just mentioned it is/was supposed to open at 6am. According to Flightradar24 Southwest flight 1019 coming from West Palm Beach is supposed to land at ISP at 8:05am, but it has been diverted to BWI. Flight 1017 (was supposed to arrive at KISP at 9:45am) from Orlando will also be diverted to BWI.

Newbiepilot wrote:

jco613 wrote:

Was scheduled on AA MIA-BDL last night...cancelled while at the airport
Rescheduled FLL-CLT-BDL...cancelled
Booked NK FLL-BDL...cancelled

Right now I've got a refundable B6 FLL-HPN and a WN FLL-BWI-BDL. WN is flying its LAS-BDL due in at 6:55pm

I don't have a good feeling about HPN today. There haven't been any arrivals at all today.

Made it. One of just 4 BDL arrivals last night

aemoreira1981 wrote:

... and Turkish is trying for Newark too.

On the way from EWR over to JFK now.

Quite surprised that Syracuse didn't get any diversions, they certainly have the capabilities to handle some.

RyanairGuru wrote:

Did Qantas unload in DTW or was it a gas-and-go only? If so then that’s a long day for te passengers!

From an operational perspective it’s lucky that Qantas operate JFK as a turnaround from LAX with three crew, as it means they can get the aircraft back to LAX to operate the flight to BNE, as presumably the crew would have timed out otherwise.

Pretty sure it was for fuel, passengers went back to LAX

ltbewr wrote:

Thursday night and into early Friday saw strong winds in the NYC metro area that blew snow around, it may limit some operations into Friday AM due to blown around snow needing to be cleared from runways, taxiways, gate areas. Then there will be severe cold, with temps in the NYC metro area as low as -1 F /-15C Friday evening and into Saturday with wind chill feel temps even lower (-15F) that will hamper ground operations. Then you have all the re-positioning of diverted aircraft, crew staffing issues, rebooking of pax and freight, that will add even more of a mess of things. It will all work out in a day or two, and this severe weather will happen a couple of times a year in the NE USA. Can't wait until Tuesday when 'normal' temps (high of 40F/8C) return.

And with the thaw the risk of local flooding?

Watching the news last night on the NBC affiliate in Chicago. Apparently, a number of UA European flights, mostly for EWR, wound up at ORD. Obviously, UA can rebook passengers who were connecting at EWR for points outside of the storm's path. The problem will be getting passengers who were headed for the New York area or other points in the Northeast out of ORD. There were a lot of angry passengers who got on flights for ORD, only to learn at ORD that their connections for BOS, EWR, LGA, etc. were cancelled.

The rental car firms were doing brisk business, either to get around the Chicago area, or to start driving east, because of the long time before getting a confirmed seat.

qf789 wrote:

RyanairGuru wrote:

Did Qantas unload in DTW or was it a gas-and-go only? If so then that’s a long day for te passengers!

From an operational perspective it’s lucky that Qantas operate JFK as a turnaround from LAX with three crew, as it means they can get the aircraft back to LAX to operate the flight to BNE, as presumably the crew would have timed out otherwise.

Pretty sure it was for fuel, passengers went back to LAX

Why would the passengers have to go all the way back to LAX when DTW is so much closer to JFK and they could just be put on another airline to JFK (or LGA or EWR)?

ckfred wrote:

Watching the news last night on the NBC affiliate in Chicago. Apparently, a number of UA European flights, mostly for EWR, wound up at ORD. Obviously, UA can rebook passengers who were connecting at EWR for points outside of the storm's path. The problem will be getting passengers who were headed for the New York area or other points in the Northeast out of ORD. There were a lot of angry passengers who got on flights for ORD, only to learn at ORD that their connections for BOS, EWR, LGA, etc. were cancelled.

The rental car firms were doing brisk business, either to get around the Chicago area, or to start driving east, because of the long time before getting a confirmed seat.

UA added some capacity to EWR this morning. There were some extra flights. They probably can't add any more since EWR is already in flow control due to wind. There are enough seats that everyone headed to New York should be able to get a flight today, but JFK/LGA/EWR are all seeing sustained winds 25-35 MPH with gusts over 40. That's going to slow things down all day.

New England is a different story. Finding flights to BOS/PVD/BDL/PWM etc is much harder.

According to a friend who dropped off a rental car there ORF terminal is dark and there’s no one visible inside. Hope that changes before I arrive.

Presumably Qantas offloading passengers to DTW would be more difficult to take care of without their own staff on hand. They have people to help in LAX.

N62NA wrote:

qf789 wrote:

RyanairGuru wrote:

Did Qantas unload in DTW or was it a gas-and-go only? If so then that’s a long day for te passengers!

From an operational perspective it’s lucky that Qantas operate JFK as a turnaround from LAX with three crew, as it means they can get the aircraft back to LAX to operate the flight to BNE, as presumably the crew would have timed out otherwise.

Pretty sure it was for fuel, passengers went back to LAX

Why would the passengers have to go all the way back to LAX when DTW is so much closer to JFK and they could just be put on another airline to JFK (or LGA or EWR)?

Qantas does not have any ground support in DTW as they dont fly there, sending the passengers back to LAX they would have had the ground support the passengers required. Also the flight back to LAX used a flight number of QF11D, if it had just positioned back to LAX it wouldnt have used that flight number

I suppose landing in Stewart or Albany is not so bad for NY bound passengers. Their friends or relatives can pick them up or they can take ground transportation to their hotels with a few hours delay. That should be the case for about 80% of the passengers. For connecting passengers it's not so good, but they should be bussed to JFK/Newark/NYC and then put up in hotels there. If they landed in somewhere like Chicago or Washington then you would have 80% of the passengers stuck and requiring hotels and onward transportation instead of just 20%.

qf789 wrote:

N62NA wrote:

qf789 wrote:

Pretty sure it was for fuel, passengers went back to LAX

Why would the passengers have to go all the way back to LAX when DTW is so much closer to JFK and they could just be put on another airline to JFK (or LGA or EWR)?

Qantas does not have any ground support in DTW as they dont fly there, sending the passengers back to LAX they would have had the ground support the passengers required. Also the flight back to LAX used a flight number of QF11D, if it had just positioned back to LAX it wouldnt have used that flight number

Presumably AA does. However, what's done is done and neither you nor I work for QF, so there's nothing either of us could do about it.

IAD using runway 30 right now. Do they have diversions parked on all the 1/19s? Wind is moderate out of NW but usually takes a really strong wind for them to do all arrivals on 30.

peterinlisbon wrote:

I suppose landing in Stewart or Albany is not so bad for NY bound passengers. Their friends or relatives can pick them up or they can take ground transportation to their hotels with a few hours delay. That should be the case for about 80% of the passengers. For connecting passengers it's not so good, but they should be bussed to JFK/Newark/NYC and then put up in hotels there. If they landed in somewhere like Chicago or Washington then you would have 80% of the passengers stuck and requiring hotels and onward transportation instead of just 20%.

Good point. Also, rescue pilots/crews can be readily available so that return flight can be ready quickly. It appears that passengers of the flights diverted to elsewhere had to wait until crews get 12 (or 24 in the worst case) hours of a rest. SQ passengers at Stewart stuck in flight for 3+ hours, but situation of the other diverted flights were not any better.

MSJYOP28Apilot wrote:

SIA going to SWF and Norwegian into ALB is piss poor planning by the airlines and/or incompetent captains. During a major snow storm, you want to divert to an airport that can handle both the aircraft and the people especially if the flight crew times out waiting for the weather to clear. SWF and ALB are alternates you would use if the weather was good or only a fuel and go diversion. On a day like today with snow removal, high winds, and low visibility, you want to go to a place like YYZ, ORD, IAD. JAL planned well to go to ORD because their connecting passengers can be accommodated on flights out of ORD and the NYC local passengers have a wider range of hotels to choose from. Add in the ORD has much better customs availability.

If SIA cant get out of SWF, it will be a nightmare for those passengers and crew customs and hotel/transport wise. Likewise for Norwegian at ALB. SWF/ALB dont regularly process widebody international flights customs wise and ramp wise too. Poor choices in diversion points on a day like this.

Bit harsh isn't it ? Seems like many aircraft needs a landingstrip at the moment. Are we sure that it was actually the pilots desicion and not that they were directed to land at these airports ?

From UA Cargo, "no shipments will be loaded on flights scheduled to arrive in these locations [EWR, BDL, BOS, LGA, MHT, ORF, PHL, PVD and PWM ] before 12:01 a.m. EST Sunday, January 7."

Ramp issues?

peterinlisbon wrote:

I suppose landing in Stewart or Albany is not so bad for NY bound passengers. Their friends or relatives can pick them up or they can take ground transportation to their hotels with a few hours delay. That should be the case for about 80% of the passengers. For connecting passengers it's not so good, but they should be bussed to JFK/Newark/NYC and then put up in hotels there. If they landed in somewhere like Chicago or Washington then you would have 80% of the passengers stuck and requiring hotels and onward transportation instead of just 20%.

Whatever it worth... Norwegian 789, according to local newspaper, had pax unloaded, CBP processed them, and people were bussed to NY. Bags could not be unloaded as no container handling equipment is available in ALB.
Catch is, 789 is shown as departing for London 24 hours after landing... I assume with bags still on board....

flyPIT wrote:

Flaps wrote:

Prior A380 diversions have been gas and go. No offloading. With the equipment available on the field (all operators) realistically a 747/77W is the largest that can be handled without advance arrangements. Equipment was brought in specifically for the G20. AF1 carries its own handling equipment. Without a towbar it would have to be remote parked and deplaned via stairs. No busses available to bus to terminal from remote parking. Todays diversions (B6 in particular) have sucked up most every bus available for hire. The airport has none. With some lead time possibly some parking shuttle busses could be commandeered but again there is lead time needed even for that. With everything stretched as thin as it is with the existing diversions there arent enough resources to go around.

Well that's a whole lot of dramatic speculation. And why would PIT need busses? We only had a bit over a dozen diversions over the course of the day which is not that many. If this article is to be believed then every diversion has a gate available to them:
http://www.post-gazette.com/news/transportation/2018/01/04/Flights-diverted-Pittsburgh-International-Airport-northeast-storm-bomb-cyclone-New-York/stories/201801040211
JetBlue used busses to bus their passengers from PIT to NYC (idiotic move), not to get them from airplane to terminal.
The only thing preventing the proper handling, including deplaning, of an A380 is customs staffing. That issue however is still an embarrassment to PIT considering how hard they brag about their ability to handle situations like this.

Irehdna wrote:

Runway28L wrote:

Now that I think of it, they are more than likely stopping at PIT for fuel then continuing to DFW to try and get the pax reaccomadated.

That's an odd move IMO. Why DFW? Couldn't they divert to YYZ or IAD?

This flight was already diverting to IAD before coming to PIT so it is a double diversion. The ONLY plausible explanation for going to DFW is to get the airplane in to position to operate a regularly scheduled DFW-DXB flight later in the week. Unfortunately for the passengers, lack of customs staffing at PIT means they most likely will be going to Dallas with the airplane; I'm sure we'll know tomorrow if they were able to deplane or not. In a sane world, they would deplane at PIT and go to a hotel, the crew would go in to proper rest, and by the time they are out of rest an A380 tow bar could be trucked in from somewhere (if that is even a real issue or just urban legend). The only thing that makes sense is the outbound JFK-DXB flight is cancelled and they will use the plane elsewhere (DFW).

Did you even read what I wrote?
1. Never said B6 used busses to deplane
2. Never said the airport should have busses
3.Point blank stated that no one should have a tow bar for a once a year event (implied as to other equip too)
4. Customs would have handled if thw aircraft could have been handled. They wouldn't have handled it well but they were prepared to do so.
5. If you're going to diss me at least get your facts straight.

Every piece of equipment except the towbar is available from one cource or another. All sources usually work very well together when it comes to borrowing/loaning equipment to each other to pull things off. This airport sees VERY little widebody traffic therefore there are a limited number of people trained to operate that equipment and there is no guarrantee that those folks wil be on duty when something like this happens. The FACT is that the airport does not have an operator that can handle an A380 even though it does have the facilities and the county owns the proper equipment. It was five degrees out. The loaders need prepped, warmed up and then driven halfway across the airport from Cargo 3 to C. That simply doesnt happen on two hours notice.

As I quite clearly stated in my original post the airport cannot handle an A380 DIVERSION on two hours notice. A scheduled flight or a charter flight, yes indeed, it can be done. There are simply a lot of logistics involved and they take considerably more than two hours to put together.

Flaps wrote:

flyPIT wrote:

Flaps wrote:

Prior A380 diversions have been gas and go. No offloading. With the equipment available on the field (all operators) realistically a 747/77W is the largest that can be handled without advance arrangements. Equipment was brought in specifically for the G20. AF1 carries its own handling equipment. Without a towbar it would have to be remote parked and deplaned via stairs. No busses available to bus to terminal from remote parking. Todays diversions (B6 in particular) have sucked up most every bus available for hire. The airport has none. With some lead time possibly some parking shuttle busses could be commandeered but again there is lead time needed even for that. With everything stretched as thin as it is with the existing diversions there arent enough resources to go around.

Well that's a whole lot of dramatic speculation. And why would PIT need busses? We only had a bit over a dozen diversions over the course of the day which is not that many. If this article is to be believed then every diversion has a gate available to them:
http://www.post-gazette.com/news/transportation/2018/01/04/Flights-diverted-Pittsburgh-International-Airport-northeast-storm-bomb-cyclone-New-York/stories/201801040211
JetBlue used busses to bus their passengers from PIT to NYC (idiotic move), not to get them from airplane to terminal.
The only thing preventing the proper handling, including deplaning, of an A380 is customs staffing. That issue however is still an embarrassment to PIT considering how hard they brag about their ability to handle situations like this.

Irehdna wrote:

That's an odd move IMO. Why DFW? Couldn't they divert to YYZ or IAD?

This flight was already diverting to IAD before coming to PIT so it is a double diversion. The ONLY plausible explanation for going to DFW is to get the airplane in to position to operate a regularly scheduled DFW-DXB flight later in the week. Unfortunately for the passengers, lack of customs staffing at PIT means they most likely will be going to Dallas with the airplane; I'm sure we'll know tomorrow if they were able to deplane or not. In a sane world, they would deplane at PIT and go to a hotel, the crew would go in to proper rest, and by the time they are out of rest an A380 tow bar could be trucked in from somewhere (if that is even a real issue or just urban legend). The only thing that makes sense is the outbound JFK-DXB flight is cancelled and they will use the plane elsewhere (DFW).

Did you even read what I wrote?
1. Never said B6 used busses to deplane
2. Never said the airport should have busses
3.Point blank stated that no one should have a tow bar for a once a year event (implied as to other equip too)
4. Customs would have handled if thw aircraft could have been handled. They wouldn't have handled it well but they were prepared to do so.
5. If you're going to diss me at least get your facts straight.

Every piece of equipment except the towbar is available from one source or another. All sources usually work very well together when it comes to borrowing/loaning equipment to each other to pull things off. This airport sees VERY little widebody traffic therefore there are a limited number of people trained to operate that equipment and there is no guarrantee that those folks wil be on duty when something like this happens. The FACT is that the airport does not have an operator that can handle an A380 even though it does have the facilities and the county owns the proper equipment. It was five degrees out. The loaders need prepped, warmed up and then driven halfway across the airport from Cargo 3 to C. That simply doesnt happen on two hours notice.

As I quite clearly stated in my original post the airport cannot handle an A380 DIVERSION on two hours notice. A scheduled flight or a charter flight, yes indeed, it can be done. There are simply a lot of logistics involved and they take considerably more than two hours to put together.

I won't even start to go into the logistics of trying to find and book hotels for 540 people. EK has no pre-arranged plan or contingencies for this at PIT. It would have to be done on the fly. Plenty of time to get those details arranged during the time the aircraft is being fueled and enroute to DFW. MUCH better for pax than having to wait three to four hours in the terminal lines at PIT while this is being done.

I do agree that DFW was likely chosen for repositioning purposes. Thats about all i agree with regarding your statements.

GolfBravoRomeo wrote:

From UA Cargo, "no shipments will be loaded on flights scheduled to arrive in these locations [EWR, BDL, BOS, LGA, MHT, ORF, PHL, PVD and PWM ] before 12:01 a.m. EST Sunday, January 7."

Ramp issues?

My guess is UA is prioritizing people with the bags of those passengers before they let cargo take the space.

Maybe it is the weather coming in after the storm. It is going to be really cold (including wind chills) making life on the ramp a nightmare for Fri/Sat/Sun.

ty97 wrote:

MSJYOP28Apilot wrote:

SIA going to SWF and Norwegian into ALB is piss poor planning by the airlines and/or incompetent captains. During a major snow storm, you want to divert to an airport that can handle both the aircraft and the people especially if the flight crew times out waiting for the weather to clear. SWF and ALB are alternates you would use if the weather was good or only a fuel and go diversion. On a day like today with snow removal, high winds, and low visibility, you want to go to a place like YYZ, ORD, IAD. JAL planned well to go to ORD because their connecting passengers can be accommodated on flights out of ORD and the NYC local passengers have a wider range of hotels to choose from. Add in the ORD has much better customs availability.

If SIA cant get out of SWF, it will be a nightmare for those passengers and crew customs and hotel/transport wise. Likewise for Norwegian at ALB. SWF/ALB dont regularly process widebody international flights customs wise and ramp wise too. Poor choices in diversion points on a day like this.

I saw a tweet earlier that the passengers from some of widebodies divertiing to IAD would be 'bussed' to NYC. Not sure if that was accurate, but if SQ winds up needing to bus to NYC, SWF sure is a lot closer than IAD.

Based on the weather predictions, I'm not sure why some of these airlines even tried to operate these flights. A planned overfly (e.g. operating a LHREWR as LHRORD to move connections through another major hub) is one thing, but trying to operate to the original destination with a large predicted storm is another. You're better off cancelling. That way, you keep the crew and aircraft in a place where you can resume operations (possibly double up) once the storm passes. What did they accomplish by attempting and ending up in ALB--the passengers still couldn't get to their ultimate destination and chances are they will get to JFK at the same time as they would have if they were flown the next day!

Flaps wrote:

Did you even read what I wrote?
1. Never said B6 used busses to deplane
2. Never said the airport should have busses

You're the one who brought busses in to the conversation, not me. Busses had nothing to do with the decision to bring these passengers to DFW.

Flaps wrote:

3.Point blank stated that no one should have a tow bar for a once a year event (implied as to other equip too)

I never suggested otherwise. What I did suggest is the airport stop promoting their ability to handle these things when if they really can't

Flaps wrote:

4. Customs would have handled if thw aircraft could have been handled. They wouldn't have handled it well but they were prepared to do so.
5. If you're going to diss me at least get your facts straight.

No one is dissing anyone and my facts are solid.

Flaps wrote:

Every piece of equipment except the towbar is available from one cource or another. All sources usually work very well together when it comes to borrowing/loaning equipment to each other to pull things off. This airport sees VERY little widebody traffic therefore there are a limited number of people trained to operate that equipment and there is no guarrantee that those folks wil be on duty when something like this happens. The FACT is that the airport does not have an operator that can handle an A380 even though it does have the facilities and the county owns the proper equipment. It was five degrees out. The loaders need prepped, warmed up and then driven halfway across the airport from Cargo 3 to C. That simply doesnt happen on two hours notice.

As I quite clearly stated in my original post the airport cannot handle an A380 DIVERSION on two hours notice. A scheduled flight or a charter flight, yes indeed, it can be done. There are simply a lot of logistics involved and they take considerably more than two hours to put together.

And as I stated it would have been much easier on the passengers and crew to get them off at PIT and to a hotel. The tow bar could be driven in while the crew is in rest. Looks like that airplane is still sitting at DFW so this could have worked while saving the passengers much time and inconvenience.

peterinlisbon wrote:

I suppose landing in Stewart or Albany is not so bad for NY bound passengers. Their friends or relatives can pick them up or they can take ground transportation to their hotels with a few hours delay. That should be the case for about 80% of the passengers. For connecting passengers it's not so good, but they should be bussed to JFK/Newark/NYC and then put up in hotels there. If they landed in somewhere like Chicago or Washington then you would have 80% of the passengers stuck and requiring hotels and onward transportation instead of just 20%.

One of the networks, on a newscast today about the airline delays, and flights landing at other airports, said that the airlines would not be providing hotel rooms, under the statement that the storm and conditions were "An Act of God." They didn't mention "which" God, but I'm assuming it's the Judaeo-Christian God they're referring to...

DIRECTFLT wrote:

peterinlisbon wrote:

I suppose landing in Stewart or Albany is not so bad for NY bound passengers. Their friends or relatives can pick them up or they can take ground transportation to their hotels with a few hours delay. That should be the case for about 80% of the passengers. For connecting passengers it's not so good, but they should be bussed to JFK/Newark/NYC and then put up in hotels there. If they landed in somewhere like Chicago or Washington then you would have 80% of the passengers stuck and requiring hotels and onward transportation instead of just 20%.

One of the networks, on a newscast today about the airline delays, and flights landing at other airports, said that the airlines would not be providing hotel rooms, under the statement that the storm and conditions were "An Act of God." They didn't mention "which" God, but I'm assuming it's the Judaeo-Christian God they're referring to...

IMO "Acts of God" as a defense falls down when there is a weather forecast 72 hours out. I don't know why some of these flights left their origin.

Here’s the list of diversions I saw at IAD this morning when I came to work;

Jet Blue E190, A320 & A321
Delta B757
SAS A330
Aeroflot A330 & B77W
ANA B77W
Turkish A330
Thomas Cook A330
British Airways 772
Aer Lingus 757 & A330
Aero Argentinas A330
Qatar B77W
Open Skies B757
Norweigian B787
LATAM B787
Emirates A380
Etihad A380
TAP Portugal A330
Virgin Atlantic A330

FLY

Meanwhile at Key West it is a comfortable 70f.

N62NA wrote:

qf789 wrote:

N62NA wrote:

Why would the passengers have to go all the way back to LAX when DTW is so much closer to JFK and they could just be put on another airline to JFK (or LGA or EWR)?

Qantas does not have any ground support in DTW as they dont fly there, sending the passengers back to LAX they would have had the ground support the passengers required. Also the flight back to LAX used a flight number of QF11D, if it had just positioned back to LAX it wouldnt have used that flight number

Presumably AA does. However, what's done is done and neither you nor I work for QF, so there's nothing either of us could do about it.

AA is outsourced in DTW. Moreover I doubt that the staff serving AA would have been trained how to use Amadeus, so could probably not help rebook Qantas passengers anyway.

DTW-NYC with AA is five RJs per day, so there is no way that AA could have reaccommodated QF’s passengers given that they would have presumably been clearing their own backlog from cancelled flights. DL and QF no longer have an interline agreement. QF and UA do, but UA is also five RJs to EWR. Rebooking the passengers would have been all but impossible on direct services, and still difficult via ORD etc given that so many online passengers would also need to be rebooked.

Rightly or wrongly Qantas prioritised operational concerns over passengers. Getting the plane back to LAX ASAP meant they could operate QF16 as planned, and the only passengers affected were those on QF11/12 LAX-JFK-LAX as opposed to having cascading delays.

N62NA wrote:

qf789 wrote:

RyanairGuru wrote:

Why would the passengers have to go all the way back to LAX when DTW is so much closer to JFK and they could just be put on another airline to JFK (or LGA or EWR)?

Since it was a weather event out of the airlines control, I doubt the airline would have rebooked diverted passengers on another carrier?

However, maybe I’m wrong and Qantas actually assists customers in these “acts of God, out of the airlines control”, unlike American carriers these days.

Would hope the passengers at least got hotel vouchers when they got to LAX?

The late night shows could make a great joke at Detroit’s expense about the plane full of Aussies that got diverted to Detroit, and decided going back to LAX was better than being stuck in Detroit!

capitalflyer wrote:

IAD using runway 30 right now. Do they have diversions parked on all the 1/19s? Wind is moderate out of NW but usually takes a really strong wind for them to do all arrivals on 30.

It was gusting to 27kts as of an hour ago. They've been using 30 for much of the day. They finally dropped the in-trail restriction, so they must be catching up.

IADFCO wrote:

AZ608 FCO-JFK just landed at BOS. All remaining flights tonight from BOS to the D.C. area are cancelled. I wonder why since BWI, DCA, and IAD all seem to be ok.

I was on the AZ608 diversion to BOS. The aircraft is on way back to FCO as AZ8014:

https://flightaware.com/live/flight/AZA ... /KBOS/LIRF

To anyone who knows - I'm curious - is a 8xxx flight number like this a repositioning flight without passengers, or could it be carrying passengers from the prior day's cancelled flight (in addition to AZ615 today). If it has passengers, seems like a weird time to leave, i.e. arriving in FCO at 3AM local time. Thanks.