pwm2txlhopper wrote:

N62NA wrote:

qf789 wrote:

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!

Qantas do, they have an obligation under Australian law which doesn’t have the same weather related exceptions that the US carriers rely on. In my time I’ve seen quite a few of my customers rebooked by Qantas onto United due to both weather and mechanical delays. Oddly enough I haven’t yet had anyone rebooked on AA72/73 when required, but have seen people reaccommodated on United on both SYD-LAX and SYD-SFO.

In this instance the passengers would have got hotels in LAX, and then anyone who could be rebooked on QF11 the next day would have done. Anyone left over would have been put on AA or VX (who they also interline with), maybe UA to EWR is if they were desperate. Technically though the obligation is to get them to JFK, not somewhere near JFK, so anyone rebooked to EWR would have either done so voluntarily or QF would have provided ground transport.

KD5MDK wrote:

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.

American can handle them at DTW.

All in all the system coped relatively well. I personally don't understand why some of these flights took off knowing that JFK/BOS/PHI were off line but nevertheless everything got worked out without any serious harm in the end. As a financial guy I would seriously question the decision chain and the financial ramifications of various go-no go decisions but that is a question for each airline to deal with.

Probably an “extra section” adding capacity after yesterday’s cancelled flight to FCO.

GF

Skywatcher wrote:

As a financial guy I would seriously question the decision chain and the financial ramifications of various go-no go decisions but that is a question for each airline to deal with.

There have been several posts asking the same question. Why did some of the world's leading airlines continue operating into a known diversion hornet's nest? Do standard company policies differ to such a degree that a UA can primarily "stand down" while others, seen from the eyes of this amateur observer, will gas and go and hope for the best?

It must be a very complex financial calculation to either "go" as many airlines did or to "not go" as UA among others did. BOS looked to be a "no go" in general and correct as it turned out while JFK was a "go" and ended up being a huge mistake. Was it all based on ineffective/inaccurate weather forecasts or something else?

PennPal wrote:

FedEx 3018 FLL-EWR diverted to IND of all places...circled over Trenton, then made two attempts at Newark.

https://www.flightradar24.com/FDX3018/10075ac2

IND is a hub for FedEx, so this makes sense.

aemoreira1981 wrote:

At Newark:

BA185 and SK903 made it in.

SK909 tried to land on Runway 4R but was forced to execute a missed approach. Right before that, SK907 also declared a missed 4R approach and diverted to IAD. I suspect SK909 will also head to IAD. EI101, which was following those two SAS planes, did not attempt the approach and is heading to IAD.

Were you keeping track ia FR24 or something else?

Skywatcher wrote:

Was it all based on ineffective/inaccurate weather forecasts or something else?

It strains credulity to think that an international airline, whose daily operational performance relies on the most advanced weather forecasting, could have so "misjudged" a storm of this characteristic size and intensity.

N212R wrote:

It strains credulity to think that an international airline, whose daily operational performance relies on the most advanced weather forecasting, could have so "misjudged" a storm of this characteristic size and intensity.

You mean this storm?

Is The storm the reason I saw an Air China 747-8i parked at the B gates at ORD last night? They don't fly to ORD. Also thought I saw an AF 787 at T5, but it may have been an A332, didn't get a good look at it.

ORD ended up with 28 international diversions and 3 carriers had little to no representation here at all; CA, CI, CZ. This is where alliance partners should kick in and did to some extent but lessons were learned.

The last two planes; CI and KL will be departing this morning.

While ORD wasn't saying no to planes who wanted to divert, it was strongly suggested that using an alternative would be a better option. (Especially, KE, EK, OZ with the A380). None of the diversion sat for more than 3.5 hours before a gate was available. Some had wanted a gas and go, but once JFK shut down that's when things became interesting.

I'll agree, it seems this storm was misjudged by a lot of folks.

How can JFK be so useless at dealing with winter weather??
JFK is one of the most important airports in the world, you'd think they have well thought out plans and the equipment to deal with this kind of weather!
Watch and learn JFK : https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Yas5NdrmixU

N212R wrote:

Skywatcher wrote:

As a financial guy I would seriously question the decision chain and the financial ramifications of various go-no go decisions but that is a question for each airline to deal with.

There have been several posts asking the same question. Why did some of the world's leading airlines continue operating into a known diversion hornet's nest? Do standard company policies differ to such a degree that a UA can primarily "stand down" while others, seen from the eyes of this amateur observer, will gas and go and hope for the best?

Many years ago, the US3 would attempt to continue operations in these types of situations. I think they've since learned that the better approach when there is certainty to a storm hitting is to stand down for the most part. If you don't, resumption of operations is a much more challenging and lengthy task. You end up with airplanes and crews all over the place, you burn precious crew time, pay for bus transportation, irritate your customers, possibly end up with a few PR issues, and risk ground personnel injury and/or aircraft damage. It's not worth it. Intentional overflying to another hub so that you can keep your connecting passengers moving, however, does make a lot of sense.

Concorde2904 wrote:

How can JFK be so useless at dealing with winter weather??
JFK is one of the most important airports in the world, you'd think they have well thought out plans and the equipment to deal with this kind of weather!
Watch and learn JFK : https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Yas5NdrmixU

They got a foot of snow that only ended about 36 hours ago. Wind is currently gusting to 29kts, but has previously been gusting upwards of 32kt. It's 10°F. I'd say they're probably doing the best they can under the circumstances. Even if the runways are 100% clear, the wind alone will have a significant effect on their arrival rate. This was a huge storm that in many ways still isn't over, so maybe don't be so quick to pass judgement.

KJFK 061451Z 29017G29KT 10SM SCT042 M12/M21 A3022 RMK AO2 PK WND 29031/1403 SLP233 T11221211 50013

Concorde2904 wrote:

How can JFK be so useless at dealing with winter weather??
JFK is one of the most important airports in the world, you'd think they have well thought out plans and the equipment to deal with this kind of weather!
Watch and learn JFK : https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Yas5NdrmixU

Its volume. There’s so much movement happening at once that plows and other snow removal equipmemt wouldn’t be able to do what they need to do without temporarily closing or holding.

Skywatcher wrote:

It must be a very complex financial calculation to either "go" as many airlines did or to "not go" as UA among others did. BOS looked to be a "no go" in general and correct as it turned out while JFK was a "go" and ended up being a huge mistake. Was it all based on ineffective/inaccurate weather forecasts or something else?

I'm sure that each airline has equally-qualified weather forecasters so UA's decision to scale down their operation in advance of this storm might have just been a luckier decision that paid off. Had the storm track veered in a different direction and ended up only dusting NYC with light snow instead of dumping on it, UA would have been publicly skewered for canceling so many flights when the weather turned out to be a non-event.

Fortunately for UA, if they had decided to keep more of their EWR schedule and the weather went sour, they had the perfect "insurance policy" that can accommodate quite a bit of overflow/diversions down the road at IAD. Not only does IAD give UA a fair amount of extra gate/ramp space but they've also got a decent amount of on-site employees to handle the aircraft/passenger servicing issues. It wouldn't be seamless but it'd be better than diverting to a small spoke with limited facilities or few alternate travel options for pax. Disclaimer: If IAD had the same forecast as NYC and New England, then all bets would be off.

My guess is that in the future airlines might be more proactive in canceling in advance of forecast big storms and avoid the risk of what happened this week.

LX015 wrote:

aemoreira1981 wrote:

At Newark:

BA185 and SK903 made it in.

SK909 tried to land on Runway 4R but was forced to execute a missed approach. Right before that, SK907 also declared a missed 4R approach and diverted to IAD. I suspect SK909 will also head to IAD. EI101, which was following those two SAS planes, did not attempt the approach and is heading to IAD.

Were you keeping track ia FR24 or something else?

FR24 and FlightAware.

BTW, a few flights last night were waiting 4-5 hours for gates. AV20 touched down on time but waited nearly 5 hours for a gate. Hainan last night was waiting 4 hours for a gate. Some flights that were inbound to JFK that left this morning are returning to Europe, including almost all of the LH Group's slate of flights (the only one still inbound that I can say will reasonably make it is LX16). Air France canceled its entire slate as well. Because there is no melting, there is reduced gate space since the only place to dump the snow is into the bay, but strong winds require the use of the Runway 31 pair for all operations.

Also of note: Korean Air ferried in a B748 from ICN empty as a rescue flight.

Friend of mine just flew into DFW. A6-EUI (EK207) that ended up doing DXB-PIT-DFW is still stuck on the ground at DFW parked at the A380 gate in Concourse D.

Not sure what exactly happened here... Is this a glitch? Looks like JFK will still be a mess for a while.

gwrudolph wrote:

N212R wrote:

Skywatcher wrote:

As a financial guy I would seriously question the decision chain and the financial ramifications of various go-no go decisions but that is a question for each airline to deal with.

There have been several posts asking the same question. Why did some of the world's leading airlines continue operating into a known diversion hornet's nest? Do standard company policies differ to such a degree that a UA can primarily "stand down" while others, seen from the eyes of this amateur observer, will gas and go and hope for the best?

Many years ago, the US3 would attempt to continue operations in these types of situations. I think they've since learned that the better approach when there is certainty to a storm hitting is to stand down for the most part. If you don't, resumption of operations is a much more challenging and lengthy task. You end up with airplanes and crews all over the place, you burn precious crew time, pay for bus transportation, irritate your customers, possibly end up with a few PR issues, and risk ground personnel injury and/or aircraft damage. It's not worth it. Intentional overflying to another hub so that you can keep your connecting passengers moving, however, does make a lot of sense.

All true, but it seems this (huge) storm is showing that if everyone aims for the hubs closest to the storm zone there's no guarantee that those hubs can cope with all the extra load, especially in the case where airlines end up flying to hubs that they don't service. It would seem in perfect hindsight more cancellations should have occurred.

No, KE 85 is heading to ORD.

So just how are things going at JFK this morning? Has there been any pull down of flights by INTL carriers or is the potential for a real Cluster developing as we speak because everyone is rushing to resume?

Aeroplasma wrote:

Not sure what exactly happened here... Is this a glitch? Looks like JFK will still be a mess for a while.

Because of snow clearance, gates are blocked. That's not a glitch. That said, since this was a ferry, why not just park remotely and then have the plane towed to its gate later on? For immigration and customs, the pilots can be taken over in a Port Authority ops SUV to T7 or T4.

jcwr56 wrote:

No, KE 85 is heading to ORD.

So just how are things going at JFK this morning? Has there been any pull down of flights by INTL carriers or is the potential for a real Cluster developing as we speak because everyone is rushing to resume?

Both. LH Group has recalled all flights back to Europe except for LX16 or they have been canceled. Air France isn't even bothering. I have never seen a meltdown this spectacular at JFK, all because it snowed, remained well below freezing, and then winds out of the northwest in excess of 26 knots (well above the crosswind limitations) which eliminate the use of the 4/22 runway pair. I'm in a local planespotting group here and I'm getting alerts of the mess on Facebook.

jetblastdubai wrote:

Skywatcher wrote:

It must be a very complex financial calculation to either "go" as many airlines did or to "not go" as UA among others did. BOS looked to be a "no go" in general and correct as it turned out while JFK was a "go" and ended up being a huge mistake. Was it all based on ineffective/inaccurate weather forecasts or something else?

I'm sure that each airline has equally-qualified weather forecasters so UA's decision to scale down their operation in advance of this storm might have just been a luckier decision that paid off. Had the storm track veered in a different direction and ended up only dusting NYC with light snow instead of dumping on it, UA would have been publicly skewered for canceling so many flights when the weather turned out to be a non-event.

Fortunately for UA, if they had decided to keep more of their EWR schedule and the weather went sour, they had the perfect "insurance policy" that can accommodate quite a bit of overflow/diversions down the road at IAD. Not only does IAD give UA a fair amount of extra gate/ramp space but they've also got a decent amount of on-site employees to handle the aircraft/passenger servicing issues. It wouldn't be seamless but it'd be better than diverting to a small spoke with limited facilities or few alternate travel options for pax. Disclaimer: If IAD had the same forecast as NYC and New England, then all bets would be off.

My guess is that in the future airlines might be more proactive in canceling in advance of forecast big storms and avoid the risk of what happened this week.

Many flights were delayed with the expectation that JFK would reopen at 3 PM on Thursday. When it got pushed back to 7 PM on Thursday and then 7 AM on Friday, combined with the fact that the storm took a nearly direct aim at JFK, combined with strong winds from the northwest restricting where snow can be put, the real mess began as flights were already in the air not expecting reopening to be pushed back. LY7 would have been really interesting had it not been able to make it into Newark (of course, it landed at EWR on its second attempt) because that plane then could not move until Sunday (remember, LY can't operate as itself on the Sabbath or major Jewish holidays---it can only fly as Sun D'Or or Israir).

qf789 wrote:

OS87 VIE-JFK and LH400 FRA-JFK are returning to their home bases



https://twitter.com/flightradar24/statu ... 8370378752

LH410 is also returning to Munich

https://twitter.com/flightradar24/statu ... 5011846144

That really surprises me. It is very rare that an inbound international arrival can’t be accommodated. The wind is strong, but I am surprised these flights were at high enough risk of diverting that they turned back.

Mortyman 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.

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 ?

Who would have "directed" them? The only thing that will direct me to land somewhere, is a fighter on my tail.

arcticcruiser wrote:

Mortyman 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.

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 ?

Who would have "directed" them? The only thing that will direct me to land somewhere, is a fighter on my tail.

Dispatchers. Fuel, available airports, weather, Etc can all be evaluated by dispatch who work with the crew on a diversion decision.

Newbiepilot wrote:

qf789 wrote:

OS87 VIE-JFK and LH400 FRA-JFK are returning to their home bases



https://twitter.com/flightradar24/statu ... 8370378752

LH410 is also returning to Munich

https://twitter.com/flightradar24/statu ... 5011846144

That really surprises me. It is very rare that an inbound international arrival can’t be accommodated. The wind is strong, but I am surprised these flights were at high enough risk of diverting that they turned back.

Or the ultimate mess at JFK, especially at Terminals 1 and (non-DL-side) 4. EVA Air has been waiting 2 hours for a gate so far because China Eastern and Air China have still not pushed back (each should have departed overnight---MU is more than 11 hours late now). The Norwegian flights had their return flights canceled because of delays (they had already chartered Hi Fly to make up one of the flights and that timed out with a 4-hour delay. Now Norwegian is chartering two Wamos 747s as rescue flights---one is on the ground and the other is en route. Also, as noted before, a Korean Air rescue flight diverted to ORD. There is simply inadequate gate space available. The only LH Group flight trying today is the only one that doesn't service T1...Swiss, and only one flight is attempting today. (Air France isn't even bothering.) At least Aeromexico, KLM, and Virgin Atlantic at JFK can be accommodated at Delta gates rather than the rest of Terminal 4, although even Delta is having problems.

aemoreira1981 wrote:

Newbiepilot wrote:

qf789 wrote:

OS87 VIE-JFK and LH400 FRA-JFK are returning to their home bases



https://twitter.com/flightradar24/statu ... 8370378752

LH410 is also returning to Munich

https://twitter.com/flightradar24/statu ... 5011846144

That really surprises me. It is very rare that an inbound international arrival can’t be accommodated. The wind is strong, but I am surprised these flights were at high enough risk of diverting that they turned back.

Or the ultimate mess at JFK, especially at Terminals 1 and (non-DL-side) 4. EVA Air has been waiting 2 hours for a gate so far because China Eastern and Air China have still not pushed back (each should have departed overnight---MU is more than 11 hours late now). The Norwegian flights had their return flights canceled because of delays (they had already chartered Hi Fly to make up one of the flights and that timed out with a 4-hour delay. Now Norwegian is chartering two Wamos 747s as rescue flights---one is on the ground and the other is en route. Also, as noted before, a Korean Air rescue flight diverted to ORD. There is simply inadequate gate space available. The only LH Group flight trying today is the only one that doesn't service T1...Swiss, and only one flight is attempting today. (Air France isn't even bothering.) At least Aeromexico, KLM, and Virgin Atlantic at JFK can be accommodated at Delta gates rather than the rest of Terminal 4, although even Delta is having problems.

Thanks for sharing. Terminal 1 must be a complete disaster.

aemoreira1981 wrote:

Newbiepilot wrote:

qf789 wrote:

OS87 VIE-JFK and LH400 FRA-JFK are returning to their home bases



https://twitter.com/flightradar24/statu ... 8370378752

LH410 is also returning to Munich

https://twitter.com/flightradar24/statu ... 5011846144

That really surprises me. It is very rare that an inbound international arrival can’t be accommodated. The wind is strong, but I am surprised these flights were at high enough risk of diverting that they turned back.

Or the ultimate mess at JFK, especially at Terminals 1 and (non-DL-side) 4. EVA Air has been waiting 2 hours for a gate so far because China Eastern and Air China have still not pushed back (each should have departed overnight---MU is more than 11 hours late now). The Norwegian flights had their return flights canceled because of delays (they had already chartered Hi Fly to make up one of the flights and that timed out with a 4-hour delay. Now Norwegian is chartering two Wamos 747s as rescue flights---one is on the ground and the other is en route. Also, as noted before, a Korean Air rescue flight diverted to ORD. There is simply inadequate gate space available. The only LH Group flight trying today is the only one that doesn't service T1...Swiss, and only one flight is attempting today. (Air France isn't even bothering.) At least Aeromexico, KLM, and Virgin Atlantic at JFK can be accommodated at Delta gates rather than the rest of Terminal 4, although even Delta is having problems.

SN has operated yesterday evening from T1.

Flying Belgian wrote:

aemoreira1981 wrote:

Newbiepilot wrote:

That really surprises me. It is very rare that an inbound international arrival can’t be accommodated. The wind is strong, but I am surprised these flights were at high enough risk of diverting that they turned back.

Or the ultimate mess at JFK, especially at Terminals 1 and (non-DL-side) 4. EVA Air has been waiting 2 hours for a gate so far because China Eastern and Air China have still not pushed back (each should have departed overnight---MU is more than 11 hours late now). The Norwegian flights had their return flights canceled because of delays (they had already chartered Hi Fly to make up one of the flights and that timed out with a 4-hour delay. Now Norwegian is chartering two Wamos 747s as rescue flights---one is on the ground and the other is en route. Also, as noted before, a Korean Air rescue flight diverted to ORD. There is simply inadequate gate space available. The only LH Group flight trying today is the only one that doesn't service T1...Swiss, and only one flight is attempting today. (Air France isn't even bothering.) At least Aeromexico, KLM, and Virgin Atlantic at JFK can be accommodated at Delta gates rather than the rest of Terminal 4, although even Delta is having problems.

SN has operated yesterday evening from T1.

Then the planes diverted on Thursday still had to come to New York (except for TK1, LY7, and PS231, which diverted to nearby Newark where passengers could easily terminate, and TP209, which was turned around to operate TP206 after TP207 had diverted to Dulles), and that's when the mess began. The SN flight which operated to T1 was the Thursday flight that had diverted to YYZ...airport closure announced en route and beyond the point of return. This morning at T1, J2 had to wait 3 hours for a gate and BR about 2 hours for a gate. Air France did operate AF22 in and it had a 30-minute wait.

Also of note: LY7 in a rarity for El Al is in the air right now en route to Israel...I'm not sure if the passengers to JFK were bussed to EWR and then boarded there or if 4X-ECF is operating an empty ferry flight. When was the last time El Al operated any passenger plane on the Sabbath not as Sun D'Or?

Edit on LH Group: LX22 is also en route to JFK. Like LX16, that goes to Terminal 4.

jetblastdubai wrote:

I'm sure that each airline has equally-qualified weather forecasters so UA's decision to scale down their operation in advance of this storm might have just been a luckier decision that paid off. Had the storm track veered in a different direction and ended up only dusting NYC with light snow instead of dumping on it, UA would have been publicly skewered for canceling so many flights when the weather turned out to be a non-event.

My guess is that in the future airlines might be more proactive in canceling in advance of forecast big storms and avoid the risk of what happened this week.

Indeed that scenario can (and has) played out, but most times the forecast is relatively accurate. That's the risk that needs to be evaluated--I still say that if the storm prediction has some level of certainty, it is better to proactively pull down than to risk trashing your operation for days, subjecting your customers to severe circumstances, and risking ground personnel injury and/or aircraft damage.

Again, I'm still surprised some of these carriers (e. g. LH, SQ, etc) didn't just proactively cancel like the US3 did.

A6-EUI enroute DFW-JFK as EK207D

http://flightaware.com/live/flight/A6EUI

BTW, that El Al Flight 2 was an empty ferry because otherwise LY would have had to cancel LY 7 tomorrow for lack of available aircraft (and because Norwegian is chartering 3 planes, only the 237-seat CS-TFX was available for charter).

ty97 wrote:

FR24 reported earlier than some international flights are waiting 2-4 hours for a gate at JFK.

https://twitter.com/flightradar24/statu ... 5658609665

FAA has now issued a NOTAM as a result of the backlog for Terminals 1, 4, and 7

https://twitter.com/AirlineFlyer/status ... 2598676486

To that end, KE81 diverted to Dulles for processing and JL6 diverted to BOS for processing. This is a major failure in this meltdown by the PANYNJ. Any plane that diverted to another airport, other than the YYZ, YOW, or YUL diversions, should have been disembarked via airstairs with busing provided to a terminal as they would have cleared immigration and customs at their diversion airfields. This isn't currently a PANYNJ policy, but it should be revisited in the wake of this disaster. Kennedy Steve must be glad that he's retired right about now.

Also, regarding terminals at PANYNJ airports JFK, LGA, and EWR (I don't know how SWF works, and the SJTA owns the ACY terminal building)...each is generally its own "fiefdom" where, except in an emergency, another airline can't use a terminal not its own, except for Terminal B at EWR, which is operated directly by the PANYNJ.

qf789 wrote:

A China Southern 77W and Kuwait Airways 77W have collided on the ground at JFK and both aircraft has sustained damage

What you might aptly call the "knock-on" effect.

KE 85 is heading to ATL
JL 6 stopped at ORD and now headed to BOS.

JFK is somehow making LHR look like snow removal experts.

I realize the enormously different scales of operations, but it's interesting to note how other airports that were hit with more snow from the same storm are back to pretty much normal operations...

FGITD wrote:

JFK is somehow making LHR look like snow removal experts.

I realize the enormously different scales of operations, but it's interesting to note how other airports that were hit with more snow from the same storm are back to pretty much normal operations...

Like you said though, JFK is a different type of operation. For example, they have all the different int'l carriers who use T1 which I believe was/is maxed out so the result of that is that most inbounds for that terminal are diverted or cancelled. Unfortunately they happen to be larger flights that impact more people.

United and EWR always get bad press and reputation, whenever something fails with them
I think that UA really made a good job in this storm. They shut down in Thursday, but since Friday are running a "normal" operation.
It is better to shut down and try later, than have planes and crews all over the place, TWO days after the storm.
Next winter, fly United

Between the long wait times for gates and additional diversions two days post-storm; I'm surprised the ongoing meltdown at JFK isn't being discussed more. Complete failure by the Port Authority of NYNJ in properly managing this whole event. Hard to believe that LGA, BOS and EWR are all pretty much back to normal ops with LGA and EWR being so close, and BOS being hit just as bad by the storm.

qf789 wrote:

AMollenhauer9 wrote:

KE 85 is heading to ATL
JL 6 stopped at ORD and now headed to BOS.

Looks like JL6 made the decision early to divert to BOS



https://twitter.com/flightradar24/statu ... 0800536576

I was just about to post this. So surprised to see it divert twice, although at least they can bus the passengers from BOS, and they have the staff and ground resources in BOS. I also noticed that JL 6 has been holding on a taxiway for the last 75 minutes according to flight radar24, not sure why.

On another note, anyone know what is going on with D-ABYC (LH 748) it came in from ORD @ 9pm yesterday, and has been at BOS since then.