WorldFlier
Topic Author
Posts: 317
Joined: Wed Aug 05, 2015 2:10 pm

More to the Story? United ERJ (swapped for CRJ) turns around from CHA because ERJ-175 "too large to land"

Mon Oct 22, 2018 7:15 pm

The original CRJ was swapped for an ERJ-175, made it further than halfway, turned around, was re-swapped for a CRJ:

Everyone got a refund for the leg and a $300 voucher, so I'm not bashing United...just wondering what happened?

Bonus here's the message from the App:

"Your 2:13 p.m. United flight to Chattanooga is delayed because of unforeseen circumstances,'' it said. "This is an unusual situation and we're working hard to solve it. We value your time and we're sorry for the inconvenience.''

https://www.usatoday.com/story/travel/f ... 694330002/

Any Professionals want to let us know whats up? ERJ-175 can't be "too large" can it when there have to be 737s, A320s, or 717s at the Airport the size of CHA?
 
United1
Posts: 3870
Joined: Wed Oct 08, 2003 9:21 am

Re: More to the Story? United ERJ (swapped for CRJ) turns around from CHA because ERJ-175 "too large to land"

Mon Oct 22, 2018 7:24 pm

Don’t think it’s an airport issue. Sounds like UAs ground handlers in CHA couldn’t work the E175.
I know the voices in my head aren't real but sometimes their ideas are just awesome!!!
 
iahcsr
Posts: 4777
Joined: Fri Jun 04, 1999 2:59 pm

Re: More to the Story? United ERJ (swapped for CRJ) turns around from CHA because ERJ-175 "too large to land"

Mon Oct 22, 2018 8:09 pm

United1 wrote:
Don’t think it’s an airport issue. Sounds like UAs ground handlers in CHA couldn’t work the E175.

I agree... Ground crews must be trained to work each aircraft type. Someone higher up in the chain of command obviously discovered too late personel in CHA were not trained/qualified for the ERJ175. :banghead:
I’m willing to bet said training will be happening shortly there. (And probably a few other stations as well)
Working Hard, Flying Right Friendly....
 
RamblinMan
Posts: 1027
Joined: Sat Oct 09, 2010 3:57 pm

Re: More to the Story? United ERJ (swapped for CRJ) turns around from CHA because ERJ-175 "too large to land"

Mon Oct 22, 2018 8:19 pm

United1 wrote:
Don’t think it’s an airport issue. Sounds like UAs ground handlers in CHA couldn’t work the E175.

Like I mentioned in the above post, 175s are used regularly on AA DFW-CHA. I don't know if all the ground handling is done in-house or contracted out but the point is SOMEBODY at the airport is qualified to work that type. A little cooperation between carriers and ground handling contractors could have solved this problem without anyone noticing a glitch.
 
Boston92
Posts: 2602
Joined: Wed Aug 09, 2006 6:56 am

Re: More to the Story? United ERJ (swapped for CRJ) turns around from CHA because ERJ-175 "too large to land"

Mon Oct 22, 2018 8:22 pm

Surprised AA/UA don't use the same ground handlers.
 
Chemist
Posts: 584
Joined: Tue Oct 20, 2015 4:46 am

Re: More to the Story? United ERJ (swapped for CRJ) turns around from CHA because ERJ-175 "too large to land"

Mon Oct 22, 2018 8:35 pm

Ahhhh the glory of UA's huge regional jet fleet.
 
United1
Posts: 3870
Joined: Wed Oct 08, 2003 9:21 am

Re: More to the Story? United ERJ (swapped for CRJ) turns around from CHA because ERJ-175 "too large to land"

Mon Oct 22, 2018 8:45 pm

RamblinMan wrote:
United1 wrote:
Don’t think it’s an airport issue. Sounds like UAs ground handlers in CHA couldn’t work the E175.

Like I mentioned in the above post, 175s are used regularly on AA DFW-CHA. I don't know if all the ground handling is done in-house or contracted out but the point is SOMEBODY at the airport is qualified to work that type. A little cooperation between carriers and ground handling contractors could have solved this problem without anyone noticing a glitch.


CHA is contracted out and while I wish "cooperation" would have solved this issue as with many things in aviation it's not that simple. Whomever handles AA in CHA could not have handled the flight without training from OO on their procedures for the E175.
I know the voices in my head aren't real but sometimes their ideas are just awesome!!!
 
ual763
Posts: 955
Joined: Sun May 14, 2017 11:46 am

Re: More to the Story? United ERJ (swapped for CRJ) turns around from CHA because ERJ-175 "too large to land"

Mon Oct 22, 2018 8:45 pm

RamblinMan wrote:
United1 wrote:
Don’t think it’s an airport issue. Sounds like UAs ground handlers in CHA couldn’t work the E175.

Like I mentioned in the above post, 175s are used regularly on AA DFW-CHA. I don't know if all the ground handling is done in-house or contracted out but the point is SOMEBODY at the airport is qualified to work that type. A little cooperation between carriers and ground handling contractors could have solved this problem without anyone noticing a glitch.


When was the last time you saw a Delta/American/United ramp crew working an aircraft from the other carrier? It doesn’t work that way and for two reasons: Insurance Requirements & Unions.
Last edited by ual763 on Mon Oct 22, 2018 8:47 pm, edited 1 time in total.
From flying to the NOTAM office
 
Junction
Posts: 555
Joined: Sat Mar 05, 2005 2:50 am

Re: More to the Story? United ERJ (swapped for CRJ) turns around from CHA because ERJ-175 "too large to land"

Mon Oct 22, 2018 8:46 pm

Not sure what the mystery is about. The USA Today article attached by the topic author explains what happened very well. The key was the second text UA apparently sent out later.
Last edited by Junction on Mon Oct 22, 2018 8:49 pm, edited 1 time in total.
 
MSJYOP28Apilot
Posts: 423
Joined: Tue Jul 21, 2009 2:09 am

Re: More to the Story? United ERJ (swapped for CRJ) turns around from CHA because ERJ-175 "too large to land"

Mon Oct 22, 2018 8:47 pm

RamblinMan wrote:
United1 wrote:
Don’t think it’s an airport issue. Sounds like UAs ground handlers in CHA couldn’t work the E175.

Like I mentioned in the above post, 175s are used regularly on AA DFW-CHA. I don't know if all the ground handling is done in-house or contracted out but the point is SOMEBODY at the airport is qualified to work that type. A little cooperation between carriers and ground handling contractors could have solved this problem without anyone noticing a glitch.


Just because somebody can work a type doesnt mean they will do so to help a competitor. Remember, every airline has its own schedule to worry about. There aren't tons of rampers sitting around looking for something to do. Flights typically leave/arrive at similar times too. Even if an agreement can be made, it wont be cheap for the airline. The diversion and equipment change might very well be cheaper and quicker.
 
DiamondFlyer
Posts: 3132
Joined: Wed Oct 29, 2008 11:50 pm

Re: More to the Story? United ERJ (swapped for CRJ) turns around from CHA because ERJ-175 "too large to land"

Mon Oct 22, 2018 8:53 pm

ual763 wrote:
RamblinMan wrote:
United1 wrote:
Don’t think it’s an airport issue. Sounds like UAs ground handlers in CHA couldn’t work the E175.

Like I mentioned in the above post, 175s are used regularly on AA DFW-CHA. I don't know if all the ground handling is done in-house or contracted out but the point is SOMEBODY at the airport is qualified to work that type. A little cooperation between carriers and ground handling contractors could have solved this problem without anyone noticing a glitch.


When was the last time you saw a Delta/American/United ramp crew working an aircraft from the other carrier? It doesn’t work that way and for two reasons: Insurance Requirements & Unions.


At small cities, it's quite common to see DGS (Delta Global Services) handling DL and other carriers. Same for other carriers inhouse ground handling. AA has Piedmont, I'm sure they handle non AA carriers in some stations.
From my cold, dead hands
 
United1
Posts: 3870
Joined: Wed Oct 08, 2003 9:21 am

Re: More to the Story? United ERJ (swapped for CRJ) turns around from CHA because ERJ-175 "too large to land"

Mon Oct 22, 2018 8:56 pm

DiamondFlyer wrote:
ual763 wrote:
RamblinMan wrote:
Like I mentioned in the above post, 175s are used regularly on AA DFW-CHA. I don't know if all the ground handling is done in-house or contracted out but the point is SOMEBODY at the airport is qualified to work that type. A little cooperation between carriers and ground handling contractors could have solved this problem without anyone noticing a glitch.


When was the last time you saw a Delta/American/United ramp crew working an aircraft from the other carrier? It doesn’t work that way and for two reasons: Insurance Requirements & Unions.


At small cities, it's quite common to see DGS (Delta Global Services) handling DL and other carriers. Same for other carriers inhouse ground handling. AA has Piedmont, I'm sure they handle non AA carriers in some stations.


And UA (and UGE) handle other airlines as well....however they are contracted, trained and staffed to do so.
Last edited by United1 on Mon Oct 22, 2018 8:57 pm, edited 1 time in total.
I know the voices in my head aren't real but sometimes their ideas are just awesome!!!
 
Antarius
Posts: 1725
Joined: Thu Apr 13, 2017 1:27 pm

Re: More to the Story? United ERJ (swapped for CRJ) turns around from CHA because ERJ-175 "too large to land"

Mon Oct 22, 2018 8:56 pm

MSJYOP28Apilot wrote:
RamblinMan wrote:
United1 wrote:
Don’t think it’s an airport issue. Sounds like UAs ground handlers in CHA couldn’t work the E175.

Like I mentioned in the above post, 175s are used regularly on AA DFW-CHA. I don't know if all the ground handling is done in-house or contracted out but the point is SOMEBODY at the airport is qualified to work that type. A little cooperation between carriers and ground handling contractors could have solved this problem without anyone noticing a glitch.


Just because somebody can work a type doesnt mean they will do so to help a competitor. Remember, every airline has its own schedule to worry about. There aren't tons of rampers sitting around looking for something to do. Flights typically leave/arrive at similar times too. Even if an agreement can be made, it wont be cheap for the airline. The diversion and equipment change might very well be cheaper and quicker.


If they could help out, I'm sure they would. Have seen ground crew borrow equipment from each other several times.

The issue is that each operator has different procedures and training needed for that. While AA crew can handle a 175, they havent been trained in all the SkyWest procedures etc.

The issue was dispatch allowing a 175 on this route.. nothing else really.
2019: SIN HKG NRT DFW IAH HOU CLT LGA JFK SFO SJC EWR SNA EYW MIA BOG LAX ORD DTW OAK PVG BOS DCA IAD ATL LAS BIS CUN PHX SYD CVG PHL MAD ORY CDG SLC SJU BQN MHT YYZ STS DOH BLR KTM MFM MEX MSY BWI DEN
 
floridaflyboy
Posts: 1591
Joined: Sat Jun 03, 2006 3:26 pm

Re: More to the Story? United ERJ (swapped for CRJ) turns around from CHA because ERJ-175 "too large to land"

Mon Oct 22, 2018 8:58 pm

United1 wrote:
RamblinMan wrote:
United1 wrote:
Don’t think it’s an airport issue. Sounds like UAs ground handlers in CHA couldn’t work the E175.

Like I mentioned in the above post, 175s are used regularly on AA DFW-CHA. I don't know if all the ground handling is done in-house or contracted out but the point is SOMEBODY at the airport is qualified to work that type. A little cooperation between carriers and ground handling contractors could have solved this problem without anyone noticing a glitch.


CHA is contracted out and while I wish "cooperation" would have solved this issue as with many things in aviation it's not that simple. Whomever handles AA in CHA could not have handled the flight without training from OO on their procedures for the E175.


Exactly! This is likely the actual issue. OO doesn't serve CHA with a 175. In fact, from my (limited) perusing of CHA's flight schedule, no carrier uses the 175 in CHA. And as you said, they have to be trained on OO's specific procedures. Even if they could cooperate and AA did have 175 ops there, they still couldn't have worked it, because their training would have been on YX and/or MQ procedures.

Bit of a rookie mistake for the plane to get halfway there before someone noticed it, though, if that's in fact the case.
Good goes around!
 
alasizon
Posts: 1954
Joined: Sat Apr 28, 2007 8:57 pm

Re: More to the Story? United ERJ (swapped for CRJ) turns around from CHA because ERJ-175 "too large to land"

Mon Oct 22, 2018 8:58 pm

ual763 wrote:
RamblinMan wrote:
United1 wrote:
Don’t think it’s an airport issue. Sounds like UAs ground handlers in CHA couldn’t work the E175.

Like I mentioned in the above post, 175s are used regularly on AA DFW-CHA. I don't know if all the ground handling is done in-house or contracted out but the point is SOMEBODY at the airport is qualified to work that type. A little cooperation between carriers and ground handling contractors could have solved this problem without anyone noticing a glitch.


When was the last time you saw a Delta/American/United ramp crew working an aircraft from the other carrier? It doesn’t work that way and for two reasons: Insurance & Unions.


It actually can and does happen; its more about how much they are willing to cooperate and what the reason is. In this case, given it was reportedly an OO E175; AA couldn't have worked the flight as AA folks don't receive OO E175 training and OO is very specific about having their own training in addition to the generic carrier training. DL's agents may or may not have been able to depending on if they receive OO 175 training. No matter what, it certainly does happen where other carriers assist with and/or work other carriers flights.

More than likely the fault to blame here is on whomever is responsible for updating the ops specs for each given subfleet as the ops specs sould have shown that the OO E175 can't go to CHA due to lack of trained personnel.
Manager on Duty & Tower Planner
 
RamblinMan
Posts: 1027
Joined: Sat Oct 09, 2010 3:57 pm

Re: More to the Story? United ERJ (swapped for CRJ) turns around from CHA because ERJ-175 "too large to land"

Mon Oct 22, 2018 9:02 pm

From the sound of it the "too big to land" was just the dumbed-down explanation from the pilot, who was understandably just as irritated as anyone. Good on UA for providing refreshments and compensation for a delay that was without a doubt the fault of the airline. Mistakes happen, people understand...it's when they outright lie and try to blame "weather" that folks get mad.
 
ual763
Posts: 955
Joined: Sun May 14, 2017 11:46 am

Re: More to the Story? United ERJ (swapped for CRJ) turns around from CHA because ERJ-175 "too large to land"

Mon Oct 22, 2018 9:04 pm

DiamondFlyer wrote:
ual763 wrote:
RamblinMan wrote:
Like I mentioned in the above post, 175s are used regularly on AA DFW-CHA. I don't know if all the ground handling is done in-house or contracted out but the point is SOMEBODY at the airport is qualified to work that type. A little cooperation between carriers and ground handling contractors could have solved this problem without anyone noticing a glitch.


When was the last time you saw a Delta/American/United ramp crew working an aircraft from the other carrier? It doesn’t work that way and for two reasons: Insurance Requirements & Unions.


At small cities, it's quite common to see DGS (Delta Global Services) handling DL and other carriers. Same for other carriers inhouse ground handling. AA has Piedmont, I'm sure they handle non AA carriers in some stations.


But DGS is it’s own company whose sole business is ground handling contracting. What I’m talking about is physical Delta/American/United employees. And even if they do “sometimes” help each other out, it’s not like they just go do it willy nilly. They aren’t allowed to touch another comoany’s Multi-million dollar asset without complex agreements and contracts. If they do, it is pre-planned in agreements and also there is lots of training that goes on. This is all mandated by the insurance companies. It was this way back at GFK when I used to work on the ramp. DGS was only allowed to work Delta flights and we over at GFK Flight Support were only allowed to touch the Allegiant MD-80s. In the off event they needed to borrow some airstairs or equipment, we had to receive training from them to do so even though it was our damn equipment. And they also had to pay out the ass for our services too.
Last edited by ual763 on Mon Oct 22, 2018 9:17 pm, edited 3 times in total.
From flying to the NOTAM office
 
evank516
Posts: 1963
Joined: Wed Mar 01, 2017 12:15 am

Re: More to the Story? United ERJ (swapped for CRJ) turns around from CHA because ERJ-175 "too large to land"

Mon Oct 22, 2018 9:05 pm

United1 wrote:
RamblinMan wrote:
Typical line of UA bullsh*t if they tried to imply it was too large to land. AA Eagle sends E175s in here all the time. Hell DL sends 3 MD88s a day.


UA is really transparent when it comes to explaining why a flight is delayed. I couldn't tell you what was said to the passengers by OO on the flight but here is what UA itself told passengers.

"We're sorry for returning to Chicago. The airport in Chattanooga is unable to assist with ground operational requirements for your current aircraft type. We assigned your flight a new plane."


Luckily the plane was only filled with 50 pax. What would they have done if the flight had 60?
 
DiamondFlyer
Posts: 3132
Joined: Wed Oct 29, 2008 11:50 pm

Re: More to the Story? United ERJ (swapped for CRJ) turns around from CHA because ERJ-175 "too large to land"

Mon Oct 22, 2018 9:07 pm

United1 wrote:
DiamondFlyer wrote:
ual763 wrote:

When was the last time you saw a Delta/American/United ramp crew working an aircraft from the other carrier? It doesn’t work that way and for two reasons: Insurance Requirements & Unions.


At small cities, it's quite common to see DGS (Delta Global Services) handling DL and other carriers. Same for other carriers inhouse ground handling. AA has Piedmont, I'm sure they handle non AA carriers in some stations.


And UA (and UGE) handle other airlines as well....however they are contracted, trained and staffed to do so.


For the planes and airlines that regularly serve the station. CHA never sees UA OO 175's, so there would be no training done in CHA... But I bet there will be now.
From my cold, dead hands
 
tys777
Moderator
Posts: 445
Joined: Sat Aug 26, 2006 1:43 am

Re: More to the Story? United ERJ (swapped for CRJ) turns around from CHA because ERJ-175 "too large to land"

Mon Oct 22, 2018 9:07 pm

Interesting that this took almost a week to make the news.
Last edited by tys777 on Mon Oct 22, 2018 9:17 pm, edited 1 time in total.
 
MSJYOP28Apilot
Posts: 423
Joined: Tue Jul 21, 2009 2:09 am

Re: More to the Story? United ERJ (swapped for CRJ) turns around from CHA because ERJ-175 "too large to land"

Mon Oct 22, 2018 9:08 pm

evank516 wrote:

Luckily the plane was only filled with 50 pax. What would they have done if the flight had 60?


Bumped 10 people when they got back to ORD.
 
tootallsd
Posts: 493
Joined: Fri Apr 28, 2006 11:02 pm

Re: More to the Story? United ERJ (swapped for CRJ) turns around from CHA because ERJ-175 "too large to land"

Mon Oct 22, 2018 9:09 pm

You can't just 'help out'. If something goes wrong during an ad-hoc servicing; what ground rules exist for resolution. Say for example, the 'helper' hits the aircraft with a vehicle. If that happened with the carriers own personnel or contractor, there are rules in place for dealing with the financial consequences. The carrier's insurance carrier may also try avoid all / part liability by calling into question the details of the situation.
 
drdisque
Posts: 1121
Joined: Mon Mar 26, 2007 9:57 am

Re: More to the Story? United ERJ (swapped for CRJ) turns around from CHA because ERJ-175 "too large to land"

Mon Oct 22, 2018 9:22 pm

Does UA ground board in CHA?

If so that could have been the problem. All CRJ's and ERJ-135/145 in the UAX fleet have integrated stairs. The E-175 does not. So it's possible that nobody in CHA was trained to move the jetbridge or marshall a jet into the jetbridge position. That would be an even bigger impediment.
 
DiamondFlyer
Posts: 3132
Joined: Wed Oct 29, 2008 11:50 pm

Re: More to the Story? United ERJ (swapped for CRJ) turns around from CHA because ERJ-175 "too large to land"

Mon Oct 22, 2018 9:31 pm

drdisque wrote:
Does UA ground board in CHA?

If so that could have been the problem. All CRJ's and ERJ-135/145 in the UAX fleet have integrated stairs. The E-175 does not. So it's possible that nobody in CHA was trained to move the jetbridge or marshall a jet into the jetbridge position. That would be an even bigger impediment.


They do not, IIRC. They're usually at gate 2.
From my cold, dead hands
 
jayunited
Posts: 2274
Joined: Sat Jan 05, 2013 12:03 am

Re: More to the Story? United ERJ (swapped for CRJ) turns around from CHA because ERJ-175 "too large to land"

Mon Oct 22, 2018 9:42 pm

Boston92 wrote:
Surprised AA/UA don't use the same ground handlers.


Even if airlines are using the same ground handlers the contract is quite specific any new equipment type that is flown into station you must be trained and signed off of that equipment type. If you are not and some type of damage happens the ground handling company might be on the hook instead of the insurance company. Even if the same ground crew handles AA's E170/175 that crew can not touch UA's aircraft until they are trained by a certified trainer from UA.

Think of it as driving with insurance v.s. driving without insurance. You can drive without insurance your not supposed to but you can if something happens your on the hook for all damages v.s. if you had insurance then all you have to pay is your deductible.
 
Jshank83
Posts: 2906
Joined: Tue Nov 01, 2016 2:23 pm

Re: More to the Story? United ERJ (swapped for CRJ) turns around from CHA because ERJ-175 "too large to land"

Mon Oct 22, 2018 9:49 pm

Reminds me of an AA (envoy?) flight I was on a couple months ago. We diverted to Richmond (going to DCA) and the pilot told us if the delay was longer than a gas and go they would have to get a bus because they didn’t have a tow bar for a E175. Which meant we couldn’t use the jetway. It surprised me but didn’t seem like a big deal. You would have thought they could have worked around it if needed at CHA but it sounds like they decided just to head back instead.
 
zakuivcustom
Posts: 2815
Joined: Sat Jun 10, 2017 3:32 am

Re: More to the Story? United ERJ (swapped for CRJ) turns around from CHA because ERJ-175 "too large to land"

Mon Oct 22, 2018 9:53 pm

MSJYOP28Apilot wrote:
evank516 wrote:

Luckily the plane was only filled with 50 pax. What would they have done if the flight had 60?


Bumped 10 people when they got back to ORD.


Come on, being UA (and at ORD also), they're going to dragged those 10 pax off the plane :duck:

Anyway, definitely not everyday you see an aircraft being "too big" for ground handling. Somebody at ops (Skywest?) would have tons of questions to answer. :scratchchin: :scratchchin:
Free Hong Kong! Free China!
 
usflyer msp
Posts: 3378
Joined: Tue May 23, 2000 11:50 am

Re: More to the Story? United ERJ (swapped for CRJ) turns around from CHA because ERJ-175 "too large to land"

Mon Oct 22, 2018 9:58 pm

drdisque wrote:
Does UA ground board in CHA?

If so that could have been the problem. All CRJ's and ERJ-135/145 in the UAX fleet have integrated stairs. The E-175 does not. So it's possible that nobody in CHA was trained to move the jetbridge or marshall a jet into the jetbridge position. That would be an even bigger impediment.


The ERJ's do not have integrated stairs, FYI.
 
CATIIIevery5yrs
Posts: 123
Joined: Wed Jun 29, 2016 4:40 am

Re: More to the Story? United ERJ (swapped for CRJ) turns around from CHA because ERJ-175 "too large to land"

Mon Oct 22, 2018 10:01 pm

WorldFlier wrote:
The original CRJ was swapped for an ERJ-175, made it further than halfway, turned around, was re-swapped for a CRJ:

Everyone got a refund for the leg and a $300 voucher, so I'm not bashing United...just wondering what happened?

Bonus here's the message from the App:

"Your 2:13 p.m. United flight to Chattanooga is delayed because of unforeseen circumstances,'' it said. "This is an unusual situation and we're working hard to solve it. We value your time and we're sorry for the inconvenience.''

https://www.usatoday.com/story/travel/f ... 694330002/

Any Professionals want to let us know whats up? ERJ-175 can't be "too large" can it when there have to be 737s, A320s, or 717s at the Airport the size of CHA?


It's possible the airport is not in the 175 operators Operations Specifications. The operator took the assignment and it was caught after the fact. Years ago when I flew for a United Express carrier, we had an event in which the exact same scenario played out. Our plane turned around halfway once we were informed the airport wasn't in our Ops Specs.
 
Cubsrule
Posts: 14003
Joined: Sat May 15, 2004 12:13 pm

Re: More to the Story? United ERJ (swapped for CRJ) turns around from CHA because ERJ-175 "too large to land"

Mon Oct 22, 2018 10:37 pm

CATIIIevery5yrs wrote:
WorldFlier wrote:
The original CRJ was swapped for an ERJ-175, made it further than halfway, turned around, was re-swapped for a CRJ:

Everyone got a refund for the leg and a $300 voucher, so I'm not bashing United...just wondering what happened?

Bonus here's the message from the App:

"Your 2:13 p.m. United flight to Chattanooga is delayed because of unforeseen circumstances,'' it said. "This is an unusual situation and we're working hard to solve it. We value your time and we're sorry for the inconvenience.''

https://www.usatoday.com/story/travel/f ... 694330002/

Any Professionals want to let us know whats up? ERJ-175 can't be "too large" can it when there have to be 737s, A320s, or 717s at the Airport the size of CHA?


It's possible the airport is not in the 175 operators Operations Specifications. The operator took the assignment and it was caught after the fact. Years ago when I flew for a United Express carrier, we had an event in which the exact same scenario played out. Our plane turned around halfway once we were informed the airport wasn't in our Ops Specs.


Maybe this is a stupid question, but shouldn’t the dispatcher catch that when planning the flight?
I can't decide whether I miss the tulip or the bowling shoe more
 
2175301
Posts: 1510
Joined: Wed May 16, 2007 11:19 am

Re: More to the Story? United ERJ (swapped for CRJ) turns around from CHA because ERJ-175 "too large to land"

Mon Oct 22, 2018 10:39 pm

ual763 wrote:
RamblinMan wrote:
United1 wrote:
Don’t think it’s an airport issue. Sounds like UAs ground handlers in CHA couldn’t work the E175.

Like I mentioned in the above post, 175s are used regularly on AA DFW-CHA. I don't know if all the ground handling is done in-house or contracted out but the point is SOMEBODY at the airport is qualified to work that type. A little cooperation between carriers and ground handling contractors could have solved this problem without anyone noticing a glitch.


When was the last time you saw a Delta/American/United ramp crew working an aircraft from the other carrier? It doesn’t work that way and for two reasons: Insurance Requirements & Unions.


Your's is one of many that makes an obvious false claim.

I have personally 3 times been on diverted flights to the closest airport (1 medical - where they then chose to have some maintenance done as that airport had the spare parts in stock; which added 2 more hours to ground time, 1 mechanical, 1 unknown) where the aircraft was ground handled and serviced by another company. In the mechanical case we and our luggage was offloaded and we were all routed onto other aircraft from competitor airlines. In the unknown case we took off after a while - and after the aircraft took on a fair amount of fuel.

So, the base agreements are indeed in place to handle any aircraft at any airport after landing. Now getting the aircraft back into the sky may not be done with passengers onboard if the runway is shorter than normal, or other factors.

Have a great day,
 
joeblow10
Posts: 198
Joined: Mon Jun 04, 2018 11:58 pm

Re: More to the Story? United ERJ (swapped for CRJ) turns around from CHA because ERJ-175 "too large to land"

Mon Oct 22, 2018 11:49 pm

2175301 wrote:
ual763 wrote:
RamblinMan wrote:
Like I mentioned in the above post, 175s are used regularly on AA DFW-CHA. I don't know if all the ground handling is done in-house or contracted out but the point is SOMEBODY at the airport is qualified to work that type. A little cooperation between carriers and ground handling contractors could have solved this problem without anyone noticing a glitch.


When was the last time you saw a Delta/American/United ramp crew working an aircraft from the other carrier? It doesn’t work that way and for two reasons: Insurance Requirements & Unions.


Your's is one of many that makes an obvious false claim.

I have personally 3 times been on diverted flights to the closest airport (1 medical - where they then chose to have some maintenance done as that airport had the spare parts in stock; which added 2 more hours to ground time, 1 mechanical, 1 unknown) where the aircraft was ground handled and serviced by another company. In the mechanical case we and our luggage was offloaded and we were all routed onto other aircraft from competitor airlines. In the unknown case we took off after a while - and after the aircraft took on a fair amount of fuel.

So, the base agreements are indeed in place to handle any aircraft at any airport after landing. Now getting the aircraft back into the sky may not be done with passengers onboard if the runway is shorter than normal, or other factors.

Have a great day,


I wonder though if there is something in the union contract about servicing aircraft at staffed airports (I.e. if UA or OO or whoever hires UAX folks at CHA has staff there, is there something in the contract that mandates it is them and only them who may do it?)

Wouldn’t surprise me if that’s the case. I too have been on diverted flights for mechanical and medical, and while we were taken care of by other airline ground staff, there was no option of staff from the original carrier.

I’d have to imagine there is probably a clause that says something to the tune of “if we have folks there, we are the ones that have to work it”.
 
tcfc424
Posts: 551
Joined: Mon Nov 17, 2003 11:56 am

Re: More to the Story? United ERJ (swapped for CRJ) turns around from CHA because ERJ-175 "too large to land"

Tue Oct 23, 2018 12:44 am

When I worked for United, the E170 towbars were notorious for breaking the fuse pin. It could simply be that they did not have a proper serviceable tow bar for the E175. That could explain so much...an issue caught only when the ground crew looked and saw that the flight inbound was an E175 vs a CRJ. Much adoo about nothing.
 
User avatar
Super80Fan
Posts: 1622
Joined: Thu Jul 06, 2017 4:14 am

Re: More to the Story? United ERJ (swapped for CRJ) turns around from CHA because ERJ-175 "too large to land"

Tue Oct 23, 2018 1:07 am

I usually like flying airlines that get me to my destination on-time, so any United Express flight is not an option.
RIP McDonnell Douglas
RIP US Airways
 
NLINK
Posts: 304
Joined: Sat Nov 15, 2003 3:20 pm

Re: More to the Story? United ERJ (swapped for CRJ) turns around from CHA because ERJ-175 "too large to land"

Tue Oct 23, 2018 1:25 am

My guess there was not a tow bar for the 175 or the ground staff was not checked off on it. I do not think the 175 can turn out of Gate 2. The CRJ-200 barely could, but we always pushed back. I am not sure who handles them now, but at NW we handled us and CO (Above and Below) for the short time they ran 135's and 145 to IAH. We could handle most of the NW planes when ATL had ground stops, usually a DC9, M80 or 727. Those were parked at a hardstand since we couldn't turn a DC9 out from Gate 2.
 
User avatar
litz
Posts: 2299
Joined: Wed Dec 24, 2003 6:01 am

Re: More to the Story? United ERJ (swapped for CRJ) turns around from CHA because ERJ-175 "too large to land"

Tue Oct 23, 2018 1:50 am

iahcsr wrote:
I agree... Ground crews must be trained to work each aircraft type. Someone higher up in the chain of command obviously discovered too late personel in CHA were not trained/qualified for the ERJ175. :banghead:


Heh, just imagine if that someone higher up had discovered this a little more too late and that plane was on a taxiway in CHA ...
 
User avatar
CLTRampRat
Posts: 154
Joined: Mon Sep 10, 2018 12:42 am

Re: More to the Story? United ERJ (swapped for CRJ) turns around from CHA because ERJ-175 "too large to land"

Tue Oct 23, 2018 2:00 am

Jshank83 wrote:
Reminds me of an AA (envoy?) flight I was on a couple months ago. We diverted to Richmond (going to DCA) and the pilot told us if the delay was longer than a gas and go they would have to get a bus because they didn’t have a tow bar for a E175. Which meant we couldn’t use the jetway. It surprised me but didn’t seem like a big deal. You would have thought they could have worked around it if needed at CHA but it sounds like they decided just to head back instead.


I used to work at RIC, AA had E175s on daily service to Miami. That’s a load of Bravo Sierra.
 
NLINK
Posts: 304
Joined: Sat Nov 15, 2003 3:20 pm

Re: More to the Story? United ERJ (swapped for CRJ) turns around from CHA because ERJ-175 "too large to land"

Tue Oct 23, 2018 2:07 am

Helping out is a big no no from both a company policy and also those that are union from a liability standpoint. We would borrow equipment from each other on a limited basis but would not touch another companies aircraft as insurance and company policy didn't like that. We would handle our own aircraft and CO Express, aka Expressjet at the time. If a mainline CO diversion came in I think we did gas it up for them once or twice but we never deplaned them. In Chattanooga if Southwest or Air Tran came in no airline's touched them, they went to the FBO.
 
Jshank83
Posts: 2906
Joined: Tue Nov 01, 2016 2:23 pm

Re: More to the Story? United ERJ (swapped for CRJ) turns around from CHA because ERJ-175 "too large to land"

Tue Oct 23, 2018 2:15 am

CLTRampRat wrote:
Jshank83 wrote:
Reminds me of an AA (envoy?) flight I was on a couple months ago. We diverted to Richmond (going to DCA) and the pilot told us if the delay was longer than a gas and go they would have to get a bus because they didn’t have a tow bar for a E175. Which meant we couldn’t use the jetway. It surprised me but didn’t seem like a big deal. You would have thought they could have worked around it if needed at CHA but it sounds like they decided just to head back instead.


I used to work at RIC, AA had E175s on daily service to Miami. That’s a load of Bravo Sierra.


I thought it was weird that Richmond wouldn’t have AA E175’s going thru there but maybe it was in use or broken or something. Didn’t feel like there was any reason to not be honest about it. Getting a bus would have been more of a hassle then using the jetbridge.
 
Boof02671
Posts: 1626
Joined: Sun Jul 10, 2016 12:15 am

Re: More to the Story? United ERJ (swapped for CRJ) turns around from CHA because ERJ-175 "too large to land"

Tue Oct 23, 2018 2:41 am

ual763 wrote:
RamblinMan wrote:
United1 wrote:
Don’t think it’s an airport issue. Sounds like UAs ground handlers in CHA couldn’t work the E175.

Like I mentioned in the above post, 175s are used regularly on AA DFW-CHA. I don't know if all the ground handling is done in-house or contracted out but the point is SOMEBODY at the airport is qualified to work that type. A little cooperation between carriers and ground handling contractors could have solved this problem without anyone noticing a glitch.


When was the last time you saw a Delta/American/United ramp crew working an aircraft from the other carrier? It doesn’t work that way and for two reasons: Insurance Requirements & Unions.

Many airlines ground handle fellow airlines.

Happens all the time.

B6 works HA’s JFK-HNL, that’s one example.

And the training excuse is BS, a BA777 diverted into CLT years ago. We as US worked the flight, ramp unloaded and I as Utility serviced the LAVS, not one US Fleet Service worker nor I were ever trained on a 777 nor any BA flights.

Oh by the way the ramp and I in Maintenance were both unionized.

Being union has zero to do with working another airline’s flight.

And I guess none of you ever heard of the MAGSA Agreements airlines have?

Basically it’s a mutual aid and servicing agreement.
 
Rdh3e
Posts: 3535
Joined: Wed Mar 30, 2011 2:09 pm

Re: More to the Story? United ERJ (swapped for CRJ) turns around from CHA because ERJ-175 "too large to land"

Tue Oct 23, 2018 2:57 am

MSJYOP28Apilot wrote:
evank516 wrote:

Luckily the plane was only filled with 50 pax. What would they have done if the flight had 60?


Bumped 10 people when they got back to ORD.

The flight was originally scheduled to be be a CRJ in the first place so it would not have been possible to have 60.
 
jetmatt777
Posts: 3929
Joined: Sun Jun 26, 2005 2:16 am

Re: More to the Story? United ERJ (swapped for CRJ) turns around from CHA because ERJ-175 "too large to land"

Tue Oct 23, 2018 3:02 am

Sure airlines will touch other airline equipment, but only with pre authorization and usually a contract already in place. We used to handle america west in OKC, and JetBlue in PDX. We also handled frontier in OKC for a year or two. Those are specific agreements and only employees that did the extra training could touch those aircraft.

United handles WN in ORD, in the event of a diversion.

Those are pre agreed on situations and are irrelevant in this case. If it were an emergency, that changes things a bit and usually only the bare minimum will be done. I.e park the airplane, hook up air and power, and offer egress. Won’t touch bags or cargo without more authorization.
Lighten up while you still can, don't even try to understand, just find a place to make your stand and take it easy
 
evank516
Posts: 1963
Joined: Wed Mar 01, 2017 12:15 am

Re: More to the Story? United ERJ (swapped for CRJ) turns around from CHA because ERJ-175 "too large to land"

Tue Oct 23, 2018 1:12 pm

Rdh3e wrote:
MSJYOP28Apilot wrote:
evank516 wrote:

Luckily the plane was only filled with 50 pax. What would they have done if the flight had 60?


Bumped 10 people when they got back to ORD.

The flight was originally scheduled to be be a CRJ in the first place so it would not have been possible to have 60.


Where does it say that in the article?
 
jayunited
Posts: 2274
Joined: Sat Jan 05, 2013 12:03 am

Re: More to the Story? United ERJ (swapped for CRJ) turns around from CHA because ERJ-175 "too large to land"

Tue Oct 23, 2018 4:06 pm

evank516 wrote:
Rdh3e wrote:
MSJYOP28Apilot wrote:

Bumped 10 people when they got back to ORD.

The flight was originally scheduled to be be a CRJ in the first place so it would not have been possible to have 60.


Where does it say that in the article?


Passengers were put on a 50-seat Bombardier CRJ 200, which United typically uses on the flight. Passengers finally arrived at the gate in Chattanooga just before 8:30 p.m. local time, more than three hours late. The original equipment was a CRJ 50 seater in fact this is the only equipment type UA sends to this airport at this time.
https://www.usatoday.com/story/travel/f ... 694330002/

In my 23 years with United I've never heard of this type of situation happening, usually UA would just cancel the UAX flight if the exact equipment type wasn't available. However UA is trying to improve our UAX completion rate and on-time departure rate and no one who was involved in the decision to upguage this flight ever thought to check an see if CHS could handle the E175. This wasn't clear in the report but I'm assuming the decision makers just treated this UAX flight like they would a mainline flight that has a upguage in equipment at the last minute because most line stations can handle any A320/19, or 737-7/8/9ER. This was an expensive lesson for UA but in the end UA did the right thing by refunding passengers their ticket giving a $300 dollar voucher, and still getting them to their destination a little over 3 hours late.
 
User avatar
kjeld0d
Posts: 451
Joined: Mon Nov 14, 2016 9:21 pm

Re: More to the Story? United ERJ (swapped for CRJ) turns around from CHA because ERJ-175 "too large to land"

Tue Oct 23, 2018 4:49 pm

They need pilots with the gumption to make things happen!
Image
 
evank516
Posts: 1963
Joined: Wed Mar 01, 2017 12:15 am

Re: More to the Story? United ERJ (swapped for CRJ) turns around from CHA because ERJ-175 "too large to land"

Tue Oct 23, 2018 5:30 pm

jayunited wrote:
evank516 wrote:
Rdh3e wrote:
The flight was originally scheduled to be be a CRJ in the first place so it would not have been possible to have 60.


Where does it say that in the article?


Passengers were put on a 50-seat Bombardier CRJ 200, which United typically uses on the flight. Passengers finally arrived at the gate in Chattanooga just before 8:30 p.m. local time, more than three hours late. The original equipment was a CRJ 50 seater in fact this is the only equipment type UA sends to this airport at this time.
https://www.usatoday.com/story/travel/f ... 694330002/

In my 23 years with United I've never heard of this type of situation happening, usually UA would just cancel the UAX flight if the exact equipment type wasn't available. However UA is trying to improve our UAX completion rate and on-time departure rate and no one who was involved in the decision to upguage this flight ever thought to check an see if CHS could handle the E175. This wasn't clear in the report but I'm assuming the decision makers just treated this UAX flight like they would a mainline flight that has a upguage in equipment at the last minute because most line stations can handle any A320/19, or 737-7/8/9ER. This was an expensive lesson for UA but in the end UA did the right thing by refunding passengers their ticket giving a $300 dollar voucher, and still getting them to their destination a little over 3 hours late.


I guess the way it was written caused me to interpret it a different way.
 
MSJYOP28Apilot
Posts: 423
Joined: Tue Jul 21, 2009 2:09 am

Re: More to the Story? United ERJ (swapped for CRJ) turns around from CHA because ERJ-175 "too large to land"

Tue Oct 23, 2018 8:20 pm

Cubsrule wrote:

Maybe this is a stupid question, but shouldn’t the dispatcher catch that when planning the flight?


Yes. But many times after multiple equipment changes and already being overloaded with work as most dispatchers are, it is something very easy to miss. Many airlines have systems built in place for this reason to catch these things but not every airline does.

Airlines especially the regionals like to save money by short staffing their dispatch, crew scheduling and maintenance control departments but in these departments where the big picture decisions are made that effect each flight, bad decisions can be made when things are rushed and not properly thought out due to the pressures put on by the much too heavy workload in an extremely time sensitive business.
 
User avatar
compensateme
Posts: 3279
Joined: Wed Jan 28, 2009 4:17 am

Re: More to the Story? United ERJ (swapped for CRJ) turns around from CHA because ERJ-175 "too large to land"

Tue Oct 23, 2018 8:25 pm

ual763 wrote:
DiamondFlyer wrote:
ual763 wrote:

When was the last time you saw a Delta/American/United ramp crew working an aircraft from the other carrier? It doesn’t work that way and for two reasons: Insurance Requirements & Unions.


At small cities, it's quite common to see DGS (Delta Global Services) handling DL and other carriers. Same for other carriers inhouse ground handling. AA has Piedmont, I'm sure they handle non AA carriers in some stations.


But DGS is it’s own company whose sole business is ground handling contracting. What I’m talking about is physical Delta/American/United employees. And even if they do “sometimes” help each other out, it’s not like they just go do it willy nilly. They aren’t allowed to touch another comoany’s Multi-million dollar asset without complex agreements and contracts. If they do, it is pre-planned in agreements and also there is lots of training that goes on. This is all mandated by the insurance companies. It was this way back at GFK when I used to work on the ramp. DGS was only allowed to work Delta flights and we over at GFK Flight Support were only allowed to touch the Allegiant MD-80s. In the off event they needed to borrow some airstairs or equipment, we had to receive training from them to do so even though it was our damn equipment. And they also had to pay out the ass for our services too.


Uh, you think there’s mainline employees working in CHA, when even stations such as DTW are contracted out by both AA and UA? At small stations like CHA, it’s the norm for contractors to work multiple legacies...
We don’t care what your next flight is.
 
B737900ER
Posts: 1028
Joined: Thu Aug 31, 2006 10:26 am

Re: More to the Story? United ERJ (swapped for CRJ) turns around from CHA because ERJ-175 "too large to land"

Wed Oct 24, 2018 12:04 am

And what would have happened had they continued to CHA? They would have landed, off loaded, and cancelled the return, or paid a contractor to handle the aircraft, just like they would have done for a diversion.

But are we surprised? No, these regional airlines who United contracts out to don’t take the PR hit. These are the same people that trigged the Dr. Dao incident by booking seats 15 minutes before departure. They don’t take the backlash from their poor decision making.
 
yonikasz
Posts: 104
Joined: Tue Nov 26, 2013 6:47 pm

Re: More to the Story? United ERJ (swapped for CRJ) turns around from CHA because ERJ-175 "too large to land"

Wed Oct 24, 2018 12:25 am

B737900ER wrote:
And what would have happened had they continued to CHA? They would have landed, off loaded, and cancelled the return, or paid a contractor to handle the aircraft, just like they would have done for a diversion.

But are we surprised? No, these regional airlines who United contracts out to don’t take the PR hit. These are the same people that trigged the Dr. Dao incident by booking seats 15 minutes before departure. They don’t take the backlash from their poor decision making.


It seems like this crap never happens to Delta. I'm not trying to fanboy here, but what has Delta done with their regional ops to make them better?

Popular Searches On Airliners.net

Top Photos of Last:   24 Hours  •  48 Hours  •  7 Days  •  30 Days  •  180 Days  •  365 Days  •  All Time

Military Aircraft Every type from fighters to helicopters from air forces around the globe

Classic Airliners Props and jets from the good old days

Flight Decks Views from inside the cockpit

Aircraft Cabins Passenger cabin shots showing seat arrangements as well as cargo aircraft interior

Cargo Aircraft Pictures of great freighter aircraft

Government Aircraft Aircraft flying government officials

Helicopters Our large helicopter section. Both military and civil versions

Blimps / Airships Everything from the Goodyear blimp to the Zeppelin

Night Photos Beautiful shots taken while the sun is below the horizon

Accidents Accident, incident and crash related photos

Air to Air Photos taken by airborne photographers of airborne aircraft

Special Paint Schemes Aircraft painted in beautiful and original liveries

Airport Overviews Airport overviews from the air or ground

Tails and Winglets Tail and Winglet closeups with beautiful airline logos