Qantas Dumps Economy Luggage in Darwin for London Flights

[TeaKozy]

Can't imagine this is going to help with recent call centre delays...

Dreamliner nightmare as Qantas dumps economy luggage in Darwin for London flights

One passenger said he only learned his bags were offloaded at Darwin 15 minutes before landing at Heathrow.

www.theage.com.au

Anyone onboard have their luggage offloaded? Not exactly a good look...

 

[justinbrett]

Anyone onboard have their luggage offloaded? Not exactly a good look...

A better look than skidding off the runway because they were too heavy.

 

[Melburnian1]

A better look than skidding off the runway because they were too heavy.

Spoken like a true QF PR spinner (although to be fair, they wouldn't want any mention of 23 September 1999 at BKK).

 

[justinbrett]

Spoken like a true QF PR spinner (although to be fair, they wouldn't want any mention of 23 September 1999 at BKK).

There's no PR, it's a matter of physics.

 

[jpp42]

A better look than skidding off the runway because they were too heavy.

True, but they could also get on with moving the flights back to PER which doesn't have runway restrictions.

 

[jrfsp]

True, but they could also get on with moving the flights back to PER which doesn't have runway restrictions.

Apparently it was looked at, but the costs of moving it early was prohibitive

 

[justinbrett]

True, but they could also get on with moving the flights back to PER which doesn't have runway restrictions.

These works were unexpected. The runway at PER is only marginally longer (less than 300FT), so from an operational perspective there's really no advantage of PER vs DRW.

Seems like it would have been easier to stop in SIN instead for these few days rather than offload pax/bags - perhaps QF is concerned people booked the flight on the basis of no transit through a third country.

 

[jrfsp]

These works were unexpected. The runway at PER is only marginally longer (less than 300FT), so from an operational perspective there's really no advantage of PER vs DRW.

Seems like it would have been easier to stop in SIN instead for these few days rather than offload pax/bags - perhaps QF is concerned people booked the flight on the basis of no transit through a third country.

The runway at DRW has a loading restriction on the 789 due to pavement strength. Not an issue at PER.

 

[justinbrett]

The runway at DRW has a loading restriction on the 789 due to pavement strength. Not an issue at PER.

What's your source on this?

The PCN is 81/F/C, and the ACN for 787-9 is - exactly 81/F/C. As is B2/E2 taxiways.

 

[jpp42]

Seems like it would have been easier to stop in SIN instead for these few days rather than offload pax/bags - perhaps QF is concerned people booked the flight on the basis of no transit through a third country.

Good point, could they do a "technical stop" (refueling only) without offloading any passengers, and thus not affecting anyone's transit status? But I expect they don't want the schedule delay this would impart. Better to get premium passengers there on time, the people they really care about, rather than economy bags.

 

[Franky]

These works were unexpected. The runway at PER is only marginally longer (less than 300FT), so from an operational perspective there's really no advantage of PER vs DRW.

Seems like it would have been easier to stop in SIN instead for these few days rather than offload pax/bags - perhaps QF is concerned people booked the flight on the basis of no transit through a third country.

Good idea, I would definitely accept one short stopover and arrive on the same aircraft as my bags...

 

[kpc]

Would have been pretty pi$$ed off if my bags were left behind!

 

[Franky]

Would have been pretty pi$$ed off if my bags were left behind!

Mightily....

 

[justinbrett]

Would have been pretty pi$$ed off if my bags were left behind!

Personally, I'd be more pissed if I was left behind.

Which was the only alternative.

 

[dajop]

There's no PR, it's a matter of physics.

And a matter of economics. Various other options (such as an additional technical stop), and another option would be to offer some compensation for some passengers and their luggage to be offloaded voluntarily. Almost certainly the cheapest and easiest option would be offloading bags and paying for them to be couriered later. If trying to minimise customer disruption, you'd probably try to offload bags associated with tickets that originated in LHR rather than those that originated in Australia, but I suspect time and system limitations would not allow that.

 

[jrfsp]

What's your source on this?

The PCN is 81/F/C, and the ACN for 787-9 is - exactly 81/F/C. As is B2/E2 taxiways.

The ACN for the 789 at MTOW for Darwin would be 88.

https://www.boeing.com/resources/boeingdotcom/commercial/airports/acaps/787.pdf

Page 164

 

[drron]

They have known about it for at least a couple of days. QF are still listing flights to London today and tomorrow on Emirates. why couldn't a few pax have been put onto those flights. for certain if bags are left behind at Darwin on todays flights then QF is well deserving of criticism. I searched for 4 pax.
They are still selling Y tix from Thursday on via DRW.

 

[justinbrett]

The ACN for the 789 at MTOW for Darwin would be 88.

https://www.boeing.com/resources/boeingdotcom/commercial/airports/acaps/787.pdf

Page 164

Fair cop, I got the ACN from wikipedia.

But the PCN at PER doesn't meet this requirement either, it's /F/A 60 there - and your reference says it's /F/A 66. It also exceeds the max tyre pressure.

They have known about it for at least a couple of days. QF are still listing flights to London today and tomorrow on Emirates. why couldn't a few pax have been put onto those flights. for certain if bags are left behind at Darwin on todays flights then QF is well deserving of criticism. I searched for 4 pax.
They are still selling Y tix from Thursday on via DRW.

Full length is available, the NOTAM was only for 48 hours from memory.

 

[TheInsider]

Good point, could they do a "technical stop" (refueling only) without offloading any passengers, and thus not affecting anyone's transit status? But I expect they don't want the schedule delay this would impart. Better to get premium passengers there on time, the people they really care about, rather than economy bags.

Nothing to do with the premium passengers and everything to do with duty hours for crew.

 

[jrfsp]

Fair cop, I got the ACN from wikipedia.

But the PCN at PER doesn't meet this requirement either, it's /F/A 60 there - and your reference says it's /F/A 66. It also exceeds the max tyre pressure.



Full length is available, the NOTAM was only for 48 hours from memory.

For the real world operating restrictions would need the calculator, so many variables at play but the 789 and 359 have the greatest pavement stresses for commercial aircraft