Jetstar turn back; Failed to Get Authorisation

[kangarooflyer88]

Just came across this article on airline ratings discussing the facts of this incident. The facts they point out about this flight are:

1. Jetstar, not the Indonesian authorities decided to turn back to Australia
2. The JetStar flight was still in Australian airspace when the error was discovered and the pilots decided to turn back
3. A diversion to Darwin was not possible due to crew scheduling

EU regulations apply to all flights departing from the EU and all EU airlines travelling within or outside the region.

EU regulations apply to all flights (and connecting flights) departing EU soil regardless of whether the impacted connection occurs outside of the EU, all that matters is that the itinerary begins in the EU.

Though in this case, the issue was not so much about compensation. Have passengers complained about compensation?

I would think that missing a day from your holiday and losing a night at a hotel has to be worth something?

But I agree that airlines have a power imbalance. They can cancel and refund tickets seemingly at will but the passenger is unable to

There's no power imbalance if they honour their commitments (i.e. booking you on replacement flights and providing compensation where appropriate).

That I would agree with.
EU261 would have been €600 cash instead of a $200 voucher (plus meals/accom/trips in vain/transport).

There is no compensation under EU261 for unused third party bookings.

In this case there might be enough wiggle room for JQ to say they did everything correctly and it was Indonesian recalcitrance that was the cause (EU261 exceptional circumstances clause). Though from a political point of view I’m not sure if JQ would want to publicly state that.

The key here is that the JQ flight would have to be on the same "ticket" as the flight originating from the EU. So something like CDG > LHR (QF) > SIN (BA) > SYD (BA) > DPS (QF) would count, the latter segment obviously being a QF codeshare for the aforementioned JQ flight.

I can't imagine that too many people, if any, on this Jetstar flight would be doing so as part of a relevant broader itinerary.

You clearly haven't met me! Who else would fly from TXL to KIX via DUS, LAS and SFO to save $500 and secure a Polaris upgrade?

Unless Australia took a weaker position on the protection laws, like Canada has done, JQ would still be in the hook here.

Don't get me started with Canadian air passenger protection regulations (APPR)! I'm still fighting Air Canada who claims that a staffing issue is outside their control for the purposes of APPR!

Not providing the correct paperwork, if that’s what occurred, would not be considered an extraordinary circumstance, but rather part of the general nature of airline operations.

Correct. Aside from weather there really aren't any excuses that are outside the airlines control, and even for weather, I know some folks who would argue that is within the airlines control!

-RooFlyer88

 

[Quickstatus]

I would think that missing a day from your holiday and losing a night at a hotel has to be worth something?

Yes that’s covered by the JQ $200 voucher. I’m not commenting on whether that’s enough. But that it appears that no one is complaining about compo. If this were under EU261, the quantum would have been €600.

if they honour their commitments

Of course there is a power imbalance- the airline unilaterally decided when it will give compo, and in what amounts. It’s not even cash

The key here is that the JQ flight would have to be on the same "ticket" as the flight originating from the EU.

No key, the point of making a EU261 comparison is just that - making a comparison. There is no similar Australian bill of air passengers rights in existence, nor is one being contemplated, tabled or currently legislated.

 

[RooFlyer]

1. Jetstar, not the Indonesian authorities decided to turn back to Australia
2. The JetStar flight was still in Australian airspace when the error was discovered and the pilots decided to turn back
3. A diversion to Darwin was not possible due to crew scheduling

Good for airlineratings.com and Geoffrey Thomas

1 - Of course the airline made the decision and not the Indonesians (assuming the pilots were Australian); see 2.
2 - Bleedingly obvious from the flight path, esp that the 'decision' would have been made somewhat before the actual turn-around. Note Thomas' own words "pilots decided to turn back"
3 - Well, I reckon it would have been possible. But sounds more like "The airline decided that a diversion to Darwin was not the best outcome, due to the impact on its crew scheduling". They could have diverted to Darwin, but chose not to.

 

[Quickstatus]

when the error was discovered

Not so sure that’s a “fact”. Ie that JQ didn’t know about it prior to takeoff

Why change to a 787. Could it be because it can carry fuel to go all the way back to MEL if the punt didn’t work?.

 

[kangarooflyer88]

Yes that’s covered by the JQ $200 voucher. I’m not commenting on whether that’s enough. But that it appears that no one is complaining about compo. If this were under EU261, the quantum would have been €600.

How do you know no one is complaining? Have you talked to the passengers? It will be interesting to see whether anyone takes JQ to court for breach of contract!

No key, the point of making a EU261 comparison is just that - making a comparison. There is no similar Australian bill of air passengers rights in existence, nor is one being contemplated, tabled or currently legislated.

That needs to change and now. If the commonwealth doesn't make the change, Australian airlines like Qantas will suffer to foreign competition as simple as that!

1 - Of course the airline made the decision and not the Indonesians (assuming the pilots were Australian); see 2.

I mean technically they could've just continued on to DPS. What are the Indonesians gonna do deny landing when the plane is critically low on fuel?

2 - Bleedingly obvious from the flight path, esp that the 'decision' would have been made somewhat before the actual turn-around. Note Thomas' own words "pilots decided to turn back"

I always thought pilots had a steering wheel at the coughpit and could simply threaten passengers to turn this (air)bus around if they keep acting up!

3 - Well, I reckon it would have been possible. But sounds more like "The airline decided that a diversion to Darwin was not the best outcome, due to the impact on its crew scheduling". They could have diverted to Darwin, but chose not to.

I suppose the relevant question would be how many qualified 787 pilots does the QF Group have based in DRW or how much would it cost to put everyone up in a hotel whilst crew take a mandatory rest versus the cost of flying all the way back to MEL?

Not so sure that’s a “fact”. Ie that JQ didn’t know about it prior to takeoff

With the QF Group sometimes it's hard to separate fact from fiction and reality from what comes out the side of Uncle Alan's mouth!

Why change to a 787. Could it be because it can carry fuel to go all the way back to MEL if the punt didn’t work?.

It does carry considerably more passengers too! That being said, I was surprised they onboarded so much fuel given the cost of transporting so much extra fuel.

 

[RSD]

It does carry considerably more passengers too! That being said, I was surprised they onboarded so much fuel given the cost of transporting so much extra fuel.

With JQ I'm surprised that the contingency plan wasn't to just to carry some extra blankets and pillows and land at somewhere like Port Hedland and make everyone sleep under the wings!

 

[kangarooflyer88]

With JQ I'm surprised that the contingency plan wasn't to just to carry some extra blankets and pillows and land at somewhere like Port Hedland and make everyone sleep under the wings!

I reckon the amount of high vis and safety equipment required by Premier McGowan for incoming passengers to wear upon landing at Port Hedland would make such a proposition infeasible indeed!

 

[RooFlyer]

3 - Well, I reckon it would have been possible. But sounds more like "The airline decided that a diversion to Darwin was not the best outcome, due to the impact on its crew scheduling". They could have diverted to Darwin, but chose not to.

I suppose the relevant question would be how many qualified 787 pilots does the QF Group have based in DRW or how much would it cost to put everyone up in a hotel whilst crew take a mandatory rest versus the cost of flying all the way back to MEL?

I don't think that's the relevant question on this point. Point being addressed is Thomas' contention that "A diversion to Darwin was not possible due to crew scheduling.". Probably just sloppy wording, but I say it was probably was possible but Melbourne suited the airline better - and it was probably a reasonable decision, all things considered (and given that consideration for the passengers is at the bottom of the list ). I think the airline put everyone up in Melbourne hotels (or those that wanted them) and then there was burning of the sacred fuel for 2 Australian transcons, plus airframe time etc.

 

[Quickstatus]

Have you talked to the passengers?

I’ve checked social media and I can’t find complaints about compo. Have you spoken to passengers that are complaining about compo?

they could've just continued on to DPS

Really?. They first have to enter Indonesia airspace. Are you really advocating declaring a fake emergency?. You know that when you declare minimum fuel, that could possibly trigger an investigation by the regulators

qualified 787 pilots does the QF Group have based in DRW

None.
AFAIK, The JQ 787 pilots overnighting there operate the JQ116-82-overnight-83-117

carry some extra blankets and pillows

There is definitely a fee for that

 

[Hampton Mike]

What is it about aircraft swops that are not permitted?

Presumably a completely justified box ticking exercise so that the receiving airport knows which planes are actually turning up on its doorstep and can make appropriate arrangements for receiving that type of aircraft.

 

[Saab34]

Any reason on why these 787 flights are always late? Pilot shortage? I mean looking at aircraft in the sky now, 90% are late.

Is it an issue with having foreign crew, and local pilots?

 

[kangarooflyer88]

Presumably a completely justified box ticking exercise so that the receiving airport knows which planes are actually turning up on its doorstep and can make appropriate arrangements for receiving that type of aircraft.

On paper yes they would need to plan for things like having a gate available for the 787 (since I believe and correct me if I'm wrong a 787 uses a different gate than an Airbus A321 Neo), having enough immigration personnel available, etc. Per the JetStar fleet website their A321 Neo can carry up to 232 passengers whereas a 788 can carry 335 passengers. Given these flights have been chock-a-block, it would be safe to assume that the number of passengers on any of these flights will be at the capacity of the respective aircraft. So it begs the question, what difference does an extra hundred passengers (and potential a couple more crew) make for an outfit like DPS? At the same time, presumably the airline would need to submit passenger information to the Indonesian authorities before takeoff meaning they would be tipped off as to how many people are arriving.

Any reason on why these 787 flights are always late? Pilot shortage? I mean looking at aircraft in the sky now, 90% are late.

Is it an issue with having foreign crew, and local pilots?

One major issue with the 787s irrespective of operator has been their engines with Rolls Royce issuing recalls and safety bulletins on them. Crew could also be an issue, but I suspect aircraft issues is the leading culprit.

-RooFlyer88

 

[Jacques Vert]

Correct. Aside from weather there really aren't any excuses that are outside the airlines control, and even for weather, I know some folks who would argue that is within the airlines control!

Air Traffic Controllers' strike was an excuse used by BA when they cancelled my flight some years ago.

 

[Quickstatus]

One major issue with the 787s irrespective of operator has been their engines with Rolls Royce

I think JQ 787 are powered by GE which have actually been the more reliable of the two endings that are available for the 787-8

 

[Saab34]

If Bali is restricted with seats due bi-laterals, why do they use the A321? Wouldn’t the seat cost be lower with a 787? Less Frequency with a more dense aircraft vs more frequency with a less dense aircraft seems like a waste of money to me.

 

[MEL_Traveller]

If Bali is restricted with seats due bi-laterals, why do they use the A321? Wouldn’t the seat cost be lower with a 787? Less Frequency with a more dense aircraft vs more frequency with a less dense aircraft seems like a waste of money to me.

Are the 787s required for other destinations on the network like seoul?