Qantas Delays/Cancellations

[jb747]

Depends if they get a longer slip in DXB then is needed. They might only need 24 hours, but get 48. If DXB-LHR requires less rest between sectors then is needed before the longer DXB-AU, they could swap crews. They could stop a QF9/10 at DXB and catch up the rest periods while transferring pax to other flights instead of operating the DXB-LHR sector.

Most of the Dubai slips are around 36 hours. It varies a bit. The crews going to London are probably the most limiting, as it's often 2 man. The 9 and 1 crews may swap northbound, and/or southbound. The crew that does the 2 out of London almost always finishes on the 10....which is how you get 36 (or so) hour slips.

You wouldn't need to stop a 9/10 unless the aircraft were broken. Crew aren't all that much of an issue.

 

[Melburnian1]

On saturday 7 May, QF1477 (1155 SYD down to CBR) was cancelled.

While the B744 QF63 from SYD across to JNB departed 53 minutes behind at 1143, for those with tight connections there is not apparently any need to panic as QF expects arrival to be only five minutes late at 1715 same day.

 

[Flyerqf]

Possibilities are
1) as you say no one on the 12 are connecting to the 94
2) if there are connecting passengers they might be told that they have to connect via SYD on the 12

The airline may want to protect the onward QF93 after the arrival of the 94 from any possible delay as there is only about 3 hours or so to change the 93 to 94 (if this is the projected forward arrangement on 4/3/16)

I could be wrong but I'm pretty sure that QF12 LAX to SYD cannot depart until after QF12 from JFK has arrived due to being the same flight number, even though they are different aircraft.

Therefore if the QF12 is delayed from JFK, the QF12 and QF16 on to Australia will both always be delayed due to the above reason for QF12 and because the JFK-LAX aircraft goes on to operate QF16.

 

[Quickstatus]

I could be wrong but I'm pretty sure that QF12 LAX to SYD cannot depart until after QF12 from JFK has arrived due to being the same flight number, even though they are different aircraft.

Therefore if the QF12 is delayed from JFK, the QF12 and QF16 on to Australia will both always be delayed due to the above reason for QF12 and because the JFK-LAX aircraft goes on to operate QF16.

Thanks Flyerqf,

Thats an interesting scenario

As you have described QF11TC depends on the arrival of QF15, and QF12TP depends on the arrival of QF12TC as it is the same aircraft.

The issue of 2x QF12 operating is not unusual. The other flight may be QF1/2/9/10 or really any long intercontinental flights with more than 2 sectors. I think DL40 has a similar SYD-LAX then aircraft change for the LAX-JFK.

In the past DL16 used to fly on to ATL in a 767 after its transpacific SYD-LAX in a 777.

I don't think an airline will hold an aircraft on the ground which is ready to go while its namesake is still airborne. (I think this has been explained before somewhere but I cant remember). Its a matter of callsigns vs flight number. What happens is that the airline will change the Callsign of one of them slightly (by adding a letter or extra digit to the ready for takeoff aircraft) for the purposes of ATC operations, but the passengers will only know their flight as flight number QF12 and wont be aware of the change

It is also common for delayed aircraft to have a slightly modified callsign such as QF8D but the boarding pass only says QF8.
Similarly an aircraft with one callsign may have several flight numbers

Maybe a Pilot or ATC eavesdropper can comment.

 

[Flyerqf]

Thanks Flyerqf,

Thats an interesting scenario

As you have described QF11TC depends on the arrival of QF15, and QF12TP depends on the arrival of QF12TC as it is the same aircraft.

The issue of 2x QF12 operating is not unusual. The other flight may be QF1/2/9/10 or really any long intercontinental flights with more than 2 sectors. I think DL40 has a similar SYD-LAX then aircraft change for the LAX-JFK.

In the past DL16 used to fly on to ATL in a 767 after its transpacific SYD-LAX in a 777.

I don't think an airline will hold an aircraft on the ground which is ready to go while its namesake is still airborne. (I think this has been explained before somewhere but I cant remember). Its a matter of callsigns vs flight number. What happens is that the airline will change the Callsign of one of them slightly (by adding a letter or extra digit to the ready for takeoff aircraft) for the purposes of ATC operations, but the passengers will only know their flight as flight number QF12 and wont be aware of the change

It is also common for delayed aircraft to have a slightly modified callsign such as QF8D but the boarding pass only says QF8.
Similarly an aircraft with one callsign may have several flight numbers

Maybe a Pilot or ATC eavesdropper can comment.

I think it's different with QF11/12 because QF don't have domestic flying rights within USA. They can only fly JFK-LAX because it's an extension of SYD-LAX.

 

[Quickstatus]

I think it's different with QF11/12 because QF don't have domestic flying rights within USA. They can only fly JFK-LAX because it's an extension of SYD-LAX.

I think from a practical point of view it only means they just cannot sell a LAX-JFK or vica versa ticket inside the USA.
I believe all foreign carriers can operate a flight between 2 US destinations. However they are unable to sell tickets for these flights domestically. The Cabotage is allowed only for passengers originating or terminating their journey outside the USA.

I suspect so long as one aircraft waits for the delayed transcontinental aircraft there is not a problem

 

[Flyerqf]

I suspect so long as one aircraft waits for the delayed transcontinental aircraft there is not a problem

Agree. But don't think a change in call sign will suffice to get around the waiting.

 

[Melburnian1]

The Saturday evening QF130 from PVG departed 16 minutes late at 2011 hours but is not expected to arrive (on Sunday 8 May) until 0905, 35 minutes behind time.

The Friday 6 May 2016 QF12 departed LAX at 0020 hours on Saturday, an hour and 50 minutes late so on Sunday 8 May should arrive in SYD at 0805. 95 minutes tardy. The B744-operated QF16 departed at 0056 Saturday instead of 2320 on Friday evening (96 minutes late) with Sunday arrival predicted as 75 minutes late at 0725 hours. As per the above discussion between AFF members Quickstatus and FlyerQF, the Melbourne-bound QF94 departed only three minutes late, giving 'legs' to these members' theory about it being the 'priority' ex LAX due to its constrained turnaround time in MEL to return as QF93 to LAX.

The delays were due to the Friday morning QF11 (formed by the B744 ex QF15) departing LAX 89 minutes late at 0949, and then arriving 88 minutes late at JFK at 1808 hours. It then departed at 1955 hours, 105 minutes late, arriving back in LAX at 2237, 92 minutes tardy.

UPDATE: Also on Sunday 8 May, QF2254, the 0700 SYD to offshore LDH is expected to depart half an hour late.

 

[Melburnian1]

On Sunday 8 May, QF1 from SYD departed an hour late at 1650 hours for DXB and LHR but is expected to pick up 15 minutes of the deficit on the way to the Middle East. QF463 (1830 hours SYD down to MEL) has been cancelled.

QF783, the evening 2005 hours SYD across to ADL is not running.

 

[Melburnian1]

Monday 9 May 2016 sees QF407, the 0715 hours SYD - MEL cancelled while QF411, the next flight at 0730 should instead depart at 0815 hours. QF415, the 0800 hours has also been cancelled. Are these cancellations weather related or has SYD airport some problems this morning? Or are these cancellations symptomatic of the downturn in bookings of 15 per cent for May 2016 that QF has disclosed?

In the opposite direction, QF416, the 0830 hours MEL - SYD has also been cancelled.

UPDATE: QF411 is even later than predicted, with A333 VH-QPB, more often seen on international flights, still taxiing at 0851 behind QF575, the late, but not as significantly so, departure to PER. QF411's MEL arrival is likely to be at 1040, 95 minutes late.

QF1463, the 0730 hours SYD short hop down to CBR took off at 0901 hours (Q400 VH-QOF) with arrival likely about 65 minutes behind schedule at 0930.

QF1529, the 0840 CBR - MEL was airborne at 0922 and should arrive at 1046, 56 minutes late. Aircraft is B717 VH-YQW.

The high noon QF431 from SYD to MEL was airborne at 1303 and should arrive at about 1415 hours, 40 minutes late. Aircraft is A332 VH-EBP.

QF19, the 1210 SYD north to election day MNL did not depart until 1248 but should nominally arrive at what can be a bad airport for delays, with extensive holding patterns, at 1855, 25 minutes late.

Our old friends the B717s on the MEL - HBA route also have problems, with QF1502, the 1010 HBA to MEL (VH-YQY) taking off at 1218 for a projected MEL arrival at 1331, 126 minutes late. The preceding flight in the oppsoite direction, QF1501 had been only 14 minutes late into HBA at 0944 this morning so a fault must have been discovered in the Apple Isle capital.

As a result, QF1503, the 1230 MEL to HBA is forecast to depart at 1405, 95 minutes late.

 

[jpk]

Monday 9 May 2016 sees QF407, the 0715 hours SYD - MEL cancelled while QF411, the next flight at 0730 should instead depart at 0815 hours. QF415, the 0800 hours has also been cancelled. Are these cancellations weather related or has SYD airport some problems this morning? Or are these cancellations symptomatic of the downturn in bookings of 15 per cent for May 2016 that QF has disclosed?

UPDATE: QF411 is even later than predicted, with A333 VH-QPB, more often seen on international flights, still taxiing at 0851 behind QF575, the late, but not as significantly so, departure to PER. QF411's MEL arrival is likely to be at 1040, 95 minutes late.

I was on the 422 1000 MEL-SYD which was also delayed about 2 hours. The story was bad weather & winds coming into MEL which was down to 1 runway ops. There was a lot of upset people who were connecting to NAN and SFO, neither flight waited for them. I was very surprised the QF73 to SFO did not wait as quite a few were connecting and the delay was foreseen several hours in advance.

 

[Melburnian1]

jpk thank you for this 'pure gold' information from the coalface.

QF422 departed MEL this morning at 1125 rather than 1000, but lost time presumably due to excess taxiing time if operations were only on one runway, arriving SYD at 1302 rather than 1125, the latter being 97 minutes late.

QF73 did not depart until 1322 and is predicted as on time into SFO for an 0930 hours same day arrival. If it had waited, departure could conceivably have been at say around the 1415 - 1430 mark (given that luggage would have been 'tagged through' and boarding passes issued in MEL) so arrival in SFO might not be much more than an hour late. As an aside, FJ910 from SYD to NAN (which is also QF345) departed SYD at 1316 and is due in Fiji tonight three minutes early at 1847.

If QF wants to continue to be SYD-centric notwithstanding that Melbourne is growing faster and is not far behind the Harbour City in raw population numbers, then it ought jolly well ensure passengers connect in such circumstances given that the airline accepted a booking from such travellers based on an hour and 35 minutes' connecting time, which exceeds the mandated minimum connecting time by a goodly margin.

In the past on other airlines such as MH I have observed that flights will be held for as few as 10 connecting passengers, but as a rule not for four or five. One connecting pax: forget it! It sounds like there were at least 10 connecting to SFO if not more. It must be more efficient to do the domestic leg in Australia rather than travel to LAX and then hop on a domestic to SFO. Many passengers dislike arriving at LAX from an international flight and view SFO (or further away, DFW or JFK) as preferable entry points.

jpk, do you suspect that these SFO (and NAN) bound passengers were given hotel rooms on arrival in SYD? They would have long missed QF11 and AA72 to LAX or competitor UA870 to SFO, and there are no later departures for LAX or SFO on a Monday if I am not mistaken.

 

[Quickstatus]

Thanks jpk

The airline may have thought it less inconvenient to rebook misconnected passengers here in Australia rather than risk delaying any onward connections at the other end. One viewpoint against this proposition is that SFO is not an AA hub so any connections on a QF/AA ticket stock should be minimal??

QF422 landed just after 11am and QF73 did not depart until 1140. Obviously this is not the aircraft door open (422) and close (73) time, but its mighty close. With help from QF ground staff the rigmarole of transferring from DOM-INT at SYD could have been completed by 1200. So departure of Qf73 would only have been 30 minutes late at best and maybe 1 hour at worst. Not a biggie considering most flights have "padding" in their schedules.

Maybe there is capacity on the next QF73 (as per recent discussions about thinning demand for airline seats) or the passengers were not important enough

 

[Melburnian1]

Maybe there is capacity on the next QF73 (as per recent discussions about thinning demand for airline seats)

That may be true Quickstatus. Unfortunately there is no QF73 ex Oz on Tuesdays at present so the next departure is Wednesday 11 May - 48 hours away.

At least since school holidays were altered to take account of four school terms not three, May has been one of three months within and from Australia when travel demand tends to drop (all other criteria being equal.)

 

[Quickstatus]

Wow a 2 day delay for the poor QF73 passengers over maybe a 1 hour delay...

Or they will be put on the next QF93 tomorrow then connect to SFO.

 

[Melburnian1]

The one thing jpk did not explain was whether the QF73 and QF345 connecting passengers actually boarded QF422 in MEL and travelled (late) to SYD or whether they were asked to go back home (or given a MEL hotel if not a local resident.)

That's the one piece of the jigsaw that is missing.

QF1560 from ADL to SYD (B717 VH-YQX), the 1350 hours, did not take off until 1643 with arrival expected at 1845, 150 minutes behind schedule.

 

[Melburnian1]

QF1584 from HBA to SYD (B717 VH-YQW) is expected to arrive at about 1910 hours, 130 minutes late.

This is a further example of what AFF member katiebell claimed was poor punctuality by QF on this route, after I referred to HBA - MEL as bad.

 

[Quickstatus]

Just a rehash of my post from February 2016 re B717 that may give a slightly differenct perspective on the woes on the 717 routes

http://www.australianfrequentflyer....eliability-issues-many-74345.html#post1404710

 

[Melburnian1]

QF93 from MEL to LAX has been delayed in its departure from 0915 to a forecast 1530 on Tuesday 10 May 2016.

One good aspect of longer turnarounds is that - touch wood - this should not affect QF94 ex LAX late on Tuesday 10 May.

 

[Quickstatus]

Oops I wonder if any of the QF73 misconnected pax are on that flight