Qantas Delays/Cancellations

[Quickstatus]

They must have fixed it enroute or at SCL

...QF27 went out without functioning IFE, and pax were given a voucher to purchase a (single) magazine, apparently. Probably the reason for the delay.

 

[Melburnian1]

On Sunday 15 May 2016, QF29 from MEL was expected (at 1000 this morning) to depart 55 minutes late at 1115 for Hong Kong. Arrival was predicted as 20 minutes behind at 1820, but this has changed because the departure time has been further put back to 1210.

Arrival in this major Asian harbour city should now be at about 1915 hours this evening, 75 minutes late.

If it forms QF30 back to MEL, HKG departure should be on time provided there are no further delays and all goes well in the preflight checks.

UPDATE: The departure time for QF29 has been further put back. By 1316, it had yet to depart. Unusually, on 15 May it is a B744: VH-OEI. It will not be in HKG until at least 2015 tonight so its return flight will be delayed, although as sometimes occurs QF has yet to update its website. QF30 to MEL, QF98 to BNE and QF128 to SYD on Sunday 15 ex HKG are all displaying as 'on time.'

 

[Melburnian1]

On Monday 16 May 2016, QF2101 has been delayed in its departure from CFS from 0630 hours to 0930 hours. SYD arrival should be at 1045 not the usual peak period 0745 hours. In the opposite direction, QF2104 from SYD to CFS on Monday 16 is delayed an hour in its departure to 0800 with predicted arrival at 0915 instead of 0825. Perhaps a cabin crew member on QF2101 has gone off sick and the flight is waiting for a replacement to fly up from SYD?

QF1760 and QF2448, the early morning BNE departures at 0620 hours to MKY and 0630 to MOV respectively were both cancelled.

The Saturday evening (14 May) QF2 from LHR departed five minutes early, arriving DXB 35 minutes early at 0655 hours on Sunday 15. However it did not then depart until 1106, an hour and 51 minutes behind time with Monday 16 May SYD arrival achieved at 0643, 93 minutes late.

The Saturday late evening QF16 from LAX departed 64 minutes late at 0024 on Sunday 15 May, arriving BNE on Monday 16 May at 0654, 44 late.

Due to Sunday 14 May's delayed QF29, QF30 from HKG on Sunday 15 May pushed back at 2138, 68 minutes late but MEL arrival is expected this morning (Monday 16) to only be 15 minutes late at 0815, a net 53 minute timetable gain from gate to gate.

QF671, the 0700 hours MEL across to ADL will instead depart at 0740.

The A388 longhaul 0915 hours MEL to LAX, QF93, will instead depart at 1100. Same day arrival is predicted as 0810 not 0635. This is because the Saturday 14 May QF94 (LAX to MEL) A388 VH-OQL diverted to SYD, where it arrived on Monday 16 at 0626 after departing LAX on Saturday evening 29 minutes late at 2244 hours. Departure from SYD this morning was at 0726 and it was airborne to the south at 0746 with MEL arrival suggested as 0900, two hours late. Was this a medical diversion?

QF423, the 1000 mid morning SYD down to MEL has been cancelled as has QF414, the 0800 MEL up to SYD.

 

[Quickstatus]

The most common reason for 94 diversion to SYD is fuel. Sometimes due to longer holding times at MEL due to fog or traffic or strong headwinds -all these require extra fuel perhaps more than what they could Hoe in the tanks?
UA98 a B789 from LAX landed on time.

The flight route suggests a direct route to SYD - (much the same as QF12 today) maybe this meant that they had planned a diversion all along. Sometimes this is a fuel related issue. Maybe they were unable to uplift enough fuel to get them to MEL due to MTOW?

Additionally the short pit stop of 1.33 hours suggests a fuel topup

 

[Melburnian1]

Thank you Quickstatus. I was going to add in 'fuel' as a possible reason but the stop was only for an hour (not '1.33 hours' as that would include taxiing time.) I suppose that is sufficient time to pump in a relatively small amount of fuel for the 707 kilometre or so flight down to MEL ex SYD, with refuelling for the MEL to LAX flight QF93 to occur in the southern capital as usual.

This is a costly way for QF to operate QF94 though with not just extra fuel but having to pay the onboard staff extra for the overtime.

 

[jb747]

The most common reason for 94 diversion to SYD is fuel. Sometimes due to longer holding times at MEL due to fog or traffic or strong headwinds.

ATC used to exempt the ultra long haul flights from the standard ATC holding. In the interests of 'fairness' they removed that. So now, short/medium haul flights that have no issue carrying vast amounts of holding fuel are treated the same as aircraft that have come a very long way, and which have trouble carrying much beyond the minimum holding fuel. End result more diversions...

The terminal area forecast isn't all that bad, but it would likely mean single runway ops. So more ATC holding (in the order of 40 minutes is not uncommon), and there is no way the 94 would have that. As a bonus, this sort of change often happens long after you depart, so you can't allow for it at the planning stage -but again, flights from closer in may well have prior notice. Lots can change in 15 hours.

TAF YMML 152301Z 1600/1706
36020G32KT CAVOK
FM160800 36016KT 9999 -SHRA SCT035 SCT060
BECMG 1613/1615 30014KT 9999 SCT040

The flight route suggests a direct route to SYD - (much the same as QF12 today) maybe this meant that they had planned a diversion all along. Sometimes this is a fuel related issue. Maybe they were unable to uplift enough fuel to get them to MEL due to MTOW?

It's quite normal to overfly the MARLN waypoint just outside of Sydney. Nothing to read into that.

 

[Melburnian1]

So more ATC holding (in the order of 40 minutes is not uncommon), and there is no way the 94 would have that. As a bonus, this sort of change often happens long after you depart, so you can't allow for it at the planning stage -but again, flights from closer in may well have prior notice. Lots can change in 15 hours.

I assume that the word 'bonus' is being used 'advisedly', through ever so slightly gritted teeth or at least with a hint of a sardonic half-grin. 'Bonus' indeed for the company supplying aviation fuel!

 

[Quickstatus]

I had the opportunity to do a QF94 diversion into SYD due to fog in MEL.
Bonus to me as my final destination was SYD.
Luggage delivered to me at my house the next day. Was so good to be able to go through SYD quarantine and grab a cab with no luggage

I hope it happens again if I do QF94

Can we read anything into the range capabilities of the 787-9 as UA98 landed in MEL

 

[milehighclub]

The diversion was because of a medical

 

[Quickstatus]

The diversion was because of a medical

This may have necessitated the use of a terminal gate instead of a remote refuelling stop as it normally does if just doing a pitstop.

SYD have 6 A380 capable gates. This morning there were 4 scheduled A380 arrivals which arrived between 0620 and 0700: QF2,8,12,EK412 and then QF94.

Wound this be called a very fast turnaround of essentially 1 hour (net of taxiway time)

 

[Melburnian1]

Thank you milehighclub for confirming that my semi-educated guess was correct.

Quickstatus, yes it is a fast turnaround, because the sick passenger is unlikely to be able to move off the aircraft in a stretcher within two minutes of arriving at the gate: the medicos may have to assess him or her, and there's the maneuvering of a stretcher (if required) down aisles and back up again. I have not seen this occur on an aircraft but it must be a bit tricky. Then the unscheduled A388 must wait for ATC clearance to push back, taxi and take off at a busy and becoming busier time of the weekday morning around 0740 hours.

Fascinating information about the number of gates and A388 arrivals this morning. EK and QF are not the only A380 operators into and out of SYD, but thankfully other arrivals are scheduled at different times.

 

[milehighclub]

This may have necessitated the use of a terminal gate instead of a remote refuelling stop as it normally does if just doing a pitstop.

SYD have 6 A380 capable gates. This morning there were 4 scheduled A380 arrivals which arrived between 0620 and 0700: QF2,8,12,EK412 and then QF94.

Wound this be called a very fast turnaround?

As you say there are 6 gates so I can't imagine it being an issue and I'm sure the airport would have been aware and made sure that a gate would be free for them.

But if all those gates were occupied, they could of easily gone to a bay and used a medical lift vehicle to come to an aircraft door and remove them that way and straight into an ambulance.

 

[milehighclub]

Thank you milehighclub for confirming that my semi-educated guess was correct.

Quickstatus, yes it is a fast turnaround, because the sick passenger is unlikely to be able to move off the aircraft in a stretcher within two minutes of arriving at the gate: the medicos may have to assess him or her, and there's the maneuvering of a stretcher (if required) down aisles and back up again. I have not seen this occur on an aircraft but it must be a bit tricky. Then the unscheduled A388 must wait for ATC clearance to push back, taxi and take off at a busy and becoming busier time of the weekday morning around 0740 hours.

It would depend on the nature of the medical, but if it is serious enough, the passenger can be off the aircraft in the blink of an eye.

Traditional stretchers don't fit down the aisle, so they use one that can be rolled up. It's made from plastic and has a metal pole on the left and right side. You tilt the passenger to one side and place part of it under them, then tilt them the other way to bring it all the way under them and then they are on it. You then have two people, one at each end and carry them away.

It sounds complicated, and it is tricky, but the medics at the airport deal with this all the time, so make it look particularly easy and do it in no time at all.

 

[jb747]

Wound this be called a very fast turnaround of essentially 1 hour (net of taxiway time)

Fastest I can recall hearing of was in Brisbane, where someone managed a splash and dash in about 30 minutes. I think most are around the 45 minute mark. When I did one a couple of months ago it was 45 or so, but we lost some of that just waiting in line for a tug to push us out.

 

[Melburnian1]

While some of the QantasLink or other non capital city routes are low profile (and do not carry many passengers in comparison to routes such as MEL - SYD), delays are continuing out of Sydney on Monday 16 May 2016.

QF1421 (1440 hours SYD down to CBR) is expected to depart at 1545; QF2046 should depart 45 minutes behind time at 1555 while QF2030, the 1530 for university city ARM is not forecast to depart until 1640 hours.

UPDATE: QF1421 departed SYD at 1606 with CBR arrival estimated as 1638, 63 minutes behind the schedule.

QF1515 on the same route is expected to depart at 1625, 65 minutes late. Later, the 1840 hours SYD - CBR (QF1525) is predicted to push back at 1920.

QF2006 from SYD to TMW is also delayed for 65 minutes until a forecast 1630 hours departure.

 

[Quickstatus]

Does anyone know what happened to QF574 PER-SYD this morning?

Apologies Songman or is it Ultraman - whats that avatar

Missed your question.

QF574 did not appear as either cancelled or delayed on any of the usual outlets. One way to look at it is to find the Rego number. That aircraft would have operated an East coast- PER as an incoming late evening May 11 because 574 is an early am departure. A brief analysis did not reveal anything particular and all aircraft arriving in PER departed from same back to the East coast (MEL,BNE,PER).



([Speculation/]:I wonder though whether it was VH-EBC A332 which was undergoing a G&O change in BNE. It operated a BNE-PER on May 12. Maybe it was late out of maintenance and late operating a westbound flight therefore QF574 did not operate??. [/Speculation]).

 

[Melburnian1]

QF23 from SYD to BKK is one of the more punctual A333 departures for QFi ex our major harbour city. However on Tuesday 17 May it departed at 1104, 74 minutes late with forecast arrival at 1755, 75 minutes behind. Provided all goes well, departure of Q24 can be expected at around the 1900 - 1910 mark this evening, 35 to 45 minutes late ex BKK. As is often the case, the QF website has yet to be updated to show this yet observers can easily work this out.

 

[Melburnian1]

B717-operated QF1508 departed HBA at 1807 on Tuesday 17 May in lieu of its timetabled 1710 hours, even though the earlier opposite number QF1507 had arrived in HBA four minutes early at 1626. MEL arrival is estimated at 1925, an hour late. Perhaps a little optimistically, QF suggests that the return flight QF1509 will depart MEL at 1955, 25 minutes behind, arriving in the Apple Isle capital at an estimated 2110 hours, also 25 minutes late.

These B717 flights continue to be less than marvellous punctuality performers to put it mildly.

The Tuesday 17 May QF1 departed SYD 43 minutes late at 1633 - often this is punctual ex SYD, arriving DXB at 0057 hours on Wednesday 18 May, 32 minutes late. With a cutdown stop in DXB it is still possible to arrive in LHR at or close to time as the schedule tends to often have some leeway in it from observed actual timings.

 

[Melburnian1]

The Tuesday 17 May 2016 QF12 (LAX - SYD) was meant to depart at 2230 hours but instead departed at 0306 hours on Wednesday 18 May (today), meaning a forecast SYD arrival on Thursday 19 at 1025 rather than 0630 hours. I do not know what time QF became aware of the delay - passengers may be able to fill us in - but if it had no advance notice and the crew had signed on and were at the airport, they must be sailing reasonably close to what one esteemed contributor from memory said was an 18 hour duty limit that can, with agreement, apparently be extended to 20 hours.

I assume that like many of us including travellers, QF and other airlines' crews may have activities planned for the day of arrival or the day after arrival so some might be if not anxious, at least expecting to 'get home' at or close to the scheduled time, notwithstanding that with most transport operators delays are a fact of life.

One question is when a crew member (say cabin crew) comes down with a virus or diarrhea at an hotel in a location where an airline does not have available other staff (because of mandatory rest minima for the others who have come off separate flights for their slips), can an A380 or B747 flight run with (say) one less cabin crew member due to extenuating circumstances or is a delay mandatory until the full staffing complement can be achieved?

 

[Quickstatus]

Wow that's an ungodly hour. A lounge access eligibility would be a godsend though in this case. I hope the staff there get paid overtime.

My ex CSM friend is offline atm. I will confirm the cabin crew question. She has said in the past that there must be enough crew to man all the emergency exits (1:1 ratio), and there are cabin crew to passenger ratios. I'm unsure whether the ratios are mandated by regulation or part of an enterprise agreement. Another question would be whether extra crew are required for a long haul.

I am confident a quality airline such as this one and others would not hesitate to delay/cancel a flight when equipment and/or crew is below minimum requirements.

JB747 our excellent contributor has finished his leave and is about to fly QF9 tonight - he may choose to comment but may be delayed at least a day or so

Whats the B744 QF12 VH-OJS forming after it arrives? It should be able turnaround for QF25 or the 27.