Qantas Delays/Cancellations

[nlagalle]

Re: QF41 delay

It shows how much slackness there is in QF's flight rosters that in under three days, QF can 'recover' about eight hours of delays. Of course, SYD airport's 2300 - 0600 + 1 curfew with only limited arrivals possible between 0500 and 0600 restricts an airline's options, but QF shareholders must look at some of the aircraft rosters and question whether operations are as effcient as they could be. The other question as to whether there would be sufficient demand at variable flight times for extra flights arises. This is a similar question to the thread about the 'demise of QF International', where fellow TAFFers have pointed out that QF's A380 rosters could be much more efficient than is presently the case if QF chose, albeit at the possible cost of loss of some corporate flyers' revenue given that the latter like late night departures from LHR and LAX not midday ones.

Can I ask, are you experienced in fleet ops? because Qantas don't leave aircraft lying around for hours on end. making up 8 hours over 3 days (or around 70 hours, nearly 10% of the time) shows the aircraft aren't sitting around. if they made it up in a day then you could argue they did. but from where I sit, and what I have experienced they don't leave their aircraft just sitting around, and i doubt the shareholders have questioned it. Also people here my question what they think is a "better" A380 roster, but no one here works in fleet ops and also don't know other limitations on how the aircraft need to be used.

p.s. the acronym here isn't TAFF, it's always been AFF.

 

[TheInsider]

Re: QF41 delay

Just wanted to say about recent posts regarding the QF9 delay's.
These haven't been due to crewing requirements, these are due to either engineering or FTB's (fail to boards). The last incident where the QF9 was delayed by a significant amount was due to a nose wheel defect, which a part had to be sent down from SYD and then replaced.

As for the LHR flights getting in later, this was never an option due to QF losing a high number of corporate clients, this has been said by AJ in the 'road shows' he has done with staff.
BTW the amount of connecting passengers (DXB-LHRvv) QF is getting from EK, from destinations in Asia far outweighs a few leisure travellers getting in later into LHR.

 

[TheInsider]

Re: QF41 delay

Just wanted to say about recent posts regarding the QF9 delay's.
These haven't been due to crewing requirements, these are due to either engineering or FTB's (fail to boards). The last incident where the QF9 was delayed by a significant amount was due to a nose wheel defect, which a part had to be sent down from SYD and then replaced.

As for the LHR flights getting in later, this was never an option due to QF losing a high number of corporate clients, this has been said by AJ in the 'road shows' he has done with staff.
BTW the amount of connecting passengers (DXB-LHRvv) QF is getting from EK, from destinations in Asia far outweighs a few leisure travellers getting in later into LHR.

 

[Melburnian1]

Re: QF41 delay

TheInsider, thank you for your kind information.

Could you please delete your comments above re QF9 delays from this thread and transfer them to the thread 'Why can't QF9 run on time?' This will help AFFers as both threads will then logically flow. Many thanks.

 

[straitman]

Re: QF41 delay

TheInsider, thank you for your kind information.

Could you please delete your comments above re QF9 delays from this thread and transfer them to the thread 'Why can't QF9 run on time?' This will help AFFers as both threads will then logically flow. Many thanks.

Within the normal forum etiquette it is reasonable to have a small amount of OT discussion so I see no reason to move the post. Thanks for the thought though.

 

[Melburnian1]

QF128 17 August 2013 diverts from HKG to MNL

I notice that Saturday 17 August 2013's QF128 departed HKG at 2028 local time (13 minutes late) but then diverted to MNL, landing there at an unscheduled 2339 before departing MNL (which is on the same time band as HKG) at 0112 this morning (Sunday 18 August 2013) before landing in SYD at 1055, 210 minutes (three and a half hours) late:

QF 20 had departed MNL more or less on time last night and arrived SYD this morning at 0624, one minute early, so it was not anything to do with that flight. Nor was it anything to do with PR209 as that flight departed MNL five minutes late at 2105 for MEL (an airline that unlike QF actually serves MEL directly from MNL).

Did the QF128 Airbus A388 make a rare visit to MNL because of a medical emergency on board? FlightStats - Global Flight Tracker, Status Tracking and Airport Information implies that the decision to divert was made at about 2256, some 43 minutes prior to landing in MNL.

The time it took to travel from HKG to MNL may suggest that the captain made the decision to land at MNL when the A388 was a little south (in broad terms) of MNL as the normal gate to gate flying and taxiing time is only two hours or two hours and five minutes, not three hours 11 minutes.

Later update at 1410 MEL time: QF11 departed SYD five minutes late at 1310 today, so it was able to turn around at SYD in two and a quarter hours despite the significant delay to QF128.

QF's computer is showing that the flight it forms in SYD, QF11 to LAX, is still due to depart gate 9 in SYD on time at 1305 this afternoon (Sunday 18 August 2013).

AFFers with a memory for QF incidents will recall that this is not the first time a QF flight has had to divert to MNL (which if I correctly recall may have had our esteemed AFFer jb747 as the captain on that date):

Qantas Flight 30 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

[markis10]

Re: QF128 17 August 2013 diverts from HKG to MNL

It was a medical diversion, ironically to the very airport the aircraft had been for the last four weeks, not sure why you would think its related to other flights, QF are not in the habit if rescuing one flight with another making more people delayed.

 

[Melburnian1]

Re: QF128 17 August 2013 diverts from HKG to MNL

markis10, thank you. I was merely trying to eliminate all other possibilities. You have typed 'marine': you may mean 'meaning.'

Was this A388 in MNL for four weeks for maintenance at Lufthansa Technik or some other hangar operator?

 

[Melburnian1]

Re: QF128 17 August 2013 diverts from HKG to MNL

Apparently the A388 did not end up diverting to MNL as the QF website states, but to CRK (the former US air base, closed about 1990 but now playing host to some domestic and international flights: 80 kilometres north of Metro Manila).

The QF website would not have CRK loaded on its database as a 'recognised airport' so that explains the incorrect information:

Qantas flight diverted to Clark airport due to NAIA congestion | Inquirer News

The report claims that QF128 was 'empty.' This must be wrong.

 

[under the radar]

Re: QF128 17 August 2013 diverts from HKG to MNL

google 'theqantassource'

 

[markis10]

Re: QF128 17 August 2013 diverts from HKG to MNL

Apparently the A388 did not end up diverting to MNL as the QF website states, but to CRK (the former US air base, closed about 1990 but now playing host to some domestic and international flights: 80 kilometres north of Metro Manila).

The QF website would not have CRK loaded on its database as a 'recognised airport' so that explains the incorrect information:

Qantas flight diverted to Clark airport due to NAIA congestion | Inquirer News

The report claims that QF128 was 'empty.' This must be wrong.

Totally wrong, that was the aircraft going to MNL for maintenance.

 

[JohnPhelan]

Re: QF128 17 August 2013 diverts from HKG to MNL

Apparently the A388 did not end up diverting to MNL as the QF website states, but to CRK (the former US air base, closed about 1990 but now playing host to some domestic and international flights: 80 kilometres north of Metro Manila).

The QF website would not have CRK loaded on its database as a 'recognised airport' so that explains the incorrect information:

Qantas flight diverted to Clark airport due to NAIA congestion | Inquirer News

The report claims that QF128 was 'empty.' This must be wrong.

And from where are you getting all your incorrect information? The details in the Inquirer News article are all correct. In no part of the article does it say it was QF 128.

 

[Melburnian1]

Re: QF128 17 August 2013 diverts from HKG to MNL

It would not be often that one QF A388 ends up in MNL and the other at CRK on the same night!

 

[Melburnian1]

Re: QF41 delay

Today (Tuesday 20 August 2013) QF9 departed MEL two hours and 11 minutes late at 1736; the computer shows it due into DXB an even two hours late at 0125 local time on Wednesday 21 August.

As I write at 1835,Airbus A388 VH-OHH is just passing over the Victorian/ South Australian state border south of Pinnaroo (SA) and is at 9754 metres in altitude. The 'competition', SQ228 (which is timetabled to depart MEL at 1545, 20 minutes behind QF9), is already passing over AYQ and has reached 10673 metres in altitude, being operated by 9V-SKQ.

Perhaps the very informative AFFer TheInsider (great name) can enlighten us as to whether today's delay was again due to a mechanical issue.

There's one thing, though, that all AFFers know as a 'dead cert': the esteemed AFFer jb747 cannot be at the controls today, as jb747 never runs late. He is the antithesis of the Greyhound coach driver who I met 25 years ago who boasted 'I always run late.' If jb747 was in charge, QF9 would never leave late, always gain a little time enroute and be early "into" DXB. jb747 has the 'Midas' touch.

The QF computer has not yet been updated to predict a departure time for QF9 from DXB and an arrival time in LHR, but one problem with the latter can be that a flight may have to do a holding pattern for a bit longer should it not be operating according to its timetable when approaching the very busy, great to observe LHR 'parade' of arriving flights.

The QF computer is sometimes updated with forecast arrival times once a plane has taken off, but at other times it takes longer. This is surprising, because presumably there is not a lot of human intervention, with the computer software knowing that past history shows when a flight is running late on route X it has an 80 per cent chance of (say) reducing time on the ground at an intermediate 'port' by say five minutes compared to the timetabled allowance, and can therefore publish predicted further times for later stage(s) of an aircraft's rotations.

UPDATE at 1910 MEL time: the QF computer predicts a DXB departure time of 0255 for a LHR arrival of 0700, 90 minutes late. While this is pretty typical for QF9 to make up half an hour between these two ports, it may be a bit harder if it's running so late.

 

[Tristanm]

Re: QF41 delay

I've flown QF9 twice this year, first time it ran I think a bit over an 1 hour late, maybe a bit more, reason given in the J lounge was a part was poached for a MEL-LAX bound 388 that was due to leave earlier. This was back in late January when it was still via SIN. Second time I flew it, QF9 left pretty much dead on time (presumably jb747 was at the controls), which was a shame as it was my inaugural visit to the MEL Flounge.

Personally I don't care, and would actually prefer a late arrival since for my trips I tend to arrive Sundays and London is pretty dead until midday. Understand some people have pressing engagements on the morning of arrival however.

If QF10 is running late on the way back, that's another matter...

 

[RB]

Re: QF41 delay

Today (Tuesday 20 August 2013) QF9 departed MEL two hours and 11 minutes late at 1736; the computer shows it due into DXB an even two hours late at 0125 local time on Wednesday 21 August.


UPDATE at 1910 MEL time: the QF computer predicts a DXB departure time of 0255 for a LHR arrival of 0700, 90 minutes late. While this is pretty typical for QF9 to make up half an hour between these two ports, it may be a bit harder if it's running so late.

 

[mannej]

re: General Qantas Delays/Cancellations/etc. Discussion

Just a small correction but OHH isn't an A380.

 

[nlagalle]

Re: QF41 delay

Gotta be the best post of the day...

 

[nlagalle]

Re: QF41 delay

As I write at 1835,Airbus A388 VH-OHH is just passing over the Victorian/ South Australian state border south of Pinnaroo (SA) and is at 9754 metres in altitude. The 'competition', SQ228 (which is timetabled to depart MEL at 1545, 20 minutes behind QF9), is already passing over AYQ and has reached 10673 metres in altitude, being operated by 9V-SKQ.

Since when was QF having a "competition" with a SQ flight? I am not sure what you are trying to imply? oh and BTW it's not VH-OHH, it's VH-OQH, if SQ was having a comp with OHH, it would win hands down as it's a CIRRUS SR22 single engine piston aircraft.. Just saying..

 

[nlagalle]

Re: QF41 delay

I've flown QF9 twice this year, first time it ran I think a bit over an 1 hour late, maybe a bit more, reason given in the J lounge was a part was poached for a MEL-LAX bound 388 that was due to leave earlier. This was back in late January when it was still via SIN. Second time I flew it, QF9 left pretty much dead on time (presumably jb747 was at the controls), which was a shame as it was my inaugural visit to the MEL Flounge.

Personally I don't care, and would actually prefer a late arrival since for my trips I tend to arrive Sundays and London is pretty dead until midday. Understand some people have pressing engagements on the morning of arrival however.

personally I'd be happy if QF9 ran late for me too.. more time in the F lounge!