Qantas Passengers "dumped" at Christchurch airport after diverting from Wellington after missing curfew

[encryptededdy]

Aussie passengers 'dumped' at Chch airport with no accommodation after flight diverted

"They were absolutely no help whatsoever, the crew just got off and went home."

www.nzherald.co.nz

I wonder why they even took off unless it was just crossing the Tasman took unexpectedly long?

 

[RooFlyer]

From the article:

The spokesperson for Qantas apologised to customers for the inconvenience, saying they appreciated the understanding.

Oh nice! Qantas feels better when their customers 'understand' being dumped at an airport with no support.

The airline would have known some time before landing that the plane was going to CHC so had time to arrange at least a greeter. But the question remains - how much margin, if any, did the plane take off from Australia with or did the want of the airline to get the plane in NZ that night overcome the"inconvenience" to it's customers?

Does anyone know if the airline can pay fee for breaking the curfew at Wellington as you can, I think, do at Sydney?

 

[defurax]

I'm quite surprised that "Mike the P1" stayed at the airport and slept on a bench. I would have simply gone to a hotel and call P1 VIP team to get them to sort some flights the next day.

 

[encryptededdy]

did the want of the airline to get the plane in NZ overcome the"inconvenience" to it's customers?

Thing is, QF162 WLG to SYD departed late anyway (11am, scheduled 6:45am). I suppose it would've been later still if it had to fly in from Sydney at 6am, but geez...

 

[Denali]

Were all the airport hotels booked out? I would have just paid for a hotel to avoid sleeping on the bench but that's me, I like the CHC Novotel

 

[drron]

And there were only a hundred onboard!

The flight was diverted from Wellington. Photo / File

The NZ Herald wins the prize for showing the wrong plane. Didn't know A380s could land at Wellington.

But QF is really going gangbusters in the race to the bottom.

 

[justinbrett]

I wonder if they considered Palmerston North instead. No curfew and they could have put pax on buses to Wellington.

Sounds like there’s more to the story. QF of all airlines, based in SYD, understand curfews.

 

[Melburnian1]

From the article:

The spokesperson for Qantas apologised to customers for the inconvenience, saying they appreciated the understanding.

Oh nice! Qantas feels better when their customers 'understand' being dumped at an airport with no support.

The airline would have known some time before landing that the plane was going to CHC so had time to arrange at least a greeter. But the question remains - how much margin, if any, did the plane take off from Australia with or did the want of the airline to get the plane in NZ that night overcome the"inconvenience" to it's customers?

This was QF163 (B738 VH-VZV, the 1840 hours SYD - WLG airborne at 2115 hours.

This flight is thrice weekly. The previous two spent 2:33 and 2:41 in the air, so with the two hour time difference there was no way the flight could have reached WLG to land before 0100 hours local time. This buttresses your point.

As it was, the diverted flight then took off from CHC at 0925 hours this morning, arriving WLG at 1003 hours.

Out of interest, why wouldn't it have diverted to AKL rather than CHC? Because AKL is further away? Although Auckland's city centre is a fair way from the airport, there'd have to be a greater choice of rooms in Greater Auckland than in Christchurch. AKL is curfew-free.

Arranging hotel rooms at 0200 in the morning wouldn't be fun, but surely there'd have been some vacant rooms even if for say a requirement of 70 rooms QFi had to ask two or three hotels in total?

This seems to be another way of cost-cutting by Mr Joyce. Given QFi charges arguably outrageous fares (higher than competitors, and high to boot), passengers ought expect to receive a hotel room when matters go wrong as occurred here.

 

[encryptededdy]

Taking off at 9:06pm AEST (11:06pm NZST) there was no way they could've made it to WLG before 1am NZST.

It really sounds like Qantas just wanted the plane in NZ for the next day's 6:45am departure, customers be dammed. I hope there's another explanation.



edit: looks like @Melburnian1 already thought about this

 

[Hvr]

Were all the airport hotels booked out?

I'm with you Denali, a hotel is much better than a floor. I've previously stayed at Jucy CHC and it's quite acceptable, also with walking distance of the airport.

Snooze Christchurch

JUCY Snooze Christchurch is located minutes from the international airport. Choose your JUCY pod or private room today.

www.jucysnooze.co.nz

 

[RooFlyer]

That looks like quite a late diversion decision. I wonder if there was some expectation on board that they could land after the curfew ( a fee paid if possible) but a decision came " no, divert if safe to do so").

@AviatorInsight do you have any experience in this scenario?

 

[justinbrett]

Taking off at 9:06pm AEST (11:06pm NZST) there was no way they could've made it to WLG before 1am NZST.

It really sounds like Qantas just wanted the plane in NZ for the next day's 6:45am departure, customers be dammed. I hope there's another explanation.

View attachment 283657

edit: looks like @Melburnian1 already thought about this

The track shows it was a true diversion. The crew left SYD intending to land at WLG. They would have taken a more southerly direct track if they intended to land in CHC.

For what reason we don’t know. Perhaps they had a waiver that was rescinded. Perhaps they were told a waiver would be likely but it didn’t come through. If it was a premeditated change they would likely have had hotels sorted.

There’s definitely more to the story.

 

[RooFlyer]

This is an interesting and relevant read:

Stuff

i.stuff.co.nz

Of course the reason for the late diversion is one thing, but the way the airline treated its customers after it landed with a diversion is quite another and probably the main focus of the OP.

 

[Denali]

Taking off at 9:06pm AEST (11:06pm NZST) there was no way they could've made it to WLG before 1am NZST.

It really sounds like Qantas just wanted the plane in NZ for the next day's 6:45am departure, customers be dammed. I hope there's another explanation.

View attachment 283657

edit: looks like @Melburnian1 already thought about this

And/or additional crew?

I wonder what happened to the crew when they landed - where did the crew go?

 

[encryptededdy]

This is an interesting and relevant read:

Stuff

i.stuff.co.nz

Post automatically merged: Jul 4, 2022

Of course the reason for the late diversion is one thing, but the way the airline treated its customers after it landed with a diversion is quite another and probably the main focus of the OP.

I guess if there's a 30min grace period for irrops then perhaps they wanted to just squeeze it in, and diverted when they realised it wouldn't work

 

[defurax]

Interesting, there is apparently a 30 minute buffer:

"Night-flying curfews were introduced at the airport in 1996. They prohibit international flights landing between 1am and 6am, with disrupted flights allowed 30 minutes' leeway"

 

[RooFlyer]

And/or additional crew?

I wonder what happened to the crew when they landed - where did the crew go?

Good question. Now I certainly don’t mind the crew being looked after in respect accommodation before the passengers, but if there’s some attempt to accommodate crew unexpectedly, then you think airlines could have continued the process a bit.

But even if getting accommodation is impossible or impractical, for goodness sake just have someone waiting at the airport to explain to the passagers what’s going on, rather than them just getting their bags, looking around and thinking what’s going on? ( at least according to the story which of course with all media you need not take with 100% gospel)

 

[encryptededdy]

But even if getting accommodation is impossible or impractical, for goodness sake just have someone waiting at the airport to explain to the passagers what’s going on, rather than them just getting their bags, looking around and thinking what’s going on? ( at least according to the story which of course with all media you need not take with 100% gospel)

Well, there would've had to be some communication if the passengers knew to get on the CHC to AKL flight the next morning.

 

[SeatBackForward]

And/or additional crew?

I wonder what happened to the crew when they landed - where did the crew go?

When I was on QF8 that diverted to NAN after a customer had a medical incident, we took off towards Sydney, ended up landing in AKL because crew limits would've been exceeded. They legged it out of the airport pretty quickly. Assume hotel arrangements?

 

[dylarr]

This is an interesting and relevant read:

Stuff

i.stuff.co.nz

Of course the reason for the late diversion is one thing, but the way the airline treated its customers after it landed with a diversion is quite another and probably the main focus of the OP.

$12,000k is a drop in the ocean compared to the penalties for breaching the curfew at Sydney. The maximum penalty is $1,050,000 but in practice airlines breaching it have copped fines in low 6 figures.