QF4 JFK-AKL diversion to Fiji (4/10/24)

[offshore171]

The 4 flight deck crew were standing around in arrivals looking rather annoyed along with a bunch of other passengers.

Is the suggestion that the plane diverted as a result of a disruptive group of passengers?

 

[Quickstatus]

Is the suggestion that the plane diverted as a result of a disruptive group of passengers?

I didnt get that impression from the original comment. Some of the passengers and crew would be NZ based. If i was NZ based i would be annoyed too.

I suspect the NZ bound pax/crew would be offered alternatives to get them to AKL on FJ or maybe even NZ

 

[jb747]

@henrus . Im not sure about the theory that the crew "timed out" given that it departed on time and flight time was about the same as a normal QF4.

Odd logic. They haven’t run out of hours in flight. But, having diverted, they’ve got an hour or so on the ground, and then a flight to Auckland. So that’s about 3-4 hours more than the normal JFK to AKL duty time. You cannot start a flight knowing that you’ll be in breach of the hours.

Also where did the crew come from to operate the subsequent sector. Maybe they flew up from AKL on a FJ/NZ flight?

This comes back to the why of the diversion. Many times, when the company gets wind of the possibility early enough, they’ll have a replacement crew on the move before the diversion happens. And as often as not, it doesn’t happen, and they’re called out in vain.

You can read a little bit into the geometry of the diversion. From the point they’ve gone, it’s about the same distance on as for the diversion. So, that means that the fuel required for the diversion is the same as required for the flight onwards. It implies that the diversion happened at the latest possible point, as does the 90º geometry. Knowing that it would terminate flight, that makes sense, but it also implies that they were pushing onwards in the hope that something would change that would allow them to continue. That’s a very common way of handling weather, especially when there’s rolling time changes on the TAFs.

One other thing is that you cannot generally read the behaviour of other aircraft into the decision. For instance the weather might be ok, but the TAF says periodic thunderstorms. They’re not actually there, and aircraft are happily coming and going. But, another aircraft on a longer flight may well still be forced to divert. The difference will lie in how far they’ve travelled and what sort of fuel loadings they have. Shorter flights may well have tonnes of spare fuel to cover weather, whilst the longer flights cannot miraculously upload any more.

 

[Quickstatus]

And as often as not, it doesn’t happen, and they’re called out in vain.

Assuming the company were told soon after the diversion - lets say 1530UTC, that gives a standby crew about 5hrs or likely 4-5hrs depending on when they were called to get on the SYD-NAN QF101. Not sure if thats enough time.

So that’s about 3 hours more than the normal JFK to AKL duty time.

If the "stars" aligned was a splash and dash possible if the destination weather was fine. I suspect they "called it" because even if they had available time, the weather at AKL was the no go.

 

[jb747]

Assuming the company were told soon after the diversion - lets say 1530UTC, that gives a standby crew about 5hrs or likely 4-5hrs depending on when they were called to get on the SYD-NAN QF101. Not sure if thats enough time.

1530UTC is 0130 in Sydney. I'm not sure of how they schedule standby these days (basings would have changed that), but there wouldn't be anyone available at that time of day. Probably not until around 6am in Sydney, and even then it's a 3 hour call out.

If the "stars" aligned was a splash and dash possible if the destination weather was fine. I suspect they "called it" because even if they had available time, the weather at AKL was the no go.

No, not ever possible. I just looked at the distance, and it's quite a bit further than my quick guess. So, the flight time would probably have been over 3 hours, plus the turnaround. And you aren't likely to get a splash and dash. So call it around 4 hours additional.

 

[henrus]

Is the suggestion that the plane diverted as a result of a disruptive group of passengers?

Not at all.

I wonder if it was something medical related? At this point all we can do is speculate as I can’t find anything else anywhere online.

 

[jb747]

I wonder if it was something medical related? At this point all we can do is speculate as I can’t find anything else anywhere online.

From the point at which they diverted, it's only marginally further to Auckland, so I'd suspect not. But, you never know.