QF1 from SIN diversion to Baku, Azerbaijan (GYD)

[RooFlyer]

The second she questioned the pilot for being over cautious, the story had lost me - I'll have a QF pilot be over cautious any day.

I can’t see where she’s questioning the pilot for being overcautious. Her main complaint seems to be the lack of information, over an extended period, once they disembarked into the terminal.

 

[RSD]

I can’t see where she’s questioning the pilot for being overcautious. Her main complaint seems to be the lack of information, over an extended period, once they disembarked into the terminal.

“The pilot kept saying ‘safety first,’ which is of course the right attitude, although to be honest the pilot seemed a little over cautious from the get go on the plane,” she said. - from https://www.news.com.au/travel/trav...d/news-story/11587c2c4b96677f17c61ac7a0695829

 

[RSD]

Well there is also the small issue of Azerbaijan immigration.... and the standing up of the local on call QF representative who probably has never hear of QF before.

That would be the biggest cause of being stuck at the airport - the Azerbaijanis aren't known for throwing out the welcome mat when planes have to unexpectedly land there.

 

[Quickstatus]

although to be honest the pilot seemed a little over cautious from the get go on the plane

Its is always informative to see again that the "get-there-itis" syndrome will always trump anything else including safety.

 

[RooFlyer]

“The pilot kept saying ‘safety first,’ which is of course the right attitude, although to be honest the pilot seemed a little over cautious from the get go on the plane,” she said. - from https://www.news.com.au/travel/trav...d/news-story/11587c2c4b96677f17c61ac7a0695829

Ah, thanks - I was only looking at what was quoted above. I wonder what cautiousness was being exhibited earlier in the flight?

 

[RooFlyer]

Its is always informative to see again that the "get-there-itis" syndrome will always trump anything else including safety.

Unreasonable expectations are more likely to develop in the absence of any information. Again as usual, we don’t know what really happened, but if the passengers hadn't been told anything about what the situation actually was, "The aeroplane cannot continue as it is, and we are waiting for the Azerbaijani officials to come to the airport to start processing your passports so we can leave the airport." - then they could well assume the worst and just think things are being unreasonably held up.

 

[SYD]

Or a face - there is the person standing right there claiming the passport. Not a dishevelled look either due to 2 nights at the Marriott.

When I was younger, it made sense to go for a new passport photo after an all night bender. Similar look and feel to travelling in whY and arriving at LHR at 5am…

 

[RSD]

Ah, thanks - I was only looking at what was quoted above. I wonder what cautiousness was being exhibited earlier in the flight?

Haven't heard anything, you don't get to be captain of a QF A380 without an absolute ton of experience so I wouldn't be second-guessing the captain.

 

[Quickstatus]

if the passengers hadn't been told anything about what the situation actually was

Yes, it is always best to give as much imformation as possible because, individual passengers will want answers to different questions. Even if no informations is available.
The one piece of information that the pasengers would not have got would have been "You will get to LHR at XX:XX"

I wonder if the Captain made an announcement on the ground. If the Captain indeed triggered the release of the fire extinguishers, he/she would have know that the aircraft was not operational with cargo in the cargo hold. If I were a passenger, and if the Captain said that, then hopes of re-boarding in a few hours are lost, and I'll start planning a stay in Baku or investigated a separate flight out of Baku (Maybe even, if I had internet, quickly finding if an AFF contributor has a Baku TR )

 

[Saab34]

Pilot was just doing his job. I mean, if they ignored the warnings and continued on because pax A and B really want to get to London, well then the pilot gets the sack.

Who gives two coughs what passengers think. Follow the Airbus and company procedures, try and keep your job by doing the right thing, and whatever the passengers think or want comes last. Braindead morons , can’t believe I even read that.

 

[RSD]

When I was younger, it made sense to go for a new passport photo after an all night bender. Similar look and feel to travelling in whY and arriving at LHR at 5am…

I can relate - have had immigration officers take a second look at me and the passport photo before deciding if it was me!

 

[dajop]

Pilot was just doing his job. I mean, if they ignored the warnings and continued on because pax A and B really want to get to London, well then the pilot gets the sack.

Actually pilot getting the sack is probably not even something the pilot would consider and is without doubt the least worst option. There are many other much graver options that can happen when pilots start wilfully ignoring safety warnings.

 

[RSD]

Pilot was just doing his job. I mean, if they ignored the warnings and continued on because pax A and B really want to get to London, well then the pilot gets the sack.

Who gives two coughs what passengers think. Follow the Airbus and company procedures, try and keep your job by doing the right thing, and whatever the passengers think or want comes last. Braindead morons , can’t believe I even read that.

Some of the "self loading cargo" are very problematic when things don't go perfectly.

 

[Quickstatus]

well then the pilot gets the sack.

There are other alternatives.


2) not get to LHR and land at an airport
3) not get to LHR and not land at an airport

No wonder the passenger had difficulty…

 

[RooFlyer]

Yes, it is always best to give as much imformation as possible because, individual passengers will want answers to different questions. Even if no informations is available.

Yes. Lets think about the passengers' mind-set. A forced but safe landing in a less-than-familiar country and taken to the terminal to see what happens next, with Christmas reunions planned etc etc. From what we hear so far (again, unlikely to be the whole story) they then had only themselves to keep themselves amused. Frustrations, reasonable or not, will emerge; speculation etc.

I wonder at what stage the passengers were told that a A380 was being mobilised out of SYD to pick them up? And how informed? Anyone seen that info?

As for the particular pax's comment, I think that's more a reflection on the reporting journal than what the passenger might have said.

I wonder if the Captain made an announcement on the ground. If the Captain indeed triggered the release of the fire extinguishers, he/she would have know that the aircraft was not operational with cargo in the cargo hold. If I were a passenger, and if the Captain said that, then hopes of re-boarding in a few hours are lost, and I'll start planning a stay in Baku or investigated a separate flight out of Baku (Maybe even, if I had internet, quickly finding if an AFF contributor has a Baku TR )

Given that there must have been an extended time between engines off and disembarkation, I'd be staggered if something wasn't said at that time; but in that immediate aftermath I dare say the Captain wouldn't have been venturing much. After disembarkation, QF32 appears to be the Gold Standard from what I understand to have been the immediate aftermath of a similar 'forced landing' type of incident. Of course SIN was a much more benign place to land than GYD.

Who gives two coughs what passengers think. Follow the Airbus and company procedures, try and keep your job by doing the right thing, and whatever the passengers think or want comes last. Braindead morons , can’t believe I even read that.

As to the first bit, that may be an all too common attitude amongst certain airlines, even in normal operations. But I really wish they would, as it would make things more pleasant all round. I can make a somewhat tenuous connection between this and flight-deck attitudes that say there is no point informing passengers (when safe to do so) about incidents in the air because there is nothing the passengers can do with that information and it isn't going to change anything.

As to the the rest, and the quoted comment from the pax, I wouldn't think it even worth addressing.

 

[Flyerqf]

OQH has landed in SYD.

 

[Quickstatus]

Who gives two coughs what passengers think

All airlines should. But what you are referring to if I’m reading correctly, is passengers have no say in pilot conduct.
However, it is important to maintain lines of communications with the passengers who are afterall paying for a service in this case to LHR

 

[half-hour]

Not even National Express?

Good point, apparently National Express do run on Christmas day (although the network's quite limited compared to the rail network).

 

[milehighclub]

OQH has landed in SYD.

And operating QF11 tomorrow

 

[Quickstatus]

And operating QF11 tomorrow

What about the fire extinguishers?