Qantas Delays/Cancellations

[mannej]

Re: QF41 delay

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..

It is superfluous information that isn't really that necessary.
As armchair critics we can speculate until the cows come home however I do agree with the horse on this one!

 

[Melburnian1]

Re: QF41 delay

By 'competition', I was referring to 'competing for passengers'.

My apologies if some interpreted this differently.

QF competes daily for revenue with SQ and a host of others on the 'Kangaroo Route'.

I was not referring to 'competing' in the sense of airspeed or similar indicators.

I agree that the 0530 scheduled arrival time at LHR is way too early but there are unlikely to be spare slots at LHR, although the media has occasionally referred to how slots are a tradeable commodity among airlines. Sometimes travellers may perceive that airline schedules are run more for the benefit of airlines than passengers, but in reality it's complex as airlines must consider slot availability, rostering and crew hours off duty as well as on, aircraft availability, connections and the demands of the market - that's you and me, varying as we do from non time sensitive lesiure travellers to higher (for the airline) yielding businessmen and women who rely upon an arrival at a particular time to clinch a large business deal at an early morning meeting.

 

[Melburnian1]

Re: QF41 delay

Tuesday's QF9 arrived DXB at 0143 (138 minutes late), departed at 0345 (165 minutes late) and arrived LHR at 0811 (161 minutes late). It had lost 31 further minutes since departing MEL significantly late.

While there are pros and cons, if QF was a United Kingdom train operator or a European airline in the EC it may be required to compensate passengers provided certain criteria were met.

One occasionally sees glossy advertising from QF and some other airlines, but there's never a mention of what they do to recompense passengers who miss meetings or air or surface transport connections when it's demonstrably the airline's fault. There may be a 'customer charter' buried in some small print but there tend to be many exclusions.

An inferior situation compared to what occurs in the UK and EC. Given that QF is a legacy airline providing 'full service', it is reasonable for passengers to have an expectation that they will arrive no more than 15 minutes late unless an Act of God intervenes. QF does not charge the cheapest fares among legacy airlines operating on this and other routes, so that buttresses the case for the introduction of a compensation scheme.

Invoking financial penalties for late running is one of the best ways to make a company like QF improve its timekeeping. Having 52 per cent of QF9 flights arrive more than 15 minutes late is unsatisfactory, particularly since on many days (although not the example quoted above), the timetable has some slackness in it, especially between DXB and LHR, where the excess seems to be half an hour.

 

[RB]

Re: QF41 delay

Tuesday's QF9 arrived DXB at 0143 (138 minutes late), departed at 0345 (165 minutes late) and arrived LHR at 0811 (161 minutes late). It had lost 31 further minutes since departing MEL significantly late.

While there are pros and cons, if QF was a United Kingdom train operator or a European airline in the EC it may be required to compensate passengers provided certain criteria were met.

One occasionally sees glossy advertising from QF and some other airlines, but there's never a mention of what they do to recompense passengers who miss meetings or air or surface transport connections when it's demonstrably the airline's fault. There may be a 'customer charter' buried in some small print but there tend to be many exclusions.

An inferior situation compared to what occurs in the UK and EC. Given that QF is a legacy airline providing 'full service', it is reasonable for passengers to have an expectation that they will arrive no more than 15 minutes late unless an Act of God intervenes. QF does not charge the cheapest fares among legacy airlines operating on this and other routes, so that buttresses the case for the introduction of a compensation scheme.

Invoking financial penalties for late running is one of the best ways to make a company like QF improve its timekeeping. Having 52 per cent of QF9 flights arrive more than 15 minutes late is unsatisfactory, particularly since on many days (although not the example quoted above), the timetable has some slackness in it, especially between DXB and LHR, where the excess seems to be half an hour.

 

[blackcat20]

Re: QF41 delay

Is it really necessary to be rude to the OP?

 

[mannej]

Re: QF41 delay

Tuesday's QF9 arrived DXB at 0143 (138 minutes late), departed at 0345 (165 minutes late) and arrived LHR at 0811 (161 minutes late). It had lost 31 further minutes since departing MEL significantly late.

While there are pros and cons, if QF was a United Kingdom train operator or a European airline in the EC it may be required to compensate passengers provided certain criteria were met.

One occasionally sees glossy advertising from QF and some other airlines, but there's never a mention of what they do to recompense passengers who miss meetings or air or surface transport connections when it's demonstrably the airline's fault. There may be a 'customer charter' buried in some small print but there tend to be many exclusions.

An inferior situation compared to what occurs in the UK and EC. Given that QF is a legacy airline providing 'full service', it is reasonable for passengers to have an expectation that they will arrive no more than 15 minutes late unless an Act of God intervenes. QF does not charge the cheapest fares among legacy airlines operating on this and other routes, so that buttresses the case for the introduction of a compensation scheme.

Invoking financial penalties for late running is one of the best ways to make a company like QF improve its timekeeping. Having 52 per cent of QF9 flights arrive more than 15 minutes late is unsatisfactory, particularly since on many days (although not the example quoted above), the timetable has some slackness in it, especially between DXB and LHR, where the excess seems to be half an hour.

Honestly, is 15 minutes an appropriate number to be setting the bar at? Factors such as ATC or a no-show can lose you more than 15 minutes or a slot, which isn't really controllable. I don't disagree with the idea, but 15 isn't really a fair number to be using in this circumstance.

 

[docjames]

re: General Qantas Delays/Cancellations/etc. Discussion

15mins is the industry standard / reported measure.


I'm not sure why the OP has the fixation on QF/QF9 when these delays occur across all airlines. Perhaps he/she could enlighten why the focus on QF over VA/SQ/CX/DL/UA/other?

 

[nlagalle]

re: General Qantas Delays/Cancellations/etc. Discussion

15mins is the industry standard / reported measure.


I'm not sure why the OP has the fixation on QF/QF9 when these delays occur across all airlines. Perhaps he/she could enlighten why the focus on QF over VA/SQ/CX/DL/UA/other?

I'd like to know too. Might i have already pointed out the equivalent EK flight runs roughly the same OTP too.. I am sure all airlines have particular flights that have a lower than normal OTP too.

 

[blackcat20]

re: General Qantas Delays/Cancellations/etc. Discussion

I'm not sure why the OP has the fixation on QF/QF9 when these delays occur across all airlines. Perhaps he/she could enlighten why the focus on QF over VA/SQ/CX/DL/UA/other?

Because that flight in particular interests them for whatever reason. Who cares why? If it doesnt interest you then dont waste time reading it.

 

[nlagalle]

re: General Qantas Delays/Cancellations/etc. Discussion

Because that flight in particular interests them for whatever reason. Who cares why? If it doesnt interest you then dont waste time reading it.

Maybe true.. but harking on like some "expert" is worse (especially when some information posted is incorrect).

 

[Melburnian1]

re: General Qantas Delays/Cancellations/etc. Discussion

docjames, because for this 'major Australian airline' that offers just one flight a day from MEL to LHR and return using its own 'metal', it's unacceptable that more than half the time QF9 is late according to the worldwide standard definition used in the airline industry.

The other reasons that piqued or evoked my interest were seeing constant boasting by QF that it was the 'most punctual' airline (this was a comparison of Australian domestic carriers not international competitors), that AFF commenced a thread on 'the decline of QF International, of how poorly QF serves the fair city of MEL with our population of 4.1 million compared with SYD's slower growing 4.6 million - compare the number of direct QF own metal flights between the two - SYD winds hands down - and how, to cap it all off, I had to travel on this flight one day recently (when it ran more than 15 minutes late!)

QF has abandoned ADL for international flights, downgraded flights ex PER despite the most recent announcement by AJ of a slight 'increase.' Most of all, QFdeclines to provide MEL with the direct flights that QF's major competitors long have. Yet despite having such a limited direct (non stop) international own metal frequency to and from MEL, QF is unwilling to increase the range of destinations served from MEL and to top it all off, QF9's punctuality is rather wanting, exacerbated by the lack of a crew base for A380 qualified pilots in MEL.

Are direct flights by JQ ex MEL to airports such as BKK good substitutes in the eyes of the travelling public for former QF direct flight destinations? For some, yes, but I recall the huge fuss from HTI residents when QF pulled out completely from that airport. They were not pleased, and vociferously complained in the pages of 'The Australian Financial Review.'

As the helpful TheInsider has commented, some QF9 delays are due to 'tech' reasons but on the day I travelled, it was due to a pilot going off sick (I assume at pretty short notice) so it was a human factor.

As the esteemed jb747 has remarked, where a base for each type of aircraft's pilots is located is a business decision for QF with such facilities extremely expensive and time consuming to establish, but it is odd to me that MEL's population may well exceed SYD's in 30 years at current growth rates, but QF appears to have no intention of ever basing this major aircraft type (A388) pilots in the southern capital.

jb747 rightly says that timetables change and so might aircraft types, but as things stand at present, A388s have the largest capacity in the fleet so one might expect that if air travel continues to attract two to five per cent more international patrons into and out of MEL per annum, these larger planes may be more frequent visitors as construction of third (and fourth) runways at MEL has yet to formally commence (although the third may be finished in a few short years if MEL airport management's plans come to fruition).

 

[mannej]

re: General Qantas Delays/Cancellations/etc. Discussion

Here we go again...

As most would agree, it doesn't take a lot to create a 15 minute delay. What I find interesting is that certain members talk with such authority without all of the facts.

That is why there is such disdain to certain parts of this thread.

 

[Melburnian1]

re: General Qantas Delays/Cancellations/etc. Discussion

mannej, you miss my point.

SQ228 that is the closest competitor to QF9 in terms of departure times ex MEL - QF9 timetabled to depart at 1525 daily, SQ228 at 1545 - has a far better punctuality record than QF9.

One might expect the reverse, as SQ is not an Australian-based airline, whereas QF is.

Given that business travellers can be on 'time poor' itineraries with tight air or rail connections at the other end, or meetings that start at a particular time, the relative punctuality performance is a legitimate subject to discuss. Of course, QF might prefer that it wasn't publicised, but even some leisure passengers who might be travelling to weddings or (sadly) funerals can be time sensitive. Some leisure travellers might even be making a same day connection to a cruise ex Southampton: not something I'd do (I'd leave a clear day).

If it 'doesn't take a lot to create a 15 minute delay', how come this SQ flight with a different routing to LHR can get there within that allowance the vast majority of the time but the sole QF daily flight using its own liveried aircraft cannot?

My suggestion to anyone who wants to arrive on time into LHR would be to think carefully about using airlines other than QF as QF seems unable to consistently deliver on time arrivals from MEL at LHR. 'Consistency' is what many travellers want.

 

[docjames]

re: General Qantas Delays/Cancellations/etc. Discussion

Melburnian1 - Thanks for answering my question.

 

[nlagalle]

re: General Qantas Delays/Cancellations/etc. Discussion

How come you aren't reporting that QF009 left a whole 1 minute late yesterday, but arrived early to DXB? if you are going to report the bad, you need to balance it with the good too (it was early to LHR too).

 

[jb747]

re: General Qantas Delays/Cancellations/etc. Discussion

How come you aren't reporting that QF009 left a whole 1 minute late yesterday, but arrived early to DXB? if you are going to report the bad, you need to balance it with the good too (it was early to LHR too).

You aren't really comparing apples with apples. The SQ flight is going to Singapore, whilst the QF one is headed off on a very long flight to London. The SQ changes to 322 (I think a different aircraft) in Singapore. The upshot is that the maintenance requirements are quite different, and many MELs may well be allowed on the SQ flight ex Melbourne, but the same document would disallow them on the QF flight. MELs are often location specific.

Over the last month, SQ have indeed done better ex Melbourne, with an average delay of 6 minutes, versus a little under 12 for QF. But, if we remove the worst 2 from QF (and these could well be maintenance issues that SQ would have been able to fly with) (and also do the same for SQ), you end up the perhaps surprising result that the average for both is just under 4 minutes. Looking to the SQ long haul flight out of Singapore, (and removing the two worst) you end up with an average 12 minute delay.

Do you actually understand what the 'departure' time is? Because it isn't the time you depart, and it's quite open to manipulation.....

Delays come up all the time. It makes me very curious if one airline is affected by a delay that another isn't. For instance, if a passenger fails to board, it will always take around 15-30 minutes to offload their luggage. Curiously, some airlines always find that the people who fail to board, also don't have luggage. That may be the case, but you do wonder. Holding patterns remove time in about 6 minute chunks. Pushback clearance...this is only immediately available about 60% of the time, so you may well be held at the gate by ATC from a couple of minutes to 20 or so...this is one easy item to manipulate for the record...but you have no idea if doing so is the norm or rare. Or just not done.

Financial penalties for delays. What a great idea. Not all that safe, but we could all have a lot of fun with it. The passenger who is late to board, could pay all the others. The blokes who are slow to sit down, and so delay closing the doors (the last door won't be closed until everyone is seated), could do the same. If ATC issue us with holding, we could send them a bill.

Fun aside, if there were penalties, the result would be that schedule would override safety. Not might. Would. You may think that aircraft are super safe, and that little happens, so this could be done. I actually know how things work, and things go wrong with all facets of aviation, all the time. The few margins that are left are not to be trifled with.

I've diverted from airports others landed at, and refused to take off in conditions that didn't bother them. Perhaps I'm a wimp, but I think I see examples of what you seem to want quite regularly. It eventually bites.

 

[blackcat20]

re: General Qantas Delays/Cancellations/etc. Discussion

Maybe true.. but harking on like some "expert" is worse (especially when some information posted is incorrect).

It's still no excuse to be rude; some of the images posted up thread are unnecessary.

 

[JohnPhelan]

re: General Qantas Delays/Cancellations/etc. Discussion

Fun aside, if there were penalties, the result would be that schedule would override safety. Not might. Would. You may think that aircraft are super safe, and that little happens, so this could be done. I actually know how things work, and things go wrong with all facets of aviation, all the time. The few margins that are left are not to be trifled with.

I've diverted from airports others landed at, and refused to take off in conditions that didn't bother them. Perhaps I'm a wimp, but I think I see examples of what you seem to want quite regularly. It eventually bites.

Exactly this. The reason that QF has such a great safety record is that QF pilots are probably the most cautious pilots around. I've been delayed on a significant number of flights because of "minor" technical issues that I'm quite sure other airlines would not have worried about.

There seems to be something about QF pilot training that inculcates this attitude with tech crew. Yes, sometimes it's irritating that flights are delayed. But rather that than take shortcuts with safety. As they say - there are old pilots, and bold pilots, but no old, bold pilots! I'm thinking of the KLM pilot at Tenerife and the SQ pilot in Taipei, as examples.

If the OP is so concerned about sticking to schedule, then fine, let him/her fly with airlines that prioritise schedule over other considerations. Some of these airlines give their operations staff ability to direct pilots to take-off (or land), rather than leave these judgements to the discretion and experience of the pilot. I'll stick with an airline where the pilot is the one who makes the decision about safety.


And if someone absolutely, positively, has to be at a meeting in London at 0900 - then they are nothing but foolish (and/or afflicted with DYKWIA syndrome) if they arrange to fly in, from the other side of the world, just a few hours prior.

 

[mannej]

re: General Qantas Delays/Cancellations/etc. Discussion

Lets not forget if you comparing like for like SQ have the advantage of swapping aircrafts over in SIN...

That would be a fairly big advantage I would imagine

 

[jb747]

re: General Qantas Delays/Cancellations/etc. Discussion

- there are old pilots, and bold pilots, but no old, bold pilots!

I'm sure there are, but it's difficult to ensure that's the group you end up in.

A better saying, and perhaps appropriate, is "I'd rather be on the ground, wishing I was in the air, than in the air, wishing I was on the ground".

The most useless things in aviation....fuel on the ground, runway behind you, height above you, airspeed you don't have...and hours in a navigator's log book.