QF76 cancelled twice in Vancouver

[thatguy]

Anyone know what happened in Vancouver?
QF76 delayed 3 hours then cancelled on Monday night and rescheduled for 24 hours later. It was just cancelled again on Tuesday night.
VH-ZNE is the aircraft that has been stuck in Vancouver during this time.

 

[fletty]

They are doing it to spite @Ricicles

 

[Quickstatus]

Prior to operation qF76, it was delayed 3.5 hours operating from PER , then 2 hours delay oeprating from SYD
I suspect some mechanical issue

But, in the end, it is impossible to know.
Even if the airline tells you something, how can you verify it?.

Of course this is going to put pressure on 787 flights -like an upcoming QF5 on 21/10/26 which has been cancelled, especially when VH-ZNA is in HKG for maintenance.

@Melburnian1

 

[Rayesfeg]

Hopefully not bedbugs

 

[Quickstatus]

Hopefully not bedbugs

The bedbug aircraft was a different one (VH-ZNI)
That aircraft had some seat covers and carpets replaced.

 

[Ricicles]

They are doing it to spite @Ricicles

Darn them! Although right now I’m loving the Qatar Q suite…. And the Dipitique (sp?) ooo what a treat!

 

[mcconky]

I was on the original QF76 19/10.
One of the four engine electrical generators on VH-ZNE faulted on the taxiway prior to take-off. The crew tried to troubleshoot on the ramp for a few hours, then deplaned everyone to do a full electrical reset, but ultimately they determined that the issue could only be resolved with replacement parts flown in from either LAX or SYD.

While I always want to be on the ground wanting to be in the sky, rather than in the sky wanting to be on the ground, the whole experience was not well managed. Boarding was at 8:30pm, and the crew continued to announce that they "should have it resolved within 30 minutes" for 4 hours, before being deplaned around 12:30pm. The crew were rapidly running out of duty time (less than 2 hours of buffer remaining upon deplaning - barely enough time to deplane, re-board a full 787 and taxi). They should have just called it and cancelled the flight hours earlier.

After timing out and cancelling the flight, they continued to run engine tests for another hour (hence baggage handlers could not approach the aircraft), leaving a couple of hundred passengers at the gate with no information in a closed terminal (all terminal facilities including immigration / customs were closed for the night by this time).

Qantas' externally contracted ground staff were a mess, totally disorganised and not able to communicate with the crowd.

Eventually myself and my 2-year old bailed from the airport around 4:00am to organise our own transport and hotel (they hadn't even started started organising this for the other 200+ pax by this time) and I called Qantas the next morning to be rebooked on another airline, even though they kept claiming "QF76 has been delayed but will fly later today (20/10)". We got home to Melbourne via UA before the QF7076 had taken off.

Bit of a rant, but it really showed the deficits in Qantas' customer service and disruptions handling is for non-major hub destinations in their network.

 

[Murmal]

Qantas' externally contracted ground staff were a mess, totally disorganised and not able to communicate with the crowd.

Bit of a rant, but it really showed the deficits in Qantas' customer service and disruptions handling is for non-major hub destinations in their network.

Similar to what I experienced @ JFK a while back.
Ground staff completely unprepared for such disruption, slow to organise themselves as well as pax accommodation, transfers etc.
These things happen and are rarely the fault of the airline or crew but to add insult to the disruption, Qantas Travel Insurance at the time refused all compensation due to an unexpected clause which said, " we will not compensate for delays due to mechanical faults in aircraft".

 

[MEL_Traveller]

Similar to what I experienced @ JFK a while back.
Ground staff completely unprepared for such disruption, slow to organise themselves as well as pax accommodation, transfers etc.
These things happen and are rarely the fault of the airline or crew but to add insult to the disruption, Qantas Travel Insurance at the time refused all compensation due to an unexpected clause which said, " we will not compensate for delays due to mechanical faults in aircraft".

Surprisingly, that’s still a pretty common clause in many travel insurance policies!

The assumption being that as it’s within the airline’s control, they will cover you for accommodation and food etc.

And indeed for Europe you’d be compensated quite well by the airline, so no need for travel insurance to step in.

 

[Quickstatus]

They should have just called it and cancelled the flight hours earlier.

Easy to say in retrospect. Impossible to predict.

Eventually myself and my 2-year old bailed from the airport around 4:00am to organise our own transport and hotel

Agree..
When we were deplaned at SFo after a mechanical issue, I didn't wait around in the line for the service desk for further information - which was basically a piece of paper and then another queue for a bus to take the passengers to some far away hotel somewhere.

As soon as I heard we were deplaning, I got on the phone and booked a room at the hotel I checked out from earlier that day, then picked up luggage and Ubered there.

I would rather pay the hotel then claim back the $200/250 or whatever it was, than wait in a queue for the service desk letter and queue again for the bus.

 

[Rayesfeg]

to add insult to the disruption, Qantas Travel Insurance at the time refused all compensation due to an unexpected clause which said, " we will not compensate for delays due to mechanical faults in aircraft".

Now that is interesting. Similar thing happened to me at KLIA - 12 hour delay due to a mechanical issue with the original plane. I immediately booked a transit hotel in the airport via booking.com as soon as they announced it (rather than wait in a 200+ person queue for a hotel coupon and then wait again for a bus and then the early start to get back to the airport) and successfully claimed the cost back to my insurance.
You've taught me to look out for this kind of clause in a travel insurance PDS.

 

[jrfsp]

Shame they had to source a part from LAX or SYD when YVR is a major maintenance base for AC.

 

[tomlee1986]

Shame they had to source a part from LAX or SYD when YVR is a major maintenance base for AC.

And AC also has their own 787 fleet - therefore unless the engines are different - they could have worked in some way i guess

 

[offshore171]

And AC also has their own 787 fleet - therefore unless the engines are different - they could have worked in some way i guess

Aren't they head to head competitors on the transpacific route? I'm not sure AC would be inclined to do Qf too many favours.

 

[tomlee1986]

Aren't they head to head competitors on the transpacific route? I'm not sure AC would be inclined to do Qf too many favours.

That maybe true but this is just to repair the aircraft - not an actually sale situation of routes