QF94 LAX MEL had to stop in SYD for refuel - seems to be down to very bad planning

[bjbrian]

The captain made it quite clear that with a full load of passengers 447 out of a possible 450, and a lot of freight we were only ever going to make it 'with luck' and 'luck' was no on our side.

As he explained with so much pax and freight we could only load so much fuel.

Surely in such a case you dont take so much freight, surely..... To fail to plan is to plan to fail.

Not happy. Arrived in MEL nearly 3 hrs late and of course missed my connections, and of course I was only one of 447 people this affected.

Seems the captain did not agree with the loading plans, and made it clear he too was not impressed.

Seems to me Qantas need to rethink, as this is NOT how to treat disgrunteled pax who have already been inconvenienced last week.

Brian.

 

[TheInsider]

Re: QF94 LAX MEL had to stop in SYD for refuel - seems to be down to very bad plannin

Seems to me Qantas need to rethink, as this is NOT how to treat disgrunteled pax who have already been inconvenienced last week.

Brian.

Seems to me **** happens. For all we know it could've been a change in head-wind speeds, ATC holding issues, diversion from planned route due to weather etc etc.

 

[tuppaware]

Re: QF94 LAX MEL had to stop in SYD for refuel - seems to be down to very bad plannin

Is this a case of #firstworldproblem?

I understand the frustration. But Pacific Routes are known for their head-wind. Would you rather pax be offloaded ?

 

[straitman]

Seems to me **** happens..

With just a small element of luck you would have made it all the way :!:

Having said that IF the Captain's concerns related to safety he has the last say and could have insisted.

It may come as a surprise but if it was necessary to offload it would probably more likely be pax rather than freight as frequently freight is a bigger earner than pax.

Also having said all of this the same situation would/could have occurred irrespective of who was the carrier. Aircraft do have their limits and part of the business model is operating toward those limits or charge more.

 

[VHOEJ]

Re: QF94 LAX MEL had to stop in SYD for refuel - seems to be down to very bad plannin

Kicking people off at LAX wouldn't have been good either after the week they had - if there was no chance of making it with the load, they wouldn't have gone out with it. Winds are obviously changing all the time and things like ATC are not in the control of the airlines.

 

[Pleb Status]

Re: QF94 LAX MEL had to stop in SYD for refuel - seems to be down to very bad plannin

The customer is of little concern to QF these days. Maybe they will blame your delay on the Unions somehow.

 

[lovestotravel]

Re: QF94 LAX MEL had to stop in SYD for refuel - seems to be down to very bad plannin

A passenger in Economy earns Qantas (keeping things VERY basic here) $8 per kg. I can assure you that Qantas earns much more than that in freight!

Well your "connections" if on the same ticket would have been provided by Qantas onto the next available flight

No Qantas is doing what every airline does, freight comes first!

 

[mannej]

Re: QF94 LAX MEL had to stop in SYD for refuel - seems to be down to very bad plannin

Perhaps this is a question to be posed in the Ask a Pilot thread? I am sure you could get an answer to the limits of the loads taken on this route by a member with quite some knowledge.

 

[NM]

A passenger in Economy earns Qantas (keeping things VERY basic here) $8 per kg. I can assure you that Qantas earns much more than that in freight!

And the freight does not require feeding and watering along the way. The "check-in" process is easier. It does not demand lounge access or priority boarding facilities. And it does not complain if the journey takes a detour for a splash and dash. Makes life much easier for th airlines, which is why we passengers sometimes feel like we are self-loading freight these days

 

[NM]

It's also likely the flight was full as they were still recovering from the backlog after the grounding, so really not a good Tim to be off-loading passengers. Better to be 3 hours late after a diversion than be a day late because you were off-loaded to ensure the flight didn't need to divert.

 

[lovestotravel]

Re: QF94 LAX MEL had to stop in SYD for refuel - seems to be down to very bad plannin

And the freight does not require feeding and watering along the way. The "check-in" process is easier. It does not demand lounge access or priority boarding facilities. And it does not complain if the journey takes a detour for a splash and dash. Makes life much easier for th airlines, which is why we passengers sometimes feel like we are self-loading freight these days

Exactly, take out the other costs of food/water/IFE/seats/crew/whinging etc and freight is very attractive!

 

[straitman]

Re: QF94 LAX MEL had to stop in SYD for refuel - seems to be down to very bad plannin

Exactly, take out the other costs of food/water/IFE/seats/crew/whinging etc and freight is very attractive!

Freight pays more per Kg from the outset let alone all those other issues.

 

[cove]

Re: QF94 LAX MEL had to stop in SYD for refuel - seems to be down to very bad plannin

Diverting is better than a splash down. I don't think the Pacfic is the equivalent of the Hudson River.
Go safety first I think.

 

[rechoboam]

Re: QF94 LAX MEL had to stop in SYD for refuel - seems to be down to very bad plannin

I had exactly the same problem last week. Would rather the 3 hour delay than paying 20k in return for a half-empty plane and guarantee of arriving on time, if that were the choice.

 

[FuzzyAUS]

Re: QF94 LAX MEL had to stop in SYD for refuel - seems to be down to very bad plannin

I can also add that the winds are massive at the moment, we flew QF11 SYD-LAX on Thursday and we arrived about 35-40 mins earlier than they had planned when we left Sydney..

Was nice and quick through Customs as the queues were much shorter than normal as we landed before 2 other major flights.