United SFO-SYD flight takes 30 hours to complete

[WorldTraveler]

or you could just admit that QF and DL dispatched their aircraft to hold long enough for the runway to be cleaned up.

and you could also admit that it has been noted multiple times that pmUA's P&W 772ERs don't have the legs to operate some of the flights that other 7772ERs do, let alone what DL can do with 772LR, QF can do with 380s, or Virgin can do with 773ERs.

aircraft choice matters and so does how the flight is dispatched.

We saw the same thing a week ago in the US on 757 flights from Europe and on transcons that used 320s and 737s compared to 757s.

 

[eolesen]

Yes, we all know DL is perfect and has never run low on fuel. Ever.

And no, I really don't see the value in trying to master memorizing what the unladen airspeed velocity of the various variants of the 772 are.

 

[WorldTraveler]

you don't have to.

you just have to be willing to acknowledge that some carriers don't operate routes with aircraft that has the potential to create this kind of situation.

and despite your efforts to turn this into a DL only issue, you missed that UA was the only carrier that diverted and then only from SFO.

QF and Virgin like DL were unaffected.

 

[Kev3188]

Had this been a DL flight, I'm sure they would have had extra fuel to make it to BNE or MEL. Or maybe they would have refueled in-flight. They do own a refinery, you know...

Silly, E...

When a DL flight gets close to bingo, winged cherubs descend from the heavens and carry the plane softly to where it needs to be...

 

[eolesen]

Don't DL's aircraft get better fuel economy than anyone else? Maybe it's the magic wrenches that the DL Tech Ops guys (they're not outsourced, you know...) use? Or maybe their crews are probably lighter, too, since DL is looking to get 15% of annual salary in profit sharing. And their passengers must also be lighter...

Seriously, it's a pretty silly issue to be trying to make. What is this -- one diversion after 12-18 months of running the route with a 772 instead of a 744?

 

[FWAAA]

Truth.  And, we should mention that of the 30 hours, they were "only 9 hours late arriving at SYD."  They were scheduled to be on the airplane for 21 hours.  Did you notice how easily I can say "only 9 hours late" getting to Sydney.  That's right up there with "There were only 5 major mudslides in LA yesterday" or "This new fighter jet will cost only $25 million each."  Only is such a useful word.

The media really let us down on this one. 21 hours from SFO to SYD? I don't think UA has an airplane in its fleet that can fly 21 hours nonstop westbound with anything resembling a full load, and this one had 251 passengers and bags, which sounds full for a 772.

So I went to UA's website, and that confirms that the media stories didn't get the math right. Flight 863 departs SFO at 10:30 pm and is scheduled to arrive at 8:35 am, 15 hours and five minutes later. This one diverted and landed at 9:00 am, 15:35 after departure. About nine hours later, they arrived at SYD, and were nine hours late. 15.5 + 9 = 24.5 hours, not the widely reported 30.

So what explains the discrepancy? Some passengers connected from EWR, and thus spent 30 hours on planes to get to SYD, explained here:

The plane reportedly left Canberra Airport at 5:18 p.m. Friday, meaning some passengers, like those who connected from New York, spent over 30 hours on the plane.

One passenger on board, Constantine, said the pilot had apologized profusely and criticized the local authorities in Canberra for not being flexible and understanding.

“It’s an unfortunate situation,” a spokeswoman for Canberra airport told AAP.

http://nypost.com/2014/12/12/300-united-airlines-passengers-stuck-on-tarmac-all-day/

The Aussie CBP folks did secure a portion of the apron and permitted the passengers to get off and stretch their legs and enjoy some sunshine.

 

[WorldTraveler]

Silly, E...

When a DL flight gets close to bingo, winged cherubs descend from the heavens and carry the plane softly to where it needs to be...

too bad Qantas has to rely on something clearly less celestial - but apparently still just as effective.

 

[jimntx]

Thanks, FWAAA.  When I posted my comment about being scheduled at 21 hours that didn't seem right to me, but i was trusting the media headline.  15.5 or 16 hours scheduled on the airplane does seem more realistic--though just as grueling.  I'm a good traveler and always have been, but when I did the LAX-SYD flight (in coach), I was ready to get down and kiss the ground when we got off the airplane.

 

[eolesen]

Something else that hasn't been mentioned... It appears the flight which diverted left SFO late, which means DL, VA, and UA's flights from LAX-SYD probably arrived at SYD *before* 863 did.

If true, that means that the choice of airplane may not have had anything to do with this at all.

 

[WorldTraveler]

if you look at flightaware, it is obvious that the flights which did not divert were in the air longer than they normally are and longer than what UA.

UA leaving late might have actually caused them to be put in this situation whereas if they were on-time, they might have gotten in before the runway issue.

again, every other aircraft that remained in the air has more range than UA's PW 772ERs. So do UA's GE 772ERs.

feel free to dismiss it.

the route very well may switch to the 789... which is probably why UA chose it to operate LAX-MEL.

 

[jcw]

interesting this is rolled back to this post

 

[eolesen]

As it should be.