UNI-TED Strikes Again!!!

[flying4food]

Yet, another fine example of United's quality service!!!


Passengers stuck on plane all night

[font=arial,helvetica,sans-serif]



July 11, 2004

BY LORI RACKL Staff Reporter






Passengers on a United Airlines flight to Chicago arrived at O'Hare Airport on Saturday morning not by plane but by bus, after spending the night stranded on the tarmac in Milwaukee.

Flight 256 from Denver to Chicago was supposed to land at O'Hare at 9:58 p.m. Friday. Weather in Chicago caused the plane, carrying 155 passengers, to be diverted to Milwaukee's General Mitchell International Airport.

But the only gate at the airport capable of handling the wide-body 777 was occupied by an Air France cargo jet, which also had been diverted because of weather, United spokesman Rich Nelson said. The Air France crew couldn't move the plane because they would have exceeded the maximum number of hours they're allowed to work, Nelson said.

With the help of Northwest Airlines, United eventually got a movable stairway to the side of the plane, allowing passengers to disembark around 5 a.m. United then bused them to Chicago.

"We're looking into why the airport was unable to make other accommodations for us so we could get passengers off the plane," Nelson said.

Dan Nettesheim, 58, was one of the passengers on the flight. He said United only had pretzels and water to tide them over. And once they landed at Milwaukee, the pilot told them that mechanical problems with the plane meant they couldn't take off.

"We were all very frustrated," said Nettesheim, who lives in Milwaukee but had his car parked at O'Hare. "A woman I sat next to had an 11 a.m. wedding in Chicago, and all her clothes were in her luggage, which they couldn't get to."

Nelson said the airline will be contacting all of the passengers and "offering them the equivalent of a round-trip domestic ticket."





[font=helvetica,arial]Copyright © The Sun-Times Company
All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.[/font]

[/font]

 

[flythere]

It's only a matter of time,,,, TED, the end of UNI-TED or Total Economic Destruction.

 

[AAflyer]

Weather in ORD this summer........UAL's fault

An AirFance CARGO jet using the only available gate (WTFO)....UAL's fault

Not having catered the airplane with meals for everyone knowing this might happen........UAL's fault

A MX on the airplane develops....Once again UAL's fault

Having the money and time to explain this to the average passenger. $91 bucks and hour.

Having to explain this to other airline pilots......Price less

AA

 

[Draginass]

Score another victory for the crack management team at UAL . . . . or is it the UAL management team on crack? I can never remember which.

The Captain should have told the passengers what was probably the truth . . . . "our management at United can't get it's act together, won't allow allow us to take off again for Chicago, won't get us a bus or a gate or air stairs to let you off the jet. If you're interested here's a phone number to call and complain right now while were waiting."

 

[Oakum_Boy]

Weather in ORD this summer........UAL's fault

An AirFance CARGO jet using the only available gate (WTFO)....UAL's fault

AA

What kind of decision between pilot and dispatcher to go to Milwaukee with a 777? Did they not consider handling capability?

 

[AAflyer]

Oakum,

Like so many other events that occur in our industry it is easy to throw stones when we were not in the cockpit, or in operations and know exactly what happened.

We can speculate all we want, but then wouldn't we be hypocrites? We can't stand it when the media does it after all.

AA

 

[embdrvr]

What would you guys have done differently?

The crew needed an alternate and MKE was suitable. Obviously noone knew some French freight dogs took the only gate.

Regrettable yes. Preventable? Let's be realistic.

 

[skykid]

And this has what to do with TED? Daginass - always smart to throw darts based on a article that is going to get about 50% of it right. I always like to second guess other flight crews, especially when the only facts I have are from the media. If it makes you feel good you can pretend United has the worst service in the business, but that is not what the gov rankings and customer feedback (at record levels for intent to repurchase) show.

 

[Draginass]

Say for the sake of arguement that they landed at 11pm, an hour after schedule due to weather. So I suppose that holding people prisoner on an airplane for six hours is acceptable service. It's not the crew's fault. I'm sure they were livid. Some bonehead in management should have had his butt out of bed in into that airport to get some air stairs up to that airplane and at least get the pax in the terminal.

 

[USNFDX]

They just should've blown the door and the airstair!

 

[Swede]

What would you guys have done differently?

The crew needed an alternate and MKE was suitable. Obviously noone knew some French freight dogs took the only gate.

Regrettable yes. Preventable? Let's be realistic.

If I'm driving around in a 777, darned right I am going to consider the airport facility for the divert. Unless they were on fumes or on fire, there are probably a few superior airports than MKE. STL, DET, MSP? Plenty of fields better than MKE for a big boy like the 777.

Available maintenance also comes into play if you have the fuel... it's always nice to choose an airport with your brand's maintenance on hand, especially if they can handle your aircraft type.

 

[skykid]

Swede, I always second guessed 777 Captains when I had 75+ hours, too. The good thing about second guessing pilots based on very limited information is no one will ever do it to you, right?

 

[buzzer]

I bet the pilots were livid too...just as pissed as the passengers.

 

[thruthemurk]

whatever

 

[CatYaaak]

Just another reason to hate the French.

 

[bandit110]

Unless they were on fumes or on fire, there are probably a few superior airports than MKE. STL, DET, MSP? Plenty of fields better than MKE for a big boy like the 777.

God, I'd love to see a 777 pull up to Murray in the Hood at DET. Maybe they could use the Pro Air gates.

http://www.airnav.com/airport/KDET


I know what you ment DTW, just made me laugh thinking about it.

 

[AAflyer]

Swede, I always second guessed 777 Captains when I had 75+ hours, too. The good thing about second guessing pilots based on very limited information is no one will ever do it to you, right?

Skykid,

Swede probably has over 7500 hours and flies the 767 on Int'l routes for a major US airline.

I know and agree it would help if we knew what was going on, but he does bring up a valid point. Was MKE the original alternate on the flight plan? Do UALs ops use airports for alternates that only meet the basic requirements, or are they specific for the aircraft. How much fuel did they have left (I know it is a 777, but the with the cost of gas these days I bet they had the minimum they needed.) So many questions, but too hard to judge or assume anything not being there.

AA
If you look at his ratings as a food boy movie critic, that is our word for Relief Pilots. Not that this really matters, just thought I would let you know he has more than 75 hours, unless we changed our hiring mins.

 

[embdrvr]

If I'm driving around in a 777, darned right I am going to consider the airport facility for the divert. Unless they were on fumes or on fire, there are probably a few superior airports than MKE. STL, DET, MSP? Plenty of fields better than MKE for a big boy like the 777.

Available maintenance also comes into play if you have the fuel... it's always nice to choose an airport with your brand's maintenance on hand, especially if they can handle your aircraft type.

Swede,
Judging by your profile I'm guessing you may not be a Part 121 captain. When you make the decision to divert you talk to dispatch. Unless the alternate is already on the release you'll need a fuel burn and some performance numbers. If I'm diverting I want to know as much information as possible about the options and if possible I'll take the aircraft somewhere convenient for the company (and pax). There's a lot to consider and not always a lot of time to figure it out. Whenever I've diverted I usually find myself with plenty of company. If a Cat 3 777 can't get in to ORD probably noone is landing there. So guess what sport? Lots of folks are calling bingo fuel and heading to the alternates. STL, DET, and MSP may have already had traffic stacking up or had wx issues of their own. MKE might have seemed like a good idea at the time. I wasn't in the cockpit with the crew. I don't know the wx or any of the specifics. Before I second guess a fellow captain I'd want to know a lot more information than what I read in the newpaper.

 

[Ty Webb]

Lots of folks are calling bingo fuel and heading to the alternates. STL, DET, and MSP may have already had traffic stacking up or had wx issues of their own. MKE might have seemed like a good idea at the time. I wasn't in the cockpit with the crew. I don't know the wx or any of the specifics. Before I second guess a fellow captain I'd want to know a lot more information than what I read in the newpaper.

Excellent points.

 

[climbhappy]

I think the assessment of thie situation at MKE as it unfolded was incorrect, due to the late hour and wondering what a foreign carrier could do. Then it turned into an hour then two , and finally let's get a bus.

One just had to think a gate would open up, but the in retrospect, a call for the bus at the first sign of trouble could have made this a non event.

One simply can't predict all of the intangibles on a situation like this. therefore, the call to go to MKE wasn't a bad one , but how they handled it when they arrived is the faux pas here.

 

[flynryan15]

yak

Finally someone gets it the real blame here is on the FROGS what the hell is a FROG cargo plane doing at a passenger gate.

Anyone else see the IRONY here if a U.S. plane diverted to Paris they would have moved that plane so quick.

God I hate France

 

[Swede]

Skykid, reread my post. Is there anything there that smells like B.S.? I was not second-guessing the captain, simply offering that, given a choice, there are probably better airports than MKE. Note the keyword "choice". Maybe he had no choice. If so, he did what was correct, no damage, no injuries, except ruffled feathers. Being a domestic flight, fuel may have been tight.

There is no legal requirement to land at your filed alternate. Given adequate fuel, the PIC can choose to divert to the field he deems best suited. He must also be able to defend his choice to his chief pilot, the FAA, the crew, and anyone else interested if it turns into a goat rodeo.

 

[mach none]

A 777 with only 155 pax. That is what will hurt United. You would think a 777 dispatched from DEN to ORD would have enough fuel to land somewhere other that MKE. They could have gone back to DEN if they had planned it right?

Yet, another fine example of United's quality service!!!


Passengers stuck on plane all night

[font=arial,helvetica,sans-serif]



July 11, 2004

BY LORI RACKL Staff Reporter






Passengers on a United Airlines flight to Chicago arrived at O'Hare Airport on Saturday morning not by plane but by bus, after spending the night stranded on the tarmac in Milwaukee.

Flight 256 from Denver to Chicago was supposed to land at O'Hare at 9:58 p.m. Friday. Weather in Chicago caused the plane, carrying 155 passengers, to be diverted to Milwaukee's General Mitchell International Airport.

But the only gate at the airport capable of handling the wide-body 777 was occupied by an Air France cargo jet, which also had been diverted because of weather, United spokesman Rich Nelson said. The Air France crew couldn't move the plane because they would have exceeded the maximum number of hours they're allowed to work, Nelson said.

With the help of Northwest Airlines, United eventually got a movable stairway to the side of the plane, allowing passengers to disembark around 5 a.m. United then bused them to Chicago.

"We're looking into why the airport was unable to make other accommodations for us so we could get passengers off the plane," Nelson said.

Dan Nettesheim, 58, was one of the passengers on the flight. He said United only had pretzels and water to tide them over. And once they landed at Milwaukee, the pilot told them that mechanical problems with the plane meant they couldn't take off.

"We were all very frustrated," said Nettesheim, who lives in Milwaukee but had his car parked at O'Hare. "A woman I sat next to had an 11 a.m. wedding in Chicago, and all her clothes were in her luggage, which they couldn't get to."

Nelson said the airline will be contacting all of the passengers and "offering them the equivalent of a round-trip domestic ticket."





[font=helvetica,arial]Copyright © The Sun-Times Company
All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.[/font]

[/font]

 

[N8Dogg]

Didn't I read in USA Today about management at some airlines planning to "save" money (weight) by dispatching aircraft with less and less fuel? It may or may not have been a contributing factor but It makes you think. Probably the same type guy who thought up "Ted". For the pilots' sake, good luck United!!

 

[8vATE]

Finally someone gets it the real blame here is on the FROGS what the hell is a FROG cargo plane doing at a passenger gate.

Anyone else see the IRONY here if a U.S. plane diverted to Paris they would have moved that plane so quick.

God I hate France

That is beautiful man.....

 

[CesnaCaptn]

I wanna know why they didn't just pull out a tug, and push the Air France airplane off the gate.

Another perspective on the fuel v. alternates. When dealing with TS, an alternate is not always required per the TAF, and then BAM! airport closed. I'm willing to bet the pilot's weren't dispatched with much extra fuel.

 

[Mugs]

They diverted to one of the nearest alternates, so they probably held as long as they possibly could. They probably never went to MKE with the intention of off loading any passengers. The goal was simply to get fuel and go to ORD. Apparently, a mechanical problem happened after they got on the ground in MKE that did not allow them to depart for ORD. This is when the gate situation became an issue. So, if the mechanical would not have happened, would anyone be second guessing anything here? Should a 777 use only alternates that have MX and 777 parts available? It is unfortunate that the maintenance issue came up, but I don't think it was unreasonable to go to MKE if the idea was simply to "gas up and go." Heck, UAL has dropped 747s into Rockford, IL before. Those events sometimes get in the local paper on slow news days in RFD, even though the airplane is there less than an hour. I guess that the experts that have chimed in here would have fueled for and used SFO as an alternate, since that is where the most extensive MX in the UAL system is located just in case it is needed.

 

[PHXFLYR]

HEY!!!


Any of you nit wits out there think that maybe,just maybe that Air France 74 freighter sitting on the UA pax gate at ORD might have been a "combi" version? Shheesh..... you guys are a bunch.....


PHXFLYR

 

[pb4ufly]

UAX (former) as Well!!!

Trapped on the tarmac

Independence Air's Boston-Washington Dulles flight taxied out to the runway last Wednesday for its 1:15 p.m. departure. Instead of taking off, however, the plane and its passengers sat on the tarmac in a weather delay for four hours before returning to the terminal. Just 25 minutes later, passengers were hustled back aboard only to sit on the runway for another hour. Independence Air 1128 finally got off the ground at 6:40 p.m. and landed at Dulles at 8:50 p.m. Total flight time: eight hours, or about the same time it would take to drive, Keith L. Alexander, Business Class columnist of The Washington Post (free registration) calculates. But Alexander says such enforced runway captivity — often without much air conditioning — was supposed to end years ago after Congressional threats prompted airlines to adopt voluntary passenger bills of rights. (Remember that Northwest flight that sat on a Detroit runway for more than eight hours during a blizzard?)
Those "bill of rights" rules stipulate how the airlines should inform customers of delayed or canceled flights — and how to treat them during "extended" waits for departure. But, "airlines differ in what qualifies as 'extended,' " Transportation Department inspector general Kenneth Mead noted in 2001. Saying that the definitions varied from 45 minutes to 3 hours, he added: "We think it is unlikely that a passenger's definition of an 'extended' on-aircraft delay will vary depending upon which air carrier they are flying." For its part, Independence's crew tried to wait out the ground stop, but air traffic controllers kept extending the delay. "This situation was totally unacceptable to us. We have immediately changed our own policies to ensure this kind of thing never occurs again," airline spokesman Rick DeLisi said. Independence now says if a flight is on the tarmac for up to two hours, it must return to the gate. Alexander reports that Northwest is the only other carrier with a similar cutoff, stipulating three hours before return. As for the 20 passengers stuck in Independence's Flight 1128 ordeal, the airline offered each a credit of $525 — the equivalent of four or five advance-purchase fares on Independence. Posted at 7:30 a.m. ET

 

[N905TW]

My crew and I arrived in MKE around noon on Saturday. While we were on final approach for runway 7R, we saw the UA 777 lift off 19R (like a rocket!).... since I was flying with a UA Furlough dude... we both said "what the heck is THAT doing here???" at the same time. The flight had been renumbered as a 9000 series flight, not sure if that is what United uses for a repo or ferry flight.

Looking over towards our gate area (C24/26), I could see a 747 tail sticking up behind the terminal. After we landed and taxiied to the gate, we saw it was Air France Cargo. MKE does indeed have one international arrivals jetway, but the Air France 747 was not, as reported, ON the jetway. It was, however, parked in that ramp area in such a way that no other aircraft would have been able to make it over TO the International Gate. Why it was parked this way, its anyones guess.

And yes, it was a full freighter version - no windows on the lower deck, and the all blue logo on the tail.

So to the United Crew's credit... they really didn't even have a shot at the one available gate if they arrived AFTER the Air France guys had bailed.