UNI-TED Strikes Again!!!

[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.

 

[Boeingman]

One has to wonder if this is another example of the new 5 % INTL. fuel reserves biting another airline in the a$$

 

[flynryan15]

Well

Maybe the Thunderstorms caused the Frog Crew to surrender and that is why they left their 747 parked akwardly across the ramp.

Just another example of how the Frogs screw everything up!!!!

I know wheree Air France could divert to!!! How about Canada?

 

[pipejockey]

Maybe the Thunderstorms caused the Frog Crew to surrender and that is why they left their 747 parked akwardly across the ramp.

Just another example of how the Frogs screw everything up!!!!

I know wheree Air France could divert to!!! How about Canada?

Too close. Better yet, back to France!! You know the French are always right, just ask them.

 

[Hutcha]

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

I'm sure they were so pissed that they turned down the exrta 5-6 hours of block time. They were, after all, off of the gate.

 

[fracflyer]

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

What about France makes you so mad? Maybe because they said Iraq didn't have those WMD's? Or maybe because they said invading Iraq wasn't a good idea? Maybe it's because we couldn't of beat the British w/o out their help during the American Revolution?

Don't let Fox News tell you what to think, or who to hate.

 

[pipejockey]

What about France makes you so mad? Maybe because they said Iraq didn't have those WMD's? Or maybe because they said invading Iraq wasn't a good idea? Maybe it's because we couldn't of beat the British w/o out their help during the American Revolution?

Don't let Fox News tell you what to think, or who to hate.

Likewise to you fracflyer, don't let moveon.org or al-jazeera tell you what to think!!!

 

[flynryan15]

frac are you kidding me

Get real the French have been worthless since the American Revolution.

I hate the French for the fact that they forget they would be speaking German if it wasn't for us.

I hate the French for the fact that they spray painted and spit on the memorials at Normandy.

And the next time another country gets them to surrender we will bail their A$$E$ out again.

Fox News doesn't tell me how to think although I do appreciate a news source that is slanted to the left. (CNN or the Clinton News Network)

 

[Tanner]

you mean to the right.

 

[flynryan15]

ops typo

 

[flynryan15]

frac are you kidding me

Get real the French have been worthless since the American Revolution.

I hate the French for the fact that they forget they would be speaking German if it wasn't for us.

I hate the French for the fact that they spray painted and spit on the memorials at Normandy.

And the next time another country gets them to surrender we will bail their A$$E$ out again.

Fox News doesn't tell me how to think although I do appreciate a news source that isn't slanted to the left. (CNN or the Clinton News Network)