View Full Version : Emirates tech problems to PER

13th Jul 2004, 09:18
The Emirates flight this Sat arrived in PER 7 hrs late (flight EK 420). According to those on the flight, taxi out from Dubai was normal, before the captain announced at the end of the runway before departure that the aircraft could not depart due to technical problems. The aircraft in question was then grounded, whilst annoyed passangers waited 7 hrs for a replacement. Anyone any ideas what the problem was? Crew seemed fairly reluctant to give a reasonable answer, or really didn't care?? Anyone out there have the reason for the delay? Replies gratefully recieved.

DIsco FEver
13th Jul 2004, 09:26
Aircraft went tech.......it happens....

Whats the big deal. New aircraft provided , 7hr delay, could have been worse.

13th Jul 2004, 13:28
Great first post DF, doesn't answer the question though!

13th Jul 2004, 14:43
I reckon DF DID answer the question... It satisfied me.

"Aircraft went tech.......it happens....

Whats the big deal"

DIsco FEver
13th Jul 2004, 15:30
Sorry SASK but this is not the Proffesional Ground Handlers Forum, it's Proffesional Pilots Forum.

Once the tech log has been signed it's no longer our problem, not a great customer service attitude, but then that's not my job,
so get over it...

scr, thanks but it's only my first posting as DF, not on PPrune.

Aircraft have tech problems all the time, some ground it, some get ADD'd.

Why are you so intersted in an EK delay, but then maybe it's because we dont have that many and it's an usual occurence??????

;) ;) ;) ;)

View From The Ground
13th Jul 2004, 15:35
So what value would it add to tell the pax exactly what caused the tech delay. Depending on what it was there is a possibility that the majority would not have understood what the errant parts vital function is. Seven hour delay not too bad, I experienced a tech with EK at DXB which was resolved with an a/c swap in 4 hours. At least EK can swap aircraft on occasion. Surely what counts in these circumstances is the level of care offered to the pax who were delayed and how quickly they were got on their way again. It is also possible that those answering the questions just knew that the aircraft was 'tech' and did not know the specifics.

Final 3 Greens
13th Jul 2004, 16:15
You guys must be smoking some pretty strong stuff to have such an attitude to your customers.

Self deluding prats you are and MOL will eat you for breakfast.

Disco Fever, you may have noticed that this post has been transferred to the SLF forum, so put on your asbestos underwear, as you are in for a warm time with your attitude.

DIsco FEver
13th Jul 2004, 16:37
Ahhh a proffesional I see, the PPL has come a long way since I did mine.

Fed up to the back teeth with pillocks and know it alls on PPrune asking about every go-around, tech delay.

And as a Professional Pilot, it is foolish to detail what exactly the problem is,,( see above).

2 reasons, firstly -- would they have a scooby about what you were talking about, and secondly it's better to be honest so to that end, be as general as you can with aircraft technical issues.

SLF can get a bit jumpy when you tell that the Hydraulics, Engines, etc has a problem.Most tend to think that any problem serious enough to ground the aircraft can only be cured after something as major as a C-CHeck.

So that when the Mikanik fixes it after 20 mins ie indication problem there is no mass hysteria.

I have had it happen when some well meaning member of ground staff told pax at the gate what the problem is/was, it did not go down with the pax, quite a few went on another plane as they did not want to get on the "death-trap", cant remeber the exact prob but was bugger all, but the girl caused chaos, bags off, new loadsheet.....more delay.

So as I said get-over it. Most airlines do care about pax(LCC and charter not so sure), doesnt always show, usually not enough staff do deal with these kind of problems, by there very nature they are unpredictable and therefore very difficult to plan for.

In Ek we have disruption plans in place, but they cannot cover every possiblity, but we do cater for pax better than most, and before Arthur Pewtey, annoyed from Basildon, gets on his soap box, even we cant please all of the people all of the time

13th Jul 2004, 18:54
Disco - Please, for your own sake SHUT UP and stop proving your self to be a full time jerk -
To all other professionals both in the air and on the ground, please be rest assured in that we don't all have the arrogant attitude towards our jobs and our passengers as Disco does.

Sask, you are correct in what you say.

Customers, passengers, SLF, call them what you like, but at the end of the day they do indeed pay my wages.
Piss of the pax = loose the company buisness = cutbacks = poss losing my job.
The majority of people in my company certainly share this attitude. I have always beleived in addressing the pax with respect. This is why, whenever possibile (even when bad news has to be delivered) I address the pax from the cabin - and not hiding behind the microphone on the F/deck. I have done this on many occassions and never shyed away from face to face contact with pax. The news you are delivering is may often still not received with joy, but if only 1 person can see that you are making an effort: then so be it.
Be polite, courtious and deal with the pax with respect (yes many are a pain in the arse, but again they do pay our wages) Basicaly, immagine yourself in there position and think how you would like to be treated and kept informed.

DIsco FEver
13th Jul 2004, 19:26
"This is why, whenever possibile (even when bad news has to be delivered) I address the pax from the cabin - and not hiding behind the microphone on the F/deck"

Cant do that on my type, you are too far away for people to see you.Your way is obviously the only way, being omnipotent and all.

My gut instinct says you are a spotter or dispatcher or maybe a biscuit chucker, your other posts almost confirm this, either way you are a , sorry no personal abuse not like you, you have no clue about commercial operations, again not your fault, but please let people that do the job do there job.
Not that you would agree, running your own airline, AOC, handling agency, ATC unit as you obvioucly do with all your experience in ground handling and passenger handling services.

Sorry to go on but reading crap from know it all 15 year old flight simmers gets on my tits.

Lets get it straight..



Mistah Kurtz
13th Jul 2004, 19:38
Don't think you'd get a job in the diplomatic service DIsco FEver but I agree with you. A seven hour technical delay, I've had a 24 hour one in the past, it goes with the job. It's an absurdly trivial topic on a professional PILOTS rumour network

DIsco FEver
13th Jul 2004, 19:50
Thanx Mr Kurtz,

Tend to get a bit direct ,esp when over refreshed. Cheap drink in Scarletts.

Tuesday night is hosties night , sorry ladies night..................oops there I go again.

:D :D

13th Jul 2004, 20:33
Please, do enlighten us as to which outfit it is you are with? Your attitude sounds kind of Ezy/Fr - Either way I wish to avoid your outfit, unless it is as I suspect (or hope for your fellow colleagues sake) that you are indeed just the bad apple in the bunch.

As I said before aircraft will always go tech, 5h1t happens, but you can retain some pax trust and future buisness by a professional and courtious approach.

FYI, have 6'200hrs rhs, A320/1 and a ctc scheduled for Nov.
Prev dispatched, worked in ops and dogsbody for a GA training/medivac outfit. I do know what Im talking about and stand by my previous statements.

Back to the thread please

DIsco FEver
13th Jul 2004, 20:45
I have 7 yrs LHS UK's 2nd largest airline, now A330/340 Emirates.

Edited for Relevancy

14th Jul 2004, 00:22
Anyone want to answer the original question instead of slagging each other off??

14th Jul 2004, 00:36
DIsco FEver - I understand the point you make, but feel bound to point out that the writing style you are using is unlikely to help you in making it!

This thread is now running in the Passengers & SLF forum - your audience are exactly that: Many of them are highly experienced, high time business travellers and they have a right to expect professional and courteous responses that are relevant to the original question. This statement holds true, regardless of the rank of the person posting a response. Captaincy does not preclude a mature attitude to public relations - rather it asumes it. If you wish to abuse First Officers, Cabin Crew or your Customers then you would be well advised to do so elsewhere. If you are unable to restrain yourself, then this can be done on your behalf.

In summary, make your case, but do it coherently and courteously, and preferably in a manner that does not bring discredit upon Flight Crew... tcr2 asked a question, let's help him/her with an answer, whether you like the question or not!

14th Jul 2004, 02:05
I am an ATC and obviously a SLF, not a Pilot.

What exactly is the problem here.

1. I'd rather be delayed (period) than end up swimming the second half of the trip to Perth.

2. The pilot might have known what the symptoms of the failure were, but not the cause so "Technical Problem" covers the Pax on a need to know basis.

3. Some parts of the world and some airlines, anything under 12 hours for a replacement (not fix) aircraft is pretty good.

4. Don't know what/how the passengers were treated (meals-lounge-hotel), but that would (in my opinion) potentially be the only area for complaint in this scenario, but as there is nothing mentioned, I assume that that was all OK.

5. Of course the Pax will be pi$$ed at a 7hr delay, they would not be human if they were not. I would be.

6. Other than a minor comment that implies that the crew did not care, the origional poster was only asking about the cause for the technical delay anyway.

Hey ... Have a nice day OK


edited for spelling

DIsco FEver
14th Jul 2004, 07:39
Well said Enterprise, that's what I was trying to say,
just tend to get a bit hot under the collar with crap postings.


As for the exact nature of the tech problem, I'm sorry but it has no relevance to anyone other than to EK and the operating crew.

The words Private&Confidential spring to mind.

14th Jul 2004, 09:41
DIsco FEver: As for the exact nature of the tech problem, I'm sorry but it has no relevance to anyone other than to EK and the operating crew.

The words Private&Confidential spring to mind.We pax may not be able to do anything about it, but we are naturally curious about what is wrecking our day as well as yours.

Plus if you can tell us that what's broken is a widget that makes the engine turn, not a widget that keeps the coffee hot, we are likely to be a lot less bolshy and a lot more sympathetic to you taking whatever time you need to fix the problem and to get us going where we're going, safely.

Most crew on most airlines I fly on seem to have no difficulty in giving a simple explanation about what's gone wrong.

But if you give us pax the mushroom treatment, we will feel unloved. And then go to the competition next time. Simple fact of commercial life.

There's nothing private and confidential about what's broken on an aircraft that's gone tech, except in airlines that want to cover up everything.

14th Jul 2004, 11:09
I am with DF on this one.

If a post was made here everytime a flight was 7 hours delayed there wouldn't be any room to past anything else.

Pax Vobiscum
14th Jul 2004, 15:17
But tcr2 has posted here because he felt he didn't get an explanation for his delay - an experience which left him less than gruntled.

Significant tech delays are relatively rare (for which thanks are due to the combined technical folks of the worlds airways). I've experienced two and in both cases I had a clear (no doubt simplified for my benefit) explanation of the cause and an estimate of the likely length of the delay, which kept me happy while I propped up the airport bar for an extra few hours.

I can see that there may be circumstances in which a general announcement may not be appropriate - some pax may be unduly worried or just bored to tears by an explanation. But I would hope that a polite request for information would receive a helpful response.

15th Jul 2004, 00:55
Ok, I don't so much think its an issue of the exact reason for the delay but a matter of communication and respect. My last trip, a week ago, the aircraft went tech. The crew handled it very well. It started as a "well folks lets see if we can handle it from up front its going to be 10 minutes" then to "well folks it looks like we have to get back to the gate and have our tech guys have a look at one of our misc ports, another 10-15 minutes" to finally "well gee folks, we're real sorry about this but we are unable to repair this aircraft, the gate crew will do everything possible to get you where you need to go". We got off, the gate crew gave us options announcing them over the loud speaker, we made our choice and had a new flight on a competitor airline to a nearby airport within 20 minutes. Were there unhappy people there?, you bet but we all knew the airline did a good job at making it as painless as possible by giving time and basic details at each step. We knew it wasnt the coffee maker or a missing bag of nuts. The information was relayed as it was known with a time estimate and appology. Good job Alaska Airlines by the way from pilots, on board crew to gate crew.

15th Jul 2004, 01:40
I agree Katlpax. I would add that "every problem is an opportunity" - from passenger's point of view there are BIG differences in the way airlines handle the occasional problem, and some of the attitudes we see recorded above would see me avoiding certain carriers if there is any choice in the matter - thankfully there is.

In particular:

1) I like to have frequent update on delays, with consistent messages as to what the GENERAL problem is. This means the messages have to come from one source e.g. the Captain or his / her designate, not different and erroneous rumours spread by the cabin staff. That really bugs me because the source of the problem is a poor attitude

2) Captain can if deemed appropriate elect to permit pax to use mobile phones to warn others of their delay

3) Captain can always make PR noise by pointing out the need to err on side of caution and empathise by saying he / she is also affected by the delay

4) Pilots who can't emphasise with pax on a basic level could consider becoming air freight dogs (but I strongly suspect that people shipping cargo raise any grumbles about delays at a much higher level in the airline).

No-one would argue that it is the Captain's perogative to make the decisions, but I feel it is also the Captain's duty to keep his pax informed.

15th Jul 2004, 07:42
{sniped} I have had it happen when some well meaning member of ground staff told pax at the gate what the problem is/was, it did not go down with the pax, quite a few went on another plane as they did not want to get on the "death-trap", cant remeber the exact prob but was bugger all, but the girl caused chaos, bags off, new loadsheet.....more delay.

I have a tendency to agree with DIsco FEver here. Sometimes a little *too* much information can be bad, especially for those pax who like drama. If you (flightcrew) phrase something just slightly wrong, then you get - "OMG! XXX Airlines were about to fly me halfway across he globe with a defective X_X!!" You get the picture.

Although I do believe most of the pax here who read PPRUNE are a little bit different from ordinary pax . . . ;)

PS - KATLPAX - I like your username! :D

15th Jul 2004, 22:49
Certainly the info should come from an appropriate source, one other story comes to mind in a small prop from San Juan to Culebra (small island). Took off from KSJU, just at lift off loud banging from port side, repeating bang bang bang...1000ft capt asks me sitting behind him to hold this lever back, he preceds to open the door to drag his seat belt in which had been banging against the side inches from prop, yes inches. Nothing said, then preceeds to turn to the north away from my understanding of where we should be generally heading...keep turning back on final lands aircraft..nothing said...taxis to terminal gets out. Ground staff comes back asks us to collect our things and says aircraft had "bad flaps". No info, who knows if correct. Don't think they are in business anymore under same name anyway...very different approach to customer service and understanding. I think most people can handle even bad news but it needs to come...

CattlePax "KATLPAX"

thanks AtlPax!

max AB
16th Jul 2004, 18:14
tcr2 I have just read through this thread for the first time and had a good laugh. From your first post it is obvious you were not on the flight as you refer to "those on the flight..." How many did you talk to before you came to the conclusion that the crew didn't care or that the pax were not cared for. Just your buddy perhaps who was just one out of 250+. I can accept that from time to time pax are left in the dark about what is happening with delays etc but any occurence is isolated and not a reflection of a companies procedure or a lack of care. More likely, as others have suggested, the tech crew didn't know the extent of a delay until the whole issue unfolded. As the Disco Duck has said in many words...It happens, if your buddy got sad and frightened all alone in the terminal then I say sorry, now is that better.

22nd Jul 2004, 07:55
Read back through the replies again. It is amazing how much arrogance and 'I've got my head so far up my own arse I can see my tonsils' attitude has been generated from a simple request for information.
Several members of my family were on the flight, and from them and many of the other passangers they talked to on the flight, they were not treated that well.
My original post was a simple and polite request to know the technical nature of the problem that caused the delay. Some of the replies on a bulletin board usually awash with common sense and friendly responses are a bit over the top. If you dodn't want to give me the answer, fine! If you think the post is pointless, fine, don't read or reply to it!!
If the nature of some of the replies is an indication of your personalities, then enjoy the rest of your sad little lives!!

23rd Jul 2004, 13:22
tcr2: If you dodn't want to give me the answer, fine!First time I posted here, it was to ask a question. The only substantive answer I got was a diatribe from someone who went to great lengths to tell me (a) that he knew the answer and (b) why he wasn't going to tell me that answer.

From that day on, I have despaired when I read posts such as the ones on this thread - particularly when I consider that (if the posters are to be taken at face value) some of these people appear to be trusted to make judgements about the operation of aircraft. Some of the responses here wouldn't encourage me to trust the posters with a telephone, let alone an airliner.

23rd Jul 2004, 16:57
Rough guess:
One reason not more information was giving to the pax might have been that the crew did not know more either:
Aircraft has a problem and gets back to stand: pilots and engineers first have to find out whats wrong.
Pax get offloaded before they know it exactly. Not wanting to give wrong information the only info given is that there is a technical problem.

Aircraft and crew get changed:
New crew gets pulled out - all the info they might have gotten is: the aircraft before went tech. So what shall they tell the pax?

Tcr2 - I agree with you that more information would have been nice - if the pax remained on the same aircraft (I'd like to know what went wrong/ got fixed if I have to continue on on the same plane).
However - if there is an airplane change why start talking about a problem, which is not applicable anymore. Especially if the crew might not know exactly what was wrong since they are not the original crew.

I rather have no information than wrong information.