Diversions to Brisbane
Thread Starter
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Where people don't care
Posts: 210
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Diversions to Brisbane
One can only wonder what CASA think of the safety implications of punters on aeroplane for prolonged period without a crew also on board as inferred by this story from today"s Sydney Morning Herald. Would the token ground staff left to tend the SLF have been able to handle an evacuation in the event of an emergency? Would they have been trained for such?
.
Fog wreaks airline havoc
Scott Rochfort
May 15, 2007
Other related coverage
* Transport turmoil as fog engulfs Sydney
PASSENGERS on a United Airlines Boeing 747 endured a horrendous 27-hour journey from San Francisco to Sydney yesterday, when their flight was left stranded on the tarmac at Brisbane Airport - without a crew.
Fog in Sydney forced the diversion of two United flights to Brisbane early yesterday. But passengers on both aircraft were left to fend for themselves when their United crews clocked off, having exceeded their legal flying hours.
Nor were the passengers allowed to leave the aircraft, because customs at Brisbane was unable to clear them. "Due to [Department of Transport] regulations, passengers were kept on board for safety and security reasons," an airline spokeswoman said in an email to the Herald.
A relief United crew was flown on a domestic flight from Sydney to Brisbane to fly the first flight down to Sydney.
The first United flight, UA839 from Los Angeles, which was supposed to arrive at 6.10am, finally landed in Sydney at 1.05pm, after an epic 22-hour flight.
But passengers on the second flight, UA863, originally due to arrive in Sydney at 6.25am, had to sweat it out seven more hours.
They had to wait for the same crew that took flight UA839 to Sydney to fly back to Brisbane on a domestic flight to pick them up.
"Passengers were provided with water and juice at approximately 0945 to supplement provisions already on board the aircraft," the airline said. "United Airlines apologises for any inconvenience caused to passengers."
The fog in Sydney forced three Qantas flights from the US to divert to Brisbane and another from Tokyo to divert to Melbourne. They landed in Sydney three to four hours late.
The fog also delayed ferries and motorists throughout the morning rush. Ferry passengers were stranded after services were cancelled at 6am and slowly resumed from 8.30am. The fog lifted over most of Sydney by 10.15am.
The Bureau of Meteorology said fog was expected again today but may not be as widespread
Scott Rochfort
May 15, 2007
Other related coverage
* Transport turmoil as fog engulfs Sydney
PASSENGERS on a United Airlines Boeing 747 endured a horrendous 27-hour journey from San Francisco to Sydney yesterday, when their flight was left stranded on the tarmac at Brisbane Airport - without a crew.
Fog in Sydney forced the diversion of two United flights to Brisbane early yesterday. But passengers on both aircraft were left to fend for themselves when their United crews clocked off, having exceeded their legal flying hours.
Nor were the passengers allowed to leave the aircraft, because customs at Brisbane was unable to clear them. "Due to [Department of Transport] regulations, passengers were kept on board for safety and security reasons," an airline spokeswoman said in an email to the Herald.
A relief United crew was flown on a domestic flight from Sydney to Brisbane to fly the first flight down to Sydney.
The first United flight, UA839 from Los Angeles, which was supposed to arrive at 6.10am, finally landed in Sydney at 1.05pm, after an epic 22-hour flight.
But passengers on the second flight, UA863, originally due to arrive in Sydney at 6.25am, had to sweat it out seven more hours.
They had to wait for the same crew that took flight UA839 to Sydney to fly back to Brisbane on a domestic flight to pick them up.
"Passengers were provided with water and juice at approximately 0945 to supplement provisions already on board the aircraft," the airline said. "United Airlines apologises for any inconvenience caused to passengers."
The fog in Sydney forced three Qantas flights from the US to divert to Brisbane and another from Tokyo to divert to Melbourne. They landed in Sydney three to four hours late.
The fog also delayed ferries and motorists throughout the morning rush. Ferry passengers were stranded after services were cancelled at 6am and slowly resumed from 8.30am. The fog lifted over most of Sydney by 10.15am.
The Bureau of Meteorology said fog was expected again today but may not be as widespread
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Sydney
Posts: 824
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Quote-
"Would the token ground staff left to tend the SLF have been able to handle an evacuation in the event of an emergency? Would they have been trained for such?"
---------
Maybe.
No.
"Would the token ground staff left to tend the SLF have been able to handle an evacuation in the event of an emergency? Would they have been trained for such?"
---------
Maybe.
No.
The crew might have reached their FDP limit, so they couldn't continue on and fly the aircraft to SYD. I'd be extremely surprised if they actually 'clocked-off' and left the aircraft, as suggested by this article. Just some idiot journo trying to beat things up as usual.
Bottums Up
My first thought was that a professional crew wouldn't deplane leaving pax on board, then I remembered seeing both the tech crew get off their shiny jet with navbags in hand, during refuelling, with the pax still deplaning behind them! 
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: NSW,Australia
Posts: 395
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The Pilots may well have clocked off,however I doubt the Cabin Crew would have, whilst pax were still onboard.This would be a serious breach of CASA Regs.
Any know the truth ??
Any know the truth ??
Extend !!!!!!
If the Journo's story is reasonably accurate it indicates that the UAL pilots stood on their digs and refused to extend whereas the QF pilots extended and flew the aircraft to SYD when the fog lifted. The QF pilot greed for overtime pay is what management rely on when there are weather diversions. It would be better in times like these, when Dixon has mounted a full scale war on mainline pilots that pilots ignore the overtime carrot and take a long term look at the industrial landscape. Dixon won't change his ways unless he is forced to do so. 
Interesting conversation I heard taking place on Brissy ground frequency yesterday morning about 1015:
(not word for word but along these lines...)
United xxx: Ahh Brisbane ground, United xxx we need some help here, we've been left at the gate now for about 2 hours with pax on board, and if we don't get them off soon we're gonna have a mutiny on our hands. Can you get someone to help us please?
Ground Controller: Okay, we'll see if we can make some calls for you and find some help. Who does your ground handling here?
United: We are handled by QF. We need to maybe get some busses out here to get the pax off.
GC: Okay well we're not a bus company up here you know, have you tried calling QF for assistance?
United: Yes we have but they don't have any spare staff left to help us. Please can you do something, the pax are angry and we really need to get them off.
GC: Sorry mate, not much I can do. I suggest you give QF another call.
Obviously with 2 United 747s and probably a couple of QF 747s turning up unscheduled, resources were stretched to the limit. I certainly wouldn't have wanted to be a crew member (or a pax for that matter) on any of these flights.
(not word for word but along these lines...)
United xxx: Ahh Brisbane ground, United xxx we need some help here, we've been left at the gate now for about 2 hours with pax on board, and if we don't get them off soon we're gonna have a mutiny on our hands. Can you get someone to help us please?
Ground Controller: Okay, we'll see if we can make some calls for you and find some help. Who does your ground handling here?
United: We are handled by QF. We need to maybe get some busses out here to get the pax off.
GC: Okay well we're not a bus company up here you know, have you tried calling QF for assistance?
United: Yes we have but they don't have any spare staff left to help us. Please can you do something, the pax are angry and we really need to get them off.
GC: Sorry mate, not much I can do. I suggest you give QF another call.
Obviously with 2 United 747s and probably a couple of QF 747s turning up unscheduled, resources were stretched to the limit. I certainly wouldn't have wanted to be a crew member (or a pax for that matter) on any of these flights.
. . . and a little later on QF Bris frequency;
"United XXX,QF Bris, we are no longer your handling agent in Brisbane, that contract was terminated some time ago!"
Obviously something was sorted out eventually.
I saw one of the United tech crews paxing down to Sydney today, and their take on the matter was along the lines of
"It was kinda tough to walk off the airplane when we could have extended, but our union is pretty pissed with the company bosses awarding themselves big bonuses while they screw us"
Geoffrey, Margaret - can you see any parallels there? Does this sound familiar to anyone out there??????
"United XXX,QF Bris, we are no longer your handling agent in Brisbane, that contract was terminated some time ago!"
Obviously something was sorted out eventually.
I saw one of the United tech crews paxing down to Sydney today, and their take on the matter was along the lines of
"It was kinda tough to walk off the airplane when we could have extended, but our union is pretty pissed with the company bosses awarding themselves big bonuses while they screw us"
Geoffrey, Margaret - can you see any parallels there? Does this sound familiar to anyone out there??????
Last edited by esreverlluf; 15th May 2007 at 10:21.
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: NSW,Australia
Posts: 395
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
who walked off
I am still waiting for my question to be answered.
Or are you guys only concerned about pilot conditions and bugger the pax and Cabin Crew.
Or are you guys only concerned about pilot conditions and bugger the pax and Cabin Crew.
Last edited by capt.cynical; 15th May 2007 at 10:13. Reason: THE TRUTH !! please
This is after all the "Pilot's Rumour Network", so forgive us for being preoccupied with our own issues, however, I can't imagine the pax would have been left unattended.
In fact with a diversion such as this, the tech crew would probably have got themselves to a hotel more quickly had they extended and flown on to Sydney. It would appear that the decision to get off in Brisbane was primarily industrial.
There is certainly a sense of obligation to one's passengers to get them to their destination - however regulations, fatigue or in this case industrial issues can get in the way of that. Well done to the crew for taking a difficult decision.
Sometimes you can't win - greedy for extending or uncaring for not.
In fact with a diversion such as this, the tech crew would probably have got themselves to a hotel more quickly had they extended and flown on to Sydney. It would appear that the decision to get off in Brisbane was primarily industrial.
There is certainly a sense of obligation to one's passengers to get them to their destination - however regulations, fatigue or in this case industrial issues can get in the way of that. Well done to the crew for taking a difficult decision.
Sometimes you can't win - greedy for extending or uncaring for not.
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Sydney
Posts: 824
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
capt.cynical,
yes it would have been a serious breach.
Qf management organised a "tour" for staff and others of the A330 at the domestic terminal when it was newly introduced.
The question was asked of management during the tour ,"where are the cabin crew". Puzzled looks and blank stares were the replies.
Evidently CASA were not amused when informed that this was occurring without having personel onboard suitably trained and certified in evac proceedures.
yes it would have been a serious breach.
Qf management organised a "tour" for staff and others of the A330 at the domestic terminal when it was newly introduced.
The question was asked of management during the tour ,"where are the cabin crew". Puzzled looks and blank stares were the replies.
Evidently CASA were not amused when informed that this was occurring without having personel onboard suitably trained and certified in evac proceedures.
Going Boeing.........your assumption that the QF pilots extended their tour of duty may be a little hasty. Remember that QF could easily have positioned a fresh crew from SYD on a domestic service, or even called up some of the crew who reside in or near BNE. Things are not always what they seem.
Obviously these options are not available to UAL.
Obviously these options are not available to UAL.
So what would happen if (as a passenger) you said. "Let me off or I'll call the police and ask that you are arrested for deprivation of liberty".
Not the easiest of tasks trying to access a terminal from the tarmac these days! You could walk onto the runway and draw attention to yourself!
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: some dive
Posts: 448
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
From the horses mouth, 1 F/O stayed on the flight deck, Capt and other dickey in bunks until relief crew arrived from Syd. No, they did not walk off aircraft leaving Pax onboard.
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: NSW,Australia
Posts: 395
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The @#$%&*($ TRUTH
Thanks all, but still waiting for the truth of this incidence.
Did the pilots get off and leave the Cabin Crew to maintain A/C secruity or did the C/C get off with the Pilots.
leaving the a/c under the control of a few (untrained) ground staff from QF or whoether to look after the pax.I am not Pilot bashing just asking for opions or answers.
]
Thread Starter
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Where people don't care
Posts: 210
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
From the horses mouth, 1 F/O stayed on the flight deck, Capt and other dickey in bunks until relief crew arrived from Syd. No, they did not walk off aircraft leaving Pax onboard
If the Cabin Crew DID abandon the ship and the SLF, then the regulatory authorities must conduct an enquiry to get to the bottom of this with a view to ensuring that the safety and well being of the SLF is never again prejudiced by UAL or any other carrier.
Join Date: May 2004
Location: all over the shop
Posts: 986
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
QF did not do the handling of these diversions, they were done by Menzies in conjunction with 2 UA reps who were flown up from SYD. QF have apparently only recently lost the UA diversion contract to Menzies.
A lot of the screwing around that did occur to the pax who originated on the SFO flight was apparently because the 2 UA reps kept changing their instructions to Menzies, who merely provided the manpower.
A lot of the screwing around that did occur to the pax who originated on the SFO flight was apparently because the 2 UA reps kept changing their instructions to Menzies, who merely provided the manpower.
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Granite Belt, Australia
Posts: 841
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
PAF
Customs and Quarantine (AQIS?) are pretty powerful organizations and can instruct airlines to keep pax on board until they can handle them... I'm not saying that that happened here... thus the passenger may have had to sue the Government for keeping them on board. Just think what refugees could do!!!
So what would happen if (as a passenger) you said. "Let me off or I'll call the police and ask that you are arrested for deprivation of liberty".