Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Delayed in Paris

Options
  • 16-01-2008 6:27pm
    #1
    oscarBravo
    Technology & Internet Moderators Posts: 28,799 Mod ✭✭✭✭


    Hey all - I was flying from Chile to Dublin yesterday, via Paris. The long-haul leg was fine, but the flight from CDG to DUB was delayed for a few hours.

    We were told that the problem was "weather en-route". Fair enough, it was windy in Paris, and the wind was 90° across the runway; the approach and touchdown in the 777 was pretty interesting. Thing is, while we were waiting for our flight (AFR5006), the next flight to Dublin (AFR5000) departed on-time.

    Once we boarded the plane (an Avro RJ), we taxied out and held short of the runway (24, I think) for something like 20 minutes. The pilot explained that the earlier problem had been the crosswind, which exceeded the RJ's rated limit. As soon as the plane left the ground, it turned into the wind by what felt like about 30°. The flight was bumpy - seat belt light on all the way - but the landing was a greaser, one of the best I've experienced.

    When I got to Dublin, my baggage hadn't arrived. The guy at the claim desk told me that because of the weather, they had loaded extra fuel on the
    plane in case it needed to divert. Because of the extra fuel load, they had to offload baggage.

    Some questions: I thought all Air France flights from Paris to Dublin were operated by CityJet, and were all Avros. If so, why did AFR5000 take off, but AFR5006 was delayed? Or am I wrong, and is the other flight an A319 or similar?

    Also, given that the weather was fine in Dublin (the problem was at CDG), why would they need extra fuel for a diversion? I could understand if there were doubts about whether they could land at the destination, but the problem seems to have been confined to the takeoff airport.

    Finally, I thought the RJ was a more capable aircraft than to be unable to take off with a full passenger load, full luggage load and enough fuel for a 780km flight, even with contingency.


Comments

  • Options
    #2
    highlydebased
    Registered Users Posts: 7,468 ✭✭✭highlydebased


    Theres still a few BAe146's in operation. Wind could have also changed....


  • Options
    #3
    pclancy
    Registered Users Posts: 3,939 ✭✭✭pclancy


    :(

    Did you get your baggage back yet?


  • Options
    #4
    oscarBravo
    Technology & Internet Moderators Posts: 28,799 Mod ✭✭✭✭oscarBravo


    Neon-Circles wrote: »
    Theres still a few BAe146's in operation.
    Same thing, no?
    Neon-Circles wrote: »
    Wind could have also changed....
    Doesn't explain why another flight was able to board and depart, while we sat at the gate.
    pclancy wrote: »
    Did you get your baggage back yet?
    Nope. Got a message from Air France this morning that it would be delivered today, but it could take a while to get to Westport. I'm expecting a "where the **** are you?" call from a van driver in the next while. ;)


  • Options
    #5
    FidesEtRobur
    Closed Accounts Posts: 25 ✭FidesEtRobur


    Doesn't explain why another flight was able to board and depart, while we sat at the gate.

    Sounds like there was a back-log of aircraft on the taxiways? Did the preceding aircraft get airborn immediately after pushing or did it hold for a while also? Other factors may include did the runway get wet or contaminated in the intervening period? May have been a training flight? Ultimately its the captains call and if he's not happy you don't go.


  • Options
    #6
    oscarBravo
    Technology & Internet Moderators Posts: 28,799 Mod ✭✭✭✭oscarBravo


    FidesEtRobur wrote: »
    Sounds like there was a back-log of aircraft on the taxiways? Did the preceding aircraft get airborn immediately after pushing or did it hold for a while also?
    No way of knowing. All I know is I saw a shuttle head to the ramp with "AF5000 Dublin" on it, full of pax, and come back a while later empty, while the departure information screens showed "boarding" then "complete".
    FidesEtRobur wrote: »
    Other factors may include did the runway get wet or contaminated in the intervening period?
    Doesn't compute. The 1235 flight (mine) was delayed due to weather conditions until some time after 1530, while the 1350 flight (which I'm almost certain was an identical, or similar, aircraft) departed on schedule.
    FidesEtRobur wrote: »
    May have been a training flight? Ultimately its the captains call and if he's not happy you don't go.
    I guess I'll never know.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #7
    FidesEtRobur
    Closed Accounts Posts: 25 ✭FidesEtRobur


    Doesn't compute. The 1235 flight (mine) was delayed due to weather conditions until some time after 1530, while the 1350 flight (which I'm almost certain was an identical, or similar, aircraft) departed on schedule.

    It may have been that once you were delayed (due weather) you missed your ATC slot and would have had to get a new one from Eurocontrol. The earliest available was obviously 1530.


  • Options
    #8
    oscarBravo
    Technology & Internet Moderators Posts: 28,799 Mod ✭✭✭✭oscarBravo


    Sounds like the most plausible explanation.

    Plus side, I just got my luggage (slightly damaged).


  • Options
    #9
    highlydebased
    Registered Users Posts: 7,468 ✭✭✭highlydebased


    BAe146's and the Avro's are similar, look practiaclly the same but they are not the same


  • Options
    #10
    Oilrig
    Closed Accounts Posts: 727 ✭✭✭Oilrig


    Both stink... literally, bleed air comes complements of engine lubrication supplier.


  • Options
    #11
    pclancy
    Registered Users Posts: 3,939 ✭✭✭pclancy


    Oilrig wrote: »
    Both stink... literally, bleed air comes complements of engine lubrication supplier.

    Ive heard that a lot all right! must be horrible.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #12
    therecklessone
    Registered Users Posts: 17,213 ✭✭✭✭therecklessone


    Was on an Avro last week to CDG, didn't enjoy the flight one bit. Pokey little fecker.


  • Options
    #13
    *Kol*
    Registered Users Posts: 2,549 ✭✭✭*Kol*


    Neon-Circles wrote: »
    BAe146's and the Avro's are similar, look practiaclly the same but they are not the same

    Is there any way of telling the difference from looking externally?


Advertisement