More BA woes – A350 goes tech

Back to Forum

This topic contains 9 replies, has 8 voices, and was last updated by  SimonS1 13 Aug 2019
at 11:05
.

Viewing 10 posts - 1 through 10 (of 10 total)

  • SimonS1
    Participant

    First week of operation and already gone tech with flights cancelled today.

    Reported online that it is a software problem. Ouch.

    Editor of Airliner World talking about poor communications from BA. There’s a surprise. At least for those cancelled in Madrid a night in town at BA expense plus €300 cash may be a result.


    StephenLondon
    Participant

    According to the BA Source: “British Airways A350-1000 G-XWBA operating BA457 Madrid – London Heathrow made a go-around at London Heathrow this morning due to high winds and was then removed from service for checks causing the cancellation of the BA464/BA465 London Heathrow – Madrid rotation.”

    A poster on another forum said there were some damaged wing slats due to the high winds, but that has not been confirmed by official sources.


    scotscrew
    Participant

    More BA bashing…..yawn yawn

    1 user thanked author for this post.

    JJ
    Participant

    I heard it had to go around due to a Traffic conflict (gapping). Back in service after checks as go around speed was out of tolerance for the flap positions.


    capetonianm
    Participant

    Not BA bashing, just reporting facts.


    MartynSinclair
    Participant

    Back in service after checks as go around speed was out of tolerance for the flap positions.

    Do you know by how much.. ?


    SimonS1
    Participant

    More BA bashing…..yawn yawn

    Do you work for them?

    Interesting to see on FT that some people seeking EC261 compensation are already being fobbed off by BA, claiming that a ‘damaged aircraft’ is exceptional. Usual lack of transparency from BA….some may allege deliberate deception, but that probably overestimates that call centre staff actually know what they are talking about. Even more interesting that known journalists were given the ‘your rights’ leaflet…


    christopheL
    Participant

    SimonS1, you are too severe with BA. They do an excellent job of analyzing the causes of delays. This is what I received last year:

    In relation to your claim, I’m afraid it’s been refused. Your flight BA0059 was delayed departing London Heathrow by 203 minutes, and arrived at Cape Town 187 minutes late. Of this delay, 76 minutes were caused by a cleaning issue, including damage caused by the cleaning truck. The remaining 127 minutes however, were caused by adverse weather conditions at London Heathrow. On 28 February there was heavy snowfall and strong winds throughout the day, as well as an air frost warning in place until 18:00 GMT. As a result of these conditions, Air Traffic Control restricted the flow rate to 38 per hour until 22:00 GMT. It should be noted the usual landing rate at London Heathrow is between 45 and 48 per hour. With such restrictions imposed, delays and cancellations were inevitable.

    Although we could be liable for 76 minutes of the delay to BA0059, the remainder was due to extraordinary circumstances. Because the cleaning issue was less than 180 minutes, compensation is not payable under EC Regulation 261/2004. Since the delay of the flight was caused by adverse weather and air traffic management decisions, as set out in Recital 14 and 15 of EC Regulation 261/2004, British Airways can prove the defence of “extraordinary circumstances” therefore no compensation is payable.

    This answer does not address the hypothesis that my flight could have left on time or with minimal delay if 76 minutes had not been lost due to the cleaning issue. But such hypothesis is pure speculation, isn’t it ?


    JasmineBear
    Participant

    Not a software issue.

    It wasn’t just the wing slats that were potentially damaged. The landing was very hard as well, exceeding G-force limits so was taken out of service for airframe checks as well. Not helped by the cross winds which were around the 40 knot limit into Heathrow that day.


    SimonS1
    Participant

    SimonS1, you are too severe with BA. They do an excellent job of analyzing the causes of delays. This is what I received last year:

    In relation to your claim, I’m afraid it’s been refused. Your flight BA0059 was delayed departing London Heathrow by 203 minutes, and arrived at Cape Town 187 minutes late. Of this delay, 76 minutes were caused by a cleaning issue, including damage caused by the cleaning truck. The remaining 127 minutes however, were caused by adverse weather conditions at London Heathrow. On 28 February there was heavy snowfall and strong winds throughout the day, as well as an air frost warning in place until 18:00 GMT. As a result of these conditions, Air Traffic Control restricted the flow rate to 38 per hour until 22:00 GMT. It should be noted the usual landing rate at London Heathrow is between 45 and 48 per hour. With such restrictions imposed, delays and cancellations were inevitable.

    Although we could be liable for 76 minutes of the delay to BA0059, the remainder was due to extraordinary circumstances. Because the cleaning issue was less than 180 minutes, compensation is not payable under EC Regulation 261/2004. Since the delay of the flight was caused by adverse weather and air traffic management decisions, as set out in Recital 14 and 15 of EC Regulation 261/2004, British Airways can prove the defence of “extraordinary circumstances” therefore no compensation is payable.

    This answer does not address the hypothesis that my flight could have left on time or with minimal delay if 76 minutes had not been lost due to the cleaning issue. But such hypothesis is pure speculation, isn’t it ?

    Exactly, they do a great analysis, almost always in ways that suit them. Plenty reported on other forums. For example a 4 hour delay to a long haul flight, caused by a modest technical issue following which the flight missed slot and had to await a new one. Of course BA blamed the delay on ATC, completely ignoring the fact that without the initial technical issue the plane would have not missed its slot.

    Luckily for travellers CEDR is increasingly exposing this, and last time I saw over 80% of cases were going in the traveller’s favour. Also with the PPP deadline coming up in about 2 weeks a lot of the claims lawyers will be looking for a new activity.

    To be fair most airlines try it on in this area, it is a direct cost, so every claim avoided, fobbed off etc is a direct savings to the bottom line.

Viewing 10 posts - 1 through 10 (of 10 total)
You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
Business Traveller October 2019 edition
Business Traveller October 2019 edition
Be up-to-date
Magazine Subscription
To see our latest subscription offers for Business Traveller editions worldwide, click on the Subscribe & Save link below
Polls