16 Mar - SQ321 LHR-SIN canx for the day

[HUGE AL]

I'm surprised it's taken you so long to mention a 747 in another thread that has got nothing to do with it.

[9V-JKL]

Glad it all worked out in the end....

I am suprised SQ did not try to get a replacement 747 to try and fill up, like they did with the SYD flight last year, and also like what QF did with the recent LAX flights.

Yes, but these happened at home base which made it logistically easier to manage. Not 7,000 miles away. I presume you know the cost of flying an empty 744 and then flying an empty A380 back.

[sumitsan]

Yes, but these happened at home base which made it logistically easier to manage. Not 7,000 miles away. I presume you know the cost of flying an empty 744 and then flying an empty A380 back.

Yeah, the SQ incident a year ago happened in SIN. But from what I heard, the QF incident happened in LAX. Did QF happen to have 747s in LAX at that time of the incident? I thought they flew them out to LAX from Australia, and assumed that was the reason why the flight left several hours later.

[9V-JKL]

Yeah, the SQ incident a year ago happened in SIN. But from what I heard, the QF incident happened in LAX. Did QF happen to have 747s in LAX at that time of the incident? I thought they flew them out to LAX from Australia, and assumed that was the reason why the flight left several hours later.

The tech fault at LAX was a 4-hr delay.
The more complicated tech fault at home base caused transfers to 744.

Tech faults occur everyday and delays are part and parcel of air travel.

I defer to Man Flyer's comment

[MAN Flyer]

I mentioned the 747 idea because it has happened in the past with both SQ and QF when A380 flights were canceled because of technical problems, and replacement 747s were flown in. I only mentioned BA loaning it to SQ because SQ is probably short on 747s now (unless they have a free one thats not under maintenance), but they can loan with a certain charge (Not free of course). MH did it for a competitor (CX) for a certain fee. It wouldn't necessarily have to be a 747.

Only four times in one paragraph. Things are looking up!.

The whole point was your seeming obsession with 747's, which in itself is fine and is up to you. However, what is not fine is contstantly jumping in on threads talking about your beloved aircraft and taking the discussion OT. We have had to delete or move around a dozen posts of yours recently because of this.

The suggestion of sending one of your beloveds from Changi was not the greatest idea. The suggestion that BA should let SQ have three of theirs for a couple of days was stark raving bonkers and the daftest thing I have read on here for a while, which is saying something.

[jhm]

Moving OT again... Just some final miscellaneous points:

1 We arrived just before 11am at SIN today so a total delay of around 16 hours.

2 Our flight was shown at LHR as SQ321Y. For whatever reason, phaleesy and I found that we were offloaded when we got to the gate (possibly because they expected us to travel in Y on SQ317) but the gate staff managed to put us back in the same seats and our luggage made it as well!

3 The re-scheduled departure time was 1pm but we only eventually left at 3pm because about a dozen pax had failed to turn up and they had to spend time offloading the luggage.

4 We jokingly asked whether there would be fresh food and was assured that there would be. However, the menu on the flight was still the same so we ended up with supper (and no satay!) for lunch.

5 The SQ LON staff person who (along with a colleague) had been present at our hotel said he hadn't slept for around 14 hours!

6 Some pax tried to wangle an upgrade to Suites at the gate for their connecting flight to Aus on the basis of "What ? You've delayed us for 12 hours! Moan, moan" but didn't succeed.

7 We were given delay survey forms to complete on the flight asking our opinion of how the process was handled well (or badly).

[jjpb3]

2 Our flight was shown at LHR as SQ321Y. For whatever reason, phaleesy and I found that we were offloaded when we got to the gate (possibly because they expected us to travel in Y on SQ317) but the gate staff managed to put us back in the same seats and our luggage made it as well!

Happy to hear that you and phaleesy made it out to SIN in the same cabin, though with a rather lengthy delay. And with luggage too!

6 Some pax tried to wangle an upgrade to Suites at the gate for their connecting flight to Aus on the basis of "What ? You've delayed us for 12 hours! Moan, moan" but didn't succeed.

Someone had to try it.

[KeithMEL]

Glad to hear that things worked out in the end.

[SMK77]

Moving OT again... Just some final miscellaneous points:

6 Some pax tried to wangle an upgrade to Suites at the gate for their connecting flight to Aus on the basis of "What ? You've delayed us for 12 hours! Moan, moan" but didn't succeed.

Final questions are:

- keep us updated on the compensation that SQ is willing to pay
and
- is it true that the 388 left earlier with 7 empty seats in Suites???

[taipeiflyer]

i am glad you and phaleesy made your flight. i truly hope that everything on your trip is perfect from here on out. look forward to hearing all about your travels.

[Nick C]

Apparently SQ221 on 05/03/2009 was delayed for 3 hours in SIN due to hydraulics as well.

[trekkie]

deleted

[boing]

Does anyone the know the a/c types of both sq321 and sq 221 ? Hyd problem