7 hour! VS15 delays today

Originally posted by Gavin
I know that Mytravel and Thomson fly both have a standby plane, as I have suffered a small delay with both while they bring in the standby plane when mine has gone tech.

I am actually supprised that VS do not have a plane on standby, if the charters can build this into their costs why can't VS.

You kind of expect it from a LCC but not from a company like VS. Seems they have cut back to the bare bones recently on almost everything.

Exactly, i mean how hard can it be for Virgin to spare a mere $250Million for a standby plane.

[:?]

Originally posted by stu

Originally posted by Gavin
I know that Mytravel and Thomson fly both have a standby plane, as I have suffered a small delay with both while they bring in the standby plane when mine has gone tech.

I am actually supprised that VS do not have a plane on standby, if the charters can build this into their costs why can't VS.

You kind of expect it from a LCC but not from a company like VS. Seems they have cut back to the bare bones recently on almost everything.

Exactly, i mean how hard can it be for Virgin to spare a mere $250Million for a standby plane.

[:?]

I don't know how these things work, but I do know that they lease the planes from a finance company, rather than directly purchase them so the direct cost would be a lot lot less than the actual cost of the plane.

The real problem here is how long VS are playing 'catch up'.
The original delay occured on Saturday and todays VS15 is still running a minimum of 3 hours late. Which means its often the pax travelling between 1 - 4 days after the event who still suffer[n]

-Steve

Part of the problem with VS having an aircraft 'on standby' is that for the relatively small fleet, there are two main 'types' 744 and A340, and different configs within each type (and minor detail differences even within config).

While there are good commercial reasons for the different types and configs, they reduce operational flexibility quite significantly when dealing with recovery from irregular ops.

The 744 fleet (both LHR and LGW) suffers more from knock-on effects because of the way it's utilised - mostly lots of flights to the US which are out during day and back to the UK as a redeye, which then usually turn straight around and go back west.

The A340 fleet at LHR can recover more easily, as mot only is it a bigger fleet, but the arrivals and departures for this fleet are more evenly spread across the day - an arriving aircraft around midday may not be down to leave until later that evening on a HKG, DXB or similar, but if there's a problem later in the afternoon, that aircraft could be stepped up to cover the earlier departure.

However, even the A340 fleet is intensively used, and aircraft arriving in the evening off VS18 or VS26 (the daylight ex-NYC flights) seem to be turned around and dispatched on late evening departures such as HKG, DXB or DEL, and don't get to stop overnight at Heathrow.

BA have both the spread of aircraft utilisation (their long haul types work a variety of routes), relatively minor config differences, and the fleet size (57 744s, 43 777s) all in their favour when it comes to sourcing a replacement aircraft to recover from delays or problems.

At some point, it does cost less to have the spare hardware on standby, than the expense of handling the disruption arising from having no spare capacity. It seems that those scales haven't tipped for VS as yet.

I'm sure that a slightly bigger fleet with a bit more room for manoeuvre is where VS would like to be, but VS are also very cautious about how they get there.

Mike

Thank you for your answers.
I may be quite a typicall VS LGW pax. I normally only travel on Low Cost Domestic flights, but I have been to MCO three times on holiday with my family. The first time (4 or 5 years ago) we went I was very pleased with VS (this was my first ever flight over 1 hour long!). I went on VS15/16 this summer and I was not impressed. The aircraft was dirty, and the IFE was not properly woking. Members of my party IFE was not working. However the CC were exceptional (condsidering the amount of kids throwing up, and a medical prombem!)
the flight was delayed both ways by more than 2 hours. I used to love longhaul travel (well to MCO , thats all Ive ever done!) but I didn't this time round.
I love the Virgin brand, but if I was to tavel longhaul again I would think very seriously about not going with them (and possibly go with BA instead)
I feel the VS product has gone down in quality for one reason or another. Does anyone agree with this? IF Iwent from LHR would I have a differnt experince?
Tjnewell

Tjnewell,

I agree with you regarding VS from LGW.

We go to Las Vegas a few times a year, so we have a vast range of connecting flights to choose from. We pay a little extra to fly VS because it's direct, as my experience of making a connection in the US is not good (long immigration lines, baggage not making the connecting flight etc).

The a/c VS use out of LGW really are in a state, the Alitalia rejects in particular. The Nova IFE is pitiful, especially on a 10+ hour flight.

This is in MARKED contrast to LHR, where I've flown to JFK, EWR and NRT a number of times on business. The a/c are far more comfortable, and the V:Port IFE is exceptional.

I just take it as a demonstration of contempt that VS has for it's LGW pax, possibly due to the fact that these flights are generally to non-business orientated destinations.

I'll almost certainly try connecting flights next time round, possibly BA or a US carrier. This is purely down to the VS experience from LGW. Any disruption I suffer during my next trip in early January may well clinch the decision........

Sorry, I know this forum takes brand loyalty to incredible levels, but that's the way I perceive it.

One has to realise - although using the aircraft on such a tight schedule can cause deleys when there are problems, it is by having such intensive use that VS has managed to keep their flight prices lower than some competitors - esp in the more premium products. Ok - maybe they could buy a spare plane - but then we would all end up paying for that luxury in higher flight costs - and then we would all go to another airline anyway!!!

Sorry, but you are wrong musicmanbrain. Looking at the LGW-MCO route the only two schedule airlines that fly this route are BA and VS (Direct). Both have comparable prices. In fact, some cynics may actually say that perhaps they are in some kind of cartel as their prices are so similar.

AND on top of this, BA's mileage redemption for a PE to Bus upgrade is 20000 miles cheaper than VS!

So in contrary to your post, I would suggest that BA's prices on this route, all things considered, are probably cheaper.

Paul

p170blo said and I Quote;

'Now I may be cynical but I believe that aircraft engineers are probably quite specialist also and that it is not in the realms of unbelievability that an untrained engineer could prepare a spare working aircraft potentially quicker that calling in specialist engineers to fix a fault of a aircraft which has gone tech.'

I would like to say that you obviously have no idea how aircraft maintenance works. Firstly as others have said airlines do not have spare aircraft lying around just in case. Airlines like BA have a larger fleet so can shuffle planes around from one flight to another a lot easier. Secondly, an 'untrained engineer'..... what is that then, someone from kwick fit? Would you want to fly on an aircraft that has been prepared by an untrained engineer? If you had any idea how aircraft engineering works you would know that an aircraft can't fly unless it has been legally certified by a 'qualified engineer'before every flight.

Im sure the people at VS do not think lets delay the the Orlando flights everyday because it is a rubbish route anyway.

I think it comes down to the fact that it is the latest departure from LGW. Also the inbound VS44 tends to operate the VS15 so if thats running late then it will make the Orlando flight late.

Most days all 8 747's fly from LGW but on some days only 5 run, this then gives time for the flights to get back on time.

The Orlando route is very popular and important route to Virgin, just look at the number of flights per day! its crazy!!

[Decker]

Truly (as another poster so incisively pointed out) it IS virtually the UK airline of Mickey Mouse!

VS just get Disney to put a disney livery on a 747, just like ANA have pokeman livery and southwest have a seaworld livery!

Originally posted by Golf747
I would like to say that you obviously have no idea how aircraft maintenance works. Firstly as others have said airlines do not have spare aircraft lying around just in case. Airlines like BA have a larger fleet so can shuffle planes around from one flight to another a lot easier. Secondly, an 'untrained engineer'..... what is that then, someone from kwick fit? Would you want to fly on an aircraft that has been prepared by an untrained engineer? If you had any idea how aircraft engineering works you would know that an aircraft can't fly unless it has been legally certified by a 'qualified engineer'before every flight.

No you are quite correct I do NOT profess to have any idea about aircraft maintenance. But thank you for taking the time to belittle me on your first post[:D]

I simply applied knowledge of another skilled profession as a possible solution.

However, here is a question for you:
If an aircraft was certified after it had returned from it's previous flight, say at 10am in the morning, could it sit and then be used at 10pm that night or would it need further certification? Or could, for instance, the crew plus a dispatcher ready the aircraft for flight?

Paul

I think this is an interesting topic.

Like most of us who have been delayed or had flights cancelled to plane technical problems, we gripe about why the airline can't have a spare plane ready to take the place of the faulty plane.

For example, I was on a BA flight from ORD a few years ago which was delayed arriving from LHR. OK, this was a technical fault, however, the next gate along from the BA flight was an Air Lingus flight to Dublin. This had been delayed for 2 DAYS!! because the plane needed to have a part replaced that had to be flown in.

Another point would be even if VA do have a plane spare, they would more than likely missed their slot, might have to move gates. So then would it be easier to delay a flight and amalgamate it with the next flight to that location (and cheaper)? This happened to me back in Oct, was on VS21 which went tech at IAD but ended on VS55, which was incidently a 9 hour delay (with the initial check-in).

However, I would have thought that VA would be hard pushed to justify spending the money on a 747 (buying or leasing) for it to be standing on a remote stand for 'a just in case moment' in the current financial climate. As previous posters pointed out BA can do it because they have more planes which can easily be used.(97 long-haul planes compared to VAs 38).

Also until Heathrow and Gatwick can increase it's capacity and the full effects of the 'Open Skies' policy on the air industry, this will not happen in the near future.

Originally posted by DarkAuror
As previous posters pointed out BA can do it because they have more planes which can easily be used.(97 long-haul planes compared to VAs 38).

I think it's more ... 57 x 747s and 43 x 777s plus 21 x 767s (not all of the latter do long haul though), added to that there are further current orders for 777s (at least 4) then the future replacement orders being 380s and 787s currently with more to come. Not forgetting that they are turning 757s into long haul for the Open Skies ventures ...

Oh geeks, how do I know all this, V-Flyer what have you done to me [:#] !

Oh geeks, how do I know all this, V-Flyer what have you done to me

Slink09, I know the feeling! [:I]

I was basing my figures on the BA's Annual Report 2007 for just 747s and 777s, didn't included 767s as you pointed out that not all do long-haul.

Originally posted by DarkAuror
I was basing my figures on the BA's Annual Report 2007 for just 747s and 777s, didn't included 767s as you pointed out that not all do long-haul.

Though declining in number these days, as a number of the fleet have been converted to longhaul config (and a bunch of the original 767 fleet leased to Qantas), there are seven Eurofleet configured 767s: G-BNWA/B/X/Z and G-BZHA/B/C.

The other fourteen are longhaul acft.

Mike

Originally posted by declansmith
Most days all 8 747's fly from LGW

There are 7.

VROS
VROY
VROM
VLIP
VGAL
VAST
VTOP
VXLG

Not to mention atm on flys from LHR to Barbados.