According to KVS these flights are canceled. Is this the result of the delays on the YYZ/HKG route?
There is runway work being done in SYD. Takeoffs are being staggered more the usual. The flights leave after midnight those two nights, causing a anomaly whereby you will have two flights with the same number flying at the same time which can't happen, so one flight each day is being renumbered. It's not confusing. It's standard practice.
I have the greatest respect for any post by Andrew or by Sebring since my experience tells me that they can provide accurate information. In this case, the conspiracy theories were totally unjustified, but a few of us were just plain curious as to why this minor rescheduling was planned, and we asked the question right upfront. In my first post, I speculated that it was related to runway work in SYD, and that has now been confirmed.
(After my first ever post on this forum earlier this year was flamed by a moderator no less, I quickly realized that I had to have a thick skin to participate!)
Better a thick skin than a fat head! :D :p (just a comment - no slight intended!!! ;) )
I only posted this thread because I noticed on KVS that flight 33 was canceled for both May 6 and 7. I thought this was strange given that the flights were still a few days away. The only thing I could think of was the delays that were reported on YYZ/HKG, as both routes use a 77L a/c. My query has been answered, so why don't we just put this thread to rest?
Another false alarm by you.
Flights simply been renumbered to 2033.
So have the flight times been changed then?
There must be a reason to renumber the flights a few days out.
Because there are many issues... one basic one is if you post the delay on day of departure, then crew report for duty at the original scheduled time meaning they sit around for an extra 45 mins so if there are any further delays, there are 45 less mins from their duty day.
ATC got us down quickly on 15R which is hardly ever used
Generally speaking with a smoke in the cabin (god forbid fire), especially since SR111 (not sure if this is right swiss air), you are gonna land on what ever concrete is the closest.
In your case you are basically coming in for a straight in approach (these flights generally come in over the wiarton/bruce peninsula area, YMS vor).
This is all of course dependent on winds but, the airport will basically shutdown to get an aircraft in this situation on the ground ASAP. Frankly the whole mentality has changed, if there is enough runway to land; the plane will land, wherever the pavement is irrelevant of the airport's location.
Another false alarm by you.
Flights simply been renumbered to 2033.
Actually, it would be "another false alarm" by KVS.
There is runway work being done in SYD. Takeoffs are being staggered more the usual. The flights leave after midnight those two nights, causing a anomaly whereby you will have two flights with the same number flying at the same time which can't happen, so one flight each day is being renumbered. It's not confusing. It's standard practice.
I'll be the first to admit that I didn't understand the situation. That's why I was reading the posts, to learn. There was nothing about runway work in the first two posts. The reason for the delays was what was causing my (and others) confusion and that was not explained until after my first post.
Agree there is likely more to this than let on.
I found out while trying to set up a flight notification - the flight had 'disappeared'. KVS says canceled and AC says 'full', which suggests that they are protecting the flight from more bookings (or maybe it is actually full).
I called the SE desk who told me the new flight number, but speculated that an equipment change or some such was going on.
As I'm only flying the YYZ-YVR segment I have 'protected' myself by using a flight pass for an alternative, because I suspect my confirmed U/G may disappear otherwise. Now I am waiting for the call from AC about holding a multiple booking!
No equipment change and no need for more speculation. The renumbering is simply because AC033 YVR SYD departs at 0040 instead of 2355 for 2 days so you can't have 2 flights with the same flight number in the air at the same time (so one has been renumbered to 2033).
Thanks for the info, Andrew, but I am still intrigued as to why there is a planned 45 minute later departure from YVR for two days. Is any of it related to the runway construction at SYD and the consequent (and controversial) increased use of the remaining runways (which are the most frequently used anyway as far as I know). Airport noise is a big political issue in Sydney. The Reed Electronics Group::
Regular passenger flights from Krivoy Rog and Kiev were added in May 1997. .. The administration office was relocated from Perth to Sydney in 2002.
http://www.reed-electronics.com/article/CA405591HOME |
The topic of this discussion is "YVR/SYD flights", not "let's discuss poster X and what I/we think are his/her motivations and attitude towards other posters."
Please stay on topic.
Simon
Moderator - AC
Isn't the 20xx designation reserved for irregular / additional flights?
What is fascinating to me aside from Andrew's honest explanation that should have put this thread to rest, is the constant fascination (obsession for some) of delayed AC flights to which they have absolutely no physical connection nor any vested interest. 033/2033/034/2034 joins the ranks of 015/016.
Unless one was physically on the flight and inconveniced as such, why are these topics even thread-worthy?? As if this was something exclusive to AC.
:confused::confused::confused:
I think Ms. Southey had some posters on this board in mind when she wrote this column
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/LAC.20080503.SOUTHEY03/TPStory/?query=southey
"No, but surely mankind will never forget (even as mankind badgers the fixed-wing-aircraft attendant to 'double-check just in case there is an extra vegan meal left over because the chicken is kinda rubbery') that crossing the Atlantic once took weeks and weeks, required years of saving, precipitated a certain amount of unwelcome sodomy and involved eating weevils?"
And here, I imagine both brothers laughed happily to themselves until they fell asleep on their respective divans, dreaming of a day when everyone flew all the time and whined about the experience and no one ever, ever had to confront the real cost of air travel.
They slept on but rose early to work, innocent of the $25 surcharge for checking a second suitcase that would one day spoil everything.
So if AC033 were delayed 45 minutes under normal circumstances (Pax on board, baggage late in being loaded etc) then it would be renumbered to AC2033. I think not, I can't imagine everyone getting new boarding passes and the associated hoopla of a new flight number. Something doesn't add up.:
I gather that the more full explanation is that there cannot be more than one flight number scheduled on any one date. So if AC33 is planned to depart at 00.40 on May 6, there cannot be another AC33 at 23.55 that same date. A late departure would still have the original date attached to it. But I am still curious to know why there is this minor schedule change on one or two days only.
No equipment change and no need for more speculation. The renumbering is simply because AC033 YVR SYD departs at 0040 instead of 2355 for 2 days so you can't have 2 flights with the same flight number in the air at the same time (so one has been renumbered to 2033).
So if AC033 were delayed 45 minutes under normal circumstances (Pax on board, baggage late in being loaded etc) then it would be renumbered to AC2033. I think not, I can't imagine everyone getting new boarding passes and the associated hoopla of a new flight number. Something doesn't add up.
ex-egll
:confused:
I guess you pick your issues then :)
Why would they not just post a delay on the day of departure? This just seems more confusing that anything and really, no one's going to find another flight to SYD to avoid a 45 minute delay.
Actually, it would be "another false alarm" by KVS.KVS Tool cannot create "false alarms", by definition.
[KVS Availability Tool 3.1.0/Platinum - Amadeus: Timetable/NL-BCDF] (http://www.KVSTool.com/?R)
YVR Vancouver Metro / Vancouver Int'l BC CA = CXH YVR [CYVR]
SYD Sydney Kingsford Smith NS AU [YSSY]
FRI 02 May 2008 - 09 May 2008
Carrier Flight From Depart To Arrive A/C St Frequency Dur'n Dep T Arr T Effect Ending Exceptions
--------- ------ ---- --------- ---- --------- ---- ---- ----------------------------------------------------------------
AC 2033 YVR 00:40 SYD 08:40 +1 77L 0 --34--- 15:00 M 1 07 May 08 May
AC 33 YVR 23:55 SYD 07:55 +2 77L 0 1--4567 15:00 M 1 01 May 31 May
Frequency 34 for 2033. Seems this happened two days in a row?
Wasn't that what Andrew said?
It seems simple enough. There was a scheduled change that meant the flight would be leaving after midnight and therefore had number conflict with the next day's flight. An unscheduled delay of a 23:55 flight would not affect the flight numbering.
Flight was delayed for 2 days in a row due to airport facilities limitations that's beyond our control. Reasons as explained above, cannot have 2 flights in the air with the same flight number on the same day, cannot have 2 flight going to the same destination in RES with the same flight number, doesn't make sense to have the crew show up 45 mins early when we know there will be a delay given this is ultra long haul so duty day is valuable.
I am still curious to know why there is this minor schedule change on one or two days only.
Me too. However, just an acknowledgment of thanks to Andrew for indulging our every demand for quenching curiosity :)
The reasoning makes sense to me, and I'm looking fwd to 33 without a HNL stop in July!
Agree there is likely more to this than let on.
I found out while trying to set up a flight notification - the flight had 'disappeared'. KVS says canceled and AC says 'full', which suggests that they are protecting the flight from more bookings (or maybe it is actually full).
I called the SE desk who told me the new flight number, but speculated that an equipment change or some such was going on.
As I'm only flying the YYZ-YVR segment I have 'protected' myself by using a flight pass for an alternative, because I suspect my confirmed U/G may disappear otherwise. Now I am waiting for the call from AC about holding a multiple booking!No equipment change and no need for more speculation. The renumbering is simply because AC033 YVR SYD departs at 0040 instead of 2355 for 2 days so you can't have 2 flights with the same flight number in the air at the same time (so one has been renumbered to 2033).
What is fascinating to me aside from Andrew's honest explanation that should have put this thread to rest, is the constant fascination (obsession for some) of delayed AC flights to which they have absolutely no physical connection nor any vested interest. 033/2033/034/2034 joins the ranks of 015/016.
Unless one was physically on the flight and inconveniced as such, why are these topics even thread-worthy?? As if this was something exclusive to AC.
:confused::confused::confused:
There is runway work being done in SYD. Takeoffs are being staggered more the usual. The flights leave after midnight those two nights, causing a anomaly whereby you will have two flights with the same number flying at the same time which can't happen, so one flight each day is being renumbered. It's not confusing. It's standard practice.
So if AC033 were delayed 45 minutes under normal circumstances (Pax on board, baggage late in being loaded etc) then it would be renumbered to AC2033. I think not, I can't imagine everyone getting new boarding passes and the associated hoopla of a new flight number. Something doesn't add up.
ex-egll
:confused:
Technically the flight would be canceled and a new one would be created. But I don't see why they would need to reprint boarding passes etc. if people would already be on board; if they did, they could simply print the whole pile and distribute them on board, but why?
I imagine it's more an operational issue, being to distinguish one flight from the other operationally, ATC, computers, etc.
I flew out on AC33 last week and, as seems to be the norm these days on the 777, the IFE was not working on a large section of the Y cabin (we were shut down a couple of time to reset the entire system).
Today (May 6) on AC34 the IFE again was not working on a large section of the Y cabin and we were again shut down several times to try and reboot the system with no luck (déjà vu!).
At about 45mins out of YYZ there was a small fire under some of the economy seats, there was a mad scramble on board by the crew with extinguishers etc etc, the plane was met by a large emergency response on and stopped right on the runway at YYZ. (ATC got us down quickly on 15R which is hardly ever used - in fact I don't think I've ever landed on that runway from the north ever!). Anyhow I guess that's one 777 that'll be out of service for a few days?
Made for an interesting day and a long wait for baggage.
Thanks Andrew!
makes sense and squashes another conspiracy (shopping) theory!
Another false alarm by you.
Flights simply been renumbered to 2033.
[KVS Availability Tool 3.1.0/Platinum - Amadeus: Timetable/NL-BCDF] (http://www.KVSTool.com/?R)
YVR Vancouver Metro / Vancouver Int'l BC CA = CXH YVR [CYVR]
SYD Sydney Kingsford Smith NS AU [YSSY]
FRI 02 May 2008 - 09 May 2008
Carrier Flight From Depart To Arrive A/C St Frequency Dur'n Dep T Arr T Effect Ending Exceptions
--------- ------ ---- --------- ---- --------- ---- ---- ----------------------------------------------------------------
AC 2033 YVR 00:40 SYD 08:40 +1 77L 0 --34--- 15:00 M 1 07 May 08 May
Frequency 34 for 2033. Seems this happened two days in a row?
YVRHKG had 007 cancelled today and is being replaced with 2007 (I believe....and HOPE).
 I Am a Sinner – What About You?
 Global Sourcing and Supplier Online by Dylan
|
YVR/SYD flights cancelled for May 6/7