Westjet Weather Limits

[Guest]

Defcon, I agree with most of your post but I see no reason why "an insider" should be provided with any more information than what is given to the general public. Both should receive an accurate explanation.

[DEFCON]

It’s only my opinion Malcolm, but if Blues were to have received a call from a pilot in WJ Flight Ops in response to his written complaint that went something like; ‘a new Captain was overly concerned with the landing conditions, which led to an improper, but safe decision on his part and corrective action has been undertaken by WJ’ ..., I’ll bet Blues would have understood the situation for what it was, been satisfied with the answer returned and the issue completely resolved.

 

I doubt this kind of technical information would be useful, or suitable to address the concerns of the ordinary uniformed traveller.

 

 

[boestar]

The original issue is a problem with ALL airlines.  The majority of the people believe whatever they are told but some out there can see through the BS.  Anyone who has flown on seasonal charter to the south on a regular basis has encountered the "Excuse generation machine" that is customer service.

Delay excuses can range from weather to mechanical to ATC or whoever gets the blame today.  Sometimes it may be true but in todays world a simple check on Flight Aware or the like will reveal the problem.

One must look at when the airline must compensate the passengers.  Weather for example is not controllable and therefore outside the airlines control so no compensation is required.  Soooo every delay will be weather if AT ALL feasible.  The other good thing about a weather delay is that every delay for the rest of the flight day on that aircraft is attributed to weather.  Neat huh? take a weather delay on the first flight of the day and you are free for the rest of day.

[Gumbi]

1 hour ago, boestar said:

The original issue is a problem with ALL airlines.

...is a problem with modern society in general!  No one wants to take responsibility...

[Guest]

1 hour ago, DEFCON said:

It’s only my opinion Malcolm, but if Blues were to have received a call from a pilot in WJ Flight Ops in response to his written complaint that went something like; ‘a new Captain was overly concerned with the landing conditions, which led to an improper, but safe decision on his part and corrective action has been undertaken by WJ’ ..., I’ll bet Blues would have understood the situation for what it was, been satisfied with the answer returned and the issue completely resolved.

 

I doubt this kind of technical information would be useful, or suitable to address the concerns of the ordinary uniformed traveller.

 

 

You would be correct if the call was made but why would WestJet make such a call .... We know he is an insider but how would they without a presentation of credentials? Anyone can say their are a pilot and ask for such a contact (even a reporter) 

[moeman]

Seems like Blues is being ignored by WS, so perhaps a quick email to the media would generate some answers?

[johnny dangerous]

2 hours ago, DEFCON said:

It’s only my opinion Malcolm, but if Blues were to have received a call from a pilot in WJ Flight Ops in response to his written complaint that went something like; ‘a new Captain was overly concerned with the landing conditions, which led to an improper, but safe decision on his part and corrective action has been undertaken by WJ’ ..., I’ll bet Blues would have understood the situation for what it was, been satisfied with the answer returned and the issue completely resolved.

 

I doubt this kind of technical information would be useful, or suitable to address the concerns of the ordinary uniformed traveller.

 

 

So, as long as the response by WJ Flt Ops completely sewers the Captain, BD would have been happy? How about instead the letter reads, "...and upon assessing the various factors that comprise a safe landing, the Captain decided to exercise his authority and divert to an alternate aerodrome. WJ management fully supports the Captain's decision in this situation. There will be no follow up with the crew, as they correctly used all information at hand to make an informed decision."

[johnny dangerous]

Moeman, that sounds like a very progressive response to a situation where no airplanes were damaged, no one was hurt, and at the worst, someone's travel plans got delayed. All because a fully trained crew, in conjunction with their dispatcher (contactable in real time  via SATCOM and ACARS) made a decision that inconvenienced some people. 

Yup. Sounds like a newsworthy item. Let us know how that works out.

[blues deville]

3 hours ago, johnny dangerous said:

So, as long as the response by WJ Flt Ops completely sewers the Captain, BD would have been happy? How about instead the letter reads, "...and upon assessing the various factors that comprise a safe landing, the Captain decided to exercise his authority and divert to an alternate aerodrome. WJ management fully supports the Captain's decision in this situation. There will be no follow up with the crew, as they correctly used all information at hand to make an informed decision."

Hey jd! How about you give it a rest? Tell me where and when this became a witch hunt about the PIC?

Let's be clear once and for all. I am not questioning the decision making of the flight crew. I have repeatedly asked for info as to WS and their limitations on the -800 because the weather In question wasn't an issue in my opinion. Some have responded with generic Boeing data and others with what they think "might" have occurred. I'm pretty sure I can do the same a since I currently  have the same job. 

And if the first WS employee I spoke to while waiting in YYG gave me a logical reason, I would have happily gone on my way. But that didn't happen and we had to spend an extra night with taxi, hotel, and meal costs. And also returning home a day late which had its own set of issues. I haven't bothered to mention this other part but there was also a theft issue regarding blues deluxe's luggage which was the icing on the cake. But I have no way of proving that event. I did speak to a YYZ baggage agent who took our phone number. Not going to get that item back....

During my time in flight operations management, I've had to follow up on many IROPS events with several departments in order to get  information and take corrective action where necessary. I'm sure someone at WS in their flight operations has done the same in this case. Or I'd like to think they have. Im sure they are very busy handling LGW and their 767s these days. 

For an airline to fly a "fully loaded" 737-800 around the maritimes for nearly 6 hours, someone would have to answer for it. I have no idea what that might be. But I'd like to have a clear and honest answer and not the "official" one WS has recently emailed me. 

[moeman]

59 minutes ago, johnny dangerous said:

Moeman, that sounds like a very progressive response to a situation where no airplanes were damaged, no one was hurt, and at the worst, someone's travel plans got delayed. All because a fully trained crew, in conjunction with their dispatcher (contactable in real time  via SATCOM and ACARS) made a decision that inconvenienced some people. 

Yup. Sounds like a newsworthy item. Let us know how that works out.

I hear you. Again, this has nothing to do with the pilots and the decisions they made. It's about why WS has given several different answers to the same question. I don't know if Blues deserves any kind of answer, or if any answer but the conclusion he has come to will satisfy him, but the fact that they keep changing their tune is bothersome. They have answered him at least 3 times now, and each time it is a different reason.

Would the media be interested? Probably not. But a call from a reporter may generate a more timely response than a "guest" pestering them from the wings. Lord knows if it was Gabor Lukacs who had been inconvenienced and given the runaround, there would be media involved. Maybe Blues should write him instead. He has a way of making airlines squirm.