Wonder did SQ put their plane/crew in the risk by choosing to land in HK?
Who make the decision? The operation team or pilot? Think no one board the plane in HK?
It showed for me, but only up to when SQ1 was active again on FR24 for the HKG-SIN leg. It ended up departing almost 20 minutes ahead of schedule before the storm got any worse. In any case, I'm glad SQ1 made it safely despite being the only active flight going thru HKG during that time.
SQ is known for taking these risks. On the day of Typhoon Pakhar last year, they refused to cancel flights despite landings being near impossible at HKG. 890 and 860 made it in somehow but I was on 856 and we departed SG 4 hours late, circled an hour at HK and had to go around twice. The descent and approach was a roller coaster ride.
I was quite annoyed they didn’t just simply retime the flight (wasted my entire Sunday reporting for the flight as scheduled when I knew there was obviously going to be a delay)!
Any insiders here know the risk tolerance for such decisions? Same thing happened to me earlier this year on SQ trying to land in KIX when the weather turned nasty and we went around twice before the pilots decided to detour to Nagoya until the weather improved. Scary as hell as it was very cloudy bouncy night flight
SQ178|18SEP (SIN-SGN) was delayed for about 2.5 hours after the original operating aircraft (9V-SSB) came into contact with the aerobridge at gate E20 during push-back; necessitating an aircraft change to 9V-STY.
Any insiders here know the risk tolerance for such decisions? Same thing happened to me earlier this year on SQ trying to land in KIX when the weather turned nasty and we went around twice before the pilots decided to detour to Nagoya until the weather improved. Scary as hell as it was very cloudy bouncy night flight
As long as the airport remains open or even for example when HK airport remains open during a impending typhoon , it would mean that its still above or at the safe minimums of operating and it is up to the pilots to decide on whether he is confident and able to make a landing or decide to go for the alternate airfield. Believed that airlines all have their minimums protocols for their pilots to decide on the approach or take off.
Last edited by flyguy; 19 September 2018, 04:12 PM.
SQ830 SIN-PVG | 19SEP18 | 9V-SKW diverted to Hangzhou and spent over 2 hours on the ground there. The flight eventually landed in PVG around 19:00 LT, 3.5 hours late. SQ833 is taxiing to the runway at the moment (21:05 LT), over 4 hours behind schedule.
SQ346 SIN-ZRH | 20SEP18 has been retimed to 03:30
Last edited by Bon; 19 September 2018, 11:33 PM.
Reason: Retiming of SQ346
SQ872/871 SIN-HKG-SIN | 21SEP18 | 9V-SSD SQ872 took off about 2 hours late and SQ871 took off around 2.5 hours late.
Usually, from FR24, SQ866 usually gets the frame from SQ1 during the Northern Summer schedule. However, the frame from SQ1 (SWG) ended up going to PVG as SQ836. I wonder if there was an issue with SWG that prompted to swap with SWA which came off SQ827 (From PVG) and this likely caused knock on effects to other flights.
Because of SQ865's very late arrival (around 1:20AM), SQ306 to LHR has also been delayed and only departed close to 3AM. At the time, SWM (From SQ11) was available could have covered that flight as it arrived with enough time on the ground.
Comment