This is the main V-Flyer Forum for general discussion of everything related to flying with Virgin-branded travel companies.
#835585 by pjh
21 Jan 2013, 23:44
As Steve said, thanks. It sounds like it was dealt with in a professional and calm manner.

Are a Flock of Buzzards any relation to the beat combo of the early 1980's, A Flock of Seagulls? :P
#835600 by lobbers
22 Jan 2013, 05:23
pjh wrote:As Steve said, thanks. It sounds like it was dealt with in a professional and calm manner.

Are a Flock of Buzzards any relation to the beat combo of the early 1980's, A Flock of Seagulls? :P


Good to hear everyone is safe.

By the way, it's actually a wake of buzzards, so no relation. :P
#835601 by Tinuks
22 Jan 2013, 07:14
I haven't read any of the FB comments, but having been in a similar situation with VS myself I can understand why people would feel angry. In my situation, the ground staff told outright porkers and were blaming the failure to take off on the on board catering when they knew that it was a fault with the plane. After that's we had one person rebooking all the pax so it took another 3 hours to get booked on the next day's flight and our connection to JFK. Then they put only UC pax in a proper hotel and put PE and Y pax in what could best be described as hovels. Next they got us out of the hotels at about 5AM the next day even though when we were bussed to the airport, the check in desks were still closed and the plane coming in from LHR hadn't even landed.

But enough rambling, the point I'm trying to make is that airlines should be able to handle these situations better. Particularly as it relates to keeping pax informed and booking accomodation. It doesn't have to be 5 star hotels, but a decent hotel would be great.

I'm not in Florida, so I won't assume to know what sort of hotels they're in, but it is possible that they probably feel upset that after what could only be described as an ordeal, they had to face another ordeal.

Everyone has different boiling points.
#835604 by pjh
22 Jan 2013, 08:44
lobbers wrote:
pjh wrote:As Steve said, thanks. It sounds like it was dealt with in a professional and calm manner.

Are a Flock of Buzzards any relation to the beat combo of the early 1980's, A Flock of Seagulls? :P


Good to hear everyone is safe.

By the way, it's actually a wake of buzzards, so no relation. :P


That I didn't know. y)
#835782 by stevebrass
23 Jan 2013, 21:55
She did the VS28 today so repaired and back in service.
#835814 by easygoingeezer
24 Jan 2013, 13:44
They put us in the Florida Mall once ( we were in what used to be called "club Orlando". The hotel was fine and they layed on a buffet and free drinks.
Glad everyone is safe.
Had a birdstrike landing once, it smelt like pot noodle lol
#835820 by Treelo
24 Jan 2013, 15:02
easygoingeezer wrote:They put us in the Florida Mall once ( we were in what used to be called "club Orlando". The hotel was fine and they layed on a buffet and free drinks.
Glad everyone is safe.
Had a birdstrike landing once, it smelt like pot noodle lol


Wot, chicken flavour, EGG? :$
#835827 by Fuzzy14
24 Jan 2013, 16:58
stevebrass wrote:She did the VS28 today so repaired and back in service.


Interesting... after the incident at Gatwick with sister ship G-VSXY the aircraft was out of service for a while, talk at the time was because the aircraft landed heavy and heavy maintenance was required.

Would the same not apply here as reports say this aircraft landed after 30 minutes so not enough time to burn off that much fuel?
#835829 by RyanJW
24 Jan 2013, 17:20
Fuzzy14 wrote:
stevebrass wrote:She did the VS28 today so repaired and back in service.


Interesting... after the incident at Gatwick with sister ship G-VSXY the aircraft was out of service for a while, talk at the time was because the aircraft landed heavy and heavy maintenance was required.

Would the same not apply here as reports say this aircraft landed after 30 minutes so not enough time to burn off that much fuel?


Invariably yes. Whilst planes can obviously land heavy, most of the landing gear's predicted life is designed for the plane with small amount of fuel left at the end of a flight rather than with fully stocked fuel tanks.

The maximum take off weight on a A333 fully stocked is ~230,000KGs. The maximum landing weight is ~185,000KGs.

So if the MTOW was higher than the MLW, then expect for G-VKSS to be out of service for a little while whilst she goes for maintenance/stress checks to make sure everything is safe.
#835880 by Golfman
25 Jan 2013, 11:38
Even if the aircraft lands over the normal maximum landing weight, the onboard computers will be interogated by maintenance and the information like the rate of descent as it lands , can checked acurately, and if below certain limits, no extra checks required. So if the pilot manages a nice smooth landing, aircraft can return to service much quicker. Obviously the original fault needs to be sorted ! Other factors like heat in the wheels and brakes need to be monitored as well.
#835883 by bobsy852
25 Jan 2013, 11:55
I noticed it flew back to LGW, I thought this flight meant it was back in service, or was this just the aircraft returning to the UK to be checked/repaired?
#836182 by Neil
28 Jan 2013, 12:28
William c wrote:typical
aircrafts at virgin are all really old :(
I'm training as crew now for them and tbh I don't feel safe training on the dam things keys hope they keep me safe


What? The aircraft involved and being discussed here are less than 2 years old, and I think you will find overall that Virgin have a pretty young fleet compared to a lot of airlines.

I find it slightly worrying that you are training as crew yet seem to know very little about the fleet you are going to be working on.
#836184 by RyanJW
28 Jan 2013, 12:37
William c wrote:<troll comment removed>


G-VKSS first flight was in 2011. It is just 2 years old. VS do really have a young fleet of long haul aircraft with an average age of 8.7 years including the 747's and A343's.

Even so, a bird strike has nothing to do with the planes age.
#836196 by tontybear
28 Jan 2013, 14:22
virginboy747 wrote:I really hope wc is not training as crew :(


If he is he must have missed the class on appropriate use of social media and the 'Facebook 13' !
#836200 by slinky09
28 Jan 2013, 15:15
is william c the new GJ in training?
#836303 by Neil
29 Jan 2013, 15:08
William c wrote:<troll comment edited> I have a point and view and I'm allowed to express my opinions


That is not true.
As I have explained, all are welcome and are free to express their opinion in a civilised and adult manner.

What is not allowed, are abusive posts, especially directed towards other members, posts containing multiple use of swearing or posts that are only intended to inflame a situation.

This is a privately owned forum, which has rules that are there to be adhered to. Provided members are willing to stick by them, then all are welcome and debate is encouraged.
#836310 by easygoingeezer
29 Jan 2013, 16:07
Pretty sure the buzzards really don't give a squark how old the plane is. Anyhow Virgins fleet overall is very young, I am guessing a fact trumps an opinion. Though its good to know V-flyer can keep the trainees up to speed ; )
Virgin Atlantic

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot] and 178 guests

Itinerary Calendar