Having been in both situations, ie a very long technical delay (52 hours) and having an aircraft changed at short notice due to technical problems (giving a slight delay instead of a long one), most people I talked to would have prefered a short delay over an aircraft change. Having said that, I think it depends on a couple of factors. Firstly, I think to a certain extent it depends on whether it's the outbound or inbound flight. I wasn't too fussed about the 52 hour delay on the inbound flight from Dom Rep as we stopped in Jamaica onroute to Manchester when the hydaulic problem that grounded the aircraft was diagnosed. We got to spend the weekend in Jamaica so wasn't bothered about the delay! Those that needed to get home for work or family were of a different opinion and would have got on any aircraft / flight. For those effected on outbound flights, which eats in to holiday time, I suspect they'd rather just get to their destination. I know I would. I think the second factor is length of flight. If it's only up to say 3 or 4 hours, it's unlikely the subbed aircraft will be much different than the original so won't make much of a difference. On long haul, where passengers have become acustomed to greater seat pitch and seat back IFE etc, a small delay of say 2 hours to correct a technical problem and retain facilities wouldn't be a problem for me. If it's a long delay, eg 12+ hours, reduced facilites might be insignificant if you face losing a day of the holiday.

Just my 2 pence.

Darren

PS I hope this is just a bit of market research and not a heads up for some of the TOM long haul fleet going offline and subbed with the 328Y's! From feedback on here, having 'rescue' aircraft available is welcome news.

I'm with Darren on this one - faced with the choice I'd always prefer to get to my destination as quickly as possible, even if that means being on a plane with a different specification. The only IFE I'm bothered about is having an interesting book that wil last the journey and my own choice of music on the headphones. Even on the return journey, I'd still make the same choice! Once I'm on my way home the holiday is over and I just want to get home as quickly as possible. For this reason I also hate a latish flight on my last day - all that hanging around - I just want to get up and go.

SM

Nothing official or any heads up.

Just interested, becuase in the past I have had to handle both situations and both have been "the end of the world" to the customers, i just want a more objective view on things.

BY-TOM-AMM-FCA,

Nothing official or any heads up

Only joking

There were a few similar discussions a couple of years ago (probably deleted now) after some long delays and most people had the opinion they'd rather just get there / home. I do sympathise with the people dealing with the situation in resort / departure airport as they tend to be treated very badly by passengers. I know it's a stressful situation for all to be in, but it's no excuse for the abuse they give reps / check-in staff. Some of the things I've seen and heard make you feel ashamed to be British. Going a little off topic but still relevant, one thing I would add is the general lack of information given during delays. If passengers knew what were going on, eg that the aircraft is being changed because of a technical problem and it takes time to organise things, it would help calm people down. Several times over the last few years, including coming back from Mombasa in March, I knew of delays and the cause well before the flight. If I can find out information, I'm sure Ops can relay that information to check-in staff / handling agents so they can inform people. No information just winds people up whereas something to put peoples minds at ease and let them know what's going on would reduce some of the stress and abuse. It's not fair on frontline staff who have to deal with the abuse. If they had something to give out to passengers, it would reduce the abuse they are subject to. I actually ended up informing some of the passengers coming back from Mombasa what the cause of the delay was, and same coming back from Turkey last year. Once they knew how long the flight was delayed and a reason for it, they just sat back and either had another drink or looked around the shops

Darren

I agree with Darren that it depends on the situation. I'd rather get away as soon as possible on outbound and inbound journeys. However, the only exception to that is that I'd rather a 2-3 hour delay on longhaul than get away on time on a substandard plane.

I am easy as long as I get on Holiday take rough with the smooth.

Thomson better not play me up only joking.

As formerly a frequent traveller and a member of ground staff I would concur that what I want more than 1/ a different aircraft or b/ a delay is ACCURATE information - even if that information is "actually we don't know- are trying to find out and will get back to you with news in an hour........" (so long as that deadline is met)

I have been given the runaround as both travelling-member-of-the-public and as Duty Manager on the ground at a large London Airport to know that the people who need to know are often the last to know and that guesswork isn't helpful (I'd like a quid for the things I have said to passengers that I had been told as "gospel" that subsequently turned out to be not much more than assumption)

However the unavoidable does happen. The sheer complexities of having a fully-operational , fully-serviced aircraft with the right crew (with sufficient rest to operate safely) at the right place with an open and fully functional airport means there are a plethora of things that can affect a reasonable "guess" of what is going to happen once a delay starts e.g.Engineering delay means crew goes "out of hours" (horrendous if you are in the middle of nowhere) or departure impossible as runway is scheduled to close overnight etc.

There is a novelty factor in staying downroute for a pleasant extra overnight stay in a nice hotel should a delay occur, but if
a/ you have a pressing reason to be home,
b/ the only hotel the airline can find for you to stay in (or get you to) is substandard (how easy do you think it is to rustle up a couple of hundred rooms plus coaches at 2 in the morning??) or
c/ you are kipping on the airport floor for 7 hours with a pair of whingy toddlers/teenagers and the only airport cafe is closed, then ANY plane is a good option - and haggle about your premium seat upgrade/IFE/extra legroom later!! (sometimes it does work in your favour - our last trip on XL which was scheduled on a 737 was subbed with 767 - LOADS of room!!!!!!!!). Somehow outbound delays are always less tolerable that the inbound ones as you watch that well-earned holiday time tick on by ......................................

But wouldn't it be boring if it was a perfect world

When working I attended dozens of training courses/seminars, call them what you will. In every case when customer service raised its head then "keep the customer informed" was always in there.

It does not matter what the product - flight delays in this case - I am sure that what was said on my courses features on them. "Always keep the customer informed of progress or delays" Customer service never was rocket science.

So often people are delivered to the airport and abandoned. Going on holiday carries its own stress. You are hyped up and want to get there. All so often the time from leaving home to actually getting on the plane exceeds by a large margin the actual flight time. And that is without any delays.

Keeping people informed really does work. Done properly they will accept without question.

fwh

I always told my sales staff
"if something goes wrong Tell the customer the truth, however unpleasant it may be, if you are truthfully you only have a problem, if not you end up with a bloody mess and any lie will come back and bite you hard"

this rule will work well in any service industry, and i have found over the years your customer's will normally be more acceptable to alternative arrangements and less aggressive

wiz

Having experienced 'being left in the lurch' at Heraklion airport last year, I can only wonder how difficult can it be to keep the custmer informed - As soon as a delay becomes apparent and at least every hour after that. It's hardly rocket science!!

I agree with Dazbo re being happy with a substitute plane with maybe less seat pitch on short haul but not on long haul. I wonder how often airlines could actually substitute a plane with less seat pitch but the same number of seats IYSWIM.
For example, Monarch couldn't put a 757 or 767 to replace one of their airbuses bound for say, Goa - or maybe I'm wrong. Dazbo?

But, THIS is something I'm totally on board with:

what I want more than 1/ a different aircraft or b/ a delay is ACCURATE information - even if that information is "actually we don't know- are trying to find out and will get back to you with news in an hour........" (so long as that deadline is met)

Although we've not experienced many bad delays, we did have one for almost 12 hours outbound. The information board just kept saying 'Update at 7am', then when that time came it was changed to 'info at 10am' etc etc. We weren't told WHY the delay had occurred. OK, we couldn't have done anything about it, but it would have made us feel a bit less 'abandoned'.
This WAS over 20 years ago, but I'm sure that most of the angry people might have been happier if we'd been told exactly what the problem was, can't remember now but if they'd said that the incoming plane had broken down in say, Tenerife and they were bringing a replacement from somewhere, it might have diffused the situation. We were probably more laid back as we were going for 3 weeks, but some people who had only a week were quite upset.
I think that customers shouldn't be promised "further information at x time" and not be given it.
Flying out of Goa last year, we were handed a slip of paper advising us that the flight was delayed for 3.5 hours, at least it set our expectations.

Prettypollycat wrote:

For example, Monarch couldn't put a 757 or 767 to replace one of their airbuses bound for say, Goa - or maybe I'm wrong. Dazbo?

That's correct as the A332 / A300B4's have 360 seats compared to the 767 with 309 and the 757 with 219. The 767 can do the route no problem performance wise, providing there are enough seats. The 757's can do it as well but will less seats, they'd need 2 aircraft to cover. The 757's used to go across the Atlantic as 'rescue' aircraft on long hauls. The 757 is a very versitile aircraft and can do pretty much anything within reason.

Darren

I Would Much Prefere Not To Be Delayed And Put Up With What Ever Aircraft They Give You, Rather Than Have To Wait Around In An Airport.

I Agree With Everyone Else Who Says Accurate Info Is Needed, It Is Not Good When Half The Time I Know The Problem Myself And The Staff Do Not.

Ps. I Normally End Up Traveling With Thomsons On Their 737-300's So Any Change Of Aircraft Has To Be Better

Gower

I posted earlier on this thread about being given accurate information, this was our recent experience on a Monarch flight (also posted on the Monarch forum):

We were on MON1548 from Gatwick to Skiathos departing 8/5/09 at 12:25, the flight was on time.
Over the Alps, the pilot turned back as the plane had developed a technical fault and was unable to land at Skiathos because of the nature of the airport at Skiathos (short runway).
When we landed, we were told that the windscreen has shattered.
It had, we could see the crazing as we left the aircraft.

The stewardess 'welcomed' us to Gatwick Airport (OK, it may be part of the standard spiel but not received very warmly under the circumstances ) and said that they had no information about what was to happen next.
By the time we were on stand, a represenative from Monarch came on board and said that there was no alternative plane to take us straight away on to Skiathos and windscreen repairs take many hours (to bond?) and as flights don't go into Skiathos at night, they would be putting us up at the Gatwick Hilton (connected to South Terminal) and flying us out at 06:20 on 9/5/09.

The low point was that it took 2 HOURS to offload our luggage - maybe this was due to the electronic handling systems as the luggage was labelled JSI (skiathos code) rather than LGW.

Of course there was a massive queue to check in at the Hilton but full marks to the staff who had 4 people on special check-in just taking passport numbers and handing out keys.

The rooms were OK and as the meal was between 19:30 & 21:30 we opted to go back into the airport to the Wetherspoons landside before eating (good choice as it turned out, the drinks at the Hilton were apparently VERY expensive).
When we got back to the Hilton at around 9pm, a lot of the food had gone but we were satisified with what choice we had.
They opened check-in at 04:30 to do a quick re-issue of boarding cards and also provide a letter from Monarch, explaining the reason for the delay (technical) and the revised departure time/date - presumably suficient information for insurance claims.

We departed on time - finally - 18 hours late.

Although it was a bit of a 'bummer' to lose almost a day of our holiday, we did feel that Monarch dealt with the situation pretty effectively, and the Hilton moved pretty quickly too.
I think most people were of the same opinion.