mikel97 wrote: » Its N2731G (prob CIA) yes Shannon
dashoonage wrote: » https://globe.adsbexchange.com/?icao=405d0f another one going round at shannon, runway closed?
10-10-20 wrote: » By the look of his track, they were initially aligning to land in Shannon and then picked Dublin. Was that correct and would it be to do with facilities and availability of company resources in Dublin, or was it due to the nature of the fault?
RocketRaccoon wrote: » Absolutely no staff available on the ground in Shannon would have been the issue.
BZ wrote: » Incorrect. Considering there was ground handlers on the ground at that time that could have easily handled the aircraft. Connectivity however if required would be a different story.
A320 wrote: » He's correct really,Was there an engineer qualified to inspect the overweight aircraft? There was in Dublin along with company staff so hence why it diverted there
Also fire cover wise SNN currently CAT7 and a 767-300 requires CAT8 so DUB was the only choice on this front.
smurfjed wrote: » Can’t this be dropped by 1? So normally requiring CAT8 can be dropped to CAT7.
Irish Steve wrote: » FR24 History is showing it as a regular scheduled operation, comes to Dublin from London, then goes out to Doha, probably not enough demand from either location at the moment to justify direct flights. Might even be cargo, as there was nothing showing on the Dublin Airport site
[Deleted User] wrote: » Unusual aircraft for such a short route, unless it turned back from its original destination? Qatar Airways 787 QR8865 from London to Dublin https://fr24.com/QTR8865/26844bb4
BZ wrote: » I'm not a 100 percent sure on that. It may be possible if operator is accepting of it?
BZ wrote: » Lufthansa / Shannon Aerospace have two hangars full of engineers at the moment and they look after Delta when scheduled into Shannon. I do understand why they diverted to DUB as Connectivity wise if the aircraft went tech its a lot easier to get people. Also fire cover wise SNN currently CAT7 and a 767-300 requires CAT8 so DUB was the only choice on this front.
Comhra wrote: »
RocketRaccoon wrote: » I doubt there was enough to handle a Delta flight, they usually demand double the amount of other airlines. Coupled with the fact there probably wasn't anyone to run their system for pax in the airport. There was no security staff in the airport to secure the aircraft door, rear door and ramp area. Then take into consideration there would have been no direct Delta employees anywhere near the airport too.