On Tuesday, United Airlines flight 002 from Singapore to San Francisco diverted to Honolulu. The reason for the diversion is vague, but we have an idea and also a debate as to whether United handled this well.
The Reason Why United Airlines 787-9 From Singapore – San Francisco Diverted To Honolulu
UA002 did indeed divert to Honolulu on Tuesday, with the onward journey to San Francisco (SFO) canceled. The flight was operated by a Boeing 787-9 and according to the flight status on united.com, every seat was taken. That’s a key fact.
On FlyerTalk, a passenger on the flight posted this account:
I was on a flight from Singapore to SF March 5. One hour into flight we were told Japan conducting military exercises and we didn’t have enough fuel to go to SF. Interestingly a Singapore flight left at similar time and made it to SF. My question is how could United not known of this? What a mess with little support when we arrived in HNL at 4 am.
S/he later added:
I am not a complainer, but the pilot gave us updates in two languages hourly about the diversion to Honolulu. Leaving us wide awake with no sleep. He also suggested we get on the United app to see what our options were but in true United fashion the app did not work very well, I love United, but this was not my favorite flight.
I was not able to independently verify that military drills were occurring on March 5th. That said, the US, Japan, and South Korea have recently conducted a series of joint exercises.
But to answer her question as to why the Singapore Airlines flight was able to make the journey without stopping, I think we have to look at the aircraft type. Singapore uses an Airbus A350-900 on its SIN-SFO route, which has a range of 8,100 nautical miles. Meanwhile, United’s 787-9 has a range of only 7,635 nautical miles. Put another way, Singapore’s A350 can hold about 20,000 pounds of additional fuel than United’s 787 can. Load must also be considered. Remember, every seat was taken on United.
That may not be definitive, but it seems to be the likely answer.
We reached out to United Airlines it confirmed that a military airspace issue prompted the diversion:
We diverted due to military airspace that was activated while we were en route and had to refuel and recrew in HNL.
The picture above is from Honolulu, but not of a 787 jet.
Did United Handle This Well?
As for the captain providing updates every hour, it seems that pilots are often ridiculed whether for making too many announcements and ridiculed again for not making enough announcements. Considering the uniqueness of a diversion, it seems to me that frequent updates were acceptable. That said, I can certainly appreciate how that interrupted sleep.
My only other outstanding question is whether United knew of this diversion before takeoff and only announced it after takeoff or if it came as somewhat of a surprise for everyone after UA002 departed Singapore.
Note that the fight terminated in Honolulu: passengers were transported to their final destinations on other flights.
CONCLUSION
Passengers onboard were told that UA002 diverted to Honolulu because the Japanese were conducting military exercises in the Pacific. While that account had not been confirmed, it is not a surprise that a United 787-9 had to stop for fuel in Honolulu if forced to deviate from its most direct routing with every seat occupied onboard.
The complaining passenger justified the complaint by asserting : “‘I am not a complainer”, and by asserting “I love United” .
‘Love’ is an emotion … which can lead one astray .
Pilot was rational .
Also it’s worth noting the SQ flight leaves 55 minutes earlier than UA002 which means they absolutely could have not been impacted by the military airspace closure. They could have transited through that particular airspace prior to it being closed. Also it’s possible SQ was not flying the exact same routing as UA002.
Ck the stats on 787-9 range, 787-9 runs daily IAH-SYD and that’s over 8500
Nautical miles are different than ground miles.
At least it wasn’t diverted from SFO to Tokyo because of falling tires after take off.
It is possible that the Singapore airline flight flew over Russia, which the UA flight cannot.
Singapore does not overfly Russia, even if they might regulatorily be allowed to. Moreover, the great circle route from SIN to SFO doesn’t pass over Russia anyway.
Crew reported to dispatch they were informed by Japan ATC that part of their route went through hot airspace. Dispatch reported they were unaware of any hot airspace during planning (which strikes me a bit odd because that stuff is usually published in advance). It’s also very possible that Singapore had a lighter load, more fuel on board and/or routed differently over the pacific. Just because the airplane can take 20k more gas doesn’t mean they have 20k more gas, maybe they had a better tailwind, who knows. Higher load = less capacity for fuel. More fuel= less capacity for pax/cargo
My mother and I were on this flight. My first reaction besides anxiety was also how the crew could not have known about this beforehand. The writer of this article said updates were made to the passengers every hour however after the initial announcement at least 4 hours went by without an update. I filed a complaint to united because of the total disorganization and chaos of this experience plus lost $ and work time due to their decisions. Overall this is probably the worst flying experience I’ve ever had and I’ve traveled all over the world.
Pilots believe in safety first . Any safe flight is a good flight .
I was on the flight and my recollection differs from yours on the announcements. What we both will agree on is that United had seven hours to prepare for the arrival of the diverted flight, and they did not execute this well. My business partner, and I incurred expenses and missed business meetings because we arrived home 24 hours late with no customer service. I have flown 3.2 million miles on United so I do expect more.
So…a few spent a day or two in Hawaii…Honolulu is a tourist trap, but the other side of the island is very nice…enjoy the diversion.
@ExitRiowSeat … +1 .
My mother and I were on this flight, the captain made the initial announcement about the Japanese military training but then your information is inaccurate. There was no additional announcement until at least 6 more hours into the flight path change. How did the pilot and crew not know about the Japanese training issue beforehand. Way too suspicious.. this was a terrible flying experience on united, caused passengers anxiety and lack of sleep and passengers should have been notified up front instead of put on a plane on wrong flight path
Everyone was lucky to have been on such a safe flight . Everyone ought to count their blessings , thank the crew , and thank the Almighty .
Amen
I was on the Singapore Airlines flight from SIN to SFO on Tuesday 5 march. We left Singapore 1 hour late at 10:20am instead of 9:20 am because the flight arrived into SIN late and they could not turn it fast enough. Initially the pilot said we would make up the time in route to SFO. This did not happen as we arrived into SFO about one hour late. It was a A350 every seat taken. The pilot did not mention anything about military exercises it appeared to be a very normal flight. The route did not go over Russia but I do not know if they deviated from the Normal route as I have never taken this flight before. Although the plane was fairly uncomfortable for over 14 hours in economy.
You must have been on a different flight Steve, the flight in question never went to SFO. Landed in Honolulu and then was cancelled. Everyone had to rebook on different flights
He made it quite clear that he was on a different flight. The bigger question is why UA choose not to refeul and leave the passengers and plane in the wrong place.
Possibly crew or part of the crew would be on too long?
So what’s more important, your interrupted sleep or being assured you are safe? Really some people are so self absorbed!
These ultra-long haul operations look good on paper, but reality shows they’re sometimes just too long with current equipment and conditions. The trouble with booking the connection, though, is that 2 flights instead of one, gives you an extra chance for malfunctions and delays. These ultra longhauls are really best for corporate travelers whose employer will absorb all the extra costs, and for very flexible retirees who can have extra travel days with minimal consequences.
For everyone else, ultimately, take your trip, but pad an extra day on each end, if you must be somewhere at a set time. And naturally, be thrilled if you arrive alive with your luggage.
That’s why you pad your schedule and purchase travel insurance to protect you from extra costs.
The SQ flight is also in the all-premium configuration, so only 161 seats (and only 161 passengers’ worth of luggage… probably not a heavy mail route at this time of year, either).
Did UA handle it well? Only if they were able to get the passengers reaccommodated efficiently. They had plenty of time to get another 787 crew dispatched from SFO or LAX to HNL to continue the flight. This is precisely why they have on-call crews at airports, ready to go.
Could even have killed some time by clearing Customs in HNL while refueling. Proper use of a stopover for a flight 2 🙂 (Yes, referencing the dearly departed BA tech stop in SNN)
Yes that is one of my main concerns. Airline should have had transparency in this issue. Safety of course above all else is important but there is part of me which again questions why all of this wasnt announced before take off. It creates a level of anxiety for passengers thatsu have been avoided.
We did go though customs, Actually blew through customs on Honolulu, easiest time ever although that brings into question other safety concerns
OK, are you trying to see just how many times you can say anxiety in your posts? If you’re that anxious over a diverted flight to Hawaii, how do you cope in normal life? Were you stranded for days on end in the terminal with no food? If the pilot is to be believed, no indication to doubt him, the military exercise could have popped up unexpectedly and changed the planned route, which led to the diversion, again to Hawaii, not North Korea. Would you have preferred the flight turned back for Singapore or been cancelled perhaps? As a former military pilot, sometimes things occur that are not necessarily planned and can cause airspace to be closed.
Saying “I love United” seems a lot like Tina saying “I love Ike.” Recognize your abuser ffs.
That is very funny! I repeated this line to United Customer Care today as I negotiated for reimbursement of my out of pocket expenses. She cracked up. As Tina would say “what’s love got to do with it”
Should have never retired the B747. The 747 Can fly faster nonstop from SIN-SFO with full passenger load than the B787 or A350
If a 747 could’ve made the trip like you say, care to explain why no airline ever tried it? The answer is: they couldn’t. That’s why SQ used an A340 until the A350s arrived.
The obvious question – why couldn’t the aircraft continue to SFO after the stopover? No mention of mechanical problems. United had plenty of warning to get a new crew if needed. Instead, a full wide body load of pax needed to be rerouted. Huh.
First of all, calling out a replacement crew would require giving said crew a few hours just to get to the airport. That’s contractual. Next, there would have to be an available flught to HNL to put them on that actually has open seats so they don’t have another Dr. DAO moment. Next, when the crew arrives after a five+ hour flight, there’s a good chance they now need a legal crew rest. Domestic work rules are different than international rules. So now, how are they of use to a plane that needs a crew right away?
Do you see how armchair quarterbacking never works in the real world with real logistics to consider?
Correct. This was a pilot/dispatch botch of NOTAMS serious enough to require a diversion. With enough time to make adjustments for passenger through travel. United 0-2 here.
I love how some other people say you should be thrilled that you just arrived safely.
This incident should be investigated
Thank you for saying this, this absolutely should be looked into further
TFR(Temporary flight restriction) NOTAM(Notice to airmen)
The above information are checked before take-off. If passengers were told an hour after take off, there’s a possibility that the pilot’s failed to check before take off. If they’ve been in the air for an hour, they should’ve already been flying at cruising altitude of about 35,000 feet and about 500 miles away. Wow, that military exercise must have covered at least 700 nautical miles!
I was on the flight. I agree that any flight that arrives in its destination safely is not an awful flight. I understand that there is a difference in aircraft, and in time of departure, What was unfortunate was the experience of those of us who paid for first class tickets only to receive vouchers for cabs that were not usable, hotels that gave us 4 hours (with a be ready to vacate call after 2 hours) and were told that the flight of our 787 to San Francisco from Honolulu was canceled when it actually left at 1:30 PM that day. My business partner and I were put on a 430 pm flight (less than 20 people on a 737-Max 8 I think) that necessitated us spending the night in San Francisco and being delayed to our final destination by a day. I have emailed United GS twice and received only AI replies. And some travel days are not good days.
Thanks for this data point!