August 8, 2003 at 10:21 pm
Unbelievable: http://www.theage.com.au/articles/2003/08/08/1060145874308.html
By: im going in - 10th August 2003 at 13:18
A curfew is a curfew, Maybe if they had spoken to the airport auth they would have got an extension or been told not to risk it. Is it a case of a low cost operator taking risks so they dont have to pay compensation for a canx flight? Is it just the airline that would get fined or would others? At ZRH, if a a/c breaks the curfew, the ATCO is fined $14000 for allowing that a/c to do so.
By: dartie - 10th August 2003 at 13:07
If i could, and if it was logical, i would take them to court, talk about a picky airport!
By: Woundsinger - 9th August 2003 at 22:31
I cannot believe the stupidity…..
A spokeswoman for th department confirmed that the airline tried to seek dispensation to land after the curfew, but there were “communication difficulties”.
Communication difficulties…Hmmm smells like a cop out if ever I heard one…
By: Hand87_5 - 9th August 2003 at 10:38
When policies take over intelligence ….. pathetic
By: dartie - 9th August 2003 at 10:14
That really sucks, they turned back a plane to Melbourne because of a curfew, of 45 secs late!
By: KabirT - 9th August 2003 at 06:37
well that was pretty stupid!:rolleyes:
By: steve rowell - 9th August 2003 at 03:49
How petty
By: Vicbitter - 8th August 2003 at 22:49
I wonder how much the fine would have been, It might have cost them less in the end just to pay up
By: A330Crazy - 8th August 2003 at 22:23
Jeeezz one extra minute… would it of made that much difference? Though you can argue that a law is a law! 😀
Thanks for the news Vic.