Norwegian changing flight to another operator last minute

photome

graeme001 wrote: »

Hi

I have just returned from NYC from Gatwick and had exactly the same experience. We were horrified when we saw the plane we had to travel on (and return).

The service levels were awful, staff were rude, No pay for inflight service. No entertainment, only by an app that requires you to own your device (with of course 100% battery) as there are no charging ports.

I have attempted to claim compensation, I'll let you know how it goes.

Why pay for a service when they don't deliver. Surely this is not right. It's only the same as ordering a Limo but getting a an old ford escort. But saying, 'oh well, at least I got there' I want my money back as we drove all the way from Birmingham to specifically use this service.

Just to add to this, they didn't even inform me of the change. i didn't recieve a text message or an email of the aircraft change. They even admitted on the phone they had a technical issue with this!

Its not the same as ordering a limo and getting an escort

It is the same as booking a taxi and getting whatever car turns up

it is the same as taking a bus or a train and getting on the one that turns up.

your ticket is to get you from A to B in a reasonable time

stevie11

Ok not to upset the OP or graeme001, you have paid for a service to get you from A to B. Norwegian have or will transport you safely I hope on both legs, although not on the type of aircraft you thought. As others have stated aircraft changes happen for various reasons but you were provided a service. I can understand for example you paid to fly to NY on Concorde but unfortunately an aircraft change meant you flew on a 767, 330 or 747 etc , you would definitely have a case to be disappointed and claim for some form of compo.

Norwegian offer discounted fares compared to other airlines so worth paying even if it means travelling halfway across country to catch the flight. If another airline had flown from a local airport at a similar price would your choice have therefore been Norwegian?

I can also understand if you had paid for premium seats or food etc and were not provided that service or if you were delayed, that may be a reason to claim compo.
Don't let this spoil your holiday.

richardw

Norwegian long haul just isn't cheap enough for what you get.
The seats are too narrow.
The flight timings are bad, you are checking in to accommodation too late.
They don't have enough back up aircraft when things go wrong.
Delays can be horrendous. They've left people for days without assistance.

CKhalvashi

richardw wrote: »

Norwegian long haul just isn't cheap enough for what you get.
The seats are too narrow.
The flight timings are bad, you are checking in to accommodation too late.
They don't have enough back up aircraft when things go wrong.
Delays can be horrendous. They've left people for days without assistance.

You can't just keep a 787 on standby, especially with a small Long Haul fleet.

You do realise for the -9, you're looking about US$1m a month, right? The -8 isn't a lot cheaper.

I have no idea why (at least) 1 of their aircraft isn't flying, but it's much cheaper to ACMI-in as needed than to keep a spare plane on standby. As far as I'm aware there are no 787 ACMI operators yet, and probably won't be for a good 10-15 years, as older aircraft come off lease usually around the 12 year mark.

Flight timings and seating are the choice of those booking, of course.

PeacefulWaters

CKhalvashi wrote: »

You can't just keep a 787 on standby, especially with a small Long Haul fleet.

You do realise for the -9, you're looking about US$1m a month, right? The -8 isn't a lot cheaper.

I have no idea why (at least) 1 of their aircraft isn't flying, but it's much cheaper to ACMI-in as needed than to keep a spare plane on standby. As far as I'm aware there are no 787 ACMI operators yet, and probably won't be for a good 10-15 years, as older aircraft come off lease usually around the 12 year mark.

Flight timings and seating are the choice of those booking, of course.

I don't think it's about having a spare plane waiting around.

It's about regularity of service. If I was flying from London to New York for example I'd have a lot more faith in BA to get me on another flight that day than I would Norweigan.

richardw

Large airlines such as BA and AA do have resources when things go wrong.
When AA couldn't sort the technical problems out on our aircraft from O'Hare they allocated another one to our flight, which is preferable to an ACMI substitution.
Airlines that offer narrow seat long haul hell should advise passengers before taking payment.

Flight timings are important, look at the new flights to Denver and Seattle which leave Gatwick too early in the day and thus the return is too early in the afternoon.
IMHO this is where Norwegian have fundamentally got their transatlantic services so wrong.

bagand96

It's only the same as ordering a Limo but getting a an old ford escort.

No. It's the same as booking a cheap transatlantic flight on a low cost airline that are new to the game and have very limited resources (hence the cheap!).

And you got what you paid for. A flight from A to B.

Aircraft types and service levels are not guaranteed with any airline. It's covered in the T&Cs you agreed to.

PeacefulWaters

Flight timings are important, look at the new flights to Denver and Seattle which leave Gatwick too early in the day and thus the return is too early in the afternoon.

What makes you think these times are "too early"?

Surely that's a personal interpretation based on when an individual wants to travel and land.

richardw

PeacefulWaters wrote: »

What makes you think these times are "too early"? Surely that's a personal interpretation based on when an individual wants to travel and land.

Here are the Norwegian Seattle timings

London Gatwick – Seattle eff 17SEP17 4 weekly
DY7131 LGW0950 – 1145SEA 789 x246
DY7132 SEA1345 – 0705+1LGW 789 x246

With the return I don't want to be on an early flight overnight where most of the passengers are on Seattle time and may not sleep that much, 0705 at Gatwick is 1105pm Seattle time, it makes for a restless and not relaxed cabin. When flying to the east it's always better arriving later in the day.

CKhalvashi

PeacefulWaters wrote: »

I don't think it's about having a spare plane waiting around.

It's about regularity of service. If I was flying from London to New York for example I'd have a lot more faith in BA to get me on another flight that day than I would Norweigan.

Then it's your choice to pay (what's often) more for BA.

They have a series of JFK evening departures times as close as 20 minutes apart for that exact reason. They also have flights out of Newark and to Gatwick and City, plus links with American Airlines.

In one day, their operation involves up to 15 BA aircraft just out of JFK. Of course that's going to offer more flexibility than one airline operating numerous routes out of numerous airports to the US to numerous airports in Europe with a fleet size not a lot bigger than that