Air Greenland is an absolutely fascinating little airline. The carrier’s only jet is a single Airbus A330-800neo, which operates its “flagship” route, between Nuuk, Greenland (GOH), and Copenhagen, Denmark (CPH). The airline has been struggling with this route the past couple of days, as it has now diverted twice. I want to take a closer look at that in this post.
In this post:
Air Greenland’s Copenhagen to Nuuk route diversions
Air Greenland’s sole jet is a two-year-old Airbus A330-800neo with the registration code OY-GKN, which the airline has named “Tuukkaq.” Generally, the carrier operates this plane daily on the 2,208-mile flight between Copenhagen and Nuuk.
Keep in mind that Nuuk is Air Greenland’s primary hub. The airline recently switched operations to this airport, thanks to a new, longer runway, which makes it possible to operate a jet here. That’s great, because Nuuk is the capital and biggest gateway in Greenland, while the previous hub of Kangerlussuaq (SJF) was primarily used because of its runway length.
However, in the past couple of days, this route has proven to be challenging. Yesterday (January 2, 2025), the plane was scheduled to operate flight GL781, departing from Copenhagen at 10:45AM, and arriving in Nuuk at 12:35PM. The plane took off at 11:47AM, quite a bit behind schedule. It climbed up to 38,000 feet, and for nearly five hours, flew its typical path, traveling over Norway, Iceland, and the open ocean, prior to flying over Greenland.
However, as the aircraft approached Nuuk, on Greenland’s west coast, the decision was made to return all the way to Copenhagen. That’s because weather at the airport wasn’t good, below the minimums required for the plane to land. The aircraft didn’t even descend when it approached Nuuk, but rather maintained its cruising altitude, and made a 180 degree turn.
In the end, the aircraft operated an 8hr32min flight, landing at 8:19PM, only to end up exactly where it started.
This wasn’t the only flight that faced these issues. All flights at the airport were canceled around the same time, due to weather.
Today (January 3, 2025), the same aircraft tried to operate the same route, but again ran into some issues. The plane was scheduled to operate flight GL779, departing Copenhagen at 8:20AM, and arriving in Nuuk at 10:10AM.
It took off at 8:47AM, flew all the way to Greenland, and then started circling, due to bad weather in Nuuk. The decision was eventually made to divert to Keflavik, Iceland (KEF), where the plane landed 6hr50min after it took off. We’ll see what the carrier’s plan is next.
Air Greenland’s weather diversion policy
Many people might be curious why Air Greenland would divert a flight all the way back to Copenhagen, rather than flying to an airport that’s closer by. Well, what I find to be pretty cool is that Air Greenland explained its diversion policy in detail, and it makes perfect sense. One of the challenges with aviation in Greenland is that the weather can change very quickly, and there are very few diversion points.
Here’s how the airline goes about managing situations where there’s bad weather in Nuuk, and a diversion is needed:
Many people ask: ‘What will Tuukkaq do if it can’t land in Nuuk?’ We understand that our customers are curious, especially now that the A330neo, Tuukkaq, is landing at the new international airport in Nuuk. Air Greenland works every day to fulfill all scheduled flights. But when weather or other conditions prevent us from taking off or landing, it’s safety that determines whether we take to the air. The same rules apply to Tuukkaq and the rest of the Air Greenland fleet as to any airline in the world.
There are special rules for weather conditions, crew rest periods, airport conditions such as snow and ice on the runway, lights and other facilities, etc. These rules determine whether a flight can be completed as planned or not. Air Greenland’s Operation Control Centre looks at all these conditions and regulations every day, and has plans for what alternative options can be used in the event that bad weather or other conditions prevent a landing in Nuuk.
These options are outlined below:
— If storms occur before departure from Copenhagen Airport, the flight will be cancelled. Air Greenland has secured space in the timetable for extra flights to be added.
— If unexpected storms occur en route a few hours after departure, Tuukkaq will return to Copenhagen.
— If Tuukkaq has landed in Nuuk and there is a storm, the departure will be changed to a night flight or passengers will be rebooked for a later departure.
— Kangerlussuaq will only be used as an alternative airport as a last resort in case Tuukkaq cannot land in Nuuk and has no fuel to return to Copenhagen. In this case, passengers who arrived on Tuukkaq and are travelling to other domestic destinations will be flown by Dash-8. Passengers travelling with Tuukkaq to Copenhagen will be flown to Kangerlussuaq by Dash-8 when weather permits.Why not Kangerlussuaq/Iceland? Kangerlussuaq and Keflavik Airport will only exceptionally be used as an alternative airport and only as a last resort. The reason for this is that landing in Kangerlussuaq or Keflavik would have major consequences for the customer due to rest time regulations for the crew. These do not allow for subsequent flights without rest time. This will mean that flights cannot be operated until the following day, which will cause inconvenience with many delays on the subsequent flights. It is important for Air Greenland to emphasise that the alternative schedules have been prepared from a customer and economic point of view.
When delays and cancellations occur, passengers have rights under EU legislation for travellers outside the EU, while Air Greenland takes care of the travellers affected by a cancellation.
That explanation makes a lot of sense, even though Copenhagen is such a long distance from Nuuk. A few thoughts:
- Air Greenland is really filling up the tanks on the A330-800neo prior to departing Copenhagen, so that there’s enough fuel to return all the way to the origin; I suspect the other benefit is that fuel is much cheaper in Copenhagen than Nuuk
- It makes sense that the logistics of stranding an A330-800neo full of people at a non-hub (particularly Kangerlussuaq, where there’s limited lodging) is very complicated
- It’s interesting that today the airline diverted to Keflavik instead of Copenhagen; I wonder if it’s because the airline has an extra crew onboard due to the cancelations, so it’ll give service to Nuuk another try, after refueling
Anyway, this certainly seems like one of the more challenging routes out there in terms of being able to operate reliably. These diversions also can’t be cheap, especially for such a small airline.
Bottom line
Air Greenland’s longest route is between Copenhagen and Nuuk. This is a challenging route to operate when the weather gets bad, given that there aren’t many diversion points. The airline reportedly consistently loads enough fuel for the aircraft to return all the way to Copenhagen in case a landing isn’t possible.
This is proving to be an especially challenging week in terms of weather — the aircraft returned all the way back to Copenhagen today, and diverted to Keflavik today.
What do you make of Air Greenland’s complicated Copenhagen to Nuuk route?
Regarding profitability, GLs fares are high. Like pre deregulation levels in the US. The airlines could fly half empty planes and still make huge profits back then. I'm guessing the same dynamic is at play here.
Note to GL: How about adding a sky pub?
I don't know in quite what way but I imagine this has to be related. A leased Wamos Air A330-300 is operating Copenhagen-Nuuk flights with an Air Greenland flight number currently.
www.flightradar24.com/GRL3780
Does this situation explain the, two years ago described as ‘surprising’, choice of Air Greenland for a -800 in stead of a -900 version of the A330?
When Greenland becomes a US territory, all these issues will be resolved.
lol. As if.
As of right now (11 am Pacific, Jan 3) Air Greenland has a weather-related cancellation notice on their website saying that the runway in Nuuk is too slippery. https://www.airgreenland.com/data-pages/irr-settings/weather/
“That’s great, because Nuuk is the place in Greenland that most people want to visit, while the previous hub of Kangerlussuaq (SJF) was just used because of its runway length.”
This is incorrect, as was pointed out in comments to your previous post on the subject, and by Air Greenland’s own words:
“Ilulissat is Greenland’s tourist centre and attractive port of call for cruise ships.”
“Kangerlussuaq, also known as Søndre Strømfjord in Danish, is much...
“That’s great, because Nuuk is the place in Greenland that most people want to visit, while the previous hub of Kangerlussuaq (SJF) was just used because of its runway length.”
This is incorrect, as was pointed out in comments to your previous post on the subject, and by Air Greenland’s own words:
“Ilulissat is Greenland’s tourist centre and attractive port of call for cruise ships.”
“Kangerlussuaq, also known as Søndre Strømfjord in Danish, is much more than a runway. It is the gateway to Greenland. Here, nature is right in front of you when you get off the plane. Kangerlussuaq is, among other things, the city where you most easily get close to the huge ice wall of the ice sheet.”
“As the largest city in Greenland, Nuuk is closely connected to the rest of Greenland. With a stopover in Nuuk, you can quickly move on to other popular destinations such as Ilulissat, Maniitsoq and Narsarsuaq. Although Nuuk has a lot to offer for first-time visitors, it is recommended to experience one of the smaller settlements, where you can get up close to the Greenlandic culture.”
@ MFK -- Good point, thank you for the correction. I updated the post.
Kangerlussaq has plenty of lodging as it was the principal airport for the A330 Greenland before Nuuk, so i dont buy it, futhermore Nassarsuaq is also capable of receiving the A330, so why not use these points instead of wasting time and fuel and fly back to Denmark?
@ Daniel -- Call me a conspiracy theorist, but I can't imagine that Air Greenland wants to light money on fire, and fly that far out of the way without a good reason. Keep in mind that back when Air Greenland used Kangerlussaq as the primary hub, there were many same day connecting flights on turboprops, so far from everyone was spending the night there.
It's also possible that the airport no longer has the...
@ Daniel -- Call me a conspiracy theorist, but I can't imagine that Air Greenland wants to light money on fire, and fly that far out of the way without a good reason. Keep in mind that back when Air Greenland used Kangerlussaq as the primary hub, there were many same day connecting flights on turboprops, so far from everyone was spending the night there.
It's also possible that the airport no longer has the ground equipment needed to handle the A330-800neo, given how much stuff was moved to Nuuk. Perhaps Greenland ATC can chime in as well.
I would rather be in CPH than the "Old Camp" as a bunch of people would end up there. The Hotel Kangerlussuaq (it is even open anymore?) isn't big enough for a full 330s worth of passengers.
In any case, this situation is somewhat temporary as when the new Ilulissat airport opens there will be two airports that can take A330s where people will actually want to stay.
The Aircraft and Crew are based at Copenhagen, and the maintenance is done by SAS at CPH, so they need the Aircraft back to base before the Crew times out or a technical issue arises that grounds the jet in Greenland.
That's a lot of operational difficulties for a small airline. I wonder are they able to operate profitably given how challenging the business can be?
@ Nikojas -- I'm not sure how the situation evolved, but Air Greenland was expecting a profit of roughly $7-10 million in 2024:
https://www.airgreenland.com/news/air-greenland-delivers-satisfactory-half-year-results/
Obviously more than anything, the airline is a vital link for Greenland, as this kind of service is needed. So the fact that the airline is turning a (mild) profit is quite impressive. These kinds of diversions can significantly eat into those margins, since the fuel bill for an A330-800neo...
@ Nikojas -- I'm not sure how the situation evolved, but Air Greenland was expecting a profit of roughly $7-10 million in 2024:
https://www.airgreenland.com/news/air-greenland-delivers-satisfactory-half-year-results/
Obviously more than anything, the airline is a vital link for Greenland, as this kind of service is needed. So the fact that the airline is turning a (mild) profit is quite impressive. These kinds of diversions can significantly eat into those margins, since the fuel bill for an A330-800neo can easily reach six figures.
We had to divert GL1785 operated by Jettime back to CPH (via KEF for fuel stop) as well Yesterday, as there was snowfall reducing visibility to 2000m at Narsarsuaq
And most of the Airports on the West coast has been fogged in this Morning
@ Greenland ATC -- Hey, if you're actually an air traffic controller in Greenland, that's pretty darn cool. Thanks for reading!
Don’t forget that the new runway at Nuuk is only ILS Cat 1, i.e., pilots need to see the entire length of the runway at decision height. As others stated, the visibility was about 2000 meters, which is less than the 2200 meters runway length.
Needless to say that Cat 2 or even 3 landings would have been within limits - but upgrading the airport comes at a cost of several milllions ….
They won’t need to see the whole length of the Runway at DA/H.
They need 750m visibility to commence the approach and a pilot may not continue an approach below the Category I decision height ... unless at least one of the following visual references for the intended runway is distinctly visible and identifiable to the pilot:
(i) Elements of the approach light system;
(ii) The threshold;
(iii) The threshold markings;
They won’t need to see the whole length of the Runway at DA/H.
They need 750m visibility to commence the approach and a pilot may not continue an approach below the Category I decision height ... unless at least one of the following visual references for the intended runway is distinctly visible and identifiable to the pilot:
(i) Elements of the approach light system;
(ii) The threshold;
(iii) The threshold markings;
(iv) The threshold lights;
(v) The threshold identification lights;
(vi) The visual glide slope indicator;
(vii) The touchdown zone or touchdown zone markings;
(viii) The touchdown zone lights; or
(ix) Runway edge lights.
This may be a dumb question, but does Air Greenland need to operate this route this frequently in winter? There’s certainly government/business traffic year round, but there can’t be many tourists now and obviously challenging weather. To use a bad analogy, instead of trying to fly everyone directly into Aspen and dealing with a lot of diversions or return to origin, use Iceland as “Denver” and people can catch the short flight to Nuuk when the weather is better.
@ MP -- It's a great question, but I believe that this route isn't just about passengers, but also about cargo. This flight delivers all kinds of essential goods, from mail to medicine.
Ha, I knew I was overlooking something and that makes sense. I wonder if Kangerlussuaq gets a second life as an important cargo airport if these issues continue…
I would say because of cargo. The same is true for many remote places, they rely on these flight because it is the only way in and out, especially in winter.
I think it's one of Greenland's essential connections? Even without tourists, you have people who need to travel for medical appointments since medical care is limited and often specialist appointments are done in Copenhagen instead.
With Greenland's strong connection to Copenhagen, I think it makes sense to build a robust network to connect those two cities, rather than relying on Iceland. Although Air Greenland is setting up a codeshare option in Summer of 2025...
I think it's one of Greenland's essential connections? Even without tourists, you have people who need to travel for medical appointments since medical care is limited and often specialist appointments are done in Copenhagen instead.
With Greenland's strong connection to Copenhagen, I think it makes sense to build a robust network to connect those two cities, rather than relying on Iceland. Although Air Greenland is setting up a codeshare option in Summer of 2025 with Icelandair.