More news on this day
Severe winter weather and a tangle of operational and regulatory constraints at Munich Airport left more than 120 Lufthansa passengers confined overnight on an Airbus A320neo bound for Copenhagen, turning a short evening hop into a grueling ordeal that has renewed scrutiny of how European hubs handle disruption and passenger care obligations.
Snowstorm Turns Routine Departure Into Nightlong Ordeal
The disruption unfolded on the evening of 19 February, when heavy snowfall swept across southern Germany and snarled operations at Munich, one of Lufthansas main hubs. Flight LH2446 to Copenhagen, operated by an Airbus A320neo and carrying more than 120 passengers, was scheduled to depart at around 9:30 p.m. local time. After boarding at a remote stand, travelers expected only a short delay while crews waited for de-icing and a slot in deteriorating conditions.
Instead, a succession of rolling delays stretched late into the night as the airport struggled with runway clearing, de-icing backlogs and an intensifying snowstorm. According to accounts later shared with Danish and German media, cabin crew updated passengers periodically, but information about the precise cause and likely duration of the delay remained fragmentary. For many on board, the expectation that departure was imminent made what followed harder to accept.
Shortly before midnight, with the snow still falling and operating conditions worsening, the flight was formally canceled. Under normal circumstances, passengers would have been bussed back to the terminal for rebooking and overnight accommodation. On that night, however, the combination of a strict night curfew, scarce buses and fully occupied parking stands near the terminal meant there was no immediate way to get people off the aircraft and back inside.
What was supposed to be a 90 minute flight to Denmark gradually turned into a night confined in narrow short haul seats, in an airplane that never left the ground.
Curfew, Staffing Shortages and a Gridlocked Apron
Munich Airport operates under one of Germanys tighter night flight regimes, with a so called core night between midnight and 5 a.m. when traffic is heavily restricted. On the evening of the snowstorm, some late departures reportedly received exemptions, but the worsening weather quickly erased those options. Once LH2446 was canceled close to midnight, the flight lost any possibility of departing before the curfew closed in.
Airport officials later cited a lack of available buses and fully occupied terminal adjacent parking positions as the main reasons passengers could not be deplaned sooner. With most contact stands taken and snow complicating movements on the apron, aircraft like the A320neo for Copenhagen remained marooned at remote parking positions. Moving buses around safely, loading passengers and transferring them back to already crowded terminals proved a logistical challenge the airport was unable to meet during the overnight hours.
Compounding the problem were staffing constraints. As the night curfew approached and flights were progressively canceled, many ground workers had already gone off duty. For the passengers on LH2446, that translated into repeated messages that there were no staff available to escort them across the apron or to operate buses to the terminal, even as the aircraft sat only a short distance away from the airport buildings.
The result was a stalemate that lasted for hours. The airport would not permit passengers to walk across the snowy tarmac for safety reasons, but also could not muster the resources to move them by bus. Trapped in the middle were travelers who had no choice but to remain seated on the aircraft until operations could restart in the early morning.
Passengers Describe Long Night Without Basic Comforts
For those onboard the A320neo, the impact of those operational decisions was intensely personal. Passengers described spending the night in economy class seats without pillows or blankets and with only limited access to food and drink. Some said the cabin temperature fell uncomfortably low at times as engines remained off and the aircraft relied on auxiliary power, even though the aircraft did not become dangerously cold.
Families traveling with children and elderly passengers reportedly struggled the most. Parents told Danish media that they tried to fashion makeshift bedding from coats and scarves to keep younger children warm and allow them to sleep. Others walked the aisle to stay limber and stave off the aches that come with long periods sitting upright. With the aircraft doors closed and movement restricted, passengers were dependent on the onboard lavatories, further adding to discomfort as the night wore on.
Cabin crew, themselves stuck onboard, were said to have done what they could within the constraints they faced, offering water and snacks and answering questions. Yet many travelers felt that the updates they received were too infrequent and too vague to provide real reassurance. It was only around 2 a.m., according to several accounts, that passengers were explicitly told there was no way back to the terminal at that time, and that they would have to remain onboard until morning.
By the time buses finally arrived around dawn, many passengers had spent close to nine hours on the aircraft, much of it at the remote stand after the cancellation had already been confirmed. Several later said that the sense of being left in limbo, rather than the cold or lack of sleep, was what they found most upsetting.
Lufthansa and Airport Under Fire Over Duty of Care
The incident has triggered sharp criticism of both Lufthansa and Munich Airport over their handling of passengers rights and welfare during the disruption. Under European Union Regulation 261, airlines are obliged to provide care to passengers affected by long delays and cancellations, including meals, refreshments and accommodation where necessary, regardless of the cause of the disruption.
While heavy snowfall and airport curfew rules lie largely outside the airlines control, consumer advocates argue that leaving passengers onboard an aircraft overnight, without meaningful options to disembark or access proper rest facilities, falls short of reasonable standards of care. Questions have also been raised about whether more decisive early action to deboard passengers before the curfew window could have prevented the overnight confinement.
Lufthansa has acknowledged the incident and expressed regret for the discomfort experienced by those onboard, while emphasizing the operational challenges posed by the weather and airport restrictions. The carrier has said affected customers will be rebooked and supported with compensation claims under EU rules where applicable, although the exact level of financial redress may depend on how regulators classify the snowstorm and resulting ground stop.
Munich Airport, for its part, has defended its safety first approach, stressing that allowing people to walk across an icy apron at night would have been unacceptable. Officials maintained that the combination of full stands, limited buses, snow clogged taxiways and the strict curfew created a scenario in which keeping passengers onboard until daybreak, though undesirable, was considered the least risky option. Critics counter that a major European hub should have more robust contingency plans to avoid such outcomes.
One Aircraft Among Hundreds Affected by Winter Chaos
Although the story of LH2446 has resonated widely, it was far from the only flight hit by the storm. Airport and local media reports indicate that around 500 passengers in total were forced to spend the night on grounded aircraft at Munich during the same weather event. In addition to the Copenhagen service, Lufthansa flights to Singapore and Gdansk and two Air Dolomiti departures to Graz and Venice were among those affected.
Across the airport, heavy snowfall led to runway closures, prolonged de icing queues and more than 100 cancellations over the course of the day. With Munich serving as a major connecting hub for southern Germany and neighboring countries, the knock on effects rippled through the wider European network, stranding travelers far beyond Bavaria.
In that context, the A320neo to Copenhagen became the focal point for broader frustrations with how airlines and airports respond to disruption. Passengers on other flights reported less extreme experiences, including being able to deplane to the terminal or being provided with camp beds, blankets and refreshments. That contrast has fueled debate over whether some aircraft were simply caught in a perfect storm of timing, resource scarcity and decision making under pressure.
For aviation analysts, the incident illustrates how quickly the finely tuned machinery of a major hub can seize up when key variables like weather, ground transport capacity and staffing all tilt in the wrong direction at once. When those stresses intersect with strict night curfews, passenger welfare can suffer in particularly visible ways.
Calls Grow for Review of Night Operations and Contingency Plans
In the aftermath, passenger groups, travel industry observers and some local politicians are calling for a thorough review of night operations and emergency procedures at Munich and other European airports with curfews. Advocates argue that while curfews serve important environmental and community noise goals, they must be balanced with clear pathways to protect travelers when flights are canceled late in the evening.
One area under scrutiny is the availability of ground transport and staff after the last scheduled departures. Critics contend that airports and airlines should maintain enough overnight capability to guarantee that all passengers can be safely brought back to terminal facilities, even under severe weather conditions, rather than leaving them confined on aircraft for hours at a time.
There are also growing calls for more transparent communication protocols. Several passengers on LH2446 said that had they known earlier in the evening that deplaning might become impossible after a certain time, they would have favored returning to the terminal sooner, even at the cost of missing a slim chance of departure that night. Clearer explanations of the trade offs facing crews and dispatchers, some argue, could help travelers make more informed choices.
Industry figures note that the growing frequency of extreme weather events linked to climate change, from heatwaves to heavy snowfalls, makes it more urgent to stress test disruption plans. What happened in Munich, they say, should serve as a case study in how quickly a manageable delay can escalate into a reputational crisis when passengers feel trapped and forgotten.
What the Incident Means for Travelers Using Major Hubs
For travelers, the Munich incident is a stark reminder of the vulnerabilities inherent in modern air travel, particularly during winter. Experts generally advise passengers with late evening departures from curfew constrained airports to be especially attentive to weather forecasts and operational updates, as the window for recovery options narrows sharply after a certain hour.
Practical steps can help mitigate risk, even if they cannot eliminate it entirely. Having essential medications, warm clothing and basic toiletries in carry on bags rather than checked luggage can make an unexpected overnight stay on an aircraft or in a terminal more bearable. Maintaining updated contact details with the airline and installing carrier apps can also speed up rebooking and communication when disruptions strike.
At the same time, consumer advocates stress that the responsibility for preventing a repeat of the Munich episode does not rest with passengers but with the industry itself. Airlines and airports, they argue, must design systems that assume things will occasionally go wrong and that prioritize passenger welfare when they do, rather than relying on best case scenarios that leave little room for error.
For Lufthansa and Munich Airport, the overnight confinement of an entire planeload of passengers on an A320neo has become a test of that commitment. How they respond in the coming weeks, both in compensating those affected and in revising procedures, will be closely watched by regulators and travelers across Europe.