Food at ATL

Just to make sure it is clear. By "trouble" I did not mean FAA or CP trouble. I meant "trouble" like they did not have enough fuel to make it to their alternate because they did not fly the CI.
I'm not saying I always fly CI. But the entire reason I brought it up was someone complaining about pilots "sandbagging" by flying .78 when that may be their CI planned speed. If you decide not to fly CI you need to watch your fuel. I've had to point out to FOs on a few occasions that our fuel flow with the thrust at cruise instead of the CI setting would start to eat into our fuel- maybe even to the point where we would not be able to make our alternate.
 
ProudPilot said:
Remember how I asked about burritos at ATL in the first post? No, yeah, it has been a while...
Click to expand...
I do apologize. No sarcasm. My initial response away from your OP was about someone complaining about pilots "sand bagging" by flying less than their max Mach.
The good thing about ATL- so many places to eat. Not sure any more about best TexMex.
 
Blackhawk said:
Just to make sure it is clear. By "trouble" I did not mean FAA or CP trouble. I meant "trouble" like they did not have enough fuel to make it to their alternate because they did not fly the CI.
I'm not saying I always fly CI. But the entire reason I brought it up was someone complaining about pilots "sandbagging" by flying .78 when that may be their CI planned speed. If you decide not to fly CI you need to watch your fuel. I've had to point out to FOs on a few occasions that our fuel flow with the thrust at cruise instead of the CI setting would start to eat into our fuel- maybe even to the point where we would not be able to make our alternate.
Click to expand...

If ATC tells you to speed up and going .02 mach faster causes you to not have enough gas to make your alternate I'd blame your dispatcher for giving you almost zero contingency fuel.
 
SurferLucas said:
The Varsity on the F-Concourse..."What'll ya have, What'll ya have, What'll ya have!"

#6 (add mustard myself) with an FO and ring = my standard meal leaving ATL for SEA :)
Click to expand...
Not going to miss that place. Never really have gotten what all the hype is about the Varsity. Only really good thing to get there is the Frosted Orange.
 
H46Bubba said:
Not going to miss that place. Never really have gotten what all the hype is about the Varsity. Only really good thing to get there is the Frosted Orange.
Click to expand...

The Varsity downtown is great for the experience. The food is okay, but nothing to get excited about. So take away the experience (which you do at the airport) and you're left with just greasy overrated food. F concourse in general has a terrible selection of food.
 
If I'm not mistaking, I think there is a Buffalo Wild Wings inside the airport at ATL. I seem to recall eating buffalo wings once at like 8 in the morning just because it was there.
 
Seggy said:
I am in and out of ORD pretty much weekly and hardly have any ground delays. This was before and after the new runway configuration. Furthermore, the ATL controllers are usually slowing down aircraft over DCA headed into ATL. The SOP at ORD is go as fast as one can for as long as possible.

Furthermore, arguably the best airport food in America is located in ORD, Tortas Frontera.
Click to expand...
Seggy said:
I am in and out of ORD pretty much weekly and hardly have any ground delays. This was before and after the new runway configuration. Furthermore, the ATL controllers are usually slowing down aircraft over DCA headed into ATL. The SOP at ORD is go as fast as one can for as long as possible.

Furthermore, arguably the best airport food in America is located in ORD, Tortas Frontera.
Click to expand...
I can't speak for ZTL or ZDC controllers up the east coast, but I can tell you Atlanta TRACON strives to be as efficient and safe as possible. You can't all go balls to the wall when we're landing 132 and departing 118 a hour... Though there are now to feeds from the NE and NW which has probably alleviated some of slowdowns hundreds of miles from ATL.
 
mshunter said:
Probably going to catch flak for this, but the controllers on the east coast suck. They will routinely slow down the whole line because some idiot is up in the front of the line sand bagging, going .68-.70. Out west, they'll pull that guy off the air way, let faster traffic by, and just penalize the guy going slow, not every one behind him.
Click to expand...
When you have less congested airspace in centers out west, you have a lot more room to maneuver aircraft and and off routes...
 
queeno said:
Atlanta Large Tracon HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA biggest one trick pony approach control in the FFA!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! even after taking Macon and Columbus airspace and a chunk in the northeast part they still cant pass C90s traffic count with the same size of airspace we had 35 years ago !!!!!!!!!!!!
Click to expand...
No one here wants MCN, CSG, or AHN... ZTL can have those sectors.
 
adk said:
If ATC tells you to speed up and going .02 mach faster causes you to not have enough gas to make your alternate I'd blame your dispatcher for giving you almost zero contingency fuel.
Click to expand...

Going faster in and of itself is normally not going to be an issue. It becomes an issue, however, when other factors are thrown in. Flying at a different altitude than planned. Holding. Deviating for weather. Some factors are put into the fuel planning, such as holding fuel. Often there is extra fuel as well to cover the deviating. The problem arises when a crew uses this contingency fuel while also flying faster than planed.
While a .02 mach difference between planned and flown is not that significant on a 1 hour flight, the longer the flight, the larger the difference between planned and flown mach, plus other differences (again, such as altitude, deviations), the greater the difference in fuel burn.
As an example, during the Chicago TRACON shutdown I had several flights where we were kept at a low altitude (14,000'), for over 15 minutes and our route of flight went around the Chicago area. Initially this was not planned and we did not learn about it until we took off. Flying CI we made the flight without an issue, though I had to keep an eye on the fuel. If we flew cruise power instead I would have had to deviate.
As for blaming the dispatcher that is bunk. The dispatch is a dual responsibility document between the captain and the dispatcher. If there is not enough fuel in the dispatch then the captain should never depart.

This argument is part of what I find infuriating about this website. A poster complained that pilots were "sandbagging" by flying too slow. I pointed out that many (probably most), airlines are moving to CI and SCI flight planning. A few immature pilots throw hissy fits and call me a liar for pointing out that crews have run into fuel issues by not flying their plan. I know this will come to a shock for many of the young pilots here who went straight to the airlines, but flight planning 101 that is taught to private pilots- If you don't fly the plan, your numbers won't work. Usually this is not an issue, but it can be.

Again to the OP. Sorry for the hijack. I'm not going to stand by while pilots who obviously have no clue about flight planning 101 jump all over me.
 
H46Bubba said:
Not going to miss that place. Never really have gotten what all the hype is about the Varsity. Only really good thing to get there is the Frosted Orange.
Click to expand...

I like chili dogs and it's cool going to a place where you can order one without the sneers of the tempeh crowd, but they're as exciting as a McDonalds cheeseburger. They're "utility" but nothing I'd make a special trip for.
 
giphy.gif
 
adk said:
If ATC tells you to speed up and going .02 mach faster causes you to not have enough gas to make your alternate I'd blame your dispatcher for giving you almost zero contingency fuel.
Click to expand...

No. Captain (PIC) is the final authority. If you don't have what you'd consider enough contingency fuel, then that's on you as Captain. You know what you're taking off with, and should know what that leaves you with for contingencies. If you as Captain don't like that, then order more fuel before departing. But don't get airborne, then discover you don't have what you think is enough, and try to blame someone else for it. That's a candyass move.

Not only is PIC the final authority, he/she is the one who signs for the aircraft, therefore he/she is the one on the blame line. You want Captain authority? Then also accept the responsibility that comes with it.
 
Last edited:
MikeD said:
No. Captain (PIC) is the final authority. If you don't have what you'd consider enough contingency fuel, then that's on you as Captain. You know what you're taking off with, and should know what that leaves you with for contingencies. If you as Captain don't like that, then order more fuel before departing. But don't get airborne, then discover you don't have what you think is enough, and try to blame someone else for it. That's a candyass move.

Not only is PIC the final authority, he/she is the one who signs for the aircraft, therefore he/she is the one on the blame line. You want Captain authority? Then also accept the responsibility that comes with it.
Click to expand...

What's this responsibility thing? I just want to wear four stripes, look cool, and complain about everyone else not doing their job.;)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top