Attn Commutair dispatchers

NovemberEcho

NovemberEcho

Dergs favorite member
Y’all gotta get your fuel planning under control cause we’re tired of having to spin 90% of the Commutairs that come to EWR cause they’re too heavy. This wasn’t an issue until the last year or so.
 
I have a feeling their new CEO will get fueling “under control” once he actually becomes CEO.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
The JIA DX in me: what is this "fuel" you speak of?

"Planning"?

Tom_and_Jerry_meme.png
 
Engines require fuel to turn. When ATC spins flights going into the NY/DC Mets consistently for 30-45+ mins, more fuel needs to be added to still get where we need to go. Unfortunately pilots tend to add 1000-2000 lbs on top of what dispatch has planned, without even looking at the release. Multiple factors in play here. Either way, calling out an airline’s dispatch group saying stop planning more fuel is like us airline dispatchers calling out the FAA controllers and saying “y’all gotta stop holding flights and putting in ground stops for a rain shower 400nm west of EWR.” You guys gotta do what you gotta do, we gotta do what we gotta do. Neither can exist without the other.
 
CF34-3B1 said:
Engines require fuel to turn. When ATC spins flights going into the NY/DC Mets consistently for 30-45+ mins, more fuel needs to be added to still get where we need to go. Unfortunately pilots tend to add 1000-2000 lbs on top of what dispatch has planned, without even looking at the release. Multiple factors in play here. Either way, calling out an airline’s dispatch group saying stop planning more fuel is like us airline dispatchers calling out the FAA controllers and saying “y’all gotta stop holding flights and putting in ground stops for a rain shower 400nm west of EWR.” You guys gotta do what you gotta do, we gotta do what we gotta do. Neither can exist without the other.
Click to expand...
So you're saying pilot's don't look at the release and put on an extra 1000 that would cause them to land overweight at the airport given the flight planned fuel burn?

Cause that's not a legal departure.
 
z987k said:
So you're saying pilot's don't look at the release and put on an extra 1000 that would cause them to land overweight at the airport given the flight planned fuel burn?

Cause that's not a legal departure.
Click to expand...
I've had this happen time and time again. Capt calls up "hey, it says over max takeoff in aerodata but we're below max takeoff." Me: "what is your block fuel?"Capt then gives me fob that is higher than planned. "Capt, that puts you over landing weight, I'll rerun you at a lower altitude to burn it off."
 
NovemberEcho said:
I’ve said stuff to the pilots I know too. But you’re the only airline that needs this on a daily basis with almost every single flight.
Click to expand...
I think they were trying to point out that flights leave with a lot more fuel than planned by dispatch originally.
 
z987k said:
So you're saying pilot's don't look at the release and put on an extra 1000 that would cause them to land overweight at the airport given the flight planned fuel burn?

Cause that's not a legal departure.
Click to expand...
My favorite is when they add 1k then ask for a million shortcuts in the air, overweighting themselves.
 
A.) I never have worked at commutair. I just find it entertaining that someone who apparently works some form of ATC is calling out a regional dispatch group cause they are tired of having to accommodate flights needing to burn off excess fuel.

B.) your job exists to separate traffic safely. If you have to work harder to do that on some days, however annoying that may be, then it is what it is. That’s just one of the reason the job pays so well.

C.)It is quite common, and reasonable in my humble opinion, to add plenty of fuel when heading to EWR/LGA/DCA/IAD because of the statistical likelihood of holding/diverting when all data viewed during the planning phase indicated things would go smoothly. Historically speaking these airports see a higher incidence of holding/diversion on a vfr day. It’s a heavily trafficked airspace. Its a lucrative market, so most airlines are trying to get the biggest slice of the pie they can. When you mix those two things there isn’t a whole lot of room (literally) for error. Add to that the directs the flight gets along the way and the times the extra is not needed and they can end up needing to burn it off.

D.) Yes I am saying captains do add more fuel than planned on the release. And yes some of them do it without looking at the fuel. I had two back to back just the other day. How do I know they didn’t look at the release? It was a tanker leg and they still added more fuel than planned. And like what who’swho said, we had to re-plan them at a much lower altitude to burn off the extra so they would takeoff expecting to land within an appropriate landing weight.
 
CF34-3B1 said:
When you mix those two things there isn’t a whole lot of room (literally) for error
Click to expand...

there’s a lot less when someone is spinning 20 miles from the airport in the middle of a 60 hour push.

but I came here out of frustration. It’s the only airline where it’s an issue and our official complaints have gone unanswered. I don’t see how the company is ok with it cause y’all gotta be burning millions of dollars worth of gas at this point just spinning a hole in the ozone over NJ alone. It doesn’t matter if the weather is VFR or IFR, windy or not. It’s just every day with almost every single flight. A lot of the pilots haven’t helped either and wait til they’re cleared for the approach before they say they can’t land. But this isn’t Topeka, Kansas. We don’t have the airspace to accommodate someone spinning. I had to put Washington Center in a hold 2 days ago because I suddenly had to re-fit a Commutair that wasn’t supposed to be there and ran out of gaps in the sequence.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top