GypsyPilot
Mohawk Town
It certainly is an ordeal. I've had it happen once, and that was after a mistake by the fueler put us WAY over MLW. Even then, we were delayed by a couple hours by the time they completed defueling.
Forbes: American airlines brings fuel reserve guidelines to regionals - dispatchers balk
- Thread starter Kev
- Start date
It certainly is an ordeal. I've had it happen once, and that was after a mistake by the fueler put us WAY over MLW. Even then, we were delayed by a couple hours by the time they completed defueling.
learhawkerbe400
Well-Known Member
I flew that plane and have commuted PHL-ORF for three 3 years. I'm very aware of its limitations. I've had multiple Air Wisconsin crews defuel in situations just like this on this very same route. You guys acting like defueling is such a big deal are doing it wrong. At mainline I've done it 2-3 times and it never was an issue. I've done it at the regional level and watched other RJ crews do it too. It happens fairly often and is by no means out of the ordinary.
belgiumania
Well-Known Member
If they're not tracking alternate usage they're probably not tracking routing. PHL-ORF via CRW should do the trick.
Let's get creative here people.
Reek
Well-Known Member
They arent, just look at their canned route mci-clt.
belgiumania
Well-Known Member
One of my favorite things to do back when I was dispatching Saabs was to file them at FL250 on the long legs and watch them struggle to make 100fpm climbs above 220. There was a significant difference in climb rate depending on pax load.
Man after typing that out it sounds super lame.
Flagship_dxer
Penske Material
Ive had to defuel dozens upon dozens upon dozens of flights at mainline and several regionals. Its almost always a pain in the backside. Its almost always the last option because its easier and quicker to plan a higher enroute burn than to defuel.
learhawkerbe400
Well-Known Member
Ok you win.
SpiceWeasel
Tre Kronor
Why were you suggesting or telling another crew from another airline how to run their ship anyway? To me, that's right up there with telling someone you have the jumpseat. The thought process from there moves towards "nope, not taking a jumpseater".
Burrito
You ARE Freaking out. Man.
@learhawkerbe400 sorry you had a hard time buddy. The -200s aren't fun times for anyone, anywhere. (and I don't work nights so I know it wasn't me that burned you!)
Gonna play the ramp card here -- at an outstation it isn't a face card, but it's got some value in the discussion.
Regarding fuel/de-fuel, Wiggins in MHT operates a 6-truck (5-truck for years) fleet with every vehicle topped off and ready for use. In my 5-year history at the airfield, we've emptied one of the 250,000 gallon(!) tanks in a day - once after Boston had the fuel facility fire and required enroute fuel stops - and later during a JFK/EWR/BDL/BOS ground stop that put MHT, BTV, PWM and BGR in the news with some serious heavy metal diversions. "We're always open," so it's important to have the fleet topped off in case JBU, VRD, ASA, UAL, or whoever sends anything larger than a 737 our way. I left the ramp just under a year ago - and this August would have been 6 years for me. In that time we never had a dedicated defueler - and of our six-strong fleet - only 2 trucks could defuel. supposedly MHT just bought one in December...old as sin too. In the case of a larger airport, though, especially Philly, they very well may have defuelers hanging out. (and I've seen quite a few 10,000 gallon trucks all stacked up at the DHL Cargo apron just hanging out...)
MORE TO THE POINT, defueling is a royal pain in the ass. It DOES take a truck out of service, as "that fuel" needs to be refiltered, inventoried (Is it actually the airline's? Does it belong to a parent company, such as World Fuel Services?) before it can even be redistributed / mixed in with "other" jet fuel. I've also only defueled....once? Maybe twice. I know I had to take a megaton out of a Delta Mad Dog when the thing refused to fire off an engine on a supremely hot summer day. Took us almost an hour to extract the 3000 lbs out of the center tank. Then, when a rookie fueler unloaded his 5,000 gallon truck into a BWI-bound SWA 737 registered N490WN when he thought he was fueling a DEN-bound SWA 737 registered N480WN...that didn't go over well with our boss.
That's nice. Give me a $10,000 bonus for not having my name in red italics. No? Leave me alone.
Weird, I don't see management in there anywhere.
Especially since CRJ fuel panels are absolutely notorious for fuel roll -- almost 300 lbs per tank -- and are only accurate to the te-- Well, only display the tens, anyway. You'll see "2250" per tank for 4500 lbs of fuel if you need it -- but you'll most likely end up with 2460 in the left and 2310 in the right. Putting 5000 lbs in a -700/-900? Lol, have fun watching the digits go wild as you inject 300 gallons a minute into the wings.
Only planes worse than CRJs were the ones that said Airbus on the side.
Gonna play the ramp card here -- at an outstation it isn't a face card, but it's got some value in the discussion.
Regarding fuel/de-fuel, Wiggins in MHT operates a 6-truck (5-truck for years) fleet with every vehicle topped off and ready for use. In my 5-year history at the airfield, we've emptied one of the 250,000 gallon(!) tanks in a day - once after Boston had the fuel facility fire and required enroute fuel stops - and later during a JFK/EWR/BDL/BOS ground stop that put MHT, BTV, PWM and BGR in the news with some serious heavy metal diversions. "We're always open," so it's important to have the fleet topped off in case JBU, VRD, ASA, UAL, or whoever sends anything larger than a 737 our way. I left the ramp just under a year ago - and this August would have been 6 years for me. In that time we never had a dedicated defueler - and of our six-strong fleet - only 2 trucks could defuel. supposedly MHT just bought one in December...old as sin too. In the case of a larger airport, though, especially Philly, they very well may have defuelers hanging out. (and I've seen quite a few 10,000 gallon trucks all stacked up at the DHL Cargo apron just hanging out...)
MORE TO THE POINT, defueling is a royal pain in the ass. It DOES take a truck out of service, as "that fuel" needs to be refiltered, inventoried (Is it actually the airline's? Does it belong to a parent company, such as World Fuel Services?) before it can even be redistributed / mixed in with "other" jet fuel. I've also only defueled....once? Maybe twice. I know I had to take a megaton out of a Delta Mad Dog when the thing refused to fire off an engine on a supremely hot summer day. Took us almost an hour to extract the 3000 lbs out of the center tank. Then, when a rookie fueler unloaded his 5,000 gallon truck into a BWI-bound SWA 737 registered N490WN when he thought he was fueling a DEN-bound SWA 737 registered N480WN...that didn't go over well with our boss.
That's nice. Give me a $10,000 bonus for not having my name in red italics. No? Leave me alone.
Weird, I don't see management in there anywhere.
Especially since CRJ fuel panels are absolutely notorious for fuel roll -- almost 300 lbs per tank -- and are only accurate to the te-- Well, only display the tens, anyway. You'll see "2250" per tank for 4500 lbs of fuel if you need it -- but you'll most likely end up with 2460 in the left and 2310 in the right. Putting 5000 lbs in a -700/-900? Lol, have fun watching the digits go wild as you inject 300 gallons a minute into the wings.
Only planes worse than CRJs were the ones that said Airbus on the side.
F
Flying Saluki
Guest
American plans its flights to land with 75 minutes of fuel, and want's its regional partners to do the same? What's the problem
Flagship_dxer
Penske Material
The problem is Danny Persuit is fighting to keep his union job.
Zapphod Beblebrox
Inventor of the Pan Galactic Gargle Blaster
Danny's a good guy and does stand up for his people. It has been a largely rear guard action because the company puts so much pressure on the dispatchers to not increase above what the computer tells them. However I have never had to argue with one of these guys if we want more fuel. I was there for the "Fuel School" debacle and the people they hauled in were not trouble makers. they were international pilots who wanted a little more, average 2000 lbs,, for landing in PHL in the winter.
Pachong
Well-Known Member
Cuz you'll be planned .65 Mach and ATC will tell you max forward speed to keep from clogging up the system.
A
Adler
Guest
Tell them no?
F
Flying Saluki
Guest
My point was that 75 minutes of arrival fuel, regardless of planned speed, is plenty for SKC/no delay conditions. If conditions are other than that, there is an abundance of tools and data available to determine what is needed. Use them and make a decision based on facts, not just on what makes you feel "comfortable."
Last edited by a moderator:
Pachong
Well-Known Member
We did. That's why I'm alive. Gets old.
The problem is that managers and number crunchers want to get involved in the decision making process when they don't have the first clue of what's actually going on.
American planned their flights that way because the dispatchers got paid for it. It creates an unsafe situation and shame on the crews for accepting such low fuel loads. But hell, pay me an extra $17k a year and every one of my flights world divert too. Glad that's gone.
Flagship_dxer
Penske Material
The union is hoping to bring the PRP back as soon as they can should the JCBA pass. Fuel is cheap now but wont always be this way. They tried to fire dispatchers before the PRP for fuel usage and I have no doubt that they will do so again if fuel prices rise again. The PRP was the only thing that worked to bring fuel numbers down across the board.
