Pilots not allowed to have enough fuel?

[sharktooth]

Actually BOTH are responsible, but the Captain's gluteus is in the airplane. I've never seen anything but cooperation between Captains and Dispatchers. I wonder if somehow the company is generating some kind of "number" based on landing fuel of the airplane. I can't imagine that dispatchers have any hand in this at all, other than maybe they are suject to retraining in retribution as well.

While both may be held responsible (company directives, whatever), the "authority" is sole and falls "solely" on the captain, per FARs, unless they have recently been changed.

It is the old authority/responsibility scam the company pulls out every few years. They want you to be responsible for a flight without having the authority.

The pilot/dispatcher act is a shared responsibility, not a shared authority. The captain signs for and is given (by FAR) full authority for the entire flight, fuel load being only one area. It is only by the captain's authority that a flight legally operates at all.

I realize this may come across as enabling ego manics and certainly the authority part can easily go to someone's head, but, it has to be there, for good reason.

Sorry if you think I came across too strong but it seems very important for people to understand the difference between the two terms and what they entail.

 

[BugWash]

Oh. My. God.

This is really scary.

It's one thing to charge $2 for a drink. The passenger has an option.

It's one thing to charge for extra baggage. Most passengers would have an option, take it or leave it.

It's one thing to take out the entertainment. Most people bring their own.

But it is another thing entirely to not carry enough fuel! When the plane crashes and burns, there is no option.

Well, that is other than not buying a ticket on US Air.

What else is there to say. I hope this is not true.

 

[Piedmont1984]

If the plane runs out of fuel it probably won't burn much - but it will be near impossible to get to the gate on time.

 

[hp_fa]

Yeah, but think of it this way...

The way the airline has disenfranchised its best customers, who also tend to be higher earning and better educated, they will likely pay less in damages per passenger if and when the plane meats terra-wetta.

 

[allstrike]

If the plane runs out of fuel it probably won't burn much - but it will be near impossible to get to the gate on time.

LOL,so true. I was watching the stock ticker this morning and saw it going :down: :down: :down: then hit the news button and saw the 15 minute old story on market watch about the fuel issue.Stock prices did not recover.IMHO I predict 1.95 close for Tuesday.Doug should have held out for a better deal,but what the heck he can average down now.

This fuel story is really sad,next time Im in hold around Harrisburg waiting for slots in PHL,Ill be wishing Id bought a ticket on WN...

 

[bigbusdrvr]

I think you will find the basic add of fuel in the range of 3000lbs....ie 15-20 minutes at holding speeds....

Nobody would question anyone on this add if it were not for ( shall we say other issues.....)

How many times did these individuals hold????
How fast did they fly on the leg to philly?
Did they add fuel on the way to europe?
What time was their comutte home?

There are a substantial amount of airports short of Philly that can accomodate the 75/76...
have they ever diverted before???

If they are legitamately concerned about running out of fuel, then some groundschool and or discussion should allay those fears..
if they still feel uncomfortable, maybe long haul isnt suited for them??

if on the other hand they were "making their commute".....

 

[robbedagain]

at ABE we have in the past handled a BDA-PHL B-767 diversion and a 757 once. given that our runways are long enough--in particular Runway 6-24 is the longest. I believe that when we did have the diverted 76 (2 summers ago i think) they had circled for almost a half hr.

 

[N965VJ]

<SNIP> But it is another thing entirely to not carry enough fuel! When the plane crashes and burns, there is no option.

Let’s not get too mellow dramatic.

Tempe’s dumb, but our pilots (east *and* west) aren’t.

 

[KCFlyer]

Just curious, but if the idea is to save fuel, doesn't a jet burn a heckuva lot more fuel on takeoff than it does in cruise? So by having to land to take on more fuel because they didn't have enough to make the trip, aren't they burning MORE on takeoff and climb out from the diversion city?

 

[BuffaloJoe]

LOL,so true. I was watching the stock ticker this morning and saw it going :down: :down: :down: then hit the news button and saw the 15 minute old story on market watch about the fuel issue.Stock prices did not recover.IMHO I predict 1.95 close for Tuesday.Doug should have held out for a better deal,but what the heck he can average down now.

This fuel story is really sad,next time Im in hold around Harrisburg waiting for slots in PHL,Ill be wishing Id bought a ticket on WN...

WN are willing to land on Runways 26 and 35 in PHL.

 

[pit_till_death]

IT'S HAPPENING ALL THE TIME!!!

A friend of mine (allegedly)just worked ATH-PHL this week. They(allegedly) had to divert to BOS for fuel and apparently this has been(allegedly) happening all summer because (according to the Captain on that flight) they are being admonished and taken to task for requesting additional fuel(that may be needed due to weather or jet stream conditions)--allegedly. Additionally, on this flight previous years, during the heat of summer, there was a passenger load restriction that was necessary in order for the aircraft to make it from ATH-PHL without diverting for fuel. Well this year, the company has instead opted to fill the plane up and grab all the revenue it can and have the plane divert for fuel ---which it has many times this summer. Missed connections, angry passengers, pressured pilots, questionable safe-operation practices, additional takeoffs/landings........

When the pilots get the releases for their flights out of ATH they are often not even for ATH-PHL, rather they are for ATH-BGR or ATH-BOS(allegedly)..........

OH YEAH.....Tempe is full of GREAT IDEAS.....

Keep the revenue coming in......

( the above is just my opinion, I'm not in the mood for another Tempe requested "meeting" this week..)

A plane will never divert for fuel just simply to carry all of the passengers. This is an assinine assumption. The ONLY reason an aircraft is fuel stopped (overseas) is because of a weight issue.

Dispatch and CLP do everything in their power to ensure that there is no fuel stop......Headwinds are calculated, temperatures are adjusted, child counts are requested....etc.


Nobody wants or causes a fuel stop. These statements are just crazy.

 

[giantfan]

pit,

How dare you bring reasoning and sanity to this thread? GF

 

[allstrike]

WN are willing to land on Runways 26 and 35 in PHL.

Ya Joe Delaware bay aint that wide,lol. Anyway heres another pre market alert for today.

http://www.tradingmarkets.com/.site/news/S...20News/1758530/

This may be there undoing guys and gals. :down:

New news also.Are they talking about tax right offs here,Im cornfused.
http://www.marketwatch.com/news/story/us-a...95749CD9FA09%7D

 

[pit_till_death]

pit,

How dare you bring reasoning and sanity to this thread? GF

Sorry GF,

You're right, what in the world was I thinking?????????????????????? Saying something that actually makes sense. That's not like me anyway, is it????


Pit

 

[US Oringinal]

July 9, 2008 ATH-PHL .....and apparently many other days this summer--divert to BOS for fuel