AA in the west country
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: earth
Posts: 81
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Again, hardly any fuel. It proberbly burned about 12 tonnes to Tenerife and had a ramp fule load of approx 17 tonnes, where as to the states a ramp figure of 65 tonnes a burn of approx 58 tonnes would be the norm. Slight difference in weight
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Bristol
Posts: 256
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
T_I-F
As I think MV has rightly said before the airlines would not come into an airport to start detailed discussions if the logistics were incorrect.
To me this would say that both AA and CO think that flying to and from BRS is a viable option with, or without a full load!!!
As I think MV has rightly said before the airlines would not come into an airport to start detailed discussions if the logistics were incorrect.
To me this would say that both AA and CO think that flying to and from BRS is a viable option with, or without a full load!!!
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Luton
Posts: 25
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I doubt CO or AA will be able to use a 767 or 777 aircraft due to take off performance and weight restrictions due to the length of BRS runway. Britannia have used a 767 BGI last winter but with a much reduced passenger load. A widebody with full fuel, passengers and baggage would be able to take off with reduced fuel and tech stop in either SNN or BGR. My Travel 767-300s sometimes tech stop in BGR on their fortnightly CWL-SFB and as previously stated CWL runway is a "bit" longer!
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: UK
Posts: 14
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I think the favoured option is a 757 with perhaps somewhere in the region of 180 pax. More room/comfort for the businessmen and less weight. There's always the option to upgrade to a 767 on the route in a couple of years when the runway is extended! 
Join Date: Mar 1999
Location: Ashbourne Co Meath Ireland
Age: 73
Posts: 470
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Living dangerously, but this is a rumour network <g>
CO operate to Ireland at present, in summer they run 767-400's to Dublin and Shannon, winter is a 757 that covers both, but it's a pain all ways round, given the problems of the very short sector, and it also means that CO lose freight contracts in the winter, as there's just not enough room on the 757 for much cargo.
I am just wondering if maybe someone is about to put together a deal that keepS SNN being served, ( the Irish Govt agreement insists on it at present) by flying to BRS as well, with ( say) a 757, and that way CO can then operate the 767-4 to DUB, which will allow them to keep the freight contracts all the year round.
Only wondering, nothing specific to base it on, but it might be a way that they are going to do it.
Might even put a 767-4 on to SNN/BRS, in that it should be able to get out of BRS to SNN with no problems at all.
As I said at the start, this is a rumour network, but I could see that being of interest to CO, given that the 757 is pretty full these days , even in the depth of winter.
CO operate to Ireland at present, in summer they run 767-400's to Dublin and Shannon, winter is a 757 that covers both, but it's a pain all ways round, given the problems of the very short sector, and it also means that CO lose freight contracts in the winter, as there's just not enough room on the 757 for much cargo.
I am just wondering if maybe someone is about to put together a deal that keepS SNN being served, ( the Irish Govt agreement insists on it at present) by flying to BRS as well, with ( say) a 757, and that way CO can then operate the 767-4 to DUB, which will allow them to keep the freight contracts all the year round.
Only wondering, nothing specific to base it on, but it might be a way that they are going to do it.
Might even put a 767-4 on to SNN/BRS, in that it should be able to get out of BRS to SNN with no problems at all.
As I said at the start, this is a rumour network, but I could see that being of interest to CO, given that the 757 is pretty full these days , even in the depth of winter.
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: earth
Posts: 81
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
My Travel 767-300s sometimes tech stop in BGR on their fortnightly CWL-SFB and as previously stated CWL runway is a "bit" longer!
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Luton
Posts: 25
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Terror is Firmer
My Travel operate SFB weekly in summer but fortnighlty in winter months. In winter months, due to low air pressure at CWL and dependant on winds across the pond, the 767-300 has had to tech stop on a number of occasions at BGR.
Hope that clears that up
Best Regards
My Travel operate SFB weekly in summer but fortnighlty in winter months. In winter months, due to low air pressure at CWL and dependant on winds across the pond, the 767-300 has had to tech stop on a number of occasions at BGR.
Hope that clears that up
Best Regards
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: UK
Posts: 9
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hey Taff Lad - hows it going?!!
I agree with what Taff Lad says. From an aircraft performance point of view the 767-300 has had to tech stop in BGR in winter months due to weather constraints both or either at CWL and across the atlantic. I remember those days well Taff!
Not sure about the performance of a 767-400 out of BRS with current runway length and ramp space but would be fun to watch!!
I agree with what Taff Lad says. From an aircraft performance point of view the 767-300 has had to tech stop in BGR in winter months due to weather constraints both or either at CWL and across the atlantic. I remember those days well Taff!
Not sure about the performance of a 767-400 out of BRS with current runway length and ramp space but would be fun to watch!!
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: earth
Posts: 81
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
My Travel operate SFB weekly in summer but fortnighlty in winter months. In winter months, due to low air pressure at CWL and dependant on winds across the pond, the 767-300 has had to tech stop on a number of occasions at BGR.
Air Transat operate for the summer season aswell.
The only transatlantic route out of Cardif in during the winter season is Britannia's 763 to BGI which operates direct and with a full load once a month on behalf of Fred Olsen.
Hope that clears things up.
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: UK
Posts: 9
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Mr Terror is Firmer
They may not operate it last winter / this winter. Dont know and to be honest dont really care (as no longer based at CWL). BUT my friend you will find that they have indeed operated this flight ex CWL in the winter as I used to operate on them and personally remember going via BGR on a good few occasions.
Now hope that clears it up!!!!!!
They may not operate it last winter / this winter. Dont know and to be honest dont really care (as no longer based at CWL). BUT my friend you will find that they have indeed operated this flight ex CWL in the winter as I used to operate on them and personally remember going via BGR on a good few occasions.
Now hope that clears it up!!!!!!
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: UK
Posts: 1,294
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The flight has been direct for as long as I can remember, also I am unaware of any airborne diversions.
Can't say that it has never happened as it obviously has, but certainly not in the last 4 years.
Can't say that it has never happened as it obviously has, but certainly not in the last 4 years.
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: UK
Posts: 9
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hi Flower
The flight was always advertised as direct but only "tech" stopped in BGR on a couple of occassions if winds were high / air pressure low and unable to fly direct then due to take off performance ex CWL with full fuel - hence the tech stop in BGR. In the summer months take off performance was great ex CWL so no issues!
The flight was always advertised as direct but only "tech" stopped in BGR on a couple of occassions if winds were high / air pressure low and unable to fly direct then due to take off performance ex CWL with full fuel - hence the tech stop in BGR. In the summer months take off performance was great ex CWL so no issues!
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: earth
Posts: 81
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I used to work for Servisair at CWL and we were tasked with creating an ETOPS plot for the flight deck. To do this we had to read the flight plan. The flight plan tells the crew how much fuel to uplift for the flight, it also tells them of any RTOW's. The only reason it would have to make a "tech stop" would be if there was an RTOW. As far as I can remember there has very rarley been any RTOW's and those flights that were restricted were still within limits for a direct flight.
Give My Travel a call on (0161) 2326600 and ask them how many times they have made a "tech stop" in the last 5 years.
Give My Travel a call on (0161) 2326600 and ask them how many times they have made a "tech stop" in the last 5 years.
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: UK
Posts: 9
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Dear Terror is Firmer
I am so pleased that you used to do the long haul dispatch called Level 2 dispatch. All that involved is reading the trans atlantic way points and plotting it. Also plotting the nat track above and below including the max distances between the alternate diversion airports. The plog (flight Plan) may still say CWL to SFB on the top but when the crew report that is when the final aircraft performance calculations takes place. A crew deciding to go into BGR on a tech stop will have no bearing on your plott that you will have kindly completed.
I actually flew the plan on the aeroplane. Now, the RTOW (restricted Take Off Weight) applies to every single flight any aircraft does. The figure is different as each different aircraft type has a different RTOW. Now, the aircraft performance is measured against both the RTOW and weather along with other limiting factors. A tech stop is usually needed when the weight of the aircraft is too heavy in comparison with the runway length, hence affecting the v1 value (if you dont know whaty v1 is then please look it up)
Therefore this should hopefully explain the reasoning. And just for your info Terror, we also tech stop out of other UK bases that you wouldnt expect us to due to the fact that they have a lot of long haul. However a harsh winter can cause such problems!!
I am so pleased that you used to do the long haul dispatch called Level 2 dispatch. All that involved is reading the trans atlantic way points and plotting it. Also plotting the nat track above and below including the max distances between the alternate diversion airports. The plog (flight Plan) may still say CWL to SFB on the top but when the crew report that is when the final aircraft performance calculations takes place. A crew deciding to go into BGR on a tech stop will have no bearing on your plott that you will have kindly completed.
I actually flew the plan on the aeroplane. Now, the RTOW (restricted Take Off Weight) applies to every single flight any aircraft does. The figure is different as each different aircraft type has a different RTOW. Now, the aircraft performance is measured against both the RTOW and weather along with other limiting factors. A tech stop is usually needed when the weight of the aircraft is too heavy in comparison with the runway length, hence affecting the v1 value (if you dont know whaty v1 is then please look it up)
Therefore this should hopefully explain the reasoning. And just for your info Terror, we also tech stop out of other UK bases that you wouldnt expect us to due to the fact that they have a lot of long haul. However a harsh winter can cause such problems!!
Last edited by CWLSWS; 15th Jul 2004 at 14:32.
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Europe
Posts: 147
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Well, times change but many moons ago when I did Perf 'A' RTOW stood for REGULATED Take off weight!!!
Take-off weight is regulated by one of three things usually, the structural limit of the aircraft, the landing weight limit of the aircraft or the temperature and pressure at the airfield of departure and the length of the runway in use, obstacles etc. etc.
The most limiting of these became the Regulating Take Off Weight and would vary according to weather and other factors.
Can't find my Perf A handbook now but it had a list of definitions on the inside cover. As I have said, times and things do change so RTOW may have been changed since those days!
Take-off weight is regulated by one of three things usually, the structural limit of the aircraft, the landing weight limit of the aircraft or the temperature and pressure at the airfield of departure and the length of the runway in use, obstacles etc. etc.
The most limiting of these became the Regulating Take Off Weight and would vary according to weather and other factors.
Can't find my Perf A handbook now but it had a list of definitions on the inside cover. As I have said, times and things do change so RTOW may have been changed since those days!
Thread Starter
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Florida
Posts: 102
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I don't think that it would be a problem for an AA 767 to operate out of BRS, when you consider that an AA 767-300 will a full pax load only carries 207 punters, whereas a BY 767-300 will carry between 315 and 328 depending on config. Also, the AA flights would not be carrying the bucket and spade brigade with their max baggage allowance, sombrero's and hi-fi systems........More of your business type travellers with walk-on suitcases and laptops.............
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Luton
Posts: 25
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I agree fescalised portion but transatlantic flights allow passengers two checked in items no more that 35 kgs each (weight may have changed slightly but that was what it was last november when I flew with AA ex LGW) so even tho less punters there is still possibility of heavy baggage.
Join Date: Nov 1999
Location: Ireland
Posts: 1,621
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Taff Lad:
A few heavy bags aren't going to bring the weight of an AA transatlantic 767 up by *that* much. What will add quite a bit is the belly hold cargo - which, I'd assume, would contribute quite a lot to the route's profitability (less likely to be the case with BY to the sun).
A few heavy bags aren't going to bring the weight of an AA transatlantic 767 up by *that* much. What will add quite a bit is the belly hold cargo - which, I'd assume, would contribute quite a lot to the route's profitability (less likely to be the case with BY to the sun).
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: UK
Posts: 9
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hi Cyrano - I happen to agree with Taff on this one. During route evaluation this has to be taken into account.
Think of the maths - ok so your loosing those seats but instead of the bucket and spaders having their usual 20kgs (and yes they get only 20kgs for long haul too unless they have special package) you are increasing that to 70kgs. Those who do load control will realise that that figure is the weight of a female passenger on a load sheet (give or take a couple of kilos depending which carrier you work for)
When carriers do performance caluclations about an airfield they cant "hope" that passengers wont take all their entitled allowance. Plan for worse case scenario. So yes - it could make the difference.
On the second point - Cargo - charter carriers do carry a lot of cargo these days espeacilly on their 767s for example as forward hold is hardly used for baggage. So yes we carry cargo and I certanly know BY carry quite a large amount of cargo too.
Think of the maths - ok so your loosing those seats but instead of the bucket and spaders having their usual 20kgs (and yes they get only 20kgs for long haul too unless they have special package) you are increasing that to 70kgs. Those who do load control will realise that that figure is the weight of a female passenger on a load sheet (give or take a couple of kilos depending which carrier you work for)
When carriers do performance caluclations about an airfield they cant "hope" that passengers wont take all their entitled allowance. Plan for worse case scenario. So yes - it could make the difference.
On the second point - Cargo - charter carriers do carry a lot of cargo these days espeacilly on their 767s for example as forward hold is hardly used for baggage. So yes we carry cargo and I certanly know BY carry quite a large amount of cargo too.