|
Originally Posted by wombat watcher
(Post 10268365)
if you have a fast flight plan and take all the optimum levels , how can you burn through your alternate fuel and contingency fuel? That’s a helluva lot of fuel to go down.
Originally Posted by Capt Fathom
(Post 10268368)
How do you know they weren't at Max Take Off Weight ex LA and unable to put on extra gas?
|
Originally Posted by krismiler
(Post 10267002)
Concorde once landed at Heathrow with so little fuel that when it arrived on the stand, the nose was too far up for the aero bridge to be connected. It had to be partially refueled before the passengers could disembark. I was at EGLL one morning, when one Concorde couldn't even make the stand, it has to be towed in --- that is really cutting it fine. Please all remember that the 30m FFR is to ensure all engines are running at touchdown, given the vagaries of fuel contents and consumption order of accuracy -- an engineering fact of life --- 30 minutes holding, calculated or indicated, could be zero minutes in fact. There are bleeding good reasons for establishing the ICAO SARP --- in the accident and serious incident history. Tootle pip!! |
Originally Posted by swh
(Post 10268388)
The extra burn was on average around 1 lb/minute, the profile flown was not as planned. Over 14+ hours it adds up.
According to the United internal communication over the event, they only took the full fuel required under their OpsSpec. are you serious: 1lb per minute. That’s 27 kg per hour which is less than 400kg over the whole sector and you are calling that out as mismanagement. The stupid STARS and vectors that have to be flown at SYD use more than that. |
| All times are GMT. The time now is 01:32. |
Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.