cutting fuel to cut costs?
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Asia
Posts: 335
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Who to blame
Robert Dr_gonzo:
If you want to lay blame in this case, maybe you should be investigating airport authorities. Especially here in Asia.
In our company we have had several diverts in Manilla and elsewhere around Asia because of a "VIP movement".
A VIP movement is when some dignitary is using the airport, so here in Asia they shut the whole airport to incoming traffic. If you happen to be inbound you wait. You can wait along time.
Most weather or system related delays are known about well in advance, or more fairly the potential for delays is known. These potential delays are planned for to the best of our abilities as flight crew and airlines. However VIP movements are not announced with enough advance notice for anyone to carry enough fuel to wait them out. Especially when you might be at the end of a 10 to 15 hour flight. They can create up to one hour or more delay. The reason being, once the airport is closed to incoming traffic, the traffic backs up. So if you are the last in the que, chances are you are not carrying and extra hour and a half of fuel. The enviromental cost alone of every aircraft carrying an extra 1 1/2 hours fuel over and above normal fuel would be prohibitive. In the Manilla case it is the best choice to land at Clark and wait it out. You save fuel, and Clark is right there beside Manilla so you really do not add much time to the delay.
So put the blame where it should be applied : on the countries and airports that slam the door with little or no notice when they need to get someone "important" away on holliday.
FG
If you want to lay blame in this case, maybe you should be investigating airport authorities. Especially here in Asia.
In our company we have had several diverts in Manilla and elsewhere around Asia because of a "VIP movement".
A VIP movement is when some dignitary is using the airport, so here in Asia they shut the whole airport to incoming traffic. If you happen to be inbound you wait. You can wait along time.
Most weather or system related delays are known about well in advance, or more fairly the potential for delays is known. These potential delays are planned for to the best of our abilities as flight crew and airlines. However VIP movements are not announced with enough advance notice for anyone to carry enough fuel to wait them out. Especially when you might be at the end of a 10 to 15 hour flight. They can create up to one hour or more delay. The reason being, once the airport is closed to incoming traffic, the traffic backs up. So if you are the last in the que, chances are you are not carrying and extra hour and a half of fuel. The enviromental cost alone of every aircraft carrying an extra 1 1/2 hours fuel over and above normal fuel would be prohibitive. In the Manilla case it is the best choice to land at Clark and wait it out. You save fuel, and Clark is right there beside Manilla so you really do not add much time to the delay.
So put the blame where it should be applied : on the countries and airports that slam the door with little or no notice when they need to get someone "important" away on holliday.
FG
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Surrounded by aluminum, and the great outdoors
Posts: 3,780
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Straight from the horses' mouth the GF flight was NOT low on fuel...how did this story get so screwed up??? It arrived over MNL to encounter a VIP movement, then diverted to it's FLIGHT PLANNED ALTERNATE....how many flights arrive at their destination with enough fuel to hold for an undetermined amount of time???? good grief people...
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: In a far better place
Posts: 2,480
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Oh by the way I just loved your opening statement. Hey but what the heck, since this is your first job with the adults you are excused for your assinine statement. But don't worry, your ignorance and arrogance will hopefully give way with maturity and experience.
Have a nice day
Last edited by captjns; 11th Jan 2007 at 15:51.
Plumbum Pendular
Join Date: Aug 1999
Location: Avionics Bay
Age: 55
Posts: 1,117
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I rest my case, you know nothing of what happens outside of the US.
No, they are the dispatcher, employed by the handling agent.
We do not have a dispatch centre.
My Company and most UK airlines do not employ dispatchers and if they did they would certainly not do what the US dispatchers do.
Please get into your very sheltered brain that the system in the UK and mostof the rest of the world is completely different to the US.
Evidently your experince is limited to your very sheltered world which leads to your ignorance and arrogance.
Have you ever flown outside of the Americas?
No, they are the dispatcher, employed by the handling agent.
We do not have a dispatch centre.
My Company and most UK airlines do not employ dispatchers and if they did they would certainly not do what the US dispatchers do.
Please get into your very sheltered brain that the system in the UK and mostof the rest of the world is completely different to the US.
But ignorance and arrogance gives way with maturity and experience
Have you ever flown outside of the Americas?
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: In a far better place
Posts: 2,480
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I rest my case, you know nothing of what happens outside of the US.
No, they are the dispatcher, employed by the handling agent.
We do not have a dispatch centre.
My Company and most UK airlines do not employ dispatchers and if they did they would certainly not do what the US dispatchers do.
Please get into your very sheltered brain that the system in the UK and mostof the rest of the world is completely different to the US.
Evidently your experince is limited to your very sheltered world which leads to your ignorance and arrogance.
Have you ever flown outside of the Americas?
No, they are the dispatcher, employed by the handling agent.
We do not have a dispatch centre.
My Company and most UK airlines do not employ dispatchers and if they did they would certainly not do what the US dispatchers do.
Please get into your very sheltered brain that the system in the UK and mostof the rest of the world is completely different to the US.
Evidently your experince is limited to your very sheltered world which leads to your ignorance and arrogance.
Have you ever flown outside of the Americas?
Check your operations manuals junior. By the way you need to watch your manners, or you'll be sent to bed with out dinner.
Plumbum Pendular
Join Date: Aug 1999
Location: Avionics Bay
Age: 55
Posts: 1,117
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
All of the relevant data is complied
We do not have a dispatch centre.
Have you ever flown outside of the Americas?
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: In a far better place
Posts: 2,480
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Now let's see... have I flown outside of the US... hmm. Europe... not that's outside the US... Asia that's too, Africa, South America... hmmm. yeah I think I have flown out of the US. But hey wait a minute does New York and England qualify??? Help me out here.
What relevant data for flight??? Come on rookie, I'm not going to do your homework... look at your Operations Manual for the information required by your captain before your flight is dispatched.
Good luck with your flight training.
What relevant data for flight??? Come on rookie, I'm not going to do your homework... look at your Operations Manual for the information required by your captain before your flight is dispatched.
Good luck with your flight training.
Last edited by captjns; 11th Jan 2007 at 16:26.
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: England
Posts: 1,389
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Perhaps someone more knowledgable than me could help the OP understand some more of the reasons why a divert for fuel might be required. For example not being able to fly at the planned height or ????
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: In a far better place
Posts: 2,480
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
A good example could be the failure of a system in flight after departure, ie..ant-ice system becomes inoperative during flight. The route of flight would have to be adjsuted to avoid known areas of icing conditions.
Per Ardua ad Astraeus
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: UK
Posts: 18,579
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
cwatters - there are numerous threads on PPRune about fuel reserves/diversions/short of fuel etc - search will locate. There are many reasons why I may not arrive in the destination area with enough fuel to continue to destination at the expected landing time, even if I have taken the company 'minimum'/'required' fuel, added on some for mum or even had shortcuts and more favourable winds. Too many variables to list.
Are you familiar with the term 'contingency fuel'? If not, that would be a good place to start.
Are you familiar with the term 'contingency fuel'? If not, that would be a good place to start.
Plumbum Pendular
Join Date: Aug 1999
Location: Avionics Bay
Age: 55
Posts: 1,117
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Lets just say that I have flown extensively long haul and short haul from both seats at the pointy end.
As you have flown outside of the US I am suprised at your ignorance of what happens outside of the US but then you do have dispatchers sheltering you and your Capt from the world outside!
For the record I notice that you have edited your last post from:
Here is the message that has just been posted:
***************
---Quote (Originally by fmgc)---
Be more specific, what data?
---End Quote---
I'm not going to do your homework... look at your Operations Manual.
Hey just for the record, are you cabin crew or a junior F/O in training?
***************
to it's current incarnation.
We have an operations department that will decide on the Co route that we will fly and liaise with ATC with regards to CTOTs (slots). The PLOGs that we pull from the computers will show that route and the alternates and the minimum fuel required for that route and the primary alternate.
It is then up to the FO & I to decide how much fuel we will carry bearing in mind the met & NOTAMs that we will also have printed off and studied (no dispatchers to brief us on the met).
We will then pass that fuel figure onto the handling agent (dispatcher) who will then produce the load sheet. He/She will organise the baggage handlers, liaise with me as to which holds the bags and freight should go into, call the refuellers, ask me for when it is OK to release the PAX etc.
There are only a handful of disptachers in the UK who have the dispatch licence that you issue in the US. They are normally employed by handling agents that handle airlines that insist on being dispatched by a US licenced dispatcher.
In the UK we do not have dispatchers who get involved in fuel decisions and who follow flights.
I think that Wiki here describes the differences very well:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flight_dispatcher
Notice:
and:
Pretty much blows your "ergo the reason for joint dispatch authority" theory.
Now will you accept the fact that the system in the UK is different to that in the US?
You will also have to acknowledge, junior, that I knew about these differences and you did not, therefore my knowledge and experince would seem to be superior to yours, but that is all very petty and childish though.
As you have flown outside of the US I am suprised at your ignorance of what happens outside of the US but then you do have dispatchers sheltering you and your Capt from the world outside!
For the record I notice that you have edited your last post from:
Here is the message that has just been posted:
***************
---Quote (Originally by fmgc)---
Be more specific, what data?
---End Quote---
I'm not going to do your homework... look at your Operations Manual.
Hey just for the record, are you cabin crew or a junior F/O in training?
***************
We have an operations department that will decide on the Co route that we will fly and liaise with ATC with regards to CTOTs (slots). The PLOGs that we pull from the computers will show that route and the alternates and the minimum fuel required for that route and the primary alternate.
It is then up to the FO & I to decide how much fuel we will carry bearing in mind the met & NOTAMs that we will also have printed off and studied (no dispatchers to brief us on the met).
We will then pass that fuel figure onto the handling agent (dispatcher) who will then produce the load sheet. He/She will organise the baggage handlers, liaise with me as to which holds the bags and freight should go into, call the refuellers, ask me for when it is OK to release the PAX etc.
There are only a handful of disptachers in the UK who have the dispatch licence that you issue in the US. They are normally employed by handling agents that handle airlines that insist on being dispatched by a US licenced dispatcher.
In the UK we do not have dispatchers who get involved in fuel decisions and who follow flights.
I think that Wiki here describes the differences very well:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flight_dispatcher
Notice:
JAR OPS 1 did not mandate the use of an operational control system with flight dispatchers/joint responsibility/flight watch.
Now will you accept the fact that the system in the UK is different to that in the US?
You will also have to acknowledge, junior, that I knew about these differences and you did not, therefore my knowledge and experince would seem to be superior to yours, but that is all very petty and childish though.
I flew the DC-10 for a UK operator (Laker) many years ago and the fuel load was very much left to the discretion of the crew but it was explained, in training, that every time you took an extra 10 tonnes of fuel it took 1 tonne of extra fuel to get it there.
I then went to a Part 121 operator at JFK and that company policy was to take Plog fuel unless there was a huge reason to do otherwise.
Initially, I viewed this idea as akin to catching leprosy but I got to like it. It took all the guesswork out of the equation. When you bowled up over Long Island and the man said "take up the hold at Mickey intersection at F250" then it was very easy to say that I do not have such fuel so "organise a divert to Bradley please".
This took ALL of the guesswork out of the equation and saved you going round in circles for ages whilst pursuing a lost cause.
I then went to a Part 121 operator at JFK and that company policy was to take Plog fuel unless there was a huge reason to do otherwise.
Initially, I viewed this idea as akin to catching leprosy but I got to like it. It took all the guesswork out of the equation. When you bowled up over Long Island and the man said "take up the hold at Mickey intersection at F250" then it was very easy to say that I do not have such fuel so "organise a divert to Bradley please".
This took ALL of the guesswork out of the equation and saved you going round in circles for ages whilst pursuing a lost cause.
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: In a far better place
Posts: 2,480
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Sorry... wikipedia is not JAA, IAA, CAA, or FARs. Your company manuals dictate procedures... not wikipedia which can be accessed and edited with any account for any wannabee such as yourself. Oh better yet, when your chief pilot asks you what you were thinking of when you asked for high speed within the London TMA, you can just tell him about wikipedia.
Anyway the initial premise of this thread was about fuel not about dispatch/relesae procedures related to company specifics.
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: fl
Posts: 2,525
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Once or twice a year I have added fuel because I knew things the dispatchers didn't. Most of the time those fuel adjustments made the difference between diverting or not. The rest of the time they are just trying to minimize fuel burn on your flight and you should cooperate with them since you are both on the same side. Just see if it makes sense. 95% of the time they do a great job so let them do it.
Join Date: May 2006
Location: 2 m South of Radstock VRP
Posts: 2,042
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Apologies in advance for drifting several dots off Thread but is there ever any pressure to "tanker" fuel from low cost sources to high cost ones?
The UK and, for that matter, European tree huggers seem hell bent on changing the Duty and Tax rules on AVTUR. If this comes about, it would become cheaper to refuel in, say, Casablanca than it would in UK. Would this encourage the carriage of max fuel loads from the low cost regions. I wouldn't see this becoming a safety matter but more a false carbon dioxide/oil reserves economy by the environmentalists. Is that scenario a possibility?
The UK and, for that matter, European tree huggers seem hell bent on changing the Duty and Tax rules on AVTUR. If this comes about, it would become cheaper to refuel in, say, Casablanca than it would in UK. Would this encourage the carriage of max fuel loads from the low cost regions. I wouldn't see this becoming a safety matter but more a false carbon dioxide/oil reserves economy by the environmentalists. Is that scenario a possibility?
Plumbum Pendular
Join Date: Aug 1999
Location: Avionics Bay
Age: 55
Posts: 1,117
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Anyway the initial premise of this thread was about fuel not about dispatch/relesae procedures related to company specifics.
No Wiki is not my Ops Manual but in this instance the information it gives is correct.
Will you please accept that in the UK there is no dispatcher sharing legal responsibility with the Capt for the flight like you have in the US?
Go on, be a real man, and admit it, you were wrong. A good pilot must always appreciate when he/she is wrong, would be dangerous otherwise.
Join Date: Jun 2000
Posts: 159
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Apologies in advance for drifting several dots off Thread but is there ever any pressure to "tanker" fuel from low cost sources to high cost ones?
The UK and, for that matter, European tree huggers seem hell bent on changing the Duty and Tax rules on AVTUR. If this comes about, it would become cheaper to refuel in, say, Casablanca than it would in UK. Would this encourage the carriage of max fuel loads from the low cost regions. I wouldn't see this becoming a safety matter but more a false carbon dioxide/oil reserves economy by the environmentalists. Is that scenario a possibility?
The UK and, for that matter, European tree huggers seem hell bent on changing the Duty and Tax rules on AVTUR. If this comes about, it would become cheaper to refuel in, say, Casablanca than it would in UK. Would this encourage the carriage of max fuel loads from the low cost regions. I wouldn't see this becoming a safety matter but more a false carbon dioxide/oil reserves economy by the environmentalists. Is that scenario a possibility?
Wouldn't call it "pressure" though. More like "encouragement". And operators of all sizes have been doing it for many years, so definitively not an environmental advantage.
Join Date: Aug 1998
Location: UK
Posts: 105
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I fly worldwide for a UK charter operator. In common with most UK comments so far, we have a plog which calculates the minimum fuel required using the most accurate weights, winds etc available, and then the F/O & I decide how much fuel we want to carry. There is no input from dispatchers or similar. There is no pressure from management to carry minimum fuel, or inquisition when we carry extra, but we have had aircrew notices asking us to consider carrying less extra fuel without reason, with an explanation of the financial penalties of unnecessary extra fuel.
We also have plog suggestions about tankering fuel when economically worthwhile, but again no inquisition/pressure. In 20 years with this company I have never been asked about how much fuel I have/have not carried.
We also have plog suggestions about tankering fuel when economically worthwhile, but again no inquisition/pressure. In 20 years with this company I have never been asked about how much fuel I have/have not carried.
Join Date: Nov 1999
Location: East Midlands
Posts: 723
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Bubbers44
Thank you. From an Ops guy (UK) you have just posted how it should be.
GZB
Tanking fuel is simple, and makes a big dollar difference. The plog calculates for the Crew and Ops guy +/- per 1000 Kg carried. Not through savings, but say as through a field where fuel is 200% base price, you bet we don't tanker. likewise if it is 85% of base price, fill the tanks.
Like you fill the the car at Tesco, but the call made by a computer.
Bored
Edit, missed a word, DOH
GZB
Tanking fuel is simple, and makes a big dollar difference. The plog calculates for the Crew and Ops guy +/- per 1000 Kg carried. Not through savings, but say as through a field where fuel is 200% base price, you bet we don't tanker. likewise if it is 85% of base price, fill the tanks.
Like you fill the the car at Tesco, but the call made by a computer.
Bored
Edit, missed a word, DOH
Last edited by boredcounter; 17th Jan 2007 at 09:17.
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Asia
Posts: 335
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Easy Kids ! Put the scissors down
Fmgc and Capt Jns:
You guys are really splitting hairs. Having flown under both systems ( licenced dispatcher and self dispatch) I can tell you that they are almost the same. You are still provided with the same information ie company recommended fuel, weather, winds, Flight levels and traffic etc. The only difference with self dispatch, is the guy behind the counter (or entering data into the computer ) does not have a legal stake in the final decision.
The buck still rests with the Pilots. In both systems you can go with the recommended fuel and accept the outcome, or you can anticipate something not covered by the plan and take more (or less even) if the stuation dictates.
Fmgc: I object, a little, to the insinuation that the US system is somehow weak. In this business you can never have too much information ! You can also learn from everyone.
Cptn Jns: An anti-ice failure is a very unlikely reason to divert. The most common reasons are (and not in any order IMHO) medical emergencies (sick pax), unforecast weather deteriation (thunderstorms and snow), in the case of Cat 1 only aircraft - wx below limits, mechanical en-route (ie eng shut down) or on the ground (blown tires on the runway can close an airport), in Asia VIP movements etc., wind outside of aircraft limits.
These are just a few. Most are known and you take the extra fuel but still get delayed far longer than expected so might have to divert. It hits long haul the most as there is a greater chance of other factors stacking up along the route.
As I have said before if the passangers realised the proffesionalism and decision making skills needed to get a large passanger jet from A to B, perhaps piloting as a proffesion would still garner the respect it once had.
FG
You guys are really splitting hairs. Having flown under both systems ( licenced dispatcher and self dispatch) I can tell you that they are almost the same. You are still provided with the same information ie company recommended fuel, weather, winds, Flight levels and traffic etc. The only difference with self dispatch, is the guy behind the counter (or entering data into the computer ) does not have a legal stake in the final decision.
The buck still rests with the Pilots. In both systems you can go with the recommended fuel and accept the outcome, or you can anticipate something not covered by the plan and take more (or less even) if the stuation dictates.
Fmgc: I object, a little, to the insinuation that the US system is somehow weak. In this business you can never have too much information ! You can also learn from everyone.
Cptn Jns: An anti-ice failure is a very unlikely reason to divert. The most common reasons are (and not in any order IMHO) medical emergencies (sick pax), unforecast weather deteriation (thunderstorms and snow), in the case of Cat 1 only aircraft - wx below limits, mechanical en-route (ie eng shut down) or on the ground (blown tires on the runway can close an airport), in Asia VIP movements etc., wind outside of aircraft limits.
These are just a few. Most are known and you take the extra fuel but still get delayed far longer than expected so might have to divert. It hits long haul the most as there is a greater chance of other factors stacking up along the route.
As I have said before if the passangers realised the proffesionalism and decision making skills needed to get a large passanger jet from A to B, perhaps piloting as a proffesion would still garner the respect it once had.
FG
