Go Back  PPRuNe Forums > Flight Deck Forums > Rumours & News
Reload this Page >

Ryanair Very Low Fuel Landing

Rumours & News Reporting Points that may affect our jobs or lives as professional pilots. Also, items that may be of interest to professional pilots.

Ryanair Very Low Fuel Landing

Old 3rd Jun 2008, 19:00
  #41 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: home
Posts: 1,567
Received 2 Likes on 1 Post
Heres a scenario......old wizened Captain diverts from destination with CNR + a little for mum. On approach one of the marshallers who has a soft spot for old Mikey Schumacher infringes the runway and causes him to go-around. Said Captain flies a circuit & lands with just a few hundred kilos under Final reserve fuel.

I guess we might just have to leave the authorities to work on the real facts....
Right Way Up is offline  
Old 3rd Jun 2008, 19:36
  #42 (permalink)  
Per Ardua ad Astraeus
 
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: UK
Posts: 18,579
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by kotakota
some NGs only have 1 FMC fitted
- what! You mean Fred N is still buying 737s? ('In joke' for old pilots)
BOAC is offline  
Old 3rd Jun 2008, 19:50
  #43 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: The Living World
Posts: 28
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Last year there was an EasyJet div. to MAN.
That declared a 'mayday' and landed due to extended hold @BHX, overshoot due to BMI baby late leaving the runway.
When i looked there was 640kg total fuel. (A319).
Circumstances have an awful lot to do with low fuel diversions/landings so i suggest all facts are digested before a 'bunfight' begins........
mrcabbage is offline  
Old 3rd Jun 2008, 20:27
  #44 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Scandinavia
Posts: 1
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Final reserve fuel

Below 30 min you have to declare at least a PAN........he didn't

Forecasted Wx is irrelevant in this case. At TOD you have a clear picture of what your options are.
Last edited by Bitburger : Today at 14:56.
Our company SOP states that landing with less than final reserve fuel (30.min) constitutes an emergency.

No PAN but MAYDAY X 3



DragonflyNO is offline  
Old 3rd Jun 2008, 21:00
  #45 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Far away from home
Posts: 49
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Slightly off topic and may not be linked, but over southern France today I heard a Ryanair aircraft ask for a more direct routing as they were quote"running low on gas". My colleague and I couldn't believe our ears!

Maybe the bullying culture within Ryanair is encouraging more and more guys to take plog fuel only which isn't always accurate. Over on REPA web there is a thread running detailing instances where guys have recieved formal "written warnings" for not endorsing the voyage report with the reasons why more than plog fuel was taken.

An open question to all reading this thread. Could there maybe be a link between this and Ryanair aircraft "running low on gas"?
Afinehelmet is offline  
Old 3rd Jun 2008, 21:34
  #46 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 1998
Location: Dubai ,U.A.E.
Posts: 40
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
I don't fly the 737 but my understanding is you can commit to a single runway if landing is reasonabley assured ( Wx, atc, etc. ) if you will be on the ground with final reserve (30 mins. at 1500'). prior to that you inform atc of an urgency if you find that excess delays beyond their initial delays have been encountered. If you are in the air with less than final reserve then that famous russian holiday is declared. ( MAYDAY) What is this business about min fuel on type and checklists for fuel quantity low? A different issue about management. The question should not be about bingo but rather was the operation safe and were the resouces( reluctantly ATC )informed to mitigate the situation or simply a commander unable to direct the appropriate course of action and just kept going hoping for the best. Perhaps he did land with 30 minutes of fuel but taxied extensively. I don't think ther has ever been a min fuel on stand.

DD
Desert Driver is offline  
Old 3rd Jun 2008, 21:34
  #47 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Dre's mum's house
Posts: 1,432
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Bitburger

Everyone departs on the basis of the TAF. Fuel is loaded with due consideration to the TAF and any likely delays.

By the time you reach TOD it's a tad late to increase the fuel load!!

And for your info, every pilot these days has to have a lawyer sitting on his shoulder watching his back!!
The Real Slim Shady is offline  
Old 3rd Jun 2008, 22:12
  #48 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Newcastle NI
Posts: 824
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Slim

I would add that in addition to the TAF what the metar is reporting when compared to the TAF and also your previous experience at airports in that area at that time of year.

The TAF are normally fairly accurate, but not by any means infallible,

league tables IMHO only encourage people to take risks, sooner or later a "weak" crew (newish Captain low hour F/O) will get into a situation where they will be forced to either land below minima or go around to divert to somewhere they don't have enough fuel left to get to, and make the wrong call because of MOL fear over their jobs, even if the fear is only in their own heads.

Base Captains and trainers are not super heros (or super pilots for that matter) plog fuel is for nice days or nights not for ABZ in winter or EDI at rush hour or PMI on a Sat or LHR most days or LBA on any day when there is the letter A in it!!
Facelookbovvered is offline  
Old 3rd Jun 2008, 22:49
  #49 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: England
Posts: 247
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
I know what it was!

He thought he was flying to Frankfurt! Didnt realise Hahn "Frankfurt" was best part of an hours flying further!
RED WINGS is offline  
Old 3rd Jun 2008, 23:03
  #50 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Leeds
Posts: 702
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
'Ryanair - The Low Fuel Airline'

It's got a ring to it.
harrogate is offline  
Old 4th Jun 2008, 08:39
  #51 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Europe
Posts: 332
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Slightly off topic and may not be linked, but over southern France today I heard a Ryanair aircraft ask for a more direct routing as they were quote"running low on gas". My colleague and I couldn't believe our ears!
I work on TWR at an aerodrome with typical taxi time of 10 minutes. On occasions (bad wx with runway changes, twy closures etc), with that time extended, I had several a/c from different airlines (RYR has only one flight here) asking for priority in departure sequence because they're running low on fuel. One German crew when asked to expedite their backtrack due to an a/c on final reported unable due to running on one engine to save fuel. Of course no previous mentioning of shutting down the other one...
criss is offline  
Old 4th Jun 2008, 10:01
  #52 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Europe
Posts: 332
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Whenever I read about "uncalled for ATC delays", I smile. Of course we are not perfect (no one is), but if you have 12 planes, someone must be first, and someone must be 12th, you can't make everyone depart at the same time. Sure, you can accomodate for requests of one crew, but it almost always means delays for other. Same goes for arrivals - the APP unit at my place usually vectors for 5-6 miles finals, and offers visuals whenever possible. But if you have a peak of arrivals, someone will have to accept a 20 mile final, speed reductions and delaying vectors. Most probably he will think its uncalled for.

You don't need to be a pilot to understand the cost of fuel these days. But there's something wrong if you report low fuel when you're not even been airborne, and the taxi took 10 minutes more than usual. Also I know perfectly well pilots use different techniques to save fuel, but entering a 3km long runway for backtrack in high traffic load and driving along at 5kts without noting the ATC prior to entering the runway that you're on 1 engine (while being told to expedite before entering) is not the best thing to do. And you should also understand that while this single crew might have saved a bit of fuel (was not so as they were moved down the sequence due to their action), they also cost other waiting a/c more fuel. You're not alone.

BTW, this was just to show that it happens everywhere, not only at RYR (and for obvious reasons). But while a good deal here will jump at everything said about RYR, they will defend "good actions of the aircrew" if it is a different airline.
criss is offline  
Old 4th Jun 2008, 10:50
  #53 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Dre's mum's house
Posts: 1,432
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Topslide

The Ryanair PLOGs, at my base at least, are incredibly pessimistic: even taking PLOG fuel will get you there with around 3 tonnes at GS intercept.

The only exceptions to that which I have encountered are the TFS sector where a lower level due to traffic can increase the burn, or the winds are significantly different to the forecast, PLOG and MET, and the LDY where the bleedin' train gets priority over aircraft and that can involve an extra 500kgs burnt in the hold.

Additionally, we don't have a facility on the PLOG to reduce the final fuel if the actual load is lower than the PBT. This can be frustrating when the PLOG final is 9002Kgs and the ZFW is a tonne under plan.

I have to emphasise that we are not under any pressure to carry minimum fuel: like every other company we are actively encouraging the crews to critically examine the amount of fuel they carry unnecessarily.

In conjunction wth this we are also examining ways of reducing the fuel burns fleet wide which include more direct routings ( we have twin GPS, twin IRS, twin VOR / DME and twin FMCs so our ANP is pretty spectacular ), optimising descents and CDAs, optimising cruising levels etc.

For my own part I will not accept a remote hold burning fuel just to massage departure stats, unlike baby and Easy who routinely do this.

Regardless of which company you may work for fuel optimisation is now part and parcel of our daily grind and will continue to be a dominant feature even if the price drops to $105.
The Real Slim Shady is offline  
Old 4th Jun 2008, 11:31
  #54 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Cotswolds, Glos.
Age: 41
Posts: 319
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
fuel optimisation is now part and parcel of our daily grind and will continue to be a dominant feature
Makes brilliant sense: regardless of the price of fuel, everything should, in my opinion, be done to reduce fuel consumption and thereby reduce fuel cost, such as by obtaining optimum flight levels, routes and speeds to finding ways to lighten aircraft. However, how achievable would those things be?
JulietNovemberPapa is offline  
Old 4th Jun 2008, 13:33
  #55 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Dre's mum's house
Posts: 1,432
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Absolutely concur gents.

Perhaps it would be of more benefit if we discarded our company hats ( if you have one ) and pooled our collective ideas to generate sensible, workable proposals on fuel saving / economy which would have global dividends.
The Real Slim Shady is offline  
Old 4th Jun 2008, 14:56
  #56 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Europe
Posts: 332
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
BTW, as we are talking about saving fuel. Maybe you could clarify sth to a lowly ATC. Do you save fuel by loading less of it, or by burning less of it? Let's say your sector requires 8T of fuel (enroute, hold, diversion etc). You can load 10.5T, or you could load 9T, changing the margin you have. Does loading 9T really means you save fuel? (I know that this 1.5T difference makes your total weight bigger and affects performance, but would it be significant for fuel burn? Let's put aside MTOW etc.). If you load 10.5 instead of 9, and arrive with 1.5 more, this fuel is not lost I think...
criss is offline  
Old 4th Jun 2008, 15:08
  #57 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: East of Monkey Island!
Age: 49
Posts: 152
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
They more heavy you are the more fuel you burn! If you take 1500 kilos more than needed for a 4 hour flight you will burn: 1500 divided by 100 times 2,5 times 4 = 150 kilos of fuel more!
babemagnet is offline  
Old 4th Jun 2008, 15:14
  #58 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Europe
Posts: 332
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
I know you burn more being heavier, but is it that significant? The 1.5T was just an example (an probably exaggerated). Also, is 150kg compared to your total fuel burn THAT significant (yeah, silly question, I know, $$$). But that's less than you use for your taxi, APU... And as said, 1.5 figure should probably be lower.
criss is offline  
Old 4th Jun 2008, 16:13
  #59 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Dre's mum's house
Posts: 1,432
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
It may seem insignificant individually, but 150kgs at todays price of around $1300 tonne is $13*15 = $195 per sector.

Multiply that by, in Ryanair's case alone almost 1000 sectors per day and that's $195 000 per day wasted.

Factor in Easyjet, Baby, BA, Virgin, Jet2 etc and you are looking at hundreds of thousands of $ per day simply discarded.
The Real Slim Shady is offline  
Old 4th Jun 2008, 16:56
  #60 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Europe
Posts: 332
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Then why this topic, and dozens of others?

Anyway, you use extra fuel for number of different reasons...
criss is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service

Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.