BA245 - Insufficient fuel to divert
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: twilightzone
Posts: 17
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Thanks ETOPS, having spoken to one of the guys the following day I figured the facts would quickly surface and put an end to some of the cr@p spouted on here!
You had to be there!! (as they say)
You had to be there!! (as they say)
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Planet Moo Moo
Posts: 1,279
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
What a surprise, the company supports the correct decisions of the Commander and crew! Exactly as it should be as the decision made were completely correct.
Doves,
EZE cannot be considered as Island as the definition of Island is as follows and Montevideo can be considered an adequate aerodrome. Plus flight time to Cordoba is under 2 hours but giving approximately a 10 tonne fuel uplift which would drastically affect payload thus revenue. It is not at the whim of the Commander to decide on the day what constitues an Island aerodrome, that responsibility lies firmly with the Operator as stated below.
Island Aerodrome:
Doves,
EZE cannot be considered as Island as the definition of Island is as follows and Montevideo can be considered an adequate aerodrome. Plus flight time to Cordoba is under 2 hours but giving approximately a 10 tonne fuel uplift which would drastically affect payload thus revenue. It is not at the whim of the Commander to decide on the day what constitues an Island aerodrome, that responsibility lies firmly with the Operator as stated below.
Island Aerodrome:
(JAR-OPS Part 1 (Commercial Air TransportationAeroplanes))
(1) Isolated Aerodrome: If there is no adequatedestination alternate aerodrome and diversion fuel plus final fuel representsmore than two hours at normal cruise consumption after arriving overhead thedestination aerodrome and if acceptable to theauthority, the operator can consider the destination aerodrome as an isolated aerodrome.
(1) Isolated Aerodrome: If there is no adequatedestination alternate aerodrome and diversion fuel plus final fuel representsmore than two hours at normal cruise consumption after arriving overhead thedestination aerodrome and if acceptable to theauthority, the operator can consider the destination aerodrome as an isolated aerodrome.
Last edited by Wirbelsturm; 11th Sep 2012 at 10:29.
DOVE
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Myself
Age: 77
Posts: 1,179
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Wirbelsturm
...Plus flight time to Cordoba is under 2 hours...
...Plus flight time to Cordoba is under 2 hours...
But mine was a... only some kind of a... "plan B" to maintain in the back of mind, just in case; next time. Take it or leave it.
It's your choose [perfectly legal BOACwise].
Last edited by DOVES; 11th Sep 2012 at 14:24.
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Planet Moo Moo
Posts: 1,279
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
But mine was a... only some kind of a... "plan B" to maintain in the back of mind, just in case; next time. Take it or leave it.
Last edited by Wirbelsturm; 11th Sep 2012 at 14:48.
Join Date: May 2008
Location: u.k
Posts: 5
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
ETOPS etc,
Is there any likelyhood of this information / report getting into the public domain or is it purely and simply a company internal ASR?
I ask out of professional interest as have been fortunate enough to not quite get painted into what sounds like a similar corner myself not so long ago, (different operation being Short Haul but similar circumstances).
I'm assuming not which is a shame as 'there but for the grace of God etc'.
Is there any likelyhood of this information / report getting into the public domain or is it purely and simply a company internal ASR?
I ask out of professional interest as have been fortunate enough to not quite get painted into what sounds like a similar corner myself not so long ago, (different operation being Short Haul but similar circumstances).
I'm assuming not which is a shame as 'there but for the grace of God etc'.
DOVE
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Myself
Age: 77
Posts: 1,179
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Wirbelsturm
..Plus flight time to Cordoba is under 2 hours but giving approximately a 10 tonne fuel uplift which would drastically affect payload thus revenue…
..Plus flight time to Cordoba is under 2 hours but giving approximately a 10 tonne fuel uplift which would drastically affect payload thus revenue…
By the way:
-Is Cordoba able to handle 777 (stairs, for instance, etc.)?
-Are there enough parkings? (You know that when... the ****... everybody go to the same place; and "First arrived: first served").
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Potomac Heights
Posts: 470
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
As a statistician I would like to say, nothing in life is certain. No matter how much extra fuel is carried, there may always be some unfortunate set of circumstances that cause it to be not enough.
To decide what is "enough," one determines (in advance) what is the acceptable level of risk (which can never be zero), and plans according to that. (I assume that is what complex flight-planning programs are intended to do.) While in this case, the flight did not go as initially planned (i.e., ordinary arrival within minimums), it also did not end up as a smoking hole in the ground. Therefore, while the flight was in the small percent of all planned flights not arriving within minimums, it also was not within the far smaller accepted probability of being a crash.
Further, the ex post fact that the flight did not go as planned doesn't mean that the ex ante planning was wrong. Bad things can always happen after the ex ante planning is complete. One can only conclude that the ex ante planning was faulty if there is a statistically significant excess of actual bad results over what just bad luck would suggest.
So unless someone knows a clear flaw in ex ante the airline planning process, or the crew's execution of that process, you cannot conclude that just because the result was undesirable that there was any appropriate earlier action that should have been taken to prevent it.
To decide what is "enough," one determines (in advance) what is the acceptable level of risk (which can never be zero), and plans according to that. (I assume that is what complex flight-planning programs are intended to do.) While in this case, the flight did not go as initially planned (i.e., ordinary arrival within minimums), it also did not end up as a smoking hole in the ground. Therefore, while the flight was in the small percent of all planned flights not arriving within minimums, it also was not within the far smaller accepted probability of being a crash.
Further, the ex post fact that the flight did not go as planned doesn't mean that the ex ante planning was wrong. Bad things can always happen after the ex ante planning is complete. One can only conclude that the ex ante planning was faulty if there is a statistically significant excess of actual bad results over what just bad luck would suggest.
So unless someone knows a clear flaw in ex ante the airline planning process, or the crew's execution of that process, you cannot conclude that just because the result was undesirable that there was any appropriate earlier action that should have been taken to prevent it.
Freight God
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: LS-R54A
Posts: 307
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
No, complex (or simple) flight planning programs can only give a basis for decision. They cannot decide, nor can they value the information correctly. This is still a task for the dispatcher and the pilot, and for a quite long foreseeable time to come.
Per Ardua ad Astraeus
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: UK
Posts: 18,579
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I know ETOPS and have every reason to accept his post regarding the 'internal enquiry', but I must observe that if a 'supposed' Ryanair insider had said the same about the MAD/VLC events there would be a torrent of 'cover up'/'whitewash' posts. Surely to tease us here with 'its ok, trust me' is not right? We would all probably benefit from a little more, from which many could probably learn.eg for starters, what actually happened - what happened to the alternate weather? When did things go pear-shaped?
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: England
Posts: 117
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
SAEZ 311127Z 00000KT 0800 R11/1100N FG NSC 08/07 Q1018
"1100m to the north of the field. After that the weather rapidly improved"
1100m to the `NORTH`???? Do you know how to decode METARs?
"1100m to the north of the field. After that the weather rapidly improved"
1100m to the `NORTH`???? Do you know how to decode METARs?
Last edited by Stanley Eevil; 12th Sep 2012 at 16:08.
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Planet Moo Moo
Posts: 1,279
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Fair 'nuff,
Rwy 11 touchdown visibility 1100m increasing to unknown.
Military TAF's, many years ago, introduced a visibility to the N,S,E,W etc. to show potential problems at the airfield.
Just mixed up a bit with a previous life.
Rwy 11 touchdown visibility 1100m increasing to unknown.
Military TAF's, many years ago, introduced a visibility to the N,S,E,W etc. to show potential problems at the airfield.
Just mixed up a bit with a previous life.
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Planet Moo Moo
Posts: 1,279
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
"Increasing to unknown" ???
Minimum 1100, minimum recorded touchdown RVR. Thus, maximum, unknown, it depends on what definition you use. Go find something better to do.
Last edited by Wirbelsturm; 12th Sep 2012 at 22:50.
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: England
Posts: 117
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
N D or U after an RVR report on a METAR is basically showing the trend of the RVR over a period of time since the previous METAR(S):
D (Down) = Decreasing trend
U (up) = Increasing trend
N = No change
D (Down) = Decreasing trend
U (up) = Increasing trend
N = No change
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Planet Moo Moo
Posts: 1,279
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Thanks for the lesson,
I'll put it with the rest of the nebulous rubbish such as NDV and dust devils. It's all in the decode book in the flight info supp, I just wrote it after a long US flight and a few beers.
I'll put it with the rest of the nebulous rubbish such as NDV and dust devils. It's all in the decode book in the flight info supp, I just wrote it after a long US flight and a few beers.
