BA Whistleblower Reveals Tankering of Fuel - BBC
KLM recently produced an advertisement encouraging the public to fly responsibly by only travelling if there was no other alternative. There is always an alternative, so be responsible, help save our planet and don't travel by aircraft. Reserve the use of aircraft to expedite people in need of urgent medical attention, combat hazardous fires, enhance security patrols.... etc, otherwise use the internet, travel by train, bus or ferry/ship. Simple
I'm certainly not a hater of the industry, but I think a carbon tax on jet fuel would be the easiest way to help the bean counters make the right decisions.[/QUOTE]
Please explain! How on earth does a carbon tax change anything except airfares?
If you and so many other crusaders here are truly concerned about the environment stop buying Chinese goods.
Maybe we could tax Japan, Indonesia, Philippines, Iceland etc. for their Volcanic emissions.
Oh, and lets ban motor racing of all kinds, it serves absolutely no purpose
Please explain! How on earth does a carbon tax change anything except airfares?
If you and so many other crusaders here are truly concerned about the environment stop buying Chinese goods.
Maybe we could tax Japan, Indonesia, Philippines, Iceland etc. for their Volcanic emissions.
Oh, and lets ban motor racing of all kinds, it serves absolutely no purpose
Just wait until that Icelandic volcano with the impossible name erupts and spews loads of greenhouse gases into the atmosphere.
The only sound you'll hear from the "greenies" is moaning about not being able to travel anywhere.
The only sound you'll hear from the "greenies" is moaning about not being able to travel anywhere.
Paxing All Over The World
Lowly pax speaking.
I would not automatically classify the 'whistleblower' as a 'greenie' or anything else related to that point of view. There is just as much chance the person is a highly disaffected member of staff who just wants to watch the fun whilst their boss and the Board jump through some hoops.
Having sat in a taxy queue at LHR for 40 mins (more than once) and observed the delights of Bovingdon, Ockham, Lambourne and Biggin (more than once) and enjoyed the benefits of a fast turnaround (more than once) we all know this is a storm in a teacup.
I would not automatically classify the 'whistleblower' as a 'greenie' or anything else related to that point of view. There is just as much chance the person is a highly disaffected member of staff who just wants to watch the fun whilst their boss and the Board jump through some hoops.
Having sat in a taxy queue at LHR for 40 mins (more than once) and observed the delights of Bovingdon, Ockham, Lambourne and Biggin (more than once) and enjoyed the benefits of a fast turnaround (more than once) we all know this is a storm in a teacup.
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Looking for the signals square at LHR
Posts: 236
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
But what really gets to me is the degree of planetary destruction occasioned by the pernicious emissions of all those hot-air balloons. Has anyone given any thought to this major contributor to atmospheric degradation and how this contribution might be expanded by the tankering of extra gas bottles?
otherwise use the internet, travel by train, bus or ferry/ship. Simple
Just think of all the jet fuel we could save if we stopped making reserve fuel mandatory? Hauling around all that fuel that is seldom needed?
Of course, we'd probably have the occasional LaMia Flight 2933, but we're saving the planet - you gotta accept a few casualties...
<yes, I'm being sarcastic>
Of course, we'd probably have the occasional LaMia Flight 2933, but we're saving the planet - you gotta accept a few casualties...
<yes, I'm being sarcastic>
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: USA
Posts: 241
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Tankering is different in aircraft
Hands up all those working at the BBC and everywhere else that drive an extra mile or two to find cheaper fuel then fill up their tanks to the brim. This practice must also use fuel to carry fuel. The Panorama programme will probably be just be another virtue signalling fest from the BBC against the great satan of flying.
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: USA
Posts: 241
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
In 35 years flying, I have yet to see a Flight Plan that shows a profit for tankering. Always a loss. Consequently, the only time any company I have flown for has tankered fuel is when there is a fuel supply problem at the destination. Never flown with BA, but can't think of any reason they would be different
Surely as a professional pilot you know that the impact on fuel consumption of added weight is vastly different for aircraft (where energy is consumed to counteract gravity as well as to overcome friction losses in moving the aircraft from point A to point B) than for wheeled vehicles (where energy is consumed only to overcome friction losses). The energy cost of "tankering" in a typical passenger automobile is probably very close to unmeasurably small.
Surely as a professional pilot you know that the impact on fuel consumption of added weight is vastly different for aircraft (where energy is consumed to counteract gravity as well as to overcome friction losses in moving the aircraft from point A to point B) than for wheeled vehicles (where energy is consumed only to overcome friction losses). The energy cost of "tankering" in a typical passenger automobile is probably very close to unmeasurably small.
Look at the UK, US, Europe and Australia at the airlines, large and small, that have come and gone because they could not manage to make a profit. It may be "small beer" but its a combination of many "small beers" that could mean survival.
If its the environment issue that worries you, go talk to China
In 35 years flying, I have yet to see a Flight Plan that shows a profit for tankering. Always a loss. Consequently, the only time any company I have flown for has tankered fuel is when there is a fuel supply problem at the destination. Never flown with BA, but can't think of any reason they would be different
Willie Walsh:
"Because clearly the financial saving would have incentivised us to do fuel tankering," he said.
From what I recall (this was circa 2000-2005) fuel in India was really expensive.. we would regularly fuel up to arrival MLW for a KUL-DEL sector. Worked for Lufthansa at the time and I cant recall doing this for any other sectors.
Another time we did tankering was when we did the KUL-CGK-KUL shuttle .. this was with the same set of crew and the crew would usually fill up at KUL with enough for both ways. On two days of the week we had runway closure scheduled for just after our KUL-FRA departure at around 1am (this was at the old airport with only one runway). Considering that a fully loaded 747-400 will take anywhere from130-140 metric tonnes we are looking at a minimum 45minute refuelling time using both wing points. So what we did is to tell the crews to take additional fuel over the KUL-CGK-KUL sector so they would have more fuel in tanks and thereby reduce the refuelling time in KUL. All of the crews were very helpful as they would reap the benefits when they departed a few days later! BTW this wasnt official but nobody questioned it.. Here it's a question of operational efficiency overiding costs/ecological concerns. If we missed our slot and the runway was closed we would have to cancel the flight and put everybody in hotels etc.
Another aspect of tankering is shortened ground time. I know a lot of narrowbodies tanker fuel simply to cut the ground time down. While you can board pax while fuelling is going on there are a lot of things to consider and its just far easier to fill up more fuel in the first place.
Anilv
Another time we did tankering was when we did the KUL-CGK-KUL shuttle .. this was with the same set of crew and the crew would usually fill up at KUL with enough for both ways. On two days of the week we had runway closure scheduled for just after our KUL-FRA departure at around 1am (this was at the old airport with only one runway). Considering that a fully loaded 747-400 will take anywhere from130-140 metric tonnes we are looking at a minimum 45minute refuelling time using both wing points. So what we did is to tell the crews to take additional fuel over the KUL-CGK-KUL sector so they would have more fuel in tanks and thereby reduce the refuelling time in KUL. All of the crews were very helpful as they would reap the benefits when they departed a few days later! BTW this wasnt official but nobody questioned it.. Here it's a question of operational efficiency overiding costs/ecological concerns. If we missed our slot and the runway was closed we would have to cancel the flight and put everybody in hotels etc.
Another aspect of tankering is shortened ground time. I know a lot of narrowbodies tanker fuel simply to cut the ground time down. While you can board pax while fuelling is going on there are a lot of things to consider and its just far easier to fill up more fuel in the first place.
Anilv