|
Perfect example today out of LHR. FO Very experienced (8000hrs I reckon) said maybe we should take more fuel for the TS delays on departure. He suggests 1T.
I said good Idea, but I though about 0.5 T might be better. After several tech delays and the weather we get off. But while we were waiting I told him that I wished I taken his 1T idea |
Conan
I rest my case. I do a LOT of Dead Head at first class, and I have seen delay up to 55 minutes were crew had to get more fuel for different reasons. ( Remote de-ice. Slott change after startup. Updated flightplan with new winds or reroute with 200kg more fuel required.) This summer with minimum Plog fuel is a good plan for a diversion. Or pushing my luck, and I do not rely on luck. As the SAS Purser said to the new Fueler in CPH when asked": Cpt, how much fuel do You want , Sir?" " Well ; Son ,topp Her up" The Cpt and Fo showed up ca 30 min later and was told by the Cabin Capt they were all good to go. 2 hrs later they pushed after some DE- fueling to max landing weight on the 2 hr sector. Turns out the 737 takes ca 24 000kg of jet A1. Off setting some crab pots! You All Have a Good Day. Cpt B |
Well this thread has been a bit of an eye opener.
I don't class myself as the most experienced skipper out there, but with some of you I would question your airline hiring policies/HR and training department if they are managing to hire characters to the RHS that don't fit the company culture (and yes I'm aware that there are substantial variations in the role of FO even within UK companies never mind the rump EU). When I am on long haul duty I don't allow the mostly experienced FO's to act as 'co-captain' on their sector. I bleedin well expect it!! These are supposed to be, and invariably are, my easy day out. I've found most of our cadets to be top notch and very keen. Selfies, Instagram, Facetwit and that rot? Prepare for a lot of ribbing and mickey taking from yours truly in the cruise and downroute :E |
Seeing as it's mentioned a lot in this thread, I often wonder if PLOG fuel obsessives are aware that if you take extra fuel and end up not needing it, the majority of it is still in the tank at the end of the flight.
Taking an extra tonne on my flight today would've added 78kg to the trip fuel. It's summer, it's busy, there are thunderstorms, it's hot and the APU is needed for longer, BA insist on blocking the runway at Gatwick every other day, the alternates are busy, the level on the flight plan may not be available. If an extra tonne costs the company £53 (per today's prices on today's flight), but almost certainly gets the aircraft to where its meant to go, how much does a diversion cost? Not accounting for the reduced stress of not finding yourself in a low fuel state. A bad captain for me is one that insists on flight plan fuel unless there's an exceptionalreason to take more, just to tow the company line or for their own personal pride. "Summer" should be a reason to take enough to be comfortable. Thread creep over. |
I don’t think anyone has advocated only taking flight plan fuel... |
Originally Posted by Vokes55
(Post 10221139)
Seeing as it's mentioned a lot in this thread, I often wonder if PLOG fuel obsessives are aware that if you take extra fuel and end up not needing it, the majority of it is still in the tank at the end of the flight.
Taking an extra tonne on my flight today would've added 78kg to the trip fuel. It's summer, it's busy, there are thunderstorms, it's hot and the APU is needed for longer, BA insist on blocking the runway at Gatwick every other day, the alternates are busy, the level on the flight plan may not be available. If an extra tonne costs the company £53 (per today's prices on today's flight), but almost certainly gets the aircraft to where its meant to go, how much does a diversion cost? Not accounting for the reduced stress of not finding yourself in a low fuel state. A bad captain for me is one that insists on flight plan fuel unless there's an exceptionalreason to take more, just to tow the company line or for their own personal pride. "Summer" should be a reason to take enough to be comfortable. Thread creep over. |
Originally Posted by Windshearescape
(Post 10221325)
I could have taken plog fuel on every single flight I've ever done and not come unstuck once. Fuel is a decision based on mathematics not emotion .
I don’t claim to know and will never know it all, but I consider myself a fairly experienced SFO and if my skipper is not looking to take an extra half to one tonne on an average summer’s day heading westbound then I’d be piping up and suggesting otherwise, that’s my job. The skipper has overall responsibility for the flight however, whether it’s my sector or not, and If they still don’t want to take more than min fuel then I’d be happy that I’ve done my bit (unless there’s a mandatory safety reason to take more). Yes, we mighn’t need it, but even on a good day, in my experience, we usually end up needing it and I’d be watching that fuel like a hawk. Any diversion required for a splash and dash is then on their head. Luckily this scenario rarely happens in our airline - we’re all pretty experienced, respect one another as equally important parts of a professional team and we’re singing from the same hymn sheet from the get-go. Good recruitment, good training, good CRM, mutual respect, some experience of the routes being flown and a sense of humour and you’ve got the perfect recipe for a good trip/day out, whichever seat you’re sat in, whether the guy’s into watches, cars or plane spotting! |
Originally Posted by Windshearescape
(Post 10221325)
I could have taken plog fuel on every single flight I've ever done and not come unstuck once. Fuel is a decision based on mathematics not emotion .
|
Originally Posted by Windshearescape
(Post 10221325)
I could have taken plog fuel on every single flight I've ever done and not come unstuck once. Fuel is a decision based on mathematics not emotion .
Fuel is based on experience and common sense, not 'emotion'. PLOG fuel is a guide, not a target, and I'd be more interested to hear somebody justify why we should take PLOG fuel, than why we shouldn't. |
One answer to that, from a previous company was that they would far rather everyone take plog fuel (assuming no glaringly obvious reason to take more) on every flight, and suffer the occasional divert because things didn't work out, than have everyone taking extra just in case, which statistically isn't needed and have the extra burn.
Now I'm not suggesting that you just blindly follow what the company says, but at the end of the day, in theory, it's their rules and their choice how to play the game. If they would rather increase the risk of diverting that is up to them as long as it doesn't incur safety issues. It's a bit like the argument of speeding up when running late to try to 'fix' the schedule. If the company would rather suffer poor time keeping and dissatisfied pax then that is their call. Understand that I am not saying we take plog fuel when the destination is on limits and all alternates are iffy and likely to fill up with other diverts. That would be silly. |
I think the divert talk is just a misnomer, let's face it, if you're taking plog fuel the chances are the weather is fine. How many captains here would divert if you reached your alternate fuel rather than commit to the destination intended? Probably not that many. I've taken plog fuel for the last 18 months on the ejet (in good weather) and have never even come close to eating into my alternate fuel and that includes flying into most of the major airports in Europe, flying lower and includes 2 or more times round the hold. There's no need for extra if you know the first fuel check is going to throw up an extra 4-500kg, it's all about trust in what's presented and that's where experience play's it's part. Horses for courses but if that makes me a "bad captain" in Vokes55's eyes then cest la vie.
|
It’s probably the contingency fuel. |
Originally Posted by Deano777
(Post 10222039)
I think the divert talk is just a misnomer, let's face it, if you're taking plog fuel the chances are the weather is fine. How many captains here would divert if you reached your alternate fuel rather than commit to the destination intended? Probably not that many. I've taken plog fuel for the last 18 months on the ejet (in good weather) and have never even come close to eating into my alternate fuel and that includes flying into most of the major airports in Europe, flying lower and includes 2 or more times round the hold. There's no need for extra if you know the first fuel check is going to throw up an extra 4-500kg, it's all about trust in what's presented and that's where experience play's it's part. Horses for courses but if that makes me a "bad captain" in Vokes55's eyes then cest la vie.
|
Yep it must be a base variable. Took off this morning with plog fuel, first check was +390, entered a hold the other end and that check indicated +440. Anyway we digress.
|
How many minutes worth of fuel are people landing with typically? At LHR, it can be 40-45 mins worth frequently. |
Nope, that is using LGW as an alternate with statistical contingency fuel that is burnt after engine start for whatever reason. Sometimes it is necessary to commit to destination (LHR) in the hold. I wouldn’t say frequently, but it isn’t a rare occasion on the 777. I frequently see remaining fuel figures of 4.0 in the tech log (on the 777) and have landed with similar on more than one occasion last year. The point I’m trying to make is that different airlines have different fuel policies...comparing Taking PLOG fuel with Saudia is different to taking PLOG fuel with BA, for example. It would be more accurate to compare how many mins of fuel are remaining at shutdown. |
I plan to land with 1 hr 20 mins in tanks on a nice day in the 737-800. A normal missed approach with vectors sees me doing the second shot with one hours fuel onboard. ( it uses 20 mins of fuel but takes 12 minutes). A flap non-normal would see me doing the high speed approach with low fuel lights on and approx 50 mins of fuel onboard. |
Just as a matter of interest, for the next sector it will cost 572 kg to carry the extra 1000 kg of fuel. So it DOES matter whether you carry extra fuel because you feel like it. It is also why companies would rather get 1 diversion from 100 sectors with min op fuel, than no diversions with 100 flights carrying extra fuel. |
That is very interesting. I’ve never flown heavy jets so I didn’t realise how different it is. On the narrow bodies it’s more like 57kg than 570. In addition to the small cost we get more bang for our buck, a tonne gives us nearly half an hour, what would you get? Ten minutes? |
Originally Posted by Yournamehere
(Post 10223916)
I've seen less drift flying through a winter jet steam.
Thread title - "FOs expectations of a new Captain." Actual discussion - "I'm a Captain and this is how I decide what my fuel order is going to be." |
| All times are GMT. The time now is 11:11. |
Copyright © 2026 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.