Planes flying into New York area on dangerously low fuel to save money

Original story

This falls under the category of "It works until it doesn't".

Sooner or later this is going to catch up with the airlines in a very dramatic way.

 

I don't understand why they don't want to put too much in. Surely they can use the excess fuel on the way back?

 

The more fuel in the plane the more weight, which means more fuel used to fly the initial leg. As a cost saving measure it seems rediculous though!

RwD

 

Er... lol?

 

They've squeezed the margins too far imho - imagine the time when a plane has to fly into a very strong headwind on its way to NY, then has to circle for a while because of an incident on the runway. It's not rocket science to see that you've got problems coming.

 

Absolute madness, saving a few bucks now with the potential of going bankrupt latter, following massive lawsuits, due to a plane falling out of the sky.
Smart thinking, not.

 

The problem is that with an aeroplane, the cost savings made in "fuel burn" from even the smallest weight reduction onboard (be this in the cabin, hold or even the fuel tank) are HUGE when the frequency of flights are taken into account for a certain period of time, say a year for example. (Although they would be alot better off reducing a non-critical weight such as the catering instead!!!)

So from the airline's perspective, this makes total sense, however looking at it from a logical point of view it is totally mad! An accident waiting to happen indeed.

 

Quote:
"Neither the DOT nor anyone else has suggested that Continental Airlines has contravened any regulations in its aircraft fuelling procedures," company spokesman Dave Messing said in a statement."

So if Continental aren't breaking the rules, then surely it's the regulator's (FAA) fault that the limit is set so low?

 

I need one of those for my car.

 

Maybe they should try omitting every fourth screw/rivet to save some money...

 

This is daft, everyone is saying it's a stupid idea but no one actually knows the facts. What is the likelihood that a plane with low fuel will run out due to unforeseen events (E.g. excessive headwind)? If it does run critically low, what is the likelihood that it won't be able to skip the queue and land?

However irresponsible it might sound, we don't know if it's actually dangerous or just scaremongering. Until anything bad happens I'm not going to lose sleep - effectively they're helping to save the environment by not carrying excessive fuel. I know by that point 'it'll be too late' but I just don't believe any company would put passengers' lives at risk in such a way - if only because an accident would cost them financially.

 

So is this a non-story? I'm sure pilots have a bit of science going when they decide how much fuel they need for a trip. They'll use computers and such new-fangled inventions, not just scribble some numbers on the back of an envelope.

Maybe the problem is Newark ATC. Or the American attitude to wasting fuel and creating pollution.

 

Welcome to America. Please enjoy your stay.

 

if the pilots were crying low fuel levels then there is something wrong... and using an air plane that is not made for that trip is kind of illogical...

 

Its time for another good idea bad idea.

*light bulb* Good idea,
Minimum fuel on a semi
*Guy standing near his semi with a gas can*

*light bulb* Bad idea,
Minimum fuel on a airplane
*Pilot looking at fuel gauge, freaking out*



Even cartoons can teach you something, like a good idea and a bad idea.....

 

Lol that's so FUBB Next things in the list of things that should be done to make flying cheaper would be to get rid of the seats and have no lights in the planes.

 

Care to speculate how many of these were genuine emergencies and how many were pilots trying to jump the queue to land?

 

It's stuff like this, and changing to all plastic cups (LOL), that make more and more people not want to fly. Plus, current news is talking about the summer travel is going to be pretty much unbearable.

I will just drive, and if it's too far, I won't go.

 

Instead of reducing fuel carried to save costs, why can't they charge obese people more to fly. I'm 6ft tall and 13.5 stone in weight, roughly average if not a little overweight, but pay the same price and have the same luggage restrictions as the elephant I was stuck next toon my last flight to Newark - she was about 5'5" and must have been about 19st - had to literally push on the seat in front to force herself into the seat. Just my opinion.

 

Either that or they're DESPERATE.