1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

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

Discussion in 'Serious' started by Cthippo, 23 Apr 2008.

  1. DXR_13KE

    DXR_13KE BananaModder

    Joined:
    14 Sep 2005
    Posts:
    9,139
    Likes Received:
    382
    why not make airplanes lighter? like the dreamliner. why not modify their design so that the engines are inside the frame, and with this increase the efficiency?
     
  2. cpemma

    cpemma Ecky thump

    Joined:
    27 Nov 2001
    Posts:
    12,328
    Likes Received:
    55
    And the big airlines are fighting back through some Senator happy to spread FUD
    1990? That's like 18 years ago? And they're still high on it? :confused:

    Strikes me the most dangerous part of the trip is the taxi ride from the airport.
     
  3. Starfighter

    Starfighter What's a Dremel?

    Joined:
    4 Apr 2004
    Posts:
    154
    Likes Received:
    0
    The problem with this is that once one company starts doing it, others will soon follow (Why do they get to land first?! If they're doing it so will I!). Then there becomes a queue for the "emergency landing", and the 45 minute fuel reserves become 20 minute fuel reserves, and then small problems become bigger ones and suchfourth...

    This strategy just isn't sustainable, and will only work whilst one company does it. Hopefully this news article will name&shame the airline into playing nice again.

    <tangent>Hurray for the iterated prisoner's dilemma!</tangent>
     
  4. modgodtanvir

    modgodtanvir Prepare - for Mortal Bumbat!

    Joined:
    28 May 2007
    Posts:
    1,960
    Likes Received:
    2
    LMAO!!
     
  5. DXR_13KE

    DXR_13KE BananaModder

    Joined:
    14 Sep 2005
    Posts:
    9,139
    Likes Received:
    382
    yeah.... the laws say that i can drive at 50Km/h max on a very curvy road, but if it suddenly starts to rain and the roads go all slippery then i think there is not a lot of logic in driving near that speed....
     
  6. cpemma

    cpemma Ecky thump

    Joined:
    27 Nov 2001
    Posts:
    12,328
    Likes Received:
    55
    And in other news...
    That's the way to do it...
     
  7. Brett89

    Brett89 Minimodder

    Joined:
    15 Dec 2005
    Posts:
    1,324
    Likes Received:
    27
    That's possible
    and also as an FAA regulation, not sure if this applies to commercial, as that's a different ball game, but a private pilot flying a plane, which means no flying for hire, must carry 30 minutes extra fuel VFR Day, I think it's 45 minutes IFR. This undoubtedly applies to the larger aircraft as well, although unexpected weather could arise as well. though not as likely, it is a possibility, one that should not be ruled out. I don't doubt that this doesn't happen all over the world, it's at least not brought up here, to my knowledge.
     
    Last edited: 24 Apr 2008
  8. supermonkey

    supermonkey Deal with it

    Joined:
    14 Apr 2004
    Posts:
    4,955
    Likes Received:
    202
    Well, I'm usually not one for conspiracy theory, but Continental is one of the only major US airlines making any money these days. So much so that they can afford to front approximately half the money to upgrade the Bush Intercontinental Airport's Terminal B, while the other airlines are suffering staggering losses and canceled flights due to forced groundings as a result of shoddy inspections.

    All of a sudden we get a story that seems to have a bit of scaremongering going on, and Continental Airlines is the target. I'm probably wrong, but there you go.

    I did see recently that just about all the airlines are going to start charging extra for a second suitcase. As a seasoned traveler, that irks me more than this story.

    -monkey
     
  9. Brett89

    Brett89 Minimodder

    Joined:
    15 Dec 2005
    Posts:
    1,324
    Likes Received:
    27
    A few reasons i can think of off the top of my head, if you mean putting it inside the fuselage like a fighter jet to streamline it instead of in a nacelle below the wing/on the fuselage (DC-9)
    Noise
    safety (what if a blade were to come off, for whatever reason)
    maintenance (getting to that engine would not be easy.)
    Also, the Dreamliner is a very new design, using about 45% composite parts, which is good, this trend will definitely continue, with Boeings previous plane the 777, using about 15% I'm not sure about any Airbus designs, the A380 does make use of them though.
     
  10. chrisb2e9

    chrisb2e9 Dont do that...

    Joined:
    18 Jun 2007
    Posts:
    4,061
    Likes Received:
    46
    I dont even see an issue here,
    so they didn't break any laws. The only reason they are declaring an emergency is to get priority handleing so that they can land sooner.

    A 45 minute reserve of fuel may not sound like much, but look at a map that has airports in the new york area, there are literally thousands of them. sure most cant handle a heavy aircraft, but at 300kts, on a 45minute reserve, you can go 225 nauticle miles. which is more than 225 miles, and whats the conversion for kilometers to miles? its over 400km i'm pretty sure anyway. Point is, if there was weather, or an airport emergency, they could easily divert to another of the dozens, if not hundreds of airports that could accomidate them.

    and the 45 minutes reserve for an ifr flight, is a 45minute reserve after you get to your alternate airport. If the weather is so bad that you cant land at your destination, you have to have an alternate airport selected, (before you start the flight) in your flight plan, have enough fuel to get there, and then have the 45 minute reserve.

    For example, I did an ifr flight from halifax to moncton one day. its just an hour flight, but my alternate aerodrome was Charlettown which was about 45 minutes away. So I needed the fuel for the hour to moncton from halifax, then the 45 minutes to charlettown, then the 45 minute reserve. A one hour trip demanded 2.5 hours of fuel on board just to satisfy legal requirments.

    So, I really dont see a problem here. other than people declaring emergencys when there isn't one.
     
    Last edited: 24 Apr 2008
  11. Brett89

    Brett89 Minimodder

    Joined:
    15 Dec 2005
    Posts:
    1,324
    Likes Received:
    27
    Exactly, I really am glad someone else actually through.
     
  12. crazybob

    crazybob Voice of Reason

    Joined:
    21 Oct 2004
    Posts:
    1,123
    Likes Received:
    6
    I came in to say pretty much this, but I can't really do it any better. I'm a pilot, and I know the regulations. I also know that no matter how the reporters try to spin this, no FAA regulations are being violated. This is because the FAA is like a Rottweiler - it can be very friendly as long as you play nice and do what it expects, but if you make it mad it'll bite your arm off in an instant. The fact that the airline is still operating pretty much proves they're not breaking regulations, and as long as the FAA's carefully planned and well-reasoned safety protocols are being followed, I'd be totally comfortable flying with that airline.
     
  13. DXR_13KE

    DXR_13KE BananaModder

    Joined:
    14 Sep 2005
    Posts:
    9,139
    Likes Received:
    382
    Peter and the wolf....
     
  14. chrisb2e9

    chrisb2e9 Dont do that...

    Joined:
    18 Jun 2007
    Posts:
    4,061
    Likes Received:
    46
    haha, good point. but in that world it doesn't work like that. If a controller doesn't follow procedure with an aircarft declaring an emergency then they can kiss their job good bye.
     
  15. profqwerty

    profqwerty What's a Dremel?

    Joined:
    2 Jan 2006
    Posts:
    1,262
    Likes Received:
    18
    It might even be preferable to fly with them - they land and get to the terminal sooner:hip:
     
  16. DXR_13KE

    DXR_13KE BananaModder

    Joined:
    14 Sep 2005
    Posts:
    9,139
    Likes Received:
    382
    yeah... and land those 30 planes in that are all declaring emergency..... at the same time!!
     
  17. crazybob

    crazybob Voice of Reason

    Joined:
    21 Oct 2004
    Posts:
    1,123
    Likes Received:
    6
    Ignoring how unlikely that situation is, they'd land as many as they could and divert the rest to nearby airports. I suspect they'd also assign priority based on the specific issue; generally when declaring an emergency you also mention what's wrong.
     
  18. EmJay

    EmJay What's a Dremel?

    Joined:
    28 Jun 2007
    Posts:
    316
    Likes Received:
    0
    Uh-oh, slow news day - quick, dig up an airplane-related scare story! That always sells!

    Nice to see one that doesn't involve terrorism for a change, though. :D
     
  19. pdf27

    pdf27 What's a Dremel?

    Joined:
    6 Jul 2006
    Posts:
    169
    Likes Received:
    1
    There are lots of aerodynamic reasons which I'd really rather not go into as they can be a bit of a screaming nightmare if you know what you're talking about, let alone if you aren't. Basically, thin wings are a REALLY, REALLY good thing for an airliner, while large diameter engines are required to meet the noise requirements for airports.
    You can therefore either put these engines inside the cabin instead of people (the airlines tend not to like this -something about preferring to use the space for paying passengers) or hang them from the wings/tail. The wings are better from a structural point of view - hanging engines on them lets you make the wings weaker for the same aerodynamic load at failure, and hence allows a lighter airframe.
     
  20. DXR_13KE

    DXR_13KE BananaModder

    Joined:
    14 Sep 2005
    Posts:
    9,139
    Likes Received:
    382
    just lets see how this will role out... and if s*** hits the fan don't go calling it terrorism!
     

Share This Page