What's new
By:

US 807 CLT-PHX-HNL today...and tomorrow

My question is since we are a diversion point for clt-hnl, we the rampers in phx dont even have a 767 towbar to my knowledge and my guess who did we borrow it from, also what if there was a emergency and that aircraft have to be unloaded? We do have k loaders but hell getting them over to a gate from cargo base, good luck, do they even work, or are we going to borrow's service air loaders???? hmmm to me sounds like this planned was not well thought thru, but another bright idea from the sandcastle!!!! DOH
 
Couldbewrong said:
My question is since we are a diversion point for clt-hnl, we the rampers in phx dont even have a t767 towbar to my knowledge and my guess who did we borrow it from, also what if there was a emergency and that aircraft have to be unloaded? We do have k loaders but hell getting them over to a gate from cargo base, good luck, do they even work, or are we going to borrow's service air loaders???? hmmm to me sounds like this planned was not well thought thru, but another bright idea from the sandcastle!!!! DOH
Click to expand...

We have a 767 towbar that, last time I checked, was in that lower parking lot behind Ground MX. I think they refurbished the K loaders last year (in fact I remember them sitting out at B27 for a while) but none of us know how to operate them AFAIK.
 
strangiatotheme said:
We have a 767 towbar that, last time I checked, was in that lower parking lot behind Ground MX. I think they refurbished the K loaders last year (in fact I remember them sitting out at B27 for a while) but none of us know how to operate them AFAIK.
Click to expand...

well we have a few east coast guys im sure they can do that
 
BoeingBoy said:
Either way, the non-revs shouldn't have made the difference. If it was a pre-planned fuel stop the non-revs made no difference, and if the fuel stop was due only to the non-revs they could have been removed from the flight.

I'm assuming that the winds aloft, and possibly the payload, required the fuel stop. So the problem comes from using an airplane with somewhat marginal range for that route (same for PHL-ATH). I haven't even tried to research what percentage of the time the ATH-PHL flight has to make a fuel stop (although it's seasonal, right?), and that's about 300 NM further than CLT-HNL (great circle distance) - anyone have a good figure?

Jim
Click to expand...

Below are the great circle distances in nautical miles by fleet type and route.

From To NM Type
PHL MAN 2,984 330
PHL LGW 3,096 330
PHL MAD 3,199 330
PHL FRA 3,431 330
CLT LGW 3,485 330
PHL FCO 3,798 330
CLT FRA 3,820 330
CLT FCO 4,182 330
PHL LHR 3,080 332
PHL CDG 3,240 332
PHL MUC 3,590 332
CLT CDG 3,627 332
PHL TLV 5,015 332
PHL BCN 3,410 767
PHL FRA 3,431 767
PHL ZRH 3,497 767
PHL MXP 3,553 767
PHL VCE 3,691 767
CLT HNL 4,065 767
CLT GIG 4,079 767
PHL ATH 4,375 767
PHL SNN 2,759 75E
PHL DUB 2,844 75E
PHL GLA 2,875 75E
PHL LIS 3,005 75E
PHL BHX 3,017 75E
PHL AMS 3,247 75E
PHL BRU 3,268 75E
PHL OSL 3,281 75E
PHL ARN 3,484 75E
 
The cretins who run this outfit did not plan correctly. The issue was, and is, re-release airports that are legal for the 767 and not in op specs. as well as flight plans being unable to generate equal time points due to critical fuel burn off on the etops portion of the flight.

It's not winds, non-revs or lack of range on the 767. It's incompetence in the management ranks that permeates this airline. From the top down. Mesa Grande is alive and well. You get what you pay for and the low cost carrier is getting what it's paying for.

Bunch of freakin amatuers.

pilot
 
Exclusive video by mrblujet
Saturday, December 19, 2009.

US Airways B767-200ER widebody jet (reg. N251AY)
Flight #807
Landing on runway 06 at PHX from CLT (diversion)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eIiqIZg5wGs

Taking-off from runway 07L at PHX to HNL
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WxKSgCElT_k

I believe that aircraft parked at the gate B23 in terminal 4 US hub for refuel needed.

----------------------------------------------------------------

I remembered that US 767-200ER (ex-N655US, now N255AY) was the last Fiesta Bowl fan charter flights to Phoenix on January 2, 2005 at former Terminal 2 (gate 11) before merger in late 2005.
Flight #9197 CLT-PHX
Flight #9121 PHX-PIT
 
Black Magic said:
How does the fueling requirments go for an aircraft, it is a mystery to me. When a aircraft is fueled is it filled completely full everytime or is it filled "just enough" for the given route?
Click to expand...

I can't imagine how the "Knower of All Things" hasn't already answered this for you. So, I will. Then I can be corrected by KOAT.

Each flight is fueled only for enough to keep it legal. This includes the fuel used to taxi out, fly to the destination, enough for reserves, and (if required) enough to get to an alternate airport if for some reason (usually weather) you can't land at the intended destination. They usually add a bit more for holding at destination when you are going to places where it commonly occurs (PHL mid-afternoon everyday is a good example.) The dispatcher calculates the amount required to meet these criteria, and then the captain reviews those numbers and either accepts them, asks for more for whatever reason he/she judges prudent, or (rarely) asks for less (and there are valid reasons sometimes for that....and the dispatcher has to agree to the lower number, or the flight doesn't go.)

It would be nearly impossible to operate the airline with the tanks full every takeoff. For instance, on the 767 flights from PHL to CLT, if you were to fill the tanks (enough fuel to get to Europe,) the airplane would be far in excess of the legal landing weight after the short flight to CLT and would have to hold over CLT for a good 3-4 hours to burn off enough fuel to legally land. (This landing limit weight is applicable to all fleets, not just the 767. I used that because it is an extreme example of why the tanks aren't always full at every takeoff.)

Hope that answers your question.
 
nycbusdriver said:
I can't imagine how the "Knower of All Things" hasn't already answered this for you. So, I will. Then I can be corrected by KOAT.

Each flight is fueled only for enough to keep it legal. This includes the fuel used to taxi out, fly to the destination, enough for reserves, and (if required) enough to get to an alternate airport if for some reason (usually weather) you can't land at the intended destination. They usually add a bit more for holding at destination when you are going to places where it commonly occurs (PHL mid-afternoon everyday is a good example.) The dispatcher calculates the amount required to meet these criteria, and then the captain reviews those numbers and either accepts them, asks for more for whatever reason he/she judges prudent, or (rarely) asks for less (and there are valid reasons sometimes for that....and the dispatcher has to agree to the lower number, or the flight doesn't go.)

It would be nearly impossible to operate the airline with the tanks full every takeoff. For instance, on the 767 flights from PHL to CLT, if you were to fill the tanks (enough fuel to get to Europe,) the airplane would be far in excess of the legal landing weight after the short flight to CLT and would have to hold over CLT for a good 3-4 hours to burn off enough fuel to legally land. (This landing limit weight is applicable to all fleets, not just the 767. I used that because it is an extreme example of why the tanks aren't always full at every takeoff.)

Hope that answers your question.
Click to expand...

Thanks...It answers it perfectly. Good explanation...I figured it was a lil more involved than just pulling up to the pump and telling the attendant to fill er up.
 
Can this company do ANYTHING right? Anything at all? My goodness. And to think we were called negative for slamming this flight the other day. MMMMMMMMK 🙄 So out of their league. :lol:
 
I am wondering what all the complaining folks are really complaining about. You were seemingly happy when CLT-HNL was added to the schedule, you know the fleet makeup and availability of specific types of aircraft to fly the route, yet you are complaining in a more nonstop manner than the actual flight. Why, especially when it does appear that there is a significant variation in the speed of the normal winter jet stream?

Can anyone tell me why?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

H
  • Locked
Flight 807 CLT-HNL
4 5 6
Replies
87
Views
22K
HottootrotNyc
H
ringmaruf
US Airways "lowers" fares at HSV
Replies
0
Views
992
ringmaruf
ringmaruf

Latest posts

Back
Top