US Flight 707

[ussnark]

Sure does. Landing fees, cost for refuling and extra time paid to crew for such a stop. What is the cost savings for those seats again? they send us emails on slide deployments costing $30,000, what do these fuel stops cost Tempe? Dare you publish the truth or stick your head in the sand like an Ostich?

A fuel stop can cost as much as an extra hour of time. If handling is last minute, extremely high fees are charged for last minute use of stairs, parking and any other facilities. Fuel, unless at a regular station, is high retail.

There are hidden costs also. At least one additional maintenance cycle is accrued and, likely, if any passengers are connecting overseas and miss their flights there will be those costs associated with accomodating them. Due to reduced frequency to the coast, recovery margins are becoming non-existent with negative implications not just from the DOT statistics but also the Star Alliance people start looking at how US "works" with the rest of the Alliance.

Marginally increasing revenue that increase costs is an exercise only a well-informed CPA is capable of, and for a gain of only a few dollars, would seem to hardly pay for the CPAs time.

 

[N924PS]

Apparently, senior management is aware of the unusual number of fuel stops. What is done about this situation remains to be seen.

I have been flying transcon on USAirways A320 Family aircraft since 2000, and I only recall fuel stops occasionally during winter months when the jet stream had extremely strong flow. The rest of the time, with coordination between the flight crew and the dispatcher, the trips were completed as scheduled.

If you think it is frustrating for the passengers, you should try walking a mile in the shoes of the crewmembers and customer service agents that have to deal with the aftermath of a diversion.

It's hard to say if the additional seats (8 on the A320) are the cause of all this havoc. But be prepared as the thunderstorm season approaches for further disruptions on transcon flying.

 

[BuffaloJoe]

US 707 AGAIN tonight. Same place Kansas City! A320 ...
US 965 an A321 made it this afternoon.

And US Airways Flight Status page has departing PHL at 6:06pm. It took off at 6:06pm. And with the stop in MCI, Flying time was a total of 5:25.

 

[FCYTravis]

My signature is coming true. :down:

 

[700UW]

There are hidden costs also. At least one additional maintenance cycle is accrued

The A320 Series Family Maintenance checks are done by Days, not cycles.

For instance the S-Check which is the most extensive check required is done once every five to six years depending on the aircraft as US first got only a five year time frame from the manufacturer and the FAA and they were extended to five and one half, new Airbus A320 Aircraft are on a six year time frame.

The Airbus undegoes a C1 through C10 which are overnight maintenance checks, then upon completion of the C10 the next check is the C11 which is a several day hangar visit.

All of these checks are based on days, not cycles.

This is for East Aircraft, not sure how the West performs their maintenance program for the A320 family.

 

[NevadaHP]

if you ask me its probably due to a CLP issue. If they would restrict the flights in the passenger cabin the plane would make the full trip. west never has problems jfk-las. and even run phx-anc though that is on A319. Its would be interesting to know if it was scheduled or diverted. if it was going to SFO you would think the better ALT would have been RNO or SLC why make them come way south.

 

[BuffaloJoe]

BREAKING NEWS...BREAKING NEWS....BREAKING NEWS!
US Airways Flight 707 from Philadelphia to San Francisco is making an attempt at San Francisco NONSTOP. (Currently over Utah) The last 4 days it stopped in Kansas City and were the Airbus 320. Todays flight is the Airbus 321. GO FIGURE! 😱

 

[Dog Wonder]

if you ask me its probably due to a CLP issue. If they would restrict the flights in the passenger cabin the plane would make the full trip. west never has problems jfk-las. and even run phx-anc though that is on A319. Its would be interesting to know if it was scheduled or diverted. if it was going to SFO you would think the better ALT would have been RNO or SLC why make them come way south.

If you ask anyone who knows what they are talking about Dispatch makes these decisions.

That is why no one asks you.

 

[BuffaloJoe]

UPDATE
(Words Changed from CCR's "Traveling Band")

707 Coming out of the Sky,
Gonna Make SFO this time on fly,
no more stop in a mid west hillbilly town,
gonna fly my a321 to SFO town.

Looks like its gonna make it tonight! less than 100 miles out and descending.


Update!
It made it nonstop. Let's have a Party! Beer's are on Mr. Parker! 😎 😎

 

[notlayedoffyet]

It's probably alternate selection, if you know what that is. Use a 737 thats rich. This board is worse than the media when it comes to aviation knowledge.

Yep, Lot's of armchair captians around here.

 

[700UW]

US flew from the East coast to LAX, SAN, SFO and SEA all with 737-300LRs it had plenty of fuel to make it.

I use to fly from TPA-LAX all the time on the 737-300LR.

Don't let the facts get in your way.

 

[twoturnin]

US Airways is'nt the only one without the long range equipment----Piedmont used non-aux tanked 300's out to KLAX /KSFO and for very short time flew a KBUR flight out of KCLT nonstop---of course we got a crick in our necks watching the gas gauge--- they made due with limited range equipment that stopped short sometimes---but had superior service in cabin.

 

[A320 Driver]

US flew from the East coast to LAX, SAN, SFO and SEA all with 737-300LRs it had plenty of fuel to make it.

I use to fly from TPA-LAX all the time on the 737-300LR.

Don't let the facts get in your way.

This is some kind of joke...right? I've never seen the -300 that had "plenty of fuel" going to the west coast.

Check your fact sheet again...and let me know how many of those flights you were CAPTAIN on.

A320 Driver B)

 

[700UW]

Funny thing is they did not make fuel stops as they had extra fuel tanks put in, that is why they were # with 500 tail numbers to differentiate from the regular 737-300 and 737-300LR, which also had higher rated thrust engines in their software programing.

Just like the 737-400s had TVs and extra fuel tanks in the 700# serious and used them for west coast and island flights when US first started flying to NAS and GCM.

 

[A320 Driver]

Funny thing is they did not make fuel stops as they had extra fuel tanks put in, that is why they were # with 500 tail numbers to differentiate from the regular 737-300 and 737-300LR, which also had higher rated thrust engines in their software programing.

Just like the 737-400s had TVs and extra fuel tanks in the 700# serious and used them for west coast and island flights when US first started flying to NAS and GCM.

I made fuel stops with the 737. In the winter, it was not unusual. Airbus 319/320 holds 4500 lbs more fuel than the long range 737 did and the 321 holds 11,500 lbs more, and the fuel burns on the 319/320 are practically the same (321 is a little higher).

There is something else going on here that does not make sense.

A320 Driver B)