ChrisNH From United States of America, joined Jun 1999, 4243 posts, RR: 2 Posted (9 years 1 month 4 days 1 hour ago) and read 5554 times:
This 747-400 had to stop in Bangor, Maine today...anybody know why? FlightAware also shows the plane had to do some 'zig-zags' as it overflew Michigan on its way from Bangor to O'Hare...ATC spacing issues perhaps?
Longhornmaniac From United States of America, joined Jun 2005, 3437 posts, RR: 44
Reply 3, posted (9 years 1 month 4 days ago) and read 5520 times:
Not saying your wrong at all, because you probably know more about it than I do, but isn't that awfully short for a refuelling stop on a 747-400? I mean LHR-ORD isn't exactly pushing the limits on a 747-400, but I suppose that its fueled according to how full it is, and how much weight its carrying. I would certainly expect a 757 to have to stop, and possibly even a 767, if the winds are really bad, but a 744?
DFW13L From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 4, posted (9 years 1 month 4 days ago) and read 5520 times:
Looks like it was "Passenger Convenience/Commerical Publicity"
Here's the raw data from SABRE
* OPERATIONAL FLIGHT INFO * BA 297 -1 WE 19APR
CITY INFO HOUR SLOCALS
LHR ESTIMATED TIME OF DEPARTURE 1255
LEFT THE GATE 1303
TOOK OFF 1331
DELAY OPERATIONAL REASON
ESTIMATED TIME OF ARRIVAL 1537 ORD
BGR DIV ORD BGR
COMMERCIAL PUBLICITY / PASSENGER CONVENIENCE
PASSENGERS ON BOARD S150S
AIRCRAFT LANDED 1451
ESTIMATED TIME OF DEPARTURE 1600
LEFT THE GATE 1552
CBPhoto From United States of America, joined Dec 2003, 1617 posts, RR: 5
Reply 7, posted (9 years 1 month 3 days 23 hours ago) and read 5382 times:
Quoting AA61Hvy (Reply 5): Quoting Longhornmaniac (Reply 3):
Not saying your wrong at all, because you probably know more about it than I do, but isn't that awfully short for a refuelling stop on a 747-400?
[quote=AA61Hvy,reply=5]EXACTLY what I was thinking, but I couldn't come up with the right wording. A 744 can do HKG-LHR with no refueling, I'd imagine a pilot would put enough fuel in a 744 for a LHR-ORD run
This is true, but remember the tanks were probebly not full of fuel. Just because it has more then enough range, doesn't mean they filled them up to capacity. Of course I know it's a Medical diversion. But just to point it out!!
N1120A From United States of America, joined Dec 2003, 27529 posts, RR: 74
Reply 9, posted (9 years 1 month 3 days 21 hours ago) and read 5274 times:
Quoting PanAm747 (Reply 8): I know AA is not filling up their airplanes full anymore, trying to save costs. Are other airlines doing that as well?
Airlines usually don't fill their aircraft full on every flight for any number of reasons. First, if it is a short flight, it may well put the aircraft over MLW (as see by how long that B6 plane with the twisted gear had to circle). Second, and the biggest reason, is that the heavier an airplane is, the more fuel it burns. They wont put a full load on because they will end up burning more up in the process. Now, since the price of fuel has gone so high, some airlines have taken to the idea of tankering. Tankering is when you load enough fuel to take you somewhere, drop passengers off, then take new passengers somewhere else. That is because you may have a big price differential between your fuel supplier in each city and want to buy cheaper fuel. This is only done when the extra weight wont override that price gain.
Mangeons les French fries, mais surtout pratiquons avec fierte le French kiss