Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
BUR Density Altitude/ JetBlue A320 Problems  
User currently offlineHighflier92660 From United States of America, joined Apr 2004, 697 posts, RR: 0
Posted (8 years 5 months 4 weeks 1 day 9 hours ago) and read 4368 times:

The summer heat is on in Southern California and at Burbank airport (elevation 778) yesterday's monsoonal 101 degree Fahrenheit temperatures sent the density altitude to 4,000 ft. It has also meant that Jet Blue's worst operational nightmare (the A320 range and hot/high limitations) are once again front and center and B6 must explain to irritated passengers why Salt lake City is so often an intermediate stop between BUR and JFK. One wonders if the tired passengers on flight 356 are still singing the praises of Jet Blue as they arrived in soggy JFK at 1:49 am. this morning.

In fairness to the company, I've heard they are arm-twisting Airbus/IAE to get another 5% efficiency out of the airframe-engine. In the meantime, is there anyone on this forum familiar with Jet Blue that can tell me what pax and load restrictions B6 is running out of BUR? If global warming has any climatological validity, it's going to be one long summer for Jet Blue out of Burbank.

13 replies: All unread, jump to last
 
User currently offlineB6FA4ever From United States of America, joined Aug 2003, 819 posts, RR: 11
Reply 1, posted (8 years 5 months 4 weeks 1 day 8 hours ago) and read 4325 times:

hey Highflier,

typically during the "hot" summer...the morning flights usually have no problem doing the BUR-JFK flights non-stop since the temp. is pretty decent. its mainly the afternoon departures and occasionally the red-eye flight that will run into the diversion problems.

i believe we cap the flights at a max of 150 (depending on load and climate at the time).

i've worked a lot of BUR flights from Aug - Dec of last year to JFK. Aug and Sept i worked the morning flts out of BUR and Oct-Dec i worked the red-eyes. the morning flights i had no problems on. but go figure, Oct-Dec (doing the red-eyes) i had 3 fuel stops to JFK. 2 to DEN and 1 to BUF.

it'll be interesting to see how the summer will turn out for our BUR operation's (5x to JFK and the 1x to MCO). not to mention the amount of threads regarding B6 Fuel stopping and the criticism that comes w/ it.

~B6FA4ever
*here's to a "cool" summer!


User currently offlineOPNLguy From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 2, posted (8 years 5 months 4 weeks 1 day 8 hours ago) and read 4218 times:

The problem at BUR isn't so much the 778 MSL elevation, or the relatively (compared to LAX) short runway--those are certainly factors. What absolutely makes the weight situation horrible for many aircraft is that same weather pattern driving the surface winds that require use of runway 33 versus the "normal" 15, and that's precisely what happened for awhile yesterday afternoon: [Bold emphasis is mine] (Oldest info is at the bottom, and move up from there)

KBUR 260253Z 14006KT 10SM CLR 33/16 A2986 RMK AO2 SLP097 T03280156 55002
KBUR 260153Z 14005KT 10SM CLR 35/15 A2985 RMK AO2 SLP094 T03500150
KBUR 260053Z 25008KT 10SM CLR 37/11 A2986 RMK AO2 SLP094 T03720111
KBUR 252353Z 24010KT 10SM CLR 37/13 A2987 RMK AO2 SLP098 T03670128 10378 20272 56030
KBUR 252253Z 33008KT 10SM CLR 38/11 A2988 RMK AO2 SLP101 T03780111
KBUR 252153Z 33006KT 10SM CLR 34/14 A2992 RMK AO2 SLP118 T03440139
KBUR 252053Z VRB04KT 9SM CLR 32/15 A2996 RMK AO2 SLP130 T03170150 58006
KBUR 251953Z 15007KT 7SM CLR 29/16 A2998 RMK AO2 SLP140 T02890156
KBUR 251853Z 15009KT 7SM CLR 29/16 A2998 RMK AO2 SLP139 T02890156
KBUR 251753Z 17007KT 8SM CLR 28/15 A2998 RMK AO2 SLP138 T02830150 10289 20217 53007

As you can see, the wind change on the 2153Z observation brought with it much warmer air, like 34C versus the 32C and 29C in the previous 2 hours; at 2253Z, the temp hit 38C, and even through the winds swung to a crosswind at 2353Z and 0053Z (allowing use of 15), and back to the southeast at 0153Z, the hot air hung around for awhile.

I can assure you that jetBlue flights were not the only ones suffering, as when BUR goes to 33 and it's that hot, many SWA 737-300s and -500s start fuel-stopping at LAX and ONT, even for short scheduled flights to Bay area and Las Vegas. Thankfully, the 737-700s are not adversely affected.


User currently offlineTimz From United States of America, joined Sep 1999, 6902 posts, RR: 7
Reply 3, posted (8 years 5 months 4 weeks 1 day 8 hours ago) and read 4188 times:

Quoting OPNLguy (Reply 2):
when BUR goes to 33 and it's that hot, many SWA 737-300s and -500s start fuel-stopping at LAX and ONT, even for short scheduled flights to Bay area and Las Vegas.

Ouch! At 38 C, 778 ft elev, a 6000-ft 1-percent-upgrade runway isn't enough for a 733/735 to make a 200-direct-nm trip? How far could they go if everything were the same except the runway was level?


User currently offlineOPNLguy From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 4, posted (8 years 5 months 4 weeks 1 day 7 hours ago) and read 4159 times:

Quoting Timz (Reply 3):
Ouch! At 38 C, 778 ft elev, a 6000-ft 1-percent-upgrade runway isn't enough for a 733/735 to make a 200-direct-nm trip?

Depends upon the balance between the payload (how many folks show up) and the fuel requirements on the other end (good weather = no alternate fuel; bad weather = alternate fuel plus extra for delays). With our load factors, stopping is usually the only option.

Quoting Timz (Reply 3):
How far could they go if everything were the same except the runway was level?

Hard to say, since there are also some obstacles to consider there...

The runway slope is indeed a major factor. LAS's 25L and 25R have about the same uphill slope, but they're so much longer. When weights on 25R preclude a non-stop, it's not all unusual to see some aircraft waiting for an opposite direction departure on 07L to take advantage of the downhill slope. That creates fits for ATC, who must clear a big hole in the arrival streams for the 25s, so big delays (1:00+) often ensue for the 07L departure. Given LAS's increasing traffic in recent years, they don't seem to do it as much as they used to.


User currently offlineGoldenshield From United States of America, joined Jan 2001, 6118 posts, RR: 14
Reply 5, posted (8 years 5 months 4 weeks 1 day 7 hours ago) and read 4115 times:

I agree with OPNL here. The hits off of 33 are rediculously bad. They aren't as bad taking off from 26, but they are still bad.


Two all beef patties, special sauce, lettuce, cheese, pickles, onions on a sesame seed bun.
User currently offlineSllevin From United States of America, joined Jan 2002, 3376 posts, RR: 6
Reply 6, posted (8 years 5 months 4 weeks 1 day 5 hours ago) and read 3995 times:

Quoting OPNLguy (Reply 2):
What absolutely makes the weight situation horrible for many aircraft is that same weather pattern driving the surface winds that require use of runway 33 versus the "normal" 15

To add some additional clarity, the hit related to 33 ops at BUR is the terrain; you are forced into significantly better performance than off 15, which launches over the relatively low foothills of Studio City/Hollywood. I also believe that 33 departures require more coordination with VNY ops for "noise abatement" as flights head for PMD.

Steve


User currently offlineLowecur From United States of America, joined Jan 2005, 585 posts, RR: 0
Reply 7, posted (8 years 5 months 4 weeks 1 day 5 hours ago) and read 3975 times:

319s would sure look good during this weather. Too bad Jetblue doesn't order a few & throw 134 seats onboard.

User currently offlineVegasplanes From United States of America, joined Jun 2005, 778 posts, RR: 2
Reply 8, posted (8 years 5 months 4 weeks 1 day 1 hour ago) and read 3836 times:

Quoting OPNLguy (Reply 4):

The runway slope is indeed a major factor. LAS's 25L and 25R have about the same uphill slope, but they're so much longer. When weights on 25R preclude a non-stop, it's not all unusual to see some aircraft waiting for an opposite direction departure on 07L to take advantage of the downhill slope. That creates fits for ATC, who must clear a big hole in the arrival streams for the 25s, so big delays (1:00+) often ensue for the 07L departure. Given LAS's increasing traffic in recent years, they don't seem to do it as much as they used to.

Thanks for the info.

The last week or so, LAS has been hot, around 110 daily highs. Take-offs have been using 7L arriving 7R and the 19's.

Quoting OPNLguy (Reply 2):
I can assure you that jetBlue flights were not the only ones suffering, as when BUR goes to 33 and it's that hot, many SWA 737-300s and -500s start fuel-stopping at LAX and ONT, even for short scheduled flights to Bay area and Las Vegas. Thankfully, the 737-700s are not adversely affected.

Does WN try to schedule more -700's to the southwest in the summer due to the hot and high airports/restrictive airports such as BUR, SAN, SNA, LAS, DEN, SLC and like ?


User currently offlineOPNLguy From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 9, posted (8 years 5 months 4 weeks 1 day 1 hour ago) and read 3805 times:

Quoting Vegasplanes (Reply 8):
Does WN try to schedule more -700's to the southwest in the summer due to the hot and high airports/restrictive airports such as BUR, SAN, SNA, LAS, DEN, SLC and like ?

We try, but -700s are also in obvious high demand for long-haul flights out of LAS, PHX, DEN, and MDW. The -700s now constitute about 52% of the total fleet, and since that's all we're getting from Boeing, scheduling gets easier as that 52% goes up.


User currently offlineThepilot From Canada, joined Jan 2010, 5 posts, RR: 0
Reply 10, posted (8 years 5 months 4 weeks 1 day ago) and read 3778 times:

Quoting Lowecur (Reply 7):
319s would sure look good during this weather. Too bad Jetblue doesn't order a few & throw 134 seats onboard.

That might not work as well. True, the A319 has the best range in its class and thus should not need a fuel stop. However, it does take more runway to get it up (more fuel), and I do not think it could operate N/S flights to the east coast out of BUR and SNA (yes, I know B6 doesn't fly there). If we were talking range alone, the 319 is better than the 320. But the 19 can't get off as quick. Please someone correct me if I am wrong.

Question: Are flights like SNA-EWR also suffering? Please, please do not turn this into an A v. B, as they are both great manufacturers and we do not need that debate.

Thanks.



From YVR
User currently offlineHnlBoi From United States of America, joined Jun 2006, 129 posts, RR: 0
Reply 11, posted (8 years 5 months 4 weeks 19 hours ago) and read 3590 times:

Can someone explain hot and high?

User currently offlineSeanp11 From United States of America, joined Jan 2006, 290 posts, RR: 0
Reply 12, posted (8 years 5 months 4 weeks 18 hours ago) and read 3551 times:

Quoting HnlBoi (Reply 11):
Can someone explain hot and high?

Hot temperatures and high altitude. BUR isn't so much high, but it is really hot right now. Jet engines put out less thrust at high temperatures and at higher altitudes. This can really penalize aircraft not optimized for hot and high ops out of shorter runways.

An airport like DEN has long runways to compensate for its mile high altitude and high temperatures in the summer. This isn't the case at BUR, which in addition to shorter runways, has terrain to clear.

Hope this answered your question.  Smile

[Edited 2006-06-27 09:54:04]

User currently offlineLaxintl From United States of America, joined May 2000, 26150 posts, RR: 50
Reply 13, posted (8 years 5 months 4 weeks 2 hours ago) and read 3386 times:

Somewhat same thing has happended today... Temps rose and winds shifted completely 180 degrees in direct.

Both JBU354 and 356 are operating with stops in SLC today.


KBUR 272353Z 34011KT 10SM BKN130 35/08 A2982 RMK AO2 RAE10 SLP083 P0000
KBUR 272253Z COR 36016KT 10SM -RA BKN130 32/09 A2986 RMK AO2 RAB51 PRESFR SLP095
KBUR 272153Z 35008KT 10SM CLR 31/09 A2991 RMK AO2 SLP115 T03110094
KBUR 272053Z 33009KT 10SM CLR 30/11 A2995 RMK AO2 SLP125 T03000106 50006
KBUR 271953Z 25003KT 10SM CLR 28/13 A3000 RMK AO2 SLP147 T02780133
KBUR 271853Z 18008KT 7SM CLR 25/15 A3002 RMK AO2 SLP152 T02500150



From the desert to the sea, to all of Southern California
Top Of Page
Forum Index

This topic is archived and can not be replied to any more.

Printer friendly format

Similar topics:More similar topics...
JetBlue A320 And XM Radio posted Thu Oct 26 2006 00:24:18 by JetBlueAUS
JetBlue A320 @ PHL Now. posted Sat Oct 7 2006 22:45:22 by USAir330
JetBlue A320 Vs. Jetway @ MCO posted Wed Mar 29 2006 17:39:07 by SCXmechanic
Jetblue A320 Landed In OKC! posted Thu Feb 16 2006 03:30:47 by Jetmatt777
JetBlue A320 Configurations posted Sat Feb 4 2006 22:03:15 by UnitedFirst
Jetblue A320 In Emergeny LGB Pt. 2 posted Thu Sep 22 2005 03:16:03 by Crogalski
Jetblue A320 In Emergeny LGB posted Thu Sep 22 2005 01:19:14 by Deltaflyertoo
DUE: JFK Latest JetBlue A320 N607JB posted Sun Feb 27 2005 20:28:52 by RobK
JetBlue's A320's posted Sat Feb 26 2005 16:35:11 by Swabur
New Jetblue A320 Delivered Today posted Fri Feb 11 2005 21:02:21 by RobK