Nickbbu From Romania, joined Jan 2007, 185 posts, RR: 4 Posted (8 years 3 weeks 2 days ago) and read 6090 times:
This routing of today’s DL 134 JFK-OTP flight is the most unusual I have ever seen… Because the flights going from west to east usually take the southern routes over the Atlantic. And this routing so far north, not very far from the coast of Greenland, is even northern than the normal routing the flights take from east to west, when crossing the Atlantic.
Maybe the flight encountered some unfavorable weather along the way, but even so, not a good reason at all to go that far north… What do you think?
CYLW From Canada, joined Apr 2000, 448 posts, RR: 0
Reply 1, posted (8 years 3 weeks 1 day 23 hours ago) and read 6023 times:
As you see their routing below, they are planned via NAT Track T (which is the most northern track going eastbound). Although they may usually fly a more southerly route, this route is not that far out of the way. Possibly the upper winds are favouring flying more north tonight or like you said, they could be avoiding some weather (most likely in Europe) as they usually don't like to plan Nat tracks through significant weather. It's possible also that there are some airway restrictions in Europe forcing them to alter the route.
ACDC8 From Canada, joined Mar 2005, 7744 posts, RR: 34
Reply 2, posted (8 years 3 weeks 1 day 23 hours ago) and read 5998 times:
Happens quite often. Sometimes, the westbound TA flights heading toward western North America will fly along the coast of Norway, head over north of Iceland, cross Greenland at about mid-section, north of Hudson's Bay and into northern Alberta, sometimes even not until BC.
SevenHeavy From United Kingdom, joined Mar 2004, 1168 posts, RR: 9
Reply 3, posted (8 years 3 weeks 1 day 21 hours ago) and read 5839 times:
The winds across the atlantic this week have been the opposite to the norm. Westbound flights have actually been shorter than eastbound. For example an LHR-JFK flight took 6:15, the same route eastbound took almost 7hrs!.
For this reason airlines are seeking ways to minimise the impact of the eastbound headwinds and are therefore taking slightly less orthodox routings, often far more northerly than usual.
BHD From United Kingdom, joined Nov 2005, 282 posts, RR: 0
Reply 4, posted (8 years 3 weeks 1 day 21 hours ago) and read 5809 times:
Maybe someone can clairfy this, but when I was a kid, about 10 years ago, I had thought Westbound routings stayed pretty close to Iceland and Greenland? Did I imagine this, or were ETOP rules back then limiting routings closer to these countries?
SevenHeavy From United Kingdom, joined Mar 2004, 1168 posts, RR: 9
Reply 7, posted (8 years 3 weeks 1 day 21 hours ago) and read 5716 times:
Quoting Nickbbu (Reply 6): So what's the cause of these abnormal winds? Global warming again?
Nothing so sinister I'm afraid .
The prevailing winds are usually east - west due to the jetstream. Occasionally this shifts from its usual position(s) ( usually in spring or atumn) and allows other weather systems that would usually be north or south of the jetstream to influence the usual wind direction.
Note: this is a very broad explanation. Individual circumstances may be different or more intricate but hopefully you get the idea
This has affected almost all of the flights to the eastern seaboard, eastern canada and even as far south as Florida. Europe-West coast flights have been unaffected as they route farther north over Icelend, Greenland and northern Canada.
MGA From Nicaragua, joined Mar 2005, 726 posts, RR: 3
Reply 10, posted (8 years 3 weeks 14 hours ago) and read 4719 times:
Quoting ACDC8 (Reply 2): Happens quite often. Sometimes, the westbound TA flights heading toward western North America will fly along the coast of Norway, head over north of Iceland, cross Greenland at about mid-section, north of Hudson's Bay and into northern Alberta, sometimes even not until BC.
777 From Italy, joined Sep 2005, 517 posts, RR: 0
Reply 13, posted (8 years 2 weeks 6 days 22 hours ago) and read 4172 times:
I had a similar experience during a FCO-JFK with Delta a year ago.
Instead of leaving Europe from Brest (Normandy) and flight below the UK and Ireland, they made a correction near Marseille (as you can see in the picture) so that we left Europe flying above Belfast and, after, quite close to Greenland!
BTW I guess that the explaination given by SevenHeavy is the right one
I've had to explain a few times to colleagues why it takes longer to fly west (to Asia) than the other way around... Some people just don't believe that there's strong enough wind way up there at 34,000 ft...
Emancipate yourselves from mental slavery. None but ourselves can free our mind.
Amirs From Israel, joined Dec 2003, 1335 posts, RR: 3
Reply 17, posted (8 years 2 weeks 6 days 14 hours ago) and read 3706 times:
I had the exact oppisite last week from LAX - TLV. usually they fly way north and cross right over Greenland - 6500 nm, last week the a/c flew over NY and then came into Europe on the French/Spanish boder.
It was an hour longer than usual, 14 and a half hours!. That added about 500 nm to the trip.
Pilot21 From Ireland, joined Oct 1999, 1416 posts, RR: 2
Reply 19, posted (8 years 2 weeks 6 days 10 hours ago) and read 3536 times:
A few years back on an EI A330 flight from DUB-SNN-BOS, we took a very far northerly route just South of Iceland, then Greenland and down over Canada into Boston. While I assumed this was due to strong winds south of us, I found out during my week in Boston from a Friend who had take the plane from BOS to DUB the previous evening that the aircraft had encountered engine trouble in BOS before departure. On my return I knew the Captain and he confirmed the story and also mentioned that the flight I was on was flown much further north to shorten it's ETOPS from the usual 180mins to about 90 or 60mins (it was a while so my figures maybe slightly off).
Can anybody confirm if this was a Pilot decision to fly closer to an alternative airport enroute across the Atlantic - just in case, or would the FAA/CAA have had a programme in place that restricts aircraft that have suffered engine issues within the previous 2 days (for example) to a shorter ETOPS range?
(I know airlines that have suffered a lot of engine issues on ETOPS aircraft can have their ETOPS license suspended - but is/was there an in between level)
FoxBravo From United States of America, joined Nov 2003, 3043 posts, RR: 4
Reply 21, posted (8 years 2 weeks 4 days 15 hours ago) and read 3042 times:
Quoting SevenHeavy (Reply 3): The winds across the atlantic this week have been the opposite to the norm.
I also experienced the unusual winds this week, flying EWR-DUB and back. The flights were almost exactly the same duration, about 6 hours 20 minutes both ways, which meant we landed about 40 minutes early on the return. We seemed to take fairly normal routes, but perhaps a bit farther north than usual on the eastbound flight.
As an aside, on the flight home I was able to spot a large number of icebergs just off the coast of Newfoundland, not far from Gander--that was an interesting sight I hadn't seen before!
My flights have taken a variety of different tracks across the Atlantic over the years, but one of the more unusual ones I remember was a EWR-FCO flight last year. We headed south along the Jersey shore for a while, then turned left and headed directly east across the ocean, across northern Spain and the Mediterranean.