Sponsor Message:
Aviation Technical / Operations Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Tech Stop Question  
User currently offlineAFGMEL From Australia, joined Jul 2007, 744 posts, RR: 0
Posted (4 years 8 months 1 day 14 hours ago) and read 2866 times:

Hi,

I was thinking about tech stops and why airlines avoid them. I am sure the bean counters have done the maths and worked out it's not economical.

I was musing and thought I would ask. If a route is pushing an aircraft's range, would a tech stop be so bad? If it were somewhere in the middle of an Asia-Europe flight for example.

As I understand it, the aircraft would take off with less fuel and burn less fuel because it is lighter. It could cruise slightly faster which would make up a lot of time over a long haul. If the stop was just for fuel it could be less than an hour and if they used out of the way airports, ATC wouldn't cause delays.

Obviously expensive landing fees and ATC would deter airlines, but there are airports who encourage airlines. Flying near the edge of your range would possibly involve a unscheduled stop in any case.

I don't know the answer to these questions but was just musing. Thoughts?


B 727-44/200 732/3/4/8/9 767-3 742/3/4, 772/3, A319/20/21 332/333 342/3 , DC3/4/10, F28/50/100, ATR72
16 replies: All unread, jump to last
 
User currently offlineThegeek From Australia, joined Nov 2007, 2638 posts, RR: 0
Reply 1, posted (4 years 8 months 1 day 13 hours ago) and read 2844 times:

Pax hate them. While your costs are reduced, also by not needing relief pilots (or less of them) in addition to the points you note, your revenue is also reduced.

User currently offlineTdscanuck From Canada, joined Jan 2006, 12709 posts, RR: 80
Reply 2, posted (4 years 8 months 1 day 12 hours ago) and read 2816 times:



Quoting AFGMEL (Thread starter):
If a route is pushing an aircraft's range, would a tech stop be so bad?

No. There are a couple of scheduled commercial flights that use them now (e.g. BA's London City - NYC route), and almost all long-haul freighters do this.

Quoting AFGMEL (Thread starter):
As I understand it, the aircraft would take off with less fuel and burn less fuel because it is lighter.

Correct. Total fuel burn for the trip is lower.

Quoting AFGMEL (Thread starter):
It could cruise slightly faster which would make up a lot of time over a long haul.

This isn't much of a factor...slightly faster = slightly less time...suppose you gain 0.05 Mach (a pretty descent change in cruise speed)...that would shave about 30 minutes off a 10 hour flight.

Quoting AFGMEL (Thread starter):
If the stop was just for fuel it could be less than an hour and if they used out of the way airports, ATC wouldn't cause delays.

The turn itself could be under an hour, but you need to factor in the extra time for descent to the airport and back out. Passengers have clearly voted with their wallets that, unless there's some overriding benefit (like a quick ground trip at London City), they don't like the extra time.

Tom.


User currently offlineBMI727 From United States of America, joined Feb 2009, 15713 posts, RR: 26
Reply 3, posted (4 years 8 months 1 day 11 hours ago) and read 2807 times:



Quoting Thegeek (Reply 1):
Pax hate them.

This is probably the biggest reason, because remember that freight carriers regularly use tech stops. They do this for other reasons as well, but the biggest factor is that it is better for them to load up the plane and make the stop since the packages don't care.



Why do Aerospace Engineering students have to turn things in on time?
User currently offlineDispatchguy From United States of America, joined Jan 2006, 1249 posts, RR: 2
Reply 4, posted (4 years 8 months 1 day 4 hours ago) and read 2713 times:



Quoting Thegeek (Reply 1):
also by not needing relief pilots (or less of them) in

Not necessarily. When I worked for UAL Pilot Scheduling, our international max duty times were based on the crewmember working a single flight segment during an operational day; the trans-oceanic segment.

So if I have a crew of 4 (2 working pilots and 2 relief pilots) working the ORD-HKG nonstop, and a tech stop say to TPE is decided on pre-departure, once you start adding the times for the tech stop, they may no longer be legal for the operation. If I remember correctly, double augmented crews were only good for an 18-hour operational day; with a 16-hr flight, you only have 2 hours of available delay before the crew can walk.

For example, the ORD B767 international operations were covered by another domicile (usually IAD) because when I was there, ORD wasnt an international domicile for the B767. So, our trips would be built for the crewmember to deadhead into ORD the day before their TATL segment; fly their transatlantic segment, come back, then the day after their arrival back in the states, they would deadhead back to their domicile.



Nobody screws you better than an airline job!
User currently offlineOly720man From United Kingdom, joined May 2004, 6682 posts, RR: 11
Reply 5, posted (4 years 8 months 1 day 4 hours ago) and read 2709 times:

It does depend on the plane. As noted, most scheduled airlines have the planes for the job and don't need to do it. Your're more likely to see such stops with charter airlines which use smaller, and generally more packed, aircraft. So, historically, and perhaps even now, charter flights from the UK to the US with B757s have stopped in Bangor. When BY flew B767s to Australia they stopped in BAH and SIN (I think).

MAN has been used occasionally by the likes of Condor on their return services from LAS to Germany when transatlantic winds have been too high. AI have also, occasionally, refuelled B772s in MAN or DUB when the headwinds have been too strong on the service to JFK.



wheat and dairy can screw up your brain
User currently offlineCosmicCruiser From United States of America, joined Feb 2005, 2255 posts, RR: 15
Reply 6, posted (4 years 8 months 1 day 1 hour ago) and read 2667 times:



Quoting BMI727 (Reply 3):
remember that freight carriers regularly use tech stops

This was covered on a recent post but we almost never have flights with fuel only stops.
big delay and hurts the tight schedules. If a jet can'y do it we use a different jet type.


User currently offlineB727LVR From United States of America, joined Jul 2008, 630 posts, RR: 0
Reply 7, posted (4 years 8 months 1 day ago) and read 2645 times:

Quoting CosmicCruiser (Reply 6):
Quoting BMI727 (Reply 3):
remember that freight carriers regularly use tech stops

This was covered on a recent post but we almost never have flights with fuel only stops.
big delay and hurts the tight schedules. If a jet can'y do it we use a different jet type.

I think what was mean by his post was that using an A300 of 767-300 from LAX-PHX-ABQ-SDF (just an example) when they could go non stop, could be cinsidered a "tech stop" to some. During this stop they can and do unload/load cargo. I agree however that in the sense of the meaning this is probally not the right choice of words to use here. Also a tech stop for the cabin crew is kind of a pain. In my case the passengers are always wanting off, then they take their sweet time getting back to the aircraft... Just easier to keep going if its possible.

[Edited 2009-11-24 06:49:19]


I'm like a kid in a candy store when it comes to planes!
User currently offlineThegeek From Australia, joined Nov 2007, 2638 posts, RR: 0
Reply 8, posted (4 years 8 months 12 hours ago) and read 2502 times:



Quoting Dispatchguy (Reply 4):
Not necessarily. When I worked for UAL Pilot Scheduling, our international max duty times were based on the crewmember working a single flight segment during an operational day; the trans-oceanic segment.

So if I have a crew of 4 (2 working pilots and 2 relief pilots) working the ORD-HKG nonstop, and a tech stop say to TPE is decided on pre-departure, once you start adding the times for the tech stop, they may no longer be legal for the operation. If I remember correctly, double augmented crews were only good for an 18-hour operational day; with a 16-hr flight, you only have 2 hours of available delay before the crew can walk.

For example, the ORD B767 international operations were covered by another domicile (usually IAD) because when I was there, ORD wasnt an international domicile for the B767. So, our trips would be built for the crewmember to deadhead into ORD the day before their TATL segment; fly their transatlantic segment, come back, then the day after their arrival back in the states, they would deadhead back to their domicile.

True, it doesn't necessarily work that way. But taking your first example of ORD-TPE-HKG, ORD-TPE would probably be a 4 pilot sector, but they could rest there and only 2 pilots who operated an flight a day or 2 earlier into TPE could continue on to HKG. Of course, on low frequency routes it can be better to just continue with the 4 pilots.

On your other example, does that mean, then that you had domestic only 767 pilots? My understanding is that QF doesn't do it that way, even for 737 ops. An alternative might have been to have the 767 pilots fly to the international destination from IAD and then operate to ORD. Perhaps there were other reasons not to do it that way.


User currently offlineDispatchguy From United States of America, joined Jan 2006, 1249 posts, RR: 2
Reply 9, posted (4 years 8 months 9 hours ago) and read 2485 times:



Quoting Thegeek (Reply 8):
On your other example, does that mean, then that you had domestic only 767 pilots? My understanding is that QF doesn't do it that way, even for 737 ops. An alternative might have been to have the 767 pilots fly to the international destination from IAD and then operate to ORD. Perhaps there were other reasons not to do it that way

Yes, at the time, ORD was a domestic 767 only domicile, so all of the ORD trans-atlantic originators (CDG, LHR, etc), all had to be crewed from other domiciles.

Some 777s operated on a W-type pattern like u discuss; ORD-CDG-LAX-CDG-ORD; some 767s also operated on a W with an ORD in the middle.

Quoting Thegeek (Reply 8):
but they could rest there and only 2 pilots who operated an flight a day or 2 earlier into TPE could continue on to HKG.

Much easier to keep the crew together, as if you split the crew in TPE, you now have a crew out of position that has flying out of HKG still to do...



Nobody screws you better than an airline job!
User currently offlineThegeek From Australia, joined Nov 2007, 2638 posts, RR: 0
Reply 10, posted (4 years 7 months 3 weeks 3 days 16 hours ago) and read 2248 times:



Quoting Dispatchguy (Reply 9):
Much easier to keep the crew together, as if you split the crew in TPE, you now have a crew out of position that has flying out of HKG still to do...

Don't economic considerations override these sorts of considerations? Just because a given 4 man crew leaves ORD together doesn't really mean that they have to arrive back in ORD together. And even if you disagree, and they wait in TPE for the 2 man crew to arrive, you'd still at least save the operating wages for the relief crew.


User currently offlineDispatchguy From United States of America, joined Jan 2006, 1249 posts, RR: 2
Reply 11, posted (4 years 7 months 3 weeks 3 days 10 hours ago) and read 2222 times:



Quoting Thegeek (Reply 10):
Just because a given 4 man crew leaves ORD together doesn't really mean that they have to arrive back in ORD together.

True, crew A, the prime crew, the takeoff/landing crew, would usually do a SIN or BKK layover, then back to HKG, then back to ORD. I wanna say they had a 6-day trip worth around 36 hours; do it twice for the month and they would meet their monthly max.

Crew B, the relief crew dozing for dollars, would turn around and after a layover, go back to ORD on the HKGORD, UA896.

Quoting Thegeek (Reply 10):
you'd still at least save the operating wages for the relief crew.

Not necessarily, as they also draw a monthly guarantee of X hours per month, or the value of their monthly line (whichever was greater). So, even if their monthly credit was, say 65 hours reduced by no fault of their own (dropping trips, trading trips, etc), they would still be paid their guarantee time; lets say 78 hours. If the company did something to their trip which would reduce their credit time, the guarantee would insure that they were pay protected.

PLUS, if they were below guarantee, and lineholders, they were higher in the order of open time assignment for any open time in domicile and seat.

Its just easier to keep the crews together to their planned layover point.



Nobody screws you better than an airline job!
User currently offlineLowrider From United States of America, joined Jun 2004, 3220 posts, RR: 10
Reply 12, posted (4 years 7 months 3 weeks 3 days 8 hours ago) and read 2203 times:



Quoting CosmicCruiser (Reply 6):
This was covered on a recent post but we almost never have flights with fuel only stops.

Big Brown and Purple might not, but plenty of others do. Over here on the non-sched side, we use them quite frequently. Sometimes it is to accommodate a customers requested airports, other times it is because we cannot carry the required weight non-stop. Sometimes the customer will request a tech stop if they are covering the cost of fuel because they have access to low cost fuel at a particular location. Since we don't have much of a fixed route structure, you sometimes find yourself making fuel stops in some of the oddest places.



Proud OOTSK member
User currently offlineBananaboy From United Kingdom, joined Oct 2004, 1573 posts, RR: 23
Reply 13, posted (4 years 7 months 3 weeks 2 days 6 hours ago) and read 2098 times:



Quoting Oly720man (Reply 5):
When BY flew B767s to Australia they stopped in BAH and SIN (I think).

For most of their years, I believe they actually used BTH (Batam) as it was cheaper than SIN.


Mark



All my life, I've been kissing, your top lip 'cause your bottom one's missing
User currently offlineBwaflyer From United Kingdom, joined Jun 2004, 689 posts, RR: 0
Reply 14, posted (4 years 7 months 3 weeks 2 days 2 hours ago) and read 2080 times:

I'm working a flight tomorrow where we're taking an empty A321 from LHR to JED. We'll make a fuel stop in ATH on the way, and do it in reverse in a couple of days time with a full load of Hajj pilgrims returning home. A fuel stop should 30-45 mins depending on how slick the ground handling contractors and fuel companies are.

User currently offlineThegeek From Australia, joined Nov 2007, 2638 posts, RR: 0
Reply 15, posted (4 years 7 months 3 weeks 1 day 4 hours ago) and read 2012 times:



Quoting Bwaflyer (Reply 14):
I'm working a flight tomorrow where we're taking an empty A321 from LHR to JED. We'll make a fuel stop in ATH on the way, and do it in reverse in a couple of days time with a full load of Hajj pilgrims returning home. A fuel stop should 30-45 mins depending on how slick the ground handling contractors and fuel companies are.

An A321 can't make LHR-JED eastbound while empty, why not? I'd think it could do it with a full pax load westbound. What am I missing, derated engines or something?


User currently offlineDispatchguy From United States of America, joined Jan 2006, 1249 posts, RR: 2
Reply 16, posted (4 years 7 months 3 weeks 20 hours ago) and read 1971 times:



Quoting Thegeek (Reply 15):
An A321 can't make LHR-JED eastbound while empty, why not? I'd think it could do it with a full pax load westbound.

Keep in mind that if they were to do nonstop, they may not be able to have the required reserves on board at arrival after a nonstop leg.



Nobody screws you better than an airline job!
Top Of Page
Forum Index

Reply To This Topic Tech Stop Question
Username:
No username? Sign up now!
Password: 


Forgot Password? Be reminded.
Remember me on this computer (uses cookies)
  • Tech/Ops related posts only!
  • Not Tech/Ops related? Use the other forums
  • No adverts of any kind. This includes web pages.
  • No hostile language or criticizing of others.
  • Do not post copyright protected material.
  • Use relevant and describing topics.
  • Check if your post already been discussed.
  • Check your spelling!
  • DETAILED RULES
Add Images Add SmiliesPosting Help

Please check your spelling (press "Check Spelling" above)


Similar topics:More similar topics...
Old Photo Of DC-10: Tech/ops Question posted Wed Jun 22 2005 16:38:12 by September11
Semi-Tech Airliner (Airbus) Question posted Tue Apr 21 2009 09:33:27 by SAA201
Tech Question, Propstrike Repairs..... posted Tue Aug 19 2008 11:57:31 by Njxc500
Tech Stops And Where To Stop. posted Wed Jan 10 2007 16:02:37 by Oly720man
Question For Any SQ Tech Employee.. posted Sun Feb 13 2005 05:49:16 by Uadc8contrail
Tech Question - Older Planes posted Tue May 25 2004 08:04:08 by Videns
Tech Question On The DC-8 posted Thu Jun 13 2002 07:31:48 by Vertigo
Tech Question For 172 & 152 posted Fri Mar 8 2002 20:27:10 by Radarbeam
Not A Very Tech. Question But posted Sun Dec 23 2001 09:06:40 by Popee
Hold Short Line Question posted Sat Nov 21 2009 18:36:19 by Theengineer

Sponsor Message:
Printer friendly format