panamair
Topic Author
Posts: 3759
Joined: Fri Oct 12, 2001 2:24 am

DL A332 N851NW Flying Nonstop SIN-ATL Ferry May 26

Sun May 26, 2013 4:19 pm

Looks like N851NW is done with the flat-bed refurbishment, and is being ferried nonstop from SIN to ATL today (Sunday 26 May). It is DL9971. Has DL ever had a nonstop SIN-ATL ferry flight on the A332 or any other type before?
 
Qantas744er
Posts: 1149
Joined: Sat Jun 04, 2005 4:36 am

DL A332 N851NW Flying Nonstop SIN-ATL Ferry May 26

Sun May 26, 2013 4:40 pm

Happiness is V1 in Lagos
 
Triple7Lr
Posts: 107
Joined: Mon Sep 17, 2012 2:17 pm

DL A332 N851NW Flying Nonstop SIN-ATL Ferry May 26

Sun May 26, 2013 4:44 pm

I don't think they've ever done that flight nonstop. The last one stopped in ANC.
 
Transpac787
Posts: 1349
Joined: Mon Jul 30, 2007 12:47 pm

DL A332 N851NW Flying Nonstop SIN-ATL Ferry May 26

Sun May 26, 2013 4:50 pm

Quoting Triple7Lr (Reply 2):

I don't think they've ever done that flight nonstop. The last one stopped in ANC.

The last one was an A333, though. N801NW.
 
G500
Posts: 1252
Joined: Tue Oct 18, 2011 11:45 pm

DL A332 N851NW Flying Nonstop SIN-ATL Ferry May 26

Sun May 26, 2013 6:41 pm

if you pull the power back enough, a number of airplanes can do SIN-ATL non-stop
 
71Zulu
Posts: 1605
Joined: Mon Aug 28, 2006 12:42 am

RE: DL A332 N851NW Flying Nonstop SIN-ATL Ferry May 26

Sun May 26, 2013 6:46 pm

Clickable links only please!
 
LH707330
Posts: 1490
Joined: Fri Jun 15, 2012 11:27 pm

RE: DL A332 N851NW Flying Nonstop SIN-ATL Ferry May 26

Sun May 26, 2013 6:48 pm

The 332 has the same center tank as the 343, so when empty they can go quite far.
 
XFSUgimpLB41X
Posts: 3960
Joined: Fri Aug 25, 2000 1:18 am

RE: DL A332 N851NW Flying Nonstop SIN-ATL Ferry May 26

Sun May 26, 2013 7:22 pm

Quoting 71Zulu (Reply 5):
So how many pilots on board?

That is a 4 pilot operation.
Chicks dig winglets.
 
jporterfi
Posts: 463
Joined: Sat Feb 25, 2012 6:25 am

RE: DL A332 N851NW Flying Nonstop SIN-ATL Ferry May 26

Sun May 26, 2013 8:20 pm

Quoting g500 (Reply 4):

They are traveling at Mach .9, so it doesn't seem like they had to pull the power back for that flight. Although the fact that it is a ferry flight means that range is automatically increased from what the aircraft could do in revenue operations.
 
rwy04lga
Posts: 1976
Joined: Mon Jul 18, 2005 7:21 am

RE: DL A332 N851NW Flying Nonstop SIN-ATL Ferry May 26

Sun May 26, 2013 8:45 pm

I wonder if a DL employee could nonrev on that flight.
Just accept that some days, you're the pigeon, and other days the statue
 
yellowtail
Posts: 3708
Joined: Fri Jun 17, 2005 3:46 am

RE: DL A332 N851NW Flying Nonstop SIN-ATL Ferry May 26

Sun May 26, 2013 10:46 pm

Quoting g500 (Reply 4):

if you pull the power back enough, a number of airplanes can do SIN-ATL non-stop

If you pull back the power enough, you will be up there forever!
When in doubt, hold on to your altitude. No-one has ever collided with the sky.
 
cessna2
Posts: 218
Joined: Sun Feb 12, 2006 6:16 am

RE: DL A332 N851NW Flying Nonstop SIN-ATL Ferry May 26

Sun May 26, 2013 11:40 pm

Quoting rwy04lga (Reply 9):
I wonder if a DL employee could nonrev on that flight.

If the Captain then Dispatch says yes...we can  
 
questions
Posts: 1141
Joined: Thu Sep 15, 2011 4:51 am

RE: DL A332 N851NW Flying Nonstop SIN-ATL Ferry May 26

Sun May 26, 2013 11:57 pm

Who else is generally onboard along with the pilots (4 in this case)?
 
trent772
Posts: 131
Joined: Wed Oct 10, 2012 10:08 pm

RE: DL A332 N851NW Flying Nonstop SIN-ATL Ferry May 26

Mon May 27, 2013 12:10 am

Quoting jporterfi (Reply 8):
They are traveling at Mach .9

The MMO for the A330 is M0,86, they can't be doing M0,90.

Quoting cessna2 (Reply 11):
If the Captain then Dispatch says yes...we can

I thought pax can't be carried on ferry flights according to FAR's.
Pedaling Squares…
 
tyler81190
Posts: 720
Joined: Fri Feb 13, 2009 10:28 am

RE: DL A332 N851NW Flying Nonstop SIN-ATL Ferry May 26

Mon May 27, 2013 12:14 am

Quoting trent772 (Reply 13):
I thought pax can't be carried on ferry flights according to FAR's.

Employees arent passengers...

Also, it is an airline Ferry, not a mechanical, or special permit ferry. The aircraft is fully airworthy. Delta just didn't sell any seats.

[Edited 2013-05-26 17:15:34]
 
trent772
Posts: 131
Joined: Wed Oct 10, 2012 10:08 pm

RE: DL A332 N851NW Flying Nonstop SIN-ATL Ferry May 26

Mon May 27, 2013 12:30 am

Quoting tyler81190 (Reply 14):
Employees arent passengers...

I disagree, if I'm non-reving on a company airplane from point A to point B and I'm occupying a passenger seat, I'm a passenger, a company employee still but acting as a passenger.

Quoting tyler81190 (Reply 14):
it is an airline Ferry, not a mechanical, or special permit ferry. The aircraft is fully airworthy. Delta just didn't sell any seats.

I Agree.   
Pedaling Squares…
 
Maverick623
Posts: 4632
Joined: Thu Nov 30, 2006 9:13 am

RE: DL A332 N851NW Flying Nonstop SIN-ATL Ferry May 26

Mon May 27, 2013 12:39 am

Quoting trent772 (Reply 13):
I thought pax can't be carried on ferry flights according to FAR's.

As long as the aircraft is airworthy and not on a special maintenance ferry permit, the FARs do not prohibit the carrying of revenue passengers provided there are enough flight attendants (1 for every 50 seats) and the flight is dispatched under Part 121 rules.

However, most airlines, per their FAA-approved ops-specs, allow employees to "non-rev" on Part 91 supplemental position ferries (with the captain's approval), even without flight attendants provided they are briefed on the location and operation of the emergency exits. This may or may not apply to international flights.

Quoting trent772 (Reply 15):
I disagree, if I'm non-reving on a company airplane from point A to point B and I'm occupying a passenger seat, I'm a passenger, a company employee still but acting as a passenger.

This is correct. The distinction lies in whether the passenger generates any revenue.
"PHX is Phoenix, PDX is the other city" -777Way
 
9lflyguy
Posts: 138
Joined: Tue Jan 05, 2010 12:49 am

RE: DL A332 N851NW Flying Nonstop SIN-ATL Ferry May 26

Mon May 27, 2013 12:39 am

Quoting trent772 (Reply 15):
I disagree, if I'm non-reving on a company airplane from point A to point B and I'm occupying a passenger seat, I'm a passenger, a company employee still but acting as a passenger.

Correct you are considered a passenger but you are taking the flight "at risk." The same rules do not apply. I can't count the times I've hitched a ride on a MX ferry to get to work as a non-rev. I've been the only one in the back many times.
319 320 321 722 732 733 734 735 737 738 739 752 753 763 772 CR2 CR7 CR9 DHA D8B D8C D95 145 170 175 190 M82 M88 M90 S340
 
XFSUgimpLB41X
Posts: 3960
Joined: Fri Aug 25, 2000 1:18 am

RE: DL A332 N851NW Flying Nonstop SIN-ATL Ferry May 26

Mon May 27, 2013 12:58 am

Quoting jporterfi (Reply 8):
They are traveling at Mach .9, so it doesn't seem like they had to pull the power back for that flight. Although the fact that it is a ferry flight means that range is automatically increased from what the aircraft could do in revenue operations.

They were likely flying on a lower cost index- probably around .83 Mach. Notice on the routing they were flying southerly to help ride better tailwinds- that is the reason for the higher groundspeed.
Chicks dig winglets.
 
RobertS975
Posts: 756
Joined: Sun Aug 14, 2005 2:17 am

RE: DL A332 N851NW Flying Nonstop SIN-ATL Ferry May 26

Mon May 27, 2013 1:47 am

I suspect that the plane parks over at the DL TOC and the pilots need to be shuttled over to the CBP.
 
User avatar
copa330200
Posts: 171
Joined: Fri Jan 21, 2011 4:59 am

RE: DL A332 N851NW Flying Nonstop SIN-ATL Ferry May 26

Mon May 27, 2013 3:43 am

Quoting qantas744ER (Reply 1):

18h 29m

that's a loooooooooooooooooooooong fly  Wow!
On the run !!!
 
filejw
Posts: 312
Joined: Mon Sep 18, 2000 2:58 am

RE: DL A332 N851NW Flying Nonstop SIN-ATL Ferry May 26

Mon May 27, 2013 3:46 am

Quoting RobertS975 (Reply 19):

Just depends on what the need is or how fast the a/c is being turned.Iv done both.
 
SYDSpotter
Posts: 585
Joined: Tue Oct 30, 2012 9:10 am

RE: DL A332 N851NW Flying Nonstop SIN-ATL Ferry May 26

Mon May 27, 2013 3:59 am

Assuming time is not a critical issue, would it have been cheaper to break up the journey into different segments say:

SIN-NRT-LAX-ATL
SIN-HNL-ATL

It's wasting a lot of fuel to do it non-stop.
319_320_321_332_333_388 / 734_737_738_743_744_762_763_772_773_77W
 
goboeing
Posts: 2428
Joined: Mon Jun 05, 2000 5:31 am

RE: DL A332 N851NW Flying Nonstop SIN-ATL Ferry May 26

Mon May 27, 2013 4:04 am

Quoting SYDSpotter (Reply 22):

Assuming time is not a critical issue, would it have been cheaper to break up the journey into different segments say:

SIN-NRT-LAX-ATL
SIN-HNL-ATL

It's wasting a lot of fuel to do it non-stop.

But do you think that putting the gear down a couple times and flying a final approach, followed by taxiing, APU on the ground, engine start, taxi out, takeoff, and climbout (huge gas burning time) would save any?

Being that it was completely empty other than fuel, I doubt there was a cheaper way than to takeoff and fly to ATL nonstop. Being an A-330-200 they probably went right up to FL330-350 even with 18 hours to go.
 
RobertS975
Posts: 756
Joined: Sun Aug 14, 2005 2:17 am

RE: DL A332 N851NW Flying Nonstop SIN-ATL Ferry May 26

Mon May 27, 2013 4:05 am

Quoting SYDSpotter (Reply 22):
Assuming time is not a critical issue, would it have been cheaper to break up the journey into different segments say:

SIN-NRT-LAX-ATL
SIN-HNL-ATL

It's wasting a lot of fuel to do it non-stop.

Don't know what the ground costs would be... landing fees, catering costs,
 
Maverick623
Posts: 4632
Joined: Thu Nov 30, 2006 9:13 am

RE: DL A332 N851NW Flying Nonstop SIN-ATL Ferry May 26

Mon May 27, 2013 4:13 am

Quoting SYDSpotter (Reply 22):
It's wasting a lot of fuel to do it non-stop.

How so?
"PHX is Phoenix, PDX is the other city" -777Way
 
akelley728
Posts: 1964
Joined: Tue Dec 07, 1999 12:35 pm

RE: DL A332 N851NW Flying Nonstop SIN-ATL Ferry May 26

Mon May 27, 2013 4:39 am

Quoting SYDSpotter (Reply 22):
It's wasting a lot of fuel to do it non-stop.

Umm, it's saving a lot of fuel to do it non-stop! Engines are most efficient at cruise. If you then descend and then take off 2x instead of just 1x, you're probably using 25% more fuel then if you can do it in one shot.

[Edited 2013-05-26 21:52:51]
 
Max Q
Posts: 5628
Joined: Wed May 09, 2001 12:40 pm

RE: DL A332 N851NW Flying Nonstop SIN-ATL Ferry May 26

Mon May 27, 2013 4:48 am

Anyway, very cool and quite an accomplishment, very curious to know how much fuel they had left in ATL.
The best contribution to safety is a competent Pilot.
 
User avatar
airportugal310
Posts: 3208
Joined: Sun Apr 11, 2004 12:49 pm

RE: DL A332 N851NW Flying Nonstop SIN-ATL Ferry May 26

Mon May 27, 2013 4:54 am

Quoting Maverick623 (Reply 25):
Quoting akelley728 (Reply 26):

While I agree with the assessment that's its probably cheaper to ferry than make multiple stops, it DOES cost money to carry fuel around that won't be burned for some time. Especially on ULH.

So no...he's not "joking". It's a fair question.
I sell airplanes and airplane accessories
 
Dreamflight767
Posts: 416
Joined: Sun Dec 28, 2008 10:43 pm

RE: DL A332 N851NW Flying Nonstop SIN-ATL Ferry May 26

Mon May 27, 2013 5:01 am

Somebody please post the flight plan?
 
b787900
Posts: 33
Joined: Wed Sep 07, 2011 5:49 am

RE: DL A332 N851NW Flying Nonstop SIN-ATL Ferry May 26

Mon May 27, 2013 5:02 am

Just curious, do non-revenue flights like these carry any flight attendants to look after the pilots and provide safety evacuation in case there is an emergency?

Thanks.
 
XFSUgimpLB41X
Posts: 3960
Joined: Fri Aug 25, 2000 1:18 am

RE: DL A332 N851NW Flying Nonstop SIN-ATL Ferry May 26

Mon May 27, 2013 5:08 am

Quoting SYDSpotter (Reply 22):

Assuming time is not a critical issue, would it have been cheaper to break up the journey into different segments say:

SIN-NRT-LAX-ATL
SIN-HNL-ATL

It's wasting a lot of fuel to do it non-stop.

Let's see. Instead of doing 1 landing and takeoff, would it have been cheaper to do 3 landings and takeoffs or 2 landings and takeoffs?

On top of that the extra crews and stopover time? It would have likely costed at least 20,000 to 50,000 extra in fuel to do what you suggsted. Not to mention many thousands of dollars of crew costs.
Chicks dig winglets.
 
SXDFC
Posts: 1655
Joined: Sun Dec 09, 2007 6:07 pm

RE: DL A332 N851NW Flying Nonstop SIN-ATL Ferry May 26

Mon May 27, 2013 5:17 am

Does anyone have any pictures of this bird when she was leaving or flying around in SIN ?
ALL views, opinions expressed are mine ONLY and are NOT representative of those shared by Southwest Airlines Co.
 
MSJYOP28Apilot
Posts: 282
Joined: Tue Jul 21, 2009 2:09 am

RE: DL A332 N851NW Flying Nonstop SIN-ATL Ferry May 26

Mon May 27, 2013 5:40 am

Quoting b787900 (Reply 30):

Typically, there are no FA's on Part 91 repositioning flights unless there is an operational need for FA's to be on there. FA's arent required on Part 91 flights so there isnt a need to have them on the flight unless it is absolutely needed.
 
SYDSpotter
Posts: 585
Joined: Tue Oct 30, 2012 9:10 am

RE: DL A332 N851NW Flying Nonstop SIN-ATL Ferry May 26

Mon May 27, 2013 5:42 am

Quoting airportugal310 (Reply 28):
While I agree with the assessment that's its probably cheaper to ferry than make multiple stops, it DOES cost money to carry fuel around that won't be burned for some time. Especially on ULH.

So no...he's not "joking". It's a fair question.

Thanks, that was the question I was getting at, were the penalties for hauling around extra fuel for ULH > the additional costs of landing/take offs etc.

Quoting XFSUgimpLB41X (Reply 31):
On top of that the extra crews and stopover time? It would have likely costed at least 20,000 to 50,000 extra in fuel to do what you suggsted. Not to mention many thousands of dollars of crew costs.

Yes but you're having to haul that additional fuel to make the ULH non-stop ferry flight. By breaking up the journey you only need to carry the fuel for that particular leg of the journey. What I didn't factor into account were things like crew costs/landing fee etc. Not sure doing ULH would save you that much in fuel...

In any case, I think in this instance, getting the bird back to ATL in the quickest time was the priority and it allows DL to deploy it for a revenue flight quicker - even if breaking the ferry flight back in segments was cheaper.
319_320_321_332_333_388 / 734_737_738_743_744_762_763_772_773_77W
 
XFSUgimpLB41X
Posts: 3960
Joined: Fri Aug 25, 2000 1:18 am

RE: DL A332 N851NW Flying Nonstop SIN-ATL Ferry May 26

Mon May 27, 2013 5:52 am

Quoting SYDSpotter (Reply 34):
Yes but you're having to haul that additional fuel to make the ULH non-stop ferry flight. By breaking up the journey you only need to carry the fuel for that particular leg of the journey. What I didn't factor into account were things like crew costs/landing fee etc. Not sure doing ULH would save you that much in fuel...

You can't be serious.... do you really think a non-stop flight burns more fuel than multiple stops with landings and climb outs?

Think about the physics of what you suggested....

[Edited 2013-05-26 22:54:42]
Chicks dig winglets.
 
SYDSpotter
Posts: 585
Joined: Tue Oct 30, 2012 9:10 am

RE: DL A332 N851NW Flying Nonstop SIN-ATL Ferry May 26

Mon May 27, 2013 7:42 am

Quoting XFSUgimpLB41X (Reply 35):
You can't be serious.... do you really think a non-stop flight burns more fuel than multiple stops with landings and climb outs?

Yes I am being serious hence my original question   

If we are talking about a normal routine mission for the A330 (e.g. a 5000nm), then absolutely, non-stop is a heck of a lot more efficient than breaking down the journey into segments. But this is a ferry flight that is stretching the A330 to the limit in terms of fuel capacity/range (it's 8657 nm !!!). My original question asked would it have been more efficient to break it into 2 or 3 segments, if you broke the journey into 2 segments, that's only 1 additional take-off and 1 additional landing. So not sure how

One of the reasons why SQ for example has had to stop it's non-stop SIN-EWR and SIN-LAX service is because of the nature of the route (ULH) where carrying so much fuel makes the flight marginal. QF could in theory fly LHR-SYD non-stop with a 77L but the cost of the route (i.e. mostly fuel) make the route uneconomic.
319_320_321_332_333_388 / 734_737_738_743_744_762_763_772_773_77W
 
phunc
Posts: 172
Joined: Sun Mar 06, 2011 10:52 pm

RE: DL A332 N851NW Flying Nonstop SIN-ATL Ferry May 26

Mon May 27, 2013 8:30 am

Quoting SYDSpotter (Reply 36):
One of the reasons why SQ for example has had to stop it's non-stop SIN-EWR and SIN-LAX service is because of the nature of the route (ULH) where carrying so much fuel makes the flight marginal. QF could in theory fly LHR-SYD non-stop with a 77L but the cost of the route (i.e. mostly fuel) make the route uneconomic.

Surely this has more to do with the yield of revenue from the ticket price? If those flights stopped enroute, the yield would reduce even more because of the cost of the tech stop. I think the problem SQ had was that they couldn't charge more for the price of a seat on the non stop or they'd price themselves above the market.

In terms of the A332 - it's a very capable aeroplane even before being trimmed correct in flight, kept in balance and flown at the best speed for the wing (M.81 from my experience).

I once managed to flight plan it empty LHR-SYD non-stop, with a 2/0 crew basic DOM, using RCF and I think I ditched alternate fuel. 114tonne fuel tanks can take it a long way. The A333...not as capable!
 
modesto2
Posts: 2669
Joined: Sun Jul 16, 2000 3:44 am

RE: DL A332 N851NW Flying Nonstop SIN-ATL Ferry May 26

Mon May 27, 2013 12:06 pm

As others have mentioned, employees could theoretically non-rev on the flight with CA approval. I once non-revved on a 777 being repositioned from ATL to DTW. There were two other pilots who were jumpseating on the flight, so there were a total of five people on board.
 
Clydenairways
Posts: 1099
Joined: Thu Jan 11, 2007 8:27 am

RE: DL A332 N851NW Flying Nonstop SIN-ATL Ferry May 26

Mon May 27, 2013 12:31 pm

Quoting SYDSpotter (Reply 34):
Thanks, that was the question I was getting at, were the penalties for hauling around extra fuel for ULH > the additional costs of landing/take offs etc.

This major difference here is that on a ferry flight, no payload is being carried, just fuel. So you can't compare this operation with ULH economics.
 
N821NW
Posts: 94
Joined: Sun May 19, 2013 3:32 pm

RE: DL A332 N851NW Flying Nonstop SIN-ATL Ferry May 26

Mon May 27, 2013 12:37 pm

Quoting SYDSpotter (Reply 36):
One of the reasons why SQ for example has had to stop it's non-stop SIN-EWR and SIN-LAX service is because of the nature of the route (ULH) where carrying so much fuel makes the flight marginal. QF could in theory fly LHR-SYD non-stop with a 77L but the cost of the route (i.e. mostly fuel) make the route uneconomic.

You simply can't compare a revenue flight to a ferry flight, the first one has (or should) a bunch of extra weight because of all the cargo (luggage and cargo), passengers, F/A's, catering (food, drinks,...),... where as the second has minimum weight because they only have 4 pilots, maybe one or two non-rev employees, some food and drinks for the crew and a few pieces of luggage. And there is no reason for airlines to a) Pay more landing fees then they need, b) Use more fuel, c) Take more time and d) Add extra rotations to the landing-gears.

Now I would have dreamed to have been on that flight...  
If only more people understood the pure beauty of the Airbus A320 and A330 family's...
 
speedygonzales
Posts: 518
Joined: Thu Sep 13, 2007 5:01 pm

RE: DL A332 N851NW Flying Nonstop SIN-ATL Ferry May 26

Mon May 27, 2013 1:01 pm

Didn't QF do an A330-200 delivery flight nonstop TLS-MEL once?
Las Malvinas son Argentinas
 
twal1011727
Posts: 449
Joined: Thu Mar 23, 2006 5:36 am

RE: DL A332 N851NW Flying Nonstop SIN-ATL Ferry May 26

Mon May 27, 2013 5:09 pm

Quoting Max Q (Reply 27):
very curious to know how much fuel they had left in ATL.

This flight left SIN with 239500 lbs and arrived ATL with 20300 lbs

KD
 
XFSUgimpLB41X
Posts: 3960
Joined: Fri Aug 25, 2000 1:18 am

RE: DL A332 N851NW Flying Nonstop SIN-ATL Ferry May 26

Mon May 27, 2013 5:52 pm

Quoting SYDSpotter (Reply 36):
If we are talking about a normal routine mission for the A330 (e.g. a 5000nm), then absolutely, non-stop is a heck of a lot more efficient than breaking down the journey into segments. But this is a ferry flight that is stretching the A330 to the limit in terms of fuel capacity/range (it's 8657 nm !!!). My original question asked would it have been more efficient to break it into 2 or 3 segments, if you broke the journey into 2 segments, that's only 1 additional take-off and 1 additional landing. So not sure how

Doing it non stop saved many hours of travel time on top of what you suggested, and adding in the extra landings and takeoffs would have burned probably 50,000 pounds more fuel than just fueling up and going non-stop.

You're confusing revenue generation capability on ULR flights versus what is more efficient for the airplane.
Chicks dig winglets.
 
N821NW
Posts: 94
Joined: Sun May 19, 2013 3:32 pm

RE: DL A332 N851NW Flying Nonstop SIN-ATL Ferry May 26

Mon May 27, 2013 8:09 pm

Quoting TWAL1011727 (Reply 42):
This flight left SIN with 239500 lbs and arrived ATL with 20300 lbs

Very interesting info, could somebody please tell me for how long they could have with the remaining fuel in the tanks?
If only more people understood the pure beauty of the Airbus A320 and A330 family's...
 
BigSaabowski
Posts: 126
Joined: Fri Jul 04, 2008 1:33 pm

RE: DL A332 N851NW Flying Nonstop SIN-ATL Ferry May 26

Mon May 27, 2013 8:52 pm

Quoting N821NW (Reply 44):

Very interesting info, could somebody please tell me for how long they could have with the remaining fuel in the tanks?

2 hours at cruise power setting at their (very light) landing weight.
 
PITrules
Posts: 2109
Joined: Fri Jun 23, 2000 11:27 am

RE: DL A332 N851NW Flying Nonstop SIN-ATL Ferry May 26

Mon May 27, 2013 9:44 pm

Planes use more fuel per mile on ULH flights than on shorter flights, whether there is payload or not. Airplanes burn additional fuel just to tanker fuel, and I think that is the very valid point SYDSpotter is trying to make.

"Long flights require more fuel, which gives the aircraft more weight and, in turn, means it has to use more fuel per mile than shorter routes."
http://www.ibtimes.com/why-worlds-lo...keep-getting-canceled-good-854033#

This is magnified on ULH flights. So here we have an A332 which took off on an 18 hour flight with 240,000# of fuel. Lets say they instead planned a stop after 9 hours. Perhaps they would only need 140,000# for the first leg (just rough ballpark numbers). Think about how much extra fuel was burned to carry an extra 100,000 pounds for the first nine hours of that nonstop flight.

I would wager the cost of that extra fuel burn is much more than the cost of an extra set of landing fees or tire wear, etc. There is the point of two departures and climb outs burning more fuel, which is true. But then this is somewhat offset by having two descents at or near flight idle.

At the end of the day Delta decided to fly this nonstop, so there was obviously a reason for it. Perhaps it was the time savings. But blanket statements such as "it saved fuel flying nonstop" when the economics of fuel tankering during ULH are known to show otherwise is not showing the full picture.

[Edited 2013-05-27 14:51:04]
FLYi
 
User avatar
airportugal310
Posts: 3208
Joined: Sun Apr 11, 2004 12:49 pm

RE: DL A332 N851NW Flying Nonstop SIN-ATL Ferry May 26

Mon May 27, 2013 10:00 pm

Quoting PITrules (Reply 46):

Agreed. I spend a lot of time figuring this out for my airline and it's not as "cut and dry" as a lot of people are making it out to be.

Nice summary
I sell airplanes and airplane accessories
 
Viscount724
Posts: 18822
Joined: Thu Oct 12, 2006 7:32 pm

RE: DL A332 N851NW Flying Nonstop SIN-ATL Ferry May 26

Mon May 27, 2013 10:20 pm

Quoting b787900 (Reply 30):
Just curious, do non-revenue flights like these carry any flight attendants to look after the pilots and provide safety evacuation in case there is an emergency?

No.
 
71Zulu
Posts: 1605
Joined: Mon Aug 28, 2006 12:42 am

RE: DL A332 N851NW Flying Nonstop SIN-ATL Ferry May 26

Mon May 27, 2013 11:09 pm

Quoting speedygonzales (Reply 41):
Didn't QF do an A330-200 delivery flight nonstop TLS-MEL once?

Not sure, but here is a HA 332 delivery, TLS-HNL non-stop with 5 pilots.

http://flightaware.com/live/flight/N...A/history/20100529/0710Z/LFBO/PHNL

Quoting XFSUgimpLB41X (Reply 7):
That is a 4 pilot operation.

Thanks.
Clickable links only please!

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: AERTANK, atypical, audidudi, Baidu [Spider], Bing [Bot], CM767, DaufuskieGuy, GloomyDe, hayzel777, milemaster, notdownnlocked, PacificBeach88, qf789, SamoNYC, United1 and 187 guests