Moderators: jsumali2, richierich, ua900, PanAm_DC10, hOMSaR

 
Gasman
Topic Author
Posts: 2203
Joined: Mon Mar 01, 2004 10:06 am

Atlantic 757 Diversions Feb. 21

Sun Feb 22, 2015 2:11 am

This relates to a recent thread entitled "UA and the 757 abuse" which is now closed.



Surely it is now time to admit the 757 doesn't work on long Atlantic routes?? Or at the very least concede to the traveler the very high likelihood of having to make a fuel diversion.

[Edited 2015-02-21 18:12:25]
 
cornishsimon
Posts: 261
Joined: Fri Mar 15, 2013 1:10 pm

Atlantic 757 Diversions Feb. 21

Sun Feb 22, 2015 2:15 am

How many times per year does each flight number operate and now many times does it divert for fuel, assuming these flights are always 757s?


cs
 
IndianicWorld
Posts: 3399
Joined: Mon Jun 04, 2001 11:32 am

Atlantic 757 Diversions Feb. 21

Sun Feb 22, 2015 2:16 am

Quoting gasman (Thread starter):
Surely it is now time to admit the 757 doesn't work on long Atlantic routes??

It may not be ideal, but I think this is an overreaction.

Many of these routes would not likely have services without a 757, so its this or nothing I would think.
 
User avatar
LAXintl
Posts: 24804
Joined: Wed May 24, 2000 12:12 pm

Atlantic 757 Diversions Feb. 21

Sun Feb 22, 2015 2:17 am

Actually it was not enroute winds - today it was destination weather requiring added fuel for distant alternates.

Another east coast winter storm is hitting today.
From the desert to the sea, to all of Southern California
 
User avatar
N62NA
Posts: 4482
Joined: Sun Aug 10, 2003 1:05 am

Atlantic 757 Diversions Feb. 21

Sun Feb 22, 2015 2:19 am

Quoting cornishsimon (Reply 1):
How many times per year does each flight number operate and now many times does it divert for fuel, assuming these flights are always 757s?

The weather isn't the same during the entire year, therefore the number of times per year each flight operates and the number of times per year each flight diverts isn't relevant.

The 757 often has to make an unscheduled, unadvertised fuel stop westbound on Europe - Newark during the winter months.

Some people believe this is acceptable. I believe it is not acceptable.
 
goboeing
Posts: 2572
Joined: Mon Jun 05, 2000 5:31 am

Atlantic 757 Diversions Feb. 21

Sun Feb 22, 2015 2:23 am

These routes obviously would not support something larger so the passengers would be stopping in some other hub during a connection anyway.

Might as well make it 95% of the time and on the other days, do a 20 minute fuel stop somewhere along the route of flight.

Really not much of a discussion to be had here.
 
Gasman
Topic Author
Posts: 2203
Joined: Mon Mar 01, 2004 10:06 am

Atlantic 757 Diversions Feb. 21

Sun Feb 22, 2015 2:29 am

Quoting goboeing (Reply 5):
These routes obviously would not support something larger so the passengers would be stopping in some other hub during a connection anyway.

Which is far preferable to an unscheduled fuel stop.

Quoting goboeing (Reply 5):
Really not much of a discussion to be had here.

I disagree. UA (it's mainly UA) are making a profit on these routes. Travelers purchase the tickets on the understanding they are non-stop. Most reasonable travelers know it is possible for things to disrupt their travel. But when such disruptions happen with a certain frequency and predictability, a line gets crossed from an acceptable act of God, to something bordering on fraud on behalf of the airline. I'd argue that line is being approached, if not crossed.
 
User avatar
TWA772LR
Posts: 7347
Joined: Thu Nov 17, 2011 6:12 am

Atlantic 757 Diversions Feb. 21

Sun Feb 22, 2015 2:33 am

Would you rather the plane stop for gas every now-and-then or glide the rest of the way to EWR?
When wasn't America great?


The thoughts and opinions shared under this username are mine and are not influenced by my employer.
 
cedarjet
Posts: 8847
Joined: Mon May 24, 1999 1:12 am

Atlantic 757 Diversions Feb. 21

Sun Feb 22, 2015 2:38 am

Quoting gasman (Thread starter):
Surely it is now time to admit the 757 doesn't work on long Atlantic routes?

Utter nonsense. Today has very high winds, my LHR-MIA took 9h40m so everyone had a bit of a slog coming across today. Why don't you ask the good people of Berlin et al who rely on these 757 nonstops to link their cities to the USA if they'd rather have no flight at all? I am sure they are delighted to have the service and accept that once a week (or less) in winter and never in summer do they have to drop in for forty minutes somewhere to pick up fuel?

On the six days a week (in winter) when they don't stop over (and even when they do, honestly it's not a big deal) btw, the 757 is a wonderful plane to fly long haul in, quick and easy to board and deplane compared to a 300 seater, with much less crowding at the gate, and much less crowding at baggage claim (if your bag is last off an A330 or 747, you could wait an hour at the carousel; if your bag is last to come off a 757, you're waiting ten or fifteen minutes).

Anyone who bitches about narrow bodies on long haul has never flown one; and the occasional fuel stop on a day like today doesn't undermine the convenience, not to mention the existence of the service at all.
fly Saha Air 707s daily from Tehran's downtown Mehrabad to Mashhad, Kish Island and Ahwaz
 
Gasman
Topic Author
Posts: 2203
Joined: Mon Mar 01, 2004 10:06 am

Atlantic 757 Diversions Feb. 21

Sun Feb 22, 2015 2:41 am

Quoting TWA772LR (Reply 7):
Would you rather the plane stop for gas every now-and-then or glide the rest of the way to EWR

A nonsense comment. But for the 0.01% chance this is anything but a facile rhetorical question, I'll answer it.

No-one is suggesting for a moment that safety should be compromised. What myself and others are suggesting, is that an aircraft appropriate to the route is dispatched OR travelers are advised up front of the high likelihood of a fuel stop.

Quoting goboeing (Reply 5):
do a 20 minute fuel stop somewhere along the route of flight.

20 minutes?? Who are you kidding?? The time taken to request and perform an approach and landing, do the refuel, perform a departure and get back en-route is going to add at least 90 minutes to a flight.
 
User avatar
par13del
Posts: 10397
Joined: Sun Dec 18, 2005 9:14 pm

Atlantic 757 Diversions Feb. 21

Sun Feb 22, 2015 2:49 am

Quoting gasman (Reply 9):
The time taken to request and perform an approach and landing, do the refuel, perform a departure and get back en-route is going to add at least 90 minutes to a flight.

Which is comparable to the connection via a hub, so ............
 
User avatar
DocLightning
Posts: 21893
Joined: Wed Nov 16, 2005 8:51 am

Atlantic 757 Diversions Feb. 21

Sun Feb 22, 2015 2:49 am

Quoting TWA772LR (Reply 7):
Would you rather the plane stop for gas every now-and-then or glide the rest of the way to EWR?

Neither. I would rather book a non-stop flight that is actually non-stop. I understand that these things sometimes happen, but when they happen very frequently, it's not an acceptable service.
-Doc Lightning-

"The sky calls to us. If we do not destroy ourselves, we will one day venture to the stars."
-Carl Sagan
 
Gasman
Topic Author
Posts: 2203
Joined: Mon Mar 01, 2004 10:06 am

Atlantic 757 Diversions Feb. 21

Sun Feb 22, 2015 2:53 am

Quoting cedarjet (Reply 8):
I am sure they are delighted to have the service and accept that once a week (or less) in winter and never in summer do they have to drop in for forty minutes somewhere to pick up fuel?

They may well be; but the point is - they are not being asked. They are being sold their tickets on the basis of this being a non-stop flight. No-one purchases a non-stop ticket thinking there might actually be a one in four (or whatever) chance they have to stop for fuel.

Quoting cedarjet (Reply 8):
Anyone who bitches about narrow bodies on long haul has never flown one;

Off topic. Also that means I have never flown a narrow body long haul. Wait a moment - yes I have. About twenty times in the last five years.

Quoting cedarjet (Reply 8):
and the occasional fuel stop on a day like today doesn't undermine the convenience

Can you please explain how a 90-120 minute delay to your expected arrival is not inconvenient?
 
timpdx
Posts: 698
Joined: Fri Jul 31, 2009 1:54 am

Atlantic 757 Diversions Feb. 21

Sun Feb 22, 2015 3:00 am

Sorry I never go to take my DL JFK-ARN 757 TATL last Sept. Alas, work interfered (this was holiday travel). Hope to get at least one or two TATL legs in the 757 just to say I did it.
Flown 2018: LAX, ARN, DXB, ALA, TAS, UCG, ASB, MYP, GYD, TBS, KUT, BER, TLS, SVO, CCF, DUB, LGW, MEX, BUR, PDX, ORD, SLC, SNA
Upcoming 2018: STL, MIA, BZE, IAH, BHM, LHR, DFW, PHX
 
frostyj
Posts: 1786
Joined: Fri Aug 29, 2014 9:04 am

Atlantic 757 Diversions Feb. 21

Sun Feb 22, 2015 3:03 am

As I was saying on the other thread the narrowbody longhaul has limits and I think it is America to UK.

We all know Newark to Berlin or Barcelona is a stupid idea.
[url=http://m.maploco.com/details/5f34zxvq][img]http://www.maploco.com/vmap/s/8395334.png[/img][/url]
 
frostyj
Posts: 1786
Joined: Fri Aug 29, 2014 9:04 am

Atlantic 757 Diversions Feb. 21

Sun Feb 22, 2015 3:04 am

Quoting IndianicWorld (Reply 2):

It isn't an overeaction. You shouldn't be flying a narrowbody to Berlin from New York its wayyyy too far.
[url=http://m.maploco.com/details/5f34zxvq][img]http://www.maploco.com/vmap/s/8395334.png[/img][/url]
 
frostyj
Posts: 1786
Joined: Fri Aug 29, 2014 9:04 am

Atlantic 757 Diversions Feb. 21

Sun Feb 22, 2015 3:06 am

Quoting LAXintl (Reply 3):

When it takes a flight 7 hours to reach Gander when it normally takes 4 hours i'd say its the winds!! I really underestimated the effects of the headwinds. Its a totally different ballgame to flying anywhere else.

It can increase the time taken so much that a 3,000 mile route that would take 6 hours typically ends up taking 8 hours.

[Edited 2015-02-21 19:10:57]

[Edited 2015-02-21 19:11:32]
[url=http://m.maploco.com/details/5f34zxvq][img]http://www.maploco.com/vmap/s/8395334.png[/img][/url]
 
flyDTW1992
Posts: 1053
Joined: Sun Jan 11, 2015 1:04 am

Atlantic 757 Diversions Feb. 21

Sun Feb 22, 2015 3:07 am

I thought for a second this was a flyer talk forum what with all the complaining. I think the key point to remembers that most of these flights wouldn't exist if they weren't being flown by 757s, there's not another aircraft for these airlines to place on these flights economically. If you're that concerned about the possibility of a brief tech stop, then book a connecting itinerary through a hub on a more capable aircraft.
Now you're flying smart
 
frostyj
Posts: 1786
Joined: Fri Aug 29, 2014 9:04 am

Atlantic 757 Diversions Feb. 21

Sun Feb 22, 2015 3:15 am

Quoting cedarjet (Reply 8):

Ok well I don't think its a bad idea to fly a 757 transatlantic, however, I do think there is a limit which is most certainly being exceeded. The limit is imo 3,500 miles which takes us to Paris.

I really don't see a justification for a narrowbody to fly the whole way from nyc to Sweden and Germany which are 1,000 miles further than Ireland to America. Its great that these people have this option but at the same time we have to wonder is it really viable in terms of costs.

Even then what about comfort? Is it good to sit in a domestic configuration for 9 to 10 hours?
[url=http://m.maploco.com/details/5f34zxvq][img]http://www.maploco.com/vmap/s/8395334.png[/img][/url]
 
UALWN
Posts: 2186
Joined: Mon Jun 01, 2009 3:27 pm

Atlantic 757 Diversions Feb. 21

Sun Feb 22, 2015 3:19 am

Quoting flyDTW1992 (Reply 17):
I think the key point to remembers that most of these flights wouldn't exist if they weren't being flown by 757s, there's not another aircraft for these airlines to place on these flights economically.

Really? UA flies BCN-EWR on a 752 while DL and AA fly BCN-JFK on 763s. Why couldn't UA use a 763 of their own on that route? The other UA flights mentioned above are: CDG-EWR, MAD-EWR and LHR-EWR. Clearly big enough markets to support a larger plane!

Quoting flyDTW1992 (Reply 17):
If you're that concerned about the possibility of a brief tech stop

Brief tech stop? UA121 arrived almost 3 hours late to EWR from BCN. That means lost connections and a huge mess. It's not a small inconvenience.

[Edited 2015-02-21 19:22:00]
AT7/111/146/Avro/CRJ/CR9/EMB/ERJ/E75/F50/100/L15/DC9/D10/M8X/717/727/737/747/757/767/777/787/AB6/310/32X/330/340/350/380
 
DualQual
Posts: 719
Joined: Sun Mar 05, 2006 6:10 pm

Atlantic 757 Diversions Feb. 21

Sun Feb 22, 2015 3:24 am

When will NW retire the DC-9?   
There's no known cure for stupid
 
goboeing
Posts: 2572
Joined: Mon Jun 05, 2000 5:31 am

Atlantic 757 Diversions Feb. 21

Sun Feb 22, 2015 3:35 am

Quoting par13del (Reply 10):
Which is comparable to the connection via a hub, so ............
Quoting UALWN (Reply 19):
Brief tech stop? UA121 arrived almost 3 hours late to EWR from BCN. That means lost connections and a huge mess. It's not a small inconvenience.

It says 2:14 late, and that is including departing BCN 17 minutes late.

So, 1:57 longer than usual gate-to-gate. Apparently that is "almost 3 hours" to you.

Anyway, it doesn't really matter, because the 757 routes are obviously working out just fine because they have been doing these for years and the passengers keep coming back.

Any passenger who had a previous bad experience on a tech stop is welcome to book a flight through a connecting hub so that they can then cross the pond in a 767/330/777.

They won't though, because there's a 757 that prevents them from having to do that.
 
incitatus
Posts: 3380
Joined: Wed Feb 09, 2005 1:49 am

Atlantic 757 Diversions Feb. 21

Sun Feb 22, 2015 3:39 am

Quoting gasman (Reply 12):
They may well be; but the point is - they are not being asked. They are being sold their tickets on the basis of this being a non-stop flight.

But stop or no stop is irrelevant. What really matters the delay at the arrival time. Say it is 90 minutes.

How often does a delay of 90 minutes happen? It is not uncommon. Limited range is just an additional factor. I don't see it as a factor relevant enough to campaign for airlines not to use the 757 over the pond.

Here is an airline rule that probably inconveniences a lot more people: minimum connecting times. They are often idealistic. Next time you travel, trying booking a connection that is as tight as allowable. Then get a seat assignment in the last row of your inbound.
I do not consume Murdoch products including the Wall Street Journal
 
prebennorholm
Posts: 7098
Joined: Tue Mar 21, 2000 6:25 am

Atlantic 757 Diversions Feb. 21

Sun Feb 22, 2015 3:44 am

Quoting flyDTW1992 (Reply 17):
I thought for a second this was a flyer talk forum what with all the complaining. I think the key point to remembers that most of these flights wouldn't exist if they weren't being flown by 757s, there's not another aircraft for these airlines to place on these flights economically. If you're that concerned about the possibility of a brief tech stop, then book a connecting itinerary through a hub on a more capable aircraft.

I totally agree with you, flyDTW.

And then I don't understand why we shall always have those "fights" about what is good or bad when s**t hits the fan. And then often backed up with totally irrelevant numbers.

If those flights had been made with 767, 777 or 787 instead of 757, then they would still be late by a few hours, due to the headwind. And hundreds of connections would have been missed anyway.

They made a fuel stop, and diversion, descend, fueling, takeoff and climb adds a couple of hours. And the wind adds another few hours. So in the end they are not 20 minutes, 90 minutes or whatever late, but rather 4-5 hours.

That's how it is to travel these days. It wasn't any better when we used ocean liners. They were also game for the weather.

It would be nice if we could stick to INFORMING each other about what is going on and what the conditions are, instead of fighting over what is good and bad.
Always keep your number of landings equal to your number of take-offs
 
goboeing
Posts: 2572
Joined: Mon Jun 05, 2000 5:31 am

Atlantic 757 Diversions Feb. 21

Sun Feb 22, 2015 3:49 am

Quoting prebennorholm (Reply 23):
They made a fuel stop, and diversion, descend, fueling, takeoff and climb adds a couple of hours. And the wind adds another few hours. So in the end they are not 20 minutes, 90 minutes or whatever late, but rather 4-5 hours.

No way. Not even close.

Go up to reply #21.

1:57 longer than usual, including the headwinds that partially brought on the fuel stop itself.

So the fuel stop added about 90 minutes from gate-to-gate.
 
N505fx
Posts: 339
Joined: Sat Aug 09, 2008 3:02 am

Atlantic 757 Diversions Feb. 21

Sun Feb 22, 2015 3:54 am

Quoting IndianicWorld (Reply 2):
Many of these routes would not likely have services without a 757, so its this or nothing I would think.

Really? A major airline in the US wouldn't connect the capitols of 3 major countries to NYC if they didn't have 757s? How about those passengers wouldn't be plagued with stupid Continental Airlines management decisions????
 
User avatar
hOMSaR
Moderator
Posts: 2358
Joined: Tue Jan 19, 2010 4:47 am

Atlantic 757 Diversions Feb. 21

Sun Feb 22, 2015 4:14 am

Just out of curiosity, I picked one of the UA flights. UA55 CDG-EWR took 1 hour 55 minutes longer than scheduled (departed 13 minutes late, arrived 2 hours 6 minutes late), including fuel stop. Time on the ground in Gander was 37 minutes.

Air France CDG-JFK had five flights. Their two morning flights were more or less on time. Their three afternoon flights were 1h08 longer than scheduled (an hour behind UA55), 1h51 longer than scheduled, and and 1h13 longer than scheduled.

So, it appears that winds/weather alone could have accounted for at least an hour of the delay regardless of whether they had to stop for gas.
I was raised by a cup of coffee.
 
nikeherc
Posts: 670
Joined: Thu Sep 13, 2012 8:40 pm

Atlantic 757 Diversions Feb. 21

Sun Feb 22, 2015 4:20 am

Buyer beware. If you are booking flights yourself, there are ways to check on time arrivals. If you are being booked by corporate travel or an agent, they should be helping you make enlightened decisions.

If you are flying point to point, a 90 minute delay might be better than adding a connection that you could still miss for any number of reasons. If the flights were so unreasonable they wouldn't be selling.
DC6 to 777 and most things in between
 
blueflyer
Posts: 4352
Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2006 4:17 am

Atlantic 757 Diversions Feb. 21

Sun Feb 22, 2015 4:32 am

Quoting frostyj (Reply 18):
at the same time we have to wonder is it really viable in terms of costs.

Do we have to wonder? I don't think airlines are charities. If transatlantic flights on 757s made no financial sense for the airlines, threads such as these would not exist.

Quoting goboeing (Reply 5):
These routes obviously would not support something larger so the passengers would be stopping in some other hub during a connection anyway.

Not every passenger is on a non-stop trip, however. A 757 with an unscheduled stop effectively turns a one-stop journey in a two-stop trip with the high risk of missing a connection. I personally am not willing to take the chance, so I do not consider any connecting flight on a 757 unless it represents a significant time saving (4+ hours) over the best widebody alternative. It's been over a year since I flew a 757 to/from Europe.

I fully realize that the number of fuel stops is fairly small over the span of an entire year, with the odds much higher during a specific season. I find it easier to remember the aircraft over the season, however.

Quoting cedarjet (Reply 8):
Anyone who bitches about narrow bodies on long haul has never flown one; and the occasional fuel stop on a day like today doesn't undermine the convenience, not to mention the existence of the service at all.

Anyone who claims to speak for everyone needs an urgent consultation with their ego.
 
AR385
Posts: 6936
Joined: Fri Nov 07, 2003 8:25 am

Atlantic 757 Diversions Feb. 21

Sun Feb 22, 2015 4:45 am

Quoting gasman (Thread starter):
Surely it is now time to admit the 757 doesn't work on long Atlantic routes?? Or at the very least concede to the traveler the very high likelihood of having to make a fuel diversion.

Here we go. Every year, around October, I look forward to these threads. This year was especially rich.

Quoting N62NA (Reply 4):
Some people believe this is acceptable. I believe it is not acceptable.

And that´s the most rational post so far. Exactly. You think it´s not acceptable, fine. go connect in FRA, CDG, LHR, ARN etc. just so you avoid the inconvenience of a probable fuel stop. You´ll see how much comfortable that is.

Quoting gasman (Reply 6):
Which is far preferable to an unscheduled fuel stop.

You are kidding.

Quoting gasman (Reply 9):
No-one is suggesting for a moment that safety should be compromised. What myself and others are suggesting, is that an aircraft appropriate to the route is dispatched OR travelers are advised up front of the high likelihood of a fuel stop.

Flying AR in their 747-200 on MEX-EZE, in the Boreal Summer, upon check in at MEX, sometimes they would tell you that the flight might have to stop at LIM. So, it was either that, or the route ALWAYS stopping at LIM, which was the case for the last 15 years until AR introduced that nonstop. It happens. Even the 742 could not pull MEX-EZE nonstop all the time. What was AR supposed to do? Pull that flight? Just because in Summer it may ocassionally have to stop at LIM?
Surely not. And back then the 77W was not even a wet dream in anybody´s mind.

Quoting gasman (Reply 9):
20 minutes?? Who are you kidding?? The time taken to request and perform an approach and landing, do the refuel, perform a departure and get back en-route is going to add at least 90 minutes to a flight.

And you think they do this en route? "Oh, you know what FO, I just think we might not make it to EWR. Let´s see if our friends at Gander would take us today, better get your slide rule out..."

Quoting frostyj (Reply 14):
As I was saying on the other thread the narrowbody longhaul has limits and I think it is America to UK.

We all know Newark to Berlin or Barcelona is a stupid idea.

You want to say East-West Frosty...

Quoting N505fx (Reply 25):
Really? A major airline in the US wouldn't connect the capitols of 3 major countries to NYC if they didn't have 757s?

No. Unfortunately the market is fragmented into many flights on many carriers so while the volume is there, for sure, no airline can fill anyhting bigger than a 757. That´s the issue.

People wanted free skies for years. On the upside you can fly BCN-NYC on SQ BCN is it? or KU LHR-JFK (If you have something other than an Israeli passport) but on the downside, airlines have to use smaller aircraft if they want to make the route sustainable. Seems nobody is ever pleased.

[Edited 2015-02-21 20:54:11]
 
N505fx
Posts: 339
Joined: Sat Aug 09, 2008 3:02 am

Atlantic 757 Diversions Feb. 21

Sun Feb 22, 2015 4:59 am

Quoting AR385 (Reply 29):
No. Unfortunately the market is fragmented into many flights on many carriers so while the volume is there, for sure, no airline can fill anyhting bigger than a 757

no true, even UAL has larger gauge on those city pairs at time. and, the gulf carriers have proven, offer a better product and people will hub...unlike the crap all US carriers are offering.
 
AR385
Posts: 6936
Joined: Fri Nov 07, 2003 8:25 am

Atlantic 757 Diversions Feb. 21

Sun Feb 22, 2015 5:09 am

Quoting N505fx (Reply 30):
no true, even UAL has larger gauge on those city pairs at time. and, the gulf carriers have proven, offer a better product and people will hub...unlike the crap all US carriers are offering.

They do sometimes. What you are saying makes no sense, unless US carriers are purposefully dropping down somewhere starting in Gander on their 757s for a number of days in Winter just to have a laugh at their passengers, or because they love to make them loose their connections and spend all that extra money finding and paying for their acommodations.

Remind me what does BA fly on LCY-JFK? LCY is in London right? Sure, the A318 can make it Westward, with a stop, but if it wasn´t for it the route would not exist.

And no. I would not go Berlin-DOH/DXB/AUH-NYC because the ME3 are so great and I wouldn´t want to maybe make a stop. I doubt many people would. Not for a Y fare.
 
wjcandee
Posts: 9194
Joined: Mon Jun 05, 2000 12:50 am

Atlantic 757 Diversions Feb. 21

Sun Feb 22, 2015 5:42 am

This is kind of silly.

Airlines don't send aircraft out with much more than the legally-required fuel based on anticipated weather at the time of dispatch. Changes in enroute conditions, from weather at the destination and/or alternates, to incidents at the destination, cause flights suddenly not to be able to make the destination legally and/or safely with the amount of fuel provided on dispatch. Crews and dispatchers don't screw around with this, lest they end up as Avianca in Oyster Bay.

Accordingly, fuel diversions happen regularly, including on aircraft with ample range, fully-fueled, to make the destination and thousands of miles more. I have been on several fuel diversions in my years of flying, all of them on aircraft which were capable of having departed with sufficient fuel to make the destination, had they known of the events that delayed arrival and caused the diversion.

Yes, because of weather, the 757 will occasionally have to make planned fuel stops westbound from Europe during the winter, but it ain't a big deal. Indeed, those who say, "Well I would rather connect through a hub than make a fuel stop" are in a distinct minority.

[Edited 2015-02-21 21:43:58]
 
frostyj
Posts: 1786
Joined: Fri Aug 29, 2014 9:04 am

Atlantic 757 Diversions Feb. 21

Sun Feb 22, 2015 5:49 am

Its not occasionally it is regularly. I am not sure why the Americans are defending this, no one should have to suffer regular fuel stops.

The following routes should be cancelled or updated to a 767-300 and the frequency reduced

1. Berlin
2. Hamberg
3. Stockholm
4. Oslo
5. Barcelona
6. Madrid
7. Paris


Also I have to wonder? Why does Brussels have a 777 and Madrid and Berlin only have 757's??

[Edited 2015-02-21 21:51:40]
[url=http://m.maploco.com/details/5f34zxvq][img]http://www.maploco.com/vmap/s/8395334.png[/img][/url]
 
AR385
Posts: 6936
Joined: Fri Nov 07, 2003 8:25 am

Atlantic 757 Diversions Feb. 21

Sun Feb 22, 2015 5:56 am

Quoting wjcandee (Reply 32):
lest they end up as Avianca in Oyster Bay.

That was a cluster&/#" at so many levels. Their alternate had weather worse than JFK, if I remember.

[Edited 2015-02-21 22:05:24]
 
FlyHossD
Posts: 2101
Joined: Mon Nov 02, 2009 3:45 pm

Atlantic 757 Diversions Feb. 21

Sun Feb 22, 2015 6:31 am

Quoting N505fx (Reply 25):

Really? A major airline in the US wouldn't connect the capitols of 3 major countries to NYC if they didn't have 757s? How about those passengers wouldn't be plagued with stupid Continental Airlines management decisions????

2 of the 6 diversions in the original posts were US - not UA - flights. Is US plagued with former CO management, too?
My statements do not represent my former employer or my current employer and are my opinions only.
 
onaclearday
Posts: 49
Joined: Mon Feb 12, 2007 2:35 pm

Atlantic 757 Diversions Feb. 21

Sun Feb 22, 2015 6:48 am

United's single-aisle service across the Atlantic isn't deprivation by any stretch of the imagination, just as a fuel stop necessitated by above average headwinds isn't evidence of a crisis of management.

My husband has piloted the 757 trans-Atlantic for eight years and has had to make a fuel stop seven times during that period. 707s and the earliest DC-10s sometimes had to make fuel stops due to strong winds on their trans-Atlantic runs. Did that make them the wrong equipment for the route?

He flies to major population centers such as Paris and London, and smaller markets such as Belfast, Bristol, Barcelona, Berlin, Hamburg, Stockholm, Copenhagen, Oslo, Lisbon, Glasgow, Edinburgh. In some markets the airline uses the 757 as one of several scheduled flights per day. In other markets it may be used as its only scheduled service on any given day. Continental Airlines management utilized this equipment (the Boeing 757-200s with Rolls-Royce engines and winglets) to successfully enter and maintain long/thin markets and augment service to larger markets. Since the merger with UAL, this aircraft has continued to be used in this capacity and is popular with both crew and passengers. And, over the years, my husband and I both have spoken personally to local business leaders, elected officials, and other residents of some of those smaller European markets, and they all expressed enthusiasm for the service.

New equipment will eventually replace it. Until then, United's 757-200 can offer convenient service to markets that would have fewer daily flights--or none at all in some cases--without it.
 
stratacruiser
Posts: 236
Joined: Thu Dec 08, 2011 7:07 pm

Atlantic 757 Diversions Feb. 21

Sun Feb 22, 2015 6:58 am

Quoting frostyj (Reply 33):
Also I have to wonder? Why does Brussels have a 777 and Madrid and Berlin only have 757's??

Maybe because there's greater demand? At least give UA management enough credit that they have some idea how to match capacity with demand, particularly on routes they've been flying for years.

Quoting frostyj (Reply 18):
Even then what about comfort? Is it good to sit in a domestic configuration for 9 to 10 hours?

UA TATL 757s are configured for international.....same seats you have on a 767 or 777. True for both BizFirst and Economy.

Quoting gasman (Thread starter):
Surely it is now time to admit the 757 doesn't work on long Atlantic routes??

I was listening in on channel 9 on a UA 777 flying IAD-NRT in December and heard an HA crew operating HNL-ICN ask for diversion to HND. Reason given was fuel. Should be also be saying that A330s aren't a match for North Pacific travel?

Also in December I spent two hours in a UA 757 at the gate in SFO while the crew and flight ops tried to figure out how to get the weight right to be able take off with the runway configuration in place due to very high winds. The point is weather happens now and again. I don't think airlines should be expected to abandon point to point routes because occasionally a tech stop is required.
 
frostyj
Posts: 1786
Joined: Fri Aug 29, 2014 9:04 am

Atlantic 757 Diversions Feb. 21

Sun Feb 22, 2015 7:04 am

I do know that but in economy it is the same as domestic
[url=http://m.maploco.com/details/5f34zxvq][img]http://www.maploco.com/vmap/s/8395334.png[/img][/url]
 
simfanatic
Posts: 51
Joined: Sat Jan 12, 2008 11:09 am

Atlantic 757 Diversions Feb. 21

Sun Feb 22, 2015 7:24 am

Quoting frostyj (Reply 33):

Berlin only gets the 757 in Winter, also due to demand. IIRC UA has planned a mix of 767-400 and -300 for the summer season.
Don't be a fool, think about what you're writing!
 
blueflyer
Posts: 4352
Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2006 4:17 am

Atlantic 757 Diversions Feb. 21

Sun Feb 22, 2015 7:47 am

Quoting frostyj (Reply 33):
Also I have to wonder? Why does Brussels have a 777 and Madrid and Berlin only have 757's?

Because BRU is a Star Alliance hub while MAD and BER are not. Many of United's 777 passengers connect every day to Africa on Brussels Airlines. It is also a less crowded alternative to reach secondary European destinations than FRA, particularly for the UK, France and even Germany.
 
frostyj
Posts: 1786
Joined: Fri Aug 29, 2014 9:04 am

Atlantic 757 Diversions Feb. 21

Sun Feb 22, 2015 7:58 am

Quoting simfanatic (Reply 39):

Um it only lasts 8 weeks.
[url=http://m.maploco.com/details/5f34zxvq][img]http://www.maploco.com/vmap/s/8395334.png[/img][/url]
 
Jetstar315
Posts: 157
Joined: Fri Sep 28, 2007 5:54 pm

Atlantic 757 Diversions Feb. 21

Sun Feb 22, 2015 8:11 am

How good would a B757NEO be?? I think the A321NEO is already making such headway into the B757 market - maybe it's time Boeing responded!
 
Gasman
Topic Author
Posts: 2203
Joined: Mon Mar 01, 2004 10:06 am

Atlantic 757 Diversions Feb. 21

Sun Feb 22, 2015 8:18 am

Quoting frostyj (Reply 33):
Its not occasionally it is regularly. I am not sure why the Americans are defending this, no one should have to suffer regular fuel stops.

Exactly. It is not as if these fuel stops are sporadic; it is the regularity and frequency of them which are key. I just don't understand why some people here can't grasp that.

Quoting stratacruiser (Reply 37):
I was listening in on channel 9 on a UA 777 flying IAD-NRT in December and heard an HA crew operating HNL-ICN ask for diversion to HND. Reason given was fuel. Should be also be saying that A330s aren't a match for North Pacific travel?

No, because fuel stops are not happening on this route with the frequency and predictability that they are happening on the 757 Atlantic routes.
 
frostyj
Posts: 1786
Joined: Fri Aug 29, 2014 9:04 am

Atlantic 757 Diversions Feb. 21

Sun Feb 22, 2015 8:38 am

Quoting Jetstar315 (Reply 42):

I've already said that I don't see it as suitable past the UK. Its too long to sit in a narrowbody in a domestic configuration.

Quoting Reply 36):

There are a few captains on here. I wonder if i've been on their plane at any time? :p

[Edited 2015-02-22 00:41:14]
[url=http://m.maploco.com/details/5f34zxvq][img]http://www.maploco.com/vmap/s/8395334.png[/img][/url]
 
CiC
Posts: 75
Joined: Mon Jun 28, 2010 6:51 am

Atlantic 757 Diversions Feb. 21

Sun Feb 22, 2015 9:17 am

Can happen, always. Some years ago a friend was onboard an A380 (!) enroute FRA-IAH, and they had to stop at DFW for fuel... reason: very very strong headwinds...
 
Gasman
Topic Author
Posts: 2203
Joined: Mon Mar 01, 2004 10:06 am

Atlantic 757 Diversions Feb. 21

Sun Feb 22, 2015 9:24 am

Quoting CiC (Reply 45):
Can happen, always. Some years ago a friend was onboard an A380 (!) enroute FRA-IAH, and they had to stop at DFW for fuel... reason: very very strong headwinds...

For the love of heaven! Yes, we all know it can happen. No, no-one is suggesting that safety should ever get compromised. But at some point it happens so frequently that it starts to look like unethical business practice. And that is what I, and others are suggesting is the case with 757 on some Atlantic routes in the winter.

Can I ask someone from the "nothing to see here/this is okay" crowd, what frequency of fuel diversion would you be comfortable with before it could no longer be advertised as a direct non-stop service? 40%? 80%? 100%?
 
tonymctigue
Posts: 997
Joined: Sat Feb 18, 2006 4:01 am

Atlantic 757 Diversions Feb. 21

Sun Feb 22, 2015 10:06 am

Quoting gasman (Reply 9):
Anyone who bitches about narrow bodies on long haul has never flown one; and the occasional fuel stop on a day like today doesn't undermine the convenience, not to mention the existence of the service at all.

              

Last year, SNN has up to 6 daily flights at the height of the peak summer season, all operated by B757's. Almost of them would not exist or at very least would not be daily if it were not for the B757 with possible exception of BOS which has been upgraded to a daily B767 for a few weeks this summer season. I have flown those narrowbodies many times and they are just as comfortable and the service quality is just as good as on any widebody. As for convenience, the only other alternative if you really want to fly to the USA from SNN is to backtrack 1.5 hours in the wrong direction to LHR. I will gladly take the unscheduled fuel stop any day.
Airports: SNN GWY NOC DUB ORK BOS EWR JFK ORD MCI BOI SEA LHR STN CDG LYS FAO GVA HKG MEL ADL HBA
 
frostyj
Posts: 1786
Joined: Fri Aug 29, 2014 9:04 am

Atlantic 757 Diversions Feb. 21

Sun Feb 22, 2015 10:14 am

eh its probably impossible to have a fuel stop from Shannon to Newark - 3,000 miles out of a range of 4600 miles.. You could basically use a 737 from there

[Edited 2015-02-22 03:14:24]
[url=http://m.maploco.com/details/5f34zxvq][img]http://www.maploco.com/vmap/s/8395334.png[/img][/url]
 
ManchesterMAN
Posts: 1056
Joined: Fri Sep 26, 2003 10:57 pm

Atlantic 757 Diversions Feb. 21

Sun Feb 22, 2015 10:18 am

Let's forget we are talking about the 757 here for a moment as that seems to divert the conversation (no pun intended!)

If I'm wanting to take a trip from Berlin to New York , I have the choice of a UA nonstop flight or several one stop connecting options. Like most people my purchase decision will be made according to some trade off between convenience and price. I am likely to pay a certain premium for a non-stop service in any case and that will increase according to how much I need to save time on a given day. So first of all I have made my purchase decision based on this being a non-stop service. I understand that things can happen but I assess the chances of this to be in line with my other flying experiences i.e. on the 500+ flights I've taken in my life, I've been diverted, heavily delayed etc in about 20 of them, or 4%. I can therefore make onward plans with a reasonable certainty that I will arrive in New York something approaching on time (but with no guarantees).

Now imagine I take the UA flight and am diverted at the cost of min 1.5 hours. I've planned my day carefully around the extra time knowing that in all reasonable expectation the flight will be somewhere close to on time. I may even have made onward travel plans by air from New York as I often will. I now arrive late and am seriously inconvenienced by the delay as I made plans according to the scheduled arrival time. I would have made different plans had I have taken the one stop option according to the scheduled arrival time of that flight. Someone then tells me that actually at this time of year this flight diverts around 15% of the time. That is almost 4 times the risk that I had calculated when making my plans.

Would that have affected my decision to fly UA? Maybe. Would it have impacted how I made my plans? Certainly. For those saying that I arrived no later than if I had taken a one stop option, while that is true I would have made my onward plans accordingly in that case as per the arrival time of the one stop flight.

So my view is that there is noting at all wrong with UA flying these routes in winter that require regular fuel stops, but the travelling public deserve to know that their normal perception of likelihood of delay should be increased and they should plan accordingly.

I'm surprised the EU hasn't stepped in here as they are usually all over airlines that are not being upfront about charges, operating carrier and stops etc. Again if I was UA I'd do nothing different but that isn't to say that consumers shouldn't know more of what is going on here.
Flown: A300,A319,A320,A321,A330,A340.A380,717,727,737,747,757,767,777,DC9,DC10,MD11,MD80,F100,F50,ERJ,E190,CRJ,BAe146,Da

Popular Searches On Airliners.net

Top Photos of Last:   24 Hours  •  48 Hours  •  7 Days  •  30 Days  •  180 Days  •  365 Days  •  All Time

Military Aircraft Every type from fighters to helicopters from air forces around the globe

Classic Airliners Props and jets from the good old days

Flight Decks Views from inside the cockpit

Aircraft Cabins Passenger cabin shots showing seat arrangements as well as cargo aircraft interior

Cargo Aircraft Pictures of great freighter aircraft

Government Aircraft Aircraft flying government officials

Helicopters Our large helicopter section. Both military and civil versions

Blimps / Airships Everything from the Goodyear blimp to the Zeppelin

Night Photos Beautiful shots taken while the sun is below the horizon

Accidents Accident, incident and crash related photos

Air to Air Photos taken by airborne photographers of airborne aircraft

Special Paint Schemes Aircraft painted in beautiful and original liveries

Airport Overviews Airport overviews from the air or ground

Tails and Winglets Tail and Winglet closeups with beautiful airline logos