Comments on: Low on Fuel?

By: Chandrielle

Chandrielle — Tue, 12 Aug 2008 14:44:00 +0000

Also keep in mind that the heavier a plane is, the more fuel it needs. But fuel also has weight. So for any extra fuel they carry, they also need to add in extra just to carry the weight of the excess. It's extremely wasteful to fill up the plane.

By: K!P

K!P — Mon, 11 Aug 2008 06:54:18 +0000

wel i realy don't want to sit on the fuel needed to cross the atlantic when im doing a city trip. Landing is the dangerous part.

By: scat

scat — Mon, 11 Aug 2008 02:03:09 +0000

A friend of mine who does load and fuel control at an airport has told me before that this is more common than most think. Pilots tell controls that they do not have enough fuel so that they have priority to land so that they don't have to circle and wait in queue to land....especially a couple of international airliners which I won't name.

By: Tweeker

Tweeker — Sun, 10 Aug 2008 18:02:20 +0000

What I mean to say is said reserve is getting dipped into more. Not that theres any need for hysterics, though.

A 777 isn’t your family minivan; it’s not ’safer’ or ‘better’ with a full fuel tank than an empty one;

Assuming the empty part of the gas tank isnt filled with oxygen now anyhow... Not that that risk is all that high relative to driving to the airport.

By: James Schend

James Schend — Sun, 10 Aug 2008 17:08:57 +0000

Tweeker: The "reserve" is enough fuel to get to the furthest place you could possibly need to divert to, plus 45 minutes. It's more than sufficient. Plus, any pilot that wants can ask for more fuel, they have the final say.

By: Tweeker

Tweeker — Sun, 10 Aug 2008 15:53:48 +0000

There is no doubt they are pushing the reserve margin harder than they used to.

By: James Schend

James Schend — Sun, 10 Aug 2008 15:02:14 +0000

They've never, in the history of aviation, filled the fuel tank full. Unless it just so-happened to be a long enough flight to require the entire fuel tank.

I agree that this article is just scare-mongering. A 777 isn't your family minivan; it's not 'safer' or 'better' with a full fuel tank than an empty one; in fact, smaller planes are safer with less fuel since they lack fuel dump capability.

Take a look at this case, for example, and imagine how bad it could have been with a full tank of fuel: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/JetBlue_Airways_Flight_292

By: Orjan Morjan

Orjan Morjan — Sun, 10 Aug 2008 12:48:50 +0000

Decreased demand of air travel? Never been such a thing.

And yes they calculate the needed fuel for the flight, always been that way.

By: MoonCake

MoonCake — Sun, 10 Aug 2008 10:50:27 +0000

it is pretty bad though, Martijn. i mean, you can't say that they're not cutting fuel. and you also can't say that people aren't going to freak out about it. fear is a government tactic carried out through the media, and it works. it has been working for decades. MW-- what do you mean "somehow?" along with decreased demand, gas prices ARE the reason for higher ticket prices.

By: Martijn

Martijn — Sun, 10 Aug 2008 10:17:03 +0000

You are misinformed and, worse, spreading wrong information, thus causing a panic. Patrick Smith, a pilot who is also a columnist, adresses this question in one of his columns on Salon.com. I urge you to read in and edit your item accordingly.

"Here's one way to exploit people's fear of flying: Tell them airlines are saving money by skimping on fuel."

http://www.salon.com/tech/col/smith/2008/04/25/askthepilot274/index.ht ml

By: MW

MW — Sun, 10 Aug 2008 07:22:51 +0000

Funny how somehow they're still able to increase ticket prices, isn't it?