FAA fuel waivers

One well known author for Flying magazine and pilot with U.S. Airways
once asked the flight department to research if any pilot had ever
asked for a 767 to be topped off in the history of the airline. He
found only one case. It costs a lot of money to take fuel, carry it up
to 33,000 feet and then carry it home unused. Airlines have never (to
my knowledge) carried such an arbitrary amount of fuel. Worst case, the
plane doesn't have enough fuel to wait for the weather at your
destination to improve and they just take you to another airport.

-Robert


wrote:
Can anyone back up this claim? It sounds convincing, but I want to
have a second opinion:


----Start quote-----
Apparently, the FAA (the same FAA who was going against our contract
and has cut out budget, cut trainees to replace all the people
retiring, and is attempting to speed up training by rushing through
important steps) is giving airlines a waver on gas. This waver states
that they don't have to fill up the plane all the way so they can save
on fuel costs. This means, they have exactly the amount of fuel they
need to get to their destination +45 minutes. Anything under that +45
minutes means an emergency. So that means these aircraft were getting
close to that emergency point. It's dangerous for the pilot, the
controller, and the passengers espicially.
-----End quote-----

I would appreciate any information anyone has about this. At least if
it's true or not.

Thanks!

I would think that with the high price of fuel, if an airline services
an airport where fuel prices are very high, they may take on full fuel
at an airport where the fuel prices are low. I'm betting the
dispatcher does a careful calculation of the cost of hauling extra fuel
over the price of fuel at every location.

I know Southwest has a look up table they use to determine the price of
hauling around fuel vs. the price difference at different destinations.
Everyone always avoids buying fuel at Sacramento International because
it's one of the most expensive in the nation. The airport requires all
fuel guys to be active and certified fire fighters.

-Robert


150flivver wrote:
I would think that with the high price of fuel, if an airline services
an airport where fuel prices are very high, they may take on full fuel
at an airport where the fuel prices are low. I'm betting the
dispatcher does a careful calculation of the cost of hauling extra fuel
over the price of fuel at every location.

This means, they have exactly the amount of fuel they
need to get to their destination +45 minutes. Anything under that +45
minutes means an emergency. So that means these aircraft were getting
close to that emergency point. It's dangerous for the pilot, the
controller, and the passengers espicially.


One item that is missing is alternate fuel. Aircraft always take into
consideration fuel needed to get to an alternate airport in case of
warranting conditions. The 45-minutes reserve is contingency fuel to
account for unexpected holding, weather, and other delays at the
destination. It's not necessarily an emergency.


--
Mike

This is another FAA controller that is worried about his job. I hope he
can separate planes on his screen better then he can spell "waver". I
am sure he has no problem cashing his government checks that we all pay
for.


wrote:
Can anyone back up this claim? It sounds convincing, but I want to
have a second opinion:


----Start quote-----
Apparently, the FAA (the same FAA who was going against our contract
and has cut out budget, cut trainees to replace all the people
retiring, and is attempting to speed up training by rushing through
important steps) is giving airlines a waver on gas. This waver states
that they don't have to fill up the plane all the way so they can save
on fuel costs. This means, they have exactly the amount of fuel they
need to get to their destination +45 minutes. Anything under that +45
minutes means an emergency. So that means these aircraft were getting
close to that emergency point. It's dangerous for the pilot, the
controller, and the passengers espicially.
-----End quote-----

I would appreciate any information anyone has about this. At least if
it's true or not.

Thanks!