tuolumne

Tommy767 noticed these diversions dealing with the IAD-AMS/CDG 757 routes. It's well documented these same aircraft had fuel shortage issues flying from Germany to EWR. Note that the return segments are nearly +2 hours. As Tommy767 states, since we are not even in winter months, I wonder how this bodes for this the future of a 757 on these routes from IAD.

IAD- CDG: 7hr 25 min RETURN: 9hr 15min
IAD- AMS: 7hr 30 min RETURN: 9hr 10min

AMS- IAD: 2 diversions in the last 2 weeks

http://flightaware.com/live/flight/C...015Z/EHAM/KIAD

CDG- IAD: 4 diversions in the last 2 weeks

flightaware.com/live/flight/COA131/history

The ugly head of a 757 performing TATL missions it was never intended for, absolutely stretching the equipment to its limits?

UA-NYC

"They're within the operational range, why shouldn't they be used on that route"...or something like that that. And just remember, they're planned stops, NOT diversions!

Gary pokes fun at CO's 757s TATL today too:

http://boardingarea.com/blogs/viewfr...g-kong-flight/

The bigger impact of the plane will come from its operating efficiencies that should make greater point-to-point travel for thin routes possible, e.g. Japan Airlines will be operating the aircraft from Tokyo to Boston. And one could imagine it very much fits the Continental strategy, they don’t have a ton of thin Pacific routes from Newark, but across the Atlantic they fly to most every little Hamlet in Europe. With 757s, that going Westbound in Winter often have trouble making the crossing. That’s why it’s said that Continental operates focus cities in Goose Bay and Gander, where they’re apt to refuel when headwinds are particularly acute. Continental will be getting the 787 in late 2012, as I understand..

FriendlySkies

What a surprise Anybody want to bet on the day that SMI/J brings the 757 to ORD for TATL?

Sulley

UA/CO won't be the first... AA has us beat.

If this keeps up, then absolutely the proper equipment should be brought back to the routes. In my personal opinion, IAD-AMS/CDG would do well with a reconfigured two class 763.

TWAB747nomore

[QUOTE=UA-NYC;17341883]"They're within the operational range, why shouldn't they be used on that route"...or something like that that. And just remember, they're planned stops, NOT diversions! [QUOTE]


ummmmmmm no i don't think they are planned stops in iad. In fact I am 1000% sure of it.
that is pretty much the max range limit. I have also heard other rumors about those flights

you seem real surprised. Maybe the 757-300 could make the trip but I don't think any of those are configured for INTL with business first yet

though give them time


I was wondering when this topic would come up about these fun trips

TWA Fan 1

Actually, the 757-300 has less range than the 757-200, because it's basically the same amount of power plant dragging a lot more airplane...so outside of KEF to the East Coast, the 753 is not a viable alternative.

channa

I think that they should replace the computers of all the flight planners responsible for this with systems that just meet their software's minimum requirements.

How's 256MB of RAM feel?

TWA Fan 1

Too much. Let's go with 64 mB of RAM...that's more than enough.

Paging Star_World... (I can't wait for the venomous outburst, accusing us of all being wrong, telling us range is irrelevant, fishing for an example in which a 777 made a diversion because insufficient fuel was loaded, etc.)

The bottom line is that the 752 is fine on many TATL routes. But operate any a/c at its operational limit and, especially in the fall and winter months, you will have to either IDB a bunch of passengers, turn back a bunch of cargo, or make a technical stop.

And this most certainly isn't a PMCO issue, since many carriers now operate 752's TATL. The reason PMCO stands out is that, since nearly one half of its overseas fleet is composed of 752's, it is more likely to operate these a/c on routes that stretch its operational limits, and thus encounter this problem with greater regularity.

Let's hope that, as UA and CO truly integrate, we see more UA widebodies operating on the longest routes where the 752 is most likely to run into problems.

fivesixseven

Yikes! This makes you want to think twice before booking this route.

channa

Why? It's still making it non-stop most of the time. The convenience of booking the nonstop combined with privilege of flying CO should keep people coming back.

Besides, CO still has strong competitive advantage over AF or KL. AF may fly the 380, but neither AF or KL fly with the "best in the business."

TWA Fan 1

I know you are being sarcastic and you know I am hardly an unconditional supporter of using the 752 for TATL, but it is certainly true that, on a number of TATL routes, PMCO's 752 does provide the only non-stop and that, even with the occasional fuel stop, it is still, on the whole, more convenient if you are ending up at the non-stop's final destination of EWR or IAD.

clubord

I was flying one of those CDG/IAD diversion flights. There was a stretch of 3 or 4 days last month where the northeast was coated with weather from BOS to IAD right at the European arrival bank.

Our alternate was DTW or CLE (don't really remember) adding over an hour of reserve fuel required to be carried all the way to IAD. In reality we had plenty of fuel to make it to IAD but due to the weather and a lack of alternate airport we ducked into the Canadian Maritimes for a "gas and go."

Had the weather cleared up enough at an airport closer to IAD we would have changed the alternate to ORF or RIC and been legal to continue to IAD. Hope that explains a bit of why we do what we do!

UA-NYC

Thanks for posting your experience! Given that it's only October, and we still have a good 4+ months of winter weather coming, do you think that these diversions will increase going forward?

channa

Thanks for the information. So it sounds like the DTW/CLE alternates would have been fine in a larger aircraft that could have carried the additional fuel, and this was most certainly an aircraft limitation with the aircraft flying the mission.

Luvs2snowbordbut1kSEA

Just because you can stretch the 757 to its operating limits doesn't mean you should. Of course many airlines have been flying the 757 TATL, because they financially could not afford to invest in larger planes.

As a consumer, the stops would aggravate me. Plus, I like the more spacious feeling of a wide body aircraft for long haul flights.