DCA-SEA Stopped in STL on 6/11?
Jun 11, 22, 11:57 am
#2
Join Date: May 2012
Location: DCA, lived MCI, SEA/PDX,BUF (born/raised)
Programs: Marriott (Silver/Gold), IHG, Carlson, Best Western, Choice( Gold), AS (MVP), WN, UA
Posts: 8,212
i was on an American flight earlier this week. It was a standard 3x3 jet but they only allowed 85. PAX on the plane due to weight. Thry said itwas fuel. It was something else getting shipped.
Jun 11, 22, 3:35 pm
#3
Join Date: Jun 2011
Posts: 184
Checked flightradar and saw it was an Airbus so I thought it might be a fuel stop but not on the 321. My other thought is it could be a short notice fallen soldier flight since it is coming from DCA. flight.https://www.flightradar24.com/data/aircraft/n923va
Jun 11, 22, 5:10 pm
#4
Original Poster
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Leavenworth WA
Programs: MVPG
Posts: 77
Checked flightradar and saw it was an Airbus so I thought it might be a fuel stop but not on the 321. My other thought is it could be a short notice fallen soldier flight since it is coming from DCA. flight.https://www.flightradar24.com/data/aircraft/n923va
My son is on the flight. Passengers were told it was a fuel stop, but now it's back to a nonstop. Confusing. I'll be watching FlightAware to see where he ends up.
Apparently, there was a catering failure and no food is available.
Maybe that made the difference.<g>
Jun 11, 22, 10:08 pm
#5
Join Date: Nov 2016
Location: CMH
Programs: BA Gold, AA Plat, NK $9 fare club
Posts: 663
Looks like it's going nonstop. Is it possible that the warm weather at DCA + headwinds prevented a full load initially? I've always wondered about those transcons with National's short runway setup.
Jun 11, 22, 10:39 pm
#6
Join Date: May 2012
Location: DCA, lived MCI, SEA/PDX,BUF (born/raised)
Programs: Marriott (Silver/Gold), IHG, Carlson, Best Western, Choice( Gold), AS (MVP), WN, UA
Posts: 8,212
Thanks. Cool site, I've got it bookmarked.
My son is on the flight. Passengers were told it was a fuel stop, but now it's back to a nonstop. Confusing. I'll be watching FlightAware to see where he ends up.
Apparently, there was a catering failure and no food is available.
Maybe that made the difference.<g>
My son is on the flight. Passengers were told it was a fuel stop, but now it's back to a nonstop. Confusing. I'll be watching FlightAware to see where he ends up.
Apparently, there was a catering failure and no food is available.
Maybe that made the difference.<g>
ive flown thst route more than a few times, evrn with strong headwinds but no need to refuel. If they were to do a refuel stop, it would make more sense to do it in denver or wait and do it in Salt Lake City, idaho or Montana where they fly more frequently than St. Louis.
i think it was a last minute cancelation of the shipment
Jun 12, 22, 9:08 am
#8
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: YYF/YLW
Programs: AA, DL, AS, VA, WS Silver
Posts: 5,819
Or possibly a big storm mid-continent they thought theyd have to route a long way around, increasing the flight distance enough to need a fuel stop? But then the forecast changed enough so they could route more directly? I see a decent-sized storm on that radar image, though it doesnt look large enough to cause that kind of issue.
Jun 12, 22, 10:00 am
#9
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: DCA
Programs: AA-Gold 0.425MM), AS MVP Gold, National EE, Marriott Titanium (LT-G), UA Silver
Posts: 1,136
fuel stop seems odd….I can be used as a cover for classified cargo transport.
ive flown thst route more than a few times, evrn with strong headwinds but no need to refuel. If they were to do a refuel stop, it would make more sense to do it in denver or wait and do it in Salt Lake City, idaho or Montana where they fly more frequently than St. Louis.
i think it was a last minute cancelation of the shipment
ive flown thst route more than a few times, evrn with strong headwinds but no need to refuel. If they were to do a refuel stop, it would make more sense to do it in denver or wait and do it in Salt Lake City, idaho or Montana where they fly more frequently than St. Louis.
i think it was a last minute cancelation of the shipment
Last edited by PaceLaw2012; Jun 12, 22 at 10:08 am
Jun 12, 22, 1:01 pm
#10
Join Date: May 2012
Location: DCA, lived MCI, SEA/PDX,BUF (born/raised)
Programs: Marriott (Silver/Gold), IHG, Carlson, Best Western, Choice( Gold), AS (MVP), WN, UA
Posts: 8,212
special cargo is shipped all the time. Its easier to ship something through commercial routes than special military/ charter aircraft
Jun 13, 22, 12:45 am
#12
Join Date: Sep 2001
Programs: Alaska Tanzanite 100K
Posts: 3,830
Friend is an exVX Airbus captain at Alaska - he said there really shouldn't be a reason for NEO to make a stop on *any* of Alaska's routes. Said the bird can really fly with a full boat, wings full of gas, and bins stuffed and not have to stop. "She can fly a little over 8 hours before we gotta start leaving bags or people, or make a fuel stop".
Jun 13, 22, 2:54 pm
#14
Join Date: May 2012
Location: DCA, lived MCI, SEA/PDX,BUF (born/raised)
Programs: Marriott (Silver/Gold), IHG, Carlson, Best Western, Choice( Gold), AS (MVP), WN, UA
Posts: 8,212
Friend is an exVX Airbus captain at Alaska - he said there really shouldn't be a reason for NEO to make a stop on *any* of Alaska's routes. Said the bird can really fly with a full boat, wings full of gas, and bins stuffed and not have to stop. "She can fly a little over 8 hours before we gotta start leaving bags or people, or make a fuel stop".
on Tuesday I was on an AA flight ORD-DCA standard jet (737 or airbus equiv). They woukd only take 85 PAX on the plane claiming the needed a full tank of fuel for some reason.
i call BS when I see it. Its because of cargo on the plane.
Jun 13, 22, 7:09 pm
#15
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: SEA (the REAL Washington); occasionally in the other Washington (DCA area)
Programs: DL PM 1.5MM; AS MVPG 75K
Posts: 20,826
seeing, calling, and *actually knowing* are three different things, and that being said, I find it *extremely* hard to believe that AA limited a mainline jet to 85 pax on ORD-DCA because of full cargo bins
A319/320 Max Zero Fuel Weight (Operating Empty Weight + Max Payload) is 129,000 lb / 141,800 lb respectively; 737-800 and 737 MAX8 are 138,200 lb / 145,400 lb respectively
Max Takeoff Weights are 166,000 lb / 172,000 lb and 187,700 lb / 194,800 lb respectively
max fuel capacity for the jets is 46,900 lb / 48,200 lb and 52,500 lb / 45,900 lb respectively; given that all have a range of ~2500 miles, required fuel for the ~600-mile ORD-DCA segment would be no more than a third of max capacity, approx 13000 lb — none of the types would be close to MTOW
A319/320 Max Zero Fuel Weight (Operating Empty Weight + Max Payload) is 129,000 lb / 141,800 lb respectively; 737-800 and 737 MAX8 are 138,200 lb / 145,400 lb respectively
Max Takeoff Weights are 166,000 lb / 172,000 lb and 187,700 lb / 194,800 lb respectively
max fuel capacity for the jets is 46,900 lb / 48,200 lb and 52,500 lb / 45,900 lb respectively; given that all have a range of ~2500 miles, required fuel for the ~600-mile ORD-DCA segment would be no more than a third of max capacity, approx 13000 lb — none of the types would be close to MTOW
