UA-NYC

How about 10%? Does that make it better for you? It's not going to be 0% or close to it, that seems pretty clear by now.

It's kind of like you saying the diversion rate for these routes would be ~1% or so from what I recall - right?

TWA Fan 1

How about a 75% diversion rate in December?

That is not a number pulled out of thin air and is beyond the pale of any defendability.

In the meantime, AF and KL, flying the same routes with a/c with adequate range both had a 0% diversion rate in December.

One month is hardly a statistically insignificant period, especially since the diversions are likely to continue unabated through the winter months, unless, of course, UaCo finally decides to do something about seriously limiting payloads.

star_world

You recall incorrectly - I've never made a prediction of fuel stop frequency on any of the IAD routes.

I'm just fascinated how you can make a prediction like this though about any percentage level for summer months when the route hasn't even operated in those months yet. Whether it's 0, 10, 25% - there's no way of knowing yet. But let me make one point clear - it absolutely could be 0% in summer months, because the passenger and cargo load have a massive affect on range. In other words, these are variables that UA can use to decide how much fuel they want to arrive with. Remember this document? (Section 3.2): http://www.boeing.com/commercial/air...ps/753sec3.pdf

Unbelievable. Take 30 seconds, go back up and read my post. I'm calling out UA-NYC on his apparent ability to predict "diversion rates" (as you call it) in the summer, which these routes have not operated in. December is not in the summer in the north Atlantic.

Again - I think this rate of fuel stops is completely unacceptable. Can I make that any clearer for you?

UA-NYC

We finally have it! Clear to me now for the first time at least.

Yes, the diversion rate could be 0%, or 10%, or 25% come summertime, but it's kind of like SHARES - it is what it is (with past performance the best indication of future performance), and it's probably not likely to change greatly, but you can always hold out hope it will be magically different later on

TWA Fan 1

I am not in the business of making predictions, nor have I made any.

I am just reading the existing record.

But what I can tell you, is that, even if there is not one more fuel diversion for the next eleven months, which is highly unlikely, the diversion rate for UaCo's 752's to IAD for the annual period 12/11 to 12/12 will be a minimum of 6.25%, already well in excess of average diversion rates for any other type of a/c operating TATL.

Regarding the document, the issue is not only the range, it's also the average payloads operated.

After all, 737's and A320's operate TATL on a daily basis without any issue whatsoever, but this is because they are configured in low-density modes (Private Air).

When you fly a 752 with 159 Y pax in 31" seat pitch + 20 J + cargo...what do you expect?

So UaCo wants to pack in every last millimeter of revenue-generating weight on a plane that simply doesn't have the range...that's the root cause of the problem.

star_world

16J, and there's E+ in a good portion of the aircraft already, but that's just a technicality

Your point is a huge exaggeration though - if that were true, we would see far, far higher rates of fuel stops on the well-established ex-EWR routes than we do. Who knows - maybe, like several people have suggested, it is due to advance bookings that were made when the flights were scheduled as 763s and over time the bookings can be managed to an acceptable load that reduces these stops.

Sorry it took you so long

If you think summer and winter are even close when it comes to North Atlantic jetstreams (and hence current patterns can be applied then) then you are way, way off the mark.

TWA Fan 1

E+? That's just beginning...and, yes, that will reduce payload to some extent. But even with E+, the density of UaCo's 752 will be a the high end for this a.c type flying TATL, and nothing like the all-J of a Private Air.

What exaggeration?

First, as you well know, the 752 issues ex-EWR became so severe as to warrant an investigation by the DoT. Things only improved there after that.

And there are still fuel stops of 752's flying TATL to EWR, just not as many as to IAD. But the rate of fuel stops of 752's flying to EWR is well in excess of any other a/c type flying TATL for any airline.

At IAD, as you yourself wrote, the situation is unacceptable. Let's see if they can indeed reduce payloads once the advance bookings have been accommodated.

Still, it is absolutely unacceptable for UaCo to treat its paying customers in this fashion, whether they are connecting at IAD or it is their final destination.

But where is the exaggeration?

star_world

This:

From what I can see the loads are actually very carefully managed, at least on the EWR routes. Not even close to packing in anything. With well managed loads, on routes to Western Europe this aircraft simply does have the range.

TWA Fan 1

You are right that it took too long, but you seem to be confused about whom it took so long to acknowledge this problem, since it was you, not UA-NYC.

For those of our fellow FT'ers who many not be familiar with your posts over on airliners.net, you have been vehemently and vitriolically denying there was any problem with 752 TATL diversions, an argument you started making years ago and continued to make without any concession until now.

Also, no one is arguing that summer and winter are anything alike. We know that. I know you are trying to use that as another red herring, but that is, as all red herrings, quite beside the point.

But if the 752 has to make fuel stops up to 75% of the time in the autumn/winter (as it did to IAD this past December), that's the problem. Period.

What happens in the summer is not the issue. It's great the plane can make this range in the summer without fuel stops, but it is not able to do so in the autumn or winter.

There are plenty of paying customers who fly in the autumn and winter who deserve better.

TWA Fan 1

First, I was referring to the IAD diversions.

Second, there are still plenty of diversions to EWR, so your assertions appears to be incorrect, unless, of course, you agree that making diversions because of overweight is consistent with "very carefully managed" routes.

eagle92

Wasn't it the Berlin to Newark flights from a couple of years ago that precipitated the DoT and German government investigation into Continental which eventually resulted in Continental being forced to use 762s during the winter on this route?

And weren't those "diversion rates" less than what is currently being seen on the IAD routes?

star_world

Categorically incorrect. I've strongly defended the fact that this is a suitable aircraft to use on transatlantic routes - don't confuse the two points.

TWA Fan 1

Actually, the DoT investigation was started when it was brought to the DoT's attention (by the CO pilot's union) that CO was strong-arming its pilots to use fuel emergency declarations as a routine procedure in order to save the company some money.

But it wasn't just TXL-EWR (which does now operate as a 762 in the winter), but a number of other routes, including, specifically, BCN-EWR, which declared a fuel emergency routinely in 2007.

Today, the long-thin 752 routes into EWR no longer routinely delcare fuel emergencies, but routes such as BCN-EWR now make fuel stops when necessary, and have some of the highest diversion routes of any routes operating TATL (behind, of course, AMS- and CDG-IAD, the champions).

entrada

I was on CO 131 on the 2nd. It was diverted. The cabin crew were really ornery. I overheard one steward saying to a passenger "we hate this even more than you since it is more work for us." That seemed to be an attitude shared by other cabin staff.

Also, the CO/UA interface completely broke down with rebookings. When we arrived at IAD there were dozens of passengers, including us, who had not been automatically rebooked due to the 4-hour delay. So we all had to fly standby. The UA desk agents said it was a combination of the holiday and the integration with CO systems.

TWA Fan 1

So what did you mean exactly when you wrote the following:

"Again - I think this rate of fuel stops is completely unacceptable."

Are you implying that there is no correlation between the fact that UaCo operates a high-density 752 on these routes and the rate of fuel stops?