2/17: Winds cause almost all westbound transcons to technical stop
#16
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Denver
Programs: UA 1K in training
Posts: 2,107
Originally Posted by justageek
They should perhaps put something up on their web page advising their passengers that during the winter, aircraft on westbound transcon flights may need to stop to refuel.
Before reading this thread, I would have been quite surprised and annoyed if I were told we had to make a refueling stop because we didn't have enough gas to go the whole scheduled flight. Now I would just be annoyed.
#17
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: NYC
Programs: AA ExecPlat; AF Gold; UA GS; Hyatt L. Globalist; Marriott Plat; Hilton Diamond; National EE
Posts: 6,166
A 1h delay I can usually deal with in the middle of the day. But if it's a late evening flight, and all I want to do is get back to the left coast, then I would be more annoyed.
#18
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: NYC
Programs: DL PM, TSA Disparager Gold
Posts: 1,431
Last July I was on a CO flight from DEN to EWR when due to heat in Denver and storms in the EWR area the 737 either had to leave 40 people or stop in MKE for fuel. CO picked the stop and it only took about 40 minutes. Frustrating, but not the end of the world.
#19
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: New York, NY
Posts: 68
Originally Posted by justageek
The part I find vaguely disturbing is that this bad situation was completely foreseen by JetBlue when they purchased the A320's (unless nobody at the company did any fuel/range calculations, which I find hard to believe). They're making quite a gamble that the passengers are going to be understanding about fuel stops and not take their business elsewhere based on a fuel stop delay. They should perhaps put something up on their web page advising their passengers that during the winter, aircraft on westbound transcon flights may need to stop to refuel. The airline (presumably) knew about this from day one, whereas the pax don't find out until it's too late to choose a different airline.
Originally Posted by Buster CT1K
I'm surprised the pax were required to disembark during refueling. I was once diverted SYD-LAX to HNL for refueling on UA and the pax stayed aboard.
#20
Join Date: Feb 2003
Posts: 1,254
Originally Posted by fs2k2isfun
Last July I was on a CO flight from DEN to EWR when due to heat in Denver and storms in the EWR area the 737 either had to leave 40 people or stop in MKE for fuel. CO picked the stop and it only took about 40 minutes. Frustrating, but not the end of the world.
#21
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Denver
Programs: UA 1K in training
Posts: 2,107
Originally Posted by flyinggolfer
Very good points. Until this happened, I wasn't aware this was an issue for the A320. One of the reasons I started flying B6 vs CO was that CO put so many 737s on their transcon routes. As a lowly silver elite, upgrades didn't occur very often and I preferred the legroom of B6. Anyone happen to know if the 737 has the same issue?
An airline with more than one type of plane has the option of redeploying their aircraft to make sure they can handle the non-stops during the most challenging times of the year, (i.e. move 757's to longer routes and A320's to shorter ones), but JetBlue doesn't have this option since they only have one type of large jet.
#22
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: London, Ontario
Posts: 5,210
I don't think the Next Generation 737's has this issue to the same extent the 320 does. The 737-700 has a range of a good 1000 or so miles longer than the A320. I think Jetblue's 320's have a range in the 2700 mile area, while the 737-700 has a 3800-ish mile range. JFK-LGB is just under 2500 miles.
But, the head winds will take their toll on the 737 as well. Westjet flies a 3500-mile range 737-800 from Vancouver to Hawaii (2700 miles) and has had to make the odd fuel stop in San Francisco on the westbound leg.
But, the head winds will take their toll on the 737 as well. Westjet flies a 3500-mile range 737-800 from Vancouver to Hawaii (2700 miles) and has had to make the odd fuel stop in San Francisco on the westbound leg.
#23
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: DCA
Programs: AMC MovieWatcher, Giant BonusCard, Petco PALS Card, Silver Diner Blue Plate Club
Posts: 22,298
Originally Posted by flyinggolfer
Anyone happen to know if the 737 has the same issue?
#24
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Denver
Programs: UA 1K in training
Posts: 2,107
Originally Posted by DanJ
But, the head winds will take their toll on the 737 as well. Westjet flies a 3500-mile range 737-800 from Vancouver to Hawaii (2700 miles) and has had to make the odd fuel stop in San Francisco on the westbound leg.
I know it's all taken into account by the airlines and that the fuel calculations have to be correct for any aircraft, but it is a little disconcerting that they're flying a plane on a route where it can't always make it all the way to dry land. I guess the weather forecasts are accurate enough that they don't have a problem with this happening unexpectedly along the way. I wish our regular weather forecasts were that good!
#25
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: London, Ontario
Posts: 5,210
Yeah, it didn't make much sense to me either at first. But I checked the Great Circle Mapper and SFO is 300 miles closer to Hawaii than YVR, so I guess they wanted to build that extra margin in. They have been taking a bit of a hit on public relations (not to mention the jabs on the Air Canada forum LOL), since it adds a few hours to the advertised non-stop flight.
#26
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: San Jose, CA
Posts: 257
Was on 173 on 2/22, stopped MSP. Just think the wrong aircraft for these flights. Checked AA, DL, UA and they all made JFK-SFO without stopping. Our arrival in SJC was 90 minutes late. Anybody read USA Today on 2/22? I think jetBLUE better be careful.........growing too fast and a big mistake with the Embraer 190. Should have kept to one aircraft.................the success of WN.
#27
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: London, Ontario
Posts: 5,210
I don't think the 190 is a bad move. Trying to copy Southwest is probably a fools game unless you think you can take them on and beat them. I think Jetblue probably wants to take on the legacy carriers more than they want to fight SW, and to do that, they need to have an aircraft that they can serve smaller markets with.
#29
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 540
Just did BOS-SEA without a stop, but we flew a bit north into Canada (not too far--we still flew over one of the Dakotas and Montana). Flt took 10 minutes extra, but since the SEA-JFK was still at the gate when we arrived, arrival time was 20 minutes late. The plane was full, but likely lots of $59 promotion fares.
As expected, on the return, took off 35 minutes late, landed 5 minutes late, due to tailwinds. A quick turn and the next flight could have been on time.
As expected, on the return, took off 35 minutes late, landed 5 minutes late, due to tailwinds. A quick turn and the next flight could have been on time.
Last edited by Murph; Feb 27, 2006 at 9:20 am