wally34949

Due to a strong jet stream, flights from Europe to Newark having been running very low on fuel or requiring a fuel stop in Canada. The 757 is a single isle plane and many people feel it is not designed for flights as long as Europe to the United States.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/business/2...stry.useconomy

wally34949

On my flight from Barcelona to Newark last month, the plane could only muster 427 miles per hour.

nytraveler

Well, yes - flying into a very strong head wind. Give me a 747 any day - it's so overengineered it can fly on only 2 engines if necessary.

rkkwan

It has nothing to do with the plane or how many engines. Just how the airline utilize them. Before Cathay Pacific switched from the 4-engine 747-400 to the 2-engine 777-300ER on their US flights, many US-HKG flights require unscheduled fuel stops in ICN or TPE in the winter.

So, the logic of you guys are faulty.

BTW, I personally started a thread on Flyertalk's CO forum about this issue at least 5 years ago. Just a common yearly thing. These newspapers have nothing new to write about.

http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/conti...ds-merged.html

mrwunrfl

But this would be news, given that the last post to that ft thread was in 2009:

The number of "minimum fuel" declarations by Continental pilots leapt five-fold at Newark airport over the past two years, prompting criticism over the carrier's use of relatively small planes for transatlantic routes.

travelgourmet

BTW, I personally started a thread on Flyertalk's CO forum about this issue at least 5 years ago. Just a common yearly thing. These newspapers have nothing new to write about.

I would think CO's continued inability to address what is a known problem qualifies as news.

rkkwan

If they're still getting passengers to pay for these flights, then it's not a problem! And safety is never an issue.

wally34949

I don't think that the average flyer knows the difference between a 757 and a 777 aircraft. Also, many people book an inclusive tour package which means the tour company books the flight. Obviously people on this website would be the exception.

The article goes on to mention that Continental flies 41 757-200's (the 757-300's hold more fuel but can't fly as far so they can't be used for these routes). If one plane arrives at an airport low on fuel, it is a small problem, but if 30+ planes are arriving at the same airport in bad weather low on fuel, it could be a major problem. Most of these flights arrive back to Newark around the same time in the afternoon.

qwovadis

Seasonal headswinds are 30 MPH stronger than usual this year
Pilots do not file flight plans properly accounting for this.
Hence they run short on fuel. Pilots in command must plan
better there will be no problems.

clevelandbrown

I often fly on 757's because CO can go to more destinations by using them. They also have the lie-flat seating, which to me makes them more attractive than the wide-body 767. I don't think safety is an issue, as they have contingency plans to refuel if the headwinds are too strong, and I seem to recall that all planes are capable of flying with less than their full complement of engines.

I wonder if they can go to the head of the line in the landing pattern by making a low-fuel declaration? Wink. Wink.

dutyfree

Qwovadis-it is not just the pilots that do flight plans. In this era of high fuel costs,flight control(read the company) preplans the flight along with a computer and the pilot can decide to abide by it or not.