Welcome to Flightinfo.com

  • Register now and join the discussion
  • Friendliest aviation Ccmmunity on the web
  • Modern site for PC's, Phones, Tablets - no 3rd party apps required
  • Ask questions, help others, promote aviation
  • Share the passion for aviation
  • Invite everyone to Flightinfo.com and let's have fun

CAL chief pilot craziness

Welcome to Flightinfo.com

  • Register now and join the discussion
  • Modern secure site, no 3rd party apps required
  • Invite your friends
  • Share the passion of aviation
  • Friendliest aviation community on the web

Pocono Pilot

flower child
Joined
Oct 23, 2004
Posts
382
Holy geez, I hope this chief pilot got fired!!!

Did he???

You guys have my sympathies from now on. LOL I feel your pain.

http://abclocal.go.com/wabc/story?section=local&id=5764621

(New York - WABC, November 15, 2007) - There is more evidence that some airlines may be putting the financial squeeze on pilots to save fuel.

The Eyewitness News Investigators first broke the story of planes landing low on fuel. Now, there's a disturbing document that has angered pilots and raises serious safety questions.

The document came to us after the airing of our first report. It's a memo from Continental's senior flight operations director to the airlines 4,500 pilots. The memo pressures the pilots to conserve fuel or possibly risk their pension funds.

Continental Flight 69 landed at Newark Liberty low on fuel, just one step below an emergency. An isolated incident? Not according to this air traffic controller:

"It's an astounding increase in minimum fuel activity. I've noticed it in working everyday just in the number of calls that we get," said air traffic controller Ray Adams.
Daily air traffic control logs we've obtained document this increase: During a six month period this year, 56 Continental flights came into Newark with low or minimum fuel. Compare that to a similar period two years ago, when Continental had just one minimum fuel landing.

The memo recently given to us by a Continental pilot may shed light on why minimum fuel landings are on the rise. While telling pilots that management will "respect their authority and judgement" on how much fuel they decide to carry, the memo then warns that "adding fuel indiscriminately... ultimately reduces profit sharing and possibly pension funding."

Retired airline captain Bob Ober says the document is a clear pressure tactic to get pilots to save the company money by cutting back on the reserve cushion of fuel needed for unexpected delays, cutting back on fuel makes planes lighter and lighter planes burn less fuel which can save thousands per flight.
"You don't say to a pilot for every extra gallon of gas you put on this airplane your retirement or pension sharing will be affected. that's not the way you put this," Ober said.
In an e-mail sent to us by a Continental pilot, he calls the bulletin "a veiled threat against pilot pensions if pilots continue to add fuel." He goes on to write that "having too much fuel in the New York City air traffic control system is always a good prudent idea."

It's a good idea because planes entering New York's crowded airspace never know whether they'll get stuck waiting for their turn to land.
Newark Liberty International, a Continental hub, has the most delayed landings in the nation. These delays coupled with pressure to carry less fuel that might explain why some Continental pilots are landing low on fuel.

"If there's pushing going on, you bet we're concerned and we''ll address that but at the end of the day the Captain has the authority the amount of fuel that goes on that airplane," said Captain Terry McVenes of the Airline Pilots Association.
In a statement to us, Continental points out that "pilots can request additional fuel if they feel it is necessary for their flight." The airline says "each flight is carefully planned to ensure that it has adequate fuel, including ample reserves to handle delays or diversions" -- adding that Continental has "...a strong focus on fuel efficiency, but that always takes a back seat to safety."
But some pilots say memos like this where fuel load is tied to profit sharing and pension funds errode their authority and ultimately safety.

Continental says while it has a strong focus on fuel efficiency, it insists that safety is its top priority. We should note that our investigation found other airlines landing with low fuel at Newark. We focused on Continental because of the memo.
This investigation began with a tip, so if you have something you need investigated please give our tipline a call at 877-tip-news.
(Copyright 2007 WABC-TV)
 
Poco, although I don't agree with the memo, I still feel that if I want the gas I will get it.

Of course I won't have to worry near as much after I am back flying F/O for you at a UAL CAL merger. How's that new job at UA?

When did you start, you never say much about it? You told us all that your friends were going to walk your stuff in, it was only a matter of short time. How come you haven't updated us on your escape from anything to do with CO?
 
I am totally on the CAL pilots side on this one. If there is anything me or other Express pilots can do let us know! Seriously.
 
i just noticed in your profile, RocketRob...you flew the Beech Starship?

you're even cooler than before
 
A friend on the 757 said months ago the "low fuel" claims into Newark have some basis in truth, but it is an effect of sending a jet designed for intercontinental use from the Western side of Europe across the Atlantic against winter headwinds. Pilots are making the right judgement to call "low fuel" to convey the message that an further delay could result in a fuel critical situation.
 
As one who flies these routes on a weekly basis, not once has any pressure been applied to not add fuel. There are some guys who simply waste fuel by adding fuel because it feels good, thats who this message was addressing. The company has put a lot of effort into improving the accuracy of our fuel burn projections and we need to take that into account.

Not once have I diverted and not once have I been uncomfortable with my landing fuel. Adding a little fuel, flying an economic profile, adjusting mach and flight level can have a significant impact on your fuel over destination. Thats not to say if we really got hammered by the winds I wouldn't hesitate to stop. Although there is a lot of anecdotal talk about diverting, my guess that on a percentage basis it is a pretty small number.

If an individual feels even slightly pressured not to add fuel because of some memo; they have no business flying an airplane for a living.
 
If an individual feels even slightly pressured not to add fuel because of some memo; they have no business flying an airplane for a living.

and this is the most sound logic applied to the scenario. a memo is a piece of paper. it is not regulatory.

fly your plane safely and use the POWER provided you by the federal government.

remember...a desk never runs out of fuel.
 
Pocono,

Are you really a pilot? Haven't you learned that the media knows nothing about aviation?

I have never flown with a Captain that was afraid to add fuel, nor should they be. Rolling into EWR while at 45 min - 1 hour of fuel is standard procedure. If it gets too low, declare min fuel, an emergency or divert to one of the other airport in the EWR area and along the arrival corridors.

Personally, I would be more appreciative of a memo that thanks the pilot group for their professionalism and fuel conservation and then reinforces some fuel savings strategies. While poorly written, this is just a memo and anyone who feels threatened by it is crazy.

-minrest
 
This is another example of the media taking advantage of the publics "fear" of flying.

The whole "minimum fuel" thing was brought about with the intent on keeping certain flights (#69 and a couple others) from making an unnecessary fuel stop. There has never been a question of safety here. It just means that we may have to stop in Stewart to get some more fuel if we keep getting vectored around. If it's feasible, ATC will give these flights priority.

I've flown flight 69 a bunch of times and we are topped off 99% of the time. We couldn't add fuel if we wanted to so "the memo" doesn't really apply here.
 
The other part of the message that you didnt hear was that the EWR 737 Asst Chief Pilot put out a memo that basically said... put what ever fuel you need on the airplane to get it done, if you have to add fuel... do it.

As far as I know no one has been called on the carpet for adding gas.

The original memo that I wont post here (internal company pubs) was written by a guy who probably hasnt touched an airplane in the last 5 years, so really take it with a grain of salt.


EDIT----

I forgot to add that Pocono is an idiot.... sorry I forgot about you!
 
Excuse me, but why are you all so rude. I didn't write the memo, and I didn't make the news report on TV. I just posted that I am in agreement with all the CAL pilots on this one. Also I was just offering any support that you guys needed from your XJT brothers and sisters.

Did you guys even bother to click the link and watch the news report? http://abclocal.go.com/wabc/story?section=local&id=5764621

I didn't write this you know, right guys???

I guess you CAL boys like to shoot the messenger becuase of your little wee-wees. LOL
 

Latest resources

Back
Top