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

737 NG operators, how much fuel do you land with?

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
Register   Log in
P

pianoman

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 27, 2005
Posts
525
UA is working hard to reduce "unnecessary" fuel loading. Up until now I would say we have usually landed with between 6-7,000 pounds of gas at a destination on a clear day. Obviously more than min legal required, but comfortable and it was just how we did things.

I'm curious to see what anyone flying 737-NG's at other airlines see for planned fuel over destination. Thanks.
 
At DAL, I'd say about 7,000 is typical. We start to perk up when we see landing fuel around 5000lbs. The paperwork also has a fuel "reliability" statistic - XXXXXlbs qty is sufficient for 95% of flights for example.
 
5000 is the high side for what I see usually. Most guys have a floor of 4000, but dispatch is "suggesting" 3500.
 
At Southwest, the normal plan is to land with close to 5,000, the minimum planned allowed. Releases commonly show arrival fuel projected to be in the 5.1 - 5.4 range. Obviously that's VMC, no issues, no tankering, etc. Landing with less than 4,000 is considered "min fuel," and landing with less than 3,000 is considered "emergency fuel."

Bubba
 
What do others typically cruise at? Cost index has us around M.80 in cruise lately and about 320/.79M going up and down.
 
wscrj said:
5000 is the high side for what I see usually. Most guys have a floor of 4000, but dispatch is "suggesting" 3500.
Click to expand...
I know this limitation is ground stationary only, but 3500. That's just crazy.

ELECTRIC HYDRAULIC PUMP OPERATIONS ON THE GROUND Minimum fuel for stationary ground operation of electric motor-driven hydraulic pumps is 1675 pounds in the related main tank.
 
We had a mandatory fuel savings class (mandated by partner UAL) several years ago. In part, they were basically saying we were carrying too much - as evidenced by the fact that we didn't have MORE diversions due to low fuel.
 
The second most important question is how much fuel have you seen "disappear" from the FOD/REMF number in flight. I've been up to 1,000 less for no apparent reason. That's why I usually consider whether I'd be comfortable with 1,000 less than what's planned.
 
I love how the guys who write this crap aren't strapped into the airplane on a daily basis. The worst thing that'll happen to them in their cubicles is they may fall off their office chairs. Ouch! "Now I believe you have my stapler. It's red."
 
densoo said:
The second most important question is how much fuel have you seen "disappear" from the FOD/REMF number in flight. I've been up to 1,000 less for no apparent reason. That's why I usually consider whether I'd be comfortable with 1,000 less than what's planned.
Click to expand...

Funny you should mention that, we were just discussing that phenomenon enroute today. It does seem to be tied in with the center tank getting toward the bottom. We'll be well below the planned burn (about 800lbs to the good) until that point, then very rapidly it begins to correct and we'll be nearly even.
 
We have lived with that"anomaly" for 14 years now on the 737-900....boeing says that it really does not exist
 
not abnormal for us to have fuel pumps light up during roll out either.....we have it down to a science at alastic airlines...
 
I like to plan to land at the furthest point with 6.0
I'm comfortable landing with 5.0
Anything less than 5000 lbs and I want to be looking at the runway.

A typical go-around uses 1500 lbs. If you have less than 4500 lbs and have to go around, you are now an emergency aircraft, with one shot remaining to get that airplane on the ground.
 
RightBettor said:
I love how the guys who write this crap aren't strapped into the airplane on a daily basis. The worst thing that'll happen to them in their cubicles is they may fall off their office chairs. Ouch! "Now I believe you have my stapler. It's red."
Click to expand...

Hear hear
 
RightBettor said:
I love how the guys who write this crap aren't strapped into the airplane on a daily basis. The worst thing that'll happen to them in their cubicles is they may fall off their office chairs. Ouch! "Now I believe you have my stapler. It's red."
Click to expand...


That was a great album (your avatar). RIP Ian Curtis ....... You dumb MF.

On the subject of fuel, I start mildly tweaking below 5K. When the lights come on, get outa our way.:eek:
 
dicko said:
That was a great album (your avatar). RIP Ian Curtis ....... You dumb MF..
Click to expand...

Dicko,

Yes, Joy Division was well on their way to huge success. However, we will never know how huge. That's just ones man's opinion. Sadly, Ian Curtis was on so many psych meds for his epilepsy that he probably had no clue he was ending his life. Also, consider the meds he was on in the 1970s were primitave compared to modern day meds, and if I remember correctly, he was on a one-year "waiting list" to see a "specialist." All while his general practitioner was prescribing the standard, sub-standard stuff. Needless and untimely demise.

If you get a chance, check out the 2007 movie "Control." Pretty good bio-pic.

Also great documentaries on YouTube covering bands like JD, NO, The Smiths, et al.

Cheers!! :cool:
 
RightBettor said:
Dicko,

Yes, Joy Division was well on their way to huge success. However, we will never know how huge. That's just ones man's opinion. Sadly, Ian Curtis was on so many psych meds for his epilepsy that he probably had no clue he was ending his life. Also, consider the meds he was on in the 1970s were primitave compared to modern day meds, and if I remember correctly, he was on a one-year "waiting list" to see a "specialist." All while his general practitioner was prescribing the standard, sub-standard stuff. Needless and untimely demise.

If you get a chance, check out the 2007 movie "Control." Pretty good bio-pic.

Also great documentaries on YouTube covering bands like JD, NO, The Smiths, et al.

Cheers!! :cool:
Click to expand...

Control is awesome as is 24 Hour Party People. Just saw Peter Hook last night, great show...again.
 
What is really missing from this whole discussion is at what fuel load, realistically, can one expect the aircraft to potentially flame out an engine? At my airline, anything below 4000 lbs and you are now into the QRH running a checklist for a low fuel state. Doesn't really inspire much confidence that the FAR requirement of 45 minutes reserve (equates to about 3500 lbs) is what I would actually have before the really bad stuff can happen. Would be nice to hear from Boeing how much of that final 3500 lbs is truly useable fuel. Not holding my breath for that info....:rolleyes:

That said, you Alaska boys are dangerous! Routinely flirting with a sub-5000 lb arrival fuel is nuts! :eek:

P.S. Let's get some input from the true subject matter expert on this topic: Hey General, what do you typically plan for arrival fuels at SkyWest? :laugh:
 
Last edited:
^^^^^
That's a good one---a SWA guy calling Alaska guys dangerous! Just because a couple of anonymous posters decided to try to impress everyone by how little fuel they can land with doesn't make it true. Just ask some of your SW brethren who jumpseat on us daily. Doubt they'd remain quiet if they saw such dangerous fuel policies. I can't remember a time in the past several years that I've landed with less than 5000lbs. Maybe a 4.9 or 4.8 crept in there there on a CAVU day. Certainly never had main tank lights illuminate on rollout. Ridiculous. Yes, I do SE AK, HI, Transcon & Mexico. Also been to Dutch and flown the Arctic--a lot.
 
Guess I didn't include enough emoticons in the first draft to convey my sarcasm. How about this version:

That said, you Alaska boys are dangerous! :D :laugh:;)

<<insert photo of Val Kilmer here>>

Routinely flirting with a sub-5000 lb arrival fuel is nuts! :eek:

Better? Sorry if I offended any AK pilots. :0:0:0
 
Chief Pilot said:
^^^^^
That's a good one---a SWA guy calling Alaska guys dangerous! Just because a couple of anonymous posters decided to try to impress everyone by how little fuel they can land with doesn't make it true. Just ask some of your SW brethren who jumpseat on us daily. Doubt they'd remain quiet if they saw such dangerous fuel policies. I can't remember a time in the past several years that I've landed with less than 5000lbs. Maybe a 4.9 or 4.8 crept in there there on a CAVU day. Certainly never had main tank lights illuminate on rollout. Ridiculous. Yes, I do SE AK, HI, Transcon & Mexico. Also been to Dutch and flown the Arctic--a lot.
Click to expand...
c



OMG



Even I could see it was a joke



Have you even seem the movie Top Gun .
 
OMG?? Seriously, you sound like my 14 year old daughter. (Only she would proofread what she wrote before hitting send). Then again your screen name is slaquer(?).

Hey StopNTsing,
All due respect--you are correct, I didn't "read" your sarcasm. Hell, if I were reading about SW guys routinely rolling out with main tank lights illuminated I would consider that not just dangerous, but reckless. Thanks for the clarification and correction.
 
RightBettor said:
Dicko,

Yes, Joy Division was well on their way to huge success. However, we will never know how huge. That's just ones man's opinion. Sadly, Ian Curtis was on so many psych meds for his epilepsy that he probably had no clue he was ending his life. Also, consider the meds he was on in the 1970s were primitave compared to modern day meds, and if I remember correctly, he was on a one-year "waiting list" to see a "specialist." All while his general practitioner was prescribing the standard, sub-standard stuff. Needless and untimely demise.

If you get a chance, check out the 2007 movie "Control." Pretty good bio-pic.

Also great documentaries on YouTube covering bands like JD, NO, The Smiths, et al.

Cheers!! :cool:
Click to expand...


Agreed. A complete shame and a waste.

The Killers video of 'Shadowplay', the Bauhaus cover of 'Transmission' and NIN Dead Souls are worth checking out. Liked 'Control' a lot.

Watching Ian Curtis, taught me how to dance.

:nuts:
 

Share this page

Latest posts

Latest resources

Latest media

Carbon Cub FX-3 Shenandoah Valley
Carbon Cub at Kittyhawk
FX-3 in the backcountry
IFR Panel in a Carbon Cub FX-3
Cub-Provo-UT-c.jpg
Back
Top Bottom