Tankering is still fairly popular. It is done on about 20% of flights I'm involved with. >From: Allan9 <exatc@xxxxxxxxxx> >Reply-To: The Airline List <AIRLINE@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Allan9 ><exatc@xxxxxxxxxx> >To: AIRLINE@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx >Subject: Re: LHR strike >Date: Fri, 24 Sep 2004 15:07:21 -0400 > >Backi in the 60's-70s it was common to "Tanker"fuel to save money. If the >fuel contract was better at this stop and the people/cargo weight was down >they put in all the fuel they could. >Al > >----- Original Message ----- >From: "Bahadir Acuner" <bahadiracuner@xxxxxxxxx> >To: <AIRLINE@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> >Sent: Friday, September 24, 2004 3:13 AM >Subject: Re: LHR strike > > > > Al, > > I wasn't clear enough.. Over the weekend the LHR flights will make an > > intermediate stop in on the way back to US in Prestwick. So, the LHR-ORD > > flight will have to land in Prestwick, get more fuel and then fly to >ORD. > > > > I saw that on United's computers in LAX today.. > > > > BAHA > > Fan of being home for next 6 months, too bad I cannot fly my beloved UAL > > that much any more. > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: The Airline List [mailto:AIRLINE@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of > > Allan9 > > Sent: Thursday, September 23, 2004 7:20 PM > > To: AIRLINE@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > > Subject: Re: LHR strike > > > > Baha > > They've been doing that for at least 40 years > > Al > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > From: "Bahadir Acuner" <bahadiracuner@xxxxxxxxx> > > To: <AIRLINE@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > > Sent: Thursday, September 23, 2004 12:04 PM > > Subject: LHR strike > > > > > > > No word of agreement on the LHR strike yet. I called United and they >told > > me > > > a very interesting approach as the solution to the problem. They are > > > planning to tanker some fuel (i.e. carry much more than they need to >make > > > the trip to LHR) and then on the return they would land on another >airport > > > to get fuel. > > > > > > Very interesting.. > > > > > > BAHA > > > Fan of being tanked :) > > > > >