SFGate: Pilots complain airlines restrict fuel to cut cost

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



=20
----------------------------------------------------------------------
This article was sent to you by someone who found it on SFGate.
The original article can be found on SFGate.com here:
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=3D/n/a/2008/08/08/national/w=
091702D94.DTL
 ---------------------------------------------------------------------
Friday, August 8, 2008 (AP)
Pilots complain airlines restrict fuel to cut cost
By JOAN LOWY, Associated Press Writer


   (08-08) 09:23 PDT WASHINGTON (AP) --
   Pilots are complaining that their airline bosses, desperate to cut costs,
are forcing them to fly uncomfortably low on fuel.
   Safety for passengers and crews could be compromised, they say.
   The situation got bad enough three years ago, even before the latest sur=
ge
in fuel prices, that NASA sent a safety alert to federal aviation
officials.
   No action.
   Since then, pilots, flight dispatchers and others have continued to sound
off with their own warnings, yet the Federal Aviation Administration says
there is no reason to order airlines to back off their effort to keep fuel
loads to a minimum.
   "We can't dabble in the business policies or the personnel policies of an
airline," said FAA spokesman Les Dorr. He said there was no indication
safety regulations were being violated.
   The September 2005 safety alert was issued by NASA's confidential Aviati=
on
Safety Reporting System, which allows air crews to report safety problems
without fear their names will be disclosed.
   "What we found was that because they carried less fuel on the airplane,
they were getting into situations where they had to tell air traffic
control, 'I need to get on the ground,'" said Linda Connell, director of
the NASA reporting system.
   With fuel prices now their biggest cost, airlines are aggressively
enforcing new policies designed to reduce consumption.
   In March, for example, an airline pilot told NASA he landed his regional
jet with less fuel than required by FAA regulations. "Looking back," he
said, "I would have liked more gas yesterday." He also complained that his
airline was "ranking" captains according to who landed with the least
amount.
   A month earlier, a Boeing 747 captain reported running low on fuel after
meeting strong headwinds crossing the Atlantic en route to John F. Kennedy
International Airport in New York. He said he wanted to stop to add fuel
but continued on to Kennedy after consulting his airline's operations
manager, who told him there was adequate fuel aboard the jet.
   When the plane arrived at Kennedy, the captain said it had so little fuel
that had there been any delay in landing, "I would have had to declare a
fuel emergency" — a term that tells air traffic controllers a plane
needs immediate priority to land.
   The last major U.S. air crash attributed to low fuel was on Jan. 25, 199=
0,
when an Avianca Boeing 707 ran out while waiting to land at Kennedy.
Seventy-three of 158 aboard were killed.
   FAA regulations require airliners to take off with enough fuel to reach
their destination or an alternate airport, plus another 45 minutes of
flight. The regulations also say it's up to dispatchers and pilots to
decide the size of fuel loads, with pilots making the final call.
   Spare fuel beyond the minimum required by FAA is often added to airliners
to allow for weather or airport delays. That adds weight, which burns more
fuel and increases a plane's operating cost. A Washington-to-Los Angeles
flight by an Airbus 320 with 150 passengers burns about 29,500 pounds, or
4,300 gallons, of fuel. That costs about $14,600. Adding an additional
1,500 pounds, about 219 gallons, would cost about $750 more.
   Complaints about airlines scrimping on fuel aren't limited to those
submitted to the NASA system.
   Labor unions at two major airlines — American Airlines and US
Airways — have filed complaints with FAA, saying the airlines are
pressuring members not to request spare fuel for flights.
   American notified dispatchers on July 7 that their records on fuel
approved for flights would be monitored, and dispatchers not abiding by
company guidelines could ultimately be fired.
   American said its fuel costs this year were expected to increase to $10
billion, a 52 percent over 2007. "The additional cost of carrying
unnecessary fuel adversely affects American's financial success," the
airline told dispatchers in a letter.
   Union officials responded that "it appears safety has become a second
thought" for the company.
   At US Airways, the pilots' union took out an ad in USA Today on July 16
charging that eight senior captains had been singled out by the company
for requesting extra fuel and had been required to attend training
sessions. The union said the training order was a message to other pilots
not to request extra fuel.
   American and US Airways blame the complaints on heated labor negotiations
— both are in contract talks with the complaining unions.
   "It's not a safety issue; it's a contract issue," said John Hotard, a
spokesman for American.
   US Airways said in a statement to its employees that the eight captains
had been adding fuel "well in excess of the norm."
   FAA spokeswoman Laura Brown said the agency has conducted several analys=
es
of airline fuel practices but found no instances of the minimum being
violated or pilots' fuel requests being denied.
   "We didn't see any proposed changes we thought needed to be made," Brown
said.
   Department of Transportation Inspector General Calvin Scovel recommended
in April that the FAA take a nationwide look at airline fuel practices.
Five months later, the agency is still developing a survey to send to its
inspectors at each airline and has no schedule for sending it out.
   Scovel also said the number of pilots reporting low fuel on approach to
Newark Liberty International Airport tripled from 2005 to 2007. More than
half were Continental Airlines flights, the dominant carrier at Newark.
   He suggested the airline was pressuring pilots "to either not stop for
fuel when needed or to carry insufficient amounts of fuel." His letter
cited two bulletins from Continental's management urging pilots and flight
crews to cut back on fuel, including one that noted "adding fuel
indiscriminately reduces profit sharing and possibly pension funding."
   But Scovel's review of 20 Newark-bound flights — out of 151
reporting low fuel on approach in 2007 — found none with less than
45-minutes worth of spare fuel.
   Former National Transportation Safety Board Chairman Jim Hall said the
situation merits an industrywide investigation by Scovel.
   "It's a safety-of-flight issue and it needs to be treated as such," said
Hall, now a transportation safety consultant. "If dispatchers and pilots
are saying the airlines are pressuring them, and it's having a chilling
effect on the decisions they make every day in regard to the fuel loads,
and it looks it's like eroding the authority of the pilot in command, then
that issue needs the attention of the government regulators who are there
to oversee the system."
   ___
   Associated Press Writer David Koenig in Dallas contributed to this repor=
t. ----------------------------------------------------------------------
Copyright 2008 AP

<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

If you wish to unsubscribe from the AIRLINE List, please send an E-mail to:
"listserv@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx".  Within the body of the text, only write the following:"SIGNOFF AIRLINE".

[Index of Archives]         [NTSB]     [NASA KSC]     [Yosemite]     [Steve's Art]     [Deep Creek Hot Springs]     [NTSB]     [STB]     [Share Photos]     [Yosemite Campsites]