Fuel Burn @ Idle

[FireFox]

Can any of the Skippers / Co-Skippers here give me a rough indication of what the fuel burn rate (per minute) is at idle for their respective aircraft types?

No doubt differing with elevation and engine type.

320 = 15 litres/minute ?

Appreciate it,

Cheers

[Vsplat]

Gatekeeper, you'll probably get your answers in kilos/hour or pounds/hour. Volume of fuel is not as relevant in aircraft as it is in surface vehicles, for two reasons - thrust is a mass exercise, so for as fuel density changes, say with changes in temperature, the actual volume of fuel consumed changes for a given amount of thrust. Also, fuel weight adds to aircraft weight, which we of course have to control. Carrying fuel costs fuel, just as carrying cargo or passengers does.

One more question. What phases of flight are you interested in? Descent and taxi? Just Descent?

Cheers

Vs

[FireFox]

Gatekeeper, you'll probably get your answers in kilos/hour or pounds/hour. Volume of fuel is not as relevant in aircraft as it is in surface vehicles, for two reasons - thrust is a mass exercise, so for as fuel density changes, say with changes in temperature, the actual volume of fuel consumed changes for a given amount of thrust. Also, fuel weight adds to aircraft weight, which we of course have to control. Carrying fuel costs fuel, just as carrying cargo or passengers does.

One more question. What phases of flight are you interested in? Descent and taxi? Just Descent?

Cheers

Vs

Beauty Vsplat...thanks. I apologize, I should have been more specific.

Idle @ the gate.

Peeve of mine. Bugs the crap out of me.

[anonymous]

Beauty Vsplat...thanks. I apologize, I should have been more specific.

Idle @ the gate.

Peeve of mine. Bugs the crap out of me.

300 kg/hr/eng

[roadbiker]

Can any of the Skippers / Co-Skippers here give me a rough indication of what the fuel burn rate (per minute) is at idle for their respective aircraft types?

No doubt differing with elevation and engine type.

320 = 15 litres/minute ?

Appreciate it,

Cheers

B737 - 600 lbs/hr or 10 lbs/min per engine. Roughly.

[yul07]

AA flies at the edge.....

http://www.latimes.com/business/la-fi-airlines-fuel-20100713,0,5631459.story

You may have to cut and paste.

[AAS]

It bugs me too. I have an EXCEL sheet you may be interested in.

I can't find a way to attach it.

PM me an email address if you're interested.

(Any errors in the sheet are all my fault.)

[Johnny]

Peeve of mine. Bugs the crap out of me.

What part 'bugs ya,' GateKeeper. The fact that certain (unnamed) Airlines can't figure out to get one lone person, to stick two orange sticks in the air?

People milling around, lunch room full watching Oprah...

...we need one person, just one, to put two Orange Sticks in the Air.

...is that too much to ask?

[AIP]

B767-300 is Approx 1400 KG/HR, or 25 KG/Minute.

[Don Hudson]

Gatekeeper;

Idle @ the gate.

Peeve of mine. Bugs the crap out of me.

Yep. Bugs a lot of people - it's money down the drain and it never, ever seem to get fixed. It never changed from the time I joined in 1973 to when I retired in 2007 - parked just outside the gate burning fuel, paying crews and airframe time was always a possibility at our "home" stations in Canada. It rarely occurred overseas (Europe/Asia/Australia).

Our FDA Program had a handy little tool called a "Gate-wait study". The FDA Program recorded the time of the last wait just outside the gate before engine shut-down, (it didn't keep track of the stops on the way in, although they would all have been part of the data).

The tool collated all the information according to time-of-day, (GMT), time spent waiting, fuel burnt during the wait, the arrival station and the month. As per standard de-identication protocols, the date and flight number were not kept. Then we would provide a report to management regarding the delays; the report included the fuel burnt "idling @ gate", the station and the comparisons with other stations by month. It was an accurate record of how much $$$ the airline was spending and at which station, waiting for wands or a prepared gate area, which means all stuff outside the white lines, gate in correct position for the aircraft.

We were also able to provide accurate information on single-engine (A320) taxi. This collated, trended, de-identified information included the fuel-saved (in kgs and $$$), by shutting one engine down on taxi-out and/or taxi-in as well as the weight of the aircraft, so that commanders could make better judgements as to what weights worked and what didn't. The decision to taxi single-engine was always the commander's; the information FDA provided was always neutral.

[deicer]

Peeve of mine. Bugs the crap out of me.

What part 'bugs ya,' GateKeeper. The fact that certain (unnamed) Airlines can't figure out to get one lone person, to stick two orange sticks in the air?

People milling around, lunch room full watching Oprah...

...we need one person, just one, to put two Orange Sticks in the Air.

...is that too much to ask?

When you are able to get certain companies to change the SOP for Ramp Ops to allow for one person to wave in a flight, then maybe it will happen.

I can tell you that you will have single pilot aircraft before that happens at 'certain (unnamed) Airlines'.

Iceman

[Johnny]

For an outfit, that claims to be continually looking for cost improvements, it is laughable (if it wasn't so pathetic.)

Two men (of a three man crew) shuffling their feet at the gate, few other folks hanging out, but - no "Lead."

Only a "Lead" is qualified to hold two orange sticks in the air?

No worries, he'll be along at "Ad Time," he is busy watching Oprah in the lunch room.

[Don Hudson]

When you are able to get certain companies to change the SOP for Ramp Ops to allow for one person to wave in a flight, then maybe it will happen.

I can tell you that you will have single pilot aircraft before that happens at 'certain (unnamed) Airlines'.

Iceman

The annual bill for "ramp rash" is approximately $10m, right off the bottom line, and it hasn't changed in years. Some damage is "unavoidable" but not most of it.

Part of the prevention is having enough pairs of eyes on wing-tips and tails to prevent collisions with any of the equipment that services the aircraft, or other aircraft themselves. RJ's on the push knocking over galley trucks with the tail-feathers is emminently preventable but probably not with one person hooked up with a headset at the nose-gear whose vision is blocked by the fuselage, (in winter, at night...). Reducing personnel to avoid waiting for everyone to be in place to avoid gate-waits is not the solution.

Motivating employees and/or outsourced service providers to avoid damage as far as possible isn't always straightforward or easy. That said, it is in all likelihood cheaper to train carefully, test frequently and pay well than it is to write cheques for millions of dollars for damage to airplanes and equipment. Perhaps the problem is, rather than the will and the imagination (within both management and the union or outsourced service provider), to fix an obvious problem, the problem is structural in the sense of who's budget is affected.

[deicer]

Hi Don

I think you hit the nail on the head when you touched on 'motivation'. Certain companies are trying to 're-invent' themselves into profitable new corporations, but they are using outdated 'big stick' tactics to do it. Training is still nonexistant on the ramp level (1hr powerpoints in a stuffy room with a manager reading off the screen isn't training imo), and yet if you have an infraction, it still leads to disciplinary action first. Proper training is the first step in moving forward.

Secondly, we haven't seen any improvement in working conditions or pay in 10 years. Cost of everything in life has gone up exponentially, yet we're still making year 1999 wages. So compensation has to be commensurate with the labour being requested. The ratio for that has become way out of wack.

Third and finally, it is what companies want when they have one employee group belittling another with comments like 'they're watching Oprah'. They want nothing better than to have us fighting amongst ourselves instead of who we should be fighting against, them. Why do you think Pass Priority (ahem, C1) issues have never been addressed?

We are our own worst enemies. We stumble along, fighting each other, rather than demanding the proper training, support and compensation that we should be getting.

So before others jump on me about rampies being overpaid, my statement above goes for ALL employee groups.

Iceman

[Johnny]

deicer:

I always enjoy your posts, unfortunately it is not belittling - it is a fact.

For the last number of years, we have had the unfortunate experience of sharing our "Deluxe Flight Planning Facility," with the Calgary Ramp Lunch Room.

I could write a book about the stuff I've witnessed.

[FireFox]

Johnny:

I can't speak for YYC, but in YVR if an aircraft is waiting at a gate it's more than likely because we're short staffed.

About the only thing that keeps me from being at a gate 10 minutes prior to departure...is working another flight.

Great points Don...and deicer.

Thanks for the info folks.

[FireFox]

Deleted by poster.

[deicer]

Hi Johnny!

Not saying what you're seeing isn't true, have heard 'rumors' about the YYC operation for years.

From my perspective, much like GK said, in YYZ generally if you're waiting it's because your crew is still tied up on their last flight. That isn't our problem, it's planning that is out of our control.

As for somebody always watching Oprah, again in YYZ we have shifts starting at 4am and afterwards at 30 minute intervals throughout the day. So at any given time, somebody is bound to be on their 30 minute UNPAID lunch. Much like you and your bretheren, we generally try to keep nourished and watered on a regular basis. Again, it is a matter of planning(which you know who controls) that your lunch period could be anywhere between the period that is 2.5 hours on either side of the mid point of your shift. With a total of just under 2000 ramp employees in YYZ, of which roughly a third are on shift at any given time, you will see alot of ramp employees on break. It's the nature of the beast.

Besides, why is it whenever I'm on break, I always see alot of Flight Crew in the Tim's line

As for requiring a Lead Hand to supervise the gate operations, the only analogy I can draw to that is to ask, would you allow a street hire to sit in the Left Seat?

Iceman

[FireFox]

So at any given time, somebody is bound to be on their 30 minute UNPAID lunch.

You guys get lunch! (unpaid or otherwise) NICE.

[chockalicious]

As a former rampie and a trainer I have trained many people on marshalling and general ramp procedures. There is no reason to have the marshalling done by the lead only if the agents have been trained properly.

I am not advocating bringing in someone off the street and turning them loose with a set of wands on day 1 but someone can be brought up to speed pretty quickly.

From my understanding at certain companies only certain positions are allowed to marshall in the plane.

[Johnny]

I am sorry for the good, hard working ramp employees here (and there are many) but the department is beyond repair. Two stations, Calgary and Ottawa, are hands down the worse. We've had this discussion before, deicer, and nothing has changed. I don't buy the 'short staffed' BS. What I see is a serious lack of 'work ethic' and ridiculous work rules.

Couple examples:

- Three ramp workers at gate 50, waiting for an inbound Aircraft (no aircraft in sight.) Aircraft pulls up to the adjacent gate, no ramp crew, Aircraft sits and waits. You would (think) the crew at gate 50 would run (there's a laugh) to the next gate - get the Aircraft parked - get the bridge mated - get the people on their way.

Doesn't happen, why? We're not assigned to that flight...

- There is an AME at the foot of the bridge; he is not allowed to marshal the Aircraft in. You're kidding me - right, he is not qualified?

- Aircraft is all closed up, ready for push-back. The Whistle Blows at the Quarry, and Fred Flintsone is off shift. Crew walks and the Aircraft waits for the next shift. 10 minutes of work, and the 200 plus passengers would have been on their way - but, no - I am "off shift" and "I'm outta here."

Out of control Union!

Having witnessed the 'day to day' operations of the Calgary lunch room, simply hardened my view. There have been numerous other issues at these two stations, that are best left off a public forum.

The comparison to putting an off the street hire in the left seat, is a little weak. I think we are slightly inflating the required skill level, to achieve "lead" status. The fact that the ramp hasn't seen a pay raise since '99,' still leaves them earning twice the competitor.

There lies the issue - welcome to 2010.

Let’s roll the dice and compare each employee group, to our competitors and see which group is 'over paid.'

It would be one thing, if you actually; "get what you pay for." That urban legend is shot down by the 'unnamed Airline' being a leader in 'Lost Luggage.' Not to mention that every station we fly to, outside of Canada, turns the Aircraft in half the time, with the added bonus of it getting a superior grooming.

30 years ago, Pacific Western Airlines could turn a 737-200 in 20 minutes. Ground crew of three men, bulk loaded pits, 122 people on - 122 off. I'll even give you the (downside) of automation at the new and improved Airports. The sheer volume we deal with at large Airports like Toronto.

What has changed?

For me the answer is; out of control Unions, ridiculous work rules and a sliding work ethic.

[FireFox]

Aircraft is all closed up, ready for push-back. The Whistle Blows at the Quarry, and Fred Flintsone is off shift. Crew walks and the Aircraft waits for the next shift. 10 minutes of work, and the 200 plus passengers would have been on their way - but, no - I am "off shift" and "I'm outta here."

And we've never heard of flight crews walking off a plane because they are over their time?

The comparison to putting an off the street hire in the left seat, is a little weak. I think we are slightly inflating the required skill level, to achieve "lead" status. The fact that the ramp hasn't seen a pay raise since '99,' still leaves them earning twice the competitor.

False. I think you'll find that Serviceair is within $1 to $3 per hour of our wages. Tack on the profit & no doubt their contracted airlines pay considerably more for their services.

[deicer]

Aircraft is all closed up, ready for push-back. The Whistle Blows at the Quarry, and Fred Flintsone is off shift. Crew walks and the Aircraft waits for the next shift. 10 minutes of work, and the 200 plus passengers would have been on their way - but, no - I am "off shift" and "I'm outta here."

And we've never heard of flight crews walking off a plane because they are over their time?

The comparison to putting an off the street hire in the left seat, is a little weak. I think we are slightly inflating the required skill level, to achieve "lead" status. The fact that the ramp hasn't seen a pay raise since '99,' still leaves them earning twice the competitor.

False. I think you'll find that Serviceair is within $1 to $3 per hour of our wages. Tack on the profit & no doubt their contracted airlines pay considerably more for their services.

Ah Grasshoppah,,,,,

One must consider the three fingers that point at them,

When they point at another

Iceman