I know of a flight leaving the NYC area for just a short hop to Washington DC, a 50 minute flight. Weather had been an issue for several hours and the flight was delayed. As the flight was full and there was the concern of exceeding max landing weight due to the short amount of flight time, only a min required fueld could be loaded. They taxied out and were delayed again by the slow moving thunderstorms, thus burning up precious fuel. Finally, they took off, but were repeatedly held at low altitude and vectored around storm. Jets are VERY thirsty at 8000ft! They were finally released onto their route, but encountered a delay at the destination and did not declare emergencu fuel until it was so late, they had to divert to the nearby US Air Force Base! That earned the crew a "carpet dance", and a lot of ridicule. Some months later, as a new captain, I experienced almost the exact same circumstance, but diverted to Baltimore just 50 miles from Washington National Airport. Only 50 miles away, but that can make the difference. I got a phone call from the Chief, but no "carpet dance". If I had not known what the previous crew had experienced, I might have pushed it a little too far and make the same mistake. So I hope these reports can help crews similarly in the future!
Great video! Perhaps you might consider doing a video on another fuel emergency from the past? Air Canada Flight 143, a 767 which ran out of fuel at 41,000 feet on a flight from Montreal Quebec to Edmonton Alberta back on July 23, 1983. The mistakes made by the flight and ground crews were mind boggling, the only thing more incredibly stupid were the decisions of Air Canada management on levels of repairs parts they stocked at the time, and what was considered a parts or system failure that stilled allowed an aircraft to remain in service. The crew did an incredible job getting the aircraft and passengers to a safe landing, it became known as 'The Gimli Glider'
Your pronunciation is correct! Sustained low cloud conditions at Paraburdoo are very unusual, which likely contributed to the "she'll be right" approach by all involved.
Hello, thank you for all your vidéo on ATR Aircrafts, Can you explain us your thinks about the Flight TUNINTER 1153, About the fuel tanks Level betwen 42/72 and the problème about this flight? I don’t understand why the jauges display a wrong values? Because on 72,There are more capacitiv sensors?
I know of a flight leaving the NYC area for just a short hop to Washington DC, a 50 minute flight. Weather had been an issue for several hours and the flight was delayed. As the flight was full and there was the concern of exceeding max landing weight due to the short amount of flight time, only a min required fueld could be loaded. They taxied out and were delayed again by the slow moving thunderstorms, thus burning up precious fuel. Finally, they took off, but were repeatedly held at low altitude and vectored around storm. Jets are VERY thirsty at 8000ft! They were finally released onto their route, but encountered a delay at the destination and did not declare emergencu fuel until it was so late, they had to divert to the nearby US Air Force Base! That earned the crew a "carpet dance", and a lot of ridicule. Some months later, as a new captain, I experienced almost the exact same circumstance, but diverted to Baltimore just 50 miles from Washington National Airport. Only 50 miles away, but that can make the difference. I got a phone call from the Chief, but no "carpet dance". If I had not known what the previous crew had experienced, I might have pushed it a little too far and make the same mistake. So I hope these reports can help crews similarly in the future!
The crew you mentioned experiencd a chain of unforeseen circumstances. Thankfully, they managed to break that chain in time.
Great video! Perhaps you might consider doing a video on another fuel emergency from the past? Air Canada Flight 143, a 767 which ran out of fuel at 41,000 feet on a flight from Montreal Quebec to Edmonton Alberta back on July 23, 1983. The mistakes made by the flight and ground crews were mind boggling, the only thing more incredibly stupid were the decisions of Air Canada management on levels of repairs parts they stocked at the time, and what was considered a parts or system failure that stilled allowed an aircraft to remain in service. The crew did an incredible job getting the aircraft and passengers to a safe landing, it became known as 'The Gimli Glider'
Your pronunciation is correct!
Sustained low cloud conditions at Paraburdoo are very unusual, which likely contributed to the "she'll be right" approach by all involved.
This weather condition was not forecasted and lasted for 3.5 hours, so it must have been quite special.
Another great video. It is so interesting how decisions has to be made and which ones to make it safe. Amazing!!! Thank you, Magnar!
Hello, this video are really good quality, please keep them coming.
Excellent video, I would have thought this was settled long ago
Hello, thank you for all your vidéo on ATR Aircrafts, Can you explain us your thinks about the Flight TUNINTER 1153, About the fuel tanks Level betwen 42/72 and the problème about this flight? I don’t understand why the jauges display a wrong values? Because on 72,There are more capacitiv sensors?
Spot on assessment and pronunciation
Thank you Captain.
THANKS CAPTAIN.
Hello Magnar, which faults you cannot reset in an ATR?
Electrical bus failures and leaks. There are a few exemptions. For example, a battery charge fault cannot be reset in flight.
@@FlywithMagnarAnd what do you do in case they fail?
@@EduardoMCfly , follow the checklist.
Thanks!
Excellent video - as always!
Thank you Captain 👍
It’s difficult to predict. Specially the future. 😂😂😂