Anders Johansson wrote:
On Saturday 29 April 2006 14:44, James Knott wrote:
Anders Johansson wrote:
My favourite is the Canadian incident, where they ordered the amount of fuel in kilos but received it in pounds, so they went flying with half a tank Incidentally, planes often fly with less than full tanks. They carry only enough to reach their destination, plus a margin for safety. To always fly with full tanks would simply waste fuel and money.
Is this relevant? What are you saying? Are you suggesting they glided to save money on fuel?
No, I'm saying planes often fly with less than a full tank, when it's not needed to fly to the destination. If a plane takes of with a full tank of fuel, when only half a tank is sufficient, then they're carrying all that fuel at great expense and may also decrease available payload. Don't forget, fuel consumption depends on weight, so if they carried far more fuel than they needed, they'd burn significanly more fuel to carry it. In that Gimli Glider incident, they goofed in calculating how much fuel they needed.