3 ms·

Just to be clear, when you say you "glided" are you saying that you ran out of fuel? Because if it did actually run out of fuel there should be a report about

Just to be clear, when you say you "glided" are you saying that you ran out of fuel? Because if it did actually run out of fuel there should be a report about it somewhere and I'm really interested in finding it or why it somehow doesn't exist. If they ran *low* on fuel, that is something else entirely. EDIT: Looks like everyone else jumped on this at the same time. lol.

anderiv 3y ago
There's no possible way the story is true as relayed by the parent. If the flight was indeed forced into a situation where there was an unpowered glide into landing, that airframe and crew would both be grounded for some time, not turned around and put back out for the continuance of the flight.
jsbg 3y ago
I have no way of knowing whether or not the plane ran out of fuel. I'm assuming they kept some fuel, e.g. in case they didn't stick the landing on the first attempt.
- cguess 3y ago
  There is, as others pointed out if a plane runs out of fuel there are reports, hearings, investigations. Nothing goes that wrong in modern commercial aviation, pretty much anywhere in the world, without being seriously looked in.
- stouset 3y ago
  JFC, yes you do. The plane did not run out of fuel. If the plane had run out of fuel, the flight crew would have prepared you for a potential crash landing. There would be no question whatsoever. It would have made national news. The plane and crew would have been grounded pending investigation by the airline and the NTSB, and not gone on to resume its journey shortly thereafter. Hell, everything else aside, it would have sat dead on the runway, unable to taxi, while passengers disembarked on the inflatable slides. Your plane had plenty of fuel. It followed established procedure where they waited for as long as they could, diverted when the fuel situation warranted a change of plans, and landed at the alternate airport with more than enough fuel for at least one go-around and likely two.
  - Symbiote 3y ago
    > while passengers disembarked on the inflatable slides. This bit isn't right. They would have brought a tug out to the runway and towed the aircraft to a remote stand, then used a staircase. The slides are only used if there's imminent danger of fire. People often get injured using them.
    - stouset 3y ago
      In principle this is true. In practice, without the engines on you don’t have hydraulics which means no anti-skid and the pilots have to stomp on the brakes. This means overheated brakes and popped tires, almost certainly starting small fires that will warrant the slides.
crazytony 3y ago
Every incident has to go into the carrier's safety reporting system which is then followed up by the FAA and/or NTSB. Even stuff as simple as a flight attendant feeling fatigued after not getting enough rest goes into the SRS. I don't think the public has access to the SRS but the FAA and NTSB do.

anderiv 3y ago

There's no possible way the story is true as relayed by the parent. If the flight was indeed forced into a situation where there was an unpowered glide into landing, that airframe and crew would both be grounded for some time, not turned around and put back out for the continuance of the flight.

jsbg 3y ago

I have no way of knowing whether or not the plane ran out of fuel. I'm assuming they kept some fuel, e.g. in case they didn't stick the landing on the first attempt.

cguess 3y ago
There is, as others pointed out if a plane runs out of fuel there are reports, hearings, investigations. Nothing goes that wrong in modern commercial aviation, pretty much anywhere in the world, without being seriously looked in.
stouset 3y ago
JFC, yes you do. The plane did not run out of fuel. If the plane had run out of fuel, the flight crew would have prepared you for a potential crash landing. There would be no question whatsoever. It would have made national news. The plane and crew would have been grounded pending investigation by the airline and the NTSB, and not gone on to resume its journey shortly thereafter. Hell, everything else aside, it would have sat dead on the runway, unable to taxi, while passengers disembarked on the inflatable slides. Your plane had plenty of fuel. It followed established procedure where they waited for as long as they could, diverted when the fuel situation warranted a change of plans, and landed at the alternate airport with more than enough fuel for at least one go-around and likely two.
- Symbiote 3y ago
  > while passengers disembarked on the inflatable slides. This bit isn't right. They would have brought a tug out to the runway and towed the aircraft to a remote stand, then used a staircase. The slides are only used if there's imminent danger of fire. People often get injured using them.
  - stouset 3y ago
    In principle this is true. In practice, without the engines on you don’t have hydraulics which means no anti-skid and the pilots have to stomp on the brakes. This means overheated brakes and popped tires, almost certainly starting small fires that will warrant the slides.

crazytony 3y ago

Every incident has to go into the carrier's safety reporting system which is then followed up by the FAA and/or NTSB. Even stuff as simple as a flight attendant feeling fatigued after not getting enough rest goes into the SRS. I don't think the public has access to the SRS but the FAA and NTSB do.