6 ms·
Looks like they tried two attempts to land in Prestwick over two hours, then flew to Edinburgh and made one aborted landing, then finally went to Manchester. W
by tyre 1y ago
Looks like they tried two attempts to land in Prestwick over two hours, then flew to Edinburgh and made one aborted landing, then finally went to Manchester.
What a nerve wracking experience for those pilots. I wonder if on the final attempt they knew they had to force it down no matter what.
- simplicio 1y agoAssuming it wasn't just luck, it seems impressive they managed to maximize their (landing attempts/fuel reserves) ratio like that.
- searedsteak 1y agoIt is a requirement [1] to land with 45 minutes of fuel remaining, if the pilots go under that, it is considered an incident. As soon as estimated landing fuel goes under the limit, the flight needs to declare an emergency (as was done in this case). [1]: https://www.ecfr.gov/current/title-14/chapter-I/subchapter-F/part-91/subpart-B/subject-group-ECFRef6e8c57f580cfd/section-91.167 https://www.ecfr.gov/current/title-14/chapter-I/subchapter-F... is the US rule, EASA has a similar rule.
- jacquesm 1y agoExactly. This will have a lot of consequences.
- jacquesm 1y agoThey got within a hair of crashing, there is nothing impressive about this. 30 minutes, ok, you still get written up but this is cutting it way too fine.
- maccard 1y ago> this is cutting it way too fine. Either this is true, or this is why there’s a 45 minute reserve requirement. There were three failed landing attempts in two airports prior to the successful landing, and they spent almost as much time attempting to land as the scheduled flight took. Seems like this was exactly the scenario it was designed for?
- jacquesm 1y agoNo, this is what should never happen. I wrote fuel estimation software for cargo 747's and the one thing I would have never ever wanted to read is that an airliner of the company I worked for had landed with too little fuel.
- MagicMoonlight 1y agoRight but this is an emergency… they didn’t plan to run out of fuel
- jacquesm 1y agoClearly, that's why it makes the news.
- 7952 1y agoAre there ever situations where running into the reserve would be a good trade off?
- jacquesm 1y agoThis one. The reserve is there in the same way that a crash barrier is there on the highway. You really don't ever want to use it, but when you do use it and it ends well you treat it just as seriously as though you would treat a crash.
- hshdhdhehd 1y agoI would imagine 6 min fuel left was designed for something extreme. Maybe involving damage to aircraft limiting where it can land etc. Or extreme weather event such had high winds affecting all airports within 500 miles.
- gosub100 1y agoAbout 5 years ago before ATC recordings became mainstay on YouTube, there was an American pilot that declared an emergency at JFK and very firmly said "we are turning back and landing NOW. Get the aircraft OFF all runways". He was low in fuel and also frustrated with Kennedy ATC because he declared "minimum fuel" earlier and was still getting vectored around. (I know "minimum fuel" is not an emergency and has a very precise meaning). They must have been very close to running out. But it was a valuable lesson learned in speaking up before you get to that point.
- Esophagus4 1y agoI’m guessing that pilot had also been taught the lesson of Avianca 052, which crashed at JFK because the FO / captain did not explicitly declare a fuel emergency. JFK ATC in particular has an enormous workload with many international flights, combined with direct, even conflictual at times, NY communication style. It puts the onus on the pilot for conveying the message to ATC, rather than ATC for extracting the message from the pilot.
- khuey 1y agoYou might be thinking of https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-sQuHnrJu1I https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-sQuHnrJu1I For comparison, this is what can happen when the pilots are not that assertive https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Avianca_Flight_052 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Avianca_Flight_052
- gosub100 1y agothis was it, thanks for finding it. I didn't realize it happened 14 years ago
- traceroute66 1y ago> But it was a valuable lesson learned in speaking up before you get to that point. I'm not sure it was a lesson learned per-se because the captain was merely doing his job as fundamentally defined. A captain has ultimate responsibility for the aircraft. However there is a side question in relation to your post... When you say "declared an emergency" in your post, the more interesting question would be whether it was actually formally declared by the captain (i.e. "MAYDAY") or whether the captain was merely "working with" ATC at a lower level, maybe "PAN" or maybe just informal "prioritised". If the captain DID declare "MAYDAY" earlier in the timeframe then yes, Kennedy would have a lot to answer for if they were spending excessive time vectoring around. But if the captain did not formally declare and then came back later and started bossing Kennedy around, that would be a different set of questions, focused on the captain.
- moralestapia 1y agoContext: because of bad weather. But I'm truly surprised (in a bad way) people on the ground couldn't solve the situation earlier. The plane was in an emergency situation for hours, wtf. Also, the airport density in the UK is high, they should have been diverted since before the first attempt, as it has happened to me and thousands of flights every single day around the world.
- dehrmann 1y agoArmchair quarterbacking it, but it was human error. They should have diverted sooner and been more aware of the weather. Edit: there might also be part of Ryanair culture that contributed, but that's speculation.
- jacquesm 1y agoThat's one conclusion. But don't rule out a lot of other things that may have been a factor, for instance, they may have had a batch of bad fuel, they may have had less fuel to start with than they thought they had (this happens, it shouldn't but it does happen), the fuel indicators may have been off (you only know for sure after touch down), there may have been a leak, an engine may have been burning more than it should have. There are probably many others that I can't think of of the top off my head but there are a lot of reasons why the margins are as large as they are.
- dehrmann 1y agoThose are all possibilities, but https://www.flightaware.com/live/flight/RYR3418/history/20251003/1425Z/LIRP/EGPK https://www.flightaware.com/live/flight/RYR3418/history/2025... They had at least an extra hour of fuel, and they landed at the third airport they tried.
- jacquesm 1y agoYes, that's how it should be. Something went badly wrong here. The big question is what.
- volkl48 1y agoPer the FlightRadar24 logs, it looks like only about 45min was wasted over Prestwick, not 2hrs. First approach was around 18:06, and they're breaking off to head for Edinburgh by about 18:51. If there's considered to be a mistake here though, I'm guessing it's going to be spending too long before committing to the initial diversion. Without knowing the weather they were seeing at the time, seems hard to say if they should have gone for a closer 2nd alternate than Manchester.
- ibejoeb 1y agoI don't think we know yet when min fuel was declared. At that point, they will be resequenced. Then we need to know when mayday fuel was declared. It sounds pretty odd, like perhaps there were multiple simultaneous situations and the crew did not have adequate information.