Fuel initiatives
 

How to fly an airplane without using too much fuel .......... Is there any other way to explain all of this ?

"Captains are expected to comply with the policy."

Do I detect a change in tone from previous communications about our "exciting initiatives?"
This place is starting to become not much fun to work at anymore.:confused:

We’re being bombarded with messages daily about fuel savings, cost savings measures, reasons why we should be comfortable landing with less fuel, that management expects some of to have to declare emergency fuel coming in to Memphis on a VFR day if the crap hits the fan, etc etc. This on top of a constant stream of checklist changes, go around procedure changes, FOM changes, callout changes, RNAV approach changes (for the MD anyway) to name a few. The only break in the constant flood of changes is the safety messages we get twice a week describing our exciting safety initiatives (like the vests required at all times) and reminding us how important safety is.... Does anyone see the irony here?

Or am I just becoming a crotchety old cuss who can’t deal with CHANGE anymore?!

Maybe we can get a millennial captain to file a fuel bullying complaint.

At this point in my career I could give 2 craps what they want. My standard is my standard. My fuel is my fuel. I've made it this long by being smart and conservative. My luck bag is damn near empty so I will rely on my experience bag. Then again, I remember the days of the "9 light trip".

I know there's at least one thing I'm going to need to see before I even considering giving a single f#@! about most of this fuel stuff.

A brand new, shiny (ok maybe just operational is enough) air cart on every aircraft I am expected to go fly when the temps don't require a coat.

When I finish my pre-flight, climb the stairs and walk into a wall of dank, hot, humid air on the jet - I suddenly find my motivation to worry about saving gas has evaporated - unlike the sweat that's immediately trashing my shirt 45 minutes into my trip.

But, since I'm not going to hold my breath on the air carts - how about some of you Captains (you know who you are) just fire up the effin' APU without being asked? I swear some of you guys act like you're buying the damn gas on these flights or maybe you put each month's green drop "My Fuel" results on your fridge. And cranking back the window isn't an option - Close the frickin' windows because hot, noisy wind, blowing papers, and electrical cart exhaust aren't an alternative to air conditioning.

And when I do ask..... which I have to OFTEN, spare me the BS. I actually had one guy tell me I'd never make it this company (at year 11 or so :rolleyes:) and then make me confirm to him verbatim "I cannot do my job effectively until you start the APU". I told him I'll say whatever you want me to say if it means you turn that knob over your head when I'm done speaking.

Rant over! :cool:

idle thoughts
 

going through Capt upgrade we met the GOC boss. I asked him, do you know the captains that always add fuel?... He kinda backsteps... well we really don't track anything like that, but then admitted, yea, well a few always seem to want more gas... I stuck out my hand and said Hi, I'm Robert Griffin, add 5000... he laughed

Wow. I check the book, interior safety check, APU oil level check, then APU fire check and if there is either a slight chill or slight bead of sweat on my bald head torch off the APU.:D

This isn't landing on a boat anymore, you have plenty of options. Always hated the flight leads who set a landing fuel of 5.5 (Rhino, that's 2hrs of loitering) on a VFR day with 4 runways when SOP was 2.2. Might as well say, "I know BFM training rules are 500', but I'm a risk adverse panzy, so we're going to do 1000' passes."

There's no reason to show up overhead MEM with 18k (almost 1.5hrs of loiter time) of fuel on a VFR day with 4 runways. Overhead with 12-13k, sure, that's a plan for long vectors. And when that go around happens with 11k of fuel on board, you get paid $300k+ a year to make tough decisions when **** hits the fan. Totally different with weather or single runway, but we're talking VFR in MEM.

If you want to continue to have a company to work for, you should think about what's affecting their bottom line. Look at United in the 2000's, Alaska today, they're all "****ed" and embraced a "we'll show the company" mentality. All they did/are doing is hurting themselves as employees.

Don't become a "yes" man. But add gas when it makes sense, start the APU when it makes sense, LTAET when it makes sense, turn the radar off when it makes sense. Be a professional.

A defensive driver isn't bad, but there becomes a point where you become so defensive, you become dangerous again.

So, if a pilot at FedEx ever ran out of gas and crashed the plane, who do you think would get the blame?

Do you think the FAA would put the blame on FedEx, the dispatcher, or the PIC?

Would FedEx be more worried about defending the company, or defending the pilot who was "pushed" to use the fuel load suggested by the dispatcher?

Just a little something to think about...