Too heavy to land
03-12-2012, 10:39 AM
#1
Gets Weekends Off
Thread Starter
Joined APC: Jun 2008
Position: In the TRACON
Posts: 109
Too heavy to land
Every once in a while we get an airplane that states they are too heavy to land and needs to burn off some gas. Working at ORD approach, I can understand adding extra fuel, particularly on days like today where the weather was pretty crappy all morning.
My question is, when it becomes apparent that you are going to need to burn extra fuel to land, what action do you take to do this? To the uneducated, it seems like you can just throw out the spoilers or flaps so you need a higher power setting to burn fuel more quickly -- is that it? Is there anything that I, as a controller, can do to help you burn more gas? I know being lower helps, but is there a speed I should assign?
I'm trying to avoid extra work for myself and a more complicated procedure by taking an aircraft out of the arrival stream and then trying to blend it back in later if there's something I can do to just keep it in line.
My question is, when it becomes apparent that you are going to need to burn extra fuel to land, what action do you take to do this? To the uneducated, it seems like you can just throw out the spoilers or flaps so you need a higher power setting to burn fuel more quickly -- is that it? Is there anything that I, as a controller, can do to help you burn more gas? I know being lower helps, but is there a speed I should assign?
I'm trying to avoid extra work for myself and a more complicated procedure by taking an aircraft out of the arrival stream and then trying to blend it back in later if there's something I can do to just keep it in line.
03-12-2012, 11:15 AM
#2
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Mar 2011
Posts: 332
Typically we'll request to descend earlier, maintain a higher airspeed, decline direct routing, etc. It doesn't happen very often, but every now & then it does. We're vigilant about monitoring it enroute & I can't speak for others, but our plane predicts out landing weight as we go so we can adjust things accordingly.
Now what you can do to help us conserve fuel is a different animal. A lot of times out of ORD we get step climbed up all the way to our final altitude. This KILLS our fuel and increases the pucker factor. I would much rather take a vector and keep climbing then have to go fast & level off.
Thank you for being proactive!
Now what you can do to help us conserve fuel is a different animal. A lot of times out of ORD we get step climbed up all the way to our final altitude. This KILLS our fuel and increases the pucker factor. I would much rather take a vector and keep climbing then have to go fast & level off.
Thank you for being proactive!
03-12-2012, 12:32 PM
#3
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Feb 2010
Position: A320/A319/B737 Sys Acft Maint Controller
Posts: 303
Originally Posted by jmcmanna
Every once in a while we get an airplane that states they are too heavy to land and needs to burn off some gas. Working at ORD approach, I can understand adding extra fuel, particularly on days like today where the weather was pretty crappy all morning.
My question is, when it becomes apparent that you are going to need to burn extra fuel to land, what action do you take to do this? To the uneducated, it seems like you can just throw out the spoilers or flaps so you need a higher power setting to burn fuel more quickly -- is that it? Is there anything that I, as a controller, can do to help you burn more gas? I know being lower helps, but is there a speed I should assign?
I'm trying to avoid extra work for myself and a more complicated procedure by taking an aircraft out of the arrival stream and then trying to blend it back in later if there's something I can do to just keep it in line.
My question is, when it becomes apparent that you are going to need to burn extra fuel to land, what action do you take to do this? To the uneducated, it seems like you can just throw out the spoilers or flaps so you need a higher power setting to burn fuel more quickly -- is that it? Is there anything that I, as a controller, can do to help you burn more gas? I know being lower helps, but is there a speed I should assign?
I'm trying to avoid extra work for myself and a more complicated procedure by taking an aircraft out of the arrival stream and then trying to blend it back in later if there's something I can do to just keep it in line.
Try and keep your touchdown BELOW 360FPM and state such in the log gripe. This will Trigger the Overweight inspection but NOT the Hard landing inspections which will keep the airplane on the ground for 6-7 hours IF done properly.
03-12-2012, 01:46 PM
#4
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Dec 2010
Position: CRJ
Posts: 273
Jmc, very nice to have you on here asking what you can do to help!
It sounds like poor planning on the flight crews part. Many times dispatch plans on fuel burn as if we were going to fly the whole arrival when in reality depending on the landing runway, we don't and end up with xtra fuel. Like others have said, a lot of things can be done. Altitude, speed etc. It's also amazing what turning on the anti ice system can do to burn fuel as well.
Like mentioned above, we really need to make progress on saving fuel. I know there is a "big picture" that I don't see, but arrivals to ORD descending abeam FLM around FL320 is crazy. Millions per year would be saved by allowing planes to stay higher longer with eliminating that one restriction not to mention a number of others.
It sounds like poor planning on the flight crews part. Many times dispatch plans on fuel burn as if we were going to fly the whole arrival when in reality depending on the landing runway, we don't and end up with xtra fuel. Like others have said, a lot of things can be done. Altitude, speed etc. It's also amazing what turning on the anti ice system can do to burn fuel as well.
Like mentioned above, we really need to make progress on saving fuel. I know there is a "big picture" that I don't see, but arrivals to ORD descending abeam FLM around FL320 is crazy. Millions per year would be saved by allowing planes to stay higher longer with eliminating that one restriction not to mention a number of others.
03-12-2012, 02:32 PM
#5
Gets Weekends Off
Thread Starter
Joined APC: Jun 2008
Position: In the TRACON
Posts: 109
Unfortunately, with so many airplanes going into and out of a major airport like O'Hare, there are inefficiencies related to getting everybody in line at approach's airspace boundary in an orderly fashion. It's even worse for flights going to MDW; they were landing 13C today, which means arrivals from the east were at 6000' or below and 210 knots or less for 40 miles.
I do know they are working on more RNAV procedures out of ORD and MDW that will allow everyone to get on course and climb quicker. Right now the towers just fling them out and the TRACON has to get them in line, miss all of the arrivals (and other departures), and get them up -- once you're switched to Chicago Center, I don't know how bad it is, but if you're coming off MDW southbound, you might climb 1 or 2 thousand feet at a time through at least 12,000, and there's no way around it because you have to stay under all of the ORD departures.
I do try to keep arrivals up as long as I can, but sometimes I just plain have to descend you right away to keep you in line. If there's a strong southwest wind aloft (which is almost all the time) and it's really busy, I might descend you 40 miles southwest of ORD, even if you're going all the way out to 14R because the line is moving slowly. If I keep you at 10 or 11 thousand, even at 180 knots you will catch the guy doing 180 knots down at 7000.
Now, if everything could be scheduled so all the arrivals come from only 2 directions at a time, the whole operation would flow a lot nicer.
I do know they are working on more RNAV procedures out of ORD and MDW that will allow everyone to get on course and climb quicker. Right now the towers just fling them out and the TRACON has to get them in line, miss all of the arrivals (and other departures), and get them up -- once you're switched to Chicago Center, I don't know how bad it is, but if you're coming off MDW southbound, you might climb 1 or 2 thousand feet at a time through at least 12,000, and there's no way around it because you have to stay under all of the ORD departures.
I do try to keep arrivals up as long as I can, but sometimes I just plain have to descend you right away to keep you in line. If there's a strong southwest wind aloft (which is almost all the time) and it's really busy, I might descend you 40 miles southwest of ORD, even if you're going all the way out to 14R because the line is moving slowly. If I keep you at 10 or 11 thousand, even at 180 knots you will catch the guy doing 180 knots down at 7000.
Now, if everything could be scheduled so all the arrivals come from only 2 directions at a time, the whole operation would flow a lot nicer.
03-12-2012, 08:19 PM
#7
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jul 2008
Position: G550 & CL300 PIC
Posts: 369
Originally Posted by jmcmanna
Is there anything that I, as a controller, can do to help you burn more gas?
Most of the time faster is better (if it's above 250kts). However if it's not slower is better.
For example CRJ flaps speeds are 200kts for the first two flap settings. If I can slow to 190 I can burn more fuel with flaps down than I could at 210kts. If I can slow all the way to 150 or 160 I can configure the airplane for landing, and while flying level I'll suck down a lot of gas.
Obviously a holding pattern would work (most of us can hold "present position" with our FMS) but you'd have to fit us back into your arrival stream. Would over flying the airport on a pseudo missed approach be easier to re integrate us?
03-15-2012, 06:43 AM
#10
Gets Weekends Off
Thread Starter
Joined APC: Jun 2008
Position: In the TRACON
Posts: 109
Originally Posted by Ditch Pickle
what side of town do you typically work traffic for just out of curiousity - I'm PWK based.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
