Any help appreciated.
Sean
s.b...@att.net
Sean Timothy Breen wrote:
Easay! UAL mindset: If you cannot get OPEC embargoed
fuel to Denver, you tank west coast planes there. We're big,
we're bad, and you're SNOT! If you have "lexus, sexus,
plexus" you can look it up on the data base. Bottom line:
we fly, you don't, and cost be dammed. What part of this
do you not understand?
Hugh
I've been wondering the same thing myself. I've taken a shot at it.
See if anyone agrees:
B1 = Fuel burn rate at weight for minimum required fuel (i.e. no
tankering of fuel)
B2 = Fuel burn rate at weight when tankering fuel
P1 = Fuel price at departure point
P2 = Fuel price at destination
Cost of buying additional fuel at destination = P2 x B1
Cost of tankering additional fuel = P1 x B2
Break even point occurs when P2 x B1 = P1 x B2
Therefore, savings is realized by tankering fuel when P2 x B1 > P1 x B2
So it follows that we should tanker fuel when P2 > P1 x B2/B1
I haven't had a chance to actually test this, so you might want to try
it out on a few situations yourself and see if it works.
----
Larry Fransson (lfransson*aol*com)
Pilots are just plane people with a different air about them.
For example, the 737 (from memory - its 10 years since I flew it)
burned about 3% per hour of the extra weight, so on a 2 hour sector,
the destination fuel price had to be more than 106% of home base price
to justify tankering.
james