Go Back  PPRuNe Forums > Flight Deck Forums > Rumours & News
Reload this Page >

Vueling returns to LGW due to too much fuel

Rumours & News Reporting Points that may affect our jobs or lives as professional pilots. Also, items that may be of interest to professional pilots.

Vueling returns to LGW due to too much fuel

Old 2nd Aug 2022, 08:48
  #1 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: uk
Posts: 313
Vueling returns to LGW due to too much fuel

Anyone know more about this? Sounds odd.

https://www.independent.co.uk/travel...35410.html?amp
vancouv is offline  
Old 2nd Aug 2022, 09:24
  #2 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: away from home
Age: 61
Posts: 832
Weird. Flying to Rome for 2 hours would have had pretty much the same effect regarding burning fuel. And they only realized AFTER take-off?
There has to be more to the story.
oceancrosser is offline  
Old 2nd Aug 2022, 13:02
  #3 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Surrey, UK ;
Age: 69
Posts: 1,102
Sounds more like they had a tech issue and either wanted some time to troubleshoot or wanted to burn some fuel to avoid an overweight landing.
Dave Gittins is offline  
Old 2nd Aug 2022, 14:06
  #4 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Reading, UK
Posts: 14,129
The author of the tweet referred to in that Independent link went on to post:


I think that tells us all we need to know about the veracity of the report ...
DaveReidUK is offline  
Old 2nd Aug 2022, 14:08
  #5 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Northumberland
Posts: 6,655
Wouldn't they explode because they'd get too near the sun?
SWBKCB is offline  
Old 2nd Aug 2022, 15:38
  #6 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Pewsey, UK
Posts: 1,963
Originally Posted by SWBKCB View Post
Wouldn't they explode because they'd get too near the sun?
Not explode but the wax bolts would melt. See the Greek AAIB report into the accident involving Icarus' home-made aircrat.
The Nr Fairy is offline  
Old 2nd Aug 2022, 15:41
  #7 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: UK
Age: 58
Posts: 2,586
I happened to catch this on FR24....my first thoughts were that it entered holding due to a problem during or immediately after departure. First at FL060 and then further SW at FL080, as reported.

What I also noticed was that there seemed to be a hold on Gatwick departures after it had departed. The next flight out (which I think was RYR to DUB) appeared to hold at the threshold for some minutes before departing. There looked to be a couple of abandoned approaches/holding of arrivals also due to this. None of this may be related, but it might be? (speculation, but maybe a runway inspection was required)
Wycombe is offline  
Old 2nd Aug 2022, 15:55
  #8 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Dorset UK
Age: 68
Posts: 1,478
A thought.
Maybe they were fuelled to max and some vented on take off requiring the runway to be inspected. Then reported as a possible fuel leak, hence the return.
Just an idea.
dixi188 is offline  
Old 2nd Aug 2022, 17:37
  #9 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: uk
Posts: 714
The aircraft suffered an issue with its pressurisation system and had to return to Gatwick but was overweight for landing and therefore required to burn off fuel weight for its return. Quite simple really. Another example of poorly researched histrionic media reporting.
Los Endos is offline  
Old 2nd Aug 2022, 18:09
  #10 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2019
Location: Cumbria
Posts: 151
Is the confusion just a phonetic issue; Vueling problem = fuelling problem?
DuncanDoenitz is offline  
Old 2nd Aug 2022, 18:36
  #11 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2018
Location: Yorkshire
Posts: 160
Originally Posted by DuncanDoenitz View Post
Is the confusion just a phonetic issue; Vueling problem = fuelling problem?
Heard/saw similar at BRU several years ago:

An A320 vacated the runway and asked to stop on the taxiway as the "had a few problems". Shortly after they asked why there were so many fire trucks around them. The answer from ATC was "you said you had a fuel problem"...!!
NoelEvans is offline  
Old 2nd Aug 2022, 19:11
  #12 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2000
Location: UK
Posts: 1,336
Or the other infamous phonetics problem on a Gatwick flight many years ago, on an Air Ops Europe TriStar going transatlantic. Passengers had been told that the aircraft would need a refuelling stop but as the Captain made a heavily-accented PA before landing in "err, Gander", there was a near riot in the cabin. Turns out most of the passengers did indeed know about the fuel stop on the way to Orlando but had taken exception to it being in Uganda, which is what they had heard...
Flightrider is offline  
Old 2nd Aug 2022, 21:10
  #13 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Reading, UK
Posts: 14,129
Originally Posted by DuncanDoenitz View Post
Is the confusion just a phonetic issue; Vueling problem = fuelling problem?
No, just a passenger getting the wrong end of the stick.
DaveReidUK is offline  
Old 3rd Aug 2022, 02:42
  #14 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2018
Location: Seattle
Posts: 158
As my account is likely to be banned shortly this may be my last anecdote to add to the illustrious pages of the once former great PPRuNe. Had a passenger pass out once due to low blood sugar/anxiety etc. Young female other wise healthy person. In Italy. I had the local Italian FO explain in Italian what the issue was but by the time we landed in Rome 15 minutes later the Tower was confirming the ‘heart attack patient’ on board….

BoeingDriver99 is offline  
Old 3rd Aug 2022, 02:43
  #15 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: Everett, WA
Age: 67
Posts: 3,629
Well I see MSN has picked up the same erroneous story.
Wasn't it Pascal that said something like 'In order to grasp the concept of infinity, one need only contemplate the magnitude of human stupidity'?
tdracer is offline  
Old 3rd Aug 2022, 05:43
  #16 (permalink)  
Moderator
 
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: various places .....
Posts: 6,850
Voltaire, perhaps ?

Nonetheless a superb observation of human incompetence.
john_tullamarine is offline  
Old 3rd Aug 2022, 07:22
  #17 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: LONDON
Posts: 77
I thought the only time you could have too much fuel while in the air is if you're on fire.
netstruggler is offline  
Old 3rd Aug 2022, 07:51
  #18 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Reading, UK
Posts: 14,129
Attributed to Ernest K. Gann, but possibly apochryphal.
DaveReidUK is offline  
Old 3rd Aug 2022, 10:50
  #19 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: uk
Posts: 313
Originally Posted by Los Endos View Post
The aircraft suffered an issue with its pressurisation system and had to return to Gatwick but was overweight for landing and therefore required to burn off fuel weight for its return. Quite simple really. Another example of poorly researched histrionic media reporting.
That makes much more sense than too much fuel and couldn't go high enough
vancouv is offline  
Old 3rd Aug 2022, 10:58
  #20 (permalink)  
Rie
 
Join Date: Aug 2020
Location: Wan Chai
Posts: 325
Overweight landing is not really that much of an issue in the 320 though. Most of the time it is just a quick check to have the plane released to line. Is this just a case of people preferring to save their own behinds instead of landing earlier?
Rie is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service - Do Not Sell My Personal Information -

Copyright 2021 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.