Ryanair flight landed at Manchester airport with six minutes of fuel left • Hacker News Board

Re: Ryanair flight landed at Manchester airport with six minutes of fuel left

#181

Post by jacquesm » Fri, Oct 10, 2025, 5:17 PM UTC

MaxikCZ wrote: post #174

dTal wrote: post #85

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You get that energy back on descent, no?

4 replies and 3 are dismissing even the idea.. Yes, you get "some" back, and its not negligible amount. Typical modern airliner can descend on 15-20:1, giving you over 150-200km (90-120mi) range from typical cruising altitude of 33 000 feet even with engines off. Most everyday descents are actually done by maintaining altitude as long as possible, and then iddling the engines fully for as long as clearance allows. (O…

(1) this was a jet, not a turboprop

Edit: changed turbofan into turbprop, which is what I meant.

(2) fuel burned stays burned, you don't 'get it back'

(3) the altitude gained may have been adjusted to account for the low fuel situation

(4) the winds are a major factor here, far larger than the fact that 'what goes up must come down', something that is already taken into account when computing the fuel reserve in the first place.

Re: Ryanair flight landed at Manchester airport with six minutes of fuel left

#182

Post by nickff » Fri, Oct 10, 2025, 5:17 PM UTC

troupo wrote: post #127

nickff wrote: post #84

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Fuel depletion is risky, but not that risky; see the Gimli Glider for a case much more dangerous than this, which still worked out amazingly well. Edit: Here is the Wiki on incidents... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fuel_starvation_and_fuel_exhau...

You could've read at least the Wikipedia page on how miraculous Gimli Glider was. From "all engine failure is never expected and not covered in training" to "Pearson was an experienced glider pilot familiar with techniques rarely needed in commercial flights" to the amount of maneuvers they had to execute on a barely responding aircraft

They also happened to know about an old airport which was no longer active, but did not know about the concrete barrier in the middle.

Re: Ryanair flight landed at Manchester airport with six minutes of fuel left

#183

Post by Hackbraten » Fri, Oct 10, 2025, 5:17 PM UTC

scrumper wrote: post #163

AceyMan wrote: post #126

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

I'm curious why you did that? It's not a very complicated sequence. The whole point of engaging in a discussion here is to think about the issues raised and offer a point of view while incorporating other perspectives into yours. You've spent your money to bypass the whole intent of this site; akin to you being hungry then sending someone else to a restaurant for you so you can later read their review of the food. ED…

> It's not a very complicated sequence.

For me, it was. I have trouble forming a mental model of itineraries so I’m grateful for the summary.

Re: Ryanair flight landed at Manchester airport with six minutes of fuel left

#184

Post by dboreham » Fri, Oct 10, 2025, 5:18 PM UTC

nostrademons wrote: post #158

fidotron wrote: post #87

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I have known former air traffic controllers that won't fly certain airlines because of a notorious habit some have for queue jumping by claiming they're low on fuel. If they are low on fuel is something else, but in any case when the ATCs have noticed a pattern then something is up. This situation sounds a lot less nefarious, but it does also sound like they should have rerouted earlier.

Since there's a lot of confusion in the comments below I'm going to hijack one of the top comments to make a couple points clear from the article and FlightRadar24 data: [1] They did reroute earlier. It was 2 failed attempts on Prestwick (Glasgow), 45 minutes in the landing pattern, then they diverted to Edinburgh (15 minute flight), a failed attempt at Edinburgh (~5-10 minutes), and then they diverted to Manchester…

Quick note that Preswick is not really Glasgow (35 miles away) and Glasgow has its own airport which presumably was also affected by the same weather so they couldn't divert to that. Between the Scottish lowlands (where they had already tried all the commercial airports) and anywhere else, Manchester is about the closest option.

Re: Ryanair flight landed at Manchester airport with six minutes of fuel left

#185

Post by nickff » Fri, Oct 10, 2025, 5:19 PM UTC

behringer wrote: post #95

nickff wrote: post #84

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Fuel depletion is risky, but not that risky; see the Gimli Glider for a case much more dangerous than this, which still worked out amazingly well. Edit: Here is the Wiki on incidents... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fuel_starvation_and_fuel_exhau...

And what happens if you're not at 40k feet when the fuel runs out?

Good thing that airliners spend so much time at altitude!

Re: Ryanair flight landed at Manchester airport with six minutes of fuel left

#186

Post by dreamcompiler » Fri, Oct 10, 2025, 5:19 PM UTC

gmanley wrote: post #131

nickff wrote: post #84

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Fuel depletion is risky, but not that risky; see the Gimli Glider for a case much more dangerous than this, which still worked out amazingly well. Edit: Here is the Wiki on incidents... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fuel_starvation_and_fuel_exhau...

That example is so well known due to how exceptional it was, especially how the pilots handled it. Robert Pearson, the captain, was a very experienced glider pilot. That's something that not many commercial pilots have. There were also two factors in the landing, that allowed for this to happen. You're going to be coming in really fast for a landing, when gliding in a commercial jet, and you don't have access to your…

And even with all that scraping damage they were able to fly the plane out, repair it, and put it back in service. Amazing.

Re: Ryanair flight landed at Manchester airport with six minutes of fuel left

#187

Post by mrguyorama » Fri, Oct 10, 2025, 5:19 PM UTC

lenerdenator wrote: post #139

jjk7 wrote: post #134

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Would that be more reliable than just ensuring there are consequences for lying?

Perhaps. If the pilot knows that the ATC can see he's full of it, he might be less likely to lie. Those who still do can be grounded and be moved into management or take up a career in politics.

Putting a theory of "you shouldn't trust pilots" into ATC breaks the entire system.

It is a system built out of very regulated parts, very professional people, and tight controls.

Pilots are encouraged to be very forward and proactive about fuel situations because of https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Avianca_Flight_052

Minimum fuel requirements are calculated as "Time of fuel for cruise to certain points", which is usually good enough, but if an Airport is stupid busy, or has bad wind patterns, just a couple go-arounds will chew through your fuel way faster than the regulation expects.

Turbofan engines are also dramatically less efficient at low altitude than high altitude cruise. So holding at low altitudes because a congested airport is dealing with traffic will chew through your reserves much faster than you expect.

Ryanair flies short hops to congested airports. They will have relatively low reserves, and you should expect them to run into "Hey we are low on fuel" more often than international flights for example.

Re: Ryanair flight landed at Manchester airport with six minutes of fuel left

#188

Post by MadnessASAP » Fri, Oct 10, 2025, 5:21 PM UTC

lenerdenator wrote: post #122

fidotron wrote: post #87

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I have known former air traffic controllers that won't fly certain airlines because of a notorious habit some have for queue jumping by claiming they're low on fuel. If they are low on fuel is something else, but in any case when the ATCs have noticed a pattern then something is up. This situation sounds a lot less nefarious, but it does also sound like they should have rerouted earlier.

Kinda surprised there's no data link for that sort of telemetry so that you don't necessarily have to take the pilot's word for it.

Second guessing a pilot saying they have a problem is a really bad idea. ATC second guessing an emergency is a really bad idea. Making a pilot explain why they're actually low on fuel, despite whatever some computer is saying, instead of focusing on flying the plane is a really, really bad idea.

Also, that sort of telemetry does exist for most major airlines, however it goes via satellite to the airline not the ATC.

Re: Ryanair flight landed at Manchester airport with six minutes of fuel left

#189

Post by whycome » Fri, Oct 10, 2025, 5:22 PM UTC

lenerdenator wrote: post #139

jjk7 wrote: post #134

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Would that be more reliable than just ensuring there are consequences for lying?

Perhaps. If the pilot knows that the ATC can see he's full of it, he might be less likely to lie. Those who still do can be grounded and be moved into management or take up a career in politics.

I’m surprised the “fuel on board” isn’t something communicated via transponder considering previous low fuel emergencies/crashes.

Re: Ryanair flight landed at Manchester airport with six minutes of fuel left

#190

Post by allturtles » Fri, Oct 10, 2025, 5:22 PM UTC

dboreham wrote: post #184

nostrademons wrote: post #158

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Since there's a lot of confusion in the comments below I'm going to hijack one of the top comments to make a couple points clear from the article and FlightRadar24 data: [1] They did reroute earlier. It was 2 failed attempts on Prestwick (Glasgow), 45 minutes in the landing pattern, then they diverted to Edinburgh (15 minute flight), a failed attempt at Edinburgh (~5-10 minutes), and then they diverted to Manchester…

Quick note that Preswick is not really Glasgow (35 miles away) and Glasgow has its own airport which presumably was also affected by the same weather so they couldn't divert to that. Between the Scottish lowlands (where they had already tried all the commercial airports) and anywhere else, Manchester is about the closest option.

As someone totally ignorant of British airports, a Google maps search for "airports northern england" shows Teesside, Carlisle, and Newcastle all significantly closer to Edinburgh than Manchester. Are these not places where a 737 under emergency could land? Or was the weather also bad there?