atcsundevil wrote:

wn676 wrote:

S-1 design RFQ is out with submissions due 6/16: https://www.phoenix.gov/financesite/Sol ... 20Svcs.pdf

Scope of work:

• A new 3-4 level concourse (basement, apron and passenger levels) with approximately 30,000
square feet per level; mezzanine potential.
• Connector bridge with moving walkways, approximately 30,000 square feet.
• Transfer bridge with moving walkways, approximately 30,000 square feet.
• Aircraft apron and hydrant fueling system for 8 gates.
• Security screening checkpoint expansion at Checkpoint D.
• Ticketing counter and baggage claim carousel expansion within the T4 Terminal.
• Outbound baggage handling system inclusive of new conveyors, carousel(s) and EDS expansion
to service T4 S1 and T4 S2 demand.
• Aircraft parking plan.
• Public Restrooms.
• Associated structural, electrical, mechanical and civil work.
• Retail and food and beverage shell spaces.
• Potential International Facilities.
• Passenger boarding bridge and gate equipment.
• Airside, landside access and loading dock.
• Service road below taxiways

The "potential international facilities" bit is interesting. It goes along with some discussion we had previously. I think they would be very well-served to do that, not least of which to entice WN to start int'l ops, but also for int'l overflow. It would give the airport greater flexibility on a number of levels.

I suppose it would depend on who ends up footing the bill for a new FIS. Does anyone see WN needing/wanting a dedicated facility for their use? Either way, I could see the City wanting more flexibility in gating international flights. I know some speculated here that WN might be moving out of S4 when S1 opens, in which case that could allow for all the gates on N4 to access the FIS there if AA moved regional over.

Anybody notice the IFL Convair was replaced by a Kalitta Charters 737? Guess I've seen the last Convair fly over the house. Ever.

MO11 wrote:

Anybody notice the IFL Convair was replaced by a Kalitta Charters 737? Guess I've seen the last Convair fly over the house. Ever.

When passing the airport, was it parked over in the NW corner of the airfield? Usually on my way to work it would pass over about 6:45 from LAX, or am I confusing it with another flight? But either way, I havent' seen it on the ground or in the air.

polywad6963 wrote:

MO11 wrote:

Anybody notice the IFL Convair was replaced by a Kalitta Charters 737? Guess I've seen the last Convair fly over the house. Ever.

When passing the airport, was it parked over in the NW corner of the airfield? Usually on my way to work it would pass over about 6:45 from LAX, or am I confusing it with another flight? But either way, I havent' seen it on the ground or in the air.

It was a DHL flight, so it would have been at west cargo. Went to LAX late evening, returned in the AM. The KFS 737 turns to Reno, so it spends the day there. The change happened a few weeks ago.

That makes sense why I haven't seen it on my way to work! Thanks!

Just as a heads up, the new American Astrojet, N905NN, is going to be at Skyharbor tonight. Arrives as AAL2519 around 7:20PM, and will leave again at 7:40AM tomorrow morning.

I was wondering which cargo operator had the most operations at PHX? while driving on the I-10(the part where the freeway curves away from the cargo terminal, my favorite part) during the day I tend to see more FedEx, but I was wondering if UPS made up for it during the night hours. I remember seeing a lot more DHL yellow a handful of years ago.

allegiantflyer wrote:

I was wondering which cargo operator had the most operations at PHX? while driving on the I-10(the part where the freeway curves away from the cargo terminal, my favorite part) during the day I tend to see more FedEx, but I was wondering if UPS made up for it during the night hours. I remember seeing a lot more DHL yellow a handful of years ago.

FedEx by a lot. UPS runs about 6-7 daily frequencies during non-peak where as FedEx runs probably about 15-16. Likewise, FedEx runs a slightly bigger gauge overall.

alasizon wrote:

allegiantflyer wrote:

I was wondering which cargo operator had the most operations at PHX? while driving on the I-10(the part where the freeway curves away from the cargo terminal, my favorite part) during the day I tend to see more FedEx, but I was wondering if UPS made up for it during the night hours. I remember seeing a lot more DHL yellow a handful of years ago.

FedEx by a lot. UPS runs about 6-7 daily frequencies during non-peak where as FedEx runs probably about 15-16. Likewise, FedEx runs a slightly bigger gauge overall.

Are FedEx ops in house? or do they contract to swissport? I know UPS has in house, not sure about DHL

Interesting to see LH continue to invest in their training facility.

Lufthansa’s flight training school in Phoenix to update its fleet

Lufthansa Aviation Training (LAT) is to buy 25 new Cirrus SR 20 aircraft for its flight training school in Phoenix, Arizona. The total volume of investment will amount to around EUR 11.5 million.

http://newsroom.lufthansagroup.com/en/n ... fleet.html

Speaking of Lufthansa, they will begin flying to SAN next spring. So now SAN has British Airways, Japan Airways and soon Lufthansa. What is PHX doing wrong? The "too close to LAX" argument is making less and less sense to me.

http://lufthansaflyer.boardingarea.com/ ... ts-to-ord/

wn676 wrote:

I suppose it would depend on who ends up footing the bill for a new FIS. Does anyone see WN needing/wanting a dedicated facility for their use? Either way, I could see the City wanting more flexibility in gating international flights. I know some speculated here that WN might be moving out of S4 when S1 opens, in which case that could allow for all the gates on N4 to access the FIS there if AA moved regional over.

Unless PHX sees a sizeable international expansion (which is highly doubtful), I don't see CBP interested in splitting their operation it just not big enough.

allegiantflyer wrote:

Are FedEx ops in house? or do they contract to swissport? I know UPS has in house, not sure about DHL

Im pretty sure DHL is contracted out. I believe it's the same folks who ground handle for Prime Air

allegiantflyer wrote:

alasizon wrote:

allegiantflyer wrote:

I was wondering which cargo operator had the most operations at PHX? while driving on the I-10(the part where the freeway curves away from the cargo terminal, my favorite part) during the day I tend to see more FedEx, but I was wondering if UPS made up for it during the night hours. I remember seeing a lot more DHL yellow a handful of years ago.

FedEx by a lot. UPS runs about 6-7 daily frequencies during non-peak where as FedEx runs probably about 15-16. Likewise, FedEx runs a slightly bigger gauge overall.

Are FedEx ops in house? or do they contract to swissport? I know UPS has in house, not sure about DHL

FedEx is in-house as well. I'm not sure who handles DHL and all the other carriers out at West Cargo anymore...IAS/CAS was handling all/the majority of them out there I believe, but it seems that WFS is now in the mix too.

Also, I've heard ATS is taking over WestJet from Swissport.

INFINITI329 wrote:

wn676 wrote:

I suppose it would depend on who ends up footing the bill for a new FIS. Does anyone see WN needing/wanting a dedicated facility for their use? Either way, I could see the City wanting more flexibility in gating international flights. I know some speculated here that WN might be moving out of S4 when S1 opens, in which case that could allow for all the gates on N4 to access the FIS there if AA moved regional over.

Unless PHX sees a sizeable international expansion (which is highly doubtful), I don't see CBP interested in splitting their operation it just not big enough.

And that would depend entirely on Southwest. I don't see them opening up any kind of sizable international operation out of PHX anytime soon, which may be why they have been referring to it as "potential" international facilities. I.e., building the new concourse with the capability to expand for that purpose in the future. Having just a few flights a day definitely would not justify the expense of building and staffing a second facility. I know they had their big announcement a while back that they had committed to the new concourse, and it's recently been reaffirmed that they are the sole tenant, so any kind of common-use FIS is probably off the table.

Spotter787 wrote:

Speaking of Lufthansa, they will begin flying to SAN next spring. So now SAN has British Airways, Japan Airways and soon Lufthansa. What is PHX doing wrong? The "too close to LAX" argument is making less and less sense to me.

http://lufthansaflyer.boardingarea.com/ ... ts-to-ord/

I know exactly how you feel, PHX seems to be getting its a** kicked by every airport around it on the international front with new transoceanic flights from San Diego, Salt Lake City, Denver, and Vegas. I think what also needs to be looked at is the fact that the airport also relies on the city and state. So the other question is what is the city of Phoenix and state of Arizona doing to promote itself internationally to European and Asian markets in order to lure companies and bring about business travelers because your right, with everything that has happened at SLC and SAN the whole LAX is to close argument is making less sense everytime.

wn676 wrote:

FedEx is in-house as well. I'm not sure who handles DHL and all the other carriers out at West Cargo anymore...IAS/CAS was handling all/the majority of them out there I believe, but it seems that WFS is now in the mix too.

Also, I've heard ATS is taking over WestJet from Swissport.

There is some sort of realignment/teaming up of WFS & IAS/CAS; perhaps they are now owned by the same overhead? The CAS team that handles Volaris also has been wearing WFS vests recently but are still CAS employees.

And yes, Swissport did lose the contract for WS because of their abysmal ramp performance (particularly quick turns).

cm642 wrote:

Spotter787 wrote:

Speaking of Lufthansa, they will begin flying to SAN next spring. So now SAN has British Airways, Japan Airways and soon Lufthansa. What is PHX doing wrong? The "too close to LAX" argument is making less and less sense to me.

http://lufthansaflyer.boardingarea.com/ ... ts-to-ord/

I know exactly how you feel, PHX seems to be getting its a** kicked by every airport around it on the international front with new transoceanic flights from San Diego, Salt Lake City, Denver, and Vegas. I think what also needs to be looked at is the fact that the airport also relies on the city and state. So the other question is what is the city of Phoenix and state of Arizona doing to promote itself internationally to European and Asian markets in order to lure companies and bring about business travelers because your right, with everything that has happened at SLC and SAN the whole LAX is to close argument is making less sense everytime.

PHX has less INTL demand than one would think. Realistically, we should be able to support a 2nd flight October-May (maybe June) but the problem really is July-September where flights simply struggle. Personally, I think 3w PHX-NRT and 4w PHX-FRA would work but you would need AA to commit an aircraft to that and I'm not sure how the yields would look. With the increasing 330 presence in PHX, perhaps this will become more of a possibility. If AA isn't too keen on the FRA idea, they can always supplement the BA service to LHR since there is a definite demand for that second daily flight.

In my opinion the State of Arizona fails miserably when it comes to marketing the many wonders of Arizona. I was at Grand Canyon for 30+ years and the vast majority of international tourist came from LA or Las Vegas. Arizona has more national parks than any other state and it should support year round international flights. If you look there is a very poor connection to GCN or even FLG. When you live there and talk with visitors most don't even know that Grand Canyon is in Arizona. When you ask most people say Colorado or Nevada. A fantastic 7 to 10 Day tour could be promoted from Phoenix using international passengers. The Park had nearly 6 Million visitors last year. The amount of visitors from Asia is very high. In my opinion that is the huge fail by the State and the City. I am sure most of you remember the LH flight to FRA with the A340 and another German Airline ( I dont remember who) flew to MUC a few days a week. Also Air Jamaica had 1 or 2 flights a week.

travaz wrote:

A fantastic 7 to 10 Day tour could be promoted from Phoenix using international passengers. The Park had nearly 6 Million visitors last year. The amount of visitors from Asia is very high.

I don't know the exact numbers, but there are a lot of Asian tour groups that come through PHX, but a lot of them are on their middle stop of their three stops with the other stops typically being some combo of SLC, LAX, DFW, SEA or SFO. Its not to say we don't get some with routings that they connected to PHX via LAX but a lot of them currently use PHX as their middle stop.

travaz wrote:

In my opinion the State of Arizona fails miserably when it comes to marketing the many wonders of Arizona. I was at Grand Canyon for 30+ years and the vast majority of international tourist came from LA or Las Vegas. Arizona has more national parks than any other state and it should support year round international flights. If you look there is a very poor connection to GCN or even FLG. When you live there and talk with visitors most don't even know that Grand Canyon is in Arizona. When you ask most people say Colorado or Nevada. A fantastic 7 to 10 Day tour could be promoted from Phoenix using international passengers. The Park had nearly 6 Million visitors last year. The amount of visitors from Asia is very high. In my opinion that is the huge fail by the State and the City. I am sure most of you remember the LH flight to FRA with the A340 and another German Airline ( I dont remember who) flew to MUC a few days a week. Also Air Jamaica had 1 or 2 flights a week.

The other German Airline was LTU to DUS flying a combo of MD-11/763's.. US also attempted MBJ but they didn't promote it and it failed. The few times that I taken the US/AA noon flight from LAX it's always filled with international (Asia) passengers..The F/A a former HP lady stated this flight was PHX's international flight as it filled with a large number of pacific rim passengers. I'm pretty sure that Kirby wouldn't have mentioned that US planned to fly to NRT with the DL slot, if they didn't think it would work out. Of course then trouble arose: the some of the 330's were delayed, an earthquake, the yen becoming weak.

Part I of your post travaz, under Gov Brewer and Ducey the money that was spend to promote Arizona to vacationers have been basically eliminated. It's basically up to the local communities and MLB to promote spring training here.

Thanks for that as soon as I read that it was YEA LTU! I still think that it could be done but I agree that they need to spend some money to promote.

allegiantflyer wrote:

I was wondering which cargo operator had the most operations at PHX? while driving on the I-10(the part where the freeway curves away from the cargo terminal, my favorite part) during the day I tend to see more FedEx, but I was wondering if UPS made up for it during the night hours. I remember seeing a lot more DHL yellow a handful of years ago.

alasizon wrote:

FedEx by a lot. UPS runs about 6-7 daily frequencies during non-peak where as FedEx runs probably about 15-16. Likewise, FedEx runs a slightly bigger gauge overall.

I put this together for reference for all carriers in PHX. CY2016 from T-100 data:

What incentives, if any, does PHX offer airlines for longhauls?

I am sure this is posted somewhere but I can't find it - what is the temperature cutoff at Sky Harbor for flights? I know that the hotter it is the less dense the air is therefore making it harder to take off, but is there a specific temperature for all aircraft or is it up to the crew?

alasizon wrote:

PHX has less INTL demand than one would think. Realistically, we should be able to support a 2nd flight October-May (maybe June) but the problem really is July-September where flights simply struggle. Personally, I think 3w PHX-NRT and 4w PHX-FRA would work but you would need AA to commit an aircraft to that and I'm not sure how the yields would look. With the increasing 330 presence in PHX, perhaps this will become more of a possibility. If AA isn't too keen on the FRA idea, they can always supplement the BA service to LHR since there is a definite demand for that second daily flight.

AA doesn't fly to FRA from JFK, ORD, or MIA - and this past winter didn't even operate PHL-FRA. AA won't be flying PHX-FRA anytime soon.

PHXAvFan wrote:

I am sure this is posted somewhere but I can't find it - what is the temperature cutoff at Sky Harbor for flights? I know that the hotter it is the less dense the air is therefore making it harder to take off, but is there a specific temperature for all aircraft or is it up to the crew?

Typically around 118°F is when aircraft start getting grounded. The CRJs, particularly the 200s, have significant issues with anything north of 115°, and are grounded not long after that. I can only recall a half dozen times in the ten years I lived there that it got hot enough to ground flights though.

PHXAvFan wrote:

I am sure this is posted somewhere but I can't find it - what is the temperature cutoff at Sky Harbor for flights? I know that the hotter it is the less dense the air is therefore making it harder to take off, but is there a specific temperature for all aircraft or is it up to the crew?

It's up to the performance charts published for each airplane.

Yes, it doesn't have anything to do with the aircraft themselves, it's the fact that some(Bombardiers) don't have published performance data above 11x degrees.

Spotter787 wrote:

Speaking of Lufthansa, they will begin flying to SAN next spring. So now SAN has British Airways, Japan Airways and soon Lufthansa. What is PHX doing wrong? The "too close to LAX" argument is making less and less sense to me.

http://lufthansaflyer.boardingarea.com/ ... ts-to-ord/

What's wrong with BA? They have things covered pretty well and having AA in OneWorld makes it Hub To Hub hard to go against.

I know you want more, I would if I was living there again. On the coast you have more Asian travelers and Aussies, Indians that travel. The one area I'd Like AA to focus on is Mexico and Central and South America flights.

777PHX wrote:

Yes, it doesn't have anything to do with the aircraft themselves, it's the fact that some(Bombardiers) don't have published performance data above 11x degrees.

To be fair, a CRJ-200 at ISA+15C is already starting to struggle, performance wise, especially in the climb. At ISA+30C in the PHX summer time, I honestly believe that Canadair didn't do testing that hot because they knew the plane wouldn't be able to do much without severe restrictions. Unless of course, bouncing around at FL200 in the summer time while dodging thunder storms was your idea of fun. Then again, it could also be partly because the ECS system was designed by a lunatic who for some reason thought that the only part of the body passengers would like to be less than 30C in the summer time was their ankles. There's multiple reasons a CRJ-200 in Phoenix in summer time is referred to as a vomit comet, and the woefully inadequate environmental cooling system is a big part of it.

atcsundevil wrote:

PHXAvFan wrote:

I am sure this is posted somewhere but I can't find it - what is the temperature cutoff at Sky Harbor for flights? I know that the hotter it is the less dense the air is therefore making it harder to take off, but is there a specific temperature for all aircraft or is it up to the crew?

Typically around 118°F is when aircraft start getting grounded. The CRJs, particularly the 200s, have significant issues with anything north of 115°, and are grounded not long after that. I can only recall a half dozen times in the ten years I lived there that it got hot enough to ground flights though.

CR2/CR9 cap out at ~116.7
CR7s cap out at ~117.4

Of course, if you get lucky, the Temp sensor reports 116.6 (46C) the whole time and everything runs bumpily but still runs. We didn't have a single day last year that we suspended operations but there were plenty of extended periods of exactly 46C.

asqx wrote:

To be fair, a CRJ-200 at ISA+15C is already starting to struggle, performance wise, especially in the climb. At ISA+30C in the PHX summer time, I honestly believe that Canadair didn't do testing that hot because they knew the plane wouldn't be able to do much without severe restrictions. Unless of course, bouncing around at FL200 in the summer time while dodging thunder storms was your idea of fun. Then again, it could also be partly because the ECS system was designed by a lunatic who for some reason thought that the only part of the body passengers would like to be less than 30C in the summer time was their ankles. There's multiple reasons a CRJ-200 in Phoenix in summer time is referred to as a vomit comet, and the woefully inadequate environmental cooling system is a big part of it.

That's what I was getting at in my post -- those 200s are MISERABLE in the heat. I've seen them on a number of occasions request 8/26 to use all 11,000ft. just to get off the ground. They're underpowered even on a good day. Fortunately Bombardier fixed that (for the most part) with the 700 and 900.

alasizon wrote:

CR2/CR9 cap out at ~116.7
CR7s cap out at ~117.4

Of course, if you get lucky, the Temp sensor reports 116.6 (46C) the whole time and everything runs bumpily but still runs. We didn't have a single day last year that we suspended operations but there were plenty of extended periods of exactly 46C.

I got pretty close! It's been a while since I worked at the TRACON, so I couldn't remember the exact temps. I recall ops starting to be affected after 115, with significant effects from 118. I think maybe that's when it started to ground mainline fleets? Either way, like I said above, the CRJ2 is as underpowered as they come, and they'd have terrible climb rates even on moderately hot days. The CRJ7s and CRJ9s seemed to fare better, but 115°+ temps affect everybody and everything. As far as I'm concerned, those are the days when the entire valley should be evacuated for higher ground.

The last heat related ground stop I can recall at PHX was the summer before last -- I think it was a stretch of two or three days when things pretty much ground to a halt around 1500. It seemed to happen every couple of years, but overall it's a pretty rare event.

Once HA retires its 767s do you guys think PHX is going to get the boost to an A330 or rather a couple A321s

boeing777200lr wrote:

Once HA retires its 767s do you guys think PHX is going to get the boost to an A330 or rather a couple A321s

It'll be the A330. AA has indicated that the A321neo will have difficulty operating PHX to Hawaii, which is why the A330 will be replacing the B752 PHX-HNL for AA. PHX will be one of the last (if not the last) station to see HAL's B763 since PHX performs 767 maintenance.

boeing777200lr wrote:

Once HA retires its 767s do you guys think PHX is going to get the boost to an A330 or rather a couple A321s

Only a guess, but I'm quite suspicious that the 321neo will have the range to make the PHX-HNL flight. Hawaiian keeps referring to the 321 routes to west coast to Hawaii, so unless Arizona suddenly got some ocean front property I don't think even HA management plans has the 321 in service to PHX. Well I guess we see in the future.

atcsundevil wrote:

boeing777200lr wrote:

Once HA retires its 767s do you guys think PHX is going to get the boost to an A330 or rather a couple A321s

It'll be the A330. AA has indicated that the A321neo will have difficulty operating PHX to Hawaii, which is why the A330 will be replacing the B752 PHX-HNL for AA. PHX will be one of the last (if not the last) station to see HAL's B763 since PHX performs 767 maintenance.

Humm, it looks like the AA 330's are only on the HNL run for the winter schedule. Last time I checked the AA schedule it shows 2 757 flights return in April.

atcsundevil wrote:

AA has indicated that the A321neo will have difficulty operating PHX to Hawaii, which is why the A330 will be replacing the B752 PHX-HNL for AA.

There was a fairly recent internal communication that indicated they believe the 321NEO will be able to operate without restriction from PHX. I'll believe it when I see it, but that was the last official word on AA's PHX-HI service.

How does this affect airline operations. AA put a notice out that it might affect non revenue travelers trying to get in or out of PHX on an RJ. Would appreciate any knowledge on how this condition affects all aircraft. If this has been a prior thread, moderators please delete. Thanks

ozark1 wrote:

How does this affect airline operations. AA put a notice out that it might affect non revenue travelers trying to get in or out of PHX on an RJ. Would appreciate any knowledge on how this condition affects all aircraft. If this has been a prior thread, moderators please delete. Thanks

The aircraft prone to weight restrictions - like the 50 seat RJs (but others, too) - will have some additional restrictions. As I recall, DEN or ABQ at 100 degrees is somewhat worse (I don't have a density altitude calculator handy, though).

But the real answer to your question is, that the impact will be the same as it was last year in the summer and the year before that (ad nauseam).

The main problem is that Bombardier doesn't publish performance data for the CRJs above 117 or so degrees, which means they can't operate when temps are at or above that.

I don't think we had a day last year where CRJ operations were suspended at KPHX because of the heat. Temps are supposed to reach 120 degrees early next week which is extraordinary even by PHX standards and certainly doesn't happen every year. The all time record high is 122 degrees, for reference. We're expected to set record highs for five days in a row next week.

Beat me to it, with Vegas and Phoenix supposed to hit 117 and 120 respectively on Wednesday things will get interesting....Of course, I have an LAS-PHX-LAS routing planned for Wednesday but on WN....Fingers crossed.

777PHX wrote:

The main problem is that Bombardier doesn't publish performance data for the CRJs above 117 or so degrees, which means they can't operate when temps are at or above that.

I don't think we had a day last year where CRJ operations were suspended at KPHX because of the heat. Temps are supposed to reach 120 degrees early next week which is extraordinary even by PHX standards and certainly doesn't happen every year. The all time record high is 122 degrees, for reference. We're expected to set record highs for five days in a row next week.

I lived in then PHX area for several years and we did see 120+ degrees days, including at Sky Harbor. There were times of the day when certain aircraft couldn't operate, just as you mentioned. But that heat didn't last the entire day either, so there weren't entire days where those limited aircraft - like the CRJs you mentioned - couldn't operate (for an entire day).

FlyHossD wrote:

I lived in then PHX area for several years and we did see 120+ degrees days, including at Sky Harbor. There were times of the day when certain aircraft couldn't operate, just as you mentioned. But that heat didn't last the entire day either, so there weren't entire days where those limited aircraft - like the CRJs you mentioned - couldn't operate (for an entire day).

Maybe as a ground temp on the tarmac at Sky Harbor. We haven't seen an air temp in the PHX area at or above 120 degrees since 1995 and it's only happened three times in recorded history. Again, it's definitely not something that is a common occurrence.

Hottest days on record in PHX:

122 degrees - 6/26/1990
121 degrees - 7/28/1995
120 degrees - 6/25/1990
119 degrees - 6/29/2013

Here in ABQ we also have issues in the summer. Density altitude is always very high on summer afternoons.

[twoid][/twoid]

ozark1 wrote:

How does this affect airline operations. AA put a notice out that it might affect non revenue travelers trying to get in or out of PHX on an RJ. Would appreciate any knowledge on how this condition affects all aircraft. If this has been a prior thread, moderators please delete. Thanks

As others have said it's not so much that the plane CANT operate in the heat, it's that most operators don't have the performance data for that kind of heat. Same with extrem cold.

I doubt the PHX - IFP flight will be operating on time (if at all) Tuesday seeing as the high in Bullhead City is supposed to be 125!!!

In 1990 when the PHX temp went above 120 degress there was a period of a couple days when Northwest's 727s couldn't operate at above that temp. Technology, as it was in those days, included a 'Weight Manual' in each aircraft which had charts for every airport the 727 serviced. The problem (as others mentioned) was the charts only went up to 120 degrees. Boeing quickly faxed charts that included temps much higher to NW flight ops. Aircrews received the charts and ops normal returned. I sure there were some load restrictions, but I can't remember.

RetiredWeasel wrote:

In 1990 when the PHX temp went above 120 degress there was a period of a couple days when Northwest's 727s couldn't operate at above that temp. Technology, as it was in those days, included a 'Weight Manual' in each aircraft which had charts for every airport the 727 serviced. The problem (as others mentioned) was the charts only went up to 120 degrees. Boeing quickly faxed charts that included temps much higher to NW flight ops. Aircrews received the charts and ops normal returned. I sure there were some load restrictions, but I can't remember.

I'm sure NW also sent Boeing a check with a few zeros on it too.

That's 46° - 49° Celsius, for the rest of us.

The previously separate topic was merged with the Phoenix Aviation Thread because the subject was discussed just yesterday. Please continue the discussion here.

✈️ atcsundevil

TripleA wrote:

I doubt the PHX - IFP flight will be operating on time (if at all) Tuesday seeing as the high in Bullhead City is supposed to be 125!!!

This flight actually should operate given the timing will get it out of IFP just before IFP hits the 118 mark. Might be a bit tight though.