In a video dipicting a British Airways A318 taking off from London City - the caption says that the A318 can go from London City to New York.
I am obviously missing something here. If it is say, more than 3,000 NM to New York USA - by Great Circle Track. And, the "light" range of the A318 is 2000 NM tops. and the historic winds (80%) are invariably (more than 80%!!) Westerly i.e., from the West at around 40 odd knots at those flight levels - then,. . . . . hang on in there - I will check capacity of the fuel tanks. . . well the wingspan is the same as the A320 but the area. . . , I`m just revising but the body is shorter so the Centre tanks may be shorter but the spec range is 2000 NM TOPS.
So, how come it can make it to New York. very funny!!
What am I missing here? If a fat`n`tubby A320 can go for 4 hours and the ground speed is 411 say, then 411 times 4 = about 1,644 NM and on a fantastically good day. . .411 x 6hrs = 2466 NM.
Trying another angle = if the GFF is about 1090 x 2 engines then the total is 2180 innit? So assuming , assuming the capacity to be 19.3 tonnes = 8.8 hours of flying. So 20 mins to get up there oh ok, maybe.
I am truly lost. So is this en-route diversion then. . ? Whereby, you see what it does by the next waypoint which is also a diversion and then if it is . . . healthy you continue onto the next waypoint for diversion, etc., etc? tsk tsk, its such a shame. . . I thought I knew so much. . .but alas. . no.
Nope I still don`t get it - what is the answer? Is it that we land at Gander? Or is it a technical factor based on density altitude and. . . well,. . . it just, cannot be. . . can it?
It is very irritating when companies of supposed savoir fare make staements like this. . . one day, the punters will expect this and wonder why they are not getting it. Tough titty - people, we are landing here for fuel. Welcome to Thule - y`all look lovely in your bikinis!!!!