July 29, 2015

Video: What Really Happened With Allegiant 426′s “Low Fuel” Situation?

More articles by »
By: NYCAviation Staff
Tags: , , , ,
Allegiant 426 has been in the headlines because of an ATC recording of the pilot telling Air Traffic Control that he doesn’t have enough fuel to divert to another airport. This need to divert was because the intended destination, Fargo, North Dakota, was closed while the Blue Angels practiced for an air show.

Though the aircraft landed safely, many feel the aircraft was in serious danger of fuel exhaustion. NYCAviation’s Phil Derner discusses some industry insight, discussing the incident’s media coverage, terminology, and flight planning.

  • Sahir Siddiqui

    Very nice listening, thank you. Sensationalism and overreaction is the name of the game these days. Who’s got time to collect the facts first…?

  • raflw

    Given the video comments, then why did the flight deck say they didn’t have enough fuel to get to Grand Forks? I did read that FAR wx was clear at dispatch, so they could have released with no alternate. Given Allegiant’s ULC cost model, I’d think that aligns with company policy.
    None the less, the 45 min reserve should have carried them safely the approx. 20 mins to Grand Forks. Reports are that the aircraft landed with 42 mins fuel remaining at FAR. Why the pilot refused to fly to GFK on his reserves is a key question for me.
    That the VP of Flight Ops and the Director of Flight Safety got themselves into this situation also gives me cause for concern.
    And the latest updates indicate that Allegiant p.r. is claiming the FAA has said they operated safely, but an FAA employee denied that any resolution has been announced. So Allegiant is shading facts (at best) even as the investigation rolls on.
    The impression is of an airline with a minimum safety culture. The public should know that.

  • Michael Kennedy

    What really happened is that the flight departed LAS because both the dispatcher and Captain thought the airport was open to air carriers because there was an exclusion in the NOTAM (Notice to Airman) similar to this current NOTAM for KFAR below:

    !FAR 07/070 FAR RWY 18/36 CLSD EXC SCHEDULED AIR CARRIER DLY 0400-1000 1507290400-1507311000

    Interestingly, the FAA’s historic NOTAM file for KFAR is returning a 404 error code.

    Footnote: Ten minutes before the AAY flight, another carrier’s aircraft was diverted to an alternate airport. They also argued with the controller but ended up just diverting.