Major airline faces backlash after using ‘ghost flights’ to exploit a legal loophole: ‘They weren’t even selling tickets’::Ultimately, it’s incumbent on lawmakers to take steps to ensure this practice is discouraged.

  • Professorozone@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    14
    ·
    9 months ago

    The airlines always complain about the cost of fuel, I’m surprised they can tolerate this. 18,000 ghost flights for Lufthansa? Just last month I sat in a 100 degree cabin for about 45 minutes before take- off because the APU needed to be turned on by a ground unit. The pilot said he called for the truck. It never came. Later I asked a pilot friend of mine and he said they can power that unit themselves but it uses fuel and the airline probably has a policy against it. Screw you Virgin Atlantic!

    • AirlineF0od@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      9 months ago

      The apu itself is located in the tail and cannot be air started. If the apu is bad and engine can be started with an air truck.

        • childOfMagenta@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          9 months ago

          I’d think so. They may have been talking about a ground air conditioning cart.

          Edit to add: APUs burn fuel, are noisy, and some airports are very picky about their use, rightly so. But typically these airports offer ground air conditioning. If not, you ask them to start the APU when it gets too hot in the plane.

          I worked for an airline that was picky about it, but the bottom line was a riot on board was worse than burning fuel. Never been told no by the airport in reasonable conditions.