Qf63 11/08

[NickN]

I am tracking QF63 in transit to MEL and they have been at FL300 the entire leg from SYD-MEL anybody know what the reason might be for such a low cruise altitude?

[Robert Zweck]

Maybe forecast turbulence at higher levels or ....lower headwind component at the lower level

Sometimes low altitudes are the best......

I was once in a TAA F-27 that flew a 150 nm ( 1 hour ) sector at 1,500 ft. Not economical but necessary due to severe tropical weather.

[Craig Murray]

Nick, thanks for yet another update from your online flight tracking service. You've been providing us with copious amounts of data over the last week or so. I trust the "new toy, must post" feeling will wear off soon

FYI a quick Google search for "QF63" returns that the flight is going to Johannesburg and not Melbourne as you thought. The reason for it being at FL300 for this period is possibly due to inflight weather (wind, turbulence etc) and also the heavy weight of the aircraft in the initial stage of the flight. During the flight step climbs to higher altitudes will more than likely occur as the aircraft burns fuel and reduces it's weight.

[NickN]

I did look it up and I understand it was bound for J'burg. I was trying to imply that that leg of the journey was undertaken at FL300 and was curious as to why when other aircraft flying the same route (Domestic) were at FL380.

If the weather was that bad surely all aircraft would have been assigned lower altitudes.

And as for the novelty wearing off, well it has. I thought this was a simple enough question to ask as I haven't seen it happen before. My compulsion to post was based off my own curiosity.

[Radi K]

The same reason QF30 was a F290, to make the emergency descent not last as long!

It's a weight thing Nick but anyway, please keep up your posting...you never know..you might be lucky and get RSI!

[NickN]

The same reason QF30 was a F290, to make the emergency descent not last as long!

Nice!

[Craig Murray]

Originally Posted by NickN

If the weather was that bad surely all aircraft would have been assigned lower altitudes.

Maybe NickN, maybe. But read what I wrote:

The reason for it being at FL300 for this period is possibly due to inflight weather (wind, turbulence etc) and also the heavy weight of the aircraft in the initial stage of the flight

You simply can't take a 747 to its service ceiling when it is operating a long haul flight and is full of fuel, freight and passengers. It simply isn't possible.

It's not only the weather that can affect the level at which an aircraft is operating. I am sure one of our resident 747 crew can elaborate further on why QF063 was at FL300 today.

[Krzysztof M]

Similarly, QF489 SYD MEL tonight on climb requested FL280 as 'final altitude'. Must be the winds up there or something.

[Mick B]

Craig is on the money. FL300 would be very close to the initial optimum cruise level at that weight for a sector such as SYD-JNB. As an added bonus it would keep you out of the worst of the jet stream.

[NickN]

I did notice last night alof of aircraft between SYD-MEL had lower than usual cruise altitudes.