UnderneathTheRadar
20th Sep 2009, 13:29
Hi all,
Was out on an entertaining Saturday evening cross country around Victoria and at about 7pm heard a large number of jets stacked all around Melbourne waiting for it to re-open.
I missed what must have been a prelude to this discussion but centre asked XXX (I won't give names - but it was a foreign longhaul flight) for his intentions, XXX asked for an approach time, centre replied that he didn't know as the first to try was still on it's way in, then advised that if XXX wanted to declare a fuel emergency they'd get cleared straight in otherwise they'd have to wait their turn, XXX asked for a minute, centre then was fairly forthright (putting it politely) that XXX needed to make a decision, XXX comes back with 'diverting to avalon'.
My curiosity is, and I think I've answered in my head, is why didn't he declare the fuel emergency and go straight in? Assuming they've ended up with more paperwork by diverting than declaring, is it that without the certainty of getting into Melbourne, he didn't want to risk missing then not having enough to get to Avalon?
I couldn't help but thinking (without knowing of course) that language and possible impatience by the controller (not criticising - there were a LOT of a/c holding and they had been for quite some time - I think the highest at CANTY was about FL260) may have contributed to not the best outcome. If he was that low on fuel and a very vigorous front covered everywhere from Mt Macedon south, surely a diversion or fuel emergency declaration would have come before being committed to one approach only?
Just curious to know if a) it was, as it seemed, a possible language issue and b) how/when you'd declare a 'fuel emergency' (if such a thing exists).
Thanks,
UTR
Was out on an entertaining Saturday evening cross country around Victoria and at about 7pm heard a large number of jets stacked all around Melbourne waiting for it to re-open.
I missed what must have been a prelude to this discussion but centre asked XXX (I won't give names - but it was a foreign longhaul flight) for his intentions, XXX asked for an approach time, centre replied that he didn't know as the first to try was still on it's way in, then advised that if XXX wanted to declare a fuel emergency they'd get cleared straight in otherwise they'd have to wait their turn, XXX asked for a minute, centre then was fairly forthright (putting it politely) that XXX needed to make a decision, XXX comes back with 'diverting to avalon'.
My curiosity is, and I think I've answered in my head, is why didn't he declare the fuel emergency and go straight in? Assuming they've ended up with more paperwork by diverting than declaring, is it that without the certainty of getting into Melbourne, he didn't want to risk missing then not having enough to get to Avalon?
I couldn't help but thinking (without knowing of course) that language and possible impatience by the controller (not criticising - there were a LOT of a/c holding and they had been for quite some time - I think the highest at CANTY was about FL260) may have contributed to not the best outcome. If he was that low on fuel and a very vigorous front covered everywhere from Mt Macedon south, surely a diversion or fuel emergency declaration would have come before being committed to one approach only?
Just curious to know if a) it was, as it seemed, a possible language issue and b) how/when you'd declare a 'fuel emergency' (if such a thing exists).
Thanks,
UTR