Fuel over destination

[Mulligan]

I asked this before but am going to try a different question,
The fuel policy at my company routinely allows flights to arrive over destination with about 45 minutes of fuel. This would be with no altenate and excellent forecast. The Regulator imposes a minimum of 30 minutes.
What do others think and what's the minimum at your outfit?

[Offchocks]

Is that after you have burnt your variable reserve?

Our absolute minimum over destination pre-flight is 30min + 10min approach fuel + variable reserve (5% of flight fuel from a PNR). You don't need to arrive with the variable reserve as it is there for adverse winds or being held down etc.

This arrival fuel is for when the forcaste is OK. Using "route experience" I tend to look for reasons to put more on!

[zonnair]

30 min of final fuel + diversion fuel to alternate. The last part can be ommitted if flt is less then 6 hours (mainly for in-flight replanning) and airport hastwo runways plus certain wx forcast, or 1 runway with another airport is within 30 min flying time provided wx is vis 5000m plus ceiling 2000'.

[PappyJ]

Commercial ops require that you arrive over your destination with:

1. Fuel to required alternate(s) or specific extra fuel in leu of alternate (Hawaii, Guam, etc)
2. Reserve fuel specified by regulations (30 or 45 mins)
3. Company required extra
4. Local regulations (ie: Singapore requires "60 minutes over SIN", where regardless of where your alternate may be, you must have 60 minutes of fuel in the tanks when arriving over the airport)

Of course, Captains are paid to make good decisions, and therefore may choose to carry additional fuel for whatever friggin reasons that we can come up with.

[blousky]

Hi Mulligan,

The fuel you have to have overhead destination WITHOUT a destination alternate is made of:

The final reserve of 30min that you mentioned PLUS

15 min Additional fuel as stated in EU-OPS Appendix 1 to OPS 1.255 Para 1.6 "Additional fuel".

(b) Holding for 15 Minutes at 1500ft (450m) above destination aerodrome elevation in standart conditions, when a flight is operated without a destination alternate aerodrome;

Of course, this might be different in Canada...

Hope this helps ;-)

Dan.

[compressor stall]

Mulligan,

The TC regs have a comment in them about the operator determining the minimum fuel required on top of the 30 mins.

My opinion, 30 mins +10% (can recalculate the 10% over long flights).

[PappyJ]

+10% (can recalculate the 10% over long flights).

10% may be an unattainable amount for some aircraft; at the least it could prove costly. On the Airbus (and some Boeings), imagine that 10% could initially be over 10 metric tonnes of extra fuel, depending on the flight time. The cost of carrying that fuel, due to increased fuel burn, can be considerable. Also, any time you take-off with additional fuel, you have to consider that you may have to turn around and land with it, or take extra time to Dump it. Not good when things are burning, etc.

Also, that 10% extra could amount to between 20% to 100% (one hundred percent) extra fuel by the time you are within an hour of your destination. That's a lot of extra fuel.

Similarily, on a shorter and heavier yield sector, that 10% could restrict available load resulting from the Maximum Landing Weight.

A more realistic number would be 3% (max 5%), provided of course that you have a suitable destination alternate, and suitable enroute alternates in the event that things go amiss during flight. We regularly use 3% and simply "Re-dispatch" in flight as we pass various points ensuring that we have the required (and safe) fuel to reach the enroute alternates, until in range of the destination, where at the final check point, you'd require 5% of the required fuel to continue to the destination.. Provided that you have suitable alternates, the same formula can be used on any type of aircraft or operation.

Basically, at each check point, you need to ensure that you have fuel to the destination, the destination alternate, and the required reserve (15/30/45/60) mins), PLUS the 3% extra. At the final check point, the Extra needs to be equal to 5% of the fuel needed to continue to the destination. Any time that the numbers don't add up, you divert to the enroute alternate. It's all in the planning and preparation.

And, of course, this is a simplified explanation.

[411A]

At our outfit, we always plan with an alternate for the destination airport...exception, island reserve, where no alternate is possible.
Thus, the minimum fuel required at the planning stage is...

Fuel to destination
5% contingency
Fuel to most distant alternate
30 minutes holding at the alternate
Any extra required by regulation/notam, for destination.

[9.G]

Mulligan, anywhere you land destination, alternate etc , you're required to have final reserve on board nothing more, nothing less. Legal requirements and commanders decisions should be coherent.:ok:

[Mulligan]

Thanks to you all. These are the the inputs I was looking for and it seems that most outfits are about the same as mine.
Now I'm going to invite opinions instead of policies/SOPs and I know things can get a little fractious at that point!
Maybe it's my age (54) but I find myself getting increasingly uneasy with FOD (fuel over destination) numbers on our flight plans. I had a flap jam (A320) some time ago. Not a very complex abnormal compared to some on the Airbus but it took about 20 minutes before we were both comfortable to land. Talked to to dispatch, maintenance,pax and cabin crew. F/O and I came up with different numbers at first so did the math again and came up with the same number. Took our time as we are always urged to do.
We were tankering 2 tons so fuel wasn't a factor but it did cause me to wonder about the same failure with 45 minutes left (no alternate scenario). Some of the more complex failures might take considerably longer than our 20 minutes. Our ops manual defines a fuel emergency as landing with less than minimum required by the state (30 mins) and this calls for another abnormal checklist during what could be a very busy time.
I think Singapore has it right. 60 minutes over destination. 30 minutes to handle an emergency and 30 minutes of what I like to consider as "unuseable fuel".
This would require another 15 minutes to be carried on our "skinniest" flights which is about 600k on a 320. We are told that it costs 3% to carry this which is 18kg. At roughly 2 dollars a kilo that's about 40 bucks. And I should add that the majority of our flights are carrying 1 hour or more FOD due to having an alternate or other factors so this would apply to a minority. So the economic argument is a bit weak in my opinion.
I realize that this subject has been beaten to death but I wonder how others feel.

[Offchocks]

Mulligan I don't think being 54 has anything to do with it, most of us have had that last minute tech problem or a go-around where it takes time/fuel to sort out, so being cautious with your fuel overhead is wise. That may not be what the bean counters want, their job is to save money, however ours is to have an efficient but safe operation. When the forcast for destination is good, my comfort factor is usually 60 minutes of fuel after the landing role, where as the accountant is probably comfortably asleep in his bed!

I'm now 59, but when I was much younger I remember a respected old Flight Engineer on a 747 saying that if you looked into the tanks after a minimum fuel landing (30 min), it would look like a couple of buckets sloshing around. That image has always stayed with me! :eek:

[avgenie]

Discussion of fuel reserve can get very emotional. I understand the ETOPS guys took a data driven approach to create scenarios and arrive at the minimum fuel requirement. Would a similar data driven approach help here? Ideas/comments?

[9.G]

avgenie, EU OPS does require additional fuel for any flight to perform a safe diversion and landing most of the time normal flight planning exceeds those requirements due to abundance of diversion options. The foundation is anchored in EU OPS though under 1.255 Fuel requirements:

The minimum additional fuel, which shall permit:
(a) the aeroplane to descend as necessary and proceed to an adequate alternate aerodrome in the event of engine failure or loss of pressurisation, whichever requires the greater amount of fuel based on the assumption that such a failure occurs at the most critical point along the route, and
(i) hold there for 15 minutes at 1 500 ft (450 m) above aerodrome elevation in standard conditions; and
(ii) make an approach and landing, except that additional fuel is only required, if the minimum amount of fuel calculated in accordance with subparagraphs 1.2. to 1.5. above is not sufficient for such an event :ok:

[DERG]

Of course there are some places on the planet where the 45 minute reserve in not enough. I can think of some places where an hour and half would be the minimum especially in winter in the N Hemisphere. But then I am a nervous old fart:O

[misd-agin]

1+05 minimum.