Alternates & TEMPO Thunderstorms

[newifr]

Hi all,

Q1: I wanted to know if your destination has TEMPO TS (Thunderstorms), my understanding is that you require the alternate however can you just carry the 60min holding instead of the alternate.

Q2: If you can carry the 60mins holding at the destination then can your alternate have TEMPO TS also and just make sure you carry 60mins for it also.

Q3: If you can't do that, and there wasn't TS at the alternate and there was a TEMPO for low cloud would you then be able just to carry the 60mins holding at your alternate and meet all the legal requirements?


If someone could clear this up for me and give me a definitive answer it would be greatly appreciated as I believe some of my peers are giving me a bum steer. :ugh:

Thanks in advance NI

[UnderneathTheRadar]

Q1: I wanted to know if your destination has TEMPO TS (Thunderstorms), my understanding is that you require the alternate however can you just carry the 60min holding instead of the alternate.

Yes

Q2: If you can carry the 60mins holding at the destination then can your alternate have TEMPO TS also and just make sure you carry 60mins for it also.

If you are holding 60min fuel (at the holding fuel flow) then you don't need an alternate.

Q3: If you can't do that, and there wasn't TS at the alternate and there was a TEMPO for low cloud would you then be able just to carry the 60mins holding at your alternate and meet all the legal requirements?

N/A - see 2.


UTR

[newifr]

Thanks for your reply UTR. :ok:

I do have one final question though, can you use an alternate which has Thunderstorms forecast on the TAF ie . TEMPO 60min TS?

Thanks NIFR

[tmpffisch]

The key point is that it's a TEMPO. Unless the TS is forecast outside of a TEMPO or INTER, or there is anything outside those periods below alternate minima, having holding fuel rather than an alternate is fine.

[compressor stall]

It might be "fine" legally, but is it sensible?

[Capt Claret]

I do have one final question though, can you use an alternate which has Thunderstorms forecast on the TAF ie . TEMPO 60min TS?

Yes. Tempo doesn't require an alternate, and may not even require holding fuel. After all, the tempo could be for an improvement in conditions, it doesn't have to be for a deterioration.

At the end of the day, an aerodrome cannot be nominated as an alternate, if it requires an alternate. So just TEMPO TS wouldn't require an alternate, just 60 mins holding fuel as a MINIMUM.

[morno]

It might be "fine" legally, but is it sensible?

Wise words Stallie.

Take the above into consideration. You may only have to carry your legally required minimum fuel, but a smart aviator would allow extra for contingency. Ie. You're on your way out to Backofthesticks with your minimum legally required fuel, you've just held for 55mins and old mate lands on the runway before you on the only available runway and forget's to put his wheels down. Then what are you going to do?

I might be happy to run around up and down the coast carrying near minimal fuel with lot's of options should sh*t hit the fan, but once I start venturing out to where my options become limited (both airports and airports with fuel), then be buggered if I'm going to be planning on arriving at my destination with 0 margin.

morno

[Jabawocky]

And if that holding puts you into the dark time :\

And the PAL does not work..... And the local community dude is at a party, the cops and ambo's have to cut the lock to the light box with bolt cutters. Then they still can't figure out how to turn the lights on........

......... And then the cloud rolls in and surrounds you while holding at the MSA.

Could never happen like that could it morno? Where is the big bloke for comment on this story? I bet his answer was lots a fuel:ok:


Chuckles and I have a mate here in Brisbane who was fondly telling stories of the days of old as a young FO, one of his old Captains said..... More fuel son, now what was the question again? :ok:

[morno]

Sounds like someone was telling you about their night flight last week Jaba, :uhoh:.

Me was on my way out to a flicker of light (well, it looked like a flicker from about 150nm's out, at least my lights worked upon arrival, :E) out in the sticks...... with plenty of fuel, listening to some poor barstard fly circles over a certain community in NW QLD because them dreaded lights wouldn't work.

More fuel is the answer. I want every pound I can possibly have.

morno

[Jamair]

Jaba - I have it on good authority that when ATC quizzed that PIC on latest time to divert to the alternate, the answer was "Still have 3.5 hours holding available" (plus alternate and reserves).....

If I ever prang my aeroplane, the searchers won't have too much trouble finding it - it'll burn for three days with the amount of fuel on board!:E

Ancient wisdom -

Three things that are of no use to the pilot: Air in the tanks, runway behind you, altitude above you.:ugh:

Three things available to the pilot, any two of which are necessary to keep you alive - brains, altitude and airspeed.:ok:

[newifr]

As Capt. Claret was saying:

At the end of the day, an aerodrome cannot be nominated as an alternate, if it requires an alternate.

So can i presume an alternate with TEMPO TS is ok, providing you carry the holding fuel?? :confused:

On a slighly different note, what is the consensus amongst everyone in the following situation:

Planned A to B (3 hour flight) no additional fuel requirements other than the normal trip fuel etc. as weather at A and B is CAVOK.

Halfway to B ATC issues an amended TAF for B for which
PROB 30 INTER TS are now forecast, a deterioration that was not planned for in the fuel calculations on the ground and therefore fuel you do not have in flight.

Common sense dictates you would have 30min of contigency fuel for such occurences, however im asking that you answer the following question on the basis you do no have this contigency fuel on board.

Q: Are you legally required to divert enroute to pick up fuel to meet the 30mins or alternate requirement?


Thanks for all the replies it been a big help.

NIFR

[mattyj]

flight plan in the office..once you've launched, you've launched..you don't have any contingency, alternate or holding fuel in your tanks..just fuel remaining..use it wisely

[Jabawocky]

You two funny guys crack me up, but I can't thank you enough for all the bits and pieces I soak up from you guys whenever I can. Any youngsters out there, use the search function and follow their posts.....most of it is good stuff, the rest is picking on me.....prolly deserved too:suspect:

Jamair....yes if I spear in, the first thing ticked off the list will be fuel. Even to somewhere like YMGI or YSGE which is 1.5 each way or around 70-75 litres, I depart with 280. I hope I never have to hold that long, must remember to pack an empty milk bottle :eek:

[Jabawocky]

On a slighly different note, what is the consensus amongst everyone in the following situation:

Planned A to B (3 hour flight) no additional fuel requirements other than the normal trip fuel etc. as weather at A and B is CAVOK.

Halfway to B ATC issues an amended TAF for B for which
PROB 30 INTER TS are now forecast, a deterioration that was not planned for in the fuel calculations on the ground and therefore fuel you do not have in flight.

Common sense dictates you would have 30min of contigency fuel for such occurences, however im asking that you answer the following question on the basis you do no have this contigency fuel on board.

Q: Are you legally required to divert enroute to pick up fuel to meet the 30mins or alternate requirement?

Go take a peek at the ranting myself, morno and Jamair have had on the Norfolk Island Westwind threads ( several of them) and despite what is legal and what is not, put yourself in those shoes and ask, at the time of receiving wx that is now below the alternate minima, and you have no planned holding fuel or alternate, nor ability to divert once overhead, but you do right now enroute. What should or would you do?

Cheers :ok:

[RENURPP]

flight plan in the office..once you've launched, you've launched..you don't have any contingency, alternate or holding fuel in your tanks..just fuel remaining..use it wisely

Do you have a reference to support that little gem?

[Shagpile]

Three things that are of no use to the pilot: Air in the tanks, runway behind you, altitude above you.

Don't forget the 4th most useless thing in aviation: hours in a navigators logbook.

[tmpffisch]

Do you have a reference to support that little gem?

Wording is probably something such as "shall not depart without adequate fuel". After that, it's up to proper airmanship to ensure a plan is in place.

[Oktas8]

"commence" I think is the word. Rule 234.

But CAAP 234-1 is an excellent idiot's guide (at least this idiot found it so.)

I am determined to finish my career aged 65+ without ever having suffered a fuel embarrassment. This guides my thinking on departing to remote destinations.

[Capt Claret]

Unless payload restricted it's my policy to always have alternate fuel. If Wx or TFC holding is required, then when able I carry said holding plus an alternate.

As a wise former colleague said to me once,

"if it's your policy to go every where on minimum legal fuel, then statistically, you're likely to get caught out having to divert with insufficient fuel, when Bloggs goes splatt on the runway as you're on short final.

If it's your policy to carry alternate fuel whenever able, then statistically, the chance of the day you're required to divert because the bloke in front has gone splatt on the RWY being the same day you couldn't carry alternate fuel, i really, REALLY, remote." :ok:

Wise man. :}

[Jabawocky]

"if it's your policy to go every where on minimum legal fuel, then statistically, you're likely to get caught out having to divert with insufficient fuel, when Bloggs goes splatt on the runway as you're on short final.

I see you have flown with Bloggs before :E

[Capt Claret]

I see you have flown with Bloggs before :E

He done tort me on the 14Sux, he done did.

Can't remember if he tort me all he knew, or all I know? ;):oh::8

[mach.865]

Gentlemen
The second question is interesting, newifr was asking what the LEGAL requirement was for having the extra fuel when AFTER departure a TEMPO was issued. I know for a fact that a senior "checkie" from J* diverted to Sydney when en-route from Brisbane to Melbourne and abeam Wagga when a new TAF was issued stating TEMPO lowish cloud because he felt it was a legal requirement to have that fuel on board.
As for opinions given, nobody I know flies around with minimum fuel by choice. Most overseas airlines outside Oz always carry an Alternate with 30 mins holding at the alternate regardless of the destination weather. However it is not a practice to carry extra fuel for mum and the boys just in case and in most airlines it would not be tolerated, extra fuel has to be justified. So getting back to the question, what is the LEGAL requirement to have the fuel on board when the TEMPO was issued after departure. Good question for the the IREX exam.

[compressor stall]

because he felt it was a legal requirement to have that fuel on board.

Which bit of "legal" was he referring to - CASA regs or J* Ops manual? For a J* pilot, both are "the law".

Most overseas airlines outside Oz always carry an Alternate with 30 mins holding at the alternate regardless of the destination weather.... and in most [Australian] airlines it would not be tolerated, extra fuel has to be justified.

And it will take a 737/A320 in the water or in a forest after running out of gas when the weather turns or an aircraft landing ahead has a collapsed gear closing the runway before this rule is changed.:eek:

[tinpis]

And when you plan for that 30year old B200 with a wx radar that has never worked do you inform the boss youre not going because of imbedded t/s in the forcast?:hmm:

[MakeItHappenCaptain]

Paddys Law.....

MURPHY WAS AN OPTIMIST!:ok:

[T28D]

You can never carry too much fuel !!

[nomorecatering]

So how do airlines in Europe, or the US for that matter, cope when they get those massive winter systems, that have blizzards spanning all of western Europe. yes you can get in on an ILS, but what do you do when everywhere requires an alternate.

[Artificial Horizon]

Yes but alternates in Europe are not the same as alternates here. I worked for a legacy carrier over there and the only requirement was that you had two useable runways available within 2 hours flying time (the two runways could be actually be at the same airport as long as they were seperate e.g. parallel runways and not crossing). The runway was useable if the weather there was forecast at or above your second choice approach i.e. If you were CAT III (LVP) you needed CAT I weather, if you were only CAT I capable then you needed the weather to make a Non Precision approach etc. So there were times when we departed LHR and the destination was BKN002 150m FG, this didn't need alternate fuel to be carried as we were CAT III capable at NO DH and 75m RVR.

[mcgrath50]

AH is that a special rule for each operator over there or built into the regs in Europe?

[frangatang]

AI you must have been a flat earther (flight time less than 5 hrs not req an alt etc??). We long haulers always have an alternate!

[redsnail]

That is the regs in Europe.
We're Cat 1 capable only - so we carry an alternate with non precision minima. :ok:

[LeadSled]

AI you must have been a flat earther (flight time less than 5 hrs not req an alt etc??). We long haulers always have an alternate!

Maybe, if you are an FAA Part 121 carrier, or from somewhere that follows the FAA rules, but even the FAA OPS.SPEC for foreign carriers operating into US territory will not necessarily require a long haul operation to carry an alternate.

And for those of you not familiar, the FAA "no alternate required" alternate weather criteria is a lot higher than normal alternate criteria, effectively something close to 1000' cloud base/1mile+ viz/+/_ 60min. of ETA.

Tootle pip!!

[j3pipercub]

AI you must have been a flat earther

Wow, you (sh)longhaulers must be awesome!!!

j3

[DUXNUTZ]

And for those of you not familiar, the FAA "no alternate required" alternate weather criteria is a lot higher than normal alternate criteria, effectively something close to 1000' cloud base/1mile+ viz/+/_ 60min. of ETA.

Yup, 1500ft above lowest circling MDA + 2SM added to vis or 2000ft and 3SM whichever is greater. Lots easier than our rules here!

Alternate Wx requirement we had in our Opspecs were Wx better than

Ceilings 200ft, 1/2 mile or 400ft, 1 mile when added to forecast weather depending on if more than one approach to separate, instrument rwys.

Also enjoy the min visibility for takeoff of 1/4 mile by just adequate visual reference.

Another interesting point is in the USA you can do a kind of visual approach to an airport if the prevailing visibility is too low for an instrument approach (think NDB) where it's higher than 1SM. You can legally request a "contact approach", remain visual and land in a situation where you can't legally conduct an instrument approach. Odd huh?