MG: It seems the call of “minimum fuel” was made because that was the fuel with which, all relevant factors considered, the aircraft was calculated to land at YWLM. That fact did not mean the aircraft was threatened with grave and imminent danger, requiring immediate assistance. It was a fact that should have been taken into account by ATC in clearing the aircraft throughout the flight, so as to reduce the chances of the flight becoming an emergency. Or maybe the pilot was a dangerous criminal and you should have refused to issue the clearance, without the declaration of an emergency. I imagine that Phantom knucks were shy and retiring types and would have accepted refusal with good grace ....
topdrop: I realise that many people crave the certainty of hard-and-fast rules for every situation. My objection is to turning, into an ‘emergency’, every situation in which fuel state is calculated to result in fuel available on landing being less than an arbitrary number. It is an arbitrary number because, on the objective facts, some of these situations won’t be real emergencies. Whether it’s a real emergency depends on the circumstances pertaining at the time (to borrow kaz’s phrase from a post above with which I agree).
Jenna: One of the points I am trying to make is that the effect of the proposed rule is to make it a criminal offence to, among other things, FAIL to declare a MAYDAY as soon as your calculations indicate e.g a 1 minute shortfall. Doesn’t matter whether it’s a clear day with little-to-no traffic at your destination.
This rule isn’t going to stop aircraft suffering fuel exhaustion. The pilots who make mistakes that result in fuel exhaustion are generally not the pilots who make accurate on-ground and enroute estimates of the fuel that will remain on landing. Otherwise, they’d probably not fly to exhaustion...
And the rule won’t stop fuel starvation.
Most ‘good idea’ rules result in unintended consequences. Will there be commercial pressures for flights into busy airports to be conducted with fuel that can reasonably be calculated as resulting in a 1 minute shortfall/margin in minimum reserves, resulting in an an obliged declaration of an “emergency” and some priority?
Most counter-intuitive rules are the product of some bureaucratic nonsense. Is the problem that if a pilot tells ATC/S that, on current calculations, the aircraft will land with only 29 minutes of reserves, ATC/S shrugs and carries on as usual, but if the pilot declares a MAYDAY in exactly the same circumstances ATC/S does stuff?
By the way, it should go without saying, but I’ll say it: We’re all trying to achieve the same end - safe aviation