Doesn't the 20 mins holding come on top of reserve(30 mins)+ diversion fuel at the planning stage?
________________________________________________
Hello Flanker
I don't want there to be any misconceptions here. We are talking about the commercial aviation world with all the constraints that implies, and we are talking about ultra long range operations in my Singapore - London example.
At no stage was I suggesting that either myself or my company are trying to fiddle or get around anything.
Captain don't get paid to marry people or demonstrate their magical handling skills these days.
We get paid to 'manage' the movement of 400 people half way round the world using a bit of kit that costs somebody else £120,000,000. I left all the zeros in. Look at them. Then multiply that by 57. That is the size of my companys' investment in just one of their fleets.
I don't think it is unreasonable of them to run the operation in such a way that they stand half a chance of getting a minimal return on their money.
They pay me, and many like me to help them do that . One hull loss for any reason would destroy all that. I sit in the middle of the money men on one side, and the passengers on the other. Unlike other professionals, (Doctors, Lawyers) who don't die under their own knives or go to jail with their clients when they make a mess of it, we have an inbuilt interest in making the whole damn show work.
So forgive me when I get a bit ratty when those not directly involved make sweeping and grandiose statements like yours. (You're not a polititian, are you?)
I say it again, it is normal in reasonable weather (which a weekend pilot wouldn't drive his car in) to 'commit' to a destination, and use the diversion fuel and the contingency fuel up whilst waiting to land. I've always thought that the secret of flying an aeroplane is simple. Knowing, from experience, what is going to happen next.
Which is why, when I leave the hold with just enough fuel to make a safe landing, I know that is safe. What I don't think is safe is having a go-around sprung on me by someone on the ground, (see above about being 'involved' in the flight), through commercial imperatives of their bosses even further from being 'on' the aeroplane.There is simply NO fuel carried to cover ATC and/or other aeroplane cock-ups during the landing process.
Sviot11 has it right. As I said before I have been around a bit and I remember an Avianca 707 running out of fuel and crashing whilst trying to land at JFK. I believe the 'Low Fuel' call came from this. Don't forget ... we don't just have to think about the CAA/JAR rules, we have to operate to FAA rules in the US of A, OZ Rules (STRANGE) in OZ etc... etc...
What I was trying to do when I got MOR'ed was to make a non-existent (in this part of the firmament) 'Low Fuel' call.
I couldn't do it officially here, and my mates in ATC couldn't respond to it , officially.
OK - where do we go from here?
ANTIGUA
