Britannia Fuel Emergency

[Bernoulli]

Earlier this year (march?) a Britannia 757 going to the Canaries got into a real pickle with a nasty combination of poor weather and poor ATC between ACE and FUE. Aparrently after several attempts to land they eventually put out a mayday and got it on the ground. Not much fuel left by all accounts.

Anybody got any hard facts to back up this firm 'rumour'? What did happen and what are the lessons for the wider community?

[This is a crisis]

I smell a journalist!!!

[sky9]

Isn't that what you carry reserves for? And isn't that what the Mayday call is for. Everthing worked as it was supposed to therefore no story.

[Bernoulli]

No, not a journalist. And no, not a story in the journalistic sense either. But a 'war story' for sure. The wx down there was pretty awful, and in this instance the alternate tried to reject the diverting aircraft. The mayday was met with indifference and a really stressful situation did develop. I'd like to know more about what happened since I go there fairly regularly in the left seat of a jet and don't want to find myself in the same situation as this crew.

I believe the crew in question were subsequently praised by their management.

The serious question is what was the sequence of events that lead to this flight having to put out a mayday?

[Bealzebub]

I am not familiar with this airlines specific operating rules but I would suspect they are broadly similar to our own. If the total fuel on board before landing is anticipated to be below final reserve fuel ( 30 minutes) then a Priority approach and landing must be requested. If the fuel on board actually reaches the Final reserve quantity then an Emergency (Mayday) must be declared.

In situations where bad weather causes multiple diversions then this scenario might be expected from time to time. Diversion airports can find themselves becoming suddenly busy and under pressure, particularly if they are reaching ramp capacity. In such situations it might well be necessary for a Pilot to make the imperative very clear and perhaps at a slightly earlier stage than the rules would otherwise suggest.

As a left seat jet pilot you would of course already know this, presumably.

[ManaAdaSystem]

Define Priority approach, and please show me where you find this definition.

Thanks.

[toon]

PRIORITY:

Precedence, especially established by order of importance or urgency.

An established right to precedence.

An authoritative rating that establishes such precedence.

A preceding or coming earlier in time.

Something afforded or deserving prior attention.

APPROACH :

the final path followed by an aircraft as it is landing

:ok:

[parkfell]

For PRIORITY, read PAN call?

[ManaAdaSystem]

Read that to a Spanish controller, and try to count the number of Que's you get in return.
It was a serious question. In my book "Priority approaches" are as useful as "we are low on fuel".
How do you expect ATC to rate your priority request? Is it defined anywhere (ATC wise), if so where?
I believe the was a South American airliner which ran out of fuel on approach into some US airport a number of years ago? He did manage to state "we are low on fuel", which means, what?? I also believe this case is one of the reasons we today have fuel emergencies. Or not.

[mudcity]

How about the russki TU154 a couple of weeks ago bringing footie supporters into FAO who declared a priority approach due fuel and then had to get a tug to the apron due to his engines flaming out !!!......we could not believe what we were hearing and seeing !

[Airbus Girl]

I believe the Mayday was declared whilst holding for an approach at ACE. The first alternate weather was somewhere in the region of 300m with very heavy rain. I think the Britannia then did 2 approaches to the runway in use followed by an approach to the opposite runway (with around a 15 knot tailwind), followed by a go-around, followed by a diversion to 1st alternate. They must have landed there because if they managed 3 approaches and go-arounds and a diversion after declaring a mayday due to low on fuel then presumably that was the only choice. Most people bogged off to LPA, where the weather was also rubbish, but the Britannia would have been accepted there with no problems.

The weather was forecast to be rubbish in the whole Canarias area that day.

I haven't yet seen any report, but an ASR at the least must have been filed. As for being praised by the company, it didn't sound like a very heroic action to me; he obviously took minimum legal fuel on a day when the destination and all the alternates were forecasting ****e weather. It must be said that ATC at ACE was also not very helpful, but there were plenty of options for those who had a bit of spare fuel.

However, I don't know all the facts, which is why I would like to know if there is any report out yet.

[beamer]

If the incident in question was at the beginning of the year I remember the day well. I was down to fly to ACE but had a lengthy slot delay from UK due to congestion at destination caused by weather and ramp problems. The forecast as I remember was particuarly dire at ACE and primary diversion FTV. We therefore loaded a shed load of fuel to cover options for all Canaries airfields and extended holding. Upon arrival into Canaries airspace we discovered that weather at FTV was now on limits and aircraft wanted to divert to ACE - this seemed to come as a shock to some aircraft, particuarly from Germany and Holland, who now wanted to divert to ACE - the closest option. Meanwhile we went into the hold at ACE prior to an approach to rw 21 - strong winds (not to mention turbulence and rain) dictated the use of that runway which regular visitors know is a more 'interesting' approach than once round the bay for 03. After 20 mins hold - cleared for approach and crept in on limits and landed safely. Ramp full - handling agents maxed out - no baggage handlers, an age to refuel, though we were lucky enough to get an airbridge. Lots of self-help, cabin crew cleaned aircraft, flight deck helped with baggage - escaped about three hours late with some use of discretion ( a scenario for which it IS intended). Lessons learnt - on days like those - bugger the cost of fuel not used - forget trying to use a calculator to work out the last kg - carry loads and keep options open.

All in a days work - hey ho.......................................

[Parapunter]

As SLF who regularly flies into ACE (once had the pleasure of a jump seat on an AMM 321 in the good old days), I've only ever gone in on 03. So for an approach to 21, how much of a sweat is that? Looking at the terrain, it's pretty hilly coming in that way, so I imagine there's a lot of concentrating to do & turbulence etc to deal with no?

[bundybear]

AIRBUS GIRL,

"As for being praised by the company, it didn't sound like a very heroic action to me; he obviously took minimum legal fuel on a day when the destination and all the alternates were forecasting ****e weather."

But then,

"However, I don't know all the facts,"

A bit too fast to assume for my liking.

I bet you find extra fuel was taken, as we all do down there with crap WX, especially if there is any chance of a southerly. I have held over ACE, waiting for an approach onto 03,with 21 being wind favoured but beneath limits, while turbo props departed off 21.

[kishna]

You can be certain that if the 3 eastern islands are using the southerly runways then something is up with the weather. Generally its nothing more than a dose of the Sahara dust being blown across the water, but this day shows the other 'extreme' of Canaries weather.
The approach the runway 21 is an offset VOR/DME with a slightly steeper slope than 3 degrees. It is made fairly close to the hills on the right hand side. The visual perspective is strange - the land slopes away from the aircraft at a similar angle to the approach. Our Company (after a minor incident) have decreed that this approach is to be flown by Captains only now.
Now that LPA has an ILS on runway 21R it certainly helps with the fuel planning - getting in there on a hazy day with an MDA in excess of 1000' and not too much petrol was always 'interesting'!

[Rads]

<he obviously took minimum legal fuel on a day when the destination and all the alternates were forecasting ****e weather>

Dear Airbus Girl, do you know your flight planning? Required fuel is for one approach, go around and divert to alternate. Therfore the captain had carried more than minimum fuel. Bur surely you would know that.

Prissy comments seem to abound on this site these days.:rolleyes:

[kaikohe76]

I can not make any specific comment on the particular incident in question, as I was not involved at all. The only thing I would say is, obviously not a nice day at all in many respects for the crew, they got the a/c safely on the ground though and that's the time for any discussion if needed.
As I understand it, in theory there is no such thing as a `Fuel Emergency`, there is of course an `Emergency` due to low fuel for whatever reason. I think in many parts of the world, in particular those off the more beaten track, if you say Fuel Emergency or Engine Emergency etc, you may not get much of a helpful response. However by just declaring `EMERGENCY` on it's own, this at least gets the Controller's attention and you can then explain just what the problem or type of Emergency you have.
I know this is a bit of a play on words, but what do the rest of you chaps and ladies feel on this point.
As an aside on the fun of operating onto 21 at ACE, I did this approach three times in our lovely old three engined lady. We did a go around off approah no1, but this helped greatly with nos 2 and 3. Super old girl, she could take 111`000 kgs if the OAT was cool enough and she now resides in happy retirement (front half anyway) in the viewing part at EGCC.

[ManaAdaSystem]

Sorry if I was unclear, I did mean fuel emergency as in an automatic MAYDAY (followed by the reason) when the situation so dictates. MAYDAY rather than, eeeh, we are a bit low on fuel and request priority.
If everything points to a landing with less than final reserve and you don't have any other options, you already have an emergency, IMHO. Why wait for the fuel to reach final reserve?
Not to mention the fact that some aircraft will display a FUEL LOW warning well before final reserve fuel.

[This is a crisis]

kaikohe76 - you are quite right. In the UK we do not recognise the term 'Fuel Emergency' If you want priority for any reason you will be expected to declare a PAN or MAYDAY. If we are not sure what you want then we are required to ask you 'do you wish to declare an emergency?' If you say NO, then things will just carry on as normal

[Zulu]

AIC 82/2003 (Pink 58) (http://www.ais.org.uk/aes/pubs/aip/pdf/aic/4P058.PDF)

Indeed.

8. Pilots should also be aware that although every effort will be made to expedite their arrival, a call such as 'Fuel Emergency' has no status in the UK and ATC cannot give priority to an aircraft with a shortage of fuel unless an emergency is declared.

Also worth noting for UK ops., that even with "No delay expected", this means you can still be holding for up to 20 minutes.

NB: You have to register (free!) to access AIS...but then who wouldn't want to have access to the UK AIP, AICs, NOTAMs, etc...!

[repulo]

Southerly winds down there can really mess up your day. You really need good VIS to ba able to finisch the approaches in FUE and ACE with a legal landing, considering that oply 300 to 400 ft are lost while doing 1 NM, so I decided for myself: southerly winds and VIS lower then 5000 m: fueling to max landing. Also ATC is of no great help due to the lack of radar below 4000 ft. Controllers are so much used to working northerly landings that the situation is getting even worse and bless good we all do have TCAS, since two AC in the same race track happend not only once.

[Airbus Girl]

Rads,

so why did the Britannia declare a Mayday whilst in the hold, due to low on fuel, prior to then commencing 3 approaches, (including one to a shortish very wet runway with a 15 knot tailwind) 3 go-arounds and a diversion (with a bit of holding in between)?

Surely he would have done 1 approach, go-around and a
diversion and been OK? If he had spare fuel, maybe do 2 approaches and go-arounds and a diversion and been OK. Surely you would declare a mayday if you were on or below your legal minimum?

I could understand if he had already done 2 approaches and then declared a mayday due to now being on minimum fuel and diverted. But even then that would have meant he'd arrived with minimum fuel.

As someone mentioned earlier, most people diverted to LPA, which is usually the 2nd alternate and requires quite a bit more fuel than FUE, the 1st alternate.

[Backtrack]

Airbus Girl.

How do you know he made 3 approaches and all AFTER declaring a MAYDAY?

How do you know he only had min fuel?

In your first post you were gracious enough to admit that you didn't have the facts. You still don't & yet you persist in making innuendos as if they are the facts.

It may be a RUMOUR network, but it is also a PROFESSIONAL one. I suggest you start behaving as the latter.

[Vox]

Airbus girl,

I could understand if he had already done 2 approaches and then declared a mayday due to now being on minimum fuel and diverted.

Well done you're getting there :ok:

[cwatters]

I believe the Mayday was declared whilst holding for an approach at ACE.

Was I the only one surprised at this remark.

If things are so bad that you have to declare a Mayday what on earth are you still doing holding?

The only reaon I can think of for not taking matters into your own hands would be if you knew for sure that others ahead of you were in a worse position or that you couldn't land for some other reason like a physically blocked runway. Bad weather counts for little if you have no fuel.

[Not Long Now]

ManaAdaSystem, as far as London is concerned, a priority approach, expeditious approach, bit tight on fuel, someone not too well and all the other slightly wooly things mentioned by pilots mean absolutely nothing as to wether you get a delay or straight in. Unfortunately we are now in the situation where ATC simply HAVE to ask "are you declaring a PAN/MAYDAY?"

Yes, then no worries, striaght in, no delay etc.

No, enter the hold 15 to 20 minutes.

Personally, if the pilot is in any doubt, then the doubt itself should be enough to warrant a PAN.

[Airbus Girl]

I know for a fact that the mayday was declared prior to the 3 approaches and diversion - you should listen to the ATC tapes if you like.
No, the runway was not blocked.
There were others trying to get into ACE that day, but at the time of the mayday call Britannia was no.1 and only 2 other aircraft in the vicinity.
Everyone else had already bogged off to LPA or elsewhere.

No, I don't have all the facts, but I do have these.

I think we can all learn something from this and it will be interesting to read the CAA's comments.

[Vox]

Airbus Girl, read the FSR…oh I forgot you haven’t seen it and you weren’t there.

What you state as fact is only hearsay and speculation on your part…not very clever to try bluffing on a professional forum.

When you finally get into the left seat, I hope you will by then have learnt not to jump to conclusions…you never know, it might prevent you from shutting the wrong engine down someday.:(

[Backtrack]

Airbus Girl,

Ever heard the phrase 'when you're in a hole, stop digging?'

In my earlier post I challenged you to substantiate 2 claims; 1, that the MAYDAY was made prior to carrying out 3 approaches at destination & then a fourth at the alternate & 2, that they only 'obviously had minimum legal fuel' (your words, not mine).

You respond that you know for a fact that your first comment is a true record of the events.

THIS IS NOT EVIDENCE.

I assume from your title that you fly on an Airbus of some kind. It is therefore a reasonable assumption that you don't work for Britannia - apart from a brief flirtation with A300s in the late 80s following the takeover of Orion, Brits have only operated Boeing jets.

Many readers of this post, perhaps even the crew involved, will however work for the airline concerned. As a result, it is most likely that they have read internal company publications and WILL KNOW THE FACTS.

You decline to answer the 2nd point. I wonder why? Has it now dawned on you that to have just min legal fuel, they would probably not have been able to carry out the number & type of approaches you claim they performed AND hold will considering their options?

Your comments are, at best, figments of an over excitable imagination and at worst, outright lies.

The only remark you make that can be taken as FACT is that you have not read any kind of report of the incident.

Backtrack.

[kishna]

Your comments are, at best, figments of an over excitable imagination and at worst, outright lies as appear to be previous posts by him!

[Zippy2004]

This is in brief reply to "Airbus Girl"s comments.

Backtrack was correct when he says that some of the readers on this forum have access to the information about what really happened. I happen to be one of these.

I am not going to list the details because I would not be comfortable doing that when there is an investigation going on. However, I do feel that there is a need to clear things up a little with regard to the allegations being made by "Airbus Girl".

I can say with absolute certainty that nothing Airbus Girl has stated is correct. Airbus Girl may think (she?) has the information but whatever it is that she has is simply not an accurate representation of what actually happened.

Airbus Girl is not credible and should be ignored.

[Bernoulli]

Zippy2004, is the investigation internal or external and in either case once the facts have been established will they be made available to the wider aviation community? As I implied at the outset my interest in all this is to avoid getting into the same situation as this unfortunate crew.

Doubtless there are lessons here for us all and I hope those of us operating to The Canaries regularly will be able to benefit from the inquiry.

ATB.

[Vox]

Bernoulli, it depends on whether your organisation receives a copy of the internal publication, I suspect that you won’t. Similarly we don’t receive publications from other carriers operating in the UK.

If there are lessons to be learned from this incident, then I’m sure the relevant authorities will take steps to disseminate the information at the appropriate time.