No Alternate IFR fuel

[Mach trim]

Now we are getting with fuel prices minumum fuel.


If you were to go CDG with good weather.cavok taf, originally holding LFPO as an alternate and had to hold for a while, then you decide to go no alternate ifr.

Would you do no alternate into Barcelona, Madrid because there is the ATC (possible holiding ) factor at these airports

Say you are in a 320 or if not how long in time in your a/c ?

What's your company policy on minumum fuel no alternate ?

Yes two independant runways,etc.

Due to traffic of hold too long how much fuel could you go down to before declaring a fuel emergency Mayday ?

You commit to the airport and then have to do a go around

Yeah dont like it but to avoid diverting to an alternate.

[411A]

Our outfit don't 'commit' to anything.
We carry alternate fuel for the most distant suitable alternate, without exception.

Dispatch without alternate?
Foolish in the extreme.

[Denti]

During the planning stage "commitment" is not a factor as it is not allowed, it can become so inflight. However whenever you may get into the situation where you have to use final reserve its an automatic PAN-PAN and when you surely have to use final reserve its a MAYDAY.

We are allowed to use commtiment to stay, however personally i have never done it and dont plan to do so if i can help it.

[FatFlyer]

JAR regulations permit despatch without fuel for alternate provided 2 non intersecting runways, good weather and fifteen minutes extra manouvering fuel at destination.
Have done this a few times (mainly with training captains) though not really felt comfortable with it.

[Mach trim]

You dispatch with alternate fuel but if you hold long enough you have to commit to alternate fuel.

If you were to get close to minimum fuel once committing to No alternate

Lets say Final Reserve plus fuel for a go around 600 kgs and 1200 kgs final reserve ( 30 minutes ) thats 1800 kgs

If you had to not wanting to be in that place at all., as a scenerio

You would declare prior to in the event of missed approach Fuel Mayday as you would be in danger of going into final reserve then ?

[ricky-godf]

As FatFlyer already mentioned, you are allowed by JAR-OPS to dispatch with no alternate fuel if certain conditions are met.

However, in my short two-year experience as a pilot, I've seen more airports closing due to terrorist alert (Scotland last year) or RFF category falling below the minimum for commercial operations (one aeroplane had a tailpipe fire, most fire fighters went to help.... airport closed for about 30 minutes), rather than weather.

JAR-OPS only takes into account weather or runway closure... but I would not personally rule out the others factors that might close an airport.

If this happens in Madrid while you are descending thorught 10000 ft you've got nowhere to go.

Just my personal opinion

Ricky

[PantLoad]

It's legal, in some cases, but not smart.

In my case, my company's SOP requires that we slect a proper alternate and carry fuel for this alternate for all flights.

Now, the practical side of this is....if you don't require an alternate under FAA/JAA...but your company SOPs require it...AND...you have everything going for you...you might consider reducing contingency fuel, extra fuel...things like that.

But, again, it's not a good idea be without an exit strategy...you never know what might turn up.


Fly Safe,

PantLoad

[Wizofoz]

Comes down to which rules you fly under. In Australia you only have to carry an alternate if the weather at your destination is below certain criteria (known as alternate minima).

Flew 737s to single runway airports without any requirement for fuel to go elsewhere for years, and it still happens down there today.

[compressor stall]

Exactly Wiz. Happens in Oz all the time. It causes the odd problem as well, mainly in Perth with unforecast fog.

I suspect that this is still allowed due to 1. the relatively low traffic density in the areas where it's an issue (PER, DWN, ASP, BRM) and 2. the geography. Holding an alternate for PER is the same as holding Oslo as an alternate for Manchester....

It's partly mitigated by the fact that we have compulsory holding fuel for temps and inters which as I understand the JAA does not.

[BarbiesBoyfriend]

I went to Warsaw last Friday.

Nothing to trouble you on the wx.

Took 300kg extra anyway.

Got there with just enough to divert (to some dump 150nm away).

wx was horrid. Giant TS near the airfield.

Had to disobey ATC instructions and 'vector myself' to avoid scaring myself and pax or getting 'hit'.

Was the last to get in before airfield shut due wx.

Had WS on final but landed anyway.

Will I take less or more next time?:mad:

[john_tullamarine]

Holding an alternate for PER is the same as holding Oslo as an alternate for Manchester

.. unless you were flying Electras .. in which case NZ for PER was an option ... :}

[lederhosen]

We always plan to arrive with alternate fuel plus final reserve and with the following proviso:

When proceeding to the destination, the alternate fuel may be used provided that:
a) Two separate runways are available and useable at the destination. Runways on the same aerodrome are considered to be separate runways when:
· They are separate landing runways which may overlay or cross such that if one of the runways is blocked, it will not prevent the planned type of operations on the other runway;
and
· Each of the landing runways have a separate approach procedure based on a separate aid.
b) The appropriate weather reports for the destination aerodromes fulfil the requirements of JAR OPS 1.297.
c) The remaining fuel after landing is not less than the Final Reserve Fuel.

Note: If the Commander decides to continue the flight to the destination aerodrome without observing the provisions given above, an irregularity report has to be completed and sent to the Flight Operations Department that will forward it to the respective Authority.

Pretty clear and that is what we do.

[42south]

In NZ we can carry a min of 60mins fuel to a destination, which includes the instrument app fuel, provided. The weather forecast at destination is above 1000ft over the inst app minima and the vis is 5km or greater, and the destination has 2 parallel runways.
Should we be forced into landing with less than 30 minutes fuel remaining, then an emergency must be declared.
THe policy works OK, but does require an increased vigilance by the crew. However most places we go to have somewhere on the way that we could duck into for more fuel if required.

[GlueBall]

JAR regulations permit despatch without fuel for alternate provided 2 non intersecting runways, good weather and fifteen minutes extra manouvering fuel at destination

Just so that I understand this correctly, FatFlyer: You're going to "save fuel" and do HKG-LHR without alternate fuel because you completely trust the forecast LHR weather to be just as advertised 14+ hours later, eh? :ooh:

[crewcostundercontrol]

EZY crews plan as standard if the following conditions are met:

1. less than 6 hours flight time.
2. 2 runways with their own apps on their own nav aids
3. 5000m vis 2000ft base
4. blablabla
5.15 min extra fuel

So when going to AMS/CDG/MAD/ why would you ever need to divert under CAVOK conditions?

Why not save the fuel?

Have you ever heard of anyone on a DIV from AMS to RHD?? 6 runways not a problem.

Its standard at many EZY bases to plan the fuel for the day based on the above No ALT Fuel reduction method. So min fuel on landing would be about 1500kg or about 1800kg if you did not burn your cont.

What many guys do is actualy not go that close to the wire, for example if your Final + Div came to about 2300 but planning with NO Alt gave you 1800 then you might elect to plan to land with 2000Kg to have a bit more fat in the system.

Crews know the ruels and have had the training and support from the comany and if extra fuel is required then it is taken with no questions.

No Alt Fuel planning is done by many crews on a daily basis and we dont run out of fuel! (YET);)

[Tight Slot]

Quote M. Fish Oct '87 I think "Don't worry, there is no hurricane on its way..." hmmm, got to love the Met. Me thinks if you only load up the fuel for dest plus some holding then fine, untill, yep its going to happen, the brown smelly stuff is gonna hit the fan.

[ford cortina]

Went to CDG this morning, 738 FL380, was optimum. We took 11T fuel, the plo gave us 10,200. Had enough to divert to EBBR, if needs be, Should'nt though as both of us and the plane are CAT III A . Saved the company a few quid as it was a tankering flight, just. Had the usual 400 and 1200 reserves. Landed with 4050 (ish) plog would have been 3400

[lederhosen]

This debate keeps on repeating itself in various threads. But it is an important subject so can you clarify a couple of points for me crewcostundercontrol?

What is meant by item 4 blablabla and are these airbus figures?

For the 737 we use 40kg per min which is 1200kg final reserve and 15 minutes additional is therefore 600kg. This gives a minimum of 1800kg, which is pretty similar to diversion fuel for most of our german destinations.


For your flights to Berlin SXF, single runway at the moment, obviously you will need an alternate. If you land with less than alternate plus final reserve fuel the german LBA requires notification in this case as per Rundschreiben 1/2007, which I am sure you are dutifully providing. Must be a lot of paperwork!

[flywestjetcr]

At Westjet, we are using No Alternate all the time with no real increase in risk. Our company SOP's dictate that our minimum fuel is 5000 lbs at destination. 3200 lbs for the legal requirement then the remaining 1800lbs is for unforseen circumstances in a No Alt environment. I have seen IFR alternate fuels that calculate less than 5000lbs. However, we always carry the min of 5000. When I accept a No Alternate plan, I usually check the airports nearby that I know I can get to if required. No Alternate is not a problem.

[Sky Wave]

lederhosen

Surely your fuel burn changes with aircraft weight?

We just half the PLOG final reserve figure to get a fuel figure for 15 minutes holding.

First I've heard of a requirment to land at SXF with ALT + FINAL RESERVE.
Do you have a link for a reference? I've tried searching the LBA site and German AIP but I've had no luck.

Cheers

SW

[crewcostundercontrol]

lederhosen

A319 Final Res aprox 990KG
A319 15 min extra = 50% of the above.

So Min landing fuel if you use your cont fuel would be aprox 1500Kg and if cont was 200-300 then you would expect to land with 1800Kg

As I said this done on a daily basis within EZY with no problems.

Its those who don't understand the rules SOP's, inflight replanning rules and actions and those with little common sense that cause the problems!

If it was my jet I would fill the wings and put the trip in the centre, but as our company is fighting for survival then I am happy to do whatever I can to help the situation.

[Mark in CA]

The pilots union for US Airways made a big stink here yesterday about this issue, saying the airline is pressuring pilots to reduce fuel reserves below what they claim is safe. They even took out a full-page advert in USA Today (a national paper) trying to scare passengers, I guess. Sounds more like politics and bargaining strategy, though, than a real safety issue.

The Associated Press: US Airways pilots: We're pressured to cut fuel (http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5hoejPS6Z25DH3KGbRFbBcU4_lnuAD91V7BQ00)

[lederhosen]

Thanks for the reply crewcostundercontrol, I am impressed that the minibus is so economical.

Sky Wave I have tried to find a way of linking our letter from the LBA received at the end of 2007 and posted on our intranet. But my IT skills are not up to it. The key paragraph says:

Entscheidet sich der Kommandant in Ausnahmefällen aus Gründen der Flugsicherheit dennoch für eine Landung am Bestimmungsflugplatz, ohne dass die unter Punkten 4. bzw.5 genannten Voraussetzungen vorliegen, so hat er hierüber den Luftfahrtunternehmen zur Weitergabe an die Aufsichtsbehörde ausführlich zu berichten.

In summary if you eat into alternate fuel continuing to an airfield with only one runway, such as Berlin SXF then you must report it to your company who must report it to the LBA.

It is pretty clear. As easy has a pretty big operation in SXF I am surprised this has not been flagged. I would be careful unless you want to experience german bureaucracy first hand!

[Sky Wave]

Is this just something that the LBA has imposed upon German registered operators? I would assume that we would have been told about it if it concerns us.

[punkalouver]

No Alternate is not a problem.

It's a problem if a bunch of unforecast thunderstorms pop up or the fog rolls in or if you have a malfunction that requires an extended period of time to deal with or your fuel guages turn out to be innacurate.

[lederhosen]

Sky Wave I cannot answer that question. But I think it unlikely that the LBA would be happy if it knew. Why don't you ask your management to find out? Tell them to ask for Referatsleiter Flugbetrieb 004953123550 in Braunschweig.

Summarising what others have posted, Westjet use 5000 pounds minimum divided by 2.2 is 2272 kg for the 737, just under one hour. 42south says they carry 60 minutes fuel in New Zealand. In Germany my company does not allow planning without an alternate and we are required to arrive with alternate plus final reserve unless the conditions I listed earlier are met, absolute minimum 1800kg.

Easy and possibly others seem to be planning with less, which is a significant competitive advantage if it is allowed.

[crewcostundercontrol]

Punk...

That is why you carry 15min extra fuel. The idea is you commit to destination before you leave! so at destination you should have just under an hours fuel, penty to sort any problem out and land at a big airport with 6 runways!! not a big deal it's just mindset. If you like you are diverting to your destination..........

The what ifs are dealt with before you leave like weather and airport equipment. And if you are not sure or don't fancy it then it's simple you carry Alt fuel.

As I said our company is fighting for survival and if knowing how to operate well helps reduce costs then it's fine by me.

[Denti]

Same here, commitment to stay is not allowed in the planning stage at all so we allways have to carry alternate fuel except for the isolated aerodrome case (in which case 2 hours of final reserve fuel is needed). German JAR rules as well, and yes JAR is not the same in each country, there are quite a few differences until EASA takes over.

We can use commitment however if enroute under certain conditions (2 separate runways with separate instrument approaches, suitable weather, current and forecast), however that is only a tool if yo drop below alternate fuel enroute with good enough weather and you have 2 separate runways at the destination. It is not allowed to use during the planning stage.

[Denti]

Divert to any enroute alternate where i can still be within the requirements. If that is not possible i have to declare a PAN PAN for low fuel and act accordingly.

Never had that except in the simulator so far, quite the contrary we usually land with around 500 to 1000gk above planned remaining due to shortcuts enroute. We use for planning longest departure and arrival including any relevant transition procedures so our flown route is usually shorter than the planned one, domestic by up to 100NM.

[flywestjetcr]

Punkalouver,

then I guess I better stop flying because there are a whole world of "what if's" that can happen. No Alternate is safe. It's up to you to decide whether or not the flight plan can be carried out under No Alt. There was a small period of time when our SOP's did not require the min fuel of 5000lbs and so theoretically Dispatch could min us to 3200lbs. I remember watching a Captain here get all tied up in a knot because the DXP had given him 5000lbs and No Alt. The DX'er said, "O.K., I'll give you an Alternate" and provided him one that only required 4800LBS. Hmmmm.....

As professional pilots, we have a responsibility towards Safety. That is first and foremost. We also have a responsibility towards the economic operation of our companies that cannot be ignored.