Easy PAN PAN "Low Fuel" LGW 1/3/15

[VJW]

Just a little note if they're to read this to say job very well done to the lads calm way of dealing with what was an awful 10 minute spell in LGW yesterday evening around 1800z. It was EZY32KL from Basel, or EZY75PR from Prague or both (think is was the former).

I was holding at WILLO when I heard two easy's had just done a go around after one another (might have been a windshear escape manoeuvres). One declared 'min fuel' straight away and asked for wx at STN and LGW..ATC was very good too as you'd expect, although she did keep forgetting to give them the updated wind when they asked for the weather (cloud layer and vis was never going to be a factor to be fair), which was getting on my nerves so must have been getting on theirs. Before long with lots of A/c in and around the area, the EJ declared a PAN in a calm but assertive manner.

I was on a 8 mile final at this point and there was a decent CB 4 miles south of LGW and with the wind at that altitude, it was obviously right over the field on their approach. I was expecting to be taken off the approach to allow the EJ in, and even though I'm loco Irish, I would have suggested the same, however the only path at the time that was clear of the weather for me was the approach path. I in fact did the landing much to the subtle annoyance of my 300 hour FO who was PF, and it was sporty to stay the least even when I landed.

In any case, I fly EJ to my base of work each week, and will continue to do so. Great, professional job by all. :ok:

[Deep and fast]

Maybe a little extra fuel in the back pocket if the conditions were as forecast?

1 go around really shouldn't create a pan (every approach go around minded etc)

No saying they were on fumes, company procedures blah blah blah

[RAT 5]

I in fact did the landing much to the subtle annoyance of my 300 hour FO who was PF, and it was sporty to stay the least even when I landed.

I don't want to distract from the thread, but you have, inadvertently, invited a response. Working for who you say it could well be you also did not have too much extra fuel. Thus a G/A would not be happy event. Heavy windshear days are not the time for a newbie to practice what might have been their first exposure to such an encounter. That's what captains are paid for; one to decide, second to perform when necessary. The newbie should have been grateful to observe & learn. But I do like the confidence to want to have a go.
Well done.

[Deep and fast]

Could be confidence, but also arrogance or ignorance.

Still hours are no cast iron protection from the weather ATC or tech malfunction, just a greater capacity and understanding to deal with it.

You never stop learning and banking what you learn.

[Centaurus]

Could be confidence, but also arrogance or ignorance.

Bloody typical of some these sprog airline copilots nowadays. Your copilot should be kicked up the arse and learn manners. If the captain chooses to offer a copilot a take off or a landing it is not necessarily "his leg." It is the captain's aircraft and the copilot should understand it is a privilege to be offered any handling.
The copilot in this case is clearly arrogant and the training department responsible for his induction and line training should have picked this early in his training and sorted him out. :ugh:

[Capot]

Yes, well, you read a lot into "subtle annoyance"!

What terrifies me, as a passenger on FR next week, is the thought that the FO (aka reserve Captain) has only 300 hours, which is a lot fewer than I've got, and I know my limitations extremely well.

The fact that the Captain felt it necessary to take charge for a landing that was going to be "sporty" illustrates my concern perfectly.

How did we ever get to this point in the industry? I believe, and have always believed that the minimums that we and others applied in the olden days, eg 1500 relevant hours or more for an FO, and even then we had a third pilot until the new FO was deemed capable, were the right ones.

I know, I know, simulators are wonderful, things have changed, bean-counters rule. So why did the OP feel the need to take over? Would it not have been better to monitor the situation with people calling PAN etc, plan what to do if forced into a GA and so on, while the FO flew the aircraft? Only if he had confidence in the FO. And if he didn't have that confidence, why should I?

Ah well, thread drift, just an observation, I can't turn the clock back. But it's a pity the regulators didn't take their responsibilities seriously when robust regulation could have saved the day.

[Lord Spandex Masher]

Could well have been outside YOT's limits.

[macdo]

Awfully glad I don't work for caveman air:=

[haughtney1]

True story.

Recently landing in large ME airport with ex RYR CPT (ex cadet, SFI, TRI) blowing dust, wind outside of F/O limits.
"Sorry Gert (name changed to protect my F/O) I'll have to do the landing"
"But CPT H1 At my old airline I was a etc etc etc,"
"Sorry Gert, I don't make the rules, I know you are very well qualified, but I am compelled to do the landing"
Alllllll the way down the approach he chipped away, until at mins where he went quiet as I landed a 74 mtr 250 tonne tube on the centre line in 30-G40 of xwind.
I asked as we taxied in how much time on the 777 he had and how many landings he'd done. "22hrs and 4 landings"
"That's why I'm the Capt, and you are the F/O, not because you are ANY less capable than me, but because on this type I've got a heck of a lot more experience"
To his credit he understood the point, sometimes the Captain actually has to be the Captain...buggy fluffy CRM or otherwise, and I'm sure when he was a RYR 300hr hero he was also easily disappointed....plus he was Dutch:E

the last point added for comic effect...:E

https://youtube.com/watch?v=QJ882QYzr-M

[Juan Tugoh]

Recently landing in large ME airport with ex RYR CPT (ex cadet, SFI, TRI) blowing dust, wind outside of F/O limits.
"Sorry Gert (name changed to protect my F/O) I'll have to do the landing"
"But CPT H1 At my old airline I was a etc etc etc,"
"Sorry Gert, I don't make the rules, I know you are very well qualified, but I am compelled to do the landing"
Alllllll the way down the approach he chipped away, until at mins where he went quiet as I landed a 74 mtr 250 tonne tube on the centre line in 30-G40 of xwind.
I asked as we taxied in how much time on the 777 he had and how many landings he'd done. "22hrs and 4 landings"
"That's why I'm the Capt, and you are the F/O, not because you are ANY less capable than me, but because on this type I've got a heck of a lot more experience"

Hmm, given this gentleman's "experience and past qualifications" I am amazed at his attitude. The company limits are not to be ignored just because you think you know better. Irrespective of experience etc, if the company mandates a captain's landing under certain weather conditions, then it is a captain's landing.

It does not reflect well on this gentleman's judgement, that he feels he knows better than the rules, just because he used to be blah blah blah. Furthermore with that level of experience on type he should darn well know better. Sounds like a menace in the air

UNLESS, of course, there is another side to the story.....

Mr Angry of Purley

[haughtney1]

Yuan, or Mr AOP...:ok:

No ulterior motive or circumstance, merely a person who in all probability reverted to his previous role in the heat of battle.

[deptrai]

Sully was generous enough to point out he flew the a/c because his FO had more experience on type and hence was more familiar with QRH and engine relight procedures.Or was it that Skiles just recently got his type rating, and therefore knew theQRH better. Sorry for the thread drift, but that's a capable captain. Im impressed with captains who praise their fellow professionals. If you don't, and if you feel you're acting like a TRI, without a safety pilot, maybe you're working for the wrong outfit.

[Juan Tugoh]

Hi Haughtney - surrounding the localizer, I prefer to stalk it using all available cover.:ok:

[VJW]

Wow, strange this has come back to bite me on the bum a bit. Although I did forget you need to explain everything on prune in minute detail before people start getting their knickers in a twist. Here's more info for those trying to make a case against the way I operate.

I got the wx at LGW at 30 mins before arrival and it gave something like 260/14 with 10k F015 etc...so this was way within the limits of the FO I was flying with. When I heard from LGW director to expect a hold, I then got the weather again to see in 30 mins it had changed to give similar wind with 30kt gust 6k vis and WS reported on final. I then heard the easyjet have all his issues, so it was only then I decided to do the landing. We were all keen once don't forget, so lets take it easy on my FO.

I also explained to him after engine shutdown on stand, that that's just the way it goes, he'll have plenty of landings to do in his career. He perfectly understood.

FYI, I landed with +6000kg, my Final Reserve and alternate were 2400kg. As with all flight plans we had a minimum fuel figure.. I took more- so at no time was I in a situation I hadn't planned for or expected 3 hours earlier. Say what you want about me etc, the fact was I had close to 90 minutes hold fuel (which of course I would have allocated a large portion to the minimum 2400kg reserves if I wanted to divert), hope now you all don't accuse me of being inefficient and carrying too much. Won't be receiving a call from anyone about taking extra fuel, never have - never will...my final decision and that's it.

[Hotel Tango]

:ok: I'll fly with you VJW. (Well, I would if I wasn't so anti the Irish loco - purely in the customer sense) ;)

[deptrai]

The urban legends about locos flying on fumes are just that. None of them are suicidal.

[Kimmeros]

Actually CAP 413 1.14 doesn't support a PAN call for fuel.

[Consol]

Good job VJW.

[Consol]

Good job VJW!

[Contact Approach]

Great job VJW!
(From one of those orange lot)

[Mr Angry from Purley]

UNLESS, of course, there is another side to the story.....

Mr Angry of Purley

WTF are you on about I never said a word?? :\

[tubby linton]

Was VJW tankering fuel for the next sector???

[Kimmeros]

Expecting to land below Final Reserve would be a Mayday call. I think it's unlikely the CAA would approve a manual that goes against their own guidance.

[Aluminium shuffler]

Re. post 10, I couldn't agree more. Qualification and behaviour well out of step. I have seen shockingly bad attitudes from some trainers or highly experienced pilots who should know better.

[off watch]

For info, no mention of PAN but .....

Extract from UK CAA CAP493 Manual of Air Traffic Services Part 1:

Fuel Shortage
4.41 Controllers are not required to provide priority to pilots of aircraft that
have indicated or suggested that they are becoming short of fuel
or have used the RTF Phraseology “MINIMUM FUEL”. The term
MINIMUM FUEL indicates that the pilot, having committed to land at a
specific aerodrome, calculates that any change to the existing clearance
to that aerodrome may result in landing with less than the planned final
reserve fuel.

4.42 Controllers shall respond to pilots who indicate or suggest that they
are becoming short of fuel or who have declared “MINIMUM FUEL”
by asking the pilot to confirm whether or not he wishes to declare
an emergency after confirming to the pilot, the estimated delay he
can expect to receive expressed in minutes, if the pilot is en-route
to, is joining, or is established in an airborne hold, or by expressing
the remaining track mileage from touchdown, if the aircraft is being
vectored to an approach.

4.43 Once in possession of either the estimated delay or remaining track
mileage, pilots will determine whether or not they should declare
an emergency. Pilots declaring an emergency will either respond
affirmatively or use the following RTF phraseology “MAYDAY, MAYDAY,
MAYDAY” or “MAYDAY, MAYDAY, MAYDAY FUEL” and controllers shall
provide such aircraft with flight priority category A. The term “MAYDAY MAYDAY MAYDAY FUEL” indicates that the pilot calculates the usable
fuel predicted to be available upon landing at the nearest aerodrome
where a safe landing can be made is less than the planned final reserve
fuel.

[fireflybob]

CAP413 states:-

Pilots shall declare a situation of fuel emergency by broadcasting ‘MAYDAY MAYDAY MAYDAY FUEL’, when the calculated usable fuel predicted to be available upon landing at the nearest aerodrome where a safe landing can be made is less than the planned final reserve fuel.

[Pininstauld]

The company culture (and SOP) at EZY is to take plan fuel unless there are sound operational reasons for doing otherwise.

The PAN call is triggered when the captain calculates that the aircraft "may" land with less than final reserve fuel (i.e. 1.0 to 1.2 tonnes typically).

The MAYDAY call is triggered when the captain calculates that the aircraft "will" land with less than final reserve fuel.

As a skipper I usually found one or other "sound operational reason" to justify having something in hand over plan fuel. The company wouldn't have agreed with my reasoning but I always thought it better to land at the planned destination, and still be able to reach the alternate legally, following an unexpected go-around. Minimum fuel might be OK but only provided that everything in the OFP has been calculated correctly - sadly I found this wasn't always the case.

There were at least 2 "landing below-final reserve" incidents while I was there, but I never saw any change of policy so presumably the bean counters still think they've got the right balance between cost and safety.

Above my pay grade to comment on that.

[Del Prado]

ATC was very good too as you'd expect, although she did keep forgetting to give them the updated wind when they asked for the weather (cloud layer and vis was never going to be a factor to be fair), which was getting on my nerves so must have been getting on theirs.

If you need a wind check just ask, don't let it get on your nerves. :\

[VJW]

Kimmeros you are quite correct. Minimum Fuel call if you are committed to an airport (i.e. no longer have alternate fuel to go anywhere else), and MAYDAY if you anticipate using Final Reserves. Our last recurrent had an exercise with exactly that situation. The lack of priority for the Easy yesterday only confirmed that to me. He was given no4 to land with no delay expected after his PAN. PAN was officially not the correct call, he declared Minimum fuel and then with that clearance from ATC, both he and ATC should know that any further delay might cause him to declare a MAYDAY. Problem with yesterday though was it wasn't due to no contact at minimums, it was due to windshear, so there was no real guarantee second time round would work either other then he did ask quite rightly if anyone else behind him had no landed to which the answer was yes. While I believe MAYDAY might be something we all really try to avoid saying, I most likely would have gone from Minimum fuel to MAYDAY in the same time he went from Minimum Fuel to PANPAN.

While I'm not sure what their planning consisted of, I can say that once in that situation they handled it as calmly as they could, and were extremely professional sounding over the freq. :D

[VJW]

Del Prado - come on mate. You just did a windshear escape manoeuvre, you declare a PAN (rightly or wrongly) and you ask for the weather and ATC gives you everything but the wind? Really?? You want them to have to make another transmission for a wind check? The did of course, but still...

[VJW]

tubby linton VJW was the Captain of a flight and landed with that much fuel, simple as that, I didn't get lucky.

[VJW]

Just found the METAR from yesterday, confirming what I said earlier about being ok one minute and significantly different 30 mins later, remembering WS was reported at 1750 on the ATIS.

EGKK 01/1720 220/15 6000 BKN020 9/6 Q0998
EGKK 01/1750 220/19G40 1800 +RA SCT012 BKN016 8/6 Q0998

[fireflybob]

FT 01/03/2015 11:02->
TAF EGKK 011102Z 0112/0218 25014KT 9999 SCT030
TEMPO 0114/0119 26018G28KT 6000 SHRA
PROB30 TEMPO 0115/0118 26026G40KT 3000 +SHRAGS BKN013CB
BECMG 0206/0209 28018G28KT
PROB40 TEMPO 0207/0210 4000 SHRASN BKN010
BECMG 0216/0218 25012KT=

01/03/2015 11:01->
TAF EGSS 011101Z 0112/0218 25015KT 9999 SCT030
TEMPO 0112/0120 26018G28KT
TEMPO 0114/0120 6000 SHRA
PROB40 TEMPO 0116/0118 25025G38KT 2000 +SHRAGS BKN014CB
PROB30
TEMPO 0201/0204 3500 SHRASN BKN012
BECMG 0208/0211 27020G30KT
PROB30 TEMPO 0208/0211 2000 SHRASN BKN007
BECMG 0215/0218 24012KT=



FT 01/03/2015 11:01->
TAF EGGW 011101Z 0112/0212 24017KT 9999 SCT030
TEMPO 0112/0121 25020G30KT
TEMPO 0113/0119 6000 SHRA
PROB40 TEMPO 0115/0118 25026G40KT 2000 +SHRAGS BKN012CB
PROB30
TEMPO 0200/0203 3000 SHRASN BKN009
BECMG 0208/0211 27020G30KT
PROB30 TEMPO 0208/0211 2000 SHRASN -SHSN BKN006=


A PROB30/40 of sporty weather at destination and alternate would get my attention for loading some extra fuel bearing in mind that TEMPO is a change of up to one hour.

[VJW]

Now it becomes obvious why I landed with +6000kg, and hopefully my post previous vindicates my initial decision to let the FO land and then subsequently change my mind.

I don't care who you work for, surely the above constitutes loading a couple kg more then minimum plog?! :)

[ESQU]

A lot of Ops Manuals allow 'PROB x TEMPOs' of sporty weather or improvements to be disregarded. Whether that's sensible is probably down to experience.

[Tom!]

As I often say to FO's during the planning stage: "It's not because it's legal, it is a good idea."

[fireflybob]

It's a brave pilot who departs with plog fuel when both destination and alternate(s) are showing PROB 30/40 limiting weather.

Big difference between doing "things right" (aka management) and doing "the right thing" (aka leadership).

Also another factor is when destination and alternates lie along the forecast line of a frontal system or trough.