Weather holding fuel
Join Date: May 2002
Location: australia
Posts: 606
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
That being the case, then what is the status of a published SkyFlow delay (read: ground holding) reports we digest and apply to our operations each day? Are they advisory only - we do seem to have to hold enroute even when we do wait out the published delay on the ground at the departure aerodrome, and yet (not that I would ever admit to being guilty of this here.... ) when the SkyFlow delay is "trimmed" a little on the ground by the operating aircrew we don't seem to get the delays (WRT arriving at SY)...?
I had extensive holding delays (40+minutes) about three weeks ago, and watched the Virgin jet get out of Port Macquarie for Sy (flight time 37 minutes) for me to hold. Go figure. Yesterday held a slot for the Pelican flight out of Williamtown and he departed fifteen minutes late.
The operational ATC will attempt to help you out but as we see with ALOFT and RTAs if everybody is not 'playing the game' this will effect the sequence.
CDM training is about to be conducted with the companies. With respect to GIGO, CDM is reliant on up-to-date information being shared by all parties. Not going to help much if the data is flawed, and I would guess during periods of delays through the network, disruptions, aircraft going unserviceable, then the chances of the data being remotely correct I would guess would be pretty low (inverse relationship).
How often do the companies send a delay? Very low percentage I would have thought.
Wednesday must have been a record number of missed approaches for Sydney, including some aircraft going around twice due weather.
And what's more, the RWY 34R LOC won't be fully replaced until this time next year. New AIP SUP to be issued.
How often do the companies send a delay? Very low percentage I would have thought.
Wednesday must have been a record number of missed approaches for Sydney, including some aircraft going around twice due weather.
And what's more, the RWY 34R LOC won't be fully replaced until this time next year. New AIP SUP to be issued.
schlong hauler, unless it's in the standard docs (AIP, MATS, & such) how are we to know anything about SAM? Particularly if it's type/airline specific. Inter means carrying 30 holding & Tempo 60 according to AIP. You'll need to enlighten me where SAM comes from and why I should need to know as a controller.
All that stuff belongs to the long deceased ops & is handled by your company now as far as I'm concerned. As a controller I can only pass on what I'm told about.
Complain to your company & get them to complain to AsA because there's nothing a controller sitting in front of a radar can do about it. Asking me over the air is pretty pointless.
All that stuff belongs to the long deceased ops & is handled by your company now as far as I'm concerned. As a controller I can only pass on what I'm told about.
Complain to your company & get them to complain to AsA because there's nothing a controller sitting in front of a radar can do about it. Asking me over the air is pretty pointless.
For SAM, then try this document, section 4 refers to Airport Weather Briefings.
http://reg.bom.gov.au/general/reg/ash/ASH.pdf
There is additional informaton available on the registered users section of BoM site eg a Graphical airport Briefing Display. If operators, individual pilots and the APP units aren't using this information then access arrangements need to be promulgated.
Airport Weather Briefings (AWB) are provided for some capital city aerodromes and are used by both operators and Air Traffic Services. They are an extension to the TAF
service aimed at expanding on the information provided in the TAF.
service aimed at expanding on the information provided in the TAF.
The Other Possibilities section should include comments on other possibilities that may occur during the validity of the TAF. It can include conditions that have a less than 30% chance of occurring, or if there is an uncertainty as to the timing of an event. Particular attention should be paid to SAM (special alternate minima) conditions, noting that decisive phrases such as “conditions could drop to below SAM” are more useful to the aviation industry than “conditions could drop to SAM”.
There is additional informaton available on the registered users section of BoM site eg a Graphical airport Briefing Display. If operators, individual pilots and the APP units aren't using this information then access arrangements need to be promulgated.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: australia
Posts: 109
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
For your information inter and tempo weather does not necessarily mean 30 or 60 minutes hold. Only if the weather for that period is at or below the alternate minima or in most RPT cases at or below the special alternate minima. I don't expect for a guy in front of a radar to have to worry about this however assumptions about an aircraft's fuel status based on GA type weather analysis is plain wrong.
Special Alternate Minima section can be found in the AIP ENR 1.5 page 31 paragraph 6.2 The aircraft navigation equipment is shown in the ATS data block of the flight plan. Every jet and probably 90% of all turboprops are capable of this basic equipment level. If holding is not promulgated for an airport I can't hold. What if we all did this just using the information supplied and flight plan fuel ordering accordingly. The ASIRs due low fuel status would make a mockery of Mum and the Kids fuel policy. A 20 minute delay in a holding pattern in level flight at 20,000' is 700-800kgs extra in a 737. I am not having a go at any individual but at a system problem. A Lack of understanding and information about such a fundamental subject like fuel and holding expectation for traffic management when we are inundated with notams about cranes miles from a runway is indicative of a department pointing in the wrong direction. GIGO.
Special Alternate Minima section can be found in the AIP ENR 1.5 page 31 paragraph 6.2 The aircraft navigation equipment is shown in the ATS data block of the flight plan. Every jet and probably 90% of all turboprops are capable of this basic equipment level. If holding is not promulgated for an airport I can't hold. What if we all did this just using the information supplied and flight plan fuel ordering accordingly. The ASIRs due low fuel status would make a mockery of Mum and the Kids fuel policy. A 20 minute delay in a holding pattern in level flight at 20,000' is 700-800kgs extra in a 737. I am not having a go at any individual but at a system problem. A Lack of understanding and information about such a fundamental subject like fuel and holding expectation for traffic management when we are inundated with notams about cranes miles from a runway is indicative of a department pointing in the wrong direction. GIGO.
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: nt
Posts: 77
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
SLAM
schlong hauler, unless it's in the standard docs (AIP, MATS, & such) how are we to know anything about SAM?
"special alt min are available for specific approaches at some aerodromes for use by aircraft with dual ILS/VOR approach capability, ie. with duplicated LOC, G/P, marker and VOR recievers blah blah blah".
It says nothing about specific company requirements. So the back of the aerodrome chart for Syd says SLAM is 700' - 2.5km for all categories of aircraft. Therefore if the TTF for syd says Tempo BKN at 1000' and 3000m vis then technically old mate in his kingair (let alone 737/747) with dual ILS equipment is not required to carry the tempo holding fuel.
Do you mean to tell me ATC don't know about this? Or have I missed the point and you guys are talking about something more specific?
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Australia
Age: 62
Posts: 252
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Im afraid (as a pilot) I can't see the relationship between SAM and ATC.
My understanding is they should not be holding us for traffic reasons using our weather holding fuel. i.e. if there is traffic for what ever reason, missed approaches, single runway ops whatever, that fuel should be NOTAMed, or promulgated in the AIP, as traffic holding.
If we are required to hold for weather, or carry out a missed approach due not meeting the required vis etc, that is primarily OUR decision not theirs, and we carry fuel based on weather forecasts.
By rights, and i am not suggesting this is sensible, we can plan to arrive at our destination with Fixed reserve, and variable reserve. (assuming no weather holding) with weather down to SAM.
Lets say we use our variable reserve en route, then we will land with fixed only.
If ATC decide for whatever reason they need to hold us, and that results in us arriving with less than fixed reserve, we make a PAN call and will be afforded priority, as I said I am not suggesting thats a good idea at all, simply my way of highlighting how I believe the requirements fit together.
If we are approaching and have say fuel for a required TEMPO, (lets say TS) and they are in the area ad there is a significant risk they will have an affect on our approach, all we have onboard is fixed reserve and tempo fuel and ATC start holding us, then we need to use airmanship and make a decision. That maybe making a PAN call, that maybe deciding that the TS will move on enabling us to land within the Tempo period and all is well, it may mean a diversion if possible.(This is the type of situation where I personally like to see an old head up front not a low time Captain with a cadet.)
I am not going to be happy having my 60 mins weather fuel eroded in a holding pattern at 60 nm in a holding pattern at FL200 with an ATIS indicating weather near the SAM.
Is that how you guys see it?
Having said all the above if I were flying into Sydney and there were no weather requirements, nut the weather was below the normal alternate minima, I would carry at least 60 mins + whatever traffic holding fuel, and thats the very minimum. More fuel would be considered based on weather at nearby possible alternates, Canberra, Williamtown etc etc.
TEMPO and INTER having little to do with holding fuel. They are simply a time frame for a change in weather. Too many people see Tempo and automatically think 60 mins holding, which is of course rubbish.
My understanding is they should not be holding us for traffic reasons using our weather holding fuel. i.e. if there is traffic for what ever reason, missed approaches, single runway ops whatever, that fuel should be NOTAMed, or promulgated in the AIP, as traffic holding.
If we are required to hold for weather, or carry out a missed approach due not meeting the required vis etc, that is primarily OUR decision not theirs, and we carry fuel based on weather forecasts.
By rights, and i am not suggesting this is sensible, we can plan to arrive at our destination with Fixed reserve, and variable reserve. (assuming no weather holding) with weather down to SAM.
Lets say we use our variable reserve en route, then we will land with fixed only.
If ATC decide for whatever reason they need to hold us, and that results in us arriving with less than fixed reserve, we make a PAN call and will be afforded priority, as I said I am not suggesting thats a good idea at all, simply my way of highlighting how I believe the requirements fit together.
If we are approaching and have say fuel for a required TEMPO, (lets say TS) and they are in the area ad there is a significant risk they will have an affect on our approach, all we have onboard is fixed reserve and tempo fuel and ATC start holding us, then we need to use airmanship and make a decision. That maybe making a PAN call, that maybe deciding that the TS will move on enabling us to land within the Tempo period and all is well, it may mean a diversion if possible.(This is the type of situation where I personally like to see an old head up front not a low time Captain with a cadet.)
I am not going to be happy having my 60 mins weather fuel eroded in a holding pattern at 60 nm in a holding pattern at FL200 with an ATIS indicating weather near the SAM.
Is that how you guys see it?
Having said all the above if I were flying into Sydney and there were no weather requirements, nut the weather was below the normal alternate minima, I would carry at least 60 mins + whatever traffic holding fuel, and thats the very minimum. More fuel would be considered based on weather at nearby possible alternates, Canberra, Williamtown etc etc.
TEMPO and INTER having little to do with holding fuel. They are simply a time frame for a change in weather. Too many people see Tempo and automatically think 60 mins holding, which is of course rubbish.
Last edited by Skynews; 2nd Dec 2010 at 23:39.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: australia
Posts: 109
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
biton and skynews got it in a nut shell. I wonder what assumptions were made in SYD about my fuel status after my G/A off 34R LOC after holding for 60 minutes for TRAFFIC . I bet they were wrong.
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Australia
Age: 62
Posts: 252
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I wonder what assumptions were made in SYD about my fuel status after my G/A off 34R LOC after holding for 60 minutes for TRAFFIC . I bet they were wrong.
At the end of the day ATC don't know whats in our tanks, only we do, so if for some reason its getting doubtful, tell them and they will have to work things out.
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Great Southern Land
Age: 73
Posts: 511
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
biton
Unless I am mistaken, from what I have read here, there may be a few ATC controllers who do not understand SAM and probably don't need to.
Having said that, increasing of holding time by ATC is understandable when they see the weather changing for the worst and a probability of traffic banking up, they will know what the system will handle.
I have to say that in my 12 years of domestic ops, I never diverted or had a PAN due lack of holding fuel.
Unless I am mistaken, from what I have read here, there may be a few ATC controllers who do not understand SAM and probably don't need to.
Having said that, increasing of holding time by ATC is understandable when they see the weather changing for the worst and a probability of traffic banking up, they will know what the system will handle.
I have to say that in my 12 years of domestic ops, I never diverted or had a PAN due lack of holding fuel.
Last edited by Offchocks; 2nd Dec 2010 at 23:41.
SLAMMING SAMMY.....wasn't he a boxer?
"Hold short runway ??" Oh sorry about that I didn't realize it was in the AIP.
We are professionals aren't we?
This has nothing to do with the PIC's command prerogative. Most companies in Australia when testing Australians (or peolple from other places
) for command are pretty thorough in vetting their candidates and provided they have commensurate experience levels nearly all take extra fuel when commonsense dictates.
However; importantly, we make these decisions based on what the 'baseline' fuel requirements are and what we need to add. If the premise of the baseline is wrong because of systemic issues we have a problem. Not regarding common sense the fuel required at Sydney initially was 35 mins ADVISORY holding and FFR (fixed fuel reserve 30 mins) plus an approach (CARs and CAAPs). The instant that ATC can see holding requirements change due traffic they should immediately issue a hazard alert / sigmet / notam etc..
The problem I see here from what I've read is that many of the controllers think we would have TEMPO fuel. We didn't yesterday as it was below alternate criteria but not below SAM. (Note. It is now SAM not SLAM). Why didn't we have TEMPO FUEL? We were at MTOW coming from somewhere over 9 hours away and were issued with an international code grey. There was no requirement to have a TEMPO as it wasn't below the SAM however we took as much fuel as we could get on to the aircraft i.e. fueled to MTOW. If however, it was below the SAM we would have been required to carry the TEMPO i.e. offload freight.
The weather wasn't significant enough to be below the SAM however the traffic requirements would be and an amended traffic requirement should have been issued. Just because it says TEMPO does NOT mean we have it nor are we required to have it. If you know however that you are going to have significant traffic delays (I don't have one of your fancy computers in the cockpit) then duty of care would require you to amend the traffic holding.
I notice some here (chest beaters) will say take more fuel but hopefully I've pointed out that it isn't always that simple. Question to ATC bosses: If all aircraft carried only the minimum legal requirements and you didn't amend the traffic requirements, how do you land 25 aircraft at once declaring a PAN PAN?
We are professionals aren't we?
This has nothing to do with the PIC's command prerogative. Most companies in Australia when testing Australians (or peolple from other places
) for command are pretty thorough in vetting their candidates and provided they have commensurate experience levels nearly all take extra fuel when commonsense dictates.However; importantly, we make these decisions based on what the 'baseline' fuel requirements are and what we need to add. If the premise of the baseline is wrong because of systemic issues we have a problem. Not regarding common sense the fuel required at Sydney initially was 35 mins ADVISORY holding and FFR (fixed fuel reserve 30 mins) plus an approach (CARs and CAAPs). The instant that ATC can see holding requirements change due traffic they should immediately issue a hazard alert / sigmet / notam etc..
The problem I see here from what I've read is that many of the controllers think we would have TEMPO fuel. We didn't yesterday as it was below alternate criteria but not below SAM. (Note. It is now SAM not SLAM). Why didn't we have TEMPO FUEL? We were at MTOW coming from somewhere over 9 hours away and were issued with an international code grey. There was no requirement to have a TEMPO as it wasn't below the SAM however we took as much fuel as we could get on to the aircraft i.e. fueled to MTOW. If however, it was below the SAM we would have been required to carry the TEMPO i.e. offload freight.
The weather wasn't significant enough to be below the SAM however the traffic requirements would be and an amended traffic requirement should have been issued. Just because it says TEMPO does NOT mean we have it nor are we required to have it. If you know however that you are going to have significant traffic delays (I don't have one of your fancy computers in the cockpit) then duty of care would require you to amend the traffic holding.
I notice some here (chest beaters) will say take more fuel but hopefully I've pointed out that it isn't always that simple. Question to ATC bosses: If all aircraft carried only the minimum legal requirements and you didn't amend the traffic requirements, how do you land 25 aircraft at once declaring a PAN PAN?
Join Date: Aug 1999
Location: Well it's an IRS nowdays, but the AHRS were fun.
Posts: 108
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Jeez, flew in Aussie for a couple of years, had a great time but I did find myself saying on many times to upgrade trainee's after they had given the standard spiel, "Its Pilot in Command not ATC in command". Being blinded by the rules is a real aussie problem.
Can someone please tell me what SAM is? TAFs, Metars, ATC holding I understand. We use them worldwide but SAM????
Special Alternate Minima section can be found in the [Australian] AIP ENR 1.5 page 31 paragraph 6.2
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Great Southern Land
Age: 73
Posts: 511
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
billyt
SAM is used by Australian operators and is a special alternate minima expressed as cloud base and visibility, not all airports have the same SAM as it depends on what nav aids are available. If the forcast cloud base and visibility is above that of SAM, you don't need an alternate.
SAM is used by Australian operators and is a special alternate minima expressed as cloud base and visibility, not all airports have the same SAM as it depends on what nav aids are available. If the forcast cloud base and visibility is above that of SAM, you don't need an alternate.
Anything to do with amount of fuel on board = P.I.C problem.
Facilitating any number of a/c to get safely on the deck asap = atc problem.
Facilitating any number of a/c to get safely on the deck asap = atc problem.
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: ɐıןɐɹʇsn∀
Posts: 1,994
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Avianca Flight 52 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Yeah, if I was running short I would probably pipe up...
Yeah, if I was running short I would probably pipe up...
Join Date: May 2001
Location: UAE
Age: 63
Posts: 516
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
good one Tyler!
I'm with Tyler on this...
I'd like a dollar/rial/dirham/euro for every time I have heard pilots complain about lack of fuel and an inability to hold etc...declare an emergency or tell me what your latest divert time to your alternate is...don't tell me that it is unacceptable, that you are "getting low on fuel" or otherwise whine and moan on the frequency.
I'd like a dollar/rial/dirham/euro for every time I have heard pilots complain about lack of fuel and an inability to hold etc...declare an emergency or tell me what your latest divert time to your alternate is...don't tell me that it is unacceptable, that you are "getting low on fuel" or otherwise whine and moan on the frequency.