Australia, New Zealand & the Pacific Airline and RPT Rumours & News in Australia, enZed and the Pacific

Qantas Fuel Mayday

Old 21st Jul 2022, 01:14
  #21 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Australia/India
Posts: 4,647
Received 17 Likes on 14 Posts
Comedy gold!

Actually, I think you mean "refuse to comply". The operator's insurers and CASA may have something to say about that. (You being an expert on insurance, after all.)
Lead Balloon is online now  
Old 21st Jul 2022, 01:19
  #22 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Aus
Posts: 2,062
Likes: 0
Received 21 Likes on 13 Posts
Whatever you want to call it, refuse to comply or follow the old set of rules, doesn't affect me, although it quite obviously allowed them more freedom in planning in a few situations where we were grounded. It's quite obvious you don't keep up with what goes on at airlines these days, WRT to if you are big enough you do what you want. That's why I will be interested to see what the ATSB comes up with in this case as the amounts seem very thin for the new rules, while still 'safe' it seems very light.
43Inches is online now  
Old 21st Jul 2022, 01:22
  #23 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Australia/India
Posts: 4,647
Received 17 Likes on 14 Posts
We all do whatever we want, 43. Whether what we do is lawful doesn't matter ... until it matters. Big or small.
Lead Balloon is online now  
Old 21st Jul 2022, 01:28
  #24 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Aus
Posts: 2,062
Likes: 0
Received 21 Likes on 13 Posts
There's also a lot of waft in part 121 about operator set minimas and such, which makes a lot of stuff happen behind closed doors. While there are factors to be applied as guided what approach minimas they use are up to the operator and get pretty low if you are using the airport as an alternate, well below what a Jepp plate suggests. It's a minefield for pilots and a lot of theories yet to be tested. In theory I could use Melbourne or Sydney as an alternate with Cat 1 only capable with as low as 450ft ceiling, allowing only 200ft margin, legal, but prudent?
43Inches is online now  
Old 21st Jul 2022, 01:33
  #25 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Australia
Posts: 533
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by itsnotthatbloodyhard View Post
QF domestic flights are all planned with a minimum of 70 minutes over destination, plus whatever dispatch or the crew deem necessary on top of that.
Normally true, but you left out a key phrase, ‘payload permitting’.
BNE-PER on a 737 with good load and a strong HW will definitely make it hard to fit on all the fuel you’d like. You can’t just take off traffic load to put on more fuel, that requires a call upstairs for approval. Yes, you can take more gas but in this circumstance it would have been a little more involved than a usual fuel order.
Beer Baron is offline  
Old 21st Jul 2022, 01:34
  #26 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Australia
Posts: 224
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by itsnotthatbloodyhard View Post

(For joker89, there’s no such thing as declaring a pan for fuel. As morno alludes to, there’s ‘minimum fuel’ and then ‘mayday fuel’. Do we know for sure that ‘minimum fuel’ wasn’t declared?)
copied, I guess the boss could have alluded to as much in the quote. Investigation will be interesting. Expect it to be completed in 2024
Joker89 is offline  
Old 21st Jul 2022, 01:42
  #27 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Somewhere
Posts: 2,898
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Actually, I think you mean "refuse to comply". The operator's insurers and CASA may have something to say about that. (You being an expert on insurance, after all.)
CASA is handing out exemptions to the new rules
neville_nobody is offline  
Old 21st Jul 2022, 01:54
  #28 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Aus
Posts: 2,062
Likes: 0
Received 21 Likes on 13 Posts
Pretty sure a certain operator forced an exemption because they flatly refused to use the new rules, that then opened up a few others to the exemption. But an exemption is what they got, whether it's temporary or whatever who knows.
43Inches is online now  
Old 21st Jul 2022, 02:00
  #29 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: A semi-detached 3x2
Posts: 65
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by Low Pass View Post
Let me guess.....Management pilot trying to show everyone why they should take flight plan fuel?
I reckon that’s a possibility. Perth is the only capital city I operate into and conditions need to be extraordinarily good for me to consider taking less than a tonne extra given the nature of traffic holding recently.
walesregent is offline  
Old 21st Jul 2022, 02:20
  #30 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: Australia
Posts: 148
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
BNE-PER in the winter. Over 5 and a half hours flying time. Last day of school holidays in WA. There would have been no room for more fuel, Management pilot or otherwise.
Chad Gates is offline  
Old 21st Jul 2022, 02:32
  #31 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: The Coal Face
Posts: 996
Received 5 Likes on 2 Posts
Originally Posted by Joker89 View Post
copied, I guess the boss could have alluded to as much in the quote. Investigation will be interesting. Expect it to be completed in 2024
From The Australian -
The ATSB investigation was expected to be completed in the first quarter of 2023.
So you're out by a year, it'll be 2025.
Chronic Snoozer is offline  
Old 21st Jul 2022, 02:55
  #32 (permalink)  
Moderator
 
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: various places .....
Posts: 7,022
Received 38 Likes on 26 Posts
We've all been caught out east coast to PER, back of the clock, in winter. Just one of those realities of life, met and best endeavours with forecasting notwithstanding. Very hard to be perfect when the crystal ball is its usual fogged up self but very nice to have a Plan B up your sleeve.

In the olden days, there were a few management examples of pushing the boundaries which very nearly came to grief. A 727 taxying in at CBR with engines spooling down comes to mind ....

I far preferred having a think about things and, if warranted, putting a bit more on for mum and the kids.
john_tullamarine is offline  
Old 21st Jul 2022, 03:02
  #33 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Above and beyond
Posts: 1,057
Received 22 Likes on 15 Posts
Originally Posted by morno View Post
Isn’t there a “Minimum Fuel” call? So if you declare that, it means you cannot absorb any further delay or you will land with below reserve fuel.

Overseas that was the case anyway. Used it myself once during a diversion and ATC prioritised us over everyone.
Yes, there is a "Minimum fuel" call, but it only means that any further delay MAY result in the aircraft landing with less than the planned final reserve fuel (See ICAO Annex 6 Pt I 4.3.7.2.2). The "Mayday Fuel" call means the aircraft IS PREDICTED to land with less than the planned final reserve fuel. The "Minimum fuel" call is only intended as a heads up and ATC is not obliged to provide priority handling (even overseas). I once declared "Minimum fuel" on descent into Hong Kong. The response was: "So is everyone else."
BuzzBox is online now  
Old 21st Jul 2022, 03:27
  #34 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2013
Location: Weltschmerz-By-The-Sea, Queensland, Australia
Age: 100
Posts: 1,280
Received 11 Likes on 5 Posts
Originally Posted by Chad Gates View Post
BNE-PER in the winter. Over 5 and a half hours flying time. Last day of school holidays in WA. There would have been no room for more fuel, Management pilot or otherwise.
That is sometimes the case, yes. So let me try to weigh up the relative merits of a tech stop compared to a min fuel arrival in PER.
What $ value should I give the headlines and CASA scrutiny do you reckon?
Australopithecus is offline  
Old 21st Jul 2022, 03:51
  #35 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Dark Side of the Moon
Posts: 1,248
Received 28 Likes on 13 Posts
Need to read the report really. With Flightplan fuel they should have arrived with 60 mins. At minimum they should have had the 30min Fixed plus 15mins. With that fuel and a 16 minute dealy ypu could go straight to a Mayday as it would mean ypu have 29 minutes left which is below the legal minimum. On the fave of it they system
worked as designed.
Ollie Onion is offline  
Old 21st Jul 2022, 04:30
  #36 (permalink)  
Gne
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: With the Wizard
Posts: 94
Received 4 Likes on 1 Post
Slightly off topic but related to the general discussion:
1979 at Amberley: (then) WGCDR pilot's taxi call one Sunday morning after a weekend jolly. "Taxi one for Willy POB 2 , Minimum Fuel." Remember it well as I was in the back seat.

Gne

Gne is online now  
Old 21st Jul 2022, 05:29
  #37 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Australia
Posts: 132
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by morno View Post
Isn’t there a “Minimum Fuel” call? So if you declare that, it means you cannot absorb any further delay or you will land with below reserve fuel.

Overseas that was the case anyway. Used it myself once during a diversion and ATC prioritised us over everyone.
Yes, there is a MINIMUM FUEL call but it does not provide any priority. To get additional priority a MAYDAY FUEL call must be made. Every call has a specific meaning that provides a common pathway for consequent actions by the pilot and ATC. Here's the relevant extract from AIP (sorry for the large lettering - that's how it uploaded):


parishiltons is offline  
Old 21st Jul 2022, 06:46
  #38 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2022
Location: tossbagville
Posts: 600
Received 28 Likes on 18 Posts
(You being an expert on insurance, after all.)


Funny bastard
tossbag is offline  
Old 21st Jul 2022, 07:37
  #39 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Above and beyond
Posts: 1,057
Received 22 Likes on 15 Posts
Originally Posted by Lead Balloon View Post
Don't forget: If you're doing circuits and you realise you might land with less than 30 minutes' fuel remaining, you must declare a 'mayday'.
I kindly suggest that if you find yourself in that situation while doing circuits, you should find another hobby.
BuzzBox is online now  
Old 21st Jul 2022, 08:01
  #40 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Australia/India
Posts: 4,647
Received 17 Likes on 14 Posts
CASA is handing out exemptions to the new rules
Of course. I should have remembered that under the new outcomes-based rules from which exemptions would not be required, exemptions are being granted.
Pretty sure a certain operator forced an exemption because they flatly refused to use the new rules, that then opened up a few others to the exemption. But an exemption is what they got, whether it's temporary or whatever who knows.
In which case the new rules are – as they were predicted to be – a farce.
Here's the relevant extract from AIP
Here’s a link to the actual instrument: CASA 29/18 — Civil Aviation (Fuel Requirements) Instrument 2018.
I kindly suggest that if you find yourself in that situation [of having with less than 30 minutes’ fuel remaining] while doing circuits, you should find another hobby.
Please let me try to learn from your wisdom. What safety risk arises from landing with 29 minutes’ fuel remaining after doing a few circuits in a C152?
Lead Balloon is online now  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service - Do Not Sell or Share My Personal Information

Copyright © 2023 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.