PART 121 Alternate requirements OZ
I used to summarize all the requirements as: can you guarantee a safe result, even when something (anything) goes wrong? It's never stated, but that's the basis of IFR ops - no guarantee of getting to your destination, but you have to be sure you always have a safe plan B.
Lighting fails - plan B - can safely go elsewhere. Engine fails - plan B - have performance to go safely somewhere. Weather worse than expected - plan B - have a safe alternate.
The things to consider have changed (very) slightly, but the philosophy is the same. Of course, there are always the unexpected (eg. unforecast fog rolling in everywhere - it happens - doesn't feel good) or multiple unrelated problems. You can't win every game, all the time, but you can make sure the odds are in your favor.
Lighting fails - plan B - can safely go elsewhere. Engine fails - plan B - have performance to go safely somewhere. Weather worse than expected - plan B - have a safe alternate.
The things to consider have changed (very) slightly, but the philosophy is the same. Of course, there are always the unexpected (eg. unforecast fog rolling in everywhere - it happens - doesn't feel good) or multiple unrelated problems. You can't win every game, all the time, but you can make sure the odds are in your favor.
Just as plan A won't "guarantee" a safe result, nor will plan B.
That would explain why CASA and ATSB consider all the TIBA and TRAs and G 'safe' for RPT...
Here's a more general question that interests me- With Part 121 we are now more aligned with OS regulations.
Why then, is it the ABSOLUTE NORM to carry a filed alternate, except in exceptional circumstances, in pretty much every OS country, and the opposite here?
Why then, is it the ABSOLUTE NORM to carry a filed alternate, except in exceptional circumstances, in pretty much every OS country, and the opposite here?
After operating overseas for a while where you always had an alternate, it scares the **** out of me not having the fuel to go somewhere if **** goes down at the destination. Seen it enough times to say that this no alternate bull**** in this country is going to come unstuck in a bad way one day.
Originally Posted by Wizz
Why then, is it the ABSOLUTE NORM to carry a filed alternate, except in exceptional circumstances, in pretty much every OS country, and the opposite here?
After operating overseas for a while where you always had an alternate, it scares the **** out of me not having the fuel to go somewhere if **** goes down at the destination. Seen it enough times to say that this no alternate bull**** in this country is going to come unstuck in a bad way one day.
Nothing stopping you from filing one, even if the regs doesn't require it.
BTW on many occasions I have informed the company the reasons I have carried an alternate when the forecast appeared clear, due to my knowledge of local weather patterns such as fog or low cloud events that met offices can miss. They accept a well reasoned argument and go no further, but carrying an alternate in-case a 172 happens to crash onto a random runway in good weather conditions is not really a factor. These days there is more chance a climate protest group sets up blocking all the runways at Sydney at once for an hour, do you allow fuel for that?
Last edited by 43Inches; 3rd Jul 2023 at 08:55.
Join Date: Dec 2015
Location: Great Britain
Posts: 14
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Personal reserves
All fine until the company asks why you have so many offloads, delayed services and why the other pilots don't. Company fuel policy is what you have to adhere to or face not being a captain. Whilst Captain is a fancy term, its just a form of shop front management, cost the company more than the baseline and face the firing squad. If you don't like the company fuel policy you will have to argue that ahead of time through the company, not do things your own way and hope for the best. Right now things are in the pilots favor, but I've been there when the bar charts come out comparing x pilots tankering vs b pilots and the meetings over 'why' you were carrying how many more tons than pilot c... And yes, this does happen at large airlines.
BTW on many occasions I have informed the company the reasons I have carried an alternate when the forecast appeared clear, due to my knowledge of local weather patterns such as fog or low cloud events that met offices can miss. They accept a well reasoned argument and go no further, but carrying an alternate in-case a 172 happens to crash onto a random runway in good weather conditions is not really a factor. These days there is more chance a climate protest group sets up blocking all the runways at Sydney at once for an hour, do you allow fuel for that?
BTW on many occasions I have informed the company the reasons I have carried an alternate when the forecast appeared clear, due to my knowledge of local weather patterns such as fog or low cloud events that met offices can miss. They accept a well reasoned argument and go no further, but carrying an alternate in-case a 172 happens to crash onto a random runway in good weather conditions is not really a factor. These days there is more chance a climate protest group sets up blocking all the runways at Sydney at once for an hour, do you allow fuel for that?
I know it’s sounds a bit simplistic but having been LHS in high cap for many years both in Australia and overseas; my personal reserve has always been 30 min on top of company/statutory rsv. I know I’m not the only one with this feel good number; when I started out, it was called a drop more for mum and the kids. I’ve always got away with it with no significant off loading except maybe a bit of freight here and there and yes, I am flexible about it too except it’s a number I try achieve on most of my ops.
The Mildura incident proved that even holding an alternate is not 100% guaranteed safety, the same things that could happen at your destination suddenly are just as likely at your alternate. You could divert min fuel from A place due fog, and arrive at B just as a Cessna crashes on the runway, oops should of had an alternate, alternate. Or just fog arrives and nobody tells you about it....
Whilst Captain is a fancy term, its just a form of shop front management, cost the company more than the baseline and face the firing squad.
The following users liked this post:
Tough words, but I'm pretty sure if 'your' fuel policy results in continual offloads and significantly more uplift than 'company' fuel policy you may not hold the fancy title of 'Captain' for very long. 30 minutes or so for 'mum' and well justified uplifts are one thing, being scared of a random very unlikely event and carrying alternates for everything even in CAVOK mild conditions is another. The candidate is employed as a Captain (duties and conditions attached) to act as pilot in command of company aircraft. The title Captain holds you to whatever is written in the company Operations manual as to the disposition of your required duties, PIC responsibilities form part of the duties and requirements. For instance if you have a dispatch service that the operations manual specifies as responsible for fuel uplifts then that is the deal, the PIC can talk with them about what extra fuel they feel is needed, but it will need to be justified.
ADL based?
How often are you limited so you can't toss on a bit of juice without an offload?
'company fuel policy' is the minimum requirement.
How often are you limited so you can't toss on a bit of juice without an offload?
'company fuel policy' is the minimum requirement.
The reason alternates aren’t law in Australia is because the Viscount or similar old machine didn’t have the numbers to make one happen in Australia’s sparse environment, laws were changed to suit by accountants.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Dec 2021
Location: Australia
Posts: 23
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Question
If your destination is forcast below landing minima you need 2x alternates. What weather minima is required for these 2x alternates. Ie. Above landing minima?
i understand if one alternates is above the alternate requirements you only need one. But it doesn't specify for the 2 case.
thanks for your input
If your destination is forcast below landing minima you need 2x alternates. What weather minima is required for these 2x alternates. Ie. Above landing minima?
i understand if one alternates is above the alternate requirements you only need one. But it doesn't specify for the 2 case.
thanks for your input
Depends on what facilities your alternate runway has.
mos 4.11 refers.
seriously, make yourself a flow chart. Use MS excel shapes and colour code the options. Put MOS refs in each box Best days study you can do
mos 4.11 refers.
seriously, make yourself a flow chart. Use MS excel shapes and colour code the options. Put MOS refs in each box Best days study you can do
Question
If your destination is forcast below landing minima you need 2x alternates. What weather minima is required for these 2x alternates. Ie. Above landing minima?
i understand if one alternates is above the alternate requirements you only need one. But it doesn't specify for the 2 case.
thanks for your input
If your destination is forcast below landing minima you need 2x alternates. What weather minima is required for these 2x alternates. Ie. Above landing minima?
i understand if one alternates is above the alternate requirements you only need one. But it doesn't specify for the 2 case.
thanks for your input
