QR fuel policy
Thread Starter
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Earth
Posts: 309
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
QR fuel policy
First of all, please don't let this become a Qatar bashing thread. My question and story is in no way intended to offend anybody working for Qatar or the crew involved. If anybody feels offended than I will happily remove the thread.
Last week while we were parked on the apron at Male (VRMM) airport we were a bit suprised by the actions of an inbound Qatar A320.
First of all Male has no radar and relies on procedures to be followed.
During the initial approach the QR flight was informed that he was number three in sequence and given an EAT. Both aircraft ahead were slower turboprop aircraft. QR was instructed to take up the RAXON hold till its EAT.
When entering the hold the (sounded like) Captain came on frequency and told ATC in a very condecending manner that he couldn't stay in the hold till his EAT because he had not enough fuel.
The discussion continued for a little while before the Captain? got angry at the controller and asked to speak to his manager. Just after this another QR (flying overhead) came on frequency and asked the QR flight if he had taken some extra fuel or just had minimum fuel loaded. The guy replied that he departed with mionimum fuel. And had to make an approach now or otherwise he would have to divert.
The number 2 in sequence gave up is position in the landing sequence to let the QR flight land.
Can somebody please tell me what the fuel policy is at QR? Is it normal policy to depart with minimum fuel or do they give the captain a bit of flexibility? And how is this minimum fuel calculated? It seems a bit strange to depart to an island in the middle on nowhere with the closest diversion an hours flying time away. Add to this that at times the time spend in the hold can be rather long.
thanks.
Last week while we were parked on the apron at Male (VRMM) airport we were a bit suprised by the actions of an inbound Qatar A320.
First of all Male has no radar and relies on procedures to be followed.
During the initial approach the QR flight was informed that he was number three in sequence and given an EAT. Both aircraft ahead were slower turboprop aircraft. QR was instructed to take up the RAXON hold till its EAT.
When entering the hold the (sounded like) Captain came on frequency and told ATC in a very condecending manner that he couldn't stay in the hold till his EAT because he had not enough fuel.
The discussion continued for a little while before the Captain? got angry at the controller and asked to speak to his manager. Just after this another QR (flying overhead) came on frequency and asked the QR flight if he had taken some extra fuel or just had minimum fuel loaded. The guy replied that he departed with mionimum fuel. And had to make an approach now or otherwise he would have to divert.
The number 2 in sequence gave up is position in the landing sequence to let the QR flight land.
Can somebody please tell me what the fuel policy is at QR? Is it normal policy to depart with minimum fuel or do they give the captain a bit of flexibility? And how is this minimum fuel calculated? It seems a bit strange to depart to an island in the middle on nowhere with the closest diversion an hours flying time away. Add to this that at times the time spend in the hold can be rather long.
thanks.
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Dohacity
Posts: 372
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
This is a very tricky issue at QR.
There is a policy whereby dispatch will give you a certain amount of flight plan fuel. This is based on statistics and usually is sufficient they say.
In case the crew wants to add extra fuel, the captain of the flight has to discuss this with dispatch! In case extra fuel is uplifted, a raport has to be issued explaining why...
Myself I dont give a damn about this policy, but many of the newer colleagues follow this policy blindly!
With scenarios like this one as a result!
A very professional 5 star airline, isnt it?
There is a policy whereby dispatch will give you a certain amount of flight plan fuel. This is based on statistics and usually is sufficient they say.
In case the crew wants to add extra fuel, the captain of the flight has to discuss this with dispatch! In case extra fuel is uplifted, a raport has to be issued explaining why...
Myself I dont give a damn about this policy, but many of the newer colleagues follow this policy blindly!
With scenarios like this one as a result!
A very professional 5 star airline, isnt it?
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: on the rocks
Posts: 111
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
CEJM, can't tell for sure what happened, you'd be better off asking the Cpt. of that flight. By the way, why didn't you do it?
In general, to my knowledge, there's no problem to stay and consume some of the alternate fuel (VCBI if I'm not mistaken) provided weather minima is fulfilled. Commander is the final authority however and perhaps he did have a sound reason to act the way he did.
Don't take it personally take it on the rocks!!!
In general, to my knowledge, there's no problem to stay and consume some of the alternate fuel (VCBI if I'm not mistaken) provided weather minima is fulfilled. Commander is the final authority however and perhaps he did have a sound reason to act the way he did.
Don't take it personally take it on the rocks!!!
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Middle East
Posts: 806
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Interesting post. Also interesting to note that VRMM approach gets so busy, with 3 aircraft lined up. Is that a regular occurrence at Male? Any time I have been there, we have been the only aircraft on the ramp, from arrival to departure. I have never seen another aircraft there. I guess ít's very much a seasonal airport??
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: FERTILE CRESCENT
Posts: 45
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
A colleague told me if the exxtra fuel taken is justified!! N0 action taken!!!!otherwise is brought to the Attention of someone
It's all to do with a few bad apples screwing it for the rest by talking unreasonable uplifts (4tons plus)
It's all to do with a few bad apples screwing it for the rest by talking unreasonable uplifts (4tons plus)
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: middleast
Posts: 1,236
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
...interesting....if i knew Exactly whatīs gone happens during my flight (but i don't have a Crystal ball...), than yes i may take minimum or what ever i need exactly...but without crystal ball..why should i put unecessary pressure on myself by taking minimum fuel and just hoping that everything will be according my flight plan during the flight....
As far as i known Fuel is one of the few (if not the only )think that will keep me in the air!!
Unfortunatly we still have some colleagues scared to take extra fuel..yes scared.......
But on the other hand and to be fully honest, if.. it was a A-320 on such a "long "flight expecially if you are at MZFW...you wonīt be able to carry that much extra fuel due to your MTOW or MLDW limitation...
As far as i known Fuel is one of the few (if not the only )think that will keep me in the air!!
Unfortunatly we still have some colleagues scared to take extra fuel..yes scared.......
But on the other hand and to be fully honest, if.. it was a A-320 on such a "long "flight expecially if you are at MZFW...you wonīt be able to carry that much extra fuel due to your MTOW or MLDW limitation...
Last edited by loc22550; 14th Mar 2008 at 15:53.
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: evicted
Posts: 339
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
VRMM approach gets so busy, with 3 aircraft lined up. Is that a regular occurrence at Male?
Adjacent to RWY 36 is one of the world's busiest floatplane harbours. Nearest alternate VCBI an hour away.
It would have to be a ver good reason not to take additional fuel.
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: on the rocks
Posts: 111
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
During the initial approach the QR flight was informed that he was number three in sequence and given an EAT. Both aircraft ahead were slower turboprop aircraft. QR was instructed to take up the RAXON hold till its EAT.
As for departing with OFP fuel, that's quite an industry standard with most majors meanwhile, of course PIC can always override. However doing so one must be certain of actions in case of.....that of course implies good knowledge of the routes flown and procedures. That's the Achilles heel of QR not necessarily applicable to that particular flight. Enthusiasm and corporate identification won't and can't be enforced, it's something very carefully cultivated throughout decades of fruitful collaboration. This is where the most money can be saved. Think about it.
Don't take it personally take it on the rocks!!!
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: In the State of Perpetual Confusion
Posts: 185
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It's all to do with a few bad apples screwing it for the rest by talking unreasonable uplifts (4tons plus)
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: middleast
Posts: 1,236
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Quote""i donīt see any reason NOT to stay at destination and burn the ALT fuel......???????""
Really well i hope the preceeding traffic will not crash on the runway, because then you can just prepare your swim suit as well as the ditching procedure
.
The only case you can burn your ALT fuel(normal circumstance) in Q.A when you have only one runway at DEST (like VRMM) is when you have an ALT within 30' +..wx......donīt think itīs the case for VRMM??
Or maybe i missed something...
Really well i hope the preceeding traffic will not crash on the runway, because then you can just prepare your swim suit as well as the ditching procedure
.The only case you can burn your ALT fuel(normal circumstance) in Q.A when you have only one runway at DEST (like VRMM) is when you have an ALT within 30' +..wx......donīt think itīs the case for VRMM??
Or maybe i missed something...
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: on the rocks
Posts: 111
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
in flight fuel policy
You're absolutely right loc. That's exactly the point I object in QR's in flight fuel policy. One can land with only final reserve anywhere but at destination most needed one. That of course makes lots of sense does it? QR's in flight fuel policy is a tailored solution making it very difficult to conduct a proper in flight fuel management enabling commercially preferable solution without compromising safety, of course. PIC is pretty much bounded by all the restrictions, mentioned by you, whereas it's not what JAR OPS says. That's the whole point mate, JAR gives the PIC all the freedom to decide what to do and where to proceed having final reserve left upon touch down only. QR doesn't trust their captains to make this decision thus all those restrictions unnecessary putting lots of pressure on the PIC. That's what I said before OFP fuel isn't a problem, unless NOTAMS WEATHER OR OPS REASONS dictate otherwise, provided PIC has the freedom to manage. NOT IN QR I'M AFRAID.
Don't take it personally take it on the rocks!!!
Don't take it personally take it on the rocks!!!
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: on the rocks
Posts: 111
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Just to show how inconsistent the in flight fuel policy is:
Diversion to VCBI does it really make sense? After one hour flight and burning diversion fuel to find yourself in the same situation like in Male? One RWY again but with only 30 min left. Well, of course, one can speculate about possible crashes on the runway etc yet there's no guaranty for anything.
You think two RWY are gonna save your life? Remember crash of BA 777 in LHR, do you? LHR got shut down completely despite two RWY being in full swing. It's always a risky decision my friend.
Don't take it personally take it on the rocks!!!
Diversion to VCBI does it really make sense? After one hour flight and burning diversion fuel to find yourself in the same situation like in Male? One RWY again but with only 30 min left. Well, of course, one can speculate about possible crashes on the runway etc yet there's no guaranty for anything.
You think two RWY are gonna save your life? Remember crash of BA 777 in LHR, do you? LHR got shut down completely despite two RWY being in full swing. It's always a risky decision my friend.
Don't take it personally take it on the rocks!!!
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Sandpit
Posts: 361
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Fuel is not a safety item
The captain is. Sometimes it takes 0 and sometimes 4t or even 8t. Anyone long enough in aviation knows that. I personally would give a crap towards such policy, if I need more fuel I will take it and I would not have a problem to explain it. Certainly Male is busy at times and that is just a fact, if you did not take the fuel you are in a tight corner, and even more so after a diversion in Colombo. The PAX and certainly the company will not thank you for your screwed up decision. 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: on the rocks
Posts: 111
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It's good that subject has been brought up. Just to wrap up the sandwich.
In-flight fuel management as per JAR OPS.
The commander shall ensure that the amount of usable fuel remaining in flight is not less than the fuel required to proceed to an aerodrome where a safe landing can be made, with final reserve fuel remaining.
If, as a result of an in-flight fuel check, the expected fuel remaining on arrival at the destination is less than the required alternate fuel plus final reserve fuel, the Commander must take into account the traffic and the operational conditions prevailing at the destination aerodrome, along the diversion route to an alternate aerodrome and at the destination alternate aerodrome, when deciding whether to proceed to the destination aerodrome or to divert, so as to land with not less than final reserve fuel.
Good luck to QR with barrel hitting 110 $ US.
Don't take it personally take it on the rocks!!!
In-flight fuel management as per JAR OPS.
The commander shall ensure that the amount of usable fuel remaining in flight is not less than the fuel required to proceed to an aerodrome where a safe landing can be made, with final reserve fuel remaining.
If, as a result of an in-flight fuel check, the expected fuel remaining on arrival at the destination is less than the required alternate fuel plus final reserve fuel, the Commander must take into account the traffic and the operational conditions prevailing at the destination aerodrome, along the diversion route to an alternate aerodrome and at the destination alternate aerodrome, when deciding whether to proceed to the destination aerodrome or to divert, so as to land with not less than final reserve fuel.
Good luck to QR with barrel hitting 110 $ US.
Don't take it personally take it on the rocks!!!
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: The Dog House
Posts: 53
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Do you actually work for the Goat Vodka drinker? Your Part A must be a bit dusty eh? Policy for cancellation of alternate fuel is clear and conservative. It also overrides JAROPS for all Qatari registered Goat Liners.
That don't mean no goat can run out of fuel eh? Did you hear about the poor bugger that diverted from MCT after the runway was blocked and landed at ALN with less than 600kg?
Far more disturbing than the fuel policy is the secrecy policy....
Have never met a more paranoid human group than The Goaties. Perhaps their bedouin ancestors spent many millenia smoking pot?
Don't take it personally, just take it like a dog....
That don't mean no goat can run out of fuel eh? Did you hear about the poor bugger that diverted from MCT after the runway was blocked and landed at ALN with less than 600kg?
Far more disturbing than the fuel policy is the secrecy policy....
Have never met a more paranoid human group than The Goaties. Perhaps their bedouin ancestors spent many millenia smoking pot?
Don't take it personally, just take it like a dog....
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Middle East
Posts: 79
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I'm not so sure that cancellation of alternate fuel is that clear?
If you read the 'one runway' requirements you must have an alternate within 30 minutes. Clearly not the case in the Maldives.
However, if you follow the Flow Chart which follows that statement in Part A, you will find no reference to this.
Which 'rule' do you follow? I'll bet you won't get an answer from the author of the fuel policy either.
Personally, I will take whatever amount of fuel I deem suitable and I will not justify it in writing or enter into an argument with others over that quantity.
Should the ACTING CP Tech have a problem with that, we can have a chat later in his office.
This so called Fuel Policy is an ill thought out and half-assed attempt at fuel saving based on dodgy statistics and fear tactics.
If you read the 'one runway' requirements you must have an alternate within 30 minutes. Clearly not the case in the Maldives.
However, if you follow the Flow Chart which follows that statement in Part A, you will find no reference to this.
Which 'rule' do you follow? I'll bet you won't get an answer from the author of the fuel policy either.
Personally, I will take whatever amount of fuel I deem suitable and I will not justify it in writing or enter into an argument with others over that quantity.
Should the ACTING CP Tech have a problem with that, we can have a chat later in his office.
This so called Fuel Policy is an ill thought out and half-assed attempt at fuel saving based on dodgy statistics and fear tactics.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Earth
Posts: 309
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Thanks everybody for your reply's.
The traffic situation in the Maldives is a bit unpredictable to say at least. At times we have spend 30 minutes standing on the runway wiating for a space on the apron. However most of the times they keep us in the hold with similar times going around the hold. This happens only on certain days and certain times during the week. Normally when aal the charter flights from Europe come in.
Personally I would not commit to the Maldives and use my alternate fuel in the hold. Years ago a Twin Otter (seaplane) crashed into the seawall surrounding the airport and scattered debris all over the runway. Runway closed for a considerable time. So it's not only the traffic that actually uses the runway that you have to take into account in the decision.
So if I understand correctly QR uses statistical fuel? Is there any fat in this system when flying to Male? As all we know the guy might have been kept low by Mumbai, hence burning more fuel.
The traffic situation in the Maldives is a bit unpredictable to say at least. At times we have spend 30 minutes standing on the runway wiating for a space on the apron. However most of the times they keep us in the hold with similar times going around the hold. This happens only on certain days and certain times during the week. Normally when aal the charter flights from Europe come in.
Personally I would not commit to the Maldives and use my alternate fuel in the hold. Years ago a Twin Otter (seaplane) crashed into the seawall surrounding the airport and scattered debris all over the runway. Runway closed for a considerable time. So it's not only the traffic that actually uses the runway that you have to take into account in the decision.
So if I understand correctly QR uses statistical fuel? Is there any fat in this system when flying to Male? As all we know the guy might have been kept low by Mumbai, hence burning more fuel.
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: on the rocks
Posts: 111
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
T.D. to answer your questions:
Yes I do work for QR.
QCAR is the only valid source for QR without a doubt. Never objected that however the policy as such isn't really sensible one. I just gave you a sample of a JAR OPS one in order to highlight the advantage of such.
Big question mark behind: Isn't Male considered an isolated airdrome?
If so, why shortage of fuel hence 2 hours cruise FF inclusive 30 min ir required over Destination.
General Idea is: Fuel in the wings, being overhead a suitable airdrome is more helpful than being on the way to that airdrome, don't you think?
What advantage does a diversion to VCBI give you, having single RWY and being another hour away? Is there another suitable airdrome within 30 min in case VCBI gets blocked? Which guaranties do you have no one is gonna crash in VCBI and block RWY? Remember you'll only have 30 min left.
Why does QR require one to have an ALT within 30 min? Due to the remote chance of a possible destinations seizure, right? In other words 30 min fuel will take you to your ALT just in case. For you info ALT for VECB is 44 min away so you're doomed with 30 min left. I mean, how good are you at predicting a crash at a particular place? Don't you think the lawmaker was opting conservative probabilities while creating rules? It's obvious that JAR version is a more ripe one cause it simply entrusts PIC with power to decide the safest course of action which QR doesn't. Bottom line is good airmanship and decision making is essential to have safe and cost efficient OPS. Part A is full of flaws my friend and solely to rely on it isn't really prudent.
As for extra fuel I don't see a problem with taken a reasonable amount for the reasons stated above.
Don't take it personally take it on the rocks!!!
Yes I do work for QR.
QCAR is the only valid source for QR without a doubt. Never objected that however the policy as such isn't really sensible one. I just gave you a sample of a JAR OPS one in order to highlight the advantage of such.
Big question mark behind: Isn't Male considered an isolated airdrome?
If so, why shortage of fuel hence 2 hours cruise FF inclusive 30 min ir required over Destination.
General Idea is: Fuel in the wings, being overhead a suitable airdrome is more helpful than being on the way to that airdrome, don't you think?
What advantage does a diversion to VCBI give you, having single RWY and being another hour away? Is there another suitable airdrome within 30 min in case VCBI gets blocked? Which guaranties do you have no one is gonna crash in VCBI and block RWY? Remember you'll only have 30 min left.
Why does QR require one to have an ALT within 30 min? Due to the remote chance of a possible destinations seizure, right? In other words 30 min fuel will take you to your ALT just in case. For you info ALT for VECB is 44 min away so you're doomed with 30 min left. I mean, how good are you at predicting a crash at a particular place? Don't you think the lawmaker was opting conservative probabilities while creating rules? It's obvious that JAR version is a more ripe one cause it simply entrusts PIC with power to decide the safest course of action which QR doesn't. Bottom line is good airmanship and decision making is essential to have safe and cost efficient OPS. Part A is full of flaws my friend and solely to rely on it isn't really prudent.
As for extra fuel I don't see a problem with taken a reasonable amount for the reasons stated above.
Don't take it personally take it on the rocks!!!