The Pacific: General Aviation & Questions The place for students, instructors and charter guys in Oz, NZ and the rest of Oceania.

Part 91 - Fuel Reserve.

Old 30th Mar 2018, 23:02
  #1 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Posts: 7,369
Part 91 - Fuel Reserve.

It seems that the "final reserve" fuel carried in an aircraft under the new part 91 Manual of standards is never to be used. If you are ever caught with less that the specified reserve in your tanks then you are a criminal. Moreover, you are required to self incriminate.

Thsi requirement also automatically allows your arriving fuel state to be inspected as part of a ramp check.





This section is for paragraph 91.320 (1) (d) of CASR
— procedures to be followed if fuel reaches specified amounts during a flight.

(2)If an in-flight fuel quantity check shows that usable fuel on arrival at the destination aerodrome would be less than:

(a) the required alternate fuel plus final reserve fuel — the PIC must:

(i) having taken into account the traffic and operational conditions likely to be prevailing on arrival — plan for a safe landing at the destination aerodrome, the destination alternate or another en-route alternate; and

(ii) proceed to whichever of those aerodromes will enable the PIC to perform a safe landing with not less than final reserve fuel remaining; or

(b) the final reserve fuel (where no alternate aerodrome is required) — the PIC must proceed to an en-route alternate aerodrome which will enable the PIC to perform a safe landing with not less than final reserve fuel remaining.

(3)The PIC of a radio-equipped aircraft must advise ATS of a “Minimum fuel” state if, having committed to land at a specific aerodrome, the pilot calculates that any change to the existing clearance to that aerodrome may result in landing with less than the final reserve fuel.

(4)If the calculated usable fuel predicted to be available upon landing at the nearest aerodrome where a safe landing can be made would be
less than the final reserve fuel, the PIC of a radio-equipped aircraft must declare to the ATS a fuel emergency by broadcasting “MAYDAY, MAYDAY, MAYDAY FUEL”.

Note The fuel emergency declaration is a distress message
Sunfish is offline  
Old 30th Mar 2018, 23:22
  #2 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: bkk
Posts: 286
This is an interesting issue.Basically its the same everywhere now, as mandated by ICAO.For most situations the FINAL RESERVE is equivalent to 30 minutes of endurance fuel based upon holding at 1500 feet overhead an airfield.This will vary with weight, but what is not stated is lets say you TOUCHDOWN with 30 minutes in tanks then have a long taxi then get ramp checked on engine shutdown? Are you a criminal?.If not why not?
piratepete is offline  
Old 30th Mar 2018, 23:34
  #3 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: N/A
Posts: 2,802
CASA's POV is all pilots are criminals, most just haven't been caught .....yet.
megan is offline  
Old 30th Mar 2018, 23:39
  #4 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Australia/India
Posts: 2,753
So an aircraft that will land with e.g. 29 minutes of reserve fuel rather than 30 minutes of required final reserve fuel is “threatened with grave and imminent danger and requires immediate assistance”? So typical that the aviation regulatory regime turns words into something they don’t mean.

I wonder what “immediate assistance” would be provided in the example I gave, to remove the “threatened grave and imminent danger”. Will aircraft be diverted so that the one “threatened” can land with 30 minutes rather than 29 of reserve? Will RFFS be dispatched and standing by if the aircraft will land with 29 minutes of reserve, but won’t be standing by if the aircraft will land with 30 minutes of reserve?

To quote the Spodman once again: May Jesus pee in a bucket, what are these wombats on?
Lead Balloon is offline  
Old 31st Mar 2018, 00:13
  #5 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Australia
Posts: 4,163
ICAO does not “ mandate”. The FAA notifies lots of differences with ICAO .

What is the equivalent FAA regulation? Is it more onerous?
Dick Smith is offline  
Old 31st Mar 2018, 00:36
  #6 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Brisbane, Qld
Posts: 1,139
Sunfish, surely in this case it is less about making us into criminals and ensuring we take the correct action? There are plenty of Pilots who simply don't want to "Make a fuss" or "Deal with the paperwork" this way it's set out in a clear manner that instructs them to declare an "Emergency" which then gives ATC the full authority to do whatever is necessary to ensure you get down in a timely manner.

I forget the specific incident and I'm sure there's been more than one where a Pilot hasn't declared an actual emergency and should have which resulted in the situation being far worse than it should have been because ATC either weren't entirely sure it was a full emergency or had their hands tied in what they could do for you considering it hasn't been declared an emergency situation yet.

I'm not fan of CASA but this one doesn't seem so bad, perhaps poorly worded for the lay person though.
Ixixly is offline  
Old 31st Mar 2018, 01:15
  #7 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Enzed
Posts: 2,208
In contrast to the NZCAA equivalent rule:

91.305 Fuel requirements for flight under VFR
(a) A pilot-in-command of an aeroplane must not begin a flight under
VFR unless, in the forecast weather conditions, the aeroplane has enough
fuel to fly to the first point of intended landing at the planned normal
cruising speed and to fly after that point of intended landing for at least—
1) a further 30 minutes during the day; or
(2) a further 45 minutes at night; or
(3) for an aeroplane that has a special category—limited
airworthiness certificate or a special category—exhibition
airworthiness certificate, the flying time specified for the VFR
minimum fuel reserve in the operator statement required under
rule 47.55(c)
CASA must be so much better at writing rules as they use many more words.
27/09 is offline  
Old 31st Mar 2018, 01:52
  #8 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Australia
Posts: 4,927
Folks,
The relevant FAA regs. are 91.151 for VFR, 91.167 for IFR.
If it is a Part 121/125/135, it will be what is in your Operations Specification.
Tootle pip!!
LeadSled is offline  
Old 31st Mar 2018, 01:54
  #9 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: bkk
Posts: 286
Dick, its just semantics.Mandated or otherwise, all member states including USA are expected to follow ICAOs SARPs.....The 30 minutes final reserve is pretty much universal these days and is a reasonable idea isnt it?
piratepete is offline  
Old 31st Mar 2018, 02:00
  #10 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: In da Big Smoke
Posts: 2,331
It's whatever you have at the end of your landing roll. What you pull up on chocks with is irrelevant.
neville_nobody is offline  
Old 31st Mar 2018, 05:08
  #11 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: bkk
Posts: 286
Neville, I like the sound of that statement, but where is your reference from or is this just your personal opinion?
piratepete is offline  
Old 31st Mar 2018, 05:11
  #12 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: bkk
Posts: 286
Why I ask is because this actually happened to me at RJTT.Because I had been saying things like "request immediate vectors to the runway due to low fuel state" I was met on shutdown by a team from the JCAB.......My calculated fuel remaining was less than the FR and I to do a lot of explaining.
piratepete is offline  
Old 31st Mar 2018, 05:18
  #13 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: nosar
Posts: 1,162
30 minutes of fuel in my aircraft is a matter of trust. It cannot be dipped or seen.
Aussie Bob is offline  
Old 31st Mar 2018, 05:19
  #14 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Seat 0A
Posts: 7,766
Pirate, in the quoted text above, "...perform a safe landing...".

Your fuel policy should define Flight Fuel or Block Fuel eg "Block fuel is fuel that will be burnt from aircraft brakes release until completion of the landing roll i.e. includes an allowance for start-up, taxi, take-off and approach.".
Capn Bloggs is offline  
Old 31st Mar 2018, 06:48
  #15 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Australia/India
Posts: 2,753
Originally Posted by Ixixly View Post
Sunfish, surely in this case it is less about making us into criminals and ensuring we take the correct action? There are plenty of Pilots who simply don't want to "Make a fuss" or "Deal with the paperwork" this way it's set out in a clear manner that instructs them to declare an "Emergency" which then gives ATC the full authority to do whatever is necessary to ensure you get down in a timely manner.

I forget the specific incident and I'm sure there's been more than one where a Pilot hasn't declared an actual emergency and should have which resulted in the situation being far worse than it should have been because ATC either weren't entirely sure it was a full emergency or had their hands tied in what they could do for you considering it hasn't been declared an emergency situation yet.

I'm not fan of CASA but this one doesn't seem so bad, perhaps poorly worded for the lay person though.
But landing with (or arriving at blocks?) with 29 minutes rather than 30 minutes of reserve is not an “actual emergency”. At least not on the face of the dictionary meanings of those words.

If it’s so important, we should make the penalty for failing to “making a fuss” life imprisonment or death. Then everyone would surely speak up.

Now that I come to think of it, why not make the penalty for stuffing up fuel calculations and in-air fuel management life imprisonment or death. Then, surely, no one would ever make the mistake.

The solution to most problems in rarely yet another law, or the addition of more complication to existing law. The solution is more education. In the case of fuel, the solution is even more education and more education after that.

Unfortunately, in Australia, at least, the willingness to “speak up” has been diminished by the lack of trust in ATSB and CASA. Good luck with restoring trust in them!

Last edited by Lead Balloon; 31st Mar 2018 at 07:03.
Lead Balloon is offline  
Old 31st Mar 2018, 06:49
  #16 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: YMML
Posts: 2,469
b) the final reserve fuel (where no alternate aerodrome is required) — the PIC must proceed to an en-route alternate aerodrome which will enable the PIC to perform a safe landing with not less than final reserve fuel remaining.
Please explain? PICs choice or an arbitary FOI pop quiz? An alternate where no alternate is required.....seriously?
OZBUSDRIVER is offline  
Old 31st Mar 2018, 06:56
  #17 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Australia
Posts: 4,927
The solution is more education.
Ain't that the truth!!

And, in Australia, unfornately the willingness to “speak up” has been diminished by the lack of trust in ATSB and CASA.
And I don't, sadly, expect to see that change in my lifetime!!

Tootle pip!!
LeadSled is offline  
Old 31st Mar 2018, 06:58
  #18 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Victoria
Posts: 712
It's clear once again that Govt could save a huge amount of money by simply contracting the NZers to run our aviation. Cheaper and better!

Kaz
kaz3g is offline  
Old 31st Mar 2018, 07:08
  #19 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Seat 0A
Posts: 7,766
Originally Posted by Ozbusdriver
Please explain? PICs choice or an arbitary FOI pop quiz? An alternate where no alternate is required.....seriously?
Enroute Alternate.

It's not that [email protected]@dy hard.
Capn Bloggs is offline  
Old 31st Mar 2018, 09:39
  #20 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Down there
Posts: 287
Spot on what Ixixly said. This is not an uncommon occurrence with RPT traffic arrivals into Sydney, Brisbane or Melbourne when CB's or another occurrence has caused massive delays resulting in fuel emergency calls. No one ends up in the charge dock as a result. Talk of criminality is simply nonsense.

There are still fuel exhaustion incidents occurring among GA aircraft, so I don't think it is a bad thing. As Capn Bloggs said, "It's not that [email protected]@dy hard".

Flame away!

Last edited by Jenna Talia; 31st Mar 2018 at 10:09.
Jenna Talia is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us Archive Advertising Cookie Policy Privacy Statement Terms of Service

Copyright © 2018 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.