Go Back  PPRuNe Forums > Ground & Other Ops Forums > Questions
Reload this Page >

Committing to an airfield.

Questions If you are a professional pilot or your work involves professional aviation please use this forum for questions. Enthusiasts, please use the 'Spectators Balcony' forum.

Committing to an airfield.

Old 13th Aug 2015, 21:51
  #1 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: under the sea
Posts: 2,470
Committing to an airfield.

I was wondering whether any operators have any company specific rules or caveats that need to be fulfilled before a pilot commits in a fuel sense to land at an airfield.
I cannot see anything in EU-OPS..
tubby linton is offline  
Old 13th Aug 2015, 23:47
  #2 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: The Netherlands
Posts: 246
Committing to an airfield.

Its loosely defined as "reasonable certainty of landing".
JeroenC is offline  
Old 14th Aug 2015, 04:00
  #3 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: I wouldn't know.
Posts: 4,131
It is not as clear cut as it used to be, but i believe CAT.OP.MPA.280 b) 2) is the relevant part. It states:

(2) If an in-flight fuel check shows that the expected usable fuel remaining on arrival at the destination aerodrome is less than:
(i) the required alternate fuel plus final reserve fuel, the commander shall take into account the traffic and the operational conditions prevailing at the destination aerodrome, at the destination alternate aerodrome and at any other adequate aerodrome in deciding whether to proceed to the destination aerodrome or to divert so as to perform a safe landing with not less than final reserve fuel; or
(ii) the final reserve fuel if no alternate aerodrome is required, the commander shall take appropriate action and proceed to an adequate aerodrome so as to perform a safe landing with not less than final reserve fuel.
The old regulation over here was quite sensible, but is not in force anymore, according to that you could commit to an aerodrome if it fulfilled a clear cut set of paramenters (two independent runways served by instrument approaches, vis >5km and ceiling > 2000ft).
Denti is offline  
Old 14th Aug 2015, 09:41
  #4 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: The Netherlands
Posts: 246
Committing to an airfield.

Didn't that apply to no need for any alternate in the planning stage?
JeroenC is offline  
Old 14th Aug 2015, 10:40
  #5 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: In front of a computer
Posts: 1,983
A few years ago (at a UK airline) we stopped using the term "committing" as part of a drive to better train low go-arounds/baulked landings. The new term we used was "dispensing with the alternate" and we used the criteria mentioned by Denti

The change was made to get across that you weren't actually "committed" until thrust reversers were deployed denoted by PM calling "reverse normal"....

It didn't lessen the arguments about carriage of extra fuel though
ETOPS is offline  
Old 14th Aug 2015, 13:38
  #6 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: under the sea
Posts: 2,470
It is mentioned in our OMA but there is no guidance about it. I believe the company is expecting the commander to use some airmanship in their decision making and I think that JeroenC's answer probably fits the best.
tubby linton is offline  
Old 15th Aug 2015, 21:39
  #7 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Wor Yerm
Age: 64
Posts: 0
You are committed when you don't have enough fuel to fly anywhere else. That other place could be just around the corner or hours away. But not having enough fuel doesn't mean you you do not have options. Any fuel in the tanks can burnt, the argument should be about who does what paperwork. Once you are relieved of the decision of where to go you can now concentrate on how you are going to soend your fuel. For example, do you want to spend it holding? Or would you prefer to spend it preparing for an off airfield/tarmac arrival? There again you could spend it doing approaches. The choice is up to you. But after the trip is over, you would be wise spending a little time trying to work out whether you could have foreseen ending up in the position you found yourself.

PM
Piltdown Man is offline  
Old 16th Aug 2015, 18:00
  #8 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Location: UK
Posts: 1,640
We have a basic yes/no flow chart in our OM-A with landing assured at destination, EAT at destination, landing assured at alternate, EAT at alternate the main questions.
ESQU is offline  

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off


Thread Tools
Search this Thread

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

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