Virgin 'low fuel' MAYDAY
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: UK
Posts: 134
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
There are a number of considerations in such a scenario that I think those with no experience of current longhaul flying might overlook.
1. The route of flight. Most Virgin 744 schedules into LGW are ex-Florida or Caribbean. The diversions available on landfall aren't particularly numerous if the flight has entered European airspace from around 45N, which is common. It may even be, in some circumstances, that LGW is actually the nearest suitable airfield (for a B744) on exit from oceanic airspace via the South-West Approaches, and that the last diversion available prior to that was Santa Maria or Lajes, at which point the fuel plot was looking acceptable - there are plenty of reasons why circumstances can conspire to trash a healthy fuel situation in the three hours or so between the Azores and UK.
2. If the captain discussed the possibility of a diversion with VS operations and was told that Heathrow ground facilities couldn't currently cope with him, and his second diversion was further away (Stansted? Birmingham?), that would explain both the comment that LHR couldn't take him and the insistence on LGW as the landing airport - he would have to have almost overflown LGW to get to LHR. Is that sensible when fuel is tight? Incidentally, there is no pressure within Virgin to land on minimum fuel. Captains are encouraged to think carefully about fuel, but if you want to take an extra few tonnes, no-one will question that decision.
3. There is no information about the build up to the declaration of the Mayday, but I'm one of those who wouldn't wait for the maximum endurance to get down to 20 minutes before declaring that Mayday. At 12 or more tonnes/hour fuel burn at low levels, anything under 10 tonnes on board would feel extremely uncomfortable. By 4 tonnes (20 minutes) my sweat would have turned brown!
4. It's far better to be on the ground safely, and able to defend your decisions, than be a smoking hole in the ground because you didn't want to upset the armchair pundits on Pprune who, of course, always know better than the captain involved....
1. The route of flight. Most Virgin 744 schedules into LGW are ex-Florida or Caribbean. The diversions available on landfall aren't particularly numerous if the flight has entered European airspace from around 45N, which is common. It may even be, in some circumstances, that LGW is actually the nearest suitable airfield (for a B744) on exit from oceanic airspace via the South-West Approaches, and that the last diversion available prior to that was Santa Maria or Lajes, at which point the fuel plot was looking acceptable - there are plenty of reasons why circumstances can conspire to trash a healthy fuel situation in the three hours or so between the Azores and UK.
2. If the captain discussed the possibility of a diversion with VS operations and was told that Heathrow ground facilities couldn't currently cope with him, and his second diversion was further away (Stansted? Birmingham?), that would explain both the comment that LHR couldn't take him and the insistence on LGW as the landing airport - he would have to have almost overflown LGW to get to LHR. Is that sensible when fuel is tight? Incidentally, there is no pressure within Virgin to land on minimum fuel. Captains are encouraged to think carefully about fuel, but if you want to take an extra few tonnes, no-one will question that decision.
3. There is no information about the build up to the declaration of the Mayday, but I'm one of those who wouldn't wait for the maximum endurance to get down to 20 minutes before declaring that Mayday. At 12 or more tonnes/hour fuel burn at low levels, anything under 10 tonnes on board would feel extremely uncomfortable. By 4 tonnes (20 minutes) my sweat would have turned brown!
4. It's far better to be on the ground safely, and able to defend your decisions, than be a smoking hole in the ground because you didn't want to upset the armchair pundits on Pprune who, of course, always know better than the captain involved....
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Middle Earth
Posts: 31
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Same old story
Once again we're on the fringes of a discusion about corporate pressure to carry min fuel.
Obviously we can't know what happened en route to the Virgin crew but on the one occassion when my (poor) decision left me over Europe with very tight fuel, after a long flight, I vowed that there would be only ONE reason why I would not take off with PLENTY to spare for the unforseen.
Namely runway/performance limitations. In that event, if circs conspired again, then an early diversion would be preferable to a repeat of the scary experience. Why push your luck?
I seem to remember that during the discussion that followed the previously mentioned Malaysian "fumes" incident, it emerged that it was a requirement to factor in "anticipated ATC delays", which for LHR&LGW I have always assumed some would exist no matter what time of day it is.
Obviously we can't know what happened en route to the Virgin crew but on the one occassion when my (poor) decision left me over Europe with very tight fuel, after a long flight, I vowed that there would be only ONE reason why I would not take off with PLENTY to spare for the unforseen.
Namely runway/performance limitations. In that event, if circs conspired again, then an early diversion would be preferable to a repeat of the scary experience. Why push your luck?
I seem to remember that during the discussion that followed the previously mentioned Malaysian "fumes" incident, it emerged that it was a requirement to factor in "anticipated ATC delays", which for LHR&LGW I have always assumed some would exist no matter what time of day it is.
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: here and there but mostly lgw
Posts: 166
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Chiglet,
I Know Man fits the two runway criteria for "no alternate reqd" planning under certain weather conditions. I doubt that means 24L is an alternate. Do you have planning reference in Jar ops 1 i could look at, or are we talking about the same thing?
I Know Man fits the two runway criteria for "no alternate reqd" planning under certain weather conditions. I doubt that means 24L is an alternate. Do you have planning reference in Jar ops 1 i could look at, or are we talking about the same thing?
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Hants
Posts: 2,295
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I work in the TMA and when obviously busy, get sick of pilots who are flying on a flight plan clearance askng on an already crowded frequency "What are we to do on reaching Biggin/LAM/OCK/BOV" etc etc.
The Clearance limit is the hold.... you CAN EXPECT TO HOLD for 20 minutes for Heathrow.
A and C -
Even in bad weather etc - you should know your anticipated fuel state before you are only 15 miles from the hoding point - if its that tight you should be making the call earlier - it will get us ATCOS doing everything we can for you to get you down.... try visiting an ATC unit (preferably TC as this is the discussion in this case) during a TRUCE. Ask to see how a fuel emergency is handled - even if we are holding with huge delays for all london airports and there is bad weather. Heavy holding and or bad weather create carnage for us ATCOs in the TMA and the surrounding sectors, but even so, we will make sure an emergency, be it fuel or otherwise, gets priority, even if it screws up all our plans.
I used to fly in the military - one of my jobs as well as fighting the A/C was fuel calculations - often in bad weather, returning to a floating 'airport' that had moved during the sortie. We worked our fuel out with an indelible pen and a hand made graph on the back of a plotting board.... We often landed just above our minima as that was our brief.
It can be done.... maybe the problem is that in this day and age, Pilots feel under pressure not to declare an emergency when they should, especially when it is due to something like fuel which may have a comeback on them. If in doubt let us know early - if nothing else it means that you have a better chance of a priority landing at your destination, than the ignominy of a priority landing at your alternate!!
The Clearance limit is the hold.... you CAN EXPECT TO HOLD for 20 minutes for Heathrow.
A and C -
Even in bad weather etc - you should know your anticipated fuel state before you are only 15 miles from the hoding point - if its that tight you should be making the call earlier - it will get us ATCOS doing everything we can for you to get you down.... try visiting an ATC unit (preferably TC as this is the discussion in this case) during a TRUCE. Ask to see how a fuel emergency is handled - even if we are holding with huge delays for all london airports and there is bad weather. Heavy holding and or bad weather create carnage for us ATCOs in the TMA and the surrounding sectors, but even so, we will make sure an emergency, be it fuel or otherwise, gets priority, even if it screws up all our plans.
I used to fly in the military - one of my jobs as well as fighting the A/C was fuel calculations - often in bad weather, returning to a floating 'airport' that had moved during the sortie. We worked our fuel out with an indelible pen and a hand made graph on the back of a plotting board.... We often landed just above our minima as that was our brief.
It can be done.... maybe the problem is that in this day and age, Pilots feel under pressure not to declare an emergency when they should, especially when it is due to something like fuel which may have a comeback on them. If in doubt let us know early - if nothing else it means that you have a better chance of a priority landing at your destination, than the ignominy of a priority landing at your alternate!!
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: LONDON
Posts: 314
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
1. It may even be, in some circumstances, that LGW is actually the nearest suitable airfield (for a B744) on exit from oceanic airspace via the South-West Approaches, and that the last diversion available prior to that was Santa Maria or Lajes, at which point the fuel plot was looking acceptable - there are plenty of reasons why circumstances can conspire to trash a healthy fuel situation in the three hours or so between the Azores and UK.
Can you give me some idea of what circumtances would upset that calculation over the 3 hour period? Unexpected headwind is obvious but what else that you didn't already know about? If it is an ATC cause you would presumably feel obliged to inform ATC that the instruction jeopardises your fuel state?
.4
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: UK
Posts: 1,691
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Failure to get a higher level, early descent or a mach no. restriction could all upset the fuel plan when coming from that part of the world. There's no requirement to have any remaining contingency fuel at that stage, you could have used it all taxying out to the runway. You don't even have to have 20 minutes holding fuel. Its a bit daft not to have it, but its not a JAR OPS requirement. In extremis I think you could be abeam Lajes with trip fuel to LGW, no holding capability and no div fuel (just min reserves) and still be legal.
PPRuNe Person
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: see roster
Posts: 1,268
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
120.4 - you said
Squawk 7600, hold until endurance and then commence an approach whilst you vector everyone else out of the way?
PS: also for 120.4, why do we fly 220kts coming off the holding beacon for LHR, not 230? On the types I've flown into LHR, 230 would be better as you can stay clean for just that bit longer, saving a few kilos, which of course, adds up to a significant amount of fuel saved over a large fleet (which saved fuel is then burnt waiting for a parking stand )
In the event of an R/T failure what should ATC expect the Captain to do?
PS: also for 120.4, why do we fly 220kts coming off the holding beacon for LHR, not 230? On the types I've flown into LHR, 230 would be better as you can stay clean for just that bit longer, saving a few kilos, which of course, adds up to a significant amount of fuel saved over a large fleet (which saved fuel is then burnt waiting for a parking stand
)
Per Ardua ad Astraeus
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: UK
Posts: 18,579
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Chiglet
JAROPS 1.295 (b) para c. Whether MAN like it or not
, if you build a separate, independent runway, then JAPOPS enables operators to discard their 'alternate' and use 24L as their diversion runway. It happens a lot of the time with BA at LHR where the departure runway becomes the alternate.
Edit: following post #47 - Overstress - 220kts was 'agreed' to be the best compromise speed in a thread a few years back on PPRune. Re-open it if you feel strongly, or simply tell ATC you need 230 and I'm sure they will accommodate. They are normally pretty good.
JAROPS 1.295 (b) para c. Whether MAN like it or not
, if you build a separate, independent runway, then JAPOPS enables operators to discard their 'alternate' and use 24L as their diversion runway. It happens a lot of the time with BA at LHR where the departure runway becomes the alternate.Edit: following post #47 - Overstress - 220kts was 'agreed' to be the best compromise speed in a thread a few years back on PPRune. Re-open it if you feel strongly, or simply tell ATC you need 230 and I'm sure they will accommodate. They are normally pretty good.
Join Date: Nov 1999
Location: Anywhere that pays
Posts: 117
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
120.4
I would EXPECT my crews, in that situation, to continue on plan, contact our OPS and discuss an alternate, and leave WILLO for, say, Bournemouth, Cardiff or Stansted for a 'splash-and-dash' BEFORE they run below minimum fuel - having EXPECTED a delay of up to 20 minutes and monitored the actual with ATC. NB If you divert from the hold, before you commence an approach with minimum flight-plan fuel, you should NOT arrive at diversion in an emergency. If a last-minute fuel problem develops - ie some fuel suddenly becomes 'unusable' (like what we like to call the BA 3-engine ferry :-))) ) then a MAYDAY is, of course, required.
Like folk say, we do NOT know the whole story here, and are in fact basing it on one post by 'Cobbler' - "I heard". I guess it is the APPARENT suddeness of the onset of the Dire Emergency that has gotten this PPRune attention.
For good o' 411A on his bandwagon again - you know and I know that the results of any 'enquiry' into this will be for the operator and the authority alone to know. Even in the good old US this would not be a 'public' issue. Any disciplinary action/retraining - IF NECESSARY - will be conducted by the operator to the satisfaction of the authority. OK?
I would EXPECT my crews, in that situation, to continue on plan, contact our OPS and discuss an alternate, and leave WILLO for, say, Bournemouth, Cardiff or Stansted for a 'splash-and-dash' BEFORE they run below minimum fuel - having EXPECTED a delay of up to 20 minutes and monitored the actual with ATC. NB If you divert from the hold, before you commence an approach with minimum flight-plan fuel, you should NOT arrive at diversion in an emergency. If a last-minute fuel problem develops - ie some fuel suddenly becomes 'unusable' (like what we like to call the BA 3-engine ferry :-))) ) then a MAYDAY is, of course, required.
Like folk say, we do NOT know the whole story here, and are in fact basing it on one post by 'Cobbler' - "I heard". I guess it is the APPARENT suddeness of the onset of the Dire Emergency that has gotten this PPRune attention.
For good o' 411A on his bandwagon again - you know and I know that the results of any 'enquiry' into this will be for the operator and the authority alone to know. Even in the good old US this would not be a 'public' issue. Any disciplinary action/retraining - IF NECESSARY - will be conducted by the operator to the satisfaction of the authority. OK?
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: UK
Posts: 1,691
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If you arrive at WILLO with insufficent fuel for a 10 minute delay you certainly won't have the fuel to go to STN or CWL. If Virgins 744 burn the same fuel as ours then they'll need about 4T for a LHW to LHR diversion which is enough for about 30 mins holding.
Join Date: Nov 1999
Location: Anywhere that pays
Posts: 117
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
CM - I do not understand! You leave WILLO from medium level (with 9 mins holding fuel) without commencing the approach (that your diversion fuel allows for) and glide gently down to your diversion - what do you do to use up the fuel?
In our OPS the 4T is for a g/a from an approach and then fly to alternate (NB a g/a and approach you will not be flying). What does your UK SOP allow for in div fuel? This could explain the problem.
In our OPS the 4T is for a g/a from an approach and then fly to alternate (NB a g/a and approach you will not be flying). What does your UK SOP allow for in div fuel? This could explain the problem.
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: UK
Posts: 1,691
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
OK, basing this on some ballpark 744 figures of say 5T reserve and 4T div to LHR, I'd allow 2T to leave WILLO and fly the approach, so I need to be leaving WILLO with 11T. 10 mins holding is about 1.5T, so I need to arrive at WILLO with 13.5T. Lets say I only arrive with 11T then I can commit to LGW, burn the 4T div fuel to give me 30 mins holding and leave WILLO with 6T to land above reserves. Obviously that would not be fun and if I thought I was going to get below 6T I'd be declaring a PAN. Alternatively if I didn't want to commit I could divert to LHR leave WILLO with 11T, join the hold at BIG or OCK for x minutes then find myself in the same position of being short of fuel, except now I'm short for LHR instead of LGW. With standard vectoring and traffic loads I would not expect to get from WILLO to STN without yet again putting myself into a fuel emergency situation and CWL is almost certainly the same.
To get to the point, if the aircraft arrived at WILLO without the capability to commit to LGW and burn the div fuel (perhaps they'd committed earlier and burnt it already) then I think they'd already be below the 11T mark and any significant delay would be likely to lead to a PAN call.
You will not be leaving WILLO at medium level, you will be at FL100-130, and you will not be gliding gently down to STN (100+ track miles away) or Cardiff (also 100+ track miles away) or LHR (50 track miles + holding). You will be flying level at an altitude which keeps you out of the way of other traffic in the extremely busy TMA. Unless you declare a PAN.
Clear as mud?
To get to the point, if the aircraft arrived at WILLO without the capability to commit to LGW and burn the div fuel (perhaps they'd committed earlier and burnt it already) then I think they'd already be below the 11T mark and any significant delay would be likely to lead to a PAN call.
You will not be leaving WILLO at medium level, you will be at FL100-130, and you will not be gliding gently down to STN (100+ track miles away) or Cardiff (also 100+ track miles away) or LHR (50 track miles + holding). You will be flying level at an altitude which keeps you out of the way of other traffic in the extremely busy TMA. Unless you declare a PAN.
Clear as mud?
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Hants
Posts: 2,295
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
C M hits the nail on the head - if you do not declare a state of urgency or distress, you will be vectored and held like every other customer.
For the sake of trying to save embarrasment over declaring an emergency due to fuel, is it worth the risk of not calling it early??
For the sake of trying to save embarrasment over declaring an emergency due to fuel, is it worth the risk of not calling it early??
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: LONDON
Posts: 314
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Overstress:
I understand the #7600 etc.
You can have 230 if you ask for it. We regularly give it to the B773s; they will also get 190 on base and 170 to 4DME if they have asked for 230 off the stack.
Bear in mind though, on the southside, with much of a southerly wind we have to give 180kts to everything before the downwind turn or we just won't get you round the corner efficiently and that will impact the landing rate.
Under normal circumstances if your "real" alternate is not the one on your flightplan how will we know what you are going to do if you r/t fail and have to divert?
Mitty:
Why would you allow your crews to pass Bournemouth, only get to WILLO and have to turn around an go back when you should have known for ages that you wouldn't have the fuel to accept the 20 minutes involved in "no delay" when you arrived at WILLO?
CM:
If you don't get the level needed, get descended early or are slowed below optimum mach you will presumably tell ATC that this compromises your fuel plan?
I understand the legal position re the 20 minutes. However, we all know what London is like. (You cannot even rely on Stansted as a diversion now because it has also become extremely busy at times.) Arriving at an LTMA hold without 20 minutes in the tanks just for holding seems to be asking for trouble.
.4
I understand the #7600 etc.
You can have 230 if you ask for it. We regularly give it to the B773s; they will also get 190 on base and 170 to 4DME if they have asked for 230 off the stack.
Bear in mind though, on the southside, with much of a southerly wind we have to give 180kts to everything before the downwind turn or we just won't get you round the corner efficiently and that will impact the landing rate.
Under normal circumstances if your "real" alternate is not the one on your flightplan how will we know what you are going to do if you r/t fail and have to divert?
Mitty:
Why would you allow your crews to pass Bournemouth, only get to WILLO and have to turn around an go back when you should have known for ages that you wouldn't have the fuel to accept the 20 minutes involved in "no delay" when you arrived at WILLO?
CM:
If you don't get the level needed, get descended early or are slowed below optimum mach you will presumably tell ATC that this compromises your fuel plan?
I understand the legal position re the 20 minutes. However, we all know what London is like. (You cannot even rely on Stansted as a diversion now because it has also become extremely busy at times.) Arriving at an LTMA hold without 20 minutes in the tanks just for holding seems to be asking for trouble.
.4
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: UK
Posts: 1,691
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
.4
No you won't tell ATC because its like telling them the sun will rise in the morning. If everybody started telling Shanwick/Gander/Santa Maria that it was affecting their fuel everytime they got a clearance that wasn't exactly as per their flight plan we'd need a lot more clearance delivery frequencies. Plus the ATCers complain that we are trying to tell them how to do their job. We try to request better levels/different routings/other options that are better for us but there's only so much sky out there. I have followed an MYT aircraft through Brest airspace when he had been given a reroute that would leave him unable to reach his destination. The French response to this was "Well you weel 'av to devert"!
No you won't tell ATC because its like telling them the sun will rise in the morning. If everybody started telling Shanwick/Gander/Santa Maria that it was affecting their fuel everytime they got a clearance that wasn't exactly as per their flight plan we'd need a lot more clearance delivery frequencies. Plus the ATCers complain that we are trying to tell them how to do their job. We try to request better levels/different routings/other options that are better for us but there's only so much sky out there. I have followed an MYT aircraft through Brest airspace when he had been given a reroute that would leave him unable to reach his destination. The French response to this was "Well you weel 'av to devert"!
Join Date: Nov 1999
Location: Anywhere that pays
Posts: 117
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
CM
Let me get this right! On your 'ballpark' figures, you are approaching 11T at WILLO with no workable OCT and you tell me you would expect to then fly 100 miles, fly an approach into Cardiff (no holding expected there?) and land with less than 5T, when 4T will give you a g/a from decision, and a diversion track distance of around 40-50 miles? No, not clear as mud. Is that gear down, speedbrake out or what?
Pedantry, but I think you mean leave WILLO with 7T?
120.4 = yes, 'cos holds CAN clear quite unexpectedly, and it would be throwing away an option to 'bolt' too early.
Another - the system as I understand it is that you do not declare a 'fuel emergency' (US) or a PAN/MAYDAY (UK) UNTIL you are in one? IF you start to get the cross-country vectors and you will be 'short', then you say 'PAN'? That will focus the minds. Incidentally, I have always found ATC 'on-side' on a diversion and the vectoring has normally been pretty tight. In any case guys, if your alternate is so busy/has crap weather that folk are holding there, why..........................
OK, basing this on some ballpark 744 figures of say 5T reserve and 4T div to LHR, I'd allow 2T to leave WILLO and fly the approach, so I need to be leaving WILLO with 11T. 10 mins holding is about 1.5T, so I need to arrive at WILLO with 13.5T.
Lets say I only arrive with 11T then I can commit to LGW, burn the 4T div fuel to give me 30 mins holding and leave WILLO with 6T to land above reserves.
120.4 = yes, 'cos holds CAN clear quite unexpectedly, and it would be throwing away an option to 'bolt' too early.
Another - the system as I understand it is that you do not declare a 'fuel emergency' (US) or a PAN/MAYDAY (UK) UNTIL you are in one? IF you start to get the cross-country vectors and you will be 'short', then you say 'PAN'? That will focus the minds. Incidentally, I have always found ATC 'on-side' on a diversion and the vectoring has normally been pretty tight. In any case guys, if your alternate is so busy/has crap weather that folk are holding there, why..........................
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: USA
Posts: 563
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
not too long ago, being a bit low on fuel into San Francisco,Ca USA was normal for one VERY VERY LARGE airline.
Declaring , MIN FUEL, was becoming standard...finally ATC gave up on them and said: MIN FUEL, roger, say diversion airport or declare an emergency.
Many flights went to OAK, across the bay from SFO.
It was all corporate decision making, carry less fuel, obtain efficiencies from carrying less fuel, push ATC into fewer delays.
It backfired.
Investigations launched, words exchanged.
It just seems to me that pilots will have to stand up and say to management...I will hit the outer marker with legal reserves PLUS XXX holding, plus diversion. And a bit more for the wife and kids.
And while there are many who will explain to me the cost this is just too high, it is time to take back from the bean counters control of the airplane.
Declaring , MIN FUEL, was becoming standard...finally ATC gave up on them and said: MIN FUEL, roger, say diversion airport or declare an emergency.
Many flights went to OAK, across the bay from SFO.
It was all corporate decision making, carry less fuel, obtain efficiencies from carrying less fuel, push ATC into fewer delays.
It backfired.
Investigations launched, words exchanged.
It just seems to me that pilots will have to stand up and say to management...I will hit the outer marker with legal reserves PLUS XXX holding, plus diversion. And a bit more for the wife and kids.
And while there are many who will explain to me the cost this is just too high, it is time to take back from the bean counters control of the airplane.
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: LONDON
Posts: 314
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Okay Mitty/ Carnage
I see that. It seems that there is large element of second guessing involved which probably makes it inevitable that this sort of thing will happen when circumstances conspire against you.
.4
I see that. It seems that there is large element of second guessing involved which probably makes it inevitable that this sort of thing will happen when circumstances conspire against you.
.4
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: UK
Posts: 1,691
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
FLWM
I'm not familiar with the term OCT, but if you leave WILLO with 11T then you are technically good for LHR as well. This assumes 2T burn for the approach, which is quite feasible for a long, low, dirty downwind, a go around then 50 odd track miles to LHR. This doesn't assume holding at LHR, as JAR-OPs does not require you to plan for further delay on your diversion. You would not leave WILLO with 11T and expect to get to CWL without a PAN as at the weights I would guess the VS 744 to be operating at (circa 245T) you will need more than 6T to get there, factoring in the delay for rerouting, rebriefing etc etc.
If you realistically expected to need to use CWL as a destination alternate then you would take more fuel to start with. I don't know about VS but in BA our flight plans show the destination fuel (ie cheapest) alternate fuel required, plus the fuel required for all the commercial alternates you might consider using. If you consider theres a serious chance of diverting then everyone takes fuel for a commercial alternate rather than the fuel alternate. Nb these are company terms, not JAR-OPs terms.
You may wonder why we carry fuel for an alternate we wouldn't necessarily use, and the answer is that we wouldn't necessarily divert. The chances are that if you have gone around at LGW then it's due to a one off event like the preceeding aircraft being slow to vacate. During your briefing you will, of course, have discussed your endurance, and would be aware that in the event of a go around for such an occurence you could commit to LGW and burn your div fuel to make another approach and landing into LGW. If the event is something more serious, like a blocked runway with undetermined delay, then you dash off to LHR.
You are quite right, I do mean 7T, although I'd be feeling mighty uncomfortable leaving WILLO with 7T and would be advising ATC that in the event of a go around I would be declaring a MAYDAY.
You misunderstand. If you think you might get a fuel emergency you declare a PAN, if you know you will get a fuel emergency you declare a MAYDAY, the magic number being whatever your reserves are. In my LGW example, coming down the ILS at 4d with 6T I know that if I land I will be above my reserve 5T so no emergency, but if I go around I will be below 5T so a MAYDAY will be required. I could call PAN earlier, but as I know that if I land I'll be OK that could be considered over cautious, rather like declaring a PAN before the take off roll just in case an engine happens to blow up after departure.
Let me get this right! On your 'ballpark' figures, you are approaching 11T at WILLO with no workable OCT and you tell me you would expect to then fly 100 miles, fly an approach into Cardiff (no holding expected there?) and land with less than 5T, when 4T will give you a g/a from decision, and a diversion track distance of around 40-50 miles? No, not clear as mud. Is that gear down, speedbrake out or what?
If you realistically expected to need to use CWL as a destination alternate then you would take more fuel to start with. I don't know about VS but in BA our flight plans show the destination fuel (ie cheapest) alternate fuel required, plus the fuel required for all the commercial alternates you might consider using. If you consider theres a serious chance of diverting then everyone takes fuel for a commercial alternate rather than the fuel alternate. Nb these are company terms, not JAR-OPs terms.
You may wonder why we carry fuel for an alternate we wouldn't necessarily use, and the answer is that we wouldn't necessarily divert. The chances are that if you have gone around at LGW then it's due to a one off event like the preceeding aircraft being slow to vacate. During your briefing you will, of course, have discussed your endurance, and would be aware that in the event of a go around for such an occurence you could commit to LGW and burn your div fuel to make another approach and landing into LGW. If the event is something more serious, like a blocked runway with undetermined delay, then you dash off to LHR.
Pedantry, but I think you mean leave WILLO with 7T?
the system as I understand it is that you do not declare a 'fuel emergency' (US) or a PAN/MAYDAY (UK) UNTIL you are in one? IF you start to get the cross-country vectors and you will be 'short', then you say 'PAN'?
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: uk
Posts: 260
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Carnage Matey
To use up the diversion fuel as holding fuel, by committing to your destination airfield, shouldn't you be at an airfield with at least 2 independent runways?
120.4
On long-haul flights, the availability of topping-up the fuel rquired to take care of LHR/LGW's advice that 20 mins holding should be considered, is often not feasible, due to take-off performance restrictions and being at max.t/o weight with minimum fuel for the flight anyway. If, after taking into consideration all relevant factors before making my fuel decision, I have the luxury of taking an extra 20 mins fuel, it's uplift, bearing in mind approximately 33-40% will be used up by the heavier weight, will also depend on time of arrival and day of the week. In short, if I ever get my fuel figures spot-on, then I will start doing the lottery again!
However, I will land safely with fuel in the tanks at destination (or alternate), which is exactly what the VS crew achieved, with of course the usual excellent co-operation of ATC..
To use up the diversion fuel as holding fuel, by committing to your destination airfield, shouldn't you be at an airfield with at least 2 independent runways?
120.4
On long-haul flights, the availability of topping-up the fuel rquired to take care of LHR/LGW's advice that 20 mins holding should be considered, is often not feasible, due to take-off performance restrictions and being at max.t/o weight with minimum fuel for the flight anyway. If, after taking into consideration all relevant factors before making my fuel decision, I have the luxury of taking an extra 20 mins fuel, it's uplift, bearing in mind approximately 33-40% will be used up by the heavier weight, will also depend on time of arrival and day of the week. In short, if I ever get my fuel figures spot-on, then I will start doing the lottery again!
However, I will land safely with fuel in the tanks at destination (or alternate), which is exactly what the VS crew achieved, with of course the usual excellent co-operation of ATC..