Extra fuel
Per Ardua ad Astraeus
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: UK
Posts: 18,579
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It is by no means unusual for commanders to annotate a PLOG with the reason for extra uplift. Presumably such an uplift is for a reason, so why not say so? I do not have a problem with it.
Per Ardua ad Astraeus
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: UK
Posts: 18,579
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Lots - eg it might highlight an error in the PLOG calculated fuel if extra fuel is constantly being loaded for a particular reason which the software has missed.
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: last time I looked I was still here.
Posts: 4,507
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
There was great mirth enjoyed, a few years ago, when the highly experienced captain of a charter airline was operating his a/c on a schedule route on behalf of the parent 'major'. It was only a short hop, wintery morning, busy major airport XXXX with lots of likely delays in handling due to the conditions and congestion etc. He was on the 1st of a multi-rotation day.
He deemed it prudent, considering all things, to tanker round trip fuel + some for Holding at XXXX . (It could be done without risking wing icing during turnround.) However, the parent 'major' did not tanker fuel on that sector and quite a contest enschewed between captain & dispatcher. In the end, as long as the captain annotated the fuel order with the reason, all would be accepted and the dispatcher had covered his rear end.
It took them a while to de-code. ME as the reaon for the extra fuel.
In the end, as Hollywood would have it, he went in and out of the congested hub with no delay, while other a/c sat around waiting for fuel. Carriers that had tankered in had burnt holding fuel at XXX, and those that handn't tankered needed some anyway, thus overloading the fuellers in the early inclement morning.
Another carrier, very long-haul charter Europe to Caribbean had min plog policy, and again requiring justificatioon why extra was taken. The argument was that cont' of 2500kgs gave you 40 mins anyway. As we were operating at the range of the a/c, across the N.Atlantic with jet streams of upto 150kts headwind, into airfields of very limited approach aids and parking areas, the likelyhood of delays, inbound was high. A diversion was a commercial nightmare. Fuel always seemd the cheapest insurance, but in any case, it was often not possible to carry any. We were nearly always at MTOW, anyway, but when not, the idea of leaving 2000kgs at home when setting off on a 13hour sector across the pond, struck me as a stress causing exercise. Sadly, the C.P. still wanted to know precisely why you'd made your decision.
It grated that you could have years of proven experience, the company was happy for you to take 200.000.000U$ worth of machinery and all the pax halfway across the world, but they were worried you would keep all the Green Shield stamps for yourself.
I would accept that on the return leg, with tailwinds & a wealth of diversion airfields available, & CAT 2 at home base, the attitude should be different.
Experience and thoughtfullness will often prove successful in avoiding the poo. I just wish it was encouraged more, rather than the 'belive the computer' attitude and don't think too much. And if you do question the 'oracle' of microsoft, woebetied unless you have a cast iron explanation. I find that attitude from on high to not be the best promoter of safety. Perhaps a revisit to the story of BY at GRO might awaken some thinking.
He deemed it prudent, considering all things, to tanker round trip fuel + some for Holding at XXXX . (It could be done without risking wing icing during turnround.) However, the parent 'major' did not tanker fuel on that sector and quite a contest enschewed between captain & dispatcher. In the end, as long as the captain annotated the fuel order with the reason, all would be accepted and the dispatcher had covered his rear end.
It took them a while to de-code. ME as the reaon for the extra fuel.
In the end, as Hollywood would have it, he went in and out of the congested hub with no delay, while other a/c sat around waiting for fuel. Carriers that had tankered in had burnt holding fuel at XXX, and those that handn't tankered needed some anyway, thus overloading the fuellers in the early inclement morning.
Another carrier, very long-haul charter Europe to Caribbean had min plog policy, and again requiring justificatioon why extra was taken. The argument was that cont' of 2500kgs gave you 40 mins anyway. As we were operating at the range of the a/c, across the N.Atlantic with jet streams of upto 150kts headwind, into airfields of very limited approach aids and parking areas, the likelyhood of delays, inbound was high. A diversion was a commercial nightmare. Fuel always seemd the cheapest insurance, but in any case, it was often not possible to carry any. We were nearly always at MTOW, anyway, but when not, the idea of leaving 2000kgs at home when setting off on a 13hour sector across the pond, struck me as a stress causing exercise. Sadly, the C.P. still wanted to know precisely why you'd made your decision.
It grated that you could have years of proven experience, the company was happy for you to take 200.000.000U$ worth of machinery and all the pax halfway across the world, but they were worried you would keep all the Green Shield stamps for yourself.
I would accept that on the return leg, with tailwinds & a wealth of diversion airfields available, & CAT 2 at home base, the attitude should be different.
Experience and thoughtfullness will often prove successful in avoiding the poo. I just wish it was encouraged more, rather than the 'belive the computer' attitude and don't think too much. And if you do question the 'oracle' of microsoft, woebetied unless you have a cast iron explanation. I find that attitude from on high to not be the best promoter of safety. Perhaps a revisit to the story of BY at GRO might awaken some thinking.
Per Ardua ad Astraeus
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: UK
Posts: 18,579
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
For that reason the flightplan data (including ordered extra fuel) can be taken easily without a report
Join Date: Dec 1999
Location: Oop North, UK
Posts: 3,076
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I would accept that on the return leg, with tailwinds & a wealth of diversion airfields available, & CAT 2 at home base, the attitude should be different.
Fox Moth I will try to explain why an increase in headwind is worse than a decrease in tailwind.
Take a 4000nm sector at TAS of 500kts would take 8 hrs still air
Take a 4000nm sector TAS 500kts wind ahead at 100kts takes 10hrs a difference of 2 hrs
Take a 4000nm sector TAS 500kts tail wind 100kts takes 6 hrs 40 min at difference of 1hr 20 mins
Thus a greater headwind has a proportionally greater cost than a lesser tail wind of the order 3:2.
I hope that is clear
HF
Take a 4000nm sector at TAS of 500kts would take 8 hrs still air
Take a 4000nm sector TAS 500kts wind ahead at 100kts takes 10hrs a difference of 2 hrs
Take a 4000nm sector TAS 500kts tail wind 100kts takes 6 hrs 40 min at difference of 1hr 20 mins
Thus a greater headwind has a proportionally greater cost than a lesser tail wind of the order 3:2.
I hope that is clear
HF
Per Ardua ad Astraeus
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: UK
Posts: 18,579
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
catchup - what is the issue? Would YOU have a problem with annotating your PLOG with a reason for extra fuel? Is it not also a useful part of the 'on-line' training for F/Os to be given the reasoning for fuel uplifts?
Nobody, especially me, is saying do NOT carry extra fuel. I generally do, sometimes I take PLOG fuel. It is simply that I have always tried to do so for a reason.
I once flew with a Captain who carried 1000kg on a Cavok day 'because it is nice to have a bit extra' and then carried 1000kg on a Cat 3 day - for the same reason. That, to me, is bordering on lunacy.
MJ - interesting questions. Did any answers appear? BTW, PS I did not query the Cavok fuel but...................
Nobody, especially me, is saying do NOT carry extra fuel. I generally do, sometimes I take PLOG fuel. It is simply that I have always tried to do so for a reason.
I once flew with a Captain who carried 1000kg on a Cavok day 'because it is nice to have a bit extra' and then carried 1000kg on a Cat 3 day - for the same reason. That, to me, is bordering on lunacy.
MJ - interesting questions. Did any answers appear? BTW, PS I did not query the Cavok fuel but...................
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: In Frozen Chunks (Cloud Cuckoo Land)
Age: 17
Posts: 1,521
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I love going with flight plan fuel/min op (assuming no additional planned for WX/holding).
Why?
Because it gives me no options at the other end in case something goes wrong!
Why?
Because it gives me no options at the other end in case something goes wrong!
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Jakarta
Age: 71
Posts: 176
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Working for an ACMI Operator, it is frequent that client airlines demand to know why any fuel in excess of CFP requirements is carried. We have no problem providing this information. It's called professionalism, guys!
Regardless, it is up to the crew, how much, if any, extra fuel is carried.
Maybe, if the bean-counters had to justify "extra" fuel carried in their Jags or Benz's on their way to deposit their paychecks..... hmmmmmm?
I stand by my first flight instructor's admonition that
"the only time you have too much fuel is when you are on fire"
Cheers
Regardless, it is up to the crew, how much, if any, extra fuel is carried.
Maybe, if the bean-counters had to justify "extra" fuel carried in their Jags or Benz's on their way to deposit their paychecks..... hmmmmmm?
I stand by my first flight instructor's admonition that
"the only time you have too much fuel is when you are on fire"
Cheers
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Vilha Abrao
Posts: 507
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
(a)Would YOU have a problem with annotating your PLOG with a reason for extra fuel?(b) Is it not also a useful part of the 'on-line' training for F/Os to be given the reasoning for fuel uplifts?
a) If anyone can tell me for what reason it's good for and it improves airsafety - NO
b) When ordering fuel, I always chat with my copilot. I don't have to write anything for that.
regards
a) If anyone can tell me for what reason it's good for and it improves airsafety - NO
b) When ordering fuel, I always chat with my copilot. I don't have to write anything for that.
regards
Only half a speed-brake
Intresting subject. Let's say I know of a company not run by beancounters yet (some will argue it is not run yet at all) where no justifications need to be made and at present probably noone thoroughly analyses fuel uplift data.
It is a single hub (two intersecting runways) s/h operation, main alternate is 1000 - 1400 kg away wind/weight dependent, company standard final reserve is planned at 1250 kg fixed, speaking of 737-4/5 operations. Vast majority of pilots decide to take no less than 1200 extra for "half an hour" irrespective of weather, thus the landing fuel stands at 4000+ kg, that is the figure aimed for. Altough perhaps unnecessary on many occasions, I agree it keeps the strain out of the brain.
Once I spoke to a fellow countryman who earns his € refuelling at Frankfurt, if he is to believe we arrive with close to most fuel, outtankering our competitors by average 2000 kg. That being said, FRA is 45 min tkof/ldg and we tanker fuel OUT of there. It is nice to know that if doomsday came we could turn back, fly home, and on minimum reserves reach the 3rd farthest alternate (1300-1700kg), but...
... my question is, would this be tolerated in "properly" run "western" company?
FD.
It is a single hub (two intersecting runways) s/h operation, main alternate is 1000 - 1400 kg away wind/weight dependent, company standard final reserve is planned at 1250 kg fixed, speaking of 737-4/5 operations. Vast majority of pilots decide to take no less than 1200 extra for "half an hour" irrespective of weather, thus the landing fuel stands at 4000+ kg, that is the figure aimed for. Altough perhaps unnecessary on many occasions, I agree it keeps the strain out of the brain.
Once I spoke to a fellow countryman who earns his € refuelling at Frankfurt, if he is to believe we arrive with close to most fuel, outtankering our competitors by average 2000 kg. That being said, FRA is 45 min tkof/ldg and we tanker fuel OUT of there. It is nice to know that if doomsday came we could turn back, fly home, and on minimum reserves reach the 3rd farthest alternate (1300-1700kg), but...
... my question is, would this be tolerated in "properly" run "western" company?
FD.
Per Ardua ad Astraeus
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: UK
Posts: 18,579
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Catchup - I'm going to bow out of this part of the thread, referring to my first post. Each to their own? For FD, I would suggest that landing a 737 with 4T+ in Frankfurt REGARDLESS of weather is unreal. 2 landing runways etc etc?
I would rather try to progress Mike J's points:-
***********NB In my experience -
-- We could ask how many Captains in our own airline carry minimum fuel, even when destination weather is poor.
Assuming by 'minimum' you mean PLOG, very, very few ..............'management' pilots have been known to do it.
-- We could ask how many First Officers would remain silent in such situations. Silent at the flight planning stage. Silent in flight at the point where diversion was demanded.
...............Likewise very few, probably none.
-- We could ask how many First Officers receive adequate CRM, aircraft performance, fuel planning and job description training.
-- Ditto the last for Captains !
...............Varies hugely with operator, all in UK receive 'formal' CRM trianing, whether that is 'adeqaute' is easily debated.
-- We could ask how many Captains regard First Officers as mere bums on seats, making up the numbers, whose opinions are worthless.
................Very very few, a dying breed, thank the Lord!
-- We could ask how many Captains are perfectly capable of abusive language directed at other staff.
...............A depressing number. Just look at some of the PP's posts here.
-- We could ask how many Captains would be reluctant to declare a Mayday, in view of possible disciplinary repercussions.
...............None AFAIK.
-- We could ask if a combination of the above factors could lead to a safety threatening in-flight shortage of fuel.
...............Do you need to ask?
I would rather try to progress Mike J's points:-
***********NB In my experience -
-- We could ask how many Captains in our own airline carry minimum fuel, even when destination weather is poor.
Assuming by 'minimum' you mean PLOG, very, very few ..............'management' pilots have been known to do it.
-- We could ask how many First Officers would remain silent in such situations. Silent at the flight planning stage. Silent in flight at the point where diversion was demanded.
...............Likewise very few, probably none.
-- We could ask how many First Officers receive adequate CRM, aircraft performance, fuel planning and job description training.
-- Ditto the last for Captains !
...............Varies hugely with operator, all in UK receive 'formal' CRM trianing, whether that is 'adeqaute' is easily debated.
-- We could ask how many Captains regard First Officers as mere bums on seats, making up the numbers, whose opinions are worthless.
................Very very few, a dying breed, thank the Lord!
-- We could ask how many Captains are perfectly capable of abusive language directed at other staff.
...............A depressing number. Just look at some of the PP's posts here.
-- We could ask how many Captains would be reluctant to declare a Mayday, in view of possible disciplinary repercussions.
...............None AFAIK.
-- We could ask if a combination of the above factors could lead to a safety threatening in-flight shortage of fuel.
...............Do you need to ask?
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: Arizona USA
Posts: 8,571
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I worked for one company where the chief pilot would always request why extra fuel was carried...and it wasn't for about a year that I found out why he never did carry any extra.
Enroute between two SE asian rather large cities he climbed the aircraft to FL350, only to me told by ATC (via HF) to descend straightaway due to crossing traffic ahead...only option being FL280.
His actions were quite astonishingly simple on this occasion, he simply turned off the HF and continued to destination at FL350.
Simple as that. Wasn't the first time either, so I was told.
Now some might well not believe, but another Captain on the obs seat, as well as the duty F/O and F/E all had the same story.
I kid you not.
Enroute between two SE asian rather large cities he climbed the aircraft to FL350, only to me told by ATC (via HF) to descend straightaway due to crossing traffic ahead...only option being FL280.
His actions were quite astonishingly simple on this occasion, he simply turned off the HF and continued to destination at FL350.
Simple as that. Wasn't the first time either, so I was told.
Now some might well not believe, but another Captain on the obs seat, as well as the duty F/O and F/E all had the same story.
I kid you not.
Join Date: Aug 1998
Location: The World
Posts: 388
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
BOAC
Your quote” I once flew with a Captain who carried 1000kg on a Cavok day 'because it is nice to have a bit extra' and then carried 1000kg on a Cat 3 day - for the same reason. That, to me, is bordering on lunacy”
I thought I was the only one that had witnessed/experienced this lunacy and I’ve had F/O’s try to do the same thing. Monkey see, monkey do I guess.
On the other hand I’ve also experienced dispatchers trying to put on tankerage fuel when the weather conditions at the departure airport were less then desirable due to slippery runways etc. They didn’t seem to understand the concept of trying to stay on the runway surface in the event of a RTO. In marginal conditions having all that extra weight on T/O certainly wasn’t going to make my job of stopping or handling an engine out any easier.
Bottom line; use your common sense when requesting additional fuel, don't be a monkey...
Your quote” I once flew with a Captain who carried 1000kg on a Cavok day 'because it is nice to have a bit extra' and then carried 1000kg on a Cat 3 day - for the same reason. That, to me, is bordering on lunacy”
I thought I was the only one that had witnessed/experienced this lunacy and I’ve had F/O’s try to do the same thing. Monkey see, monkey do I guess.
On the other hand I’ve also experienced dispatchers trying to put on tankerage fuel when the weather conditions at the departure airport were less then desirable due to slippery runways etc. They didn’t seem to understand the concept of trying to stay on the runway surface in the event of a RTO. In marginal conditions having all that extra weight on T/O certainly wasn’t going to make my job of stopping or handling an engine out any easier.
Bottom line; use your common sense when requesting additional fuel, don't be a monkey...
Only half a speed-brake
BOAC:
Unreal I would use for flying to SVO with alternate HEL (CAVOK day in Moscow) with 6 runways available in the city and being MLW limited on a -500! Anyhow, thank you for a swift reply I accept I´ll see no more due to the simplicity of the topic.
What exactly would be the arrival fuel to FRA, LHR (MAN nominated for alternate! - 30 min hldg fuel understood) and, gentlemen, PRG perhaps? I understand a number of UK pilots visit a here a lot on various equipment, say in terms of holding time available?
Hail PPRuNe,
FD.
What exactly would be the arrival fuel to FRA, LHR (MAN nominated for alternate! - 30 min hldg fuel understood) and, gentlemen, PRG perhaps? I understand a number of UK pilots visit a here a lot on various equipment, say in terms of holding time available?
Hail PPRuNe,
FD.
I have read this thread with interest but when it reaches the position of trying to pin someone down to a fuel figure for a specific flight I do feel it is turning into a joke. Yes, we can all learn from errors in the past, but, when it comes to predicting the future we use our experience, local knowledge and best judgement. This pointscoring attitude sucks!