use contingency fuel on the ground before t/o
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: UK
Posts: 24
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Contingency Fuel
Hey guys thought I woulfd throw my penny into the debate...
My understanding was that contingency was to be used after despatch, for something which was unknown to the crew at the time.
I am only an FO but on my sectors if i think that we will be sat waiting on the ground longer than we envisage, then i make a point of adding the fuel on. Most of our captains agree thats good sense.
However to to back to the original thread. I dont think I would consider taxiing back in to get refueled. That would cause so many problems its not worth mentioning.
I also agree that the big men of the day seem to be the ones who take plan fuel on a daily basis, because we live in a world where the purse strings are being very tightly drawn shut, and anyone who takes more is perhaps being perceived wrongly. It will only take one diversion due to fuel and all the fuel savings that person has made will soon disappear.
Coincidentally we did a flight last year to CUN in a 757 and we actually disatched 100kg above Comp Min Req'd Fuel because thats all that would fit in the yanks. Had we been held up on the ground we were still going, as we could just have our pick of every airport along the route within 10 hours of departure to drop into and refuel, which would be much quicker and less hassle that going back in to stand at LHR/MAN... etc
ps have some of you guys never heard of the pencil sharpener, or even ECON...
My understanding was that contingency was to be used after despatch, for something which was unknown to the crew at the time.
I am only an FO but on my sectors if i think that we will be sat waiting on the ground longer than we envisage, then i make a point of adding the fuel on. Most of our captains agree thats good sense.
However to to back to the original thread. I dont think I would consider taxiing back in to get refueled. That would cause so many problems its not worth mentioning.
I also agree that the big men of the day seem to be the ones who take plan fuel on a daily basis, because we live in a world where the purse strings are being very tightly drawn shut, and anyone who takes more is perhaps being perceived wrongly. It will only take one diversion due to fuel and all the fuel savings that person has made will soon disappear.
Coincidentally we did a flight last year to CUN in a 757 and we actually disatched 100kg above Comp Min Req'd Fuel because thats all that would fit in the yanks. Had we been held up on the ground we were still going, as we could just have our pick of every airport along the route within 10 hours of departure to drop into and refuel, which would be much quicker and less hassle that going back in to stand at LHR/MAN... etc
ps have some of you guys never heard of the pencil sharpener, or even ECON...
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Scottish FIR
Posts: 344
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
However to to back to the original thread. I dont think I would consider taxiing back in to get refueled. That would cause so many problems its not worth mentioning.
Why not ask the company? Your on the ground, taxi time taking much longer than expected. Maybe even plan a tech stop. I had it happen once. A landing 747 dumped bits and pieces on the runway, so our departure was delayed. If I've burnt my start and taxi fuel and contingency is being burned and I'm still on the ground, plan 'A' isn't working, so its back on stand for a splash, or tech stop.
Varies from state to state. States quite clearly in our FOM that it can be used anytime after the refueler dis-connects, so that includes APU burn BEFORE dispatch.
411As diatribe-
Shows his companies culture is as geriatric as the aeroplanes he flies!!
411As diatribe-
Only a very foolish Commander would use his contingency fuel prior to departure.
IF he does so...back to the RHS, or better yet, shown the door.
With a swift kick in the backside.
IF he does so...back to the RHS, or better yet, shown the door.
With a swift kick in the backside.
Nemo Me Impune Lacessit
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Derbyshire, England.
Posts: 4,094
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I do believe it is necessary for us to draw the considerable distinction between, for example, departing JFK around a weekday evening time when a 30 to 45 minute taxy time is to be expected and the rather different case of being caught out by some unforeseen and unexpected event between engine start and lining up for take off.
Wizofoz: "States quite clearly in our FOM that it can be used anytime after the refueler dis-connects, so that includes APU burn BEFORE dispatch" - APU burn, (400kg/hr?), is not normally the problem though is it? It is all four burning and turning after start and before take off and I, for one, would not want to be using my contingency fuel whilst still on the ground.
Wizofoz: "States quite clearly in our FOM that it can be used anytime after the refueler dis-connects, so that includes APU burn BEFORE dispatch" - APU burn, (400kg/hr?), is not normally the problem though is it? It is all four burning and turning after start and before take off and I, for one, would not want to be using my contingency fuel whilst still on the ground.
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: cloud 9
Posts: 198
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The problem with contingency fuel, is that the FAA, JAA and CASA all have different methods of determining fuel requirements in addition to trip fuel. Under JAA, contingency fuel may be used after dispatch (and there are different definitions of dispatch!), and may be used in its' entirety before take-off. I, for one, would not be happy to depart on the basis that all my contingency fuel has already been used, but it is legal under JAR-OPS.
It comes down to individual command decisions, as it should always be. However, in these times of high oil prices, I would expect Flight Management to put pressure on Captains not to return to the gate for refuelling, if there was still some contingency fuel on board.
"You've earned that 4th stripe, now go and use it."
It comes down to individual command decisions, as it should always be. However, in these times of high oil prices, I would expect Flight Management to put pressure on Captains not to return to the gate for refuelling, if there was still some contingency fuel on board.
"You've earned that 4th stripe, now go and use it."
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Round n About
Posts: 103
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Parabellum you make a good point – using contingency fuel on taxy when the delay could be predicted might well be poor judgment. However, there are reasons, as BOAC said, when the delay is unexpected and more thought might be required as to the merits of getting airborne or taxying back. Things in aviation are rarely clear cut.
However, typically, life is very black and white for 411A and predictably, he delivers his usual unthinking and simplistic type of answer…..
However, typically, life is very black and white for 411A and predictably, he delivers his usual unthinking and simplistic type of answer…..
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: Arizona USA
Posts: 8,571
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
However, typically, life is very black and white for 411A and predictably, he delivers his usual unthinking and simplistic type of answer…..
Few options remain, having used up contingency fuel, before takeoff.
The paying passengers deserve better.
Further, I find it rather strange indeed that some 'more modern' pilots, engaged in 'team building' and CRM etc, would then be prepared to throw away one of the most essential requirements for a safe arrival of their assigned flight...fuel in tanks.
Strange indeed, and very foolhardy.
Last edited by 411A; 24th Jun 2008 at 19:27.
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Auckland NZ
Age: 65
Posts: 25
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Liquid Gold
Hello gentlemen, yes the favorite discussion about fuel! Everyone has a valid point and answer to how much fuel one should carry. Some times it is due to experience and local knowledge, and other times it is purely down to putting on extra fuel with no justification at all, just because I want extra fuel. My feeling is the last reason is totally unacceptable 
Lets have a look at a standard minimum fuel policy.
1: Taxi fuel.
2: A to B plus approach.
3: Contingency.
4: B to C plus visual approach
5: 30 minutes hold
6: And in some cases APU burn.
The requirements at flight planning and departure are to have at least the regularity or company minimum fuel which ever is the greatest. You can't dispatch with a lower fuel figure. Once you are under way and this includes while still on the ground, the Captain has to have sufficient fuel to land safely at a airport with 30 minutes fuel remaining or declare a fuel emergency.
So in reality what the Captain should be looking at is the weather at destination going to be at the time of arrival above landing minima? How many runways does it have if one was to close? Could I safely land at a closer alternate if I had too? This is the more practical approach to have I got enough fuel to safely land at my destination. How many times have you divert for a runway closure which is not expected? Of course if the weather was forecast to be marginal you would have carried extra fuel and yes sometimes there are unexpected changes in the weather. But with fuel at the price it is today and climbing I think a more practical approach is required, carrying minimum fuel is not a compromise on safety at all, it just requires better judgment and management of the fuel onboard and not the old lets fill it up and go mentality of the past when fuel was cheap. At present I believe the cost of fuel to be approximately 50% of the total running costs of the aircraft. If you want to keep your job I suggest you reevaluate the amount of fuel you carry in the safest and efficient manner.
Lets have a look at a standard minimum fuel policy.
1: Taxi fuel.
2: A to B plus approach.
3: Contingency.
4: B to C plus visual approach
5: 30 minutes hold
6: And in some cases APU burn.
The requirements at flight planning and departure are to have at least the regularity or company minimum fuel which ever is the greatest. You can't dispatch with a lower fuel figure. Once you are under way and this includes while still on the ground, the Captain has to have sufficient fuel to land safely at a airport with 30 minutes fuel remaining or declare a fuel emergency.
So in reality what the Captain should be looking at is the weather at destination going to be at the time of arrival above landing minima? How many runways does it have if one was to close? Could I safely land at a closer alternate if I had too? This is the more practical approach to have I got enough fuel to safely land at my destination. How many times have you divert for a runway closure which is not expected? Of course if the weather was forecast to be marginal you would have carried extra fuel and yes sometimes there are unexpected changes in the weather. But with fuel at the price it is today and climbing I think a more practical approach is required, carrying minimum fuel is not a compromise on safety at all, it just requires better judgment and management of the fuel onboard and not the old lets fill it up and go mentality of the past when fuel was cheap. At present I believe the cost of fuel to be approximately 50% of the total running costs of the aircraft. If you want to keep your job I suggest you reevaluate the amount of fuel you carry in the safest and efficient manner.
Join Date: Sep 1998
Location: wherever
Age: 55
Posts: 1,616
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If you've use cont. fuel due to taxi delays he is my secret to success.
1. no de-rate take off. save a hundred kg
2. max climb thrust. save another 3-4 hundred kg
Job done.
remember cane the engines save the fuel.
1. no de-rate take off. save a hundred kg
2. max climb thrust. save another 3-4 hundred kg
Job done.
remember cane the engines save the fuel.
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Over the Moon
Posts: 780
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
You can burn contingency when you dispatch so in my view no big issue.
Taxi fuel in my company is based on a statistical analysis airfield by airfield but the unexpected can and does happen. If you are aware there is an issue prior to loading your fuel then load more. If the problem is unexpected then you can hardly have been expected to forsee delays above and beyond what is normaly expected and accounted for on your fuel plan.
If your plan assumes longest departure and arrival then happy days if you are useing a shorter departure or arrival as you can correct your fuel required accordingly and maybe find a couple of hundred extra kgs that way. Same for ZFW verses the plan etc. You may know from experience that you alays get a large shortcut and end up 300 kgs up on that route in any case.
At the end of the day its a judgement call and you have to take the relevant factors on the day into account and make your decision. If the situation arises were you are burning into contingency then you will have to keep a very critical eye on things. Conserve fuel shut an engine or two down. Should you feel you may need to return to stand then it would indeed be appropriate to exercise CRM in its broadest sense and prempt the problem by chatting to your company to see what they would prefer you to do. Maybe a tech stop would work better.
As in so many things with aviation the answer is not black and white that is why we are paid to exercise judgement on the day.
Taxi fuel in my company is based on a statistical analysis airfield by airfield but the unexpected can and does happen. If you are aware there is an issue prior to loading your fuel then load more. If the problem is unexpected then you can hardly have been expected to forsee delays above and beyond what is normaly expected and accounted for on your fuel plan.
If your plan assumes longest departure and arrival then happy days if you are useing a shorter departure or arrival as you can correct your fuel required accordingly and maybe find a couple of hundred extra kgs that way. Same for ZFW verses the plan etc. You may know from experience that you alays get a large shortcut and end up 300 kgs up on that route in any case.
At the end of the day its a judgement call and you have to take the relevant factors on the day into account and make your decision. If the situation arises were you are burning into contingency then you will have to keep a very critical eye on things. Conserve fuel shut an engine or two down. Should you feel you may need to return to stand then it would indeed be appropriate to exercise CRM in its broadest sense and prempt the problem by chatting to your company to see what they would prefer you to do. Maybe a tech stop would work better.
As in so many things with aviation the answer is not black and white that is why we are paid to exercise judgement on the day.
Bottums Up
If the contingency fuel carried if for the worst case scenario, and if one eats into contingency fuel on the ground prior to takeoff, what does one then do if the worst case scenario eventuates en-route?
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Over the Moon
Posts: 780
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
You then action your companies fuel policy for arriveing at destination below CNR. This may involve landing at destination or it may mean diverting. Does not mean your decision to use some of your contingency on the ground was wrong.
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Auckland NZ
Age: 65
Posts: 25
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Reality
The reality is if the weather is suitable you carry minimum fuel, if the forecast is indicating marginal weather you carry extra fuel as a diversion could cost a lot of money and possibly run out of crew duty hours. As a Captain and professional pilot I would hope this is how the majority of people operate. In reality I know it is not as I see what other pilots load on as extra fuel and it is not required. Every time you land compare your remaining fuel with your MDF (Minimum Diversion Fuel) Normally you will see quite a margin, especially if you have loaded extra fuel.
If one was to divert when MDF was reached you would arrive at your alternate with only 30 minutes of fuel, at the most. "Fuel Emergency" I hear you all say this is my point for loading extra fuel! My point is to use your fuel correctly and professionally. If you had a slight delay on arrival at your destination which was going to put you below MDF, would you divert? This is a call to be made on the day! How is the weather? expected landing time? Number of runways? Is there a closer alternate? etc. As I said in my earlier post a Captain can use his or her fuel in any manner as long as a safe landing can be achieved with 30 minutes fuel remaining once dispatched.
Certainly in the case above you would land with more fuel at your destination by holding a little longer than diverting when MDF was reached. Yes I agree that you have now lost your alternate. From the other point of view what happens when you arrive at your alternate and that closes due to a runway closure etc?
This is why we have a minimum fuel policy like we do to mitigate against endangering passengers and ourselves from dangerous situations. The problem is that pilots come along and add their own factors and the fuel load get bigger than Ben Hur.
My closing statement is carry the appropriate amount of fuel for each flight don't just add fuel for the sake of adding fuel, can I justify the extra fuel I am carrying.
If one was to divert when MDF was reached you would arrive at your alternate with only 30 minutes of fuel, at the most. "Fuel Emergency" I hear you all say this is my point for loading extra fuel! My point is to use your fuel correctly and professionally. If you had a slight delay on arrival at your destination which was going to put you below MDF, would you divert? This is a call to be made on the day! How is the weather? expected landing time? Number of runways? Is there a closer alternate? etc. As I said in my earlier post a Captain can use his or her fuel in any manner as long as a safe landing can be achieved with 30 minutes fuel remaining once dispatched.
Certainly in the case above you would land with more fuel at your destination by holding a little longer than diverting when MDF was reached. Yes I agree that you have now lost your alternate. From the other point of view what happens when you arrive at your alternate and that closes due to a runway closure etc?
This is why we have a minimum fuel policy like we do to mitigate against endangering passengers and ourselves from dangerous situations. The problem is that pilots come along and add their own factors and the fuel load get bigger than Ben Hur.
My closing statement is carry the appropriate amount of fuel for each flight don't just add fuel for the sake of adding fuel, can I justify the extra fuel I am carrying.
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: sh!# hole
Posts: 175
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Personally I think we are missing the mark here.
Use of contingency on ground and deciding whether to depart or top up should be based on the amount of contingency fuel you are dispatched with.
If I'm on a long flight, I will have either 3%, 5% or 20 mins worth of contingency. I have used some or most of that and I'm departing from a busy airport, I would definately consider departing and assessing my fuel situation en-route. In co-ordination with the company then decide if we do a tech stop at "not so busy" airport.
If I'm on a short flight and dispatched with 5mins contingency and departing from a "not so busy" airport, I will go back and top up again.
You just have to add up your situation and make a decision on what's the best on that day.
Making only one decision (no decision making) to return back to the gate to top up without considering the situation is not what you are paid to do!
Oz
Use of contingency on ground and deciding whether to depart or top up should be based on the amount of contingency fuel you are dispatched with.
If I'm on a long flight, I will have either 3%, 5% or 20 mins worth of contingency. I have used some or most of that and I'm departing from a busy airport, I would definately consider departing and assessing my fuel situation en-route. In co-ordination with the company then decide if we do a tech stop at "not so busy" airport.
If I'm on a short flight and dispatched with 5mins contingency and departing from a "not so busy" airport, I will go back and top up again.
You just have to add up your situation and make a decision on what's the best on that day.
Making only one decision (no decision making) to return back to the gate to top up without considering the situation is not what you are paid to do!
Oz
