How much is your minimum fuel at destination?
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: Arizona USA
Posts: 8,571
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I've never been carpetted for taking more than the plan either
I went directly to the airline Chairman and told him about this nonsense.
Color CP...gone.
Made my day.
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: on the golf course (Covid permitting)
Posts: 2,131
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
SNS
I think that is where the major difference is between our different ways of determining fuel required.
We used to use a fixed % which 5% for short flights and 3% for long range flights with en-route alternates.
We now use Statistical Contingency Fuel based on gathered data for that route and flight number. That means that some flights get a generous amount of CF (maybe up to 10%) whereas some flights get less - typically long range flights arriving at quiet airfields or before the LHR rush.
As an example, I came back from the Far East into LHR recently on a B744 with a 10 hour flight time, we had trip fuel of 103tonnes + 2tonnes contingency (95%SCF) +3.9tonnes div +4.4tonnes reserve +0.7taxi.
We landed with 8.3tonnes (~18250lbs for our US colleagues) having burnt the contingency fuel holding at LHR, equating to 49 minutes fuel in tanks. So it all worked out nicely on a cavok day. Loading extra fuel would have been my call, I would not have needed to give anyone a reason, but on that day I was happy.
[Note: not trying to point score, just for amplification and interest]
plus ten percent of the total fuel burn for the Class II portion
We used to use a fixed % which 5% for short flights and 3% for long range flights with en-route alternates.
We now use Statistical Contingency Fuel based on gathered data for that route and flight number. That means that some flights get a generous amount of CF (maybe up to 10%) whereas some flights get less - typically long range flights arriving at quiet airfields or before the LHR rush.
As an example, I came back from the Far East into LHR recently on a B744 with a 10 hour flight time, we had trip fuel of 103tonnes + 2tonnes contingency (95%SCF) +3.9tonnes div +4.4tonnes reserve +0.7taxi.
We landed with 8.3tonnes (~18250lbs for our US colleagues) having burnt the contingency fuel holding at LHR, equating to 49 minutes fuel in tanks. So it all worked out nicely on a cavok day. Loading extra fuel would have been my call, I would not have needed to give anyone a reason, but on that day I was happy.
[Note: not trying to point score, just for amplification and interest]
Join Date: May 2002
Location: dubai
Posts: 942
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Reading a few of these posts, has been a frightening experience.
Try flying around parts of Africa with those sort of reserves and you may come unstuck very quickly indeed.
It amuses me when an alternate is chosen depending on weather. What if an a/c lands, burst the tires and the runway is closed. Then where will you go?
One outfit used to fly into Khartoum years ago the closest alternate then was Jeddah, so commercial pressure took over and they amended the arrival fuel to "Island" hold!! What a lot of BS.
The legal minimum fuel quiet often is not enough, in the 3rd world, very often it is not enough.
Try flying around parts of Africa with those sort of reserves and you may come unstuck very quickly indeed.
It amuses me when an alternate is chosen depending on weather. What if an a/c lands, burst the tires and the runway is closed. Then where will you go?
One outfit used to fly into Khartoum years ago the closest alternate then was Jeddah, so commercial pressure took over and they amended the arrival fuel to "Island" hold!! What a lot of BS.
The legal minimum fuel quiet often is not enough, in the 3rd world, very often it is not enough.
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: UK
Posts: 24
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Minimum Fuel @ Chocks.
Hey Guys, I have been reading this thread and i'm amazed at how much fuel some of you guys are landing with.
We landed yesterday evening from a Medium-Haul Destination (flight time 5.20)
and shut down with 3.4 Tonnes. (0.7T above MFR)
Which comprised of
1.Fuel to Alternate
2. 30 mins holding @ 1500'
3. remainder of 3% contingency fuel
a/c B757-200
I think that in this day and age, we should all of course be giving due consideration and respect to factors such as weather, notam's, time of day, etc etc....
But I think the days of a ton for mum and the kids has well and truly been left behind now
JetJockey
We landed yesterday evening from a Medium-Haul Destination (flight time 5.20)
and shut down with 3.4 Tonnes. (0.7T above MFR)
Which comprised of
1.Fuel to Alternate
2. 30 mins holding @ 1500'
3. remainder of 3% contingency fuel
a/c B757-200
I think that in this day and age, we should all of course be giving due consideration and respect to factors such as weather, notam's, time of day, etc etc....
But I think the days of a ton for mum and the kids has well and truly been left behind now
JetJockey
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: on the golf course (Covid permitting)
Posts: 2,131
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
uu-anker
You have to read it in context as to where you are flying to.
Flying to JNB we would carry Durban or even Cape Town fuel as alternates. Flying to Bombay we may well have Chennai or Delhi but to JFK we may just carry EWR. In those former instances the planned landing fuel would be even more than the 40,000lbs referred to earlier.
Horses for courses, but then again coming from Dubai I don't suppose fuel cost is really a consideration
What do you suggest then. Presumably you always carry fuel for two alternates or an airport with two independent runways. What happens if they both have problems? Do you carry fuel for a third alternate. At the end of the day it comes down to risk management, and you cannot get rid of the last incy-wincy bit of risk unless you stay on the ground. Maybe you should
You have to read it in context as to where you are flying to.
Flying to JNB we would carry Durban or even Cape Town fuel as alternates. Flying to Bombay we may well have Chennai or Delhi but to JFK we may just carry EWR. In those former instances the planned landing fuel would be even more than the 40,000lbs referred to earlier.
Horses for courses, but then again coming from Dubai I don't suppose fuel cost is really a consideration
It amuses me when an alternate is chosen depending on weather. What if an a/c lands, burst the tires and the runway is closed.
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: US
Posts: 285
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
TopBunk
The day I am dictated to as to how much fuel I will carry when I am PIC, is the day I will stay on the ground.
Yes I am fully aware it costs fuel to carry fuel. However you only need one diversion (expensive) and all that saving plus some, is lost.
12 months ago if you flight planned to Mumbai for eg.,with 30 mins holding fuel, you would have a 50/50 chance of a divert.
You are right, it is horses for courses.
The day I am dictated to as to how much fuel I will carry when I am PIC, is the day I will stay on the ground.
Yes I am fully aware it costs fuel to carry fuel. However you only need one diversion (expensive) and all that saving plus some, is lost.
12 months ago if you flight planned to Mumbai for eg.,with 30 mins holding fuel, you would have a 50/50 chance of a divert.
You are right, it is horses for courses.
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: ? ? ?
Posts: 2,281
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
However you only need one diversion (expensive) and all that saving plus some, is lost.
12 months ago if you flight planned to Mumbai for eg.,with 30 mins holding fuel, you would have a 50/50 chance of a divert.
It does not mean that we can continue to carry on tons for dad and mummy as in the good old times.
I agree, and i used to work as, with 757jetjockey.
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: uk
Posts: 524
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Landed in NCL with 3.2T, 757 the other day having taken paper work fuel.
Interestingly enough it says in our OPS MAN that alternate fuel should comprise of the fuel required in order to go around, execute entire missed approach procedure to holding point, then complete worst case expected departure routing enroute to worst case expected standard arrival at alternate to the IAF, followed by worst case procedural arrival.
Our alternate routing certainly doesn't consist of this. More like most direct route to alternate airfield with enough to get you overhead the airfield with final reserve....what about other airlines?
Interestingly enough it says in our OPS MAN that alternate fuel should comprise of the fuel required in order to go around, execute entire missed approach procedure to holding point, then complete worst case expected departure routing enroute to worst case expected standard arrival at alternate to the IAF, followed by worst case procedural arrival.
Our alternate routing certainly doesn't consist of this. More like most direct route to alternate airfield with enough to get you overhead the airfield with final reserve....what about other airlines?
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Here There Yonder
Posts: 244
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I have been flying for airlines, some big and some quite small, for over twenty years. Fuel policies, overall, are fairly similar; fuel to destination + 5% ( used to be 10%)+ full missed + alternate + 30 minutes. Having said that and to add to some previous posts, I recently chose to carry extra because with local knowledge I was doubtful of the weather forecasts at the time. Within days I was called in and asked to justify myself.
For me that was a first. Needless to say, I was not impressed.
To satisfy the curiosity it is in S.E. Asia.
For me that was a first. Needless to say, I was not impressed.
To satisfy the curiosity it is in S.E. Asia.
Join Date: Jan 2000
Location: Europe
Posts: 168
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Common Sense
Good Question.
For me there is 1) What is legal ?
2) What is safe ?
There is common sense, experience,route experience and local knowledge.
3) One usable runway at destination. OR
Two or more seperate runways. If one is blocked it will no
4) How accurate are your flight plans ? Jeppensen ?
Is there a fudge factor with extra fuel built in or not /
Performance factor ?
Rome FCO I take traffic contingency fuel I may have to justify this by taking fuel to a more distant 2nd alternate.
Quite often when weather is good ( JAA) Final reserve + GA + Alternate.
I take 6-10 minutes extra holding fuel
Now if I have to hold traffic delays at destination ( less than 6 hours ) and the destination has two separate runways and VMC-good WX
If I have to, rather than going to Alternate. I look at No Alternate fuel
Approach can be made from MSA in VMC.
I say landing at destination is assured.
Dont like it but it is better than unnecessarily going to alternate.
If it were to come to expect on landing destination Final reserve + 400kg (A-320 ) I would declare a PAN PAN
For me there is 1) What is legal ?
2) What is safe ?
There is common sense, experience,route experience and local knowledge.
3) One usable runway at destination. OR
Two or more seperate runways. If one is blocked it will no
4) How accurate are your flight plans ? Jeppensen ?
Is there a fudge factor with extra fuel built in or not /
Performance factor ?
Rome FCO I take traffic contingency fuel I may have to justify this by taking fuel to a more distant 2nd alternate.
Quite often when weather is good ( JAA) Final reserve + GA + Alternate.
I take 6-10 minutes extra holding fuel
Now if I have to hold traffic delays at destination ( less than 6 hours ) and the destination has two separate runways and VMC-good WX
If I have to, rather than going to Alternate. I look at No Alternate fuel
Approach can be made from MSA in VMC.
I say landing at destination is assured.
Dont like it but it is better than unnecessarily going to alternate.
If it were to come to expect on landing destination Final reserve + 400kg (A-320 ) I would declare a PAN PAN
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: USA
Posts: 3,218
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Reading a few of these posts, has been a frightening experience.
Try flying around parts of Africa with those sort of reserves and you may come unstuck very quickly indeed.
It amuses me when an alternate is chosen depending on weather. What if an a/c lands, burst the tires and the runway is closed. Then where will you go?
Try flying around parts of Africa with those sort of reserves and you may come unstuck very quickly indeed.
It amuses me when an alternate is chosen depending on weather. What if an a/c lands, burst the tires and the runway is closed. Then where will you go?
I don't think it's reasonable to make assumptions on the miriad of possibilities which could occur at the destination or alternate; surely someone could blow a tire, but then you could come under attack from flying saucers or both have thousands of streaking nudists take the runway, too. The safe solution then, is to always have an alternate, and that's out policy.
Our normal fuel is fuel to the destination plus ten percent of that amount, then to the alternate, then 30 minutes holding at 1,500'. We do have island fuel allowances which are to the destination and then 2 hours, in cases where one just doesn't have alternates. By and large, we always have an alternate. We have an allowance which reduces the margin of reserve slightly, which allows us to take the ten percent value and reduce it to ten percent of the class II time. This occurs on the premise that when not Class II nav, we have a greater selection of alternate fields from which to choose.
We also do re-release, with ten percent of the fuel to the re-release point. Within two hours of that point we recalculate along with the dispatcher for the remaining leg. If we can do the remaining leg with ten percent of that leg plus the required alternate and reserve, then we go on...if not, we divert to the re-release point field.
In either case, we still carry ten percent overage on the enroute portion, plus the full alternate diversion, plus holding fuel at the alternate.
The area that really can bite us is the Equal Time Point fuel, which is figured at a minimum of fifteen minutes fuel remaining at the ETP alternate, in a worse-case scenario. I think it would be a rare situation for that to occur, but that's the legal minimum. Based on our regular fuel loads, I think invariably we'd arrive at the ETP alternate with substantially more...but then more can occur that places the aircraft outside the planned ETP envelope (one ETP for two-engine drift down, a different one for depressurization, etc...but what about two engines out and depressurized...that's not a profile that's planned, and that changes things).
The company has no desire to carry more fuel than necessary; we figure an approximate 5% overburn for tankered fuel, so it can certainly be costly and wasteful, yet at the same time we have no desire to park an airplane in the sea.
Join Date: May 2002
Location: dubai
Posts: 942
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
http://www.pprune.org/rumours-news/3...ed-runway.html
The above is what I try to avoid. Maybe if the Captain was allowed to take a little more fuel, this would not have happened.
Believe me when I say we will read about more incidents of this nature in the future.
Fortunately the outfit I work for, money is no object (at present and long may it last), so I am encouraged to take fuel I am comfortable with, within reason.
The above is what I try to avoid. Maybe if the Captain was allowed to take a little more fuel, this would not have happened.
Believe me when I say we will read about more incidents of this nature in the future.
Fortunately the outfit I work for, money is no object (at present and long may it last), so I am encouraged to take fuel I am comfortable with, within reason.
Last edited by doubleu-anker; 4th Oct 2008 at 03:59.
