Fuel policy, minimum fuel at destination

[Slasher]

There ya go.

[ImbracableCrunk]

We're crossing so many different regulations.

I've heard this so many times, but I've yet to see it in print:

You must divert from your destination if you burn your trip fuel, (i.e. you're at Bingo fuel).

I think it's BS, but does this have any basis in regulation in any country?

[I-2021]

ImbracableCrunk,

If you burn more than your expected trip fuel, you have your contingency fuel (that's the reason you carry it). If you burn that out, you can choose maybe a different alternate, that is still suitable and requires less fuel. If don't have any, you could maybe decide to cancel your destination alternate as per the regulations in your country and your your ops manual. Anyway that is just theory because whenever you decide that you want to divert it is just your decision, and if you start your diversion above the minimum diverting fuel you probably have all your reasons to do so.

[Agni]

Trip fuel +
6% - 10% tolerance for winds +
IFR App. at Destination +
Go Around at Dest. +
Alternate Fuel +
30 mins. holding at 1500' at Alternate +
VFR App. at Alternate +
Taxi In.

Over and above this is Extra Fuel for holding at Destination.

[ross_M]

I always take more than min fuel, how much more depends on forecast or actual weather and traffic conditions. Every company ive worked for have had the "its up to the flight crew how much extra fuel you take, thats why you get paid the big bucks" policy.

Do the bean counters have a way to get back at you if you are too conservative about fuel?

[ImbracableCrunk]

If you burn more than your expected trip fuel, you have your contingency fuel (that's the reason you carry it). If you burn that out, you can choose maybe a different alternate, that is still suitable and requires less fuel. If don't have any, you could maybe decide to cancel your destination alternate as per the regulations in your country and your your ops manual. Anyway that is just theory because whenever you decide that you want to divert it is just your decision, and if you start your diversion above the minimum diverting fuel you probably have all your reasons to do so.

I'll mark that down as a "No."

[flyburg]

Here's the regulation in our manual, normal phase is landing with alt plus final reserve, abnormal is Landing with less than alt plus final but more than final

7.3 Normal phase

As long as a flight is operating in the normal phase no special conditions apply, apart from regularly checking the current weather and forecasts weather at destination and alternate aerodromes in accordance with chapter 8.1-2.3.

7.4 Abnormal phase

The decision either to continue the flight to the destination, or to divert, shall be based on planning to land with at least final reserve fuel remaining. In his decision the commander shall take into account the traffic and operational conditions, prevailing at the destination, along the diversion route to and at the en-route aerodrome considered for diversion. Preferably, final reserve fuel plus 15 minutes holding fuel should be planned as minimum remaining fuel upon landing. Since it is impossible to cover all variables related to a safe and economical flight in the abnormal phase, the following should be regarded as general guidelines and be adapted as circumstances dictate: — Replacing the original alternate by another suitable alternate demanding less fuel may be used to return to the normal phase. — Continuation of the flight to the destination in the abnormal phase may be considered with due regard to all operational circumstances. This will lead to a situation where there is no alternative left. — In-flight re-planning (significant diversion from planned route) to an adequate aerodrome may be applied to return to the normal phase. The required fuel at the point of diversion must then be at least the sum of: � Trip fuel (from point of diversion to new destination); � 3% over the newly calculated trip fuel, provided an en-route alternate is available (otherwise 5%); � Alternate fuel (new alternate for new destination); � Final reserve fuel, and � Extra fuel (when required).

NOTE: The above mentioned in-flight re-planning procedure should be in concert with Flight Dispatch. When entering the abnormal phase, the commander should consider advising ATC of the situation. When, upon reaching destination any undue delay may result in entering the emergency phase, ATC should be advised of the fuel status. Such an advisory does not guarantee traffic priority. Where applicable the term ‘Minimum Fuel' should be used, refer to OM Part C.

7.5 Emergency phase

The commander shall immediately declare an emergency when the estimated fuel on board the aeroplane upon landing will be less than final reserve fuel. The distress call 'MAYDAY' shall be used. — An emergency due to low fuel suggests the need for traffic priority to ensure a safe landing. — Report remaining usable fuel in minutes and state intentions to ATC.

[Klosterman]

Thanks flburg

Thats real answer, i love to her about.

Its resonable policy. Its clear that min fob upon landing is min f res.
So you as captain have to see big picture and to calculate and gamble your licence.

I heard but not confirmed that some companies request from their crews to carry some extra fuel like 35 min. And for europe is around one hour of flying. Thats resonable.

In normal condition to land at destination with fuel enough to fly one hour. And that will cover you to arrive near destination, to hold there due to congestion for exemple around 30 min and after that to divert safely without abnormal conditions.

Nice, does anyboady else have some policies to share

Thanks

[Klosterman]

I-2021 realy thanks

I know all these wery well, the compny policy is what i ask for.
But thanks a lot for source, it will help me a lot in some arguing

[boredcounter]

Klosterman

As a humble Ops chap, that should of given you a bit of extra petrol at the planing stage, I cannot see your point. As the Commander, load it?

File the report?

Educate,

simples.

[flyburg]

Hi Klosterman,

Don't know about that. EU ops are pretty simple, in the planning phase you have to have taxi, trip, alt final reserve and 3 or 5 % extra, depending on availability of an enroute alternate or instead of the 3% a statistically derived amount of fuel approved by the authorities. Anything on top of that is up to the commander. In my company there is absolutely no questioning if a commander decides to take more, however they do keep statistics on that too, just for learning purposes for the commander. You can acces where you fall percentage wise amongst your college's when it comes to ordering extra fuel.

Things are monitored pretty closely by the union in this regard that you are not harassed by the company about your decision making. I've yet to hear from anyone being questioned about it.

[Klosterman]

Question

Can you burn your alternate fuel at destination in folding.

[EGPFlyer]

Yes, as we have said before, providing you plan to land with at least final reserve (30 mins in EU), you have an expected approach time that will allow you to land with at least final reserve, and the forecast weather is such that you will be able to land even if a single piece of landing equipment (for instance G/S aerial) fails. That is the legal minimum you can plan to land with however if something else goes wrong and you find that you will land with less than final reserve (for instance, there's a further technical problem causing you to go around) then you call a Mayday and get the aeroplane on the ground in as safely a manner as you can manage, write up an ASR/MOR and go home thinking about how unlucky you were to end up in that situation but how glad you were that you still had that 30 mins of fuel up your sleeve.

[Ashling]

Minimum Fuel is Final Reserve, end of. If you are going to land with less than this then it is a MAYDAY if you only think you might land with less its a PAN.

CNR or Final Reserve + Alternate Fuel is what you need to take you from Destination to Alternate leaving Final Reserve intact.

Some here seem to think CNR is minimum fuel, it is not. Some here seem to think that as soon as you hit CNR you MUST divert probably because they view CNR as minimum fuel. Madness. You may well be able to land after another approach or a few minutes holding and touch down with more fuel than you would have had had you diverted. Of course diverting may well be the correct thing but it is not the only option.

[9.G]

put it simple, the in flight fuel management provision allows to land anywhere with final reserve. that's all it is to it and has got nothing to do with re-dispatch or re planning in flight. As for decision making of where to go or where to stay, well that's airmanship.

[Microburst2002]

in Eu OPS, what you have to do is check your EFOB at destination regularly.

If that fuel is less than minimum diversion fuel (alternate plus final reserve) then you have to make a decision: you may divert to the destination alternate, or to an enroute alternate or you may just continue to destination (whatever you decide, you have do do it based on the circumstances at those airports and enroute) so as to land with more than the final reserve.

So it seems that if you land with less, your decision can be regarded as "erroneous". If you land with more, it still can be regarded as such.

Extra fuel gives more options, and should be function of those circumstances that affect decision to divert or continue, so you have more chances to be able to choose 'continue'.

[mona lot]

Well something different to whatever ATPL course you did Mona!

Thanks for the education, I have now thrown my ATPL notes away. Next time I am told by ATC to hold for 5 minutes, I will be sure to divert