Announcement

Collapse

PMDG Forum Rules

1) SIGN YOUR POSTS. Since 1997, we have asked users to sign their real name, first and last, to all posts in the PMDG forum. We do this in order to keep conversations personal and familiar. You took the time to be here, we want to get to know you. This is one of the few rigid rules that we enforce regularly. We do so because we feel that forums in which users must engage one another personally are generally warmer, more collegial and friendly. Posts that are unsigned will be quietly removed without comment by the moderators, so to make your life easy- we recommend enabling your forum signature so that you never need to remember. Do this by clicking the username pull-down at the top right, then selecting "User Settings." You will find the signature editor on the ACCOUNT tab, about half way down the page. Look for "Edit Post Signature." Be sure to click the "Show Signatures" box.

2) BE NICE. We are all simmers here and no matter our differences of opinion, we share a common love of aviation, computing and simulation. Treat everyone else in the forum with respect even when you disagree. If someone frustrates you, walk away from the conversation or ask for a moderator to get involved. Speaking of Moderators, they prefer not to be treated as "The Thought Police" but if any behavior infringes on the enjoyment of another user or is otherwise considered to be unacceptable in the moderator's judgment, it will be addressed in keeping with our view of ensuring that this forum remains a healthy environment for all simmers.

3) BE LAWFUL: Any behavior that infringes upon the law, such as discussion or solicitation of piracy, threats, intimidation or abuse will be handled unsympathetically by the moderators. Threats and intimidation may, at the moderator's discretion, be provided to law enforcement for handling.

4) BE FACTUAL: When you post, always be factual. Moderators will remove posts that are determined not to be factually accurate.

5) RESPECT COPYRIGHTS: Posting of copyrighted material such as flight manuals owned by Boeing or various airlines is not allowed in this forum. If you have questions related to copyrighted material, please contact a forum moderator for clarification.

6) RESPECT PMDG: We love to hear what you like about our products. We also like to hear what you think can be improved, or what isn't working. Please do tell us and we will always treat your feedback with value. Just be sure to treat the team respectfully, as they do put a significant amount of effort into building and maintaining these great simulation products for you.

7) RESPECT PMDG DEVELOPERS: All of the developers will spend some time here. Given the ratio of developers-to-users, it simply isn't possible for us to answer every post and private message individually. Please know that we do try to read everything, but developer workload is simply too high to manage personal contact with tens-of-thousands of users simultaneously. In most cases, members of the development team will stick to conversations in the forum and will not answer private messages.

8) RESPECT OTHER DEVELOPERS: PMDG has always advocated for a strong development community and we have many friends within this community. Every developer offers something unique that helps to make the simming community larger and more vibrant. We insist that you treat our friends respectfully.

9) RESPECT MODERATORS: Moderators have a tough job, and none of them enjoy having to stomp out negativity. If a moderator has to weigh in to keep a thread peaceful, please respect that effort and refrain from giving the moderator any grief.

10) If you require official support for any of our products please open a support ticket through the support portal, https://support.precisionmanuals.com

11) This forum is designed primarily as a vehicle for the PMDG development team to interact with our customers, and for customers to interact with one another in a manner that is positive, supportive and assists in the general advancement of understanding the simulation and helping to make this and future simulations better. Any other use of this forum is not permitted, including but not limited to discussion of pricing policies, business practices, forum moderating policies, advertising of non-PMDG products, promotion of events, services or products that are not approved in advance by PMDG or any other topic deemed unacceptable by any forum administrator

12) HAVE FUN: This is the whole point of it all.
See more
See less

Storm Ciara and reserve fuel

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

    Storm Ciara and reserve fuel

    If you were watching some of the fantastic YouTube footage of various widebodies going around at London and Manchester, you might’ve also seen some of them divert all the way to Germany.

    This is made me wonder under normal weather, how much extra fuel are these jets carrying? Because to me, two go arounds and a diversion to Central Europe seems excessive. Did they carry that much because airlines anticipated there would be a high chance of a go around or do they typically carry enough fuel for alternates that are over an hour away?
    Angelo Busato

    #2
    Depends on the carrier and regulations but normal is 30 to 45 minutes plus contingencies.
    Contingencies in this case, aircraft dispatched to London and Manchester have carried extra fuel for approaches, maneuvering, holding, and distant alternates (which would be subject to weather minimums being filed for dispatch destination alternate).
    Regards,

    Aaron Zylman

    Comment


      #3
      I would think it would all be situation dependent, taking into consideration weather everywhere in the area. There was a snowstorm that hit the Northeast back in the beginning of 2018, and flights heading to JFK were diverting as far as Chicago O'Hare. Most of these flights had been delayed because they were told that JFK would re-open in the afternoon, and that ended up not happening. By the time they were aware that the airport wasn't re-opening, they were already quite a ways en route.
      Captain Kevin

      Kevin Yang

      Comment


        #4
        Aircraft always take off with enough fuel for:

        Trip - enough to get to destination
        Contingency - depends on airline (normally either 3 or 5% or between 5 and 20 minutes extra fuel)
        Alternate - fuel required to get to alternate
        Final reserve - normally 30 minutes extra fuel

        Then you also have the flight crews optional extra on top. I can guarantee you that airline ops/flight crews have been looking at the weather coming in for days previous to the storm and had a plan in place.

        Flight crews can legally take as much extra fuel as they want (up to max take-off weight and offload pax/bags if they want to take more, this is however rare).

        More go arounds at airports throughout the UK put a strain on airspace and ATC, in turn causing slot delays and restrictions for other flights so it is maybe easier to divert elsewhere in Europe or return back to the departure airport altogether (I believe SAS and some others done this yesterday).
        Last edited by et31; 10Feb2020, 23:19.
        Greg Marshall

        Comment


          #5
          Originally posted by et31 View Post
          Aircraft always take off with enough fuel for:

          Trip - enough to get to destination
          Contingency - depends on airline (normally either 3 or 5% or between 5 and 20 minutes extra fuel)
          Alternate - fuel required to get to alternate
          Final reserve - normally 30 minutes extra fuel

          Then you also have the flight crews optional extra on top. I can guarantee you that airline ops/flight crews have been looking at the weather coming in for days previous to the storm and had a plan in place.

          Flight crews can legally take as much extra fuel as they want (up to max take-off weight and offload pax/bags if they want to take more, this is however rare).

          More go arounds at airports throughout the UK put a strain on airspace so it is maybe easier to divert elsewhere in Europe or return back to departure airport altogether (I believe SAS and some others done this yesterday).
          Yes there was an Austrian 320 that resolved to fly back to Vienna. I want to try doing this on the 738 because with a payload of 60 tons, it doesn’t allow me to have a lot of reserves for distant alternates.
          Angelo Busato

          Comment


            #6
            The FMC is definitely your friend especially in this scenario. Fuel calculations would be monitored and checked constantly. If it at any point became unsafe a diversion to a closer airport would be done.
            Greg Marshall

            Comment


              #7
              The minimum regulatory requirement is for:

              - Fuel for start, taxi and takeoff
              - Trip fuel from departure to destination
              - Alternate fuel from the destination to the alternate aerodrome
              - Contingency fuel (which varies but may either be a fixed percentage of the trip fuel, typically 5% or 15 minutes whichever is greater, or for many airlines these days may be statistically derived based on previous flights operated by the airline)
              - Final reserve fuel of 30 minutes @ 1500 ft.
              - Extra fuel if and as required by the Commander

              Typically airlines will plan with the minimum legal fuel (i.e. everything in the above list up to final reserve fuel) and then beyond that it is up to the Captain to decide if any extra is warranted and if so how much.

              Now, before you even get to the 'extra' -- the alternate obviously has to be sensible. In good weather conditions (i.e. the chance of actually having to divert can be considered extremely low) normally a nearby airport will be designated as the alternate provided it meets the minimum regulatory criteria, even if it may not have, for instance, full support and passenger handling facilities - thus reducing the alternate fuel requirement and the overall fuel uplift.

              However, if the chance of a diversion is high (as would have been the case over the weekend) then a 'commercial alternate' will normally be planned which may be a bit further away but may be better suited (from a customer service point of view) o handle a diversion (e.g. the airline may have customer service reps based there, a contract for engineering support, better options for onward travel for the passengers etc).

              In any event, alternate planning minima apply -- which can be broadly summarised as 'one up'. That is to say, that if the alternate has a CAT II/III approach available then the weather at the alternate must be forecast to be at least CAT I, if only a CAT I approach is available the forecast must be at least good enough for a non-precision approach and so on, for at least one hour before and after the ETA. It stands to reason as well that the wind must be forecast to be within limits as well!

              As such, given the forecast across the UK on Sunday it's likely that most suitable alternates would have been in mainland Europe in the first place.

              This brings us to the question of 'extra fuel as required by the Commander' -- which is where you earn your money, Captain! Obviously simply taking the mininum flight plan fuel would only provide the capability to fly to the destination, make a single approach with no delay, go around and head straight to the alternate. Taking extra fuel allows time for holding (for example, to wait for a sufficient lull in the wind to make an approach, not to mention the fact that ATC flow rates were substantially reduced which in itself is likely to lead to delays) and additional approach attempts.

              The advantage of being able to make additional approaches and hold for longer is that safety is (assuming you use your fuel wisely) enhanced as you have more time and more flexibility, and commercially you therefore more likely to make it in to your planned destination, which at the end of the day is what your customers want! However, this has to be balanced against the cost of uplifting extra fuel, any potential performance or commercial impact on the departure (takeoff weight restrictions/payload capacity restrictions - the commercial impact of offloading bags/pax vs uplifting more fuel etc). This is the 'commercial' aspect of a 'commercial airline pilot'!

              Another factor limiting the maximum amount of additional fuel to be uplifted is the Maximum Landing Weight and this can be quite limiting on some aircraft types/sectors.

              Something else which needs to be taken in to consideration is that you have to burn fuel to carry fuel - in the region of about 3% per hour. So if you want to arrive with, say, an extra 45 minutes of fuel (about 7500kg) after a 12 hour sector in the B747-400, you would need to load about 10,200kg of 'extra' before you depart -- you will burn around 2700kg of fuel just to lug that 7500kg of extra weight 6000nm.

              At the end of the day it is up to the Captain to balance the risk factors and decide upon a safe and commercially appropriate fuel load for the flight in question. The important things to remember are firstly that once you're up there you can't just pull over and pop in to a petrol station if you're running a bit low, and secondly on a day like Sunday with widespread extreme weather things can get very chaotic very quickly. What you must bear in mind is that you are not the only aircraft in the sky and everybody is facing the same challenges so if you are going to divert there's a good chance lots of other aircraft will be doing the same thing! In a scenario where there may only be limited viable diversion options available, especially for a widebody, this can put massive strain on the system and it may be that you end up at the back of a queue to try and get in to your alternate, or perhaps your originally planned alternate reaches capacity and refuses to accept any more diversions -- it can be an extremely dynamic scenario with things changing all the time and you really don't want to be in a scenario where you have fumes in the tanks and your options are rapidly diminishing.

              Fuel = options!
              Simon Kelsey

              Comment


                #8
                Originally posted by skelsey View Post
                The minimum regulatory requirement is for:

                - Fuel for start, taxi and takeoff
                - Trip fuel from departure to destination
                - Alternate fuel from the destination to the alternate aerodrome
                - Contingency fuel (which varies but may either be a fixed percentage of the trip fuel, typically 5% or 15 minutes whichever is greater, or for many airlines these days may be statistically derived based on previous flights operated by the airline)
                - Final reserve fuel of 30 minutes @ 1500 ft.
                - Extra fuel if and as required by the Commander
                I assume this is for either the UK or EU. US fuel regulations are a bit different. For a flight under US Domestic fuel regulations, you are required to have:

                - Trip fuel.
                - Fuel for the most distant alternate if an alternate is required.
                - Final reserve fuel of 45 minutes at cruise altitude.

                For a flight under US Flag fuel regulations (international flights or domestic flights over 6 hours), you are required to have:

                - Trip fuel.
                - Fuel for 10% of the trip time.
                - Fuel for the most distant alternate.
                - Final reserve fuel of 30 minutes at 1500 feet.

                And of course any additional fuel that the Captain deems necessary, but the above I listed is the minimum required for US operations.
                Captain Kevin

                Kevin Yang

                Comment


                  #9
                  Originally posted by Captain Kevin View Post
                  I assume this is for either the UK or EU. US fuel regulations are a bit different. For a flight under US Domestic fuel regulations, you are required to have:

                  - Trip fuel.
                  - Fuel for the most distant alternate if an alternate is required.
                  - Final reserve fuel of 45 minutes at cruise altitude.

                  For a flight under US Flag fuel regulations (international flights or domestic flights over 6 hours), you are required to have:

                  - Trip fuel.
                  - Fuel for 10% of the trip time.
                  - Fuel for the most distant alternate.
                  - Final reserve fuel of 30 minutes at 1500 feet.

                  And of course any additional fuel that the Captain deems necessary, but the above I listed is the minimum required for US operations.

                  Thankfully the has FAA finally arrived in the 21st century and with OPSPEC B343 (each operator must apply and be certified for it) US Flag Fuel regulations are aligned with ICAO/EASA standards.

                  - Trip fuel.
                  - Performance Based Contingency Fuel (i.e., PBCF)*
                  - Fuel for the most distant alternate.
                  - Final reserve fuel of 30 minutes at 1500 feet.


                  *(i.e., PBCF) sufficient to fly for a period of time, restricted to no less than 5 minutes of fuel (calculated at 1,500 feet holding speed), based on the statistical burn deviation specific to each airplane make and model/city pair/arrival time window combination authorized in the reference document.
                  Typically 90% contingency fuel (meaning the likelihood of burning of burning all contingency fuel is no greater than 10% (or no greater than 1% when thunderstorms are forecasted or can reasonably be expected in the vicinity of the destination airport)

                  UAL and FDX are FAA 121 operators with OSPEC B343 approval (IIRC AAL and DAL are working with the FAA on their approval).

                  UAL refers to PBCF as ACF (Analyzed Contingency Fuel) on their OFP.
                  ACF90 - likelihood of burning of burning all contingency fuel is no greater than 10%
                  ACF99 - likelihood of burning of burning all contingency fuel is no greater than 1%



                  Carrying 10% of trip-fuel as as a in-flight reserve was a archaic leftover from the days of DC-6 and L1069's crossing the Atlantic on three engines (more often than not). Flight planning accuracy and aircraft system reliability have come a long way since then. B043 (10% in Class II airspace only) and B044 (inflight re-dispatch) were first steps used to reduce the 10% of trip fuel burden and remain available to operators who have not yet applied for or been approved for B343 (B043 and B044 also requires individual operator approval).

                  While EASA/JAA operators were safely flying with 3% (fixed 20 minute) contingency fuel, Flag operators were carrying 10% of trip fuel or having to rely on B043 and B044 to reduce the burden of the 10% contingency. Lots of payload left behind over decades of this being required.
                  Last edited by Calzonister; 11Feb2020, 01:37.
                  Leo Cal

                  Comment


                    #10
                    The other misconception is that you must first fly all the way to your destination. In the real world, many times decisions to divert happen before reaching the destination. And you don’t have to divert to your filed alternate. That’s just for planning.
                    Regards,

                    Aaron Zylman

                    Comment


                      #11
                      Originally posted by Calzonister View Post
                      Thankfully the has FAA finally arrived in the 21st century and with OPSPEC B343 (each operator must apply and be certified for it) US Flag Fuel regulations are aligned with ICAO/EASA standards.

                      - Trip fuel.
                      - Performance Based Contingency Fuel (i.e., PBCF)*
                      - Fuel for the most distant alternate.
                      - Final reserve fuel of 30 minutes at 1500 feet.
                      I'm curious as to when they did this. I will admit that the last time I even looked at this was in 2013 when I did my flight dispatch course, so I don't know what all changed now. If you can point me to this change, I'd like to have a look myself. Thanks.
                      Captain Kevin

                      Kevin Yang

                      Comment


                        #12
                        Originally posted by Captain Kevin View Post
                        I'm curious as to when they did this. I will admit that the last time I even looked at this was in 2013 when I did my flight dispatch course, so I don't know what all changed now. If you can point me to this change, I'd like to have a look myself. Thanks.
                        Regulation: http://fsims.faa.gov/PICDetail.aspx?docId=N+8900.383
                        (Click on PDF at the bottom of the page and CTRL+F for the B343 section)

                        UAL and FDX lead the usergroup/FAA discussions on this subject matter for close to a decade and were a driving force behind its implementation. OPSPEC B343 was revised to include PBCF around 2016/2017.

                        Just to be clear, the 121.645 Flag Rule you quoted remains unchanged. However, OPSPEC B343 using PBCF (instead of 10% of TRIP) is now widely used in lieu of the basic 121.645 Flag Rule. (if the operator has FAA approval for B343).


                        Some background (directly from the FAA)

                        Background. OpSpec B343 allows part 121 flag operators to deviate from the fuel requirements of part 121, � 121.645(b)(2). This OpSpec was modified to harmonize with International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO) Annex 6, Part I, and take advantage of scheduled air carriers’ considerable investment in fuel-planning, tracking, and communication capabilities. The statistical method calculates a required unplanned contingency fuel, which is specific to each unique airplane make and model, departure airport, arrival airport, and arrival time window combination.
                        Last edited by Calzonister; 11Feb2020, 23:47.
                        Leo Cal

                        Comment


                          #13
                          In addition, carriers in Australia do not usually plan an alternate unless it is required by another state as part of their operating there (e.g. the US in certain weather) or there is weather below minimums/crosswind etc.

                          More destination and foreacast-specific fuel to wait out thunderstorms/weather/ATC delays is more frequently carried instead.

                          To reduce contingency fuel (10% of trip fuel for jets per CASA regulations), operators frequently select an enroute alternate airport (essentially a redispatch) and carry a smaller amount of reserve fuel (usually a fixed amount).

                          I would suggest for the storm situation that if weather is widespread and possibly above crosswind limitations, a suitable alternate would be carried - OR - an enroute alternate may be nominated to divert to before reaching the destination if the weather detiorates is below what is expected.

                          It depends on a number of factors - but in Australia at least, alternate fuel for far-flung alternates is definitely not carted around all the time for the fun of it.
                          Rudy Fidao

                          Comment


                            #14
                            Interesting post so I’ve finally decided to sign up to the forums.

                            On Sunday flying from a London airport to Ireland, I took around an extra 4000kg of fuel (PIC 737-800).

                            Our Lido flight plan provided 4 alternates, 2 in Ireland, 1 in Northern Ireland and 1 in the UK (Liverpool). The system automatically picks an alternate based on closest distance and forecast weather usually +/- 1hr (and a few other things like NOTAMS etc). For planning minima, gusts can be disregarded so all alternates were within crosswind limits.

                            However, as the PIC I’ve got to make a final call on how much fuel to take. With storm Ciara and the whole of the UK and Ireland affected there was no way I was taking minimum fuel. I try and decide how much extra fuel to take based on time, not just a quantity. If you consider the fuel burn is 2400kg an hour, so 5 minutes of fuel is 200kg extra. I’ve also got to consider the max landing weight of 65.3T, and with wet runway conditions do I have enough runway length to land at that weight (landing dispatch calculations on EFB). You also burn fuel to carry extra fuel (2.5% an hour), but you usually get there with more fuel than the flight plan calculates so generally I don’t factor that in.

                            I can’t remember exactly what I factored in, but it was something like 2 go arounds (10 minutes each) at destination, 2 go arounds at an alternate and an hour spare as comfort fuel. So:

                            2 go arounds at destination = 20 mins = 800kg
                            2 go arounds at an alternate = 20 mins = 800kg
                            1 hour extra on top = 60 mins = 2400kg
                            TOTAL = 1hr 40min = 4000kg

                            These are my figures I use and it varies amongst captains based on experience. I know some people that day taking an extra 6 tonnes of fuel!

                            On a day like that, take plenty of extra fuel and play it safe. It’s obvious to say you will always try and land at your destination first, as the cost of taking extra fuel to accomplish that is a lot cheaper than the cost of a diversion. On top of that the company then have to work out the logistics in getting passengers to their original destination (refuel and wait till weather improves, hotels, ground transport, knock on affect on subsequent flights etc).

                            In aviation, sometimes the best laid out plans don’t always work! Plan accordingly and minimise the risk.

                            Hope this helps and gives you an insight.

                            Regards,

                            James Pearce
                            Last edited by jp.pilot; 12Feb2020, 01:58. Reason: Grammar

                            Comment


                              #15
                              Originally posted by Calzonister View Post
                              Regulation: http://fsims.faa.gov/PICDetail.aspx?docId=N+8900.383
                              (Click on PDF at the bottom of the page and CTRL+F for the B343 section)

                              UAL and FDX lead the usergroup/FAA discussions on this subject matter for close to a decade and were a driving force behind its implementation. OPSPEC B343 was revised to include PBCF around 2016/2017.

                              Just to be clear, the 121.645 Flag Rule you quoted remains unchanged. However, OPSPEC B343 using PBCF (instead of 10% of TRIP) is now widely used in lieu of the basic 121.645 Flag Rule. (if the operator has FAA approval for B343).
                              Copy. Thank you, sir.
                              Originally posted by jp.pilot View Post
                              Hope this helps and gives you an insight.
                              Interesting read. WELcome to the forum. Question. How do you calculate how much fuel is required for a go-around, or is that already in your information somewhere. I don't think I've ever seen it in PFPX for my flight planning, so I'm not really too sure how much fuel to factor in for that.
                              Captain Kevin

                              Kevin Yang

                              Comment


                                #16
                                Originally posted by Captain Kevin View Post
                                Copy. Thank you, sir.

                                Interesting read. WELcome to the forum. Question. How do you calculate how much fuel is required for a go-around, or is that already in your information somewhere. I don't think I've ever seen it in PFPX for my flight planning, so I'm not really too sure how much fuel to factor in for that.
                                Many thanks!

                                The average go-around is usually around 10-20 minutes. It depends on a few things such as complexitity of airport, reason for go-around (unstable, weather releated, runway occupied etc), how good ATC is and generally how efficient you are.

                                I'll expand on those four:

                                Complexity of airport - Some of the airports I fly to, the missed approach procedures are fairly simple. Some are climb straight ahead to 3000ft, some specifiy a turn, and some of the more complex ones require multiple turns and step climbs generally because of terrain or airspace.

                                Reason for go-around - If it was a go-around because you were unstable (you'd be surprised how often one forgets to engage both autopilots on a CATII/III approach) or runway occupied, I would generally shoot another approach straight away. If it was weather related, I would discuss the current situation and decide whether its safe to execute another one.

                                ATC - Flying around Europe and you'll see the difference in ATC. If you did a go-around in the UK, the controllers and on it straight away (after they ask you the reason for go around) and they'll help you get back in as soon as possible. Give you example, the last go-around I did because the runway was still occupied, the controller gave us vectors for an immediate left turn and put us on a downwind leg then switched us back to the approach controller. When we were ready to execute another approach, we let them know and they turned us in for around an 8 mile final. The whole go-around probably took no more than 10 minutes. Other airports in other countries may make you do the whole missed approach procedure, multiple frequency changes, then fly the whole approach procedure which could take up to 20 minutes.

                                How efficient you are - There are a few things to do when you go-around, and if you're quick and safe you can be ready for another approach in a few minutes. Its not often you go around, and in the 10 years of flying commercially I probably do a go-around once every 2 years. When you go-around, I've got to complete the after takeoff checks, the cabin crew will call and be on standby, after speaking to them I do a PA, quick discussion with First Officer, reselect the approach, fix page runway rings, reselect VREF speeds, check the remaining fuel, quick rebrief from chart to plate, descent and approach checks, then tell them I'm ready. If you're quick and efficient, you can do all this in around 2-3 minutes. Actually, I have to say here I'm not a big fan of using the word 'quick'; because if you rush stuff its very easy to miss something and make a mistake and you'll end up with the Swiss Cheese model. Always take your time and most importantly make sure its safe.

                                If you have a plane finder app with playback, take a look at Stansted airport around Sunday 9th Feb starting from around 7:45 UTC. I just took a look at two go-around, and one took just over 10 minutes and another took just under 15 minutes.

                                So to summarise, if I'm flying to my home base or airport I'm very familiar with, I'll usually estimate 10 minutes a go aorund. On this day in particular I had the extra 1 hour of comfort fuel on top, so this could be used for whatever reason I chose.

                                Regards,

                                James Pearce

                                P.S Apologies if there are a few grammar mistakes, I've just woken up!

                                Comment


                                  #17
                                  Copy. I guess I wasn't too clear in my question. In your earlier post, you said 2 go-arounds was 800 kilograms of fuel, so I assume 1 go-around was 400 kilograms. I was more so wondering how you know a 10-minute go-around uses that much fuel, if it's in your information somewhere or how you come to that figure.
                                  Captain Kevin

                                  Kevin Yang

                                  Comment


                                    #18
                                    Some personal rule of thumbs for the 737 I have is 1000kg for one full go around and approach IFR or busy airport. 500kg for a go around and VFR close in circuit/traffic pattern without traffic.
                                    Last edited by MeatServo; 12Feb2020, 13:03.
                                    ATPL - Class I Instructor - Seaplane - B737 - BE1900D

                                    Comment


                                      #19
                                      Originally posted by Captain Kevin View Post
                                      Copy. I guess I wasn't too clear in my question. In your earlier post, you said 2 go-arounds was 800 kilograms of fuel, so I assume 1 go-around was 400 kilograms. I was more so wondering how you know a 10-minute go-around uses that much fuel, if it's in your information somewhere or how you come to that figure.
                                      Its using an average of 2400kg an hour. There are other factors that could affect it but to keep things simple this is what we use in our airline. So 60 minutes is 2400kg, therefore 5 minutes is 200kg.

                                      10 to 15 minutes is a very efficient go-around to another landing.

                                      Hope this helps.

                                      Regards,

                                      James Pearce

                                      P.S. Just to add, every aircraft in our fleet has a fuel bias which is from -5.0 to +5.0 (might actually be 6.0). The Lido flight plan will state the average fuel burn an hour for the aircraft and also factors in the average weight based on predicted ZFW. This could vary some aircraft fuel burn from around 2200kg and hour to 2600kg. Some people use this average.
                                      Last edited by jp.pilot; 12Feb2020, 14:04. Reason: P.S. Fuel Bias

                                      Comment


                                        #20
                                        Originally posted by killairbus View Post
                                        If you were watching some of the fantastic YouTube footage of various widebodies going around at London and Manchester, you might’ve also seen some of them divert all the way to Germany.

                                        This is made me wonder under normal weather, how much extra fuel are these jets carrying? Because to me, two go arounds and a diversion to Central Europe seems excessive. Did they carry that much because airlines anticipated there would be a high chance of a go around or do they typically carry enough fuel for alternates that are over an hour away?
                                        If we're talking about weather like storm Ciara then you wouldn't mess around with fuel, trying to save the company some money.
                                        If all of northern, western and central europe is **** then you take fuel for the next good alternate plus plenty of extra.
                                        The good thing is in this kind of weather you won't have too many passengers on board so you'll have plenty of weight to spare between your ZFW and your MLW.

                                        In the 738 10 minutes flying is around 400kg of fuel. A go around is around 800kg. A windshear escape manouver even more.

                                        In this kind of weather I'd take some holding fuel to wait for weather improvements as well since normally the really bad area is rather small and some 20-30 minutes of holding can bring a LOT of improvement!
                                        Landing with some 5-6t of fuel in the tanks in would not be uncommon in the unlikely event that the first approach works out straight away.
                                        This is just not the kind of weather in which you f**k around with minimum fuel rules. You take as much as you need. Keep in mind 2t extra is only two go arounds and maybe some 10 minutes holding in between, then you're forced to divert. Unless you have an alternate where landing is absolutely assured (aka wind calm cavok) I would not be happy with such little fuel.
                                        Greetings,
                                        Emanuel Hagen

                                        Comment


                                          #21
                                          Originally posted by Emi View Post

                                          In the 738 10 minutes flying is around 400kg of fuel. A go around is around 800kg. A windshear escape manouver even more.
                                          This is my experience. 400kg for each approach is no where near enough unless you can keep it in tight for at 1500' and 3nm final. Probably going to burn >300kg in 2 minutes alone at go around thrust.

                                          I burn close to a ton every time I had to go around and shoot another IFR approach.
                                          ATPL - Class I Instructor - Seaplane - B737 - BE1900D

                                          Comment


                                            #22
                                            As per MeatServo's post, agreed. Just looked at the records of last go-around I did as explained above and it probably burnt around 600kg (guestimating here from fuel figures and burn off), and took no more than 10 minutes. But, this was at my home base which I'm very familiar with, runway occupied as an A321 had a slight technical issue before departing so I think we were around 500-1000ft already at point of hitting TOGA, a short downwind leg and low drag approach (gear at 4 miles). Bigger airports expect to burn more as suggested above.

                                            James Pearce
                                            Last edited by jp.pilot; 12Feb2020, 21:32.

                                            Comment


                                            • MeatServo
                                              MeatServo commented
                                              Editing a comment
                                              Its all about options and pilot decision making. I may try another approach with less fuel, if there are multiple runways, the weather is good, etc. But if i want to guarrentee making my alternate without declaring min fuel or an emergency, those are my rule of thumb's for trying a second attempt. I make that decision prior to TOD l and stick to it. I'll never try it a 3rd time. I've lost too many colleague's and friends trying multiple approaches in bad weather.

                                            • DDowns
                                              DDowns commented
                                              Editing a comment
                                              Reminds me of a carrier operations documentary, last bird in for the night in rolling pitching seas. Finally hit the traps on the fourth attempt. That was a nail biter.
                                          Working...
                                          X