Fuel requirements

[RotorAndWing]

Good point, Ron!

Not really true. 45 minute fuel requirement for reserve is a planning requirement. Once airborne if say headwinds are more than predicted and you burn 10 minutes into your reserves you are not illegal.

To put it another way, if you did proper planning and departed then encountered ATC delays and upon landing had only 30 minutes fuel remaining you are not illegal.

 

[Captain]

Thus, any time you end up in the air under IFR with less than 45 minutes of reserve fuel, either you have an emergency or you broke 91.167.

Can't believe I missed this...

That is not a true statement Ron. You only have to PLAN to land with the :45 minutes. If winds cause you to land with :30 minutes no rule has been broken and it's certainly not an emergency. From the FAAs perspective, as long as the engines are turning at touchdown you're fine.

Obviously any competent pilot would insist on more...at least enough to taxi to the ramp!

 

[Everskyward]

No, I've never flight trained in BJC. I did grow up in that area...but that was pre- Navy. I've not lived there since...although I'd love to go back.

You didn't post this?

Maybe I should head over to BJC. I've only been there 200 times. I grew up in Arvada and the first time I was on a runway in BJC was in 1987. Got me beat?

I was a CFI at KBJC during that time frame. I lived in Arvada. That's why I remembered your post. Anyway, in the late 1980s the smaller airports around there and around most of the country did not have weather. They obviously didn't have observers, and automated weather had not been widely implemented yet if at all. Even as recently as 2000 I can remember many airports not having any weather observation. That was about the time I started doing 135 and I was surprised at the number of airports where we couldn't shoot instrument approaches because they didn't have official weather.

The Automated Surface Observing System (ASOS) units are operated and controlled cooperatively in the United States by the NWS, FAA and DOD. After many years of research and development, the deployment of ASOS units began in 1991 and was completed in 2004.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Automated_airport_weather_station

 

[Henning]

Originally Posted by Captain
I grew up in Arvada

Huh, cool, I spent a few summers around there growing up, did you know Kim or Kelly (both boys) Geist?

 

[aterpster]

"as some approaches have both with higher mins for the alternate setting)"

That's what I said.

 

[Captain]

You didn't post this?

Lol.

Well, it's technically a true statement. However I may have been bending the truth just a bit to help my point.

The full story is that I was on a runway in BJC in '87. But it was at night and I had 'borrowed' my dads car and went joy riding with a friend. We ended up on the unlit runway racing my Dads car up and down it.

It ended when a cop came out and asked what we were up to. He didn't even give me a ticket, but worse he did call my dad. Times were different then.

 

[Greg Bockelman]

Oh yeah, that. You don't agree that if I crash (IFR flight) because I never checked the weather the FAA and NTSB is going to review the tape and see if I reported having it?

Don't be absurd. We are discussing WHY it is required, not that it IS required.

Much of what we do is required to be recorded and the reason is so the flight can be reconstructed later if metal gets bent. From historical weather to saved radar plots to taped ATC transmissions to fltplan.com keeping a record of users. It all get saved for the purpose of future investigation.

No argument on that point.

I agree with Ron's statement in post number 65:

As regards getting the ATIS letter on the tape, controllers are required to give you the data unless you give them the current letter, so forcing you to say the letter is a CYA for the controller. As regards nontowered airports, they don't have ATIS, so there's no letter to get on tape, but when the local altimeter is required for the approach, whatever ATC owns that airspace will make sure you announce on tape that you have it. Again, it's CYA for the controller.

And the ONLY reason that ATC really even cares is they want to know you have the current altimeter setting. That is the only concession to your argument that I will make until you provide a reference that supports your view.

 

[Captain]

Why is it required? Okay, several reasons. Redundancy for one. Having ATC confirm you have the weather puts another set of eyeballs on the issue and that lends to safety. Having a requirement also makes the pilot get the weather because he knows it'll be asked of him. Also, verbalizing it on a recorded medium preserves it for future flight reconstruction.


I still don't really get what your after. Do you not agree with what I just typed above on this post? I've never really seen a place that lists the reasons behind each regulation. What I just posted is my best guess based on my experience, which includes 200'ish visits to BJC and a couple high speed runs in my dads car.

 

[gismo]

Then as long as your destination airport has an approach you can fly, it doesn't matter what the weather is at Long Beach -- no alternate is required.

So what if your IFR route terminates somewhere that's not an airport, e.g. IFR climb to VFR over the top or maybe a VOR on the other side of the pass that's socked in?

 

[Captain]

So what if your IFR route terminates somewhere that's not an airport, e.g. IFR climb to VFR over the top or maybe a VOR on the other side of the pass that's socked in?

Then you're VFR and VFR rules apply. If you then need to pick up another IFR to get back in the slate is reset and you need fuel to your destination and alternate if required plus 45 minutes.

 

[Tracey]

Tracey, making sure you have the right altimeter setting for an instrument approach is one of the "shared" controller/pilot responsibilities. You're supposed to get it from the ATIS/AWOS, and the controller is going to either give it to you, or ask you a question to ensure that you have it.
But we're talking IFR stuff here.

For VFR, you are of course supposed to get the altimeter from AWOS/ATIS, and if you're talking to a tower controller, you should let him know you have the weather, and if it's an ATIS give him the letter. That tells the controller that you have the weather AND the various other stuff (taxiway closures, birds, etc) that make up the ATIS recording.
Sometimes you'll report the weather and the controller will give you a different altimeter setting. That's because it's changed since the ATIS was recorded, but not enough to require a new ATIS recording. They'll also if they have time tell you the current winds, particularly if they're "interesting" in terms of directional variability or gustiness.

A-ha! It's an IFR thing, that's why it wasn't making sense.

As for the other information, thank you for that as well-- it's something that I do and understand (for a change), but I have never had it explained out like this, so thank you!

 

[Tracey]

It's an IFR thing. For Instrument approaches. VFR it doesn't matter.

Got it! Thanks Cap'n!

 

[Tracey]

IOW, we're talking strictly about communication with ATC during IFR ops -- not VFR on CTAF.

Thanks, that's why I wasn't understanding.

 

[Tracey]

Not the CTAF and not the altimeter. The approach ATC will want to hear that you have the 'Weather" before they hand you off to do the approach.

This I know and do already. I was confusing an IFR reg with my VFR experience!

Thank you though.

 

[denverpilot]

Lol.

Well, it's technically a true statement. However I may have been bending the truth just a bit to help my point.

The full story is that I was on a runway in BJC in '87. But it was at night and I had 'borrowed' my dads car and went joy riding with a friend. We ended up on the unlit runway racing my Dads car up and down it.

It ended when a cop came out and asked what we were up to. He didn't even give me a ticket, but worse he did call my dad. Times were different then.

In 1987 KBJC was fully fenced, as I recall. They also were never "unlit" with the pilot controlled lighting being set to low-intensity after the tower closes, for as long as I can remember.

And driving on the runway once, if that ever even truly happened... is the equivalent of "200 landings" at KBJC?

Let me go get my hip waders. Your credibility is getting all over my shoes.

 

[dell30rb]

My new home base is a class C. I called up clearance delivery this morning to depart IFR. forgot to get the atis. Clearance Del asked if I had it. I said that I did not, but I would pick it up asap. I listened to the broadcast, then called ground and informed them I was ready to taxi. Neither ground or tower asked if I had in fact listened to it.

Listening to the ATIS and having that info ready is good form. But the few times I have forgotten it has not been a big deal. Usually it goes something like "Do you have information Delta?" "Negative, i'll get that asap" " No need, wind 360 at 5, altimeter 30.14"

 

[Captain]

In 1987 KBJC was fully fenced, as I recall.

You recall wrong.

They also were never "unlit" with the pilot controlled lighting being set to low-intensity after the tower closes, for as long as I can remember.

Yeah, me being a kid in my dads car I didn't activate the lights on the CTAF...8 years before I even knew what a CTAF was.

And driving on the runway once, if that ever even truly happened... is the equivalent of "200 landings" at KBJC?

The 200 landings happened after I spent 7 years in the Navy, got my private, commercial, ME, Instrument, CFI, CFII, MEI, ATP, spent 5 years at an airline, and THEN 2005 rolled around and I started flying in and out of KBJC.

Let me go get my hip waders. Your credibility is getting all over my shoes.

Do what you have to do. My credibility is just fine. BTW, as long as we're fact checking, the 200 is an estimate. Could be a few less, could be a few more. See the little map below my post? I made that in 2008.

 

[Everskyward]

Well, it's technically a true statement. However I may have been bending the truth just a bit to help my point.

OK...

 

[poadeleted20]

Not really true. 45 minute fuel requirement for reserve is a planning requirement. Once airborne if say headwinds are more than predicted and you burn 10 minutes into your reserves you are not illegal.

Plain reading of the regulation suggests otherwise, unless one believes "operate" means the same thing as "begin a flight." However, R&W's statement appears to be true -- see this interpretation:
http://www.faa.gov/about/office_org...nterpretations/data/interps/2009/Negron-2.pdf

However, read also in that interpretation the cautions about 91.13 careless/reckless if things end badly.

 

[poadeleted20]

And the ONLY reason that ATC really even cares is they want to know you have the current altimeter setting.

Actually, at a towered airport, they also have to make sure you know the winds and weather, which must also be provided by the controller if there is no ATIS. But from the controller's perspective, where there is ATIS, all that matters is that they have on tape that you said you had the right ATIS letter so they are off the hook if you smack an obstruction. The rest is your problem, not theirs.:wink2:

 

[poadeleted20]

So what if your IFR route terminates somewhere that's not an airport, e.g. IFR climb to VFR over the top or maybe a VOR on the other side of the pass that's socked in?

Then since your destination isn't an airport with 1-2-3 weather and an SIAP you can fly, you'll have to file a legal alternate, and you'll need fuel to get from that destination point to your alternate plus 45 minutes reserve.

 

[Captain]

Plain reading of the regulation suggests otherwise, unless one believes "operate" means the same thing as "begin a flight." However, R&W's statement appears to be true -- see this interpretation:
http://www.faa.gov/about/office_org...nterpretations/data/interps/2009/Negron-2.pdf

However, read also in that interpretation the cautions about 91.13 careless/reckless if things end badly.

An excerpt from your linked document...which is not a reg.

"The regulations do not require a pilot to declare an emergency if
he or she uses a portion of the 45-minute fuel reserve."

 

[poadeleted20]

An excerpt from your linked document...which is not a reg.

It's not a reg, but it has legal weight before the NTSB and the courts as the FAA's official interpretation of its own regulations, and as such, must be deferred to in such procedings unless it can be shown to be "arbitrary, capricious, or otherwise not according to law" -- and that is very, very rare.

"The regulations do not require a pilot to declare an emergency if
he or she uses a portion of the 45-minute fuel reserve."

Yes, it says this, but it also says:

Further, a "pilot whose aircraft suffers fuel exhaustion prior to reaching either the destination or alternate airport, or who must declare an emergency for an expedited landing (due to low fuel), can be found to have failed to exercise' good judgment,' which could result in a violation of section 91.13, for the careless or reckless operation of the aircraft." See Legal Interpretation to Colonel Gallagher, from Rebecca MacPherson, Assistant Chief Counsel, Regulations Division (Jan. 28, 2005).

In addition, this only applies to Part 91. You Part 121 pilots can't take advantage of this because Part 121 is stricter. See Administrator v. Morris and Wallace. And keep in mind that even if you don't declare an emergency, the controller may effectively declare one for you if you require priority handling due to low fuel, and that will probably be reported to the FSDO.

 

[Captain]

Further, a "pilot whose aircraft suffers fuel exhaustion prior to reaching either the destination or alternate airport, or who must declare an emergency for an expedited landing (due to low fuel), can be found to have failed to exercise' good judgment,' which could result in a violation of section 91.13, for the careless or reckless operation of the aircraft."

I agree with this too. Neither my quote (of your document) or your quote (which is right above in this post) suggests that you can't burn into your 45 minute reserve. It says don't run out of gas and don't declare an emergency or you'll have questions to answer. I guarantee if I declare an emergency for low fuel I'll be able to answer those questions.

 

[Greg Bockelman]

Actually, at a towered airport, they also have to make sure you know the winds and weather, which must also be provided by the controller if there is no ATIS. But from the controller's perspective, where there is ATIS, all that matters is that they have on tape that you said you had the right ATIS letter so they are off the hook if you smack an obstruction. The rest is your problem, not theirs.:wink2:

Granted.