Fuel Restrictions

209ERWHATSYOURVECTOR

209ERWHATSYOURVECTOR

Active Member
I'm curious if other Airlines give their Dispatchers a lot a push back when they add fuel or are they more lenient and let the Captain and the Dispatcher deicide even if it's a VFR day?
 
209ERWHATSYOURVECTOR said:
I'm curious if other Airlines give their Dispatchers a lot a push back when they add fuel or are they more lenient and let the Captain and the Dispatcher deicide even if it's a VFR day?
Click to expand...
There was a man by the name of Tom McDonald at PSA who came in and gave us a talk during ground school about fuel and the difference in thinking about fuel in pounds vs minutes...and how tanker and/or alternate fuel was calculated by Dispatch monitor.
It was probably one of the more enlightening discussions I've ever heard about fuel. In two years of dispatching, I never got any sort of pushback on fuel from anyone except captains who decided to just "fill 'er up"
 
At the end of the day, the amount of fuel should be an agreed decision between the dispatcher and PIC. If the dispatcher sees or feels the need for additional fuel, note it in the release. If the PIC wants more and the dispatcher agrees, no big deal. If the PIC doesn't have a valid reason, then there should be some way for the dispatcher to note this in case the higher ups want to ask questions.

I am aware of those "expert" talks many regionals give and those "perfect world" scenarios they use are laughable compared to reality.
 
I think there are reasonable and unreasonable amounts and a lot of it lends to whether you have a legitimate reason to add that fuel. I've seen guys have canned comments and amounts and that's a red flag in my eyes.

Vfr day and no comments but landing with 2 hours endurance? Seems like it's just padding. Vfr day but verifiable concerns from ATC, VIP, Notams etc? Totally get it

If you can't articulate the reason other than "I'm in control and can make that decision" take a minute and review your process.
 
Nah no issues at my current carrier. I plan on a perfect vfr day at a minimum enough fuel to do one go around and land back at destination at company minimum fuel. A go around is a routine operation and we should not be declaring minimum fuel to do one. I add more if i see good reasons, but im not kicking people off for some extreme extra fuel for no discernable reason.
 
autosave36 said:
I plan on a perfect vfr day at a minimum enough fuel to do one go around and land back at destination at company minimum fuel. A go around is a routine operation and we should not be declaring minimum fuel to do one.
Click to expand...
If you're going to be landing after the go around at company minimum, that warrants a min fuel declaration, at least everywhere I've worked.
 
Delta Echo said:
If the PIC doesn't have a valid reason, then there should be some way for the dispatcher to note this in case the higher ups want to ask questions.
Click to expand...

The old FOS/DECS had this when I was at Envoy. Only had a pilot push back once when I put the fuel in captain add.
 
If a captain wants more fuel, they'll get no pushback from me unless it would bump people, put us over MTOW, or like the one I had the other day where they were already tankering 15000lbs and he wanted 5000 more because he didn't know he could burn the tanker if he needed it (even though I always put a remark that says "tanker may be used for contingencies." )
I just put it in the captain add and send it.
 
CrashesDrones said:
If you're going to be landing after the go around at company minimum, that warrants a min fuel declaration, at least everywhere I've worked.
Click to expand...
Minimum fuel everywhere i've been is a specific number and the company min arrival fuel is a slightly higher number. I plan them to land at the higher after a go around
 
My previous airline (regional) would absolutely audit our flight plans. I'll never forget the day my boss came to me with a flight plan from 3 weeks prior and print out of the radar imagery at the time I sent the flight plan and asked "you said you added fuel for enroute weather, where on this radar image was the enroute weather?"

It was frustrating and insulting because 1- I had to try and remember what the hell I did 3 weeks prior and 2- I then had to explain to her about turbulence and how it is also classified as weather and it was all over the place that day and that you can't see turbulence on the radar. I should have specified turbulence in my remark I guess.
 
Acceptable_Risk said:
My previous airline (regional) would absolutely audit our flight plans. I'll never forget the day my boss came to me with a flight plan from 3 weeks prior and print out of the radar imagery at the time I sent the flight plan and asked "you said you added fuel for enroute weather, where on this radar image was the enroute weather?"

It was frustrating and insulting because 1- I had to try and remember what the hell I did 3 weeks prior and 2- I then had to explain to her about turbulence and how it is also classified as weather and it was all over the place that day and that you can't see turbulence on the radar. I should have specified turbulence in my remark I guess.
Click to expand...
Guessing by the fact you had to explain to her what turb was that she either A NEVER had an ADX or B dequaled years ago. Either way my stance on this is fuel is cheaper than accounting writing checks to pax injured by said turbulence had we gone that routing.
 
A1TAPE said:
Guessing by the fact you had to explain to her what turb was that she either A NEVER had an ADX or B dequaled years ago. Either way my stance on this is fuel is cheaper than accounting writing checks to pax injured by said turbulence had we gone that routing.
Click to expand...
It doesnt get dumped out on the tarmac either when you land
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top