Alternate planning and fuel emergency - Virgin Australia incident

[belgiumania]

http://avherald.com/h?article=465890d1&opt=0

Link provided for reference, but to summarize the flight was planned no alternate based on a CAVOK TAF and healthy METAR. While enroute the destination and all surrounding airports fogged in unforecast leaving the flight with no option but to shoot an emergency approach to below minimums, sounds from the report that the crew never actually saw the runway on a handflown approach. They landed a 737 with just over 1000lbs of fuel remaining - for those who don't work with 737s that isn't enough to perform a go around. Reading the account it sounds like the captain did one hell of a job making sure noone died.

This one gets me because it seems like a total fluke and I would say that most of the blame falls at the feet of the forecasters for doing such an awful job. I'm not entirely sure what the dispatch position looks like in Australia or if they really even have anything comparable to the US/Canadian systems, but if indeed someone was flight following and the first the crew heard of fog at their destination was from a controller then something is going wrong there.

Thoughts from the dispatchers of JC? I know every airline has slightly different rules for no alternate planning and extra fuel, but I believe most go by the regs on this one and this situation could have just as easily happened in the US.

 

[MT]

I agree this falls on the forecaster primarily. However the Dispatcher / Flight Follower is just as at fault since it sounds like he didn't inform the PIC of the situation. The flight should not have been allowed to continue to its destination with no alternate in this situation. There would have been some sort of warning signs that weather the destination and near in airports was deteriorating be it a low temp / dew point or other red flag.

I think Virgin got away with one here. Thank goodness it ended well.

 

[belgiumania]

I agree this falls on the forecaster primarily. However the Dispatcher / Flight Follower is just as at fault since it sounds like he didn't inform the PIC of the situation. The flight should not have been allowed to continue to its destination with no alternate in this situation. There would have been some sort of warning signs that weather the destination and near in airports was deteriorating be it a low temp / dew point or other red flag.

I think Virgin got away with one here. Thank goodness it ended well.

Indeed, looks like a one point temp/dew point spread at time of release.

I think this incident is one of a few really good examples and teaching tools for dispatchers, as this is clearly something that we should be able to avoid. Not a ton of those. Looks like Qantas fell in the same trap as well, though they landed with a bit more gas.

 

[drunkenbeagle]

I agree this falls on the forecaster primarily.

Well, it is a forecast. There is no way right now to predict weather with absolute certainty - there are just models that give pretty damn good guesses. I'm not a high time guy, nowhere close, but I've watched fields go IMC in a few minutes, without it being forecast.

 

[DE727UPS]

Thank Gawd for autoland. It could be handy in many unfortunate circumstances.

 

[amorris311]

How it got to that situation is beyond me. If you only have enough fuel at landing for the "45 minutes" and you hear that several aircraft have gone around its time to go do plan b. let the dispatcher know while you're enroute to whatever the next airport is. You don't have time for holding and those are the types of things you need to think about while closing in on the terminal area. Maybe I'm paranoid but lots of lapses in my opinion.

 

[pljenkins]

Excellent teaching tool, to be sure. One point temp/dewpoint spread+ calm winds is a big red flag. Remember kids, forecasts are nothing more then a horoscope with numbers, and a lot depends on where you're going. Any of my fellow dispatchers used to planning flights into the former Soviet airports can attest to the accuracy of a TAF. Remember your training, Skywalker!

 

[belgiumania]

Thank Gawd for autoland. It could be handy in many unfortunate circumstances.

Indeed, but in this scenario the best they had available was an RNAV approach with a 437' MDA. Scary stuff.

How it got to that situation is beyond me. If you only have enough fuel at landing for the "45 minutes" and you hear that several aircraft have gone around its time to go do plan b. let the dispatcher know while you're enroute to whatever the next airport is. You don't have time for holding and those are the types of things you need to think about while closing in on the terminal area. Maybe I'm paranoid but lots of lapses in my opinion.

Absolutely, but when your chosen diversion airport also fogs in there isn't much you can do. Again, I'm not sure what kind of "dispatcher" equivalent they have in Australia, I know that it is a very different position in other parts of the world as compared to the States.

Any of my fellow dispatchers used to planning flights into the former Soviet airports can attest to the accuracy of a TAF. Remember your training, Skywalker!

I have heard stories from the old days that eventually Soviet forecasters were getting in so much trouble for blowing forecasts that they started including TEMPO sections for 1/4SM FG covering the entirety of their forecast period for CYA purposes.

 

[Mach82]

Indeed, looks like a one point temp/dew point spread at time of release.

I think this incident is one of a few really good examples and teaching tools for dispatchers, as this is clearly something that we should be able to avoid. Not a ton of those. Looks like Qantas fell in the same trap as well, though they landed with a bit more gas.

Agreed! Thank God all ended well.

This tends to bring up Florida this time of year and that the TAFs will show no CBs and yet the radar clearly shows building cells heading towards your destination. I've gotten in the habit of adding fuel or an ALT, sometimes both for those darn pop up CBs that hang around. Better to already have a Plan B and remark it, I say

 

[McCrosky]

http://avherald.com/h?article=465890d1&opt=0

They landed a 737 with just over 1000lbs of fuel remaining - for those who don't work with 737s that isn't enough to perform a go around. Reading the account it sounds like the captain did one hell of a job making sure noone died.

The article link states the airplane landed with 2100Kg of fuel, which is about 6400lbs. Never having dispatched a 737 not sure how long of a duration that equals, but doesn't seem "that low".

Indeed, but in this scenario the best they had available was an RNAV approach with a 437' MDA. Scary stuff.



Absolutely, but when your chosen diversion airport also fogs in there isn't much you can do. Again, I'm not sure what kind of "dispatcher" equivalent they have in Australia, I know that it is a very different position in other parts of the world as compared to the States.

As I recall from previous looks into a job in Oz, the dispatcher position there (by whatever name) isn't as repsonible or as well versed as the 121 level counterparts. That's old info though. I was once informed that ATS in Oz was responsible for providing weather updates enroute.

Secondly, unforecast fog... it happens Working for a "fly by night" carrier arriving at prime fog time, I've leanred there's no sure way to forecast it. That includes checking the temp/dew point spread. I've seen them right on top of each other and no fog On the other hand, having a met department who is (allegedly) well versed in fog forecasting does miss the forecast... right along with the NWS. Sometimes, as the dispatcher, to certain places you can see a forecast and just get a bad feeling, based on experience. Example, the temp/dewpoint spread is 3 degrees, but, the winds are forecast to shift to a direction that in the past has caused fog to "suddenly" develop... up slope for instance. Going with my gut has saved me a few times...

At least in the US i have the luxury (in most places) of a lot of CAT 2/3 approaches and oher airports nearby. OZ,at least at the airports I've looked at in the past, seems to be geared to a much more fair weathered environment with less landing options for a big jet... which should require some extra attention. In the case cited, it all worked out. If there would have been loss of life, rules may have changed. Aviation law everywhere seems to be written in blood.

I have heard stories from the old days that eventually Soviet forecasters were getting in so much trouble for blowing forecasts that they started including TEMPO sections for 1/4SM FG covering the entirety of their forecast period for CYA purposes.

Old days?? They still do that crap! Try using one of their PAC rim airports for an ETOPS alternate at night! Today isn't bad, except UHMM with an 11 hour TEMPO of 0900 FG and VV003. Winter is worse, 20 hour tempos! Really.. it's gonna be fogged in (maybe) for 20 hours! We call it Vodka forecasting.

 

[belgiumania]

The article link states the airplane landed with 2100Kg of fuel, which is about 6400lbs. Never having dispatched a 737 not sure how long of a duration that equals, but doesn't seem "that low".

Whoops, I posted the Qantas link, the Virgin flight landed with 535kg of fuel. HTTP://avherald.com/h?article=46588ddb&opt=0

That's about 10-15 mins of hold fuel at altitude.

And "vodka forecasting," I like it.

 

[SteveCostello]

The article link states the airplane landed with 2100Kg of fuel, which is about 6400lbs. Never having dispatched a 737 not sure how long of a duration that equals, but doesn't seem "that low".

That article links to the Virgin flight that was critical on fuel: http://avherald.com/h?article=46588ddb&opt=0

 

[pljenkins]

Yeah, tempo conditions for 300 meters in fog for the duration of an otherwise VMC forecast are still the modus operandi for many of the old CCCP joints, especially in the 'Stans. Our SOP was to just call MeteoVoriElectric and get a forecast based upon, you know, reality. The Soviet forecasts many times had no bearing on what was going to happen out there.

 

[deltabobo]

Yeah, tempo conditions for 300 meters in fog for the duration of an otherwise VMC forecast are still the modus operandi for many of the old CCCP joints, especially in the 'Stans. Our SOP was to just call MeteoVoriElectric and get a forecast based upon, you know, reality. The Soviet forecasts many times had no bearing on what was going to happen out there.

They are only as good if you pay your bills...cough, cough, cough, RIA, cough, cough...

 

[OneBadLT123]

Buy a scamTAF. Oh Kavouras and Meterologix, how I loved thee.

 

[pljenkins]

Buy a scamTAF. Oh Kavouras and Meterologix, how I loved thee.

Haha! Yeah, I've been on both ends of this. You'll be surprised how many times "buy a TAF" blew up in my face when the RAMTAF was worse then the local TAF.

 

[OneBadLT123]

We usually got the "what do you need to get in?" question
Haha

 

[pljenkins]

We usually got the "what do you need to get in?" question
Haha

"I see the lights!"

 

[F9DXER]

1-800 - INE - EDWX

 

[MT]

Haha! Yeah, I've been on both ends of this. You'll be surprised how many times "buy a TAF" blew up in my face when the RAMTAF was worse then the local TAF.

That's poor customer service right there! =P