Airports that require Holding Fuel

[FL280]

.

[BigMac]

Oh dear. This should be fun.

[Longtimer]

Hi all,
A friend of mine that flies in Manitoba asked me about holding fuel and if certain airports require it? What do most operators in 703 use as reserve / holding fuel? I'm sure 704 / 705 operators have certain requirements as well. If I recall, the 602 says fuel to dest, alternate plus 45 mins (including approaches, etc) but under 703 it also says that in ADDITION to those in the 602, you also need other fuel. I've heard of people calling it "granny gas" or "a little extra just in case". CARS can be a tad grey at times.

Your friend sounds like an accident waiting to happen. You might get him to read the following just to give him an idea of what "reserve fuel" is or are you just trolling for reaction?

http://www.tc.gc.ca/eng/civilaviation/p ... n4-987.htm

[FL280]

.

[KK7]

I'll start off with saying I don't know anything about 703 ops beyond what I read in the CARs, having never worked in that realm.

However, I have worked 705, and since you asked, it is not like the fuel requirements listed in the CARs for 703.

Basic 705 fuel requirements are:

705.25 (1) Subject to subsection (2), no air operator shall authorize a flight and no person shall commence a flight unless the aircraft

(a) when operating in VFR flight, carries sufficient fuel to fly to the destination aerodrome and thereafter to fly for 45 minutes at normal cruising speed;

(b) when operating in IFR flight on designated routes or over designated areas as defined in the Commercial Air Service Standards, carries an enroute fuel reserve of five per cent of the fuel required to fly to the destination aerodrome; and

(c) when operating in IFR flight, except when complying with the Safety Criteria for Approval of Extended Range Twin-engine Operations (ETOPS) Manual, carries sufficient fuel to allow the aircraft

(i) to descend at any point along the route to the lower of

(A) the one-engine-inoperative service ceiling, or

(B) 10,000 feet ASL,

(ii) to cruise at the altitude referred to in subparagraph (i) to a suitable aerodrome,

(iii) to conduct an approach and a missed approach, and

(iv) to hold for 30 minutes at an altitude of 1,500 feet above the elevation of the aerodrome selected in accordance with subparagraph (ii).

(2) An air operator may be authorized in an air operator certificate to reduce the enroute fuel reserve required by paragraph (1)(b) where the air operator complies with the Commercial Air Service Standards.

It does not refer to Part VI or say "and" like it does in 703.

[FL280]

Awesome thanks. Nice to hear from someone in the 705 ops.

[oldtimer]

What is this 45 minutes stuff??? I thought it was 4/5 minutes

Actually, I think a lot of this discussion comes from airports like Calgary or Toronto that may have slot times and flow control, usually published in Notams, that will require aircraft to carry sufficient fuel for any anticipated enroute delays.
Many accountants/ops managers/sales people for 703 operators plan minimum fuel/maximum payload when selling a charter and when things go south, the crew and customers are left in a pickle.
That is my opinion.

[FL280]

.

[Jack In The Box]

If he flies in Manitoba, he shouldn't need to plan for "holding" fuel. The traffic volume out here generally does not require you to hold.

Plan Fuel to Destination + approach/MA fuel if wx sucks
Fuel to alternate + 45 minutes reserve

A lot of people add a few hundred pounds of granny to be safe. I'm not going to open up the discussion on that can of worms (some people will call this criminal, others will call this common sense), I'm just stating a fact. The only time I'd add "holding fuel" is if there was a Notam to expect delays.

[The Hammer]

Would you not require the higher of the 2 options? Suitable aerodrome is vague. Suitable to me means nothing more than someplace the landing #'s work. That is all. I may be screwed trying to depart later but that is not the intent of the regulation.

Our operation's scheds and regular charters have all been checked to confirm that even with the closest alternates, the dest+45 fuel loads will cover the suitable + 30 min clause thanks to aerodromes along the route. It's never really been an issue for us.

[sidestick stirrer]

The only one that I have any experience with is EGLL.
The airport briefing notes reference a reg that requires 20 minutes of holding fuel be available before entering their terminal airspace...
British ATC give the most-casual holding clearances I've ever heard, like, " Take up the hold at Bovington, twice around should do it".
Yet they are the best in the world, completely unflappable.

[Bede]

On the 737, we routinely fly with 5000 lbs which includes an alternate (YHM going into YYZ) and 3200lbs (30 min) of reserve. We also add in 5% route factor.

I've never heard of "holding" fuel as that is included in the reserve. The 737 has accurate fuel gauges (as does the PC12 I think), so it's never an issue- hold until you hit your reserve+alternate fuel and then head to the alternate. Most likely you will land with more than your reserve fuel since you never did an approach or missed approach.

[Cat Driver]

A lot of people add a few hundred pounds of granny to be safe. I'm not going to open up the discussion on that can of worms (some people will call this criminal, others will call this common sense), I'm just stating a fact.

Granny???

If you mean adding a few hundred pounds extra fuel over and above the gross allowable take off weight of the aircraft you are flying then you are intentionally taking off in an airplane after you just cancelled the C of A for that aircraft. .

Brilliant, simply brilliant.

[FL280]

I'm hoping the statement referred to adding fuel over and above the "required" amount for the flight, not fuel to take it over gross.

[flyincanuck]

@ Cat,

Granny gas usually means gas added above MTOW.

The CARs are pretty straight forward wrt fuel requirements - essentially 30 mins after you reach your alternate (IFR).

Internationally, or above 60N, you're require to add an additional 5% contingency fuel.

It's also the responsibility of the PIC to add contingency fuel if delays are probably or predicted (ATC, wx, etc). For instance you depart YQT knowing flow control is in effect at YYZ. If you know beforehand that the destination airport is holding (say) 30 minutes...I would be adding that to my uplift. Unless you really want to end up at your alternate.

[Cat Driver]

Granny gas usually means gas added above MTOW.

Yes, of course I know that.

And it still is beyond my ability to figure out why anyone would deliberately put them - self in such a position.

Stupid does not quite describe such actions.

[squirrely]

I think there may be some confusion about what is being asked by the posted here..I'm not really sure myself but I think The Hammer touched on it.

This is how I understand it:

The 30 minutes of holding fuel referenced in car 703.20 is only needed after you have gone to a suitable airport along the route of flight as described in A and B of 703.20 (this is NOT your filled alternate). So in your example of flying from yyz to yqt with the alternate of yam, lets say you need 2000lbs to go from yyz to yqt and to go from yqt to yam plus 45min is another 1000lbs bringing the total to 3000lbs (to meet the requirements of 602.88). Now you have to look along your route of yyz-yqt and determine if at ANY point along this route you can descend to either 10 000' or the single-engined service ceiling (whichever is lower) and proceed to a "suitable aerodrome" and conduct a "approach and a missed approach, and to hold for 30 minutes at an altitude of 1,500 feet above the elevation of the aerodrome...". So lets say you run the numbers for this and find the most you will need is 1000lbs. Since it only takes 2000lbs for yyz-yqt and 1000lbs for either yam or the suitable aerodrome en route leaving with yyz 3000lbs will satisfy both 602.88 and 720.20.

In my experience the fuel required to meet 602.88 has always been enough to meet 703.20 as well. Now I'm sure that there will be times when it doesn't but I think for flying in Manitoba it should be ok. 703,704 and 705 all have this requirement along with some others that have been mentioned above. Hopefully I haven't added confusion to this and please feel free to correct any errors.. I have been wrong at least once today.

[AOW]

The CARS that you referenced are talking about different things. The first is an alternate if you miss at your destination; the second is about diverting enroute, if for example youlost pressurization. Let's say that you're planning YYZ to YQT at FL280. Now over APNEL you suffer a rapid depressurization and must descend to 10,000'. Perhaps your fuel burn at 10,000 is so high that you can't make it all the way to YQT. You are legal, however, if you can proceed to YAM, and hold for 30 minutes at 1500 AAE. In (almost) all 703 ops, the fuel to alternate plus 45 minutes is going to be more restrictive than the enroute diversion, but if you managed to find a scenario where it requires more fuel than destination plus approach and missed approach plus alternate and approach at alternate plus 45 minutes, then it is the minimum IFR fuel for the trip.