ATC forcing diversions - a question

[Snagmaster E]

I've skimmed the manops and the CARs and the AIM. I just want some imput.

Scenario:

MF Airport with no radar coverage but FSS.

Aircraft is approaching destination, has had stronger winds at altitude and therefore has burned more fuel than planned. Told by ATC that a hold may be required due to traffic departing on the ground. Pilot looks at the numbers and informs controller that a hold will not be possible (as the fuel remaining is for alternate and reserve). Controller says that a hold will be required to accommodate traffic. Pilot asks if aircraft on ground is a priority (medevac or likewise). Answer is no, he's been de-iced and has been waiting for 15 minutes. Pilot states that if he/she is not permitted to conduct the approach, he/she will have to divert to alternate. ATC asks so will you be diverting to your alternate? Answer is "Well I have to if I can't land now". Pilot is cleared to alternate airport (50 minutes away).

Now does this sound like a sensible solution? Make an aircraft divert to an alternate rather than delay an aircraft on the ground for an additional 10 minutes?

Even thought the specifics of ground conditions are not really important, other than it's IFR, I'll put them here to evaluate the ground icing conditions. They are:

CXXX BKN 010 3SM -SN -2/-4

With a Type IV UCAR EG 106 Endurance fluid the hold over time for these conditions is 0:40 - 1:20 minutes estimated.

Thoughts? What about if the aircraft had been holding for 15 minutes already and was told that an additional 10 minutes would be required and the pilot has stated that he/she doesn't have more fuel to hold and still is not given clearance?

Food for thought: Both of these situations have happened.

[kevinsky18]

I had a very similar issue happen the other day. We were number 1 to land and ATC was telling the number 2 aircraft to hold. Number two tried to convey to ATC that they would like priority due to a low oil pressure indication in one of their engines. ATC either didn't get it or wouldn't budge. So I popped up on the radio and told ATC we had plenty of fuel to hold and please make us number two and let the other aircraft go in ahead of us. ATC finally gave in.

When we were all on the ground the pilot from the other aircraft came over and thanked us for our assistance.

Sometimes ATC doesn't get it or is having a bad day and figures f-u all if you want priority declare an emergency.

When these situations arise we aren’t always in a position to help out, I just so happened to have extra fuel. But if you are able to assist I would suggest a radical thought here, offer your fellow pilots and ATC a helping hand by letting them know you wouldn’t mind waiting.

Not the technical answer the OP might have been looking for but one that is all too often forgotten, "stick together and help your fellow pilots out."

[yeah yeah]

Here go the start of the "what ifs"

What if aircraft on ground has passengers who will miss their connections at their destination with any further delay;
What if aircraft on ground faces night-time restrictions into destination airport (ie CYTZ);
What if crew on aircraft on ground is also thinking that headwinds may eat into their fuel reserve once airborne.

Any others that anyone can think of?

[ahramin]

PAN PAN, PAN PAN, PAN PAN. We have a low oil pressure indication, require immediate landing.

If that's too complicated, it's time to go find a hobby/profession with less severe consequences.

As for the original situation, it's ATC's call. If they require you to hold, and you don't have the fuel, you are welcome to commit to the destination or divert to your alternate. You can argue the point with the ACC manager later, but in the air is not usually the place to do so. You can give the controller information and make suggestions, but at the end of the day it's the controller's call. Since the right of way rules state that a landing aircraft has priority over one that is taking off, I would think the controller would have to have good reason for deciding otherwise.

[Shadowfax]

The OP hasn't really provided all the facts here. They didn't say how long the hold would be - but that they could fly 50 mins to the alternate. Was the hold going to be 50 minutes?

Minimum fuel or an emergency fuel situation? Infringing on comfort zones or the regs? Anytime a pilot is concerned about actually running out of go-juice - tell ATC clearly and you will get priority (you may have to complete some paperwork on the ground IF TC decides to look into it). ATC are not traffic cops - they serve all users on a first come first served basis until someone utters those magic words....then the rules change dramatically. Read up on Avianca or even SWR111.

[francois201]

So the guy on the ground had a valid clearance at a non radar airport. Maybe the controller had no other choice but to protect for the departure because he forgot about the arrival or something. I understand that in this situation there is an FSS that could ultimately stop the aircraft from taking off but keep in mind that at some other places there won't be and that would be the reason why the controller has to put you in a hold. Non-Radar rules are a lot less permissive than radar ones!

[Snagmaster E]

The OP hasn't really provided all the facts here. They didn't say how long the hold would be - but that they could fly 50 mins to the alternate. Was the hold going to be 50 minutes?

Minimum fuel or an emergency fuel situation? Infringing on comfort zones or the regs? Anytime a pilot is concerned about actually running out of go-juice - tell ATC clearly and you will get priority (you may have to complete some paperwork on the ground IF TC decides to look into it). ATC are not traffic cops - they serve all users on a first come first served basis until someone utters those magic words....then the rules change dramatically. Read up on Avianca or even SWR111.

Hold was about 10 - 15 min. Fuel burn had been higher due to winds aloft so the "granny gas" had been used up.