Narrative:

We were climbing out passing through 9000' when we received a bleed duct warning message; followed by a bleed duct caution message. I was pilot flying; so I continued to fly the airplane while the captain ran the appropriate QRH procedure. In complying with the procedure; we were limited to FL250 but could continue the flight to [our destination]. We were originally planning on flying at FL340; but determined we had enough fuel to fly at the lower altitude. When we reached ZZZ to begin the arrival; center asked us to speed up to 300 knots for spacing. The capt was on the radio and replied that we could not because we had been flying at a lower altitude (which burns more fuel); so we were flying slower at 280 knots to compensate. The controller asked why we had been flying at a lower altitude; and the capt replied that we were complying with a procedure and were conserving fuel by flying slower. The controller then asked if speeding up would lead to a min fuel situation. For the sake of brevity and to reduce frequency congestion the capt simply replied; 'no;' without going into the details of how we had monitored our fuel burn the entire flight and were planning on landing with 2830 pounds of reserve fuel. The planned reserve fuel on the release was 2274; so we would have a comfortable 'fudge factor' of fuel in case anything unexpected came up (runway closures; extended downwinds; go-around; etc). Burning into our 2830# would have been legal; but not necessarily prudent. However; the controller would not accept our decision to be prudent and decided that our reluctance to speed up to 300 knots constituted a 'possible pilot deviation.' he gave us a phone number to call on the ground. He then handed us off to the next center controller who also demanded we speed up to 300 knots. After we once again declined to speed up from 280 knots; the controller made an ultimatum demanding we speed up to 300 knots or he would give us a 360 degree turn. That would completely defeat the purpose of us flying slower to conserve fuel; so we decided to speed up. Shortly thereafter we were handed off to [the next] center; and he immediately slowed us to 280 knots again. We later landed without incident and with 3000 pounds of fuel on board. The initial threat was the bleed air problem that caused us to fly at a lower altitude. We managed that threat by continually tracking our fuel burn and flying slower to conserve fuel. The controllers' unprofessionalism on frequency and refusal to understand our situation was the other threat. A 360 degree turn is unheard of; and I believe the controller was trying to bully us. Once on the ground; the captain called the center phone number we had been given. The center manager admitted that his controllers had acted unprofessionally and apologized for the incident. We always accommodate ATC requests when possible. We routinely speed up and slow down multiple times during the arrival. We also sometimes descend very rapidly (necessitating the use of speed brakes) to help the controller with unexpected separation issues. We understand that in the fluid environment of airspace management things will not always run smoothly and are happy to help; even if it is not always convenient for us. All we ask is that the controllers return the favor. The vast majority of controllers I have worked with are very helpful; and this was an unfortunate and; I hope; isolated incident.

Related reports:

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: A CRJ900 First Officer experiences a bleed duct warning climbing through 9;000 FT and compliance with checklist procedures requires the flight to remain at or below FL250. The crew elects to slow down to conserve fuel but approaching destination ATC assigns a higher speed which the crew declines. The Controller issues a 'possible pilot deviation' statement and a phone number. The next Controller also asks for more speed which is declined; then a 360 degree turn and the crew elects to speed up. The next Controller returns the crew to their desired speed.

Narrative: We were climbing out passing through 9000' when we received a BLEED DUCT warning message; followed by a BLEED DUCT caution message. I was pilot flying; so I continued to fly the airplane while the Captain ran the appropriate QRH procedure. In complying with the procedure; we were limited to FL250 but could continue the flight to [our destination]. We were originally planning on flying at FL340; but determined we had enough fuel to fly at the lower altitude. When we reached ZZZ to begin the arrival; Center asked us to speed up to 300 knots for spacing. The Capt was on the radio and replied that we could not because we had been flying at a lower altitude (which burns more fuel); so we were flying slower at 280 knots to compensate. The controller asked why we had been flying at a lower altitude; and the Capt replied that we were complying with a procedure and were conserving fuel by flying slower. The controller then asked if speeding up would lead to a min fuel situation. For the sake of brevity and to reduce frequency congestion the Capt simply replied; 'No;' without going into the details of how we had monitored our fuel burn the entire flight and were planning on landing with 2830 pounds of reserve fuel. The planned reserve fuel on the release was 2274; so we would have a comfortable 'fudge factor' of fuel in case anything unexpected came up (runway closures; extended downwinds; go-around; etc). Burning into our 2830# would have been legal; but not necessarily prudent. However; the controller would not accept our decision to be prudent and decided that our reluctance to speed up to 300 knots constituted a 'possible pilot deviation.' He gave us a phone number to call on the ground. He then handed us off to the next Center controller who also demanded we speed up to 300 knots. After we once again declined to speed up from 280 knots; the controller made an ultimatum demanding we speed up to 300 knots or he would give us a 360 degree turn. That would completely defeat the purpose of us flying slower to conserve fuel; so we decided to speed up. Shortly thereafter we were handed off to [the next] Center; and he immediately slowed us to 280 knots again. We later landed without incident and with 3000 pounds of fuel on board. The initial threat was the bleed air problem that caused us to fly at a lower altitude. We managed that threat by continually tracking our fuel burn and flying slower to conserve fuel. The Controllers' unprofessionalism on frequency and refusal to understand our situation was the other threat. A 360 degree turn is unheard of; and I believe the controller was trying to bully us. Once on the ground; the Captain called the Center phone number we had been given. The Center manager admitted that his controllers had acted unprofessionally and apologized for the incident. We always accommodate ATC requests when possible. We routinely speed up and slow down multiple times during the arrival. We also sometimes descend very rapidly (necessitating the use of speed brakes) to help the controller with unexpected separation issues. We understand that in the fluid environment of airspace management things will not always run smoothly and are happy to help; even if it is not always convenient for us. All we ask is that the controllers return the favor. The vast majority of controllers I have worked with are very helpful; and this was an unfortunate and; I hope; isolated incident.

Data retrieved from NASA's ASRS site and automatically converted to unabbreviated mixed upper/lowercase text. This report is for informational purposes with no guarantee of accuracy. See NASA's ASRS site for official report.