Narrative:

I was the captain (ca) and pilot flying (PF). The aircraft and I were both in need of a CAT III/autoland/FCC (flight control computer); so we planned; briefed and executed an autoland at ZZZ via the ILS Z runway xr. Ops normal until the flare phase of the approach; when the automatic land warning light illuminated; and as per SOP for CAT III; I executed an uneventful go-around and we were vectored for a visual approach back to runway xr. First officer/pm (first officer / pilot monitoring) notified ATC the reason for the go-around was for [an] autoland fault. During the entire flight I was monitoring the fuel status since we were dispatched to arrive with a little under 5000 lbs (5.0). ATC descended us early which decreased the arrival fuel. And then the go-around further decrease the arrival fuel. During the radar downwind on the second approach I noticed that the fuel was at 3.6 just before turning base. At about 1000 feet AGL on the second approach the fuel lo lvl intermittently annunciated on the pper ECAM (electronic centralized aircraft monitor). Landing and taxi to the gate was uneventful. Rsv (reserve) fuel was 2.9. I made an aml (aircraft maintenance log) entry noting the failure of the FCC/autoland. I noted that on the flight progress report in the center column the mach/flight level was showing 370/.76; but based on flying the uploaded flight plan with updated winds; we were at FL370/.78 which did give us a higher burn and decreased the arrival fuel. ATC descended us earlier than was planned on the flight plan; which coincidentally was at the exact same point and altitude as the flight I flew the day prior on a line check. The obvious suggestion would be to carry more fuel. Input the lower crossing altitudes into the flight planning software.

Related reports:

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: Flight Crew flying A319 aircraft landed with lower than planned fuel.

Narrative: I was the Captain (CA) and Pilot Flying (PF). The Aircraft and I were both in need of a CAT III/autoland/FCC (Flight Control Computer); so we planned; briefed and executed an autoland at ZZZ via the ILS Z RWY XR. Ops normal until the Flare phase of the approach; when the AUTO LAND Warning Light Illuminated; and as per SOP for CAT III; I executed an uneventful go-around and we were vectored for a visual approach back to RWY XR. FO/PM (First Officer / Pilot Monitoring) notified ATC the reason for the go-around was for [an] autoland fault. During the entire flight I was monitoring the fuel status since we were dispatched to arrive with a little under 5000 lbs (5.0). ATC descended us early which decreased the arrival fuel. And then the go-around further decrease the arrival fuel. During the radar downwind on the second approach I noticed that the fuel was at 3.6 just before turning base. At about 1000 feet AGL on the second approach the FUEL LO LVL intermittently annunciated on the pper ECAM (Electronic Centralized Aircraft Monitor). Landing and taxi to the Gate was uneventful. RSV (Reserve) Fuel was 2.9. I made an AML (Aircraft Maintenance Log) entry noting the failure of the FCC/autoland. I noted that on the flight progress report in the center column the Mach/flight level was showing 370/.76; but based on flying the uploaded flight plan with updated winds; we were at FL370/.78 which did give us a higher burn and decreased the arrival fuel. ATC descended us earlier than was planned on the flight plan; which coincidentally was at the exact same point and altitude as the flight I flew the day prior on a line check. The obvious suggestion would be to carry more fuel. Input the lower crossing altitudes into the flight planning software.

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.