Narrative:

On a flight from lfpg to klax I landed at kden to put on more fuel to complete the flight to klax. I was on a reclr flight plan with kden as my refueling airport. On the direct flight plan there was an error in the reserve requirement. This made the direct fuel less than reclr fuel. Reclr fuel is always less than direct fuel. Far 121.645 states that reserve fuel on any international flight must be equipment to that required to fly 10 percent or the total time from the airport or departure to, and land at, the airport to which the flight was released. A reclr flight plan is constructed so that the flight is originally released to an airport short of the intended destination. Then during flight, it is rereleased (reclred) to the intended destination from a point where 10 percent of the flight time requires much less fuel. Our flight was on a slot time of XA25-XA35 out of lfpg. If I had requested a new flight plan, I would have missed my slot time. I thought the error was in the etr 924304 and put on 185600 pounds of ramp fuel. Landing fuel at kden was 20400 pounds. Supplemental information from acn 250750: the other first officer/international relief officer did the outside preflight and weight and balance. I did the cockpit safety inspection and preflight. Meanwhile, the captain had the flight plan and calculator working on a fuel load. Approximately 10 mins prior to engine start the captain asked if we agreed with his fuel calculations. The flight plan was a refile plan used by air carrier. Neither myself nor the other first officer/international relief officer had been trained in its use. I have, however, discussed such plans with our dispatchers and thought I knew fuel burn as the total of burn to the reclr point plus burn to destination (both in column 2 of our flight plan). The captain indicated I was using the wrong data. As I was basically unfamiliar with the details of the refile format, I accepted his decision. Dispatch filed random tracks, as a result, we never got filed altitude (FL350) until over canadian territory, we crossed at FL280. Callback conversation with reporter revealed the following information: dispatch issued an improper flight plan that confused the captain. He knew it was wrong and tried to sort out the figures, but was not successful. He asked the first officer to check his figures who disagreed with them but was not positive enough to insist. Refile flight plans are not permitted through canadian airspace, but the air carrier does it anyway. The FAA was made aware of this at the hearing. Crew did not get a new flight plan because the aircraft was parked at a remote site making it difficult, and they were concerned, for security reasons, about a missing passenger who had checked his baggage. The chief pilot threatened to have the FAA pull reporter's ticket if he complained about the lack of first officer training in refile procedures. Reporter is union chairman and the company has been trying to 'get' him. The flight crew appealed their grounding and the company backed down somewhat. The FAA attended their amnesty hearing, they were not supposed to. They had legal fuel to make den.

Related reports:

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: WDB BOARDED INSUFFICIENT FUEL TO MAKE THE TRIP DIRECT TO DEST AND HAD TO LAND AT THEIR REFILE POINT FOR MORE FUEL.

Narrative: ON A FLT FROM LFPG TO KLAX I LANDED AT KDEN TO PUT ON MORE FUEL TO COMPLETE THE FLT TO KLAX. I WAS ON A RECLR FLT PLAN WITH KDEN AS MY REFUELING ARPT. ON THE DIRECT FLT PLAN THERE WAS AN ERROR IN THE RESERVE REQUIREMENT. THIS MADE THE DIRECT FUEL LESS THAN RECLR FUEL. RECLR FUEL IS ALWAYS LESS THAN DIRECT FUEL. FAR 121.645 STATES THAT RESERVE FUEL ON ANY INTL FLT MUST BE EQUIP TO THAT REQUIRED TO FLY 10 PERCENT OR THE TOTAL TIME FROM THE ARPT OR DEP TO, AND LAND AT, THE ARPT TO WHICH THE FLT WAS RELEASED. A RECLR FLT PLAN IS CONSTRUCTED SO THAT THE FLT IS ORIGINALLY RELEASED TO AN ARPT SHORT OF THE INTENDED DEST. THEN DURING FLT, IT IS RERELEASED (RECLRED) TO THE INTENDED DEST FROM A POINT WHERE 10 PERCENT OF THE FLT TIME REQUIRES MUCH LESS FUEL. OUR FLT WAS ON A SLOT TIME OF XA25-XA35 OUT OF LFPG. IF I HAD REQUESTED A NEW FLT PLAN, I WOULD HAVE MISSED MY SLOT TIME. I THOUGHT THE ERROR WAS IN THE ETR 924304 AND PUT ON 185600 LBS OF RAMP FUEL. LNDG FUEL AT KDEN WAS 20400 LBS. SUPPLEMENTAL INFO FROM ACN 250750: THE OTHER FO/IRO DID THE OUTSIDE PREFLT AND WT AND BAL. I DID THE COCKPIT SAFETY INSPECTION AND PREFLT. MEANWHILE, THE CAPT HAD THE FLT PLAN AND CALCULATOR WORKING ON A FUEL LOAD. APPROX 10 MINS PRIOR TO ENG START THE CAPT ASKED IF WE AGREED WITH HIS FUEL CALCULATIONS. THE FLT PLAN WAS A REFILE PLAN USED BY ACR. NEITHER MYSELF NOR THE OTHER FO/IRO HAD BEEN TRAINED IN ITS USE. I HAVE, HOWEVER, DISCUSSED SUCH PLANS WITH OUR DISPATCHERS AND THOUGHT I KNEW FUEL BURN AS THE TOTAL OF BURN TO THE RECLR POINT PLUS BURN TO DEST (BOTH IN COLUMN 2 OF OUR FLT PLAN). THE CAPT INDICATED I WAS USING THE WRONG DATA. AS I WAS BASICALLY UNFAMILIAR WITH THE DETAILS OF THE REFILE FORMAT, I ACCEPTED HIS DECISION. DISPATCH FILED RANDOM TRACKS, AS A RESULT, WE NEVER GOT FILED ALT (FL350) UNTIL OVER CANADIAN TERRITORY, WE CROSSED AT FL280. CALLBACK CONVERSATION WITH RPTR REVEALED THE FOLLOWING INFO: DISPATCH ISSUED AN IMPROPER FLT PLAN THAT CONFUSED THE CAPT. HE KNEW IT WAS WRONG AND TRIED TO SORT OUT THE FIGURES, BUT WAS NOT SUCCESSFUL. HE ASKED THE FO TO CHK HIS FIGURES WHO DISAGREED WITH THEM BUT WAS NOT POSITIVE ENOUGH TO INSIST. REFILE FLT PLANS ARE NOT PERMITTED THROUGH CANADIAN AIRSPACE, BUT THE ACR DOES IT ANYWAY. THE FAA WAS MADE AWARE OF THIS AT THE HEARING. CREW DID NOT GET A NEW FLT PLAN BECAUSE THE ACFT WAS PARKED AT A REMOTE SITE MAKING IT DIFFICULT, AND THEY WERE CONCERNED, FOR SECURITY REASONS, ABOUT A MISSING PAX WHO HAD CHKED HIS BAGGAGE. THE CHIEF PLT THREATENED TO HAVE THE FAA PULL RPTR'S TICKET IF HE COMPLAINED ABOUT THE LACK OF FO TRAINING IN REFILE PROCS. RPTR IS UNION CHAIRMAN AND THE COMPANY HAS BEEN TRYING TO 'GET' HIM. THE FLC APPEALED THEIR GNDING AND THE COMPANY BACKED DOWN SOMEWHAT. THE FAA ATTENDED THEIR AMNESTY HEARING, THEY WERE NOT SUPPOSED TO. THEY HAD LEGAL FUEL TO MAKE DEN.

Data retrieved from NASA's ASRS site as of July 2007 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.