37000 Feet | Browse and search NASA's Aviation Safety Reporting System |
|
Attributes | |
ACN | 351198 |
Time | |
Date | 199610 |
Day | Thu |
Local Time Of Day | 1201 To 1800 |
Place | |
Locale Reference | atc facility : pxr |
State Reference | AZ |
Altitude | msl bound lower : 12000 msl bound upper : 12000 |
Environment | |
Flight Conditions | IMC |
Light | Daylight |
Aircraft 1 | |
Operator | common carrier : air carrier |
Make Model Name | B737-300 |
Operating Under FAR Part | Part 121 |
Navigation In Use | Other Other |
Flight Phase | cruise other |
Route In Use | enroute airway : zab |
Flight Plan | IFR |
Person 1 | |
Affiliation | company : air carrier |
Function | flight crew : captain oversight : pic |
Qualification | pilot : cfi pilot : atp pilot : flight engineer |
Experience | flight time last 90 days : 175 flight time total : 15000 flight time type : 350 |
ASRS Report | 351198 |
Person 2 | |
Affiliation | company : air carrier |
Function | flight crew : first officer |
Qualification | pilot : atp |
Experience | flight time last 90 days : 70 flight time total : 16000 flight time type : 2500 |
ASRS Report | 351250 |
Events | |
Anomaly | other anomaly other |
Independent Detector | other flight crewa |
Resolutory Action | controller : issued new clearance flight crew : declared emergency |
Consequence | Other |
Supplementary | |
Primary Problem | Flight Crew Human Performance |
Narrative:
The flight had originated in phl, but had diverted to pit due to minor flight attendant and passenger injuries caused by severe clear air turbulence. The flight continued from pit after being released with estimated landing fuel of 7900 pounds, no alternate required, and a reserve fuel requirement of 3800 pounds. WX at phx was VFR with light easterly winds. Strong winds aloft and rough rides at the higher altitudes forced us to fly at FL260, but the headwind component at that altitude was over 100 KTS less than at the planned cruise altitude of FL310. The estimated landing fuel was reduced to 6200 pounds and remained at that throughout most of the flight. The WX at phx remained VFR with visibility at 10 SM as the winds slowly shifted to the southwest over several hours. Our position abeam zun showed a dramatic increase in fuel burn during the last 30 mins from an increased head wind component resulting in an estimated landing fuel of 5200 pounds. The WX at phx continued to be VFR. Approximately 75 mi northeast of phx the ATIS was now broadcasting visibility of 3/4 mi with blowing sand and winds from the west gusting to 30 KTS. This was right at minimums for the only ILS approach available. Abq issued us a clearance to hold at tonto intersection, at 12000 ft with an efc of about 25 mins. The WX at tonto was IMC, light to moderate rime icing, light turbulence, and thunderstorms about 15 mi to the south. Holding for that amount of time in those conditions would have resulted in landing with less than 4000 pounds of fuel on board. Diverting to tucson would also have the same or less fuel at landing and a second divert would be very unsettling to the emotional state of the passenger. Planning to land with less than 5000 pounds of fuel on board does not leave much time to contend with any possible emergencys on final approach. I declared 'minimum fuel' and advised abq I could not accept the holding clearance. Abq questioned our minimum fuel declaration and asked if we would declare an emergency if issued the holding clearance again, the first officer responded that we would, after a short pause she stated that we would be treated as an emergency aircraft. Shortly thereafter we were handed off to phx approach, he advised us that our status was that of minimum fuel and not emergency. We were vectored for the ILS and arrived at the gate with 4300 pounds of fuel on board. I felt that abq was trying to force us to accept a hold clearance that I deemed unsafe, and she was using the declaration of an emergency as leverage. It would not be prudent to enter holding planning to leave with slightly more than reserve fuel especially with only 1 runway available with 1 approach and visibility at minimums. I was under the impression that declaring 'minimum fuel' was designed just for this particular set of circumstances.
Original NASA ASRS Text
Title: B737-300 ACFT CONCERNED ABOUT FUEL DECLARED MINIMUM FUEL TO ELIMINATE THE HOLDING CLRNC WHICH HAD BEEN GIVEN. CTLR ASKED IF IT WAS AN EMER AND FLC RESPONDED YES. PRIORITY HANDLING FOLLOWED.
Narrative: THE FLT HAD ORIGINATED IN PHL, BUT HAD DIVERTED TO PIT DUE TO MINOR FLT ATTENDANT AND PAX INJURIES CAUSED BY SEVERE CLR AIR TURB. THE FLT CONTINUED FROM PIT AFTER BEING RELEASED WITH ESTIMATED LNDG FUEL OF 7900 LBS, NO ALTERNATE REQUIRED, AND A RESERVE FUEL REQUIREMENT OF 3800 LBS. WX AT PHX WAS VFR WITH LIGHT EASTERLY WINDS. STRONG WINDS ALOFT AND ROUGH RIDES AT THE HIGHER ALTS FORCED US TO FLY AT FL260, BUT THE HEADWIND COMPONENT AT THAT ALT WAS OVER 100 KTS LESS THAN AT THE PLANNED CRUISE ALT OF FL310. THE ESTIMATED LNDG FUEL WAS REDUCED TO 6200 LBS AND REMAINED AT THAT THROUGHOUT MOST OF THE FLT. THE WX AT PHX REMAINED VFR WITH VISIBILITY AT 10 SM AS THE WINDS SLOWLY SHIFTED TO THE SW OVER SEVERAL HRS. OUR POS ABEAM ZUN SHOWED A DRAMATIC INCREASE IN FUEL BURN DURING THE LAST 30 MINS FROM AN INCREASED HEAD WIND COMPONENT RESULTING IN AN ESTIMATED LNDG FUEL OF 5200 LBS. THE WX AT PHX CONTINUED TO BE VFR. APPROX 75 MI NE OF PHX THE ATIS WAS NOW BROADCASTING VISIBILITY OF 3/4 MI WITH BLOWING SAND AND WINDS FROM THE W GUSTING TO 30 KTS. THIS WAS RIGHT AT MINIMUMS FOR THE ONLY ILS APCH AVAILABLE. ABQ ISSUED US A CLRNC TO HOLD AT TONTO INTXN, AT 12000 FT WITH AN EFC OF ABOUT 25 MINS. THE WX AT TONTO WAS IMC, LIGHT TO MODERATE RIME ICING, LIGHT TURB, AND TSTMS ABOUT 15 MI TO THE S. HOLDING FOR THAT AMOUNT OF TIME IN THOSE CONDITIONS WOULD HAVE RESULTED IN LNDG WITH LESS THAN 4000 LBS OF FUEL ON BOARD. DIVERTING TO TUCSON WOULD ALSO HAVE THE SAME OR LESS FUEL AT LNDG AND A SECOND DIVERT WOULD BE VERY UNSETTLING TO THE EMOTIONAL STATE OF THE PAX. PLANNING TO LAND WITH LESS THAN 5000 LBS OF FUEL ON BOARD DOES NOT LEAVE MUCH TIME TO CONTEND WITH ANY POSSIBLE EMERS ON FINAL APCH. I DECLARED 'MINIMUM FUEL' AND ADVISED ABQ I COULD NOT ACCEPT THE HOLDING CLRNC. ABQ QUESTIONED OUR MINIMUM FUEL DECLARATION AND ASKED IF WE WOULD DECLARE AN EMER IF ISSUED THE HOLDING CLRNC AGAIN, THE FO RESPONDED THAT WE WOULD, AFTER A SHORT PAUSE SHE STATED THAT WE WOULD BE TREATED AS AN EMER ACFT. SHORTLY THEREAFTER WE WERE HANDED OFF TO PHX APCH, HE ADVISED US THAT OUR STATUS WAS THAT OF MINIMUM FUEL AND NOT EMER. WE WERE VECTORED FOR THE ILS AND ARRIVED AT THE GATE WITH 4300 LBS OF FUEL ON BOARD. I FELT THAT ABQ WAS TRYING TO FORCE US TO ACCEPT A HOLD CLRNC THAT I DEEMED UNSAFE, AND SHE WAS USING THE DECLARATION OF AN EMER AS LEVERAGE. IT WOULD NOT BE PRUDENT TO ENTER HOLDING PLANNING TO LEAVE WITH SLIGHTLY MORE THAN RESERVE FUEL ESPECIALLY WITH ONLY 1 RWY AVAILABLE WITH 1 APCH AND VISIBILITY AT MINIMUMS. I WAS UNDER THE IMPRESSION THAT DECLARING 'MINIMUM FUEL' WAS DESIGNED JUST FOR THIS PARTICULAR SET OF CIRCUMSTANCES.
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.