Narrative:

1) problem arose when flying from key west to grand cayman over cuba on a properly issued overfly permit. I determine when almost over ycl that my fuel calculations might be inaccurate and could in fact be insufficient to reach my destination. 2) contributing factors were inadequate familiarization with rate of fuel consumption of airplane following engine overhaul and unanticipated headwinds. 3) situation was discovered by careful observation of ground speed (verification of headwinds) and determination used versus available fuel. 4) corrective action was to request deviation to an alternate landing site for refueling. Landing for refueling was done with more than adequate reserves. Subsequent calculations lead me to conclude I could have reached original intended destination without refueling but I probably would not have adequate reserves. 5) perceptions: fuel burn would be less than actual. Judgements: bad -- taking off without verifying fuel burn and headwinds throughout trip. Good -- landing at alternate site when fuel availability in question. 6) factors affecting quality of human performance -- desire to make trip after long planning.

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: PVT PLT OF A C172 ON A CUBAN OVERFLT REALIZES THAT HIS FUEL SUPPLY IS NOT ADEQUATE FOR DEST AND RESERVE FUEL REQUIREMENTS. LANDS AT CAYO LARGO DEL SOL WITH ATC ASSISTANCE AND APPROVAL.

Narrative: 1) PROB AROSE WHEN FLYING FROM KEY WEST TO GRAND CAYMAN OVER CUBA ON A PROPERLY ISSUED OVERFLY PERMIT. I DETERMINE WHEN ALMOST OVER YCL THAT MY FUEL CALCULATIONS MIGHT BE INACCURATE AND COULD IN FACT BE INSUFFICIENT TO REACH MY DEST. 2) CONTRIBUTING FACTORS WERE INADEQUATE FAMILIARIZATION WITH RATE OF FUEL CONSUMPTION OF AIRPLANE FOLLOWING ENG OVERHAUL AND UNANTICIPATED HEADWINDS. 3) SIT WAS DISCOVERED BY CAREFUL OBSERVATION OF GND SPD (VERIFICATION OF HEADWINDS) AND DETERMINATION USED VERSUS AVAILABLE FUEL. 4) CORRECTIVE ACTION WAS TO REQUEST DEV TO AN ALTERNATE LNDG SITE FOR REFUELING. LNDG FOR REFUELING WAS DONE WITH MORE THAN ADEQUATE RESERVES. SUBSEQUENT CALCULATIONS LEAD ME TO CONCLUDE I COULD HAVE REACHED ORIGINAL INTENDED DEST WITHOUT REFUELING BUT I PROBABLY WOULD NOT HAVE ADEQUATE RESERVES. 5) PERCEPTIONS: FUEL BURN WOULD BE LESS THAN ACTUAL. JUDGEMENTS: BAD -- TAKING OFF WITHOUT VERIFYING FUEL BURN AND HEADWINDS THROUGHOUT TRIP. GOOD -- LNDG AT ALTERNATE SITE WHEN FUEL AVAILABILITY IN QUESTION. 6) FACTORS AFFECTING QUALITY OF HUMAN PERFORMANCE -- DESIRE TO MAKE TRIP AFTER LONG PLANNING.

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.