Narrative:

Off-schedule due to a broken jet earlier in the day; we were en route to ZZZ1 when we received an ACARS message indicating ZZZ1 runway was closed due to a mishap. ZZZ2 center broadcast the same information. Captain elected to immediately slow to maximum endurance and continue with the flight. Dispatch sent a message stating that the runway should be clear by our ETA and that the whole thing would probably be a non-event. Dispatch said that he was looking into changing our filed alternate from ZZZ4 to ZZZ5 as ZZZ4 would be closed by the time we would need it. This was followed by a message indicating that we should keep ZZZ4 as our alternate and that they would stay open as long as necessary. ZZZ1 center gave us holding instructions for ZZZ3 intersection without an efc. Their workload was clearly ramping up as they tried to control traffic; issue holding instructions and pass along ZZZ1's status. The captain floated the idea in the cockpit of heading to ZZZ5 since ZZZ4 was on 'the other side of the problem;' ie; ZZZ1; but elected to stick with ZZZ4 as that was the going-in game plan. It is noteworthy that the captain was talking with ZZZ1 operations on the radio but couldn't get any official word regarding the situation on the ground. En route to ZZZ3 we tailored our FMS data and determined that we had very little loiter time at ZZZ3; ie; we had to proceed to ZZZ1 or to ZZZ4 after one turn. About the time we arrived at ZZZ3; we got an ACARS message indicating that the runway at ZZZ1 was open; but we had just heard from ZZZ1 center that it would be at least another 1 - 1 1/2 hours until ZZZ1 runway would be open. After the first turn in holding and hearing no one receiving descent/vectors for an approach at ZZZ1; the captain elected to divert to ZZZ4. We sent the ACARS diversion message as we continued in holding; trying to get a word in with ZZZ1 center as to our intentions. My sense was that we were not in extremis as we would be 'fuel ahead' by not descending into ZZZ1 but; rather; flying at cruise altitude to ZZZ4. As we waited for our turn on the radio; we received an ACARS message that we could not go to ZZZ4 because they were closed and that ZZZ5 was preferred for our diversion. Because of bad information ZZZ4 would be open as long as we needed it -- we had burned below our onboard calculations for minimum fuel required for ZZZ5. As was previously noted; we never received alternate fuel/time requirements for ZZZ5 from dispatch. The captain assessed the situation and; after establishing radio communication with ZZZ6 elected to divert there. In order to get priority handling; the captain declared an emergency with ZZZ1 center. This was the only safe course of action given the tone of the ATC controller who was; understandably; becoming frustrated with being the middleman in an extremely busy; unclr situation. The center controller suggested ZZZ7 when he learned that fuel was the issue. We declined the offer and proceeded to ZZZ6. After sending the second ACARS diversion report; we received a message back querying as to whether or not we could make ZZZ5 as they would be better equipped to handle the diversion. Bottom line was that we did not have the time/fuel to safely change to a third alternate in what had become a rapidly decaying situation. The questions that remain open are: 1) why were we told ZZZ4 was going to be available when it was not? 2) why were we told ZZZ1 runway was open when it was not? 3) how can the captain be expected to make smart decisions when he is supplied inaccurate information? This report doesn't even scratch the surface of what the captain had to deal with after landing due to a no-notice divert with 260+ hostile passenger. He should be commended for not allowing safety to be jeopardized in the pursuit of logistical ease for the company.

Related reports:

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: A300 AIRBUS FLT CREW IS FORCED TO DEVIATE TO ANOTHER ARPT DUE TO LOW FUEL. THE PRIMARY DEST HAD ITS RWY CLOSED DUE TO AN INCIDENT AND POOR INFO WAS PASSED TO THE FLT CREW REGARDING THE ALTERNATE.

Narrative: OFF-SCHEDULE DUE TO A BROKEN JET EARLIER IN THE DAY; WE WERE ENRTE TO ZZZ1 WHEN WE RECEIVED AN ACARS MESSAGE INDICATING ZZZ1 RWY WAS CLOSED DUE TO A MISHAP. ZZZ2 CTR BROADCAST THE SAME INFO. CAPT ELECTED TO IMMEDIATELY SLOW TO MAX ENDURANCE AND CONTINUE WITH THE FLT. DISPATCH SENT A MESSAGE STATING THAT THE RWY SHOULD BE CLR BY OUR ETA AND THAT THE WHOLE THING WOULD PROBABLY BE A NON-EVENT. DISPATCH SAID THAT HE WAS LOOKING INTO CHANGING OUR FILED ALTERNATE FROM ZZZ4 TO ZZZ5 AS ZZZ4 WOULD BE CLOSED BY THE TIME WE WOULD NEED IT. THIS WAS FOLLOWED BY A MESSAGE INDICATING THAT WE SHOULD KEEP ZZZ4 AS OUR ALTERNATE AND THAT THEY WOULD STAY OPEN AS LONG AS NECESSARY. ZZZ1 CTR GAVE US HOLDING INSTRUCTIONS FOR ZZZ3 INTXN WITHOUT AN EFC. THEIR WORKLOAD WAS CLRLY RAMPING UP AS THEY TRIED TO CTL TFC; ISSUE HOLDING INSTRUCTIONS AND PASS ALONG ZZZ1'S STATUS. THE CAPT FLOATED THE IDEA IN THE COCKPIT OF HEADING TO ZZZ5 SINCE ZZZ4 WAS ON 'THE OTHER SIDE OF THE PROB;' IE; ZZZ1; BUT ELECTED TO STICK WITH ZZZ4 AS THAT WAS THE GOING-IN GAME PLAN. IT IS NOTEWORTHY THAT THE CAPT WAS TALKING WITH ZZZ1 OPS ON THE RADIO BUT COULDN'T GET ANY OFFICIAL WORD REGARDING THE SITUATION ON THE GND. ENRTE TO ZZZ3 WE TAILORED OUR FMS DATA AND DETERMINED THAT WE HAD VERY LITTLE LOITER TIME AT ZZZ3; IE; WE HAD TO PROCEED TO ZZZ1 OR TO ZZZ4 AFTER ONE TURN. ABOUT THE TIME WE ARRIVED AT ZZZ3; WE GOT AN ACARS MESSAGE INDICATING THAT THE RWY AT ZZZ1 WAS OPEN; BUT WE HAD JUST HEARD FROM ZZZ1 CTR THAT IT WOULD BE AT LEAST ANOTHER 1 - 1 1/2 HRS UNTIL ZZZ1 RWY WOULD BE OPEN. AFTER THE FIRST TURN IN HOLDING AND HEARING NO ONE RECEIVING DSCNT/VECTORS FOR AN APCH AT ZZZ1; THE CAPT ELECTED TO DIVERT TO ZZZ4. WE SENT THE ACARS DIVERSION MESSAGE AS WE CONTINUED IN HOLDING; TRYING TO GET A WORD IN WITH ZZZ1 CTR AS TO OUR INTENTIONS. MY SENSE WAS THAT WE WERE NOT IN EXTREMIS AS WE WOULD BE 'FUEL AHEAD' BY NOT DSNDING INTO ZZZ1 BUT; RATHER; FLYING AT CRUISE ALT TO ZZZ4. AS WE WAITED FOR OUR TURN ON THE RADIO; WE RECEIVED AN ACARS MESSAGE THAT WE COULD NOT GO TO ZZZ4 BECAUSE THEY WERE CLOSED AND THAT ZZZ5 WAS PREFERRED FOR OUR DIVERSION. BECAUSE OF BAD INFO ZZZ4 WOULD BE OPEN AS LONG AS WE NEEDED IT -- WE HAD BURNED BELOW OUR ONBOARD CALCULATIONS FOR MINIMUM FUEL REQUIRED FOR ZZZ5. AS WAS PREVIOUSLY NOTED; WE NEVER RECEIVED ALTERNATE FUEL/TIME REQUIREMENTS FOR ZZZ5 FROM DISPATCH. THE CAPT ASSESSED THE SITUATION AND; AFTER ESTABLISHING RADIO COM WITH ZZZ6 ELECTED TO DIVERT THERE. IN ORDER TO GET PRIORITY HANDLING; THE CAPT DECLARED AN EMER WITH ZZZ1 CTR. THIS WAS THE ONLY SAFE COURSE OF ACTION GIVEN THE TONE OF THE ATC CTLR WHO WAS; UNDERSTANDABLY; BECOMING FRUSTRATED WITH BEING THE MIDDLEMAN IN AN EXTREMELY BUSY; UNCLR SITUATION. THE CTR CTLR SUGGESTED ZZZ7 WHEN HE LEARNED THAT FUEL WAS THE ISSUE. WE DECLINED THE OFFER AND PROCEEDED TO ZZZ6. AFTER SENDING THE SECOND ACARS DIVERSION RPT; WE RECEIVED A MESSAGE BACK QUERYING AS TO WHETHER OR NOT WE COULD MAKE ZZZ5 AS THEY WOULD BE BETTER EQUIPPED TO HANDLE THE DIVERSION. BOTTOM LINE WAS THAT WE DID NOT HAVE THE TIME/FUEL TO SAFELY CHANGE TO A THIRD ALTERNATE IN WHAT HAD BECOME A RAPIDLY DECAYING SITUATION. THE QUESTIONS THAT REMAIN OPEN ARE: 1) WHY WERE WE TOLD ZZZ4 WAS GOING TO BE AVAILABLE WHEN IT WAS NOT? 2) WHY WERE WE TOLD ZZZ1 RWY WAS OPEN WHEN IT WAS NOT? 3) HOW CAN THE CAPT BE EXPECTED TO MAKE SMART DECISIONS WHEN HE IS SUPPLIED INACCURATE INFO? THIS RPT DOESN'T EVEN SCRATCH THE SURFACE OF WHAT THE CAPT HAD TO DEAL WITH AFTER LNDG DUE TO A NO-NOTICE DIVERT WITH 260+ HOSTILE PAX. HE SHOULD BE COMMENDED FOR NOT ALLOWING SAFETY TO BE JEOPARDIZED IN THE PURSUIT OF LOGISTICAL EASE FOR THE COMPANY.

Data retrieved from NASA's ASRS site as of January 2009 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.