Narrative:

I was the first officer and pilot flying from ZZZ1 to ZZZ. We were cleared to 2000 ft MSL and cleared the instrument approach to ILS xxr to ZZZ by approach control. Just prior to intercepting the glide slope at 2;000 ft MSL; we were asked if we could see the aircraft that ATC said was approximately 4-5 miles ahead of us. We had been cleared for the ILS approach and precisely followed all of the controller instructions. We were unable to positively identify the preceding aircraft because it was below us on the glide slope and blended in with the numerous ground lights. The captain informed ATC that we did not see the preceding aircraft. The tower controller instructed us to maintain 2;000 ft MSL and continue straight ahead. We were vectored back for the 4R ILS approach. We were ahead of our fuel plan as we passed zzzzz on the arrival. Due to some vectoring for the initial approach and the subsequent go around we determined that we were at a minimum fuel state while on downwind for the second approach. The captain informed ATC that we were minimum fuel and asked the controller how long it would take to get us on the ground. The controller said that we were number 5 or 6; I don't recall which one; for the approach but did not give us a time to landing. The captain asked again how long it would be until we landed; saying we were minimum fuel and he needed this information to determine if he needed to declare an emergency. The controller did not provide us with a time to landing instead we were asked how much fuel/how long of a delay could we accept. At this time the captain checked the fuel state and number of aircraft ahead of us and decided to declare an emergency for low fuel. I don't believe we were given traffic priority after declaring the emergency; and were subsequently sequenced in with the traffic on the ILS xxr approach. The approach and landing were uneventful and as we exited the runway we received a fuel quantity low EICAS message. We were not told that we may be required to transition to a visual approach in order to land after being cleared for the instrument (xxr ILS) approach. We followed all controller instructions and complied with all applicable regulations and procedures.

Related reports:

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: Air Carrier on an ILS approach was issued a go around because they were unable to sight preceding traffic resulting in a fuel emergency declaration; the reporter claiming ATC failed to afford appropriate priority.

Narrative: I was the First Officer and pilot flying from ZZZ1 to ZZZ. We were cleared to 2000 FT MSL and cleared the instrument approach to ILS XXR to ZZZ by Approach Control. Just prior to intercepting the glide slope at 2;000 FT MSL; we were asked if we could see the aircraft that ATC said was approximately 4-5 miles ahead of us. We had been cleared for the ILS approach and precisely followed all of the controller instructions. We were unable to positively identify the preceding aircraft because it was below us on the glide slope and blended in with the numerous ground lights. The Captain informed ATC that we did not see the preceding aircraft. The Tower Controller instructed us to maintain 2;000 FT MSL and continue straight ahead. We were vectored back for the 4R ILS approach. We were ahead of our fuel plan as we passed ZZZZZ on the arrival. Due to some vectoring for the initial approach and the subsequent go around we determined that we were at a minimum fuel state while on downwind for the second approach. The Captain informed ATC that we were minimum fuel and asked the Controller how long it would take to get us on the ground. The Controller said that we were number 5 or 6; I don't recall which one; for the approach but did not give us a time to landing. The Captain asked again how long it would be until we landed; saying we were minimum fuel and he needed this information to determine if he needed to declare an emergency. The Controller did not provide us with a time to landing instead we were asked how much fuel/how long of a delay could we accept. At this time the Captain checked the fuel state and number of aircraft ahead of us and decided to declare an emergency for low fuel. I don't believe we were given traffic priority after declaring the emergency; and were subsequently sequenced in with the traffic on the ILS XXR approach. The approach and landing were uneventful and as we exited the runway we received a fuel quantity low EICAS message. We were not told that we may be required to transition to a visual approach in order to land after being cleared for the instrument (XXR ILS) approach. We followed all controller instructions and complied with all applicable regulations and procedures.

Data retrieved from NASA's ASRS site as of April 2012 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.