![]() |
If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
john smith wrote:
Callback #318 http://asrs.arc.nasa.gov/callback_issues/cb_318.htm ³Minimum Fuel" Does Not Mean Priority Handling It never has. It is a great tool for an airline pilot to use to give ATC "heads up" that any further delay could result in the pilot declaring an emergency because of low fuel state. It is folly to use the tool unless the flight has been properly planned, dispatched, and flown with fuel progess in a satisfactory state. Thus, it can only be used in the destination terminal area, after a lot of arrival dalay holds, delay vectors, etc. And, if the flight is required to have an alternate, then "minimum fuel" is not a valid reason to avoid going to the alternate because of delays. It works best when no alternate is required and the ATC handling on arrival is a series of "endless" delays. For Part 91 operations in light aircraft, I am not sure any of this has much value. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|