Low Fuel penalty

[iflyfsx]

How about putting an unrealistic number in the aircraft.cfg, so your actual performance is realistic?

[MEISTER046]

I could try that I'm just suprised i seem to be the only one with this problem.

JIm

[iflyfsx]

Who says you are the only one?

[SkyAirWorld]

Perhaps people just.... dont really care...


Perhaps they can make do with whats available...

[Cydon Prax]

Back on topic, it would be nice if FSPax only counted in the penalty once the 'prepare for landing' F/A brief occures. That is, once the flight
attendants give their final in-flight announcement (Occurs at about 600 ft on final) the ''fuel'' penalty is disabled for the rest of the flight. So
say, on final approach, you have 46 min of fuel remaining - you won't get penalized, you can do a go around and fly to your alt.

Say you do that same first final approach with 30 min of fuel remaining - now you're behind regulations and do get penalized. Either way, the system
is a bit more realistic to ''what if you fly to your alternate/do go arounds'' as technically you DID reach your origional destination with the 30 or
45 minutes of fuel remaining.

[SkyAirWorld]

But then if that penelty is disabled, then even if your just landing normally under the reserve minimum then you wouldnt be penalised.

FSP would somehow need to recognise a go around

[Cydon Prax]

Aye - wonder where Dan has been lately. Haven't seen him post in a while.



Post Edited ( 03-14-09 03:56 )

[lassombra]

Federal Aviation Regulations require ALL IFR flights to terminate with 45 minutes of cruise fuel on board, regardless of the circumstances leading up
to that landing. It is the responsibility of the flight crew and dispatchers to plan for a sufficient reserve above and beyond this "legal" reserve
to handle such things as diversions to another airport, or extended holding at final destination. It is STANDARD in the airline industry to never
dispatch aircraft planned for less than 1:15 minutes of cruise left upon landing. That's assuming the flight has no filed alternate (legal if the
destination airport is above VFR minimums, and it is a domestic flight). One perfect example of how dispatch figures fuel, taken from an actual
CRJ-200 flight from Rapid City, SD (KRAP) to Minneapolis, MN (KMSP) with Rochester, MN (KRST) as alternate:

Reserve: :45 - 2.3
Cont: :30 - 1.5
Alt: 30 - 1.5
enroute: 1:15 - 3.7
FOB T/O: 9000 lbs.

This allowed the pilot to fly the 1:15 minutes to planned touch down in KMSP (note this is from takeoff to landing, we load about 300 lbs more on the
CRJ-200 for taxi to the runway). Then, the pilot has a full 1:45 minutes of fuel still onboard. The :45 minute reserve is considered "untouchable"
and allows the pilot to circle in MSP for approximately 30 minutes if weather deteriorates. Of course, in reality, chances are high that unforcast
winds, or other factors, will result in fuel burn not quite matching this, and so the crew might only circle for 20 minutes before declaring min fuel
and diverting. In all cases, the crew is planning on landing with more than 2300 lbs of fuel, potentially as high as 5300 lbs of fuel if everything
goes exactly according to the plan (it never does). The preferred is to land at KRST with 4800 lbs of fuel still on board, though some holding might
lead the crew to arrive with only 2600 - 3000 lbs. They CERTAINLY wouldn't be planning on hitting the pavement with exactly 2300 lbs of fuel.

For those curious where I got my information, they are taken directly out of the dispatch release for a NW2458 flight from a few days ago. I personally am a Ramp Service Agent for Mesaba Airlines (A subsidiary of NW) in Rapid City, SD



Post Edited ( 03-19-09 01:13 )

[SkyAirWorld]

He's around

[Anastasios]

The 45 minutes rule definitely is not realistic in FsP.

In real life I notice it really is completely different.

*) I fly the Wilco 737 in Fs (which is pretty realistic I think) and I calculated that I need 2500 in each wing tank to have 45 minutes of flight.
So after landing I need 2500 in each wing tank.

I have been in a 737-300/400 many times and I often saw around 1000 - 1200 in each tank on landing.

*) Sometimes after a flight of 01:30 the co-pilot told the ground handling: We probably don't need fuelling. We have enough fuel to fly back.

*) On a flight to La Palma we encountered real strong headwinds and a lot of turbulence. At La Palma they wanted us to enter a holding
pattern where the (female) captain (just nice to know) decided we don't have enough fuel for that. We were going in for landing
immediately or divert to Las Palmas. (The captain obviously was not penalized for this).

*) After a go-around at Istanbul and diverted to another airport we landed with 35 minutes of fuel left. Ofcourse the pilots were
not 'penalized' for that either.

I do not find the 45 minute fuel ruel realistic in FsP.

Anastasios.

[relichd]

The post from lassombra was about FAA, meaning that's how they have it in the US. Anyone knows how is it here in Europe?



Post Edited ( 03-19-09 13:34 )

[Anastasios]

I think it is more on captain's descretion in Europe.

But a company can give an advise to pilots to take more fuel because earlier there were weather problems ( go around or diverts)etc...

Anastasios.

[lassombra]

FSPax is based on FAA (In short, like FS itself, it is ameri-centric). Also, ALL international flights adhere to the ICAO standard which requires 45
minutes of fuel PLUS an alternate PLUS cont fuel to be planned.

It does happen where the events in flight unfold differently than expected, and when a pilot DOES land with less than 45 minutes of fuel, the
authorities do investigate to find out if it was bad planning, or simply unforeseeable circumstances. Sometimes higher than forecast winds can do it.
We did have one flight here in Rapid City recently that landed with only 15 minutes. This flight didn't need an alternate when originally
dispatched, but low level freezing fog moved in at their destination airport, which didn't have the benefit of instrument approaches. They had to
divert, and due to the situation, we were their only option. They burned an additional 30 minutes of fuel beyond their contingency before they
reached the ground. I'm quite sure that captain has not been penalized, just as the one who declared Min Fuel (A standard procedure in most of the
world) for landing or diversion. The captain who said we land now or we divert was in fact looking at their fuel status and decided they didn't have
enough to hang around anymore if they had to divert. Also, I believe some parts of Europe only have a minimum of 30 minutes depending on forecast
weather.