Clearly states they spent 18 minutes holding. And by landing they were down to 42 minutes, so it was probably more than that. Probably had about 1h10 or so reserve on takeoff which is more than adequate for VMC conditions at field.
Allegiant Air has low fuel emergency... Or - did they?
- Thread starter docmirror
- Start date
Lindberg
Final Approach
So the pilot could have safetly followed ATC instructions, but chose to declare an emergency instead so he wouldn't have to. The FAA doesn't have a problem with that?
I don't think landing with less than 20 mins fuel (assuming all goes right) is safe. What if all doesn't go right? What if you have a missed or go around?
warthog1984
Cleared for Takeoff
- Joined
- Jul 22, 2013
- Messages
- 1,447
- Location
- Chicagoan exiled to California
- Display Name
- LanCA'r
- Home Airfield
- KSMO
Learn math. They had 48 minutes of fuel after holding, landed with 42, and other carriers landed 15 minutes later. 30 minutes of fuel is vfr reserve.
Don't like? Divert.
That's being psychic, again. He had no way to know planes would land 15 mins later.
He had 48 mins. Was told would be 20 more mins of holding. That brings you to 28. Plus after clearance, then getting set up on the approach and actually landing. Brings you potentially under 20. And that's assuming, once again, no missed or go around.
What was closest diversion airport that would accomodate MD80 with appropriate refueling facilities etc? How long to get a new clearance from center, get there, get set up on approach, and land? How much fuel remaining at that point? What if a missed was necessary?
NoHeat
Final Approach
If there is no runway available, and the situation is really bad, there is the taxiway. Not really a bad option for a single-aisle airliner, unless it requires an instrument approach to minimums.
Lindberg
Final Approach
What if there were nails on the runway at Fargo? I didn't write the press release, the pilot's company did. And he's apparently a honcho, so I assume he had some input. For some reason, they chose to say that he had sufficient fuel to divert. If he didn't have sufficient fuel to divert safely, I'd assume they'd say so.
kkoran
Pattern Altitude
Not much of an issue in this case; if the runway at Grand Forks Int'l wasn't available, they could land at Grand Forks AFB.
That said I'm not going to second guess the pilot's decision to declare an emergency.
Palmpilot
Touchdown! Greaser!
- Joined
- Apr 1, 2007
- Messages
- 23,096
- Location
- PUDBY
- Display Name
- Richard Palm
- Home Airfield
- Palo Alto (SFO area)
I don't know how much of the company's press release to believe. It says the NOTAM "clearly exempted scheduled air carriers from the airfield closure," but when you read the wording, it actually says "unless authorized by ATC."
Fearless Tower
Touchdown! Greaser!
- Joined
- Jan 1, 2010
- Messages
- 16,718
- Location
- Norfolk, VA
- Display Name
- Fearless Tower
- Home Airfield
- KORF
Yes. Delta demonstrated you can land a 767 on a taxiway at night just fine.
eetrojan
Pattern Altitude
- Joined
- Jan 19, 2012
- Messages
- 1,531
- Location
- Orange County, CA
- Display Name
- eetrojan
- Home Airfield
- KSNA
I don't know how much of the company's press release to believe. It says the NOTAM "clearly exempted scheduled air carriers from the airfield closure," but when you read the wording, it actually says "unless authorized by ATC."
This other NOTAM seems to read pretty clearly in support of what was said in the press release:
!FAR 07/020 FAR AD AIRPORT CLSD EXC SCHEDULED AIR CARRIERS DLY
1700-2200 1507231700-1507242200
You and I aren't, but the FAA is all up in his business still. According to the R&W linked info above, the tower got it wrong that the field was closed to all traffic, when it was supposedly open to comm ops. I didn't read the NOTAM, but there's still some confusion there, that set this process in motion once the plane was on the descent to Fargo.
If I were the pilot in the same situation, I might have done the same thing(less using 'bingo'), but the FAA wants to see the pilot's colon for some reason. Maybe just because they're the FAA and they can do that kind of shyte.
Fearless Tower
Touchdown! Greaser!
- Joined
- Jan 1, 2010
- Messages
- 16,718
- Location
- Norfolk, VA
- Display Name
- Fearless Tower
- Home Airfield
- KORF
I don't think it's the FAA that wants to see the pilots hung out to dry...
eetrojan
Pattern Altitude
- Joined
- Jan 19, 2012
- Messages
- 1,531
- Location
- Orange County, CA
- Display Name
- eetrojan
- Home Airfield
- KSNA
Are the second set of NOTAMS "local" NOTAMS because they're associated with an airport?
If so, is there some sort of priority between local NOTAMS and FDC NOTAMS.
If so, is there some sort of priority between local NOTAMS and FDC NOTAMS.
That -- is a very cogent question. I've run up against FDC and local NOTAMs before at a large airport, and while they read the same in that case, in this case, there is a subtle but interesting difference.
kkoran
Pattern Altitude
I believe the NOTAMs put out by airports are advisory (runway closed, taxiway closed, PAPI out of service, etc.) While FDC NOTAMs are regulatory. Not sure it matters in this case, since one pertains to the airport and the other to the airspace.
DavidWhite
Final Approach
When it rains it pours
http://m.reviewjournal.com/news/allegiant-airliner-returns-las-vegas-after-engine-problem
http://m.reviewjournal.com/news/allegiant-airliner-returns-las-vegas-after-engine-problem
SCCutler
Touchdown! Greaser!
- Joined
- Feb 27, 2005
- Messages
- 17,409
- Display Name
- Spike Cutler
- Home Airfield
- T82
bflynn
Touchdown! Greaser!
Nope. But I would have a problem with the FAA having a problem with it. The pilot is in charge. He made the decision that reserve meant reserve, probably because many who decided that reserve meant "another 30 minutes" came up short.
Sounds like there is a flaw in the NOTAM system.
Kritchlow
Final Approach
- Joined
- Dec 2, 2014
- Messages
- 7,958
- Display Name
- Kritchlow
Yeah... I don't disagree. Just a few notes.
- It's not 30 minutes, it's 45
- it's not "must land" with 45, it's planned 45
- the 45 isn't always planned at the speed/altitude you think
Fearless Tower
Touchdown! Greaser!
- Joined
- Jan 1, 2010
- Messages
- 16,718
- Location
- Norfolk, VA
- Display Name
- Fearless Tower
- Home Airfield
- KORF
FWIW, some of the comments I've been seeing about Allegiant on the pro boards describe it like Eastern under Lorenzo.
I feel bad for the guys working there.
I have a buddy from high school there, he's left seat in the MD and isn't complaining as it beats flying the feeders. He is laughing about this though.
eetrojan
Pattern Altitude
- Joined
- Jan 19, 2012
- Messages
- 1,531
- Location
- Orange County, CA
- Display Name
- eetrojan
- Home Airfield
- KSNA
Good point on the airspace versus the airport.
The FDC's airspace NOTAM re the TFR said that "aircraft operations are prohibited [from 1700-2220] ... unless authorized by ATC," but KFAR's D-NOTAM said the airport was closed from 1700-2200 "except for scheduled air carriers."
Read together, I guess, this should simply mean that if you're flying a scheduled air carrier, and if ATC authorizes you to transit the restricted airspace to get there in the first place, then you're welcome to land?
Palmpilot
Touchdown! Greaser!
- Joined
- Apr 1, 2007
- Messages
- 23,096
- Location
- PUDBY
- Display Name
- Richard Palm
- Home Airfield
- Palo Alto (SFO area)
Good point on the airspace versus the airport.
The FDC's airspace NOTAM re the TFR said that "aircraft operations are prohibited [from 1700-2220] ... unless authorized by ATC," but KFAR's D-NOTAM said the airport was closed from 1700-2200 "except for scheduled air carriers."
Read together, I guess, this should simply mean that if you're flying a scheduled air carrier, and if ATC authorizes you to transit the restricted airspace to get there in the first place, then you're welcome to land?
Maybe the D-NOTAMs could be read as guidance on what type of operations you can expect ATC authorization for.
Either that, or the left hand doesn't know what the right hand is doing.
Clark1961
Touchdown! Greaser!
- Joined
- Jun 7, 2008
- Messages
- 17,737
- Display Name
- Display name:
Maybe someone should tell them that one hand is giving a reach-around and the other is blocking entrance...
Lindberg
Final Approach
Good point on the airspace versus the airport.
The FDC's airspace NOTAM re the TFR said that "aircraft operations are prohibited [from 1700-2220] ... unless authorized by ATC," but KFAR's D-NOTAM said the airport was closed from 1700-2200 "except for scheduled air carriers."
Read together, I guess, this should simply mean that if you're flying a scheduled air carrier, and if ATC authorizes you to transit the restricted airspace to get there in the first place, then you're welcome to land?
Except they weren't on schedule. Presumably, the airport didn't schedule any operations during the time it was closed....
Lindberg
Final Approach
I didn't realize that declaring an emergency was a get-out-of-jail-free card that exempts you from scrutiny as to how you got there in the first place. I don't have any problem with ATC moving mountains to get him on the ground without question once he declares. But that doesn't mean that the entire event, including his judgment, shouldn't be questioned after the fact.
Exactly, now ask, who normally makes those phone calls at an airline?