IFR Fuel Reserves?

[UndauntedFlyer]

I ran into a guy today that sez 30 minutes (VFR reserves) of reserve fuel is all that's required for an IFR flight if the weather is clear (no clouds). He says that's what the regulation says, and sure enough when I re-read it, it does sort of say that. I know that 45 minutes is really required for an IFR flight, but doesn't the regulation say "IFR conditions" rather than "under IFR"? Any comments on this?


Sec. 91.167 - Fuel requirements for flight in IFR conditions.
(a) No person may operate a civil aircraft in IFR conditions unless it carries enough fuel (considering weather reports and forecasts and weather conditions) to --
(1) Complete the flight to the first airport of intended landing;
(2) Except as provided in paragraph (b) of this section, fly from that airport to the alternate airport; and (3) Fly after that for 45 minutes at normal cruising speed.

 

[brokeflyer]

if your quote is correct then it's based on IFR conditions.

 

[UndauntedFlyer]

if your quote is correct then it's based on IFR conditions.

So then it is your belief that if the weather is VFR and an IFR pilot on an IFR flight plan will not encounter any IFR weather conditions, then that pilot does not need to Fight Plan for 45 minutes of reserve fuel?

 

[brokeflyer]

no, im basing it on the referenced reg you posted.....is that what the reg says? or is that what you think it says.

Im not gonna go look it up.

if the reg you referenced is what it really says then yes, mr.pilot don't need the 45 minute reserver if flying in VFR conditions.

the regulation appears to be very clear and VFR/IFR weather conditions is also clear.

 

[SSDD]

That is correct. You only need the fuel is you're going to be in IFR conditions.

 

[mattaxelrod]

You are confusing IFR with IMC. IFR refers to operating under Instrument Flight Rules, and each time you file and fly on an IFR flight plan, that is what you're doing, and you need a 45 minute reserve, regardless of whether it's IMC or VMC outside.

 

[MauleSkinner]

You are confusing IFR with IMC. IFR refers to operating under Instrument Flight Rules, and each time you file and fly on an IFR flight plan, that is what you're doing, and you need a 45 minute reserve, regardless of whether it's IMC or VMC outside.

Nope...it says "IFR conditions", which is basically IMC, not "IFR". If you're not in the clouds, you don't have to have 45 minutes. Doesn't even say "if you're not going to enter the clouds", because it's not a "departure" reg like the VFR fuel reserve reg.

For flight in "VFR Conditions":

(a) No person may begin a flight in an airplane under VFR conditions....

(note that there's not even a requirement to have ANY fuel in the tanks when you land, so long as you BEGIN the flight with legal reserves)

On the other hand, for flight in "IFR Conditions":

(a) No person may operate a civil aircraft in IFR conditions....

So, basically, as soon as you fly out of the last cloud on your route, you can dump fuel so as to land with dry tanks at your destination and still be legal. (well, other than "careless" or "reckless"...)

 

[AC560]

"IFR conditions means weather conditions below the minimum for flight under visual flight rules." as defined in Part 1.1.

 

[Fly91]

I ran into a guy today that sez 30 minutes (VFR reserves) of reserve fuel is all that's required for an IFR flight if the weather is clear (no clouds). He says that's what the regulation says, and sure enough when I re-read it, it does sort of say that. I know that 45 minutes is really required for an IFR flight, but doesn't the regulation say "IFR conditions" rather than "under IFR"? Any comments on this?


Sec. 91.167 - Fuel requirements for flight in IFR conditions.
(a) No person may operate a civil aircraft in IFR conditions unless it carries enough fuel (considering weather reports and forecasts and weather conditions) to --
(1) Complete the flight to the first airport of intended landing;
(2) Except as provided in paragraph (b) of this section, fly from that airport to the alternate airport; and (3) Fly after that for 45 minutes at normal cruising speed.

If there's no IMC conditions, there's no IFR fuel reserve requirements. You'll need to comply with VFR fuel reserves though.

The slick attorneys that write this stuff for the FAA should have written it like this:

Sec. 91.167 - Fuel requirements for flight while operating under IFR.
(a) No person may operate a civil aircraft on an IFR flight plan in IMC conditions unless it carries enough fuel (considering weather reports and forecasts and weather conditions) to --
(1) Complete the flight to the first airport of intended landing;
(2) Except as provided in paragraph (b) of this section, fly from that airport to the alternate airport; and
(3) Fly after that for 45 minutes at normal cruising speed

 

[AC560]

The slick attorneys that write this stuff for the FAA should have written it like this

No because then one would be allowed to depart in Class G in IMC with no fuel requirements. Slick lawyers at the FAA get it right sometimes.

 

[ILOVEBEER]

So, basically, as soon as you fly out of the last cloud on your route, you can dump fuel so as to land with dry tanks at your destination and still be legal. (well, other than "careless" or "reckless"...)

You could do that in IMC too if you want. The required 45 min reserve is a planned reserve. The FARs do not state that you have to land with 45 mins of fuel. You just have to PLAN to land with 45 mins.

 

[MauleSkinner]

You could do that in IMC too if you want. The required 45 min reserve is a planned reserve. The FARs do not state that you have to land with 45 mins of fuel. You just have to PLAN to land with 45 mins.

The FAR's state that you may not "operate" in IMC without a 45-minute reserve...the VMC reserve is a "planned" reserve ("begin a flight"), but the IMC reserve isn't.

 

[MauleSkinner]

The FAR's state that you may not "operate" in IMC without a 45-minute reserve...the VMC reserve is a "planned" reserve ("begin a flight"), but the IMC reserve isn't.

Although I'll grant you that there's an NTSB decision somewhere (I can't find it right now) that appears to agree with you rather than me, but since I can't guarantee the same people will be judging my case, I'm not going to take the chance.

 

[brokeflyer]

What he means is you have to plan to have that 45 minutes AFTER going to your alternate if you are flying in IMC conditions.

If you start out and get to your first stop and you have to hold, then you have to wait in line..etc...etc and you land with only enough fuel to fly to an alternate you are still legal.


PLANNED meaning you planned to have the right amount of fuel if everything worked perfectly.....which it dont so that is why they added 45 minutes on top an alternate.

 

[AC560]

What he means is you have to plan to have that 45 minutes AFTER going to your alternate if you are flying in IMC conditions

Not exactly

(a) No person may operate a civil aircraft in IFR conditions unless it carries enough fuel (considering weather reports and forecasts and weather conditions) to—
(1) Complete the flight to the first airport of intended landing;
(2) Except as provided in paragraph (b) of this section, fly from that airport to the alternate airport; and
(3) Fly after that for 45 minutes at normal cruising speed or, for helicopters, fly after that for 30 minutes at normal cruising speed.
(b) Paragraph (a)(2) of this section does not apply if:

Paragraph (a)(2) does not apply if an alternate is not required.
Paragraphs (a)(1)(3) though always to so if an alternate is not required it reads.

(a) No person may operate a civil aircraft in IFR conditions unless it carries enough fuel (considering weather reports and forecasts and weather conditions) to—
(1) Complete the flight to the first airport of intended landing;
(3) Fly after that for 45 minutes at normal cruising speed or, for helicopters, fly after that for 30 minutes at normal cruising speed.

 

[brokeflyer]

yeah I meant if an alternate is required.

 

[PURPLEHAZE21]

30 mins....end of story.....NEXT !!!!!!!!!!

 

[VW Pilot]

The 45 mins worth of fuel is a minimum amount....Build margins. Take along more fuel. You can never have too much fuel or altitude...unless you're on fire or out of the envelope because your duffel bag weighs 900lbs.... It has happened too many times where a plane's engine was starved of fuel...best take all you can or plan legs where you're left with a healthy fuel reserve for those times when ATC gives you vectors in all directions other than intended......

 

[avbug]

It has happened too many times where a plane's engine was starved of fuel...best take all you can or plan legs where you're left with a healthy fuel reserve for those times when ATC gives you vectors in all directions other than intended......

That's all good and well if you have a 30 gallon fuel tank and can land on the nearest road.

With fuel often limited by payload, one needs to plan carefully...but simply carrying all the fuel one can may be economically unfeasible, and may be operationally out of the ballpark, too.

 

[VW Pilot]

Well Avbug that's kind of what I meant. I was leaning towards a GA sort of situation, you know, 2 pilots or single pilot, a 172 or Warrior on an IFR flight. You can pretty much top off the tanks and fly....Yes, after you have "carefully" contructed a plan to do so and and considered ALL the information available.....

 

[brokeflyer]

That's all good and well if you have a 30 gallon fuel tank and can land on the nearest road.

With fuel often limited by payload, one needs to plan carefully...but simply carrying all the fuel one can may be economically unfeasible, and may be operationally out of the ballpark, too.

Then you do a fuel stop.

 

[nismo611]

That's all good and well if you have a 30 gallon fuel tank and can land on the nearest road.

With fuel often limited by payload, one needs to plan carefully...but simply carrying all the fuel one can may be economically unfeasible, and may be operationally out of the ballpark, too.

Who the hell is this guy????? Who says things like this??? The only careful planning avbug does is what his dispatch sends to him or most likely the other guy who does have a handle on what is going on. One needs to plan carefully not to find themselves in an airplane with a jackoff like avbug......but simply trying may be not enough..........

 

[VW Pilot]

No can of worms needed. I think Avbug was just commenting on a broader scale. That's all. Basically all he said was what might work in general aviation won't or will not always work under commercial carrier ops under 135. Seems he was just being thourough...as always.....

 

[nismo611]

No can of worms needed. I think Avbug was just commenting on a broader scale. That's all. Basically all he said was what might work in general aviation won't or will not always work under commercial carrier ops under 135. Seems he was just being thourough...as always.....

If that was all he was trying to say why didn't he? You managed to. Thorough is one thing this guy is an ***********************************, it seems there is no topic that is above his expertise.

 

[VW Pilot]

Well he wasn't wrong....

 

[brokeflyer]

wait till he starts copy/pasting the regs in here.....then you'll really know what depression looks like.

 

[nismo611]

Well he wasn't wrong....

How do you know he was right? Maybe he did not read the question maybe he didn't care to and wanted to put his 2 worthless cents in with no common sense. at any rate he is a ass.

 

[bizjet800]

What he means is you have to plan to have that 45 minutes AFTER going to your alternate if you are flying in IMC conditions.

Its not if you're flying in IMC conditions, its the conditions at the airport that is the question here. The enroute weather means nothing in 91.167.

 

[brokeflyer]

Its not if you're flying in IMC conditions, its the conditions at the airport that is the question here. The enroute weather means nothing in 91.167.

yes i know thats what i said.

 

[avbug]

From the FAA Assistant Chief Legal Counsel, answering specific questions regarding 91.167 and reserve fuel:

http://www.faa.gov/about/office_org...terpretations/data/interps/2005/gallagher.rtf

[FONT=&quot]2005[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot] [/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]Colonel Gallagher, USAF (Ret). [/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]3206 Rosemont Drive Sacramento, CA 95826[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot] [/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]Dear Colonel Gallagher,[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]This letter responds to your request for a legal interpretation dated December 7, 2003. You specifically ask for clarification on the alternate airport and fuel requirements codified in 14 C.F.R. § 91.167. We begin by reciting the information that you provided as background for your question, after which we will respond to your question.[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]
[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]In your letter you contend that "a careful reading of section 91.167 could lead a person to believe that they are only required to have sufficient fuel to land at the destination airport." You rely on the language of the regulation to reach this conclusion because it requires sufficient fuel to complete the flight to the destination airport, but only requires "sufficient fuel to fly to the alternate airport and have 45 minutes reserve at normal cruise." We do not agree with your analysis.[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot] [/FONT]
[FONT=&quot] Question #1:[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]Does section 91.167 require a pilot operating an aircraft under instrument flight rules (IFR) to have sufficient fuel to attempt an approach at the destination airport and then fly on to the alternate airport, with 45 minutes of fuel remaining upon arrival at the alternate?[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot] [/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]Answer #1:[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]Section 91.1671 requires the pilot to fuel his aircraft with enough fuel to "land" at the destination airport, then fly on to the alternate and operate for 45 additional minutes. The regulation does not specifically speak to an "attempt to land" or "attempt to approach" but it requires that the aircraft have enough fuel to complete the flight to the first airport of intended landing. See, 14 C.F.R. § 91.167 (a)[/FONT]

[FONT=&quot](1). Webster's dictionary defines the word "complete" to mean: "brought to an end or to a final or intended condition.”2 Thus, to "complete the flight", as used in this rule, means the aircraft has enough fuel to be flown to, and land at, the first airport of intended landing. Having fueled the aircraft with only enough fuel to "attempt an approach" would fall short of the regulatory requirement. A pilot whose aircraft suffers fuel exhaustion prior to reaching either the destination or alternate airport, or who must declare an emergency for an expedited landing (due to low fuel), can be found to have failed to exercise "good judgment," which could result in a violation of section 91.13, for the careless or reckless operation of the aircraft.3 See, Administrator v. Ostgrove, NTSB Order No. EA-4916 at 22 (2001).[/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]Question #2:[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]When would it be legal to continue onto the destination when that means that the pilot would no longer be able to reach his alternate airport and land within 45 minutes?[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot] [/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]Answer #2:[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]A pilot would be acting reasonably in deciding to land the aircraft at the destination airport if, before commencing the approach, he confirms that the reported weather continues to be above minimums. As such, the reported weather upon arrival but before commencing the approach would need to be at least 2,000 feet above the airport elevation and visibility of at least 3 statute miles, and no other factors, such as runway closures, interfere with a safe landing. The pilot-in-command is responsible for the safe operation of the aircraft. See, 14 C.F.R. § 91.3. Part of the pilot-in-command's duty is to properly preflight the aircraft in accordance with the provisions of section 91.103.4 A proper "preflight" requires that, before beginning an 1FR flight, the pilot-in-command becomes familiar with weather reports, forecasts, fuel requirements and alternatives available if the planned flight cannot be completed. Id. The pilot's failure to correctly interpret or translate weather information and aircraft performance data into the correct amount of fuel required for flying time can be a violation of section 91.13. Ostgrove, NTSB Order No. EA-4916 at 21. Therefore, under the circumstances (e.g., weather below minimums) it would be illegal to land at the destination airport and if the pilot nonetheless makes the attempt and thereby wastes the available fuel for landing at the alternate airport, the pilot could be charged with operating the aircraft in violation of the regulations.[/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]Question #3:[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot] Is there a gray area in the regulations that would allow a pilot to attempt to land at the destination airport if one extreme is when the destination airport conditions are such that an alternate is no longer required and the other extreme is that both airports have conditions that would allow the pilot to land? Answer #3:[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot] [/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]The regulations are written to provide a standard by which pilots may operate their aircraft safely. Without a clear definition of what you mean by "gray area" we cannot give you a concrete answer.[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot] [/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]We hope that this interpretation has been helpful. Please feel free to contact us if you have additional questions.[/FONT]


[FONT=&quot]Sincerely,[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot] [/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]Rebecca MacPherson [/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]Assistant Chief Counsel [/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]Regulations Division, AGC-200[/FONT]