saw this on Jetflyers, thought this crowd should have it...I've found lately when I decide to add fuel and call GOC they sound relieved rather than question it.

So, this is what has been going on in GOC ground school:
Apparently, upper management is putting on a very strong push to induce GOC controllers to upload the minimum fuel possible at anytime possible. Apparently the effort is surprising in how energetically and consistently the message is reiterated.
Its the "We Thrive at 85" program. It refers to ACF 85 from the FOM. The ACF is the Analyzed Contingency Fuel. It refers to the historical (three years) data that suggests if that a contingency fuel amount loaded onto an aircraft would preclude the need to burn into FAR required minimum fuel. ACF 85 implies 85 percent of the aircraft would not have burned into the FAR minimum required fuel for dispatch. Of course, it also implies that 15% of the flights would have been less comfortable with that amount and would have burned into FAR minimum dispatch fuel. ACF 85 is the minimum fuel for dispatch of a FedEx aircraft.
I am in no way suggesting that ACF 85 is a bad thing. There are certainly times wherein this amount is acceptable.
The unacceptable occurs when upper management endeavors to manipulate competent GOC controllers instead of allowing them to judiciously plan our fuel based upon their experience and their education.
GOC does an excellent job. They, and this pilot group, do not need management conjured powerpoint presentations inducing them to do anything other than exercise their better judgement.

 

I really don't care what fuel they put on the release. If I don't think I have enough, I add gas. No big deal.

To be honest...or as the cool kids say "tbh"...I have seen lots of extra gas in the last several months since the massive divert madness we had for a couple of nights.

 

"Tuuna Fuel"....

 

Yep, those were some pretty expensive tuna sandwiches, back in the day. "No extra sandwich? Let's add 10,000 pounds, just to be on the safe side".

Well, they did save a couple of bucks by withholding that extra requested tuna sandwich.

It's a good thing this company makes so much money, to make up for some of the bone headed decisions that have come down the pike.

It's what happens when you tick off the people holding the control wheel.

But as long as their MBO is protected, who cares? It takes IGM to a different level.

 

I have never added gas gratuitously, just because I could. But there was time when I was senior enough on a certain airplane that I flew the same city pairing almost exclusively for sometimes months in a row. The FPR fuel for the MEM leg was frequently just enough to be legal, but not enough to give me any sort of "warm fuzzies" or enough to allow for much of anything that didn't go strictly according to plan. I had to add fuel so often the layover ramp folks began calling me "Capt. Moregas."

To GOC's credit, I never had a problem getting the fuel I needed. I also never ran short and had to divert due to a lack of planning.

The way I saw it, GOC could claim they planned it to be super-efficient but the mean ol' captain insisted on hedging his bets. That let them off the hook. I was happy to accept the responsibility. Their "efficiency" numbers might take a hit, but it was my butt in the airplane. End of discussion.

 

ACARS'ed dispatch for fuel uplift with a few reasons. Response back was, thank you, I agree. So maybe there is a new policy limiting dispatcher uplift until questioned by flight?

 

Had one of our dispatchers on our jumpseat a couple of years ago who said in conversation that they are incentivized with bonuses to shave fuel. Our jumpseater said there was one dispatcher in particular (PL, not sure if he's still there as I haven't seen his name on a release in a while) who pushed back against us adding fuel because he was trying to re-build his savings. (YGTBSM)

I had two incidents with this guy PL, who tried to shave fuel. Once, I was operating CDG to DEL and the captain wanted to add fuel because of India's unpredictible ATC. The ACARS reply from PL came back "Why adding fuel, what's changed." This went on for three exchanges which included an attempt to negotiate down the amount the captain wanted, "Instead of 3,000 lbs, how about 1,500 lbs." We finally got the amount of fuel my captain wanted but only after he said he wasn't closing the doors until 3,000 lbs of fuel was added. I thought it would be interesting to see PL's reply if the captain had said, "since you've questioned my request, I now want 4,000 extra and this increases everytime you ask why." The second incident was ANC to somewhere in Asia but this captain didn't reply to PL's attempt to not add the gas he wanted. This captain never replied, we just waited with 1L open until finally at push time PL sent an ACARS message with time and initials for the added gas and suddenly a fuel truck arrived. This captain told me: "Nothing happens here unless it costs them money." I thought that was a great reply.

My jumpseating dispatcher said that a couple of captains had submitted PORs on PL which earned him some unwanted attention by management so maybe he's backed off. It also indicated to me that someone does actually read those things.

 

Did PL get promoted to Manager of that department?

Despite all of this discussion, I've never received any static (NONE!) when I wanted to add fuel. That's how it should be (as long as you're not adding tuna fuel.

 

If the Go-Around won't be free, I'll add fuel. I call that Arrival Contingency. I've never had to argue about it, and I don't mind the dispatcher asking why. It's his responsibility, too.

Pretty simple, no stress. Not a bad idea to ask him/her about weather and NOTAMs while we're on the phone.






.

 

I know a captain who refuses to add more gas. Instead, he calls GOC and simply asks for a recommendation on where to land between the departure airport and the final destination to get more gas. When they suggest he add more fuel, he politely declines and repeats his request for a suitable fuel stop on the way. Eventually, GOC adds more gas.