Narrative:

Flight was dispatched from bos-lax with ont as alternate with no significant WX forecast. All during the flight, cruise winds were higher than forecast and we were running 3-5 mins behind our flight plan. Our fuel over several check points was lower than projected, but we eventually were even with projected fuel plan (approximately gld). ATC (ZDV) tried to rerte us off our cleared direct routing to pgs to over hve J60 pgs, but the captain said we were unable due to fuel planning. At that time, the controller pressed the captain into declaring min fuel. As it turned out, when we were near lax (with ZLA) several aircraft deviated due to thunderstorms, but we did not have to deviate because of our altitude and route of flight. We shut down engines in lax with about 10.5 fuel on board which would have been enough to comply with ATC request for in trail spacing -- but add deviations for thunderstorms and vectoring for spacing and maybe holding, things could have been different. Supplemental information from acn 222181: the procedures and exertion of control without concept of WX, alternates and likely possibility of delays on arrival pushes pilots for unnecessary compliance. Also, most aircraft were deviating within 200 NM and spacing was established with min speed and heading adjustments to adjust aircraft for arrival 600 mi from destination with 60 mi and more increases in mileage to destination is a safety concern. This greater than 10 percent increase, without awareness of future WX deviations necessary is a cause for recomputing the fuel requirements of your flight. It is also a concern that turns off course of this magnitude can be directed this far from destination, when differences in flight level produce different winds and outside air temperature resulting in great differences in true airspeed and ground speed at the same mach number. The artificial controling of aircraft 1 hour and 1/2 from destination, especially with circuit breaker's in thunderstorms in last 250 mi to destination, is either ill informed or job generating, but in either case, unsafe to make a practice doing without consideration of required fuel over destination and the mandated reserves.

Related reports:

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: ACR LGT ACFT LOW FUEL DUE TO INFLT ENCOUNTER WITH WX.

Narrative: FLT WAS DISPATCHED FROM BOS-LAX WITH ONT AS ALTERNATE WITH NO SIGNIFICANT WX FORECAST. ALL DURING THE FLT, CRUISE WINDS WERE HIGHER THAN FORECAST AND WE WERE RUNNING 3-5 MINS BEHIND OUR FLT PLAN. OUR FUEL OVER SEVERAL CHK POINTS WAS LOWER THAN PROJECTED, BUT WE EVENTUALLY WERE EVEN WITH PROJECTED FUEL PLAN (APPROX GLD). ATC (ZDV) TRIED TO RERTE US OFF OUR CLRED DIRECT RTING TO PGS TO OVER HVE J60 PGS, BUT THE CAPT SAID WE WERE UNABLE DUE TO FUEL PLANNING. AT THAT TIME, THE CTLR PRESSED THE CAPT INTO DECLARING MIN FUEL. AS IT TURNED OUT, WHEN WE WERE NEAR LAX (WITH ZLA) SEVERAL ACFT DEVIATED DUE TO TSTMS, BUT WE DID NOT HAVE TO DEVIATE BECAUSE OF OUR ALT AND RTE OF FLT. WE SHUT DOWN ENGS IN LAX WITH ABOUT 10.5 FUEL ON BOARD WHICH WOULD HAVE BEEN ENOUGH TO COMPLY WITH ATC REQUEST FOR IN TRAIL SPACING -- BUT ADD DEVS FOR TSTMS AND VECTORING FOR SPACING AND MAYBE HOLDING, THINGS COULD HAVE BEEN DIFFERENT. SUPPLEMENTAL INFO FROM ACN 222181: THE PROCS AND EXERTION OF CTL WITHOUT CONCEPT OF WX, ALTERNATES AND LIKELY POSSIBILITY OF DELAYS ON ARR PUSHES PLTS FOR UNNECESSARY COMPLIANCE. ALSO, MOST ACFT WERE DEVIATING WITHIN 200 NM AND SPACING WAS ESTABLISHED WITH MIN SPD AND HDG ADJUSTMENTS TO ADJUST ACFT FOR ARR 600 MI FROM DEST WITH 60 MI AND MORE INCREASES IN MILEAGE TO DEST IS A SAFETY CONCERN. THIS GREATER THAN 10 PERCENT INCREASE, WITHOUT AWARENESS OF FUTURE WX DEVS NECESSARY IS A CAUSE FOR RECOMPUTING THE FUEL REQUIREMENTS OF YOUR FLT. IT IS ALSO A CONCERN THAT TURNS OFF COURSE OF THIS MAGNITUDE CAN BE DIRECTED THIS FAR FROM DEST, WHEN DIFFERENCES IN FLT LEVEL PRODUCE DIFFERENT WINDS AND OUTSIDE AIR TEMP RESULTING IN GREAT DIFFERENCES IN TRUE AIRSPD AND GND SPD AT THE SAME MACH NUMBER. THE ARTIFICIAL CTLING OF ACFT 1 HR AND 1/2 FROM DEST, ESPECIALLY WITH CB'S IN TSTMS IN LAST 250 MI TO DEST, IS EITHER ILL INFORMED OR JOB GENERATING, BUT IN EITHER CASE, UNSAFE TO MAKE A PRACTICE DOING WITHOUT CONSIDERATION OF REQUIRED FUEL OVER DEST AND THE MANDATED RESERVES.

Data retrieved from NASA's ASRS site as of July 2007 and automatically converted to unabbreviated mixed upper/lowercase text. This report is for informational purposes with no guarantee of accuracy. See NASA's ASRS site for official report.