Narrative:

We were heading from miami, fl, to houston hobby, tx. First of all, the winds at altitude were stronger than reported and forecasted and the temperatures were warmer. These were 2 conditions that were not anticipated, causing us to burn more fuel. At about 300 NM from houston, houston had us start descent to FL270 then expedite to FL270, then expedite to FL230. Then she came back and told us to expedite to 10000 ft. The copilot blindly, without thinking or communicating with myself, acknowledged. I then got on the radio and explained to center if we were put down to 10000 ft, 150-200 NM out, that would put us into a fuel critical situation, so I asked her if we could stay at FL230. She then told us to cross gilco intersection at 10000 ft, which was ok with me and would not put us into a fuel critical situation or even touch our reserves. She then switched us to approach. At this point my copilot contacted approach and approach asked him if we were fuel critical because that's what was passed on to him, and he blindly acknowledged again, but I didn't catch it this time because I was trying to pick up ATIS. I guess the copilot and controller thought I was declaring fuel critical when I tried to avoid the situation. After we were turned over to tower, tower said they were expediting us because of our situation. This made me question the copilot. So instead of adding more confusion I elected to go with the flow and resolve it when we got on the ground. We landed with more than enough fuel, didn't even come close to our reserves. I then called the tower supervisor and explained the situation and thanked him for his help. I think ATC should have a better idea of what different aircraft performance characteristics are and are not.

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: THROUGH A MISUNDERSTANDING, ATC THOUGHT THE LTT WAS AT MINIMUM FUEL WHEN IT WAS NOT.

Narrative: WE WERE HDG FROM MIAMI, FL, TO HOUSTON HOBBY, TX. FIRST OF ALL, THE WINDS AT ALT WERE STRONGER THAN RPTED AND FORECASTED AND THE TEMPS WERE WARMER. THESE WERE 2 CONDITIONS THAT WERE NOT ANTICIPATED, CAUSING US TO BURN MORE FUEL. AT ABOUT 300 NM FROM HOUSTON, HOUSTON HAD US START DSCNT TO FL270 THEN EXPEDITE TO FL270, THEN EXPEDITE TO FL230. THEN SHE CAME BACK AND TOLD US TO EXPEDITE TO 10000 FT. THE COPLT BLINDLY, WITHOUT THINKING OR COMMUNICATING WITH MYSELF, ACKNOWLEDGED. I THEN GOT ON THE RADIO AND EXPLAINED TO CTR IF WE WERE PUT DOWN TO 10000 FT, 150-200 NM OUT, THAT WOULD PUT US INTO A FUEL CRITICAL SIT, SO I ASKED HER IF WE COULD STAY AT FL230. SHE THEN TOLD US TO CROSS GILCO INTXN AT 10000 FT, WHICH WAS OK WITH ME AND WOULD NOT PUT US INTO A FUEL CRITICAL SIT OR EVEN TOUCH OUR RESERVES. SHE THEN SWITCHED US TO APCH. AT THIS POINT MY COPLT CONTACTED APCH AND APCH ASKED HIM IF WE WERE FUEL CRITICAL BECAUSE THAT'S WHAT WAS PASSED ON TO HIM, AND HE BLINDLY ACKNOWLEDGED AGAIN, BUT I DIDN'T CATCH IT THIS TIME BECAUSE I WAS TRYING TO PICK UP ATIS. I GUESS THE COPLT AND CTLR THOUGHT I WAS DECLARING FUEL CRITICAL WHEN I TRIED TO AVOID THE SIT. AFTER WE WERE TURNED OVER TO TWR, TWR SAID THEY WERE EXPEDITING US BECAUSE OF OUR SIT. THIS MADE ME QUESTION THE COPLT. SO INSTEAD OF ADDING MORE CONFUSION I ELECTED TO GO WITH THE FLOW AND RESOLVE IT WHEN WE GOT ON THE GND. WE LANDED WITH MORE THAN ENOUGH FUEL, DIDN'T EVEN COME CLOSE TO OUR RESERVES. I THEN CALLED THE TWR SUPVR AND EXPLAINED THE SIT AND THANKED HIM FOR HIS HELP. I THINK ATC SHOULD HAVE A BETTER IDEA OF WHAT DIFFERENT ACFT PERFORMANCE CHARACTERISTICS ARE AND ARE NOT.

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.