Narrative:

While returning from ewr to yip, I was asked if I could divert to bak and did so. Notifying ZOB after passing eri, I requested diversion and initial vectored heading to bak. I received a vector of 230 degree heading and clearance direct to bak. Immediately, we contacted FSS and obtained destination WX, winds aloft for route at various altitudes. We calculated distance, gndspd and fuel burn which gave us fuel reserve required by far. We then contacted company and gave update and ETA. While over port clinton, ZOB gave us a vector back to crl, a right turn of approximately 60 degrees and a distance of 45 mi. The controller stated that this was requested by detroit and may necessitate a hold. A hold was not given, and after the crl VOR, we continued the route. This vector added approximately 20 mins to our routing. I believed we still could continue without problems. We then asked ATC for a lower altitude for more favorable headwinds. They responded that they were unable due to detroit airspace even though we were in unrestr visibility and there wasn't any conflicting traffic. Our headwinds were 40 to 50 KTS less at 9000 ft but due to the LOA between the 2 agencies, we could take advantage of this. As we proceeded closer to our destination, the winds became stronger than forecasted and our gndspd fell off considerably. Now communicating with ZID, we began to get lower. Our fuel now becoming more of a concern, and gndspd falling off, we advised ATC of 'minimum fuel condition' but not declaring an emergency. He responded by asking if we would like to continue to our destination or divert to 3SM. In consideration of WX and winds, I felt it was prudent to divert and land with a comfortable fuel level than to continue the flight. We received radar vectors to 3SM, now IMC, and then a cruise altitude. At this altitude, we broke out and were VFR. With the airport in sight, we landed. It is my belief that while LOA's between agencies serve a fine purpose, there are factors which should allow controllers the ability to permit use of airspace for aircraft for other than emergencys. At very least, this airspace that is unusable or not available to pilots due to LOA's should be charted so that it can be taken into account when flight planning for winds aloft and fuel requirements.

Related reports:

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: LOW FUEL ADVISORY ISSUED BY ATX FLT.

Narrative: WHILE RETURNING FROM EWR TO YIP, I WAS ASKED IF I COULD DIVERT TO BAK AND DID SO. NOTIFYING ZOB AFTER PASSING ERI, I REQUESTED DIVERSION AND INITIAL VECTORED HDG TO BAK. I RECEIVED A VECTOR OF 230 DEG HDG AND CLRNC DIRECT TO BAK. IMMEDIATELY, WE CONTACTED FSS AND OBTAINED DEST WX, WINDS ALOFT FOR RTE AT VARIOUS ALTS. WE CALCULATED DISTANCE, GNDSPD AND FUEL BURN WHICH GAVE US FUEL RESERVE REQUIRED BY FAR. WE THEN CONTACTED COMPANY AND GAVE UPDATE AND ETA. WHILE OVER PORT CLINTON, ZOB GAVE US A VECTOR BACK TO CRL, A R TURN OF APPROX 60 DEGS AND A DISTANCE OF 45 MI. THE CTLR STATED THAT THIS WAS REQUESTED BY DETROIT AND MAY NECESSITATE A HOLD. A HOLD WAS NOT GIVEN, AND AFTER THE CRL VOR, WE CONTINUED THE RTE. THIS VECTOR ADDED APPROX 20 MINS TO OUR ROUTING. I BELIEVED WE STILL COULD CONTINUE WITHOUT PROBS. WE THEN ASKED ATC FOR A LOWER ALT FOR MORE FAVORABLE HEADWINDS. THEY RESPONDED THAT THEY WERE UNABLE DUE TO DETROIT AIRSPACE EVEN THOUGH WE WERE IN UNRESTR VISIBILITY AND THERE WASN'T ANY CONFLICTING TFC. OUR HEADWINDS WERE 40 TO 50 KTS LESS AT 9000 FT BUT DUE TO THE LOA BTWN THE 2 AGENCIES, WE COULD TAKE ADVANTAGE OF THIS. AS WE PROCEEDED CLOSER TO OUR DEST, THE WINDS BECAME STRONGER THAN FORECASTED AND OUR GNDSPD FELL OFF CONSIDERABLY. NOW COMMUNICATING WITH ZID, WE BEGAN TO GET LOWER. OUR FUEL NOW BECOMING MORE OF A CONCERN, AND GNDSPD FALLING OFF, WE ADVISED ATC OF 'MINIMUM FUEL CONDITION' BUT NOT DECLARING AN EMER. HE RESPONDED BY ASKING IF WE WOULD LIKE TO CONTINUE TO OUR DEST OR DIVERT TO 3SM. IN CONSIDERATION OF WX AND WINDS, I FELT IT WAS PRUDENT TO DIVERT AND LAND WITH A COMFORTABLE FUEL LEVEL THAN TO CONTINUE THE FLT. WE RECEIVED RADAR VECTORS TO 3SM, NOW IMC, AND THEN A CRUISE ALT. AT THIS ALT, WE BROKE OUT AND WERE VFR. WITH THE ARPT IN SIGHT, WE LANDED. IT IS MY BELIEF THAT WHILE LOA'S BTWN AGENCIES SERVE A FINE PURPOSE, THERE ARE FACTORS WHICH SHOULD ALLOW CTLRS THE ABILITY TO PERMIT USE OF AIRSPACE FOR ACFT FOR OTHER THAN EMERS. AT VERY LEAST, THIS AIRSPACE THAT IS UNUSABLE OR NOT AVAILABLE TO PLTS DUE TO LOA'S SHOULD BE CHARTED SO THAT IT CAN BE TAKEN INTO ACCOUNT WHEN FLT PLANNING FOR WINDS ALOFT AND FUEL REQUIREMENTS.

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.