First officer of B737-400 is concerned air carrier practice of dispatching with no alternate and a p...

Attributes
ACN	702622
Time
Date	200606
Local Time Of Day	1201 To 1800
Place
Locale Reference	airport : sea.airport
State Reference	WA
Aircraft 1
Controlling Facilities	tracon : s46.tracon
Operator	common carrier : air carrier
Make Model Name	B737-400
Operating Under FAR Part	Part 121
Flight Phase	descent : approach
Flight Plan	IFR
Person 1
Affiliation	company : air carrier
Function	flight crew : captain oversight : pic
ASRS Report	702622
Person 2
Affiliation	company : air carrier
Function	flight crew : first officer
Events
Anomaly	other anomaly other
Independent Detector	other flight crewa
Resolutory Action	none taken : anomaly accepted
Consequence	other
Supplementary
Problem Areas	Company Flight Crew Human Performance
Primary Problem	Company

Narrative:

We were dispatched with minimum fuel and no alternate because of lack of takeoff performance. Passenger were left behind because of a short runway and hot outside temperatures. Company minimum landing fuel is 4000 pounds. We added 300 pounds additional pounds and still landed with less than minimum (3800 pounds). There were many thunderstorms near our route of flight but we did not have to deviate and we had higher tailwinds than forecasted in our flight plan. We still landed with less than minimum fuel. I do not feel that this is a safe practice. If we had gone around because of a traffic conflict or a mechanical problem we would have been in a state of a low fuel emergency. Dispatching a 2 hour 28 min flight with minimum forecasted landing fuel and no alternate leaves no wiggle room. I do not believe dispatch can accurately forecast a 2 hour 28 min flight to land with exactly 4000 pounds.

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: FO OF B737-400 IS CONCERNED ACR PRACTICE OF DISPATCHING WITH NO ALTERNATE AND A PLANNED ARR FUEL EQUAL TO THE AIRPLANE MANUAL MINIMUM ALLOWABLE FUEL FOR LNDG MAY RESULT IN EMER FUEL DECLARATIONS.

Narrative: WE WERE DISPATCHED WITH MINIMUM FUEL AND NO ALTERNATE BECAUSE OF LACK OF TKOF PERFORMANCE. PAX WERE LEFT BEHIND BECAUSE OF A SHORT RWY AND HOT OUTSIDE TEMPS. COMPANY MINIMUM LNDG FUEL IS 4000 LBS. WE ADDED 300 LBS ADDITIONAL LBS AND STILL LANDED WITH LESS THAN MINIMUM (3800 LBS). THERE WERE MANY TSTMS NEAR OUR RTE OF FLT BUT WE DID NOT HAVE TO DEVIATE AND WE HAD HIGHER TAILWINDS THAN FORECASTED IN OUR FLT PLAN. WE STILL LANDED WITH LESS THAN MINIMUM FUEL. I DO NOT FEEL THAT THIS IS A SAFE PRACTICE. IF WE HAD GONE AROUND BECAUSE OF A TFC CONFLICT OR A MECHANICAL PROB WE WOULD HAVE BEEN IN A STATE OF A LOW FUEL EMER. DISPATCHING A 2 HR 28 MIN FLT WITH MINIMUM FORECASTED LNDG FUEL AND NO ALTERNATE LEAVES NO WIGGLE ROOM. I DO NOT BELIEVE DISPATCH CAN ACCURATELY FORECAST A 2 HR 28 MIN FLT TO LAND WITH EXACTLY 4000 LBS.

Data retrieved from NASA's ASRS site as of January 2009 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.

First officer of B737-400 is concerned air carrier practice of dispatching with no alternate and a planned arrival fuel equal to the airplane manual minimum allowable fuel for landing may result in emergency fuel declarations.