Narrative:

The day was long to begin with and with dealing with weather; maintenance; and two aircraft swaps; we were already stressed. We were at the gate and delayed. We had boarded as soon as we could and were then notified of a ground stop for all departures going in our direction. We stayed in touch with dispatch via ACARS throughout the delay. After several calls to clearance; they finally were able to issue us a reroute. We put the reroute into the FMS before ever leaving the gate. Once the FMS was programmed; we checked our fuel load with the new route and had 1;000 pounds more than minimum to fly the route to the destination; execute a missed approach; and divert to the alternate airport. It was not a long taxi and after we took off the fuel situation was fine. About two-thirds into the flight; ATC asked us to maintain 310 [KTS] or better and we complied. We also started our descent early because of what seemed to be airspace and traffic limitations. We were burning more fuel than we should have been; but still seemed to be in a good situation. About halfway between the alternates fuel started to become more of an issue. I decided to continue knowing that we were at the minimums to get to the destination and then to the alternate; but knew if we had any issues; we would have to divert. Once we were 40 to 50 miles from the airport; we were asked to slow and started to get vectors off the arrival. A few minutes later; I declared minimum fuel and the controller said we were following a general aviation aircraft that was doing 80 KTS across the ground. He asked if we wanted to declare an emergency. I stated that we did want to declare an emergency and and he vectored us onto final and cleared us for the approach. If we had to go to the alternate; we would have been within our reserves. Planning on my part was part of the problem. Knowing that we were going up to new york airspace during bad weather; I should have gotten extra fuel to begin with. Also; I didn't recognize the urgency of the situation early enough to just divert to albany when we hit the minimum fuel to get to the destination and return to the alternate. Weather was also a factor. My suggestion would be information. I will not let this happen again in my aircraft; but I would like to understand more about the flight planning and fuel burn used for the releases. In theory; we should have had more than enough fuel for this flight and the diversion to the alternate. From the fom planning guidelines; the higher speed we were asked to fly should not have been a factor; but the early descent would. Also; I would like to know if the fuel burn used for planning is fleet specific; aircraft specific; or engine specific. This is a cause of concern for me because I have had aircraft where one engine burns 200 pounds more per hour at all power settings than the other engine. When I asked maintenance; I was told that it was because some engines are older and less efficient. Since we are having many engine overhauls on the fleet; we have many less efficient engines out there and if you had an aircraft with two less efficient engines; that would be 400 pounds per hour different than two newer engines. My questions are in no way trying to put blame of this on anyone or any other reason. I should have caught this before it even became an issue.

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: Air carrier inbound declared a fuel emergency after being advised by ATC of the sequence; the reporter noting he was late in recognizing the developing fuel problem.

Narrative: The day was long to begin with and with dealing with weather; maintenance; and two aircraft swaps; we were already stressed. We were at the gate and delayed. We had boarded as soon as we could and were then notified of a ground stop for all departures going in our direction. We stayed in touch with Dispatch via ACARS throughout the delay. After several calls to Clearance; they finally were able to issue us a reroute. We put the reroute into the FMS before ever leaving the gate. Once the FMS was programmed; we checked our fuel load with the new route and had 1;000 LBS more than minimum to fly the route to the destination; execute a missed approach; and divert to the alternate airport. It was not a long taxi and after we took off the fuel situation was fine. About two-thirds into the flight; ATC asked us to maintain 310 [KTS] or better and we complied. We also started our descent early because of what seemed to be airspace and traffic limitations. We were burning more fuel than we should have been; but still seemed to be in a good situation. About halfway between the alternates fuel started to become more of an issue. I decided to continue knowing that we were at the minimums to get to the destination and then to the alternate; but knew if we had any issues; we would have to divert. Once we were 40 to 50 miles from the airport; we were asked to slow and started to get vectors off the arrival. A few minutes later; I declared minimum fuel and the Controller said we were following a general aviation aircraft that was doing 80 KTS across the ground. He asked if we wanted to declare an emergency. I stated that we did want to declare an emergency and and he vectored us onto final and cleared us for the approach. If we had to go to the alternate; we would have been within our reserves. Planning on my part was part of the problem. Knowing that we were going up to New York airspace during bad weather; I should have gotten extra fuel to begin with. Also; I didn't recognize the urgency of the situation early enough to just divert to Albany when we hit the minimum fuel to get to the destination and return to the alternate. Weather was also a factor. My suggestion would be information. I will not let this happen again in my aircraft; but I would like to understand more about the flight planning and fuel burn used for the releases. In theory; we should have had more than enough fuel for this flight and the diversion to the alternate. From the FOM planning guidelines; the higher speed we were asked to fly should not have been a factor; but the early descent would. Also; I would like to know if the fuel burn used for planning is fleet specific; aircraft specific; or engine specific. This is a cause of concern for me because I have had aircraft where one engine burns 200 LBS more per hour at all power settings than the other engine. When I asked Maintenance; I was told that it was because some engines are older and less efficient. Since we are having many engine overhauls on the fleet; we have many less efficient engines out there and if you had an aircraft with two less efficient engines; that would be 400 LBS per hour different than two newer engines. My questions are in no way trying to put blame of this on anyone or any other reason. I should have caught this before it even became an issue.

Data retrieved from NASA's ASRS site as of April 2012 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.