Just to clarify, I was thinking only about fuel planning, not all rules.
To be honest, before I got the replies on this thread I was expecting either the ICAO rule or a safety-objective-based rule. But it seems that states all have subtly different prescriptive rules.
bookworm wrote:
The differences run the full spectrum from trivial to major.
Just to clarify, I was thinking only about fuel planning, not all rules.
That may be in line with ICAO requirements in the regional manual.
You are right, I forgot the NAT manual is from ICAO. It should be the same. With Canada gone the next one is the Iceland with its three hour reserve (for singles, even those masking as twins).
Martin wrote:
I expected these rules to be implemented, with some minor variations, across the EU.
The differences run the full spectrum from trivial to major.
IIRC, Canada has higher requirements for crossing the Atlantic.
That may be in line with ICAO requirements in the regional manual.
bookworm wrote:
But unless it does, Annex 6 Part II would not apply.
I understand the principle, I’m just surprised. I expected these rules to be implemented, with some minor variations, across the EU.
but no more
AFAIK there can be exceptions. IIRC, Canada has higher requirements for crossing the Atlantic.
Martin wrote:
Do I understand it correctly that you don’t have to follow ICAO Annex 6 Part II in those countries?
Yes. There’s nothing to stop a state publishing Annex 6 Part II almost word for word as its national rules. But unless it does, Annex 6 Part II would not apply.
What happens internationally is somewhat trickier. I think there is an expectation that an aircraft exercising its rights to international air navigation under the Chicago Convention might be required by a foreign state to adhere to Annex 6 Part II, but no more. For most of us it will be moot when Part-NCO comes in next August.
bookworm wrote:
and a general safety objective rule (UK, DE)
Do I understand it correctly that you don’t have to follow ICAO Annex 6 Part II in those countries? National rules quoted here all sound familiar. AFAIK the Czech Republic publishes translated ICAO Annexes as a sort of aeronautical order which you then have to follow. The law itself doesn’t contain the information. I could probably find you a link if you want.
Thanks. I really only need to divide the states up into those who have a prescriptive rule with specific amounts (SE, FR, DK, PL) and a general safety objective rule (UK, DE).
Took me a while to find it, but I think I have it:
– the regulation proper and all annexes
– Annex 2 is the one you want, that is for “general and utility aviation”, section 4.2.5
– Annex 1 is relevant to commercial air transport, it refers to JAR OPS 1.350 and says “the flight shall not start until the captain has verified that the airplane has sufficient oil and fuel to safely complete the flight in the expected operating conditions”
Based on this I believe the 2004 regulation is current. Why that repository does not contain the annexes is beyond comprehension for me – all the real info is in the annexes. Job creation, eh?
I don’t think these are officially available in any other language than Polish, if you want anything translated / explained let me know.
tmo wrote:
In Poland the best I could find is a 2004 (so after we joined the EU, if that matters) law (Dziennik Ustaw Nr 262, poz. 2609) that says:
I can find the regulation but not the annexes that have the detail. Are they online?
Rwy20 wrote:
From the same link that you posted:
I see. Thanks. I was looking for 15 (in digits). So in other words, for a local VFR flight, final reserve is actually 15 minutes. That’s cutting it awfully short. Even the French 20 minutes is, to me, insane. That’s 2-3 USG in many airplanes, and in that case the gauges have probably shown E (empty) for a while. This is just the margin of error for the FOB at departure on some airplanes, and on a low wing airplane, to get there you probably need to run a tank dry in order to land without risking fuel starvation at the wrong moment.
