Using a non-planned airport when you find you might be short on fuel

Nowadays, so many airports in Europe have some kind of “administrative” PPR requirement, if you couldn’t land in all these places in case of necessity, it would be impossible to fly safely. Personally, I have rarely had the need to land at an alternate, and when it was, I was usually able to choose an airport without any PPR requirement. Also, many places are PPR only for parking, but not for landing, so a short fuel stop is usually possible.

I wouldnt worry too much abou these PPR things. Just let ATC know well in advance so they have time to contact the airport. Don’t declare an emergency in such a situation (unless you are already past that point and ATC doesn’t cooperate). Just explain the situation to ATC, but choose your words carefully, because a) you don’t want to get them stirred up too much, and b) because in many countries, ATC will not understand things if you make it too complicated. In particular, avoid drastic phrases like “short of fuel”, because someone might think that you are about to fall out of the sky. On the other hand, you need to make it clear to them that you really need to land there for fuel reasons, otherwise they might not cooperate. Think about your exact words beforehand.

Also, remember that if you really need it, you will get 100LL at Thessaloniki.

lmsl1967 wrote:

- Request ATC for deviation?
- Have to declare some sort of emergency (if for me there is only one type of emergency, the one that is really an emergency)?
- Pray for the rest of the winds to help?
- None of the above.

You don’t “request”. You declare to ATC that you are diverting to another airport. As Bosco writes, it is important to be clear and assertive so to keep the decision-making in the cockpit. Oddly enough, there does not seem to be any ICAO standard phraseology for diversions. I would say something like “DIVERTING TO … FOR REFUELING”.

As long as you will arrive at the diversion airport with the necessary fuel reserves, there is no emergency. ATC might object to a diversion to a PPR airport if you don’t have prior permission, but if that was the only possible diversion airport I would not hesitate to use the e-word.

There was a case a few years ago here at LKPD, which is half civil, half military where they refused an airplane to land as the wording was unfortunately incorrect. The said airplane landed some twenty minutes later on a highway near to Brno, LKTB. So in case of fuel shortage, one needs to be very strict. You say you are diverting very clearly and make sure the other side understands what you say otherwise you might find yourself in much bigger trouble than talking to a few bureaucrats after landing. In your case, proper fuel planning is crucial in the first place.

This is a part of communication from final report, you can clearly see an example of a communication, which is not appropriate if you have real fuel emergency:

“V 16:23:31 pilot navázal spojení s MAPP LKPD a vyslal zprávu: „..we are now 20 miles from your airfield and we should divert maybe on your field or LKTB“. MAPP EC na tuto informaci odpověděl zprávou: „DEU confirm you are proceeding to LKTB“. Pilot vyslal zprávu: „Could you confirm please your field is open“, na kterou MAPP EC odpověděl: „Negative sir aerodrome Pardubice is closed for civilian traffic. Now only military traffic.“ Pilot vzápětí sdělil: „OK, I think we will land at your field LKPD. OK I land in your field.“ MAPP EC znovu opakoval: „Negative sir negative we are closed. Pardubice is closed. LKPD there is not any possibility to land.“Letadlo bylo ve vzdálenosti 13 NM od LKPD. Pilot v 16:24:38 vyslal zprávu: „OK, could you check it LKTB is open please?“ MAPP EC pak ověřil, že letiště LKTB je v provozu a tuto informaci potvrdil pilotovi: „DEREU …proceed direct LKTB, this airfield is open.“

Aircraft registration was D-EREU and the fuel starvation was caused by improperly installed ferry tank.

.. “and we should divert maybe on your field”

The problem here is that the pilot did not declare an emergency. Had he done so the landing would hardly have been refused. But whatever: In such a situation if I wouldn’t get the clearance, I’d simply inform them about my landing, and not ask.

Alexis wrote:

The problem here is that the pilot did not declare an emergency.

Exactly. “Should divert” and “maybe to your field” won’t achieve anything. This is what controllers need in order to do something for you.

I would file an alternate on the flight plan if it is one which you might actually use in this situation. They will get a copy of the flight plan, FWIW.

Then, it is an old debate whether your alternate needs you to comply with any PNR/PPR requirements. For sure, most pilots don’t bother. Also, let’s say you are now on your way to the alternate… and they refuse you a landing for this reason (which definitely does happen, even though it is very unusual). Are you going to divert to alternate #2? Not really. So once you are on your way to your #1 alternate, it is a mayday situation and you need to be fully ready to declare a mayday (low fuel, “low oil pressure”, whatever) if you get any hassle at all, and just land.

My plan for gratutious landing clearance refusals is to declare a mayday due to low oil pressure.

There have been too many cases where somebody diverted, then diverted again, etc, and eventually crashed somewhere because he let ATC make the decisions for him.

lmsl1967 wrote:

My question does not relate with emergency, just a precautionary action in case headwind is a bit stronger than expected and while abeam LGSM if I realize that I will likely arrive LWSK with fuel not sufficient to land in LYNI (closer with AvGas) in case of a sudden interdiction of LWSK, that I would stop in LGSM.

I would use the phrase “MINIMUM FUEL” (see the document linked by what_next) and if that does not work, still declare and emergency.