BAW243 pan-pan diverted KMSP fumes in cabin 2016-01-01

[oktalist]

British Airways flight 243 (B747-400) from Heathrow to Mexico City diverted to Minneapolis due to a smell of electrical burning in the cabin and cockpit. ARFF took their places and followed to the stand. Captured the majority of the RT from Minnie Center, Approach, Tower, and Ground, edited for silence and unrelated RT.

http://avherald.com/h?article=491bbaf3

[GeoffSM1]

Thanks for a very interesting clip.
One observation is that when asked for 'fuel remaining' the pilot was only able to give it  in terms of 'duration' or 'metric tonnes' rather than the required unit, 'pounds'. This is far from the first time I've heard this problem arising and if the required unit is 'pounds' (presumably for good reason) shouldn't steps be taken to ensure that pilots can comply?

[VASAviation]

Why the heck do pounds really matter?

Pilots are european, operating metric system, ask for the fuel in weight, no matters the unit and then you, lovely ATC, convert it into the unit you want.

I remember an audio when a Lufthansa was asked for the fuel, gave it in kilos and the ATC begged him to say it in pounds... WTF? Pilots have probably more important things to work over!!!

[martyj19]

rather than the required unit, 'pounds'.

I hesitate even to get into this level of pedantry but the normal unit is time remaining to exhaustion.  This is in the American AIM and as far as I know is also the ICAO phraseology.

Would you be kind enough to cite where you have determined that "pounds" is required?

If I am declaring an emergency I can promise you I am going to give it in whatever units are conveniently read out from the available instrumentation.

[SirIsaac726]

ATC only needs fuel remaining in time; that's according to the AIM and 7110.65. The crew provided the fuel remaining in time and fulfilled their requirement. My guess is that emergency services often request fuel in pounds but if the pilots cannot provide that, then so be it. It isn't a requirement.

[GeoffSM1]

Thanks for your comments folks in response to my observation.

There are numerous examples in these threads of pilots either being asked to quote fuel remaining in pounds or naturally using that unit. I'm sure I'm not mistaken when I say that there are instances where a pilot who has given a time remaining response has been asked to use pounds. The idea that this will be helpful to Emergency Services surely makes an awful lot of sense. Although Victor's observation about the European nationality of pilots is justified in this particular thread, I'm sure its very wide of the mark for the majority of contributions in the Forum. In any case, what's wrong with the old adage 'When in Rome etc'?

[cptbrw]

While the AIM requires only fuel in time remaining, emergency services often try to establish fuel in pounds remaining for firefighting purposes should the need arise.  Since fire services will often ask the tower for that specific info the tower will often try to obtain it from the crew if possible.  

[GeoffSM1]

While the AIM requires only fuel in time remaining, emergency services often try to establish fuel in pounds remaining for firefighting purposes should the need arise.  Since fire services will often ask the tower for that specific info the tower will often try to obtain it from the crew if possible.  

Thank you.
All this seems to add up to the fact that pilots should be able to provide fuel remaining in pounds if asked to do so in the USA. What if the aircraft comes down someway from an airport? Fuel in time remaining terms may not be helpful to staff at the local fire station if they are not  familiar with the type of aircraft involved in an incident they are called to.

Perhaps someone could say what happens here in the UK?

[SirIsaac726]

While the AIM requires only fuel in time remaining, emergency services often try to establish fuel in pounds remaining for firefighting purposes should the need arise.  Since fire services will often ask the tower for that specific info the tower will often try to obtain it from the crew if possible.  

Thank you.
All this seems to add up to the fact that pilots should be able to provide fuel remaining in pounds if asked to do so in the USA. What if the aircraft comes down someway from an airport? Fuel in time remaining terms may not be helpful to staff at the local fire station if they are not  familiar with the type of aircraft involved in an incident they are called to.

Perhaps someone could say what happens here in the UK?

Well then the FAA needs to amend their documents. That said, I'd rather pilots not have to worry about thinking about fuel loads in more than one weight measurement. We've seen what happens when there is a mixup between lbs and kgs (ref. Gimli Glider). I don't see a problem with how things are currently done (requirement being fuel in time, and if needed, ask pilots for fuel in weight). If they can only provide KGs, it would take the ATC sup a whole 30 seconds to Google what that weight is in LBS.

Don't put that on the flight crews. Let's let them worry about flying the plane.

[Shokapik]

I work in an European ARTCC. For us it's not compulsory to ask the remaining fuel in time, as far as I know. It's probably a silly question, but I wonder why US ATC must ask this question when an aircraft declares an emergency. What really matters for me are pilots intentions... But I probably miss something here, there must be a reason.

When it comes to fire fighters requiring fuel remaining in kg / pounds, I wonder how they deal with it... I recently had a "pan-pan" (possible tyre burst), and the fire fighters wanted to know the "remaining fuel in kg"... The thing is, the aircraft was still 30 minutes from landing! Did it help the fire fighters to know that at this point of the flight he had 4600kg of fuel remaining? Because by the time he lands, the fuel left in the tanks will be a lot different...