SAMRA/SARON Flight Planning Questions

Under CAR 602.88, the minimum fuel required for an IFR flight is generally sufficient to fly to the destination aerodrome, then to the alternate aerodrome (if one is required), then to fly for a further

• 30 minutes at maximum endurance speed.
• 15 minutes at normal cruising speed.
• 45 minutes at normal cruising speed.
• 2 hours at normal cruising speed.

Explanation: The baseline CAR 602.88 IFR fuel requirement is built around reaching the destination, then the alternate if one is required, plus a further 45 minutes at normal cruising speed as a final reserve -- distinct from the more detailed contingency fuel provisions that apply to specific types of commercial air operations.

CARs 602.88 - Fuel Requirements

Beyond the basic VFR or IFR reserve figures, CAR 602.88 requires that fuel planning also account for factors such as

• taxi and pre-takeoff delays, expected weather, ATC routing delays, and reaching a suitable aerodrome after an engine failure or pressurization loss en route.
• the aircraft's insured hull value, which supposedly determines how much reserve fuel the operator's insurer requires it to carry.
• crew duty time remaining, which is substituted for any fuel calculation entirely on flights under 2 hours in scheduled duration.
• only the direct trip fuel between departure and destination, calculated at maximum-range cruise power with no other adjustment made.

Explanation: CAR 602.88's fuel requirement isn't just a fixed VFR/IFR reserve bolted onto trip fuel -- it explicitly requires accounting for realistic operational factors: taxi and pre-departure delays, forecast weather, expected ATC routing and traffic delays, and the fuel needed to reach a suitable aerodrome if an engine fails (multi-engine aircraft) or cabin pressurization is lost at the worst possible point along the route.

CARs 602.88

Beyond taxi fuel, trip fuel, contingency fuel, and the required VFR/IFR reserve, a flight plan's fuel load may also include 'additional' (or route reserve) fuel, which is intended to

• replace the requirement to carry a final reserve or alternate fuel figure at all, since additional fuel is considered a full substitute for those requirements.
• provide a further margin against operational factors the standard reserve calculations don't fully capture, such as a specific route's known unreliability, forecast uncertainty, or company policy for a particular operation.
• be used only for ground taxiing purposes after landing, functioning as a second, separate taxi fuel allowance.
• count toward the aircraft's payload capacity rather than its fuel load, since it is treated as cargo rather than fuel for weight purposes.

Explanation: Additional (or route reserve) fuel sits on top of the standard fuel stack -- it's a further, often operator- or route-specific margin added where experience, forecast uncertainty, or company policy suggests the standard contingency and reserve figures alone might not be enough for that particular route or situation, rather than replacing any of the mandatory fuel components it supplements.

TP 690 Section 9 - Flight Planning, Fuel Policy

Performance-Based Navigation (PBN) routes, as opposed to conventional ground-based-NAVAID routes, define required navigation performance primarily in terms of

• the accuracy, integrity, and functional capability an aircraft's navigation system must demonstrate and monitor, rather than in terms of which specific ground-based NAVAID equipment must be carried or overflown.
• the aircraft's maximum certified altitude alone, with navigation accuracy considered entirely unrelated to PBN route eligibility.
• the specific brand and model of ground-based NAVAID equipment that must physically exist along the route, with aircraft equipment playing no role in the requirement.
• the number of passengers carried, with PBN requirements varying by passenger count rather than by navigation system performance, despite PBN being defined entirely around navigation accuracy and monitoring rather than passenger count.

Explanation: PBN shifts the basis of route and airspace design away from 'you must be able to receive this specific ground station' toward a performance specification -- a required navigation accuracy, along with, for RNP specifications, on-board monitoring and alerting if that performance isn't being met -- that an aircraft's navigation system and equipage must be able to satisfy, which is what allows PBN routes to be flown by any suitably equipped and approved aircraft regardless of the particular ground infrastructure (or lack of it) beneath the route.

TP 690 Section 9 - Flight Planning, Route Planning

For a given flight, the maximum payload that can actually be carried is generally constrained by the most limiting of several weight limits, including

• Maximum Zero Fuel Weight (MZFW), Maximum Takeoff Weight (MTOW) once planned fuel is added, and Maximum Landing Weight (MLW) once fuel burned off en route is subtracted -- whichever produces the lowest available payload.
• Maximum Zero Fuel Weight alone, since MTOW and MLW are understood to have no bearing whatsoever on the maximum payload that can be carried.
• a single fixed payload figure that never varies with route length or fuel load, since payload capacity is considered independent of trip distance, planned fuel uplift, or which of the three weight limits actually governs.
• Maximum Takeoff Weight alone, since MZFW and MLW are understood to be irrelevant to payload once the aircraft has been fuelled for departure.

Explanation: Maximum payload is constrained by whichever of several weight limits is most restrictive for the specific flight: MZFW limits payload directly, MTOW limits payload once the required fuel load is added, and MLW limits payload once fuel burned off en route is subtracted back out -- on a longer sector requiring more fuel, MTOW or MLW can become the limiting factor even when MZFW would allow more payload, so no single one of these limits can be considered in isolation, and payload capacity is not a fixed figure independent of trip length.

TC AIM RAC - Payload-Range Limits

For an Extended Diversion Time Operation (EDTO/ETOPS), the 'critical fuel scenario' used in fuel planning generally assumes

• only a single, isolated system failure with no combination of simultaneous failures considered at any point, a simplification that would understate the fuel burn of the more demanding combined-failure diversion case actually used.
• no failure at all -- EDTO critical fuel is calculated purely from normal all-engines-operating cruise fuel flow, which would leave no fuel margin for the reduced-altitude diversion an actual failure would require.
• a failure occurring only at the departure aerodrome, since en route failures are not part of EDTO fuel planning, even though the whole purpose of EDTO planning is to cover the en route segments farthest from a suitable diversion aerodrome.
• a combined failure case at the most critical route point -- typically an engine failure with a cabin depressurization -- requiring diversion to the nearest alternate at reduced altitude, with required reserves intact on arrival.

Explanation: EDTO/ETOPS critical fuel planning generally uses the most adverse combination reasonably expected at the most critical point along the route -- commonly an engine failure combined with a cabin depressurization -- requiring a descent to a lower diversion altitude and diversion to the nearest suitable alternate, with the specified fuel reserves still intact on arrival there.

TC AIM RAC -- Extended Diversion Time Operations

During flight, cross-checking the FMS 'progress' page (showing waypoints, distances, and fuel predictions) against the original flight plan is a useful practice primarily because it

• provides no information relevant to fuel status, showing only distance and time data with no fuel prediction of any kind.
• replaces the need for the crew to monitor any other flight instrument or navigation display for the remainder of the flight.
• is required only once, immediately after departure, with no value in repeating the cross-check at any later point in the flight.
• allows the crew to confirm the aircraft is actually progressing along the route and consuming fuel as originally planned, and to notice promptly if actual progress has begun to diverge meaningfully from the plan.

Explanation: Periodically cross-checking the FMS progress page against the original flight plan lets the crew confirm that actual progress -- position, fuel remaining, and predicted fuel at destination -- is tracking reasonably close to what was planned, and lets them notice promptly if actual conditions (stronger-than-forecast headwinds, a routing change, and so on) have caused a meaningful divergence that might call for a decision such as requesting a more direct routing or reviewing fuel options, rather than only discovering such a divergence much later in the flight.

TP 690 -- Flight Planning: En Route Monitoring

Before a flight can be planned to a particular aerodrome requiring special qualification (such as one surrounded by challenging terrain or with an unusually demanding approach), an operator generally requires that

• special aerodrome qualification applies only to VFR operations, with no application to IFR flights into a similarly demanding aerodrome.
• no special qualification of any kind is ever required, since any crew holding a valid type rating for the aircraft is automatically qualified for every aerodrome that type can operate into.
• the specific crew members assigned to that flight hold the required route or aerodrome qualification, typically established through specific training, briefing materials, or a minimum number of supervised visits, before the aerodrome may be used.
• only the aircraft itself, rather than the crew, requires any special qualification or certification for such an aerodrome, a description that misplaces the requirement, since it is specifically the individual crew members assigned to the flight, through training, briefing, or a minimum number of supervised visits, who must hold the qualification rather than the aircraft alone.

Explanation: Some aerodromes, because of challenging surrounding terrain, an unusually demanding approach procedure, or other operational complexities, are designated by an operator as requiring special qualification -- meaning the specific crew members assigned to that flight must have completed particular training, reviewed specific briefing materials, or accumulated a minimum number of supervised visits before being permitted to operate there, a requirement that applies to the crew's qualification rather than simply to the aircraft's general capability.

TP 690 -- Flight Planning: Route and Aerodrome Qualification