Question about fuel burn in long approaches

[Will C]

Hypothetically, the route is OERR-GCLP. The STAR is RUSIK1K which ends at LALTO.

 

The approach is going to be GCLP ILS Z Rwy 03L, which involves a 12 mile leg from LALTO to intercept the 10 DME arc from LPC to the final approach course.

 

My question has to do with fuel planning for the approach. The stretch from the origin (OERR) via RUSIK1K to LALTO is fine, but PFPX plans a direct leg from LALTO to the airport, whereas the approach takes a non-direct route because of the DME arc. This increases the fuel burn, especially if ATC ends up asking for the arc to be flown at a constant altitude. 

 

Therefore, what is the typical and preferred way to account for extra fuel burn in the approach itself? Would you add this to contingency? Or to "Approach Time" on the Aircraft editor? Or somewhere else?

 

Thanks.

 

 

[srcooke]

For the example if we use the route editor summary page PFPX has legs from LATLO giving a total @27nm

 

From the approach chart the total leg distance via the arc is @37nm

 

You could enter the 10nm difference as a circuit in distance on the route section of the planner.

 

Additionally you could enter an average or maximum circuit in distance for the various approaches in the airport editor for automatic application on any arrival.

[Will C]

Got it, thanks.