Regional Jet 200 ER/LR (CRJ200)
Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
ATC Issue All Types; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural FAR; Inflight Event / Encounter Fuel Issue; Inflight Event / Encounter Weather / Turbulence
Flight Crew Landed in Emergency Condition
Company Policy; Procedure
We were filed for the arrival into ZZZ; during cruise flight; we were unable to get to FL330 due to performance of the aircraft; so we requested FL290 for the final. We put the altitude and changes into the FMS and ACARS ECON speed. It showed our fuel more than adequate for FL290 with initial routing. Prior to ZZZ VOR we requested direct to ZZZ1 VOR; which was approved and flown. During our routing we were given a reroute. We were also given a [second] additional reroute.I do not recall exactly when; but I believe after the 2nd reroute we were given I believe a 180 degree heading away/south of course and slowed. This off route vector lasted approximately +30 minutes. We had additional off route vectors; if I recall; 180 heading; 090; then another northwest turn; etc.We asked the Controller how much longer on the headings; as we would be slim on fuel if we were taken further away from our destination/routing. He said not much longer - we were told by controllers that it would be only a few minutes. We were then given deviations back towards our route and the Controller stated that they are going to need more spacing; as he didn't give them enough. Once on the arrival our fuel continued to reduce. We sent an ACARS to dispatch asking current weather and another airport of their choice. We told them the situation of considering possible divert but we are continuing at this point.When our fuel continued to [be] reduced; we were considering [alternate airports]. However; at this point these airports were equal distance from each other and [one] was behind us. With all the consideration and factors we continued [to the destination]. With our estimated fuel on arrival continuing to be reduced; we elected to declare MIN FUEL to the Controller and Dispatcher; planning [visual approach]. At that point we were landing with approximately 1.6 fuel and planning the [visual approach to XY] (as our previous flights were and it was a non-event / no delays). We were given descend via [a second arrival]. Once on approach we informed them also that we were min fuel.At this point we were task saturated. Approach informed us that we will be doing the LDA XY with a +12 mile final; which was different than expected from the Visual XY of less than a 6 mile final. When we inserted the LDA Z XY into the FMS; it showed our estimated fuel on arrival at being 850 lbs. At that point; we immediately decided to [advise ATC we were minimum fuel] due to the inability to complete the entire LDA XY approach. Once [we advised ATC of our fuel state]; ATC immediately turned us to the right and said go direct to ZZZZZ Intersection I believe (which was on LDA Y XY). LDA Y XY is not in the FMS and we said we needed Z.There was confusion with ATC with our inability for Y vs. Z; as we were all task saturated at that point. He said unable Z; and asked if we had the [landmark]. We were in and out of IMC/VMC. At that point we crossed the inbound course to LDA XY / north side of the [landmark]. I do not believe we penetrated [restricted airspace] but there is a chance that it did happen; but I do not believe we did. Controller advised 220 degree heading while we were in IMC; which was complied with.CA came on the radio really quickly and asked what is ATC's plan if we don't get the [landmark in sight]. A few seconds later we had visual on the [landmark] and FO (First Officer) called in sight; which was off our right. At that point; we were cleared Visual XY. Once we were taken off the arrival and immediately turned in for the visual; our fuel became min fuel status.We flew the Visual to XY and advised to contact Tower. On contact with Tower; ATC asked if we preferred XZ. We declined XZ; as the CA personally has never landed or taken off from XZ; and we had numbers for XY. It was the best course of action to continue with the original plan of XY so it did not make the situation more complex. Cleared to land XY. Landed on XY; and clearedat Taxiway D I believe. Continued taxi without incident. Upon arrival at the gate; we had approximately 1.5/1.6 FOB (Fuel on Board).The [admission of low fuel to ATC] was necessary and the safest course of action due to the expected approach; etc. However; since we were taken off the arrival and not the long final; it enabled our fuel at gate to remain approximately 1.5/1.6. Upon arrival; CA called TRACON to discuss the confusion with Y/Z as they wanted to know where the confusion happened. CA informed them we were unable to accept direct ZZZZZ Intersection due to FMS limitations and the last minute changes and task saturations. He said something along the lines of understanding that [company] has issues with Y; etc.
In my humble opinion; I believe the event could have been avoided. It's not uncommon to receive extended vectors or numerous reroutes going in to ZZZ or any other high traffic volume airport. In this case; our flight was twenty-three minutes over planned block time and the majority of that time was spent flying ATC assigned headings. We were given minimum RESERVE fuel; zero ALT or HOLD fuel and only TANKER 697 lbs. If our flight was adequately fueled beyond the absolute minimum levels; I do not believe this event would have occurred. It seems to be extremely common that crews are only given MIN fuel for flights; with no contingency fuel added. Unless contingency fuel starts to be added to all flights; I believe this sort of event will continue to occur.
CRJ-200 flight crew reported being dispatched with minimum fuel landing at their east coast destination with very low fuel on board after a series of ATC vectors.