Date: 201906
Local time of day: 0001-0600
Location: ZZZ.Airport, CA
Flight conditions: VMC
Aircraft: B787 Dreamliner Undifferentiated or Other Model
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Landing
Airspace: Class B ZZZ
ATC / advisory: Tower ZZZ
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Multiengine
Human factors: Communication Breakdown; Time Pressure
Second reporter function: Pilot Not Flying; First Officer
Anomaly: Deviation - Speed All Types; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Inflight Event / Encounter Fuel Issue; Inflight Event / Encounter Unstabilized Approach
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Landed As Precaution; Flight Crew Overcame Equipment Problem
Contributing factors: Procedure; Human Factors; Aircraft
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: On arrival to ZZZ while on the published arrival we were issued holding at 2 different fixes. The delay caused us to burn 4000 pounds of fuel over intended REMF[Remaining Fuel] of 16000 pounds. Once on approach we were then expedited to the visual close in approach to XXL. (aka slam dunk). The final approach was going well until I noticed after requesting flaps 25 degrees that the aircraft was not slowing down.  We were now at approximately 1200 feet with flaps 20 and the gear down. I began to investigate and noticed that the landing data print out had slipped down over the last two detents of the flap selection handle. The FO is relatively new on the aircraft and had inadvertently selected 20 degrees of flap thinking he had selected 25 degrees of flaps. I had already called for 30 degrees of flaps and was having trouble figuring out why the aircraft was not slowing; I was hand flying at the time and my attention was mostly outside of the aircraft. When I noticed that the last two flap detents were covered up by the landing data print out I pushed it aside and noticed that we were at flaps 20 not 30 as I had requested. I quickly pointed this out and he selected 30 degrees of flaps. The reason I did not go around was a quick determination that based on remaining fuel and the current airspace saturation that it might be quite some time before we could execute another approach and landing. This could have led to a critical fuel situation. I did land at ref speed 147 knots and flaps 30 but this did not occur until approximately 700 feet. I had multiple chances to go around but the potential for a low fuel state distracted me from making a more timely and compliant decision. If I encounter a similar situation in the future I will elect to go around and if necessary declare minimum fuel and or declare an emergency and get expedited handling. I will say that at no time did I feel that we were in any danger and the landing was uneventful and in the touchdown zone on speed and fully configured. After fully debriefing the landing with the crew we all agreed that better VVM skills should have been used and had we been given more time for discussion we would have all elected to go around. I believe we all learned a valuable lesson from this event.


Second narrative: We held twice inbound for ATC delays which put our fuel on the low side; though not critically so (10;000#). We were cleared a visual to XXL with the Captain (CA) performing as Flying Pilot (FP). We were cleared #1 and I was concerned that we were behind on getting the drag out as we were Flaps 15 and fairly high. The FP called for gear down at around 1800' than once we had Green GEAR; landing flaps. I selected what I thought was full flaps once we had the speed reduced; but it quickly went above 180 KIAS. I looked at the flap indicator which showed '20;' I assumed they had blown up. I was puzzled as I expected to see 'Load Relief' on the EICAS SNF commented that we were too fast. We were still having trouble getting the speed down. Finally; the speed came down to w/I 15 KIAS of target. However; The EICAS landing checklist wouldn't complete which was puzzling and then we realized we were only showing F20. I stated; 'We're going to have to go-around.' as we were at about 700 feet RA. We then realized that the Flaps selector was only at only Flaps 20. (Since we were at F15 instead of 20 I must have hit the gate and didn't notice as papers were partially obscuring the scale.). We than selected F30. The checklist still wouldn't complete and we had a 'Too Low-Flaps' GPWS call. We noted that the EICAS showed F30 and the CA elected to land (vs. Go-Around) as it appeared we were now properly configured and were stabilized. Since we were stable I did not force the GA as the flap problem was resolved. Albeit late; and we were configured for landing. After landing the CA stated he decided to land as we were finally stabilized and configured and a GA could have put us in a fuel critical state; especially if there were some other problem with the flaps. Curious; the IRO who could see the flap lever noticed that it was only in F20 vs. F30; but didn't say anything because he 'Didn't hear the CA call for Flaps 30.' ???'


Synopsis: B787 Crew reported an unstabilized approach with low fuel.  Crew stabilized and elected to land to avoid a fuel critical state.