Originally Posted by
sonicbum
If, and I say if there are flaws in the system they need to be tackled so that the same mistakes are not repeated. In aviation there must be a fail proof system as consistent as possible and safety nets need to be placed where there is an identified risk. The regulations allow me to start a flight with minimum flight plan fuel and 0 extra fuel even with crap weather because a) I have contingency b) I have 1 or more alternate depending on circumstances. The regulations allow me to start a diversion right a minimum diversion fuel and land at my alternate with 30 min fuel (EU OPS) by following exactly my flight plan route. Are we doing this on a day to day scenario ? Of course not, because we assess the threats of bad weather, load extra fuel and use it wisely. Is this system fail proof ? Not at all, especially because we aim everyday on reducing the amount of fuel we carry by reducing contingencies, planning shortest routes flying through all sorts of weather, etc..
But I guess that if for every 100.000 flights one screws up and land on vapours then it's good enough for the statistics.
Sonic, I fully agree with your comment/opinion. With current regulations one can end up fully legal in a low fuel situation. During my command course (EU flag carrier) it was demonstrated how a flight in the middle of Europe (xxxx to LFPG for example) with min fuel may end..... But, it's not only the regulator, it's also a matter of company culture/training.