Hats off
I have spoken to the Captain concerned as the allegations seemed most unlikely imho. I wouldn't claim to have all the facts but that they landed with well above final reserve fuel (frf) is certain. The fact that they allegedly had not put "extra" fuel on does not mean that they arrived over the airfield with alternate + frf. I went without extra the other day - held for 10 minutes at Talla whilst they repaired the runway at EDI - and still used less than the PLOG trip fuel. And I still had enough to hold for another 15 minutes before even getting close to diversion + frf.
I am sure that most of us consider whether other aircraft are likely to be diverting also as well as whether the diversion airport is normally busy anyway, when considering what fuel we would divert with.
To go back to the original allegations though, there are a number of flaws in them. For example:
Would you need to put extra fuel on if the forecast was "light snow showers"? - Not necessarily so, especially if you had performance issues. (I don't know what the forecast was)
Would you divert if you were assured of a landing in half an hour, especially if the diversion airfield was over half an hour away? - I wouldn't.
Would anyone honestly say "Shut the **** up" and "Take control"? - Not really very likely.
Why wouldn't you change your mind and divert if you were given new information that meant your landing wasn't assured? - I can't imagine you would even go into the diversion fuel before you were guaranteed a landing.
Would you seriously not upgrade to a "Mayday" IF you had less than frf? - Of course you would.
Stifler; I would be very careful what you say on here because some of this stuff is bordering on slanderous.
Titus
ps. I have never been a big fan of Pprune because of the ridiculous allegations that people make under pseudonyms, and this thread further confirms my thoughts.