>>>I would tech-stop or divert en-route if I thought I was going to arrive at LHR with only enough fuel to immediately divert (allowing for holding).<<<
Sadly there are those who routinely plan to depart for Heathrow with this in tanks.
It’s astounding that so many aviation professionals can have such tunnel vision over such a critical subject. Even on a bright sunny day, a 20 minute hold at Heathrow should not compromise your plan for contingency and diversion.
The question of diversion is one of perception; the single runway to single runway scenario is valid. It is however only one of a number of factors to be taken into account. Should you, quite legally fly less than six hours to a CAVOK two runway airport, you need not have a diversion. You might consider however, the likelihood of that whole airport being denied you at the critical moment.
[ALLEGEDLY]A couple of years ago Heathrow lost all electrical power. It had negotiated an exemption from the statutory need to provide standby generators because it had two substations supplied by two separate branches of the National Grid. Unbeknown to the BAA, the grid had been altered and suffered a major high tension fault which blacked out both branches. Subsequently all of Heathrow including all ATC and navaids were knocked out.[/ALLEGEDLY]
With all of our infrastructure being squeezed by undesigned load and enthusiastic management, how wise is it to place all your eggs in one basket? Heathrow runs as tight as a drumskin. All you need is for the one in front to miss his exit, and your committing approach becomes a go-around on fumes. Tight visual circuit? Are you still good at those? You better get it right, because there’s no final final reserve.
You wouldn't leave without fire bottles, you wouldn't fly with only one generator, you wouldn't fly with only one hydraulic system, so why would you fly with only one chance? I simply don't understand the mentality, or see the rewards.
(edited to keep Danny's lawyers happy)
