I am becoming quite fascinated by this anti-Ryanair phenomenon. This latest outburst of venom and vitriol was started by:
Whitebraz from Frankfurt
Post: No.1
"Anyone with details concerning the Ryanair Frankfurt Base Captain who landed with less than 800 kgs of fuel"?
Now this is not an accusation as such but is smack full of innuendo and, as such, is clearly designed as a sh*t stirring exercise.
In this it has been largely successful for it has so far generated 7 pages of rubbish and learned discussion (in mixed proportion) on the thread but let us look at the facts:
1. Whitebraz has made his entrance to pprune with this piece of innuendo.
2. Whitebraz has found nobody to confirm this event.
3. Whitebraz has produced no evidence of any sort.
4. Whitebraz has not made one other single posting on this piece of innuendo (or on anything else for that matter). In other words, he has started his bit of sh*t-stirring and is too cowardly to come back and defend his corner.
From all of this one can only conclude that Whitebraz has his own agenda which probably involves the Frankfurt Base Captain. Perhaps he could enlighten us?
In the meantime, we have had 7 pages of mostly regurgitated opinions about fuel planning and the only thing that has emerged (as someone who has never flown a Boeing) is that a whole bunch of pontificators who cried foul about the low-level lights coming on at 907 kgs a side were enlightened by those who really knew their aeroplane that this was merely an ETOPS requirement and that their aircraft were modified so that the low-level lights came on at 453 kgs per side.
And so it seems to me, as one who flew professionally for over 50 years (and who still teaches in the simulator), pretty pathetic that even if Whitebraz is indeed correct, and considering the thousands and thousands of sectors flown, that one aircraft landed and had about 100 kgs less than low level in the tanks.
There could be around a million reasons for this. Diverting is not always a cut and dried and simple procedure.
I will give you an example; I was captain of a DC-10 inbound to LGW from JFK. Gatwick had had early morning fog but it was clearing rapidly. However, because of their single runway and the general backlog there was a lot of holding going on.
I held until I got down to minimum diversion fuel and all the time kept ATC advised of my fuel status. I then asked for a diversion to Stansted (where the weather was actually worse than Gatwick) and so we set off in that direction.
Somewhere north of Heathrow, they called me and said that Gatwick would take us now without delay and so it was that I landed at my original destination (having started a diversion) where the weather was much better and was, incidentally, where the 380 punters wanted to be.
Needless to say, I had less than C+D when I got on the ramp but I defy any of you so-called professionals out there to tell me that I made the wrong decision.
In summary, when you see a posting like this and the person that starts it is not prepared to put up or shut up, then maybe those of us who really are professional pilots should just totally ignore it and let the spotters get on with it.
P.S. I started by describing this as a piece of innuendo. I don't know if you have heard the definition of innuendo?
It is a Spanish suppository!