Well, we are just supposed to simply go to the alternate, and the company will "support us". This is not in out Part A, but I remember being quoted on the first page of that magnificent letter (yeah, yeah, I read a bit more than the first paragraph, I admit, but I promise I did not read more than one page, honest
...) verbatim from another company's OPS Manual. So, let's see, am I supposed to follow another company's OM, or, if the company is so keen that we divert with their "support", why does this policy land in our Part A?
As far as I am concerned, I do as Lulu does: just carry the extra that I am entitled by law. Not "full tanks", not always the same X'thousand kilos, just what I consider to be fair, economic and safe.
HOWEVER, I was trying to go deeper than just what we do in our daily operation with my last comment. "Commander-Dispatcher" decision? "Dispatcher Empowerment"? Deviation from recommended practices in EGLL?
Aren't we loosing sight of the ball here? Is it only me who feels patronized?
Disturbing...
Cheers
MigBird