Mr Fishy
Couple of points if we all did that then there would be many diversions each day, especially on a good weather day when many of us do carry flight plan fuel.
Secondly it has been pointed out that diverting at the point you suggest means you burn your diversion fuel and reach your diversion with 30 minutes reserve only. Much the same as burning it in the hold except that this time you are not where everybody wants to be!
What is worring many of us now is that with the old SWORD flightplan one nearly always burned less than planned. Presumably due to slack in the SWORD program. Now we have CIRRUS which is too clever by half and appears to have no slack. It is very, very precise, just a shame the real world isn't.
Yesterday I received a letter and multi-page notice explaining why we are now going to be using 'statistical' contingency fuel ie avaraged figure using historical data. Again a very precise tool in a very imprecise environment.
When I joined BA we always took extra above the required for comfort. In fact I was told during my route training that only managers took SWORD fuel. Gradually the culture changed led by the new (then) '400 fleet. The culture is now take plan fuel unless you need more and in the process much money was saved or should I say less money was wasted carrying unnecessary fuel.
The problem now is that many of us feel that men with calculators are trying to be too clever. It is now apparent that many of us do not trust the new CIRRUS planning system and will be reluctant to take 'statistical' contingency. As somebody pointed out in conversation we will have turned a full circle and once again nobody but managers will carry CIRRUS fuel!
I am all for being thrifty but CIRRUS and 'statistical' contingency fuel are, in my opinion, a step too far.
What is really worrying is that the CAA approve all of this.