Originally Posted by
Dysag
If AF447 took additional fuel it would at least give a clue that they were prepared to deviate around the weather.
If they didn't take more fuel, it tells us nothing. The extra fuel required to pass 50nm to one side and then rejoin the original track is almost negligable: just a fraction of the en-route contingency already on board.
IMO, if they didn't have enough fuel for a diversion around the CB (Which I doubt), they should have diverted back, probably posted on here before, but this thread seems to be going round in circles and getting nowhere!!
Having said that, it's been interesting reading this thread, if only for the technical information learnt.