Fuel policy stuff
carrying alternate fuel as EK does for everywhere is fine but sometimes a bit of an overkill.
Perth is a great example... we go in there most days with enough gas to get to Learmonth. ( carrying cost is about 350 kg per tonne) .... but if we were to actually divert there it would be the biggest admin nightmare ... base is minimum equipped for 777 /345 and the 350 pax , 40 mins from accom, you would be out of duty etc etc.. total night mare.
So if the weather is bad you carry ADL fuel.. but if the WX is good why carry gas for somewhere that you would have absolutely no intention of going to..ie commit to destination concept.
.....when PEA is 20 miles north if the 'C310' craps out at the intersection and cant be dozed pulled or what ever out of the way.
I calculated that for the two flights a day we go in there, versus the number of times we need fuel for ADL we could very easily carry less gas for good ( ie above STD alt minima) WX and save about ... 3000 tonnes per day of burnt gas .. which at 600USD per tonne is a lot of money.....
Notwithstanding the carbon, NOX blah blah GRI's etc etc ...
but ...We can't nominate PEA as an alternate as it is not joint user etc etc... so entirely politics...( and by the way we operate into perth when Pearce is closed most of the time...)
So if Peter Garret really wanted to fix the environment this is one football he could take and run with and would save the planet from heaps of problems..
but what do I know... I just push the tin...
WDJA