You muppet. If the MINIMUM fuel was enough to get the aircraft to LTN, then a tech-stop would not have been required, would it?
As has been explained, the change in airframe meant that the aeroplane could not put on ENOUGH fuel to get all the way to LTN with sufficient reserves.
Carrying Min fuel
is encouraged in EZY, as it is in every other UK airline I have ever worked for, but there is absolutely no problem with loading EXTRA fuel if it is forseen to be needed by the crew. Which it is, regularly, and which we do, regularly.
I heard flying MIN FUEL is almost "compulsary" for EZY crews. And any fuel above MIN has to be reported and seriously stated.
It is not "compulsary" [sic]. yes the reasons have to be stated, as they do in bmi, BA etc etc - we base fuel plans on facts, not 'feeling' and every single crewmember I have flown with in any of those 3 airlines would be happy to stand in front of management and justify their fuel plan decisions without prejudice or fear of recrimination. As it should be.
Tech-stops are not an uncommon thing, particularly on long routes where margins are tight and the long flying time means just a small change in forecast wind or ATC allocated flight level can make the difference between having to stop off for a top-up or not.