In 13 years of flying overseas for four different carries on three different continents, I have NEVER even ONCE departed without fuel for a nominated alternate.
Whatever the nuances of the rules, in practice, a TINY percentage of the Worlds flights EVER depart without fuel to an alternate.
Wizofoz,
There is nothing nuanced about the regulations, they are quite plain.
I dare say that most of the operators you have worked for have, at least originally, come form areas where, at least originally in their history, the combinations of often lousy weather, and relatively short distances made always carrying an alternate a matter of little commercial importance.
In short, habit is no excuse for not doing considered analysis. In total contrast to the history of Qantas, where intense attention to such matters, to minimise fuel burn and maximize available payload was core to the business, and we all understand/understood that was core to company success.
We all know pilots are a conservative bunch, long ingrained practices are hard to shift, suggested changes produce the mantra of "safety", applying rational risk based criteria to airspace classification is a prime example in Australia.
A UK airline that I worked for for some years, having acquired a contract for some very long fuel critical sector into southern Africa, when we ( a couple of Australian working for this company) pointed out the fact that there was an legal "alternate" to always carrying an alternate, realised they had never really considered operating without an alternate. After rejigging the system, commercial payloads increased significantly.
The way fuel policies have developed in Australia, under quite different circumstances, for all carriers, not just Qantas, tells you no more than operating around Europe or the north Atlantic (something with which I am intimately familiar) is quite different to operating around Australia or the Pacific.
Using like scales, put a map covering just NSW and Vic. over western Europe, you may very well be surprised.
The common use of Inters and Tempos here to add 30 or 60m holding is a case in point, carrying 30 or 60 on YSSY is a lot less than carrying YMML as alternate, particularly if you are flying an aeroplane where there are no other alternates --- based on wheel loads, if nothing else.
Anybody who doesn't understand that it is all about risk management, and maximizing realisable commercial payload, need to rethink their approach.
Tootle pip!!