My point is that the minimum safe fuel uplift, as required by EU and presumably NA law, is surely ALREADY conservative. If so (and I'd love to be corrected on this) then Ryanair's apparent policy of regarding the minimum uplift as a target is perfectly legitimate.
I would like to respond to your invitation to correct you on this.
If the 5% contingency is burnt because of getting a flight level two below planned or a 100nm weather deviation, then you are arriving with NO fuel to spare. If something goes slightly wrong, you are diverting. The diversion is planned so that you land at your alternate airfield with 30 minutes fuel remaining. If you don't then this is an emergency.
If the 5% contingency fuel is used up (not uncommon), there is no spare in the planning. Nothing. These figures are not conservative. They are minimums. Absolute minimums.
If you want an example of how trusting the company provided ''legal'' fuel plan can go wrong, then this is it:
http://www.fomento.es/NR/rdonlyres/5..._FINAL_ENG.pdf
This crew, bought up in the ''low cost'' culture didn't consider carrying extra fuel to an airfield where there was a known potential for problems and ended up having to declare a Mayday. The passengers posting on this forum may not see much wrong with it, but running an airliner out of fuel is not quite like running out of fuel in your car. Most of the professional pilots reading this report will get goose bumps.
Now consider the case of several aircraft approaching a busy airport all with close to minimum fuel, and a thunderstorm has to all and intents, rendered the airport unusable. However, the aircraft have to make the approach because they don't have the fuel to hold to let the storm pass. They can't make the approach, so have to go around and divert. Now, four of them want to go to their alternate at the same time, but that airfield can't cope so tells them to hold. But they can't do that. They are flying with the legal minimum and that doesn't factor in further holding at the alternate. The result:
Three Ryanair mayday calls go out on same day - Independent.ie
The policy of uploading the legal minimum; by definition; is legal. The pertinent question to ask is, ''Is it safe?''. Often it is, but frequently there are factors which make taking the legal minimum imprudent. The responsibilities of the Commander in all aviation jurisdictions require him/her to take enough fuel and reserves considering all the factors and possible contingencies - it is his/her legal responsibility. And this doesn't means that by taking the legal minimum they will always fulfil this requirement. However, the drive for greater profits in the "low cost'' airline industry has seen managers gradually reduce the Captain's authority to do this. But one thing is for sure, if the Captain does run out of fuel, it's he/she who will be legally responsible - and the manager, through careful wording of fuel policy instructions will be largely absolved. A company cannot legally prevent a Captain from taking extra fuel, but he can easily be intimidated into following policy.
As a Captain myself, I never take the minimums. For a start, I fly for a "full fares'' airline and our fuel policy requires us to arrive with quite a bit more than the legal requirements. And because I operate in an environment with high ground, poor weather, political considerations and where ATC delays are common, I regularly load more and I have never had this questioned by the company. As passenger, you have to ask yourself which airline would you rather fly with, if the ticket price was the same. And then, are you willing to fly with an airline which treats the legal minimums as a target in order to save a few dollars.
If you treat the legal minimums as a target, you are eroding safety margins and going to have incidents. Airline travel is safe, and Ryanair have an enviable safety record. Unfortunately, the statistics are compiled taking into account actual accidents and not reported incidents.