BOAC - I don't agree. No matter what fuel was loaded, this event was waiting to catch an unsuspecting crew. This event clearly demonstrates the need to reconcile the fuel indicated with the actual amount in the tank.
But with regard to minimum fuel, as a European short haul pilot I have no problems whatsoever departing on statistically calculated minimum fuel - just so long as no one objects to me diverting or carrying more if I want to. I have now been flying on minimum fuel for nearly ten years which means I have flown in the order of 5,000 flights under this regime. Only occasionally do I or my company decide to put on more than minimum. In the last few years my only diversions were for en-route repairs and I'll also admit I've been close to diverting quite a few times.
But let us be clear. More fuel does not give you increased safety. It's how and where you burn the fuel that matters. More fuel certainly makes it easier to fly without thinking and it also means you can holder for longer. And when you can no longer hold, you will almost certainly come and and join me at the diversion airport. But my pax will have knicked the busses, I will be fuelled up and ready to depart. And you will be with the whingers wanting to know when you'll be getting the steps, fuel, busses etc. Additional fuel is an insurance policy for the company to minimise diversions. And remember, I fly in Europe and because of our warmongering past I'm spoilt for choice with regard to diversionary airfields. But if I flew long haul or out in the sticks I might have a different opinion.