I'm not sure anyone has suggested that so I find it a bit weird that you even make the point.
ATC has never said anything to me to the effect "being related to wake separation and/ or the ability to get a both of us away (Dash out in front of me turning right shortly after takeoff and then me before the next arrival) instead of just getting me away due to their not being enough for the Dash to get 2 minutes behind me" unless people carry on about it.
Because if it's happening on a regular basis then we can feed that back to the company and they can do something about it.
Which illustrates my previous point exactly, you have no control over it, it is niff naff. Sure give the company feedback, and there will be the correct channels for something maybe done, maybe not. It is an artificial to think you have some control over it, ATC control you, not the other way around.
It gave us a commercial disadvantage with being slowed to allow other aircraft on the visual in front of us- to maximise the airspace use.
Foreign AOC holders are not even offered visual approaches, they can be requested.
Using the logic you've articulated here I just 'suck it up' and do nothing about it- to the detriment of my airline when doing it's best to reduce costs. This is an 'easy win'.
I am not suggesting doing nothing about it, all you can do on the flight deck is to provide your company feedback, nothing more.
However I also know that sometimes the delay on the ground in MEL is caused by something that happened ex Sydney and if I can manage to avoid it then so much the better.
Sure the delay happened ex SYD, right out scheduling/planning in QCC. You cannot schedule a 767 after two A320s and a 737 to the same destination and expect to think you will not be slowed down by the slower traffic infront of you.
I've never made such a suggestion that it is the fault of the foreign AOC holders.
It was in the first post of this thread, not by you, but that is what the topic is about, dumping on the people from up north.
"Without wishing to be too much of a pedant, does anyone else get irked by our neighbours from the north forever requesting the longest runways.
When asked if they "require" the requested runway their level 6 English doesn't appear to know the difference. Knowing the performance of these aircraft, I very much doubt they have operational requirements without an un serviceability. The rest of us are in effect being displaced for their comfort, convenience or lack of airmanship knowing the difference between request and require."
Were I to make some implications of my own I would suggest that your comments allude to a quite blasé attitude to operating a commercial service or an ignorance of the multiple things that impact on whether a domestic network provides the service the passengers pay for as well as whether it's making money.
All I can do is to facilitate what I have direct control over, scheduling, ATC, facility and procedures design etc is not part of that. I dont pretend to get upset/worry/care about things I have no control over, you might call that a "blasé attitude" (cup half full), I call it a realist attitude (cup half empty).
Both of the large domestic carriers have stated in their recent annual results that there is a glut of excess domestic capacity, that is a self inflicted race for market share. The real cost saving is not generated by saving 10 minutes on one flight, it is by consolidating schedules to improve yields.