As posted in another thread...
From down under, the continued push for 'fuel reductions', driven by management continues.. Management claim that the 'data' suggests less fuel can be ordered lessening FOD and therefore carriage...
The problem with data captured yesterday, assessed tomorrow and released next week, is that it tells you what already happened. Its ability to predict the unknown is of limited value. Sometimes experience tells a pilot he needs more fuel...Have certainly been there
Cui bono?
Pilots at this 'large carrier domiciled in Australia' get an 'app' on their company tablet to compare
company offered fuel and whether or not their order and subsequent burn is 'competitive'
What about pilots at BA, CX, EK and anyone else wishing to comment!
Given that 'strict liability' for having sufficient fuel, including reserves
always sits with the PIC and all state rules are derived from, as I recall ICAO Annex 6 (SARPS) do Captains/FO consider it a conflict for a pilot manager to push for continued fuel order reductions, increased single engine taxi and APU usage, when financial inducements may flow to the management pilots pushing this agenda?
Should ever the people charged with the safe operation of an airline's fleet make personal financial gain from reductions and actively push pilots, without declaring their financial conflict?
Who benefits?
