Dan, show me a flight plan with that notam and I'll show you the REC EXTRA they gave you to cater for it. Let me guess, you see that notam and in your superior knowledge carry an additional hour on top of CFP which already has the REC EXTRA to cater for the notamed delays.

geh065, can you clarify exactly how flying an aircraft halfway around the world is related to driving a bus in HK?

Arfur Dent,
How long is a piece of string??

SOP's are merely a skeletal framework, around which we build up layers of airmanship judgement calls etc. On a CAVOK event, then possibly min SOP is fine..its up to us as experienced aviators to apply the extra gravy that makes as little impact on the sector in question going totally pear shaped.
Just like the days when we applied,(altho not every one did..), MSS. I personally witnessed two a/c lose their slots in AMS as a consequence of a CX Bus taxying at such a slow speed to 36L..poor airmanship suffocated by politik..maybe that was the start of our loss of Professionalism as a pilot collective..small 'p' intended...sad days brothers and sisters!!

You know exactly what I mean. Our profession is being whittled down slowly. What was a prestigious career looked up to by the general public and widely admired is becoming a blue collar job. We are partly to blame of course, and individuals amongst us who do not act like professionals do not exactly help our cause.

Never had my judgement questioned so all this is pure speculation. There are quite a few examples of Captains who habitually put fuel on 'for Mum' being asked up to the '3rdFloor' to explain their expensive actions. Why not?? Also, take fuel off when the ZFW drops ( I believe that originated from a certain Capt Best many years ago and has saved CX a fortune). If in Fleet Management, I would be annoyed by pilots who take extra fuel unnecessarily so the message is (and has ever been) - 'only exceed CFP fuel if you have a reason' and, if challenged, be prepared to justify your actions. As I said - never happened. Sample? - 26 years as PIC. Reason for landing with 20 tons somewhere? 'Thought I might need it'. Also, as a previous contributor mentioned, if the weather is really forecast to be awful, the rec extra will reflect that, originating from the DOM, presumably. If you disagree, take some more. Twas ever thus.....:ok:

True, but the training the military gave many of us, has stood us in good stead. We do not in general blindly follow strategic directives without looking more closely at the tactical situation at hand. (capitals for the benefit of curtain stick)
It has kept many of us, our passengers and crew safe over the years by looking at things objectively, and not being afraid to stand up and do what is right and sensible, sometimes in the face of crass directives (eg CFP fuel) from those higher up.
Don't get me wrong, I'm not an advocate of 3t for mum on every flight, that is unprofessional and would show belligerence, underconfidence or lack of comfort in doing ones job. However one should never feel guilty in taking thinking mans fuel when the situation justifies it. I've been a skipper for over 20 yrs, and never been questioned on fuel uplifts. I frequently take extra, but only when warranted, similarly I decrease fuel when the ZFW drops. The latter is not to justify the former, it is just the right thing to do.
I understand the rationale from proponents of the 'Take CFP fuel and divert if necessary' and agree that in the main, that is what the company is prepared to cope with. .......however, the timescale between CFP production and when you make your decision, is often such that strategic changes may have occured that justify changing the fuel load. From my point of view, we are paid to look at all aspects on a continual basis to ensure both safe and efficient operation, and not be automons relying on the Nurenburg defence after spending 17 hrs on the ground in ZGSZ.

I always used to scoff at the NTC phrase 'Please be guided accordingly', but perhaps there is some scope for some captains to re-evaluate if they are really being safe and efficient or whether they are happy to justify the position the have found themselves in by saying "I was just following orders"

Curtain Man. Landing with 20 Tons does not mean you were wrong at all. If the enormous thunderstorm has just passed by and left the approach clear- your luck's in and you didn't need Manilla fuel or 45 mins holding or whatever contingency you decided upon. How is that wrong??:hmm:

So true Dan

cxorcist I actually agree with you - weird huh? Dan et al, I'm with you on this one. As far as Curtain rod's (or should that be curtain rod, or even Curtain Rod given his dislike of random capitalisation? :)) assertion that

I disagree. He is clearly only looking at the situation from a ULR perspective. Regionally, the situation is clearly different when the options to "do something safely about it" would be limited should you decide to take CFP fuel into an area experiencing known ATC or weather-related difficulties.

Even on ULR operations, you don't really consider options until you are towards the end of a flight - would Curtain rod divert to Chitose on the way back from Vancouver if the weather in Hong Kong indicated passing heavy showers? I doubt it very much, so there goes one of his so called 100-1000+ options.

As many others have said, the CFP is a guide for the crew to make a fuel decision on how we can best get our fare-paying passengers to their planned destination somewhere near the scheduled arrival time. This way, they might actually choose to fly with us again.

STP

Ask dispatch who decides recommended extra during the major holidays, it is IOC, Yes that's a non pilot.

As for notamed holding, What holding? Radar vectors for 10-15 mins do not require a notam.:ugh:

As professionals we look after the passengers, not the managers, who have other priorities.
They pay us to get to the destination not the alternate because of lack of fuel.

Mods:--- time to lock this thread, it ain't achieving anything useful!!:eek:

You can't use that as a reason to lock a thread. There would be no topics left to read!!

For those that haven't read the email from P.E., it's in your Outlook inbox. Have a read.

Now, more than ever, the emphasis is to take CFP, and not a drop more. In fact, he highlighted that the RecExtra is "subject to payload", so if you're landing weight limited, they want you to carry the payload, rather than the fuel.

Fine with me. Anyone got some good tips for nightlife in RCKH????

These guys should REALLY GET OUT OF THE OFFICE and see how a one line TAF in Singapore really looks upon arrival. While CEO pockets a 30% payrise whilst crying poor, I, like Dan, am insulted.

Not only was the content an insult, so was the writing style. It made me feel like I was back in primary school.


Deleted.

I love to fly with Captains (and First Officers) who think for themselves and use personal initiative in spite of being swamped by bureaucratic bull****!

May their species survive forever and protect the innocent traveling public...

Cheers and safe flying,
FB

Quoting Arrowhead,
We can't get the aircraft up the gangplank.
:rolleyes:

Speaking of fuel efficiency....

The airline industry's big sham: fuel surcharges

b.

It has often amazed me that the press hasn't caught on to the fuel scam. Do the math.

If an aircraft burns 80 tons of kero on a 10 hour flight and carries 300 passengers then each passenger could pay for 80/300 or 266 kgs of fuel and you could fill 'er up. At a kero price of around 1100 USD a ton that is around 292 USD per passenger.

So if you are charging USD500 fuel charges you are making a whole bundle for the CEO's bonus per flight. And this is without the freight and excess baggage revenue, don't get me started.

No so called fuel surcharge should be more than the cost of the fuel on board. There is a cost of doing business, and if you have an input you need to cover that in your fixed revenue, not in your variables.

Or am I being teeeribly naive here?