I am firm believer that our colleagues in this company are under more pressure than the rest of us to carry less excess fuel. I do not think that they are spineless for speaking up. I think that the doco mentioned one or two hundred extra as a norm, in a 738 is a bit close to the wire in my opinion. Commercial concerns seem to be overtaking airmanship. Not good.

Can't help feeling that if PPRuNe had the guts to place this thread where it belonged i.e. in the "Rumours and News" section frequented by a few more PILOTS, we would get some more balanced views from slightly more technically informed contributors. Too many comments from SLF happy with their cheap tickets to Ibiza here.

"Spottters corner" hardly seems appropriate, still that's where the PPRuNe mods have seen fit to hide it these days.

Yeah, so they're spineless for not using good airmanship and taking extra when its needed, because they feel under more pressure.

Why do you think 200kgs is "a bit close to the wire"? I've not taken more than minimum fuel for weeks (rounded up to the nearest hundred), not because I'm under pressure to, which I suppose I am, but because there's been no need to.

Are you one of those types who always takes extra for no reason?

You carry on LSM, top marks!

I will, until I think I need to take more and then I'll do that too.

So, are you?

Spandex

There are a myriad of reasons that one may elect to carry extra fuel, if you are alluding that I just bang on a few hundred extra for the hell of it, then you are barking up the wrong tree mate.

As for 'those types' who consistently fly around with the bare minimum good luck to you.

FRFO, my opinion on Ryanair contracts is documented somewhere hereabouts. Briefly, no, I don't think it is reasonable.

To stand up to management you need a spine, or balls but preferably both and the law. It seems that Ryanair ask you to justify your fuel decision making. If there was no justification to carry extra fuel then did it need to be carried?

Shaun, you don't say! I'm not alluding to anything. I asked you a question. You said that 200 kgs extra was a bit too close to the wire, I take it from that that you always carry more than 200 kgs extra fuel so you aren't as close to the wire as you would be. Why? What's the wire?

And if you think it's the bare minimum then I politely suggest you revisit the fuel planning section of your Ops manual.

Ok thats fine I will, noted.

And answer the questions?

Sober Lark,

Simply Voting Online Election System

Lord,

Having to explain the reasons for carrying extra fuel to management is in itself a barrier to good airmanship. You can not disagree that this can have some bearing on decision making about fuel carried. Unfortunately for them they do not have the luxury that you and I most likely enjoy in not having to answer to management about OUR decisions during the day. Yes we will most likely have the balls to answer to them (they wont ask), thing is our jobs wont be on the line because of it. These guys operate millions of pounds of equipment carrying hundreds of pax and they are being questioned on their judgement rather than being left to carry out their jobs as professionals.

I wasn't absolutely sure before, but now I am ... so we have clowns out there flying planes who think their pre-flight measurements of existing fuel and calculations of fuel burn to empty on a particular route on a particular day are ALWAYS accurate to within 1 and bit kilos of fuel per passenger :hmm: ... must be bloody powerful stuff that JetA1 ... I wouldn't try it in my 5 seat diesel ... the donkey might splutter and give up somewhere embarrassing.

Clearly some of these things are not being flown by scientific or engineering minds who easily understand that calculating the size of the likely error in their main calculation is more important than committing aviation on the strength that the man who wrote the manual and the EAA can worry about errors and whether the standard method fits the day. I just knew we'd be bound by now to have a significant number of ex bloody traders in cockpits who know the price of everything and the value of nothing including that of their lives or ours and are prepared to gamble both on their limited mindsets day after day and claim management plaudits for it.

In agreement with that it's nothing more than a computer generated PLOG that tells you how much your minimum fuel is for the flight. It does not take into consideration any ATC delays, tech problems or anything else which you may care to add.

I think we're mostly simging from the same hymn sheet, but to be pedantic isn't the fact that the plogs cannot be perfectly accurate accounted for by the 5% contingency. If the legal minimum aint enough to cover 99.9% of sectors then the legal minimum needs to be adjusted. The greater issue is whether captains feel at liberty to use their experience and airmanship to take extra fuel without pressure or interference from outside influences.

For the record, RYR PLOG's are not aircraft specific, as with some companies, are not always accurate (you need experience to spot that) and as for the written explanation, sure you can and I personally never had a problem - except for the Base Capt BCN who never accepted any decision to take more than minimum fuel - BUT, and it's a BIG but, if you are a young, inexperienced Capt who has flown for no other airline than RYR and you PERCEIVE that you might just be in trouble, get demoted, have your base changed if you are marked out as a persistent offender, this isn't always the case.
The fear of repercussions in RYR is real. I didn't always say yes and I did take the fuel that I felt was required (and I'm also happy to fly min fuel when appropriate). The end result? I was fired by Brookfield for 'non-compliance' with my contract after refusing to carry out an unreasonable and unsafe duty.
I could afford to do so with the experience level and contacts that I have built up over the years. Not so for the newly qualified 4000hr Capts.

Sober Lark

It's very simple.

Ask a question (to the VERIFIED pilot member)

Get a response. (Yes, No a. b. c. etc)

From this very simple format you can work out who has responded in which way and give a simple breakdown of the results in percentage terms.

Do you understand?

a.) YES

b.) NO

:8

Lord Spandex Masher:

(Nice but slightly weird handle btw!)

Ref: Balls and Spine - Yes it would be nice if all RYR pilots had these in abundance. But when any action on an individual basis can easily lead to you losing the means to pay your mortgage every month it is a tough call. This is why collective representation is so important - then the RYR management would be unable to single out pilots for 'special treatment'. Of course MOL knows this and that is why he is going to such great lengths to avoid it (killing RPG facebook and twi++er for example).

Pilots or Spotters? This forum is a runaway where many are in denial.

It's closed!