3 ms·
>to flying with so little fuel that they regularly call fuel emergencies on approach. If you're talking about the recent incident, I thought that was because t
by gruez 1y ago
>to flying with so little fuel that they regularly call fuel emergencies on approach.
If you're talking about the recent incident, I thought that was because they tried landing several times at different airports? Is there any evidence that they routinely fly with less fuel buffer than other airlines?
- throwaway290 1y agoa lot of hearsay saying they pack less fuel than other airlines (but not below minimum required limit) in https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=45539943 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=45539943
- rkomorn 1y ago> (but not below minimum required limit) I hate just about everything I know about Ryanair but if they're not below required limits, then I'd say they're not the problem and the point is moot.
- throwaway290 1y agobut no one said they did illegal stuff;) just purposefully unsafer stuff than other airlines strawman
- PaulRobinson 1y agoSure, I first heard about this years ago when Channel 4 (a UK broadcaster) ran a program about pilots stating they were concerned about the policy. There had been outrage within the aviation industry after three fuel emergencies in one day at one airport. [0] Ryanair sued [1], and lost: Channel 4 had engaged in fair journalism, it turns out. Seems they're still at it, hence the recent incident. [0] https://www.eurocockpit.eu/news/fuelling-debate-safety-vs-profitability https://www.eurocockpit.eu/news/fuelling-debate-safety-vs-pr... [1] https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-23686678 https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-23686678
- sodality2 1y agoAll three flights were diverted due to weather, and none of them fell below the legally required amount of fuel. One has to wonder if it’s really reasonable to criticize them in this instance if a single weather event affected them all.