[gruez]

>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?

[PaulRobinson]

Sure, 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-pr... [1] https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-23686678

[sodality2]

All 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.

[throwaway290]

a 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

[rkomorn]

> (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]

but no one said they did illegal stuff;) just purposefully unsafer stuff than other airlines

strawman