Jetairfly in 2015

[JamesD]

I would be surprised if they want to keep the old bird in there own fleet... But you never know...

[Passenger]

Too bad the 'Belgian' name Jetair(fly) will disappear to become TUI

Will it? I know that the rebranding was announced in april but afaik not a single plane, website, etc... is being rebranded at the moment and wasn't it the plan to start early September?

All aircraft will indeed get TUI colours and names, even the Jetairfly. And the official company names in all countries will indeed become TUI. But the local brand names will not disappear where they are too strong to give up. Example: "Jetair". And even if all local brand names have to disappear, the have a problem in Belgium with Sunjets/Sunjets.be: this touroperator has no budget for an expensive name change (yes, I know Sunjets nv/sa integrated into Jetair in 2002). I even wonder if the name "Jetairfly" will disappear.

[Bralo20]

I would be surprised if they want to keep the old bird in there own fleet... But you never know...

I agree, I don't think it's the best bird to expand the fleet. It's a 14 year old ex-Ryanair bird and flew for a bit less then 8 years with Ryanair (they probably got rid of it just before the first D-check). It was bought by CIT from Ryanair who leased it to Canjet.

CIT can probably sell it quite cheap but since it needs another D-check in a few years I doubt it's the best investment.

[ostair]

I would be surprised if they want to keep the old bird in there own fleet... But you never know...

I agree, I don't think it's the best bird to expand the fleet. It's a 14 year old ex-Ryanair bird and flew for a bit less then 8 years with Ryanair (they probably got rid of it just before the first D-check). It was bought by CIT from Ryanair who leased it to Canjet.

CIT can probably sell it quite cheap but since it needs another D-check in a few years I doubt it's the best investment.

Agree she is a noisy one and it would give more ammunition for the anto EBOS folks.

[JAF737]

No "worries"... OO-CAN will leave the fleet and will be ferried back to Canada later this month.

[sn26567]

Arkefly will officially be renamed TUI on October 1st. I don't know the date for Jetairfly, but it will also happen.

From an answer given by Jetairfly on Facebook, it seems that the conversion from Jetairfly to TUI will occur in 18 (!) months from now...

[Bralo20]

From an answer given by Jetairfly on Facebook, it seems that the conversion from Jetairfly to TUI will occur in 18 (!) months from now...

Which is the same as saying we are going to take the "wait and see" approach. I guess they'll see what happens with Arke (& co), how people are going to react on the rebrand and probably only going for an indefinite rebrand when the results are positive. Seems they aren't quite sure the rebranding is the right thing to do?

[Passenger]

From an answer given by Jetairfly on Facebook, it seems that the conversion from Jetairfly to TUI will occur in 18 (!) months from now...

Which is the same as saying we are going to take the "wait and see" approach. I guess they'll see what happens with Arke (& co), how people are going to react on the rebrand and probably only going for an indefinite rebrand when the results are positive. Seems they aren't quite sure the rebranding is the right thing to do?

We'll soon know: next Thursday, Arke (the touroperator) should be renamed into TUI:
http://www.arke.nl/klantenservice/?faqnodeid=13737

Belgium is more important for TUI then the Netherlands: TUI Belgium has a far bigger market share (%) then TUI NL.

[sn26567]

A young disabled man disembarked from a flight because of his breathing apparatus

A mishap that is not soon forget! Mohamed Kanbour suffering from myopathy and severely disabled, was disembarked Friday from a Jetairfly flight to Metz from Marrakech because the captain considered his respirator could be a "dangerous object". The young man of 20, who was travelling with his parents, had already taken place in the Jetairfly plane that was to take him home in Moselle when the pilot insisted he back down, because he was unable to present a medical certificate.

The young man and his parents, who say they were not informed of why they were asked to get off the plane, have announced their intention to file a complaint, in France and Morocco.

The young man, who goes "three to four times a year" to Morocco, had made the outward journey bluntly, with the same equipment and the same company according to his family. Jetairfly has written to the family via a Facebook message that "denied boarding was related to international legislation on the transport of dangerous objects that the captain applied for reasons of security." Besides his wheelchair, the young handicapped was equipped with an "anti-apnea during sleep" machine, which the company seems to have mistaken for a device with an oxygen tank, said the sister of the young man.

The young man and his parents, staying in a hotel in Morocco, do not know when or how they will be able to return to France, according to their families.

[sean1982]

All types of portable oxygen concentators need to be declared beforehand (and only certain models are allowed per OPS manual) and need to be accompagnied by a medical certificate. If anything is missing the crew has no other option than to refuse travel.

[sn26567]

Thanks for your explanation Sean. I only reported the facts and did not imply in any way that Jetairfly was at fault. According to your post, they did exactly what they had to do.

[sean1982]

At least that's how it is at my company, but I would assume that it is similar at JAF as those are EASA regulations. Had a similar incident in pmi a few months ago where I had to offload a passenger. Not a nice situation, but as a crewmember your hands are tied

[nordikcam]

I heard this morning on the radio Europe 1 that this family had arrived from Metz by the same company. Different configuration between outbound flight and inbound ?

[sn26567]

I heard this morning on the radio Europe 1 that this family had arrived from Metz by the same company. Different configuration between outbound flight and inbound ?

Or rather difference of appreciation between the two captains?

[Passenger]

The young man and his parents, who say they were not informed of why they were asked to get off the plane, have announced their intention to file a complaint, in France and Morocco.

I strongly advise them to look for an out of court settlement with Jetairfly. I don't know what French and/or Moroccon courts would do, but Belgian courts would reject the claim because 1. the decision was taken by the captain, and 2. because the decision was taken for a safety/security reason: "...because the captain considered his respirator could be a "dangerous object".

[airazurxtror]

I strongly advise them to look for an out of court settlement with Jetairfly. I don't know what French and/or Moroccon courts would do, but Belgian courts would reject the claim because 1. the decision was taken by the captain, and 2. because the decision was taken for a safety/security reason: "...because the captain considered his respirator could be a "dangerous object".

- with Jetairfly, there is no such thing as an out of court settlement. I would strongly advise the prejudiced passengers to take a lawyer.
- it's a flight between Morocco and France, the Belgian courts have no business there.
- a captain can make a mistake same as anybody else, and if so he (or his employer) must pay for the damage it caused. The fact that these passengers were accepted on the outbound flight is a good argument for them.

Besides :
http://www.rtl.be/info/monde/internatio ... 61365.aspx
-Jetairfly était injoignable samedi pour répondre aux questions de l'AFP : usual PR of JAF.
-Contacté par l'AFP, l'agence de voyages ayant vendu les billets d'avion assure que "tout avait été signalé, comme à l'accoutumée, à la compagnie aérienne Jetairfly qui avait donné son accord". "C'était la première fois qu'il voyageait avec un appareil respiratoire" mais ce point avait été "signalé à la compagnie", a ajouté une responsable de l'agence Leclerc Voyages à Creutzwald (Moselle)

[sean1982]

The young man and his parents, who say they were not informed of why they were asked to get off the plane, have announced their intention to file a complaint, in France and Morocco.

I strongly advise them to look for an out of court settlement with Jetairfly. I don't know what French and/or Moroccon courts would do, but Belgian courts would reject the claim because 1. the decision was taken by the captain, and 2. because the decision was taken for a safety/security reason: "...because the captain considered his respirator could be a "dangerous object".

The passenger was refused because the passenger broke the terms and conditions of carriage. In my opinion the carrier doesnt have to pay anything, and any payment made would be a commercial gesture rather than a penalty

Just declaring beforehand that you have a portable o2 concentrator is NOT enough, azuxtror. It needs to be an approved model by the company AND the passenger needs to have a medical declaration by his doctor. If any paperwork is missing the passenger needs to be refused.

[Passenger]

with Jetairfly, there is no such thing as an out of court settlement.

Jetair/Jetairfly makes out of court settlements on a daily basis, I can assure you from first hand.

I would strongly advise the prejudiced passengers to take a lawyer.

I only advise them to take a lawyer when these costs will be less then the claim they have (unless they have a legal assistance Insurance).

it's a flight between Morocco and France, the Belgian courts have no business there.

I didn’t say that the Belgian courts have no business in this case. I only wrote: I don't know what French and/or Moroccon courts would do, but Belgian courts would reject the claim because…

a captain can make a mistake same as anybody else, and if so he (or his employer) must pay for the damage it caused.

No sir. Not in aviation law. When the captain decides that there is a safety risk, it is irrelevant what is proven afterwards (example about the gravity of the risk). The captain stated that he regarded the presence of the medical equipment as a safety risk, so it was a safety risk. Doens’t matter what is proven afterwards. Just like every precaution landing for those dozens of notes found in the toilet “there is a bomb on board”. It is proven that all those messages were wrong/false. But were the captains wrong in their decision to divert/land? No. Why? Because they thought there was a safety/security risk.

[airazurxtror]

Just declaring beforehand that you have a portable o2 concentrator is NOT enough, azuxtror. It needs to be an approved model by the company AND the passenger needs to have a medical declaration by his doctor. If any paperwork is missing the passenger needs to be refused.

If so, why was he accepted on the outbound flight ?
If he had been refused on the outbound flight, he would have go back home and the prejudice would have been much less than being stranded at Marrakech with his family.

http://www.rtbf.be/info/societe/detail_ ... id=9104837
http://www.metronews.fr/info/jetairfly- ... LODeBQBjs/

Le jeune homme, qui se rend "trois à quatre fois par an" au Maroc, avait effectué le trajet aller sans ambages, avec le même équipement et sur la même compagnie.

La compagnie a indiqué à la famille, via un message sur Facebook, que "le refus d'embarquement était lié à la législation internationale en matière de transport d'objets dangereux que le commandant a appliquée pour des raisons de sécurité".

le jeune handicapé était équipé d'un appareil anti-apnée du sommeil, que la compagnie semble avoir confondu avec un appareil muni d'une bouteille d'oxygène.

[Passenger]

Just declaring beforehand that you have a portable o2 concentrator is NOT enough, azuxtror. It needs to be an approved model by the company AND the passenger needs to have a medical declaration by his doctor. If any paperwork is missing the passenger needs to be refused.

If so, why was he accepted on the outbound flight ?

I don't know. Perhaps he wasn't noticed. Perhaps the cabin crew thought he had a certificate. Perhaps there was another reason we don't know.

If he had been refused on the outbound flight, he would have go back home and the prejudice would have been much less than being stranded at Marrakech with his family.

Indeed. That's why I suggested an out of court settlement with Jetairfly. Like Sean said: "...any payment made would be a commercial gesture rather than a penalty..."In the Netherlands, they use the French word "coulance" for this practice: we understand there is damage, we don't admit guilt but we offer you an amount to compensate your damage. In Dutch, "dading" - in English "settlement".