Ryanair claimed unsafe in upcoming UK TV documentary

regi · Post by **regi** » 11 Feb 2006, 21:34

O'Learry said in the interview for the Belgian press that Zaventem will never be an option because the "transit" time is too long. (wrong expression , can't find the right word for the time between landing , disembarking , reloading and departure)

Avro · Post by **Avro** » 11 Feb 2006, 21:39

it's turn around

regi · Post by **regi** » 11 Feb 2006, 21:57

thanks

horizon · Post by **horizon** » 12 Feb 2006, 16:36

Of course mr teach, maintainance of the aircrafts takes a littlebit more than 20 minutes and in an hangar probably,but things can happen when you have little time too look after eventual problems. And i Apologise of my bad english cant help that i am not born on the islands or use it frequently

If the plane is clean or not that is another issue, but i have experience when parts are repelling away from an boeing engine -lowcost airline.

Avro · Post by **Avro** » 12 Feb 2006, 16:53

horizon wrote: but i have experience when parts are repelling away from an boeing engine -lowcost airline.

Please elaborate

Buzz · Post by **Buzz** » 12 Feb 2006, 17:00

horizon wrote:of course they will be unsafe in the future, 20-25 minutes is not enough to do the maintainance properly. They have new aircrafts so in the beginning nothing will happen but after a while and with tired staff everything is possible. Ryan air is cheap but maybe will this cheap ticket be an ticket to ......... -fly with another company if possible eventhough they are expencier.

Ryanair began their LCC model with BAC1-11's and replaced them with B732's, wich flew untill late last year. They all had the 25 minute turnaround time, and nothing ever happened.
In fact, I believe that all LCC airlines (or most anyway) have the 25 minute turnaround time, also easyJet's older 733's etc. It's an essential part of their bussiness model to keep airplanes in the air making money.

Your argument just doesn't make sense...

Buzz · Post by **Buzz** » 12 Feb 2006, 17:13

horizon wrote: If the plane is clean or not that is another issue, but i have experience when parts are repelling away from an boeing engine -lowcost airline.

And I have heard from the brother of my mother's sister-in-laws daughter that...
Heard about the SIA jet that lost a wing coverplate some time ago? I believe it crashed on a car... Stuff like that happens to everyone.

When will you all just accept the fact that Ryanair isn't any different on the safety issue than SNBA or any other (western) airline?

There are a lot of checks done every day by aviation officials from the various countries FR (and all the other airlines) fly to. They wouldn't hesitate a second to ban FR if they would be unsafe.
A crash or serious safety issue is probably the only thing that could kill (or at least seriously hurt) FR. MOL knows that an has openly said it himself.

horizon · Post by **horizon** » 12 Feb 2006, 22:17

It can be the manufacturers fault as well, but my experience was not in a dreaming stage or told by another one. The human factor can be a big problem after all-ryan air is pressing maximum of their staff.
Buzz- it is not that i want an accident to occur to then tell i was right-but i am not sure that ryan air has 100% under control with their expanding right now.

Avro · Post by **Avro** » 12 Feb 2006, 23:00

Dear horizon,

I repeat myself, but can you please tell us more precisely what you saw ???

Chris

Buzz · Post by **Buzz** » 13 Feb 2006, 00:10

Has anyone bothered to read the correspondence between MOL and Channel 4 on the FR website? It is really interesting and funny!

This is just a advertising stunt from Channel 4. Of course there will be some problems here and there, but I would be really surprised if they can uncover underlying FR-rules wich are wrong...

For example: it is really funny how they keep saying that their undercover reporters 'heard' from other crewmembers that they had to work very long days and very hard, when they have to admit at the same time that their 2 undercover reporters had weeks of 30 and 37 hours on average. It reminded me of the A.net 'my brothers girlfriends grandma's daughter works for XYZ and has heard ...' nonsense.

Also, they want MOL to give and interview to explain his side, but they don't want to do it live. They want the right to edit and adapt it to their liking. Smart move from MOL to politely refuse under those conditions...

I think they're more interested in ratings and spectacular TV than in an objective documentary.

Anyone from the UK who will watch tomorrow and can give us a summary?

hakan · Post by **hakan** » 13 Feb 2006, 09:12

We are all going with what media says and speculate. Anyone has any evidence of wrongdoing should go to EASA to complain, otherwise we should not judge the other people or companies with what see in TV (one sided story). As said before, if you pay for cheap tickets don't expect first class service.

horizon · Post by **horizon** » 13 Feb 2006, 12:34

Dear Avro!

Just little bit before landing i saw from my window(exit row 737-300) that a screw slowly on the engine went up and vanished and when we landed the engines started to cool-using the wind and when the engine was partly open one part flew away from it. When we landed and i went out i was going stright to the mechanics, they were surprised when i told them what i saw-they told me that the mechanism is working like that and that i should not worry. After picking up my luggage the plane was still there and the technicians around the engine for a while more than usual.
I never heard something after that, from maintainance or newspapers or something elsewhere-maybe i was seeing in my dream

or they fixed the problem without biggercomplications.

Avro · Post by **Avro** » 13 Feb 2006, 13:29

horizon wrote: Just little bit before landing i saw from my window(exit row 737-300) that a screw slowly on the engine went up and vanished and when we landed the engines started to cool-using the wind and when the engine was partly open one part flew away from it.

First of all Ryanair doesn't operate any B737-300, was it an ex-buzz plane maybe ?

Anyway, what do you mean by cooling down the engine ?? Do you mean reverse thrust ? That's done to slow down the plane not to cool down the engine ?

Was it a big piece that vanished while reversing ?

I'm curious

Chris

airazurxtror · Post by **airazurxtror** » 13 Feb 2006, 14:38

Eurapart wrote:
I have logged more than 60 flights on Ryanair, and I have quite enjoyed them - without having ever felt myself in danger ...!
Was that for business or pleasure? Do you consider the effect on the environment of flying that much?

John

Dear John,
Thank you for your reaction.
I was not adressing the environmental issue. There is much to be said concerning the effect of human activities - be it for business or pleasure - on the environment. Everybody - including me - is inclined to blame somebody else - but I think nobody would agree to suppress all the things that can influence environment. (This being a forum for aviation enthusiasts, I don't think many readers would like to dispense with flying !)
And, as regards aviation, I don't see what difference it makes to the environment if somebody is flying for business rather than for pleasure.
Michel

horizon · Post by **horizon** » 13 Feb 2006, 16:25

Hello again!
Well i never said it was ryanair but a lowcostcarrier within scandinavia goodjet-went bancrupcy some years ago. You have parts on the engine too who lower the speed and in the same way cooling the engine-the wind is doing the work. A metall piece went of during the landing not big but i could see it because i was focusing on the engine. some of us have this habit

-never saw in a paper or report that something was wrong with the engine afterwards

regi · Post by **regi** » 13 Feb 2006, 22:05

we know what happens if parts of airplanes remain on the concrete, untill a Concorde or so passes over it.

Avro · Post by **Avro** » 13 Feb 2006, 23:33

horizon wrote:You have parts on the engine too who lower the speed and in the same way cooling the engine-the wind is doing the work. A metall piece went of during the landing not big but i could see it because i was focusing on the engine.

Excuse me my ignorance, but why should an engine be cooled that way during landing and can you explain me the mechanism with more details if you can ? I'm curious. I'm not speaking of the thrust reversers mechanism, but the cooling thing

we know what happens if parts of airplanes remain on the concrete, untill a Concorde or so passes over it.

That's why frequent runway checks are done.

Chris

Junkers52 · Post by **Junkers52** » 13 Feb 2006, 23:38

First post

I'm in the UK have just seen the Ryanair dispatches programme. Nothing too suprising, but then there seems to be a general acceptance of companies that are quite frankly the 'pits' as long as they deliver 'me' a cheap product.

What this programme really opened up was the dismal employment conditions of this company. You can visit the Ryanair website and join the joke, they offer 'careers'. Cabin crews paying £1400 to get 'trained', £25.00 a month for uniforms, are pilots still charged £50.00 to have their cv's considered?

Over the past decade the whole airline industry has had to follow the lead of these 'sweat shops'. As prices have fallen so careers have been cut short, replaced by cheap young employees that have low wages and zero benefits. Careers in the airline industry are a thing of the past thanks to the likes of Ryanair.

One thing the arrogant Mr Leary does not have control over is the one thing that makes his planes something other than glorified tin cans, fuel. And if you haven't heard oil is a finite source that is reaching a critical historical production point. Currently trading at $61.00 a barrel, Ryanair's hedging at $49.00 unwinds at the end of March. O'Leary reckons Ryanair will be out at $100.00. Maybe, but I reckon it will be much lower and he will be squirming. Perhaps global warming will be given a break and the Irish Tinker can get on his bike...

Eurapart · Post by **Eurapart** » 13 Feb 2006, 23:52

Junkers52 said:

One thing the arrogant Mr Leary does not have control over is the one thing that makes his planes something other than glorified tin cans, fuel. And if you haven't heard oil is a finite source that is reaching a critical historical production point. Currently trading at $61.00 a barrel, Ryanair's hedging at $49.00 unwinds at the end of March. O'Leary reckons Ryanair will be out at $100.00. Maybe, but I reckon it will be much lower and he will be squirming. Perhaps global warming will be given a break and the Irish Tinker can get on his bike...

My video recoded a blank screen because my scart lead wasn't in properly, so I didn't see the programme. You can tell I hardly ever watch the box anymore. The point you make above is something I too had noticed. Mr O'Leary is always spinning Ryanair's policy of no fuel surcharges. Come the end of March and fuel is still around $60 a barrel or even more, what will he do? I think we'd notice if he puts it on the airport charges.

Michel,
You are correct in saying that there is no difference between business and leisure travel as far as the environment goes. Excessive air / car travel just depletes a limited supply of oil faster. This is an aviation site, so I am not advocating the destruction of the airline industry. Actually Ryanair is one of the least damaging as their aircraft have very high passenger loadings and are pretty efficient consumption wise.

John

Eurapart · Post by **Eurapart** » 14 Feb 2006, 00:01

Junker52,

I didn't pick up on that "Ryanair will be out at $100 a barrel". He has hundreds of Boeings on order. It would get very messy over in Seattle.

John