Three Ryanair "emergency" landings in Valencia on same day

[cnc]

Where did I state pprune as a source of info?
I did quote an opinion from Pprune, though.

in general, not specific the source for this topic

EBAW Flyer is correct, there are so many parameters that play, that if you weren't in the cockpit that day, you should refrain from criticizing.

well then you should also refrain from defending

[Inquirer]

there are so many parameters that play, that if you weren't in the cockpit that day, you should refrain from criticizing.

We definitely should not!

What happened that day was pure statistical sampling: on a randomly selected day, a meaningful number of flights from numerous airlines from around the world, all heading to Madrid, were forced to unexpectedly demonstrate the robustness of their contingency planning in routine operations, not under some theoretical best case scenario, but in case they are forced to deviate from their intended flightplan for a reason beyond their own influence: no less than 3 problematic cases emerged from this real world sample, all of which were Ryanair flights!

I am working in QC and using statistical sampling as one of the means of doing my work and I can tell you this is a statistical deviation which screams loudly for further analysis and urgent structural rectification, not so much because multiple Ryanair flights ended up in an emergency situation that day, but because this airline appears to be the only one of the whole sample population ending up in such an unwanted state.

Ryanair clearly was the weakest link that day and I'd really like to see authorities dig deep into this to find out just why they were the only ones who had to put extra stressload on an already stressed system and as such risk causing cascade problems for all users of that system, i.e. the other airlines and passengers in the air!

Analysing statistical deviations can help to detect structural faults well before they start to cause dangerous systemic failures: better not ignore them like you are much too eager to do here, just because the deviator is not of a convenient nature to you...

[Homo Aeroportus]

@Flaner : Facts please.
Where did you get "The Ryanair pilots in this case had more than minimum fuel :
How else would they be able to hold 70 minutes at MAD, fly to a second choice and far alternate like VLC, hold again for 30 minutes at VLC before they landed .."

Did they hold at MAD?
Did they hold at VLC?

Possible answers are :
Yes,
No,
I don't know

Mucho thanks,

H.A.

[shockcooling]

Guys, got some info from flightradar24.com
This is one of the RYR flights


http://img6.imageshack.us/img6/58/ryrj.jpg

[cnc]

cool thx but is flightradar24 accurate and reliable?

[fcw]

@Flaner : Facts please.
Did they hold at MAD?
Did they hold at VLC?
Possible answers are :
Yes,
No,
I don't knowH.A.

Did you bother to read the previous posts???
I was there, so know hat I am talking about.
YES they held at MAD, planned alternate ZAZ became unavailable due to squal line.
Yes they were holding at VLC with an EAT allowing to land with minimum reserve fuel when a Lan Chile, who was behind, requested priority due to abnormal engine parameters. VLC app decided to hold all arrivals till LAN was on the ground and announced an extra holding of 15-20 mil. Because of this the Ryans decleared emergency . BruAir landed before LAN but was minimum fuel as well, so would have had exactly the same problem when they would have left BRU half an hour later.

[B.Inventive]

Fuel emergency, 3 times like this is in all honesty not a pilot error.
The conditions were apparantly not in favor of anyone.
Wether it was ryanair or another airline, honestly there may be a small link between their fuel policy and this occasion, but you can't plan fuel expecting to hold at dest, then hold at alternate for a lot longer than is realistic, and not go into your final reserve fuel.
This is simply an extreme case.

on the other hand if it is true RYR 'forces' pilots to limit their margin to 300kg, they are playing a statistical game, and a potentially dangerous one too, certainly if they actively reprimand personell for taking more fuel and increasing safety that way.

[OO-ITR]

Interesting article (in french)

http://www.lalibre.be/actu/internationa ... anair.html

[sean1982]

Clearly someone who has been let go and feel he has to get closure by talking rubbish in the press. I'm not saying all of it is not true, partly yes, but safety is and always will be our crews primary concern. I have never ever felt unsafe when working, ever.

[airazurxtror]

Those who inspire attacks on Ryanair safety (to try and level the playing field ?) play a very dangerous game - it could well turn against them : no airline is immune from an accident.


http://www.lalibre.be/actu/internationa ... anair.html

"On se dirige vers un crash chez Ryanair"

[Inquirer]

But who is playing a game then, in your eyes?

Other than affirmations of potentially worrying fuel limiting practices by people working at Ryanair -some of them claiming these strict methods are still just as safe, while colleagues of theirs claim they aren't any longer- I haven't seen any other airline publicly comment on the matter?

I suggest ryanair to let go of the inappropriate Calimero attitude and consider the fact that in their never ending search for ever more efficiency, this airline may actually have reached a hard limit indeed, or even ended up crossing it on some accounts!

Given the apparent internal controversy about this issue, they obviously seem to have ended up at the first stage and possibly even at the later, which shouldn't be a total surprise because when you keep shaving away margin, there is going to be a point where you will end up taking away too much, no matter what your trying to save on: be it fuel consumption at an airline, or the use of plastic granules like at my company.

To me as a passenger, it looks like this airline is simply unwilling to accept its pilots can not always have all the hind- and oversight prior to their flight as needed to operate with the absolutely lowest possible fuel quantity in all cases and under all circumstances, yet rather pushes them to plan for the best case, rather than the most likely one in order not to tank extra fuel and thus "waste some" which in hindsight wasnt needed after all.

[airazurxtror]

I stand by my statement here above.
To me, as a passenger, Ryanair is as safe as any airline, and safer than most - especially those on the brink of financial collapse.

[Inquirer]

I stand by my statement here above.
To me, as a passenger, Ryanair is as safe as any airline, and safer than most - especially those on the brink of financial collapse.

Real world statistical sampling has irrefutably hown there's a potential hazard at RyanAir, however.

As both a passenger and QC manager, I can only say it's a real pitty they don't take up this unexpected opportunity to rectify asap what I would expect them to qualify as an unwanted weakness in their corporate operating methods and which just got highlighted by no less than 3 real events.

I know that at my company, whever I come across statistical deviations of this nature in our processes, we would see immediate remedy and support from all levels of management, rather than the somewhat arrogant attitude of infallability which got demonstrated here by -amongst others- the CEO.

PS: why do you use the italic print for 'as a passenger'???

[cnc]

I stand by my statement here above.
To me, as a passenger, Ryanair is as safe as any airline, and safer than most - especially those on the brink of financial collapse.

cabin crew don't have any idea about fuel on board let alone pax...
just pick any cabin crew out and ask her if she know how much fuel they loaded or how much fuel the aircraft burned. none will know.

[Airbus330lover]

Who is the effective responsaible on board ?
Who has to bring the plane and the passengers at destination ?
Who has to find a solution in case of problem ?

Not the CEO nor the CFO but the captain and the pilot !

Putting pressure on this guys can be criminal

[OO-ITR]

Those who inspire attacks on Ryanair safety (to try and level the playing field ?) play a very dangerous game - it could well turn against them : no airline is immune from an accident.


http://www.lalibre.be/actu/internationa ... anair.html

"On se dirige vers un crash chez Ryanair"

Ever heard of freedom of speech? Or is that only valid when you wanna bash SN ...again???
To my knowledge there was only Ryanair declaring an emergency...3 times. No other airline and I assume a lot of carriers were involved. If you can't live with the facts, then that is your problem.

[OO-ITR]

I stand by my statement here above.
To me, as a passenger, Ryanair is as safe as any airline, and safer than most - especially those on the brink of financial collapse.

Of course RYR won't be on the brink of bankruptsy. They hardly take enough fuel to perform a flight. Lol

[airazurxtror]

If you think that all is well and perfect at other airlines, read this book :
viewtopic.php?f=17&t=46495
It will put things in perspective ...
(and he had also a case of not enough fuel ...)

[nordikcam]

But how we can be satisfied with such a level of exchanges deserving of a bad sandbox ! It is pathetic! On the other hand why to send back towards Sabena what touches Ryanair ? Perspective of what ? Pitoyable !

[cnc]

If you think that all is well and perfect at other airlines, read this book :
viewtopic.php?f=17&t=46495
It will put things in perspective ...
(and he had also a case of not enough fuel ...)

care to explain the link between the sabena flights and this topic?