What's happening in Charleroi and Maastricht

[Jense]

I see that many of you post the Avro as a cat II aircraft, this is not correct, all avro's of sn brussels airlines are CAT IIIb as well as all pilots

Yes indeed you're right. But the problem with the SN's is that the BAe 146-200 isn't certified on CAT IIIb operations. That's what causes so much problems to them in fog.

[an-148]

@ acid drop
with the bad weather we have sometimes, for sure!
to your second remark, for sure the belgian airports outside BRU (LGG, OST, CRL, ANR) should take more and more importance: good for the country and jobs!

[beaucaire]

Urgent Information - Last Updated: 21 Nov 05 12:57
Due to low visibility (fog) Frankfurt Hahn, Brussels Charleoi, Paris Beauvais airports our below legal operating limits, aircraft are currently unable to land. All flights operating this morning to Frankfurt Hann, Brussels Charleoi, Paris Beauvais have been forced to divert to alternate airports. While this is outside our control we will endeavour to minimise disruption to schedule. Any passenger effected by a flight cancellation make call our dedicated reservation line at 00353 1 249 7700

[an-148]

@beaucaire:
Charleroi seems again operational (have a look to their website under "arrivees")

[beaucaire]

But the issue regarding fog-related diversions remains - as long as FR and the airports they use in the "fog-corners" of Europe are not compatible ILS Cat 3b they face the thunder of angry clients.This can back-fire dramatically through media-articles,discrediting their way of handling bad-weather flights.

[an-148]

agree

[Airbus330lover]

But the issue regarding fog-related diversions remains - as long as FR and the airports they use in the "fog-corners" of Europe are not compatible ILS Cat 3b they face the thunder of angry clients.This can back-fire dramatically through media-articles,discrediting their way of handling bad-weather flights.

Once again....
Not compatible is a problem
Leaving the pax without any solution (LGG for example) is commercially very BAD

[an-148]

I've just read on the forum of opinion airways http://opinionsairways.forumactif.com/v ... =2940#2940 that the transfer HAS actually been organized!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
To be sure, we would need eyewitnesses !

[Airbus330lover]

I've just read on the forum of opinion airways (http://opinionsairways.forumactif.com/v ... =2940#2940 ) that the transfer HAS actually been organized!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
To be sure, we would need eyewitnesses !

Perhaps they read the forum !!

[Rayman]

I've just read on the forum of opinion airways http://opinionsairways.forumactif.com/v ... =2940#2940 that the transfer HAS actually been organized!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
To be sure, we would need eyewitnesses !

.....Do these stupid pax really expect the same level....if tomorrow a new airline offers lower fares still, all the stupid pax will switch to that one.

Don't tell me you've been "chatting" 2 pages, almost fftopic: , prejudging something that didn't happen.
And everything have been teasingly said indeed: about maintenance, pilots, aircrafts, silly (>30mln) passengers etc.
As I said elsewhere: the allegations on FR are made here before the news is spread. Really a way to cover some chauvinistic mess!
Such a chitchat is understandable among the “stupid pax” (or let’s better use some respect by calling them “less experienced pax”), but not in a respectful aviation site.

Please, take a very good look at your own backyard first, then judge your neighbor's one.

[pascal-air]

I disagree strongly: most people never read the small prints

Very likely, indeed. Is that FR's fault? Do these stupid pax really expect the same level of service from a LCC than from a main line carrier?

Allow me to disagree: it is the pax that care for low fares and nothing else. Otherwise they'd never book on this airline. Decent gestures would be quite useless for FR: if tomorrow a new airline offers lower fares still, all the stupid pax will switch to that one. Even if there's no seats in the planes and/or no toilets. Leaving FR with no pax - so why any decency? Low fares = low fares. The other airlines keep on attracting pax, surely that must mean something? No?
Apart from that, I think you are dishonest in applying the word "screwed". If FR were really incorrect, they'd soon have a bunch of lawyers on their back. They offer small service for small money - what's wrong with that?
People who expect a Trabant to be as fast, comfortable and reliable as a Mercedes are simply fools. I can't pity them.

I am disagree with you. In fact, the pax doesn't know anything about planes and safety. And for sure, Low Costs are using this aspect in order to sell their tickets. So I think that the right direction would be to force Low Cost companies to explicitly inform the customer about the service or the non-service they are providing to them. Otherwise, I would feel right to explain in which terms the services is strongly degraded. And sorry for all Low Cost staff, but I am convinced (but this is only my opinion) that Low Cost staff is less, in general, experienced/trained than other companies. I have some examples, but just to take Ryanair, they made in the past serious error that could cost some lives ! Hopefully, everything was right, but just by luck !

[Rayman]

I wasn't pointing at you, Jan. And maybe I didn't make myself clear.

It's not the point of getting what you pay for, the point is that it's often so black and white described, understandable in a respectable aviation forum, as if IATA carriers and LCC are from two different worlds.
Some IATA carriers are even worse than LCC, such as among LCC's some are better than others. But still it depends on circumstances and expectations.

Let’s put it in this way:

1) Due to heavy fog on wide region, a “son of a b**ch” airline having 91% of the fleet with CAT3 and 2.5 yrs avg age cancel flights because the dest. airport is not CAT3 equipped.
They tell pax that they can be rebooked to a next flight at no costs or carried to an alternate. Nothing is granted because outside own control and because it’s a “son of a b**ch” carrier.
The “less experienced pax” says: “S**t why did I choose such a son of a b**ch airline”.
I say: “LGG is fine, at least we are moving and gettig closer”.

2) Due to heavy fog on wide region, a “decent” IATA airline having 85% of the fleet without CAT3 and 9.4 yrs avg age cancel flights.
They tell pax that they will be rebooked to a next flight hours later or carried to an alternate. No DBC is granted because outside own control (bull s**t, others are flying). Maybe you get a cup of coffee meanwhile.
The “less experienced pax” says: “thanks for the solution”.
I say: “S**t why did I choose such a cheap made airline”.

The primary product (in particular short haul) is still to carry from A to B. As long as a carrier, with high movement frequency, can show figures above 95% in terms of punctuality and regularity and baggage handling is IMO worth the risk; all complementary and marketing approaches are IMO bull s**t, for the unexperienced are biblic (doesn't mean they are stupid or don't deserve pity).

[Avro]

Please guys stay polite and calm in this discussion.

And Rayman. I see a lot of *** words in your post. Please watch your language otherwise some censoring will be done.

Chris

[Rayman]

And Rayman. I see a lot of *** words in your post. Please watch your language otherwise some censoring will be done.

Well that wasn't bothering me. At least the msg was clear!
But I'm getting tired - better keep my big trap shut for this night.

Jan, thanks.

[Airbus330lover]

I wasn't pointing at you, Jan. And maybe I didn't make myself clear.

It's not the point of getting what you pay for, the point is that it's often so black and white described, understandable in a respectable aviation forum, as if IATA carriers and LCC are from two different worlds.
Some IATA carriers are even worse than LCC, such as among LCC's some are better than others. But still it depends on circumstances and expectations.

Let’s put it in this way:

1) Due to heavy fog on wide region, a “son of a b**ch” airline having 91% of the fleet with CAT3 and 2.5 yrs avg age cancel flights because the dest. airport is not CAT3 equipped.
They tell pax that they can be rebooked to a next flight at no costs or carried to an alternate. Nothing is granted because outside own control and because it’s a “son of a b**ch” carrier.
The “less experienced pax” says: “S**t why did I choose such a son of a b**ch airline”.
I say: “LGG is fine, at least we are moving and gettig closer”.

2) Due to heavy fog on wide region, a “decent” IATA airline having 85% of the fleet without CAT3 and 9.4 yrs avg age cancel flights.
They tell pax that they will be rebooked to a next flight hours later or carried to an alternate. No DBC is granted because outside own control (bull s**t, others are flying). Maybe you get a cup of coffee meanwhile.
The “less experienced pax” says: “thanks for the solution”.
I say: “S**t why did I choose such a cheap made airline”.

The primary product (in particular short haul) is still to carry from A to B. As long as a carrier, with high movement frequency, can show figures above 95% in terms of punctuality and regularity and baggage handling is IMO worth the risk; all complementary and marketing approaches are IMO bull s**t, for the unexperienced are biblic (doesn't mean they are stupid or don't deserve pity).

About IATA, my only opinion in the forum was about exchange off pax if necessary. In this case it's regulated between airlines and the pax can travel (eventually with airport change... BRU in this case due to the lack of reaction of FR to LGG!)

[airazurxtror]

According to the BSCA Manager (on the TV yesterday evening) there is severe fog statistically only ten days a year at Charleroi. It thus seemed more important to build first a new air terminal rather than implementing better landing aids - they had to choose, as they don't have the money to do the two things at the same time.

[Rayman]

About IATA, my only opinion in the forum was about exchange off pax if necessary. In this case it's regulated between airlines and the pax can travel...

Not all carriers, even if participating in IATA clearing house sampling, have bilateral FIM (Flight Interruption Manifest) agreements in place.

...(eventually with airport change... BRU in this case due to the lack of reaction of FR to LGG!)

As a matter of fact, it looks like FR flew straight into LGG and transfers have been organized.

Or maybe it was better if FR staff would have uses their head only to hang the ears and repro pax e.g. from GRO (Girona) to BCN by bus, then with other different carriers via other different gateways and hours connecting time to BRU (where no transfer is waiting)? And the last stretch for some was FRA-BRU, some on SN and some on LH. In BRU is suddenly foggy, LH leaves but SN doesn't because of CAT. SN can't do anything because outside their control (censored in advance) and again stranded pax and again a new thread to paint FR.

There was once a King
seated on the sofà
who asked his servant
to tell him a fairy story.
And the servant began:
There was once a King
seated on the sofà...