Ryanair - 5

[pwalhx]

I won't confess to being FR's greatest fan. I have experienced difficulties on several occasions with them.

However my philosophy, and I would suggest other peoeple's too, is you get what you pay for.

So if you pay £0.99 for a flight thats the level of service you get.

[James 1077]

Wow, I didn't realise Ryanair did 99p flights; every time I've looked at them they have been at least 25 times that amount.

But then I normally look at the price that I have to pay and not that of some marketing department.

[DONTTELLTHEPAX]

Well PMI rtn from STN just £45 in Jun try and beat that.

[pwalhx]

The significance of my comment was not in the 99p merely the fact peopel should accept what they pay for.

Next time I shall ensure I include the phrase excluding taxes and other extras.

[BRUpax]

Well PMI rtn from STN just £45 in Jun try and beat that.

Excellent price. However, PRICE is not everything for everyone on this planet! Some expect certain standards of SERVICE (and I'm not talking meals & champagne), and those of us that do also expect that we will have to pay a little more. I certainly won't pay the over inflated fares that some of the full service legacy airlines want to charge, but I do want a little peace of mind that if my flight is cancelled I won't be left high & dry. I fly regularly on several carriers at what I consider to be competitive fares FOR THE SERVICE PROVIDED. I'm sorry to say that carriers such as FR don't give me that peace of mind.

[CamelhAir]

People love us as we fly from regionals/local airports to Europe.

Only Micko has admitted we will soon be forced to fly from main airports. Why? Beacause there is only a finite level of customers wanting to fly to an airport that is nowhere near where we claim it to be.

We don't get delayed,

Becasue we cut corners that any authority other than the IAA would close us down for.

we don't lose bags,

Because we don't offer interline, which is where most bags get lost. Compared to non-interline bags of other airlines we don't do so well.

we don't operate cheap old aircraft, .

Old no. Cheap yes. And by selling said aircraft we make out money. We don't make in on transporting pax. Read the accounts.

we don't slap on fuel surcharges,

We do, we just don't call it a fuel surcharge. We call it a baggage fee, or a wheelchair levy or whatever you're having yourself. Its also disguised as the far higher level of so-called "taxes and charges" than anyone else charges

we do offer the lowest fares.]

The marketing department does. The passenger doesn't see them as often as we make out, not by a long shot. Particuarly as we misquote the actually fare charged as ancilliary revenue which conveniently disguises the amount the pax actually pay.

Good god, the constant flow of BS from the propaganda department is disgustingly sickening.

[maxalt]

Ryanair flights to New York come as news to New York
Richard Delevan , Sunday Tribune

'RYANAIR to launch Euro10 flights to US' made front-page headlines on both sides of the Atlantic, but we the media may have got a bit ahead of ourselves.

For one thing, Ryanair made it clear on Friday that the airline had no plans to launch a service.

If it happens, setting up a new airline will actually be Michael O'Leary's idea of a quiet retirement after he steps down as Ryanair CEO.

The "announcement" - in fact remarks by O'Leary originally made to Flight International magazine - was also news to the airport that would be the New York area linchpin of the reported transatlantic strategy, Long Island Islip MacArthur Airport.

Full disclosure: this reporter grew up two miles from the airport and worked there on school holidays as a skycap.

Islip MacArthur isn't exactly sleepy - two million passengers passed through last year, or less than 10% of the traffic at Dublin airport. It's also about 50 miles from New York, a geographical oddity Ryanair passengers will be used to. It has 92 passenger flights a day, with Southwest Airlines - Michael O'Leary's lowcost inspiration - as its anchor tenant.

One other health warning about a Ryanair transatlantic service for Euro10 one-way. The price in news stories should, like Ryanair adverts, have been accompanied by an asterisk. The "taxes, fees and charges" that Ryanair leaves off its list price would actually make a Euro10 Stansted to Islip flight cost over Euro225. Zoom already offers a Euro344 service from Gatwick to JFK. And that's for a round trip.

On the plus side, a station for the Long Island Rail Road is 2 miles away, with hourly service into Manhattan and also trains eastbound to the Hamptons. A shuttle bus connection costs $5.

The airport also has four runways, one stretching 7,000 feet long and built for military transports that use it as a base.

But the news came as a total surprise to Catherine Green, spokeswoman for the Town of Islip, the local authority which owns and operates the airport.

"We had a couple of phone calls yesterday from New York papers. You're the first from Ireland, " she said.

Any official approach from Ryanair? "Ryanair hasn't discussed this in any way with us."

"The airport is not set up at this time for international flights, " she said, though the airport terminal recently underwent a $60m expansion. "It would require infrastructure to allow for customs and immigration."

Might that require investment? "Oh yes."

Would the town pay for it?

"Well, it would require investment."

If the transatlantic dream becomes reality and they're negotiating with Michael O'Leary over a terminal, Islip officials won't know what hit them.

But there is a chance O'Leary isn't waiting for retirement to get things going. Local rumour has it that a company connected to O'Leary has already been in discussions with Comair, a subsidiary of Delta Air Lines, to sublet landing rights at Islip MacArthur for three domestic flights a week. Watch this space.

http://www.tribune.ie/article.tvt?_s...ibune/Business

[Euroboy39]

CamelhAir, your arguments against FR are slightly invalid- whether an airline offers interlining or not, it is still a good thing if it loses fewer bags- FR loses significantly fewer bags than most legacy carriers. If these seemingly wonderful airlines cannot interline without losing baggage, then maybe it is THESE airlines which are not providing the level of service which the customer requires.

FR do not just serve secondary airports- LPL is the main airport for the UK's fourth largest city (in population terms), RIX is the main airport for Latvian capital- Malmo, Madrid, Porto, Dublin, Edinburgh, Bratislava, Marseilles, Salzburg and Krakow are all the main airports for their cities- only in the largest cities, where slots are restricted and fees extremely high (London, Frankfurt, Paris, Stockholm) FR fly to smaller airports.

Yes, FR do slap on extra taxes after the promotional penny fares, but their average fare is still significantly less than other airlines- if you discounted taxes and charges from the all-inclusive fares of other airlines, my bet is you wouldn't find many penny fares there!

Moreover, FR operate newer aircraft, operate under the same EU safety certificates, have had NO aircraft accidents, are more punctual than most airlines, offer a wider network of destinations for the regional traveller (could you ever imagine BA opening up new routes for travellers in Liverpool?).

This site is too full of airline snobs who resent FR for taking the glamour and prestige out of flying, for normalising flying for the masses- for the majority, this is a good thing and hence FR has seen such tremendous growth in the past few years- if you can afford to fly in style, do so, but respect FR for providing what the common man (myself included) wants- cheap fares, regional options and nothing else. After all, the airline doesn't promise any more than that.

[maxalt]

CamelhAir, your arguments against FR are slightly invalid- whether an airline offers interlining or not, it is still a good thing if it loses fewer bags- FR loses significantly fewer bags than most legacy carriers. If these seemingly wonderful airlines cannot interline without losing baggage, then maybe it is THESE airlines which are not providing the level of service which the customer requires.

First - give us some links to these baggage statistics, I want to see the evidence.
Next - show us the breakdown in statistics for point to point baggage losses for FR and the other companies surveyed.
Leave comparisons with interline out of it - Ryanair don't interline bags.
You can compare interline baggage losses between those that interline if you wish, that would be usful. Anything referencing Ryanair and comparisons with interlining is plainly misleading and irrelevant.
Looking forward to all that - your call.

FR do not just serve secondary airports- LPL is the main airport for the UK's fourth largest city (in population terms), RIX is the main airport for Latvian capital- Malmo, Madrid, Porto, Dublin, Edinburgh, Bratislava, Marseilles, Salzburg and Krakow are all the main airports for their cities- only in the largest cities, where slots are restricted and fees extremely high (London, Frankfurt, Paris, Stockholm) FR fly to smaller airports.

Fine, lets see the evidence. Break it down into specific delays per airport, and show comparative delays of the major airlines which operate into those same airports.
Boy, you're gnnna be busy!

Yes, FR do slap on extra taxes after the promotional penny fares, but their average fare is still significantly less than other airlines- if you discounted taxes and charges from the all-inclusive fares of other airlines, my bet is you wouldn't find many penny fares there!

Yes, their average fare is below average (?), and thats just fine - for those who want a below average service. There is a definite market in that sector. Good luck to them.

Moreover, FR operate newer aircraft, operate under the same EU safety certificates, have had NO aircraft accidents, are more punctual than most airlines, offer a wider network of destinations for the regional traveller (could you ever imagine BA opening up new routes for travellers in Liverpool?).

No accidents? Bull****. You are wrong. Do you mean nobodys been killed yet? You are a patent amateur if thats how you measure safety.

This site is too full of airline snobs who resent FR for taking the glamour and prestige out of flying, for normalising flying for the masses- for the majority, this is a good thing and hence FR has seen such tremendous growth in the past few years- if you can afford to fly in style, do so, but respect FR for providing what the common man (myself included) wants- cheap fares, regional options and nothing else. After all, the airline doesn't promise any more than that.

This board is full of PILOTS who see through all the bull and propoganda sucked up by the naiive.

[MUFC_fan]

Well PMI rtn from STN just £45 in Jun try and beat that.

Thats quite expensive in my book!

I often use the BLK-STN shuttle and I have never payed more than £25 for a return flight in either 2006 or 2007 (plus Dec 05 when I made my first trip on the route.)

DUB is often around the same price. Currently you can get to both destinations from BLK return for £18.99 (FR even pay the £1.01 for the departure tax!)

I have also used FR on the BLK-GRO route twice(further than STN-PMI) and it only cost £25 each time (return)!

Congrats to FR for their perfectly respectable service and EXTREMELY LOW FARES!

All these flights include t&cs.

[CamelhAir]

have had NO aircraft accidents

The accepted standard within the industry is that an accident is the last warning of unsafety, most definitely not the first. Accepted that is by everyone except ryr management and the IAA.
The first warnings are the minor incidents, which taken together reveal a pattern that could lead to a headline-grabbing accident. By this definition ryr is very definitely heading for a "big one." A quick perusal of the AAIU website would be instructive for you, particularly if you are able to read the hidden messages in the reports that the IAA don't want to touch for political reasons.
I understand that when you are in your "cheap" seat the idea that the aircraft is being operated by a company that has a rash of very serious incidents in the last couple of years is unsettling. In fact, you probably don't want to think about it. You probably prefer to make ill-informed pronouncements on the matter on web forums. However, it would serve you well to know what you're getting for your money, so I suggest a little impartial reviewing of ryrs safety record. You won't like what you find, however a head in the sand attitude won't be good enough if, god forbid, either you or I happen to be on board when the inevitable happens.
I'll quickly rebut the standard responses:
"ryr is very big, things will happen" - but ryr have had substantially more very serious incidents in recent years, by a very wide margin, than any other similarly sized Western European carrier.
"they are safety regulated like everyone else" - wrong. The IAA regulate to a far lower standard than, for example, the CAA. The rules are more lax and very much unchecked. The IAA is beholden to ryr and won't touch them. The head of the IAA has gone so far as to formally dismiss ryr pilots valid safety concerns by calling us "troublemakers." As a safety regulator, don't you think they should at the very least hear the concerns of those who are most aware of any safety issues?
Don't kid yourself, ryr is NOT safety regulated in the manner accepted as standard by anywhere else in Europe or the US.

This board is full of PILOTS who see through all the bull and propoganda sucked up by the naiive.

Funny how those who see how it all really works are less than enthusiastic. And yet we get dismissed as "snobs" and other such garbage. Ah well, maybe I, and most other ryr pilots, suffer from fits of delusional fantasy everytime we get in the cockpit, which in itself should have the pax worried!

[cesare]

Ryanair Italian and French website show 3 new routes:

NYO-TSF start 23/05
NYO-AHO start 24/05
NYO-MRS start 7/05

Probably will be annunced soon...

A new plane based at NYO or will be reduced some routes?

[DONTTELLTHEPAX]

Shame the so called flag carriers dont announce routes
as often as Ryanair, Guess its down to demand .

[Avman]

I think that last post would indicate you've lost the plot now DTTP

[Euroboy39]

According to most recent figures (AEA and FR websites) FR lost 0.4 bags per 1000 in 2006, whereas BA lost 23 bags per 1000. Even if you consider interlining, the disparity between the statistics is astounding. Similarly, 2006 saw 72% of BA flights leaving on-time (i.e, within 15 minutes of scheduled time), but FR saw 88%... No doubt, Maxalt, FR only has these statistics because it flies point to point and uses non-main airports, but if it gets passengers to the place they're going on time, with their bags, at a lower price, then FR are surely offering a BETTER service to the consumer. What use is BA to Franfurt Main over Frankfurt Hahn, if the flight is more expensive, is more likely to be delayed and loses significantly more baggage.

What are your reasons for thinking FR not a safe airline? They operate under the same EU licenses as BA, AF, LH etc., and operate newer aircraft. They have had no crashes- I would love some data to back up your assertions.

Mate, you seem to have lost it...."pilots who have seen through the bull and propaganda"- really? This isn't the X-Files. This is simply a case of a company coming into a market which was full of state-run incumbent business models and offering a new product, which has benefitted a large segment of the travelling population. You simply can't argue that FR isn't providing what the customer demands- DONTTELLTHEPAX does have a point when he points out FR's huge network growth, whilst traditional network carriers have been more timid in their expansion plans.....

And yes, you are an airline snob.

[DrKev]

Originally Posted by Euroboy39

According to most recent figures (AEA and FR websites) FR lost 0.4 bags per 1000 in 2006, whereas BA lost 23 bags per 1000. Even if you consider interlining, the disparity between the statistics is astounding.

True, but a significant portion of FR passengers only have carry on luggage, which would skew the figures even more make the disparity a little less astounding.

I don't think it's fair to say that FR offer a better service, bearing in mind they often operate out of airports with minimal facilities, often very distant from their name cities, which means longer travel times and more expense getting to the airports. Hahn is 120km by road from Frankfurt, slightly closer to Luxembourg I'm told. (It's a bit like calling an airport 'London-Ipswich'). Beauvais is 80km from Paris.

Include higher flight cancellation rates, poor customer service in the event of cancellations, delays, or lost luggage, and non allocated seating and IMO FR certainly offer a different service but I'm not convinced that it is better. One should take everything into account when comparing service, as that is what the passengers have to deal with. For me living in Paris, FR do not offer a better service, all things considered, so I choose to avoid all the hassle and headaches that I find makes the FR experience less than pleasant.

[DONTTELLTHEPAX]

Ryanair flys to Rome CIA airport which is closer to Rome than FCO !
and not all pax want to go to the city anyway.
Pax who wanted to go to Cambridge before STN was so busy, would fly into LHR or LGW then travel hours back up to Cambridge, STN is
just as for out of London as many of Ryanairs other destinations and not
all pax traveling into STN want to go to London do they.

There is no point talking about this anyway the pax are and will
vote with there feet and it looks like the pax are walking
in the direction of the big yellow harp.


On the baggage thing, maybe BA should think about only checking
in bags point to point and getting pax to only take hand baggage
as they clearly cant Give a good customer service to the pax who do
check in there bags, whats the point in offering a service for
interlined baggage if you cant make it work.

[CamelhAir]

What are your reasons for thinking FR not a safe airline?

Daily observance and intimate knowledge of the safety culture, or lack thereof. Working under a CEO who is on record as saying that he can get away with 2 accidents. And from a au fait with what constitutes "safety", something with escapes most of the ryr apologist brigade. Does this make me an airline "snob"? If so, i'm a snob and proud of it. Just ask yourself, who has a greater stake in safety: you, mick o'l or the pilots who fly everyday?

They operate under the same EU licenses as BA, AF, LH etc., and operate newer aircraft.

Re-read my previous post. There are no such thing as "EU licences". There are national licences that are supposed to conform to ICAO standards. The standard of oversight and the onerousness of the regulations imposed by the IAA is very substantially less stringent than that of other EU regulators.
The age of the aircraft is irrelevant. The standard of the operation is what counts.

They have had no crashes- I would love some data to back up your assertions.

No you wouldn't, cos that would destroy the cosy little world view you have. However, try www.aaiu.ie

DrKev, you heathen, you dare to challenge the unassailable right of the ryr fellow-travellers to be the sole arbiters of truth about ryr! And what's this? Unpalatable facts that show ryr in a less than glorious light?? How dare you mention facts in the same sentence as ryanair? Off with your head.

[DONTTELLTHEPAX]

so are you saying the likes of BA have had fewer "accidents" than RYR

[maxalt]

According to most recent figures (AEA and FR websites) FR lost 0.4 bags per 1000 in 2006, whereas BA lost 23 bags per 1000.

Want the ACTUAL LINK please - this is YOUR argument, so YOU prove it!

No doubt, Maxalt, FR only has these statistics because it flies point to point and uses non-main airports, but if it gets passengers to the place they're going on time, with their bags, at a lower price, then FR are surely offering a BETTER service to the consumer.

You seem too thick to understand what I've said many times here. There is a market for cheapo low service carriers. But don't try to sell the low end of the market as a target for everyone else. Not everyone wants to fly to back of beyond airports on hand-luggage only weekenders. Your problem here is that you cannot produce the statistics to compare the interline market with a LoCo operation - because there is no such comparator, and your figures are therefore meaningless and worthless.

What use is BA to Franfurt Main over Frankfurt Hahn, if the flight is more expensive, is more likely to be delayed and loses significantly more baggage.

The 'use' is that Frankfurt Main connects with long-haul International services, while FR connects with nothing except a bus.

What are your reasons for thinking FR not a safe airline? They operate under the same EU licenses as BA, AF, LH etc., and operate newer aircraft. They have had no crashes- I would love some data to back up your assertions.

Ohhh....about a million reasons, perhaps you should do more research on this site. Instead of listening to know nothing journalists - listen to the people who work for FR.

Mate, you seem to have lost it...."pilots who have seen through the bull and propaganda"- really? This isn't the X-Files. This is simply a case of a company coming into a market which was full of state-run incumbent business models and offering a new product, which has benefitted a large segment of the travelling population. You simply can't argue that FR isn't providing what the customer demands- DONTTELLTHEPAX does have a point when he points out FR's huge network growth, whilst traditional network carriers have been more timid in their expansion plans.....

Again - with feeling - FR provide a product (I hesitate to call it a service) to a certain market sector. Good luck to them. Why do you believe they represent the best and (putatively) only product for the market?
Patent nonsense.

And yes, you are an airline snob.

No, I'm an airline pilot, and you are a naiive or a knave.