Ryanair - 6

[Cyrano]

Originally Posted by Handover

Not all of Ireland's aviation problems are because of Shannon.

Shh! Tom will hear you!

[johnnychips]

Davidjohnson6

Obviously a lot of tourists love Ireland and visit it as often as possible.

But I wonder how many people who would never normally have thought of making the effort to go to Dublin went there because of Ryanair operating a flight from near where they lived? Even if these people don't spend that much (though with Irish hotel prices I don't think that's possible), there must be a lot of them.

But I would speculate that that's why routes like DSA-DUB have gone down the pan. Apart from the £/€ rate and the recession, when the route opened, a lot of locals went; now they've been and seen it, they want to go somewhere else.

[davidjohnson6]

jonnychips - I can certainly believe that Ryanair launching routes from regional Irish airports has boosted inbound tourism benefitting the Irish economy (well - apart from routes from Ireland to places like the Costa del Sol). In particular the existence of a direct flight makes a big difference to a visitor's likelihood of making the trip.

However, I have reservations as to whether it's OK for the Irish taxpayer to be subsidising both airline and passenger, when it's meant to be Ireland trying to benefit from this. I draw a distinction between airports which are entirely Govt owned and operated, compared to Aer Arann, Aer Lingus or Ryanair as Cork's dominant airlines which are substantially non-state-owned companies.

If we think that an extra 5 euros on a ticket is going to turn a visitor from being in favour of visiting Ireland to going somewhere else instead.... this implies that the visitor is highly price sensitive. If the visitor is *that* price sensitive, are they going to be staying in a hotel or a hostel ?

For a region like that surrounding Shannon airport which is very tourism dependent, maybe it's worth subsidising a bit to ensure jobs are retained. For somewhere like Cork where the economy is more diverse and not everyone is coming as a tourist... does the same argument really apply ?

[johnnychips]

Cheers David,

Good arguments. The only points I was really trying to make were:

1. Any tourism is better than none (I was really thinking of Dublin where subsidies don't apply)
2. The novelty value of visiting Ireland has worn off; don't get me wrong, it's a fantastic country and I had a great stay, but next time I'll be going somewhere warmer.

[Facelookbovvered]

Ryanair turnrounds

I was waiting for a flight yesterday and watching the Ryanair flight crew on the turn around, one of the Flight deck was plugged into the Flight deck/ground comms jack with a pair of bright green/yellow headsets, he appeared to be watching loaders or re fueler?

What all that about? not the first i have seen it either, just interested?

[Cloud Bunny]

This is the most pathetic, pointless, ridiculous procedure you've ever heard of, bought in by the IAA but as far as I can tell only FR are required to carry it out. We have to stand attached to the aeroplane to monitor the fueling process, in the event that there is a leak or a fire(!) we have to inform the Pilot left in the flightdeck. You can hear it now.."quick, there's a leak and its ignit.....BOOOOOOOOMMMMMMMM!!!!" Not only is it a waste of time but it totally compromises the turnarounds in terms of planning and briefing and makes it almost impossible to complete a turnaround in 25 minutes.
Bit of a rant but hope it answers the question!

[potkettleblack]

So being able to communicate with the flight deck in the event of a spillage and/or fire is a waste of time whilst passengers are boarding/deplaning? How do you plan on communicating with the cabin manager then if your sitting on your tod somewhere and no one is watching what is going on outside your aircraft? Perhaps you expect the Hungarian refueller who speaks not a word of english to run up to the flight deck and use sign language - once he has gotten past the scrum on the stairs that is?

I am sure your paying customers would be most assured with that attitude. If you feel that the 25 minute turnaround is to blame then I am sure the IAA would love to receive your written correspondence.

[The Real Slim Shady]

cloud bunny

Appendix 1 to OPS 1.305
Re/defuelling with passengers embarking, on board or disembarking
An operator must establish operational procedures for re/defuelling with passengers embarking, on board or disembarking

to ensure the following precautions are taken:

(1) One qualified person must remain at a specified location during fuelling operations with passengers on board. This qualified person must be capable of handling emergency procedures concerning fire protection and fire-fighting, handling communications and initiating and directing an evacuation;

(2) A two-way communication shall be established and shall remain available by the aeroplane’s inter-communication system or other suitable means between the ground crew supervising the refuelling and the qualified personnel on board the aeroplane;

(3) Crew, staff and passengers must be warned that re/defuelling will take place;

(4) ‘Fasten Seat Belts’ signs must be off;

(5) ‘NO SMOKING’ signs must be on, together with interior lighting to enable emergency exits to be identified;

(6) Passengers must be instructed to unfasten their seat belts and refrain from smoking;

(7) Sufficient qualified personnel must be on board and be prepared for an immediate emergency evacuation;

(8) If the presence of fuel vapour is detected inside the aeroplane, or any other hazard arises during re/defuelling, fuelling must be stopped immediately;

(9) The ground area beneath the exits intended for emergency evacuation and slide deployment areas must be kept clear;

and
(10) Provision is made for a safe and rapid evacuation.

Hence it has nothing to do with the IAA and every EU Ops operator should following these procedures.

[Based]

(2) A two-way communication shall be established and shall remain available by the aeroplane’s inter-communication system or other suitable means between the ground crew supervising the refuelling and the qualified personnel on board the aeroplane;

The Real Slim Shady, this paragraph only stipulates that there has to be someone on the ground supervising, not that it has to be a pilot which is what I believe Cloud Bunny is referring to.

[tom de luxe]

The Real Slim Shady, this paragraph only stipulates that there has to be someone on the ground supervising, not that it has to be a pilot which is what I believe Cloud Bunny is referring to.

Fair point, but then again, who's it gonna be if not one of the pilots?
The Spanish student hired as cabin crew ( never mind that the cabin has to be prepared for evac -> 189 seats means three cabin crew, and that's what's available on FR)?
The abundant Ryanair ground staff (oops, one cabin crew is helping out at the gate during boarding on a regular basis, so no slack there)?
A baggage handler?
The fuel guy, supervising himself ?
A hairy camel that just happens to drop by?

T.

[captplaystation]

If the fueler is likely to keel over at any moment and at the same time the cut-off switches in the tanks fail thereby resulting in the fuel ending up everywhere, then I suggest the two plots that are required in the flightdeck to complete the subsequent evacuation checklist ( according Mr Boeing) should have been watching the gauges , as the 7000kg they requested became 7800 and then some, that is what they should be supervising.
If the fuelling procedure requires supervision, then I suggest it is incumbent on the company providing it ( and raking in the associated profits ) to provide a second qualified bod.
Me, I reckon any turnaround / evacuation , will be more professionaly accomplished if both of us are present, and not standing outside freezing our bollox off in the p1ssing rain. Call me old-fashioned, but this is another case of the tail wagging the dog.
If Blogs the refueller cannot work unsupervised, let his employer pay/train/ provide the supervisor. None of us received any specific training.
I have better things to do on a 25min turnaround and perhaps it might also be better if my actions were supervised that is why there are two of us, and I certainly don't demand that the fueller pops up and checks the loadsheet once I am finished with it

[Stopend]

The reason may be quite simple. If FR's own staff do it they can squeeze some more off the turn round bill. Just like reducing the number of handling agent escorts they pay for by getting one of the cabin crew to act as an escort, or am I just being a little too suspicious here, maybe!

[F14]

Not sure if it has been posted, but PSR to be new base.

[frfly]

The fuelling policy is an absolute farce with a 25 minute turnaround. Not only does it mean one of the flight deck is outside, it also means the much needed no.4 is stuck onboard the aircraft, therefore the handling agent has more work to do for the same amount of pay from Ryanair.

I think its a policy that will need to be looked at.

What would happen if RYR A/C were registered in another country, would the same procedure apply? If its put in place by the IAA and its being done say in Spain because the IAA say it must be done, could you not switch the country of registration theoretically to get their rules to apply? A drastic move I know but I just wondered what the rules were?

[captplaystation]

I he never seen any other company doing it, except in Tenerife Sur, where EVERY company does it , at the insistence of the refueller, who tells me apologetically that he is under threat of sacking if he doesn't apply it.
Does this mean that RYR are the ONLY company complying with this JAR rule ? who would have thought it

[Based]

New routes from theairdb.com


Bergamo, Orio Al Serio (BGY) to Malaga (AGP)
Bergamo, Orio Al Serio (BGY) to Nantes, Atlantique (NTE)
Bergamo, Orio Al Serio (BGY) to Tangier, Boukhalef (TNG)
Sevilla, San Pablo (SVQ) to Fez, Sais (FEZ)
Sevilla, San Pablo (SVQ) to Marrakech, Menara (RAK)

[airbourne]

From the lovely Ryanair website. It a complete load of bollocks, but its gets everyone talking about Ryanair again and on the news and in the papers!!! Free advertising yet again!


20,000 Ryanair Passengers So Far Vote for ‘Fat Tax’


Passengers to Decide Which Idea Will Win €1,000 Cash Prize

Ryanair, Europe’s largest low fares airline, today (14 Apr) announced that almost 20,000 passengers have voted in favour of charging excess fees for overweight passengers with over 45,000 votes registered so far for Ryanair’s passenger poll to select the airline’s next discretionary charge.

Ryanair revealed the current top five as the poll reaches it midway point and urged passengers to continue to vote for their favourite on Ryanair - Book Cheap Flights to Europe - Cheap Flights from the UK before Friday 17th April.

The top five as voted by passengers to date are:


* 40% - Excess fees for overweight passengers based on body mass index.
* 20% - €3 to smoke in a converted toilet cubicle,
* 18% - €1 for toilet paper – with O’Leary’s face on it,
* 14% - annual subscription to access Ryanair.com,
* 8% - €2 “corkage” fee for passengers who bring their own food onboard.


Ryanair’s Stephen McNamara said:

“We are delighted with the number of votes cast to date and a little surprised with how the vote has gone so far. We urge more passengers, especially those who may be a little larger, to vote before the poll closes on Friday. Those who want to cast their vote can do so at www.ryanair.com.”

[Cloud Bunny]

Wow, flamed!!!! Bit like I would be after a fuel leak!! The point I was alluding to (and forgive the post, I'd just come off the phone after another argument with one the vicious that work in Crew Control so was fuming at the time) was that there are any number of people who could do this, most obviously someone from the fueling company. The procedure as it says from FRs' point of view is that we have to establish two way comms however there is no requirement for us to stay on the headset once we have done so which seems to me to make a complete mockery of it in the first place. The re-fueller has a "dead mans handle" so if he drops down dead the fueling will be automatically cut off anyway.
Like I said it just adds to the pressure on us during a 25 min turnaround to get everything done (Cabin Crew/Boarding staff the same). From an SLF point of view I would be happier in the knowledge that the two guys up front are throughly briefed and prepared for the flight than have some guy outside freezing hits nuts off then tear-arsing it through the door at STD-3 minutes and going straight into a c/list so they can push on time. All because the fueller can't be trusted. Failing that, why not just not allow pax on the aeroplane when re-fuelling like in Italy? If the fueller gets to the aeroplane as it pulls on stand then it makes bugger all difference to turnaround times anyway, and means we as a crew are fully prepared for what we are there to do - fly the aeroplane!!
Thats all I can be bothered to say on the matter, it really isn't worth getting worked up about so Slim please don't spend another riveting evening trawling through EU-OPS on my behalf - treat yourself to a beer and do the missus!!

[VanBosh]

Sevilla, San Pablo (SVQ) to Fez, Sais (FEZ)
Sevilla, San Pablo (SVQ) to Marrakech, Menara (RAK)

SVQ going to be a base or are these going to W in from another base?

[Seljuk22]

I've read SVQ flights operated by BGY based a/c.
New flights from BGY starting on July, 9th a/c for BGY - flights to Cagliari, Fez, Leeds, Manchester and Ibiza will be increased.