Foreign Operators whose principal operations are UK based
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Cork, Ireland
Posts: 730
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I'm afraid that statement is untrue .... Shorts 360 EI-BEM
I was working for EI at LHR at the time.
ASN Aircraft accident Shorts 360-100 EI-BEM East Midlands Airport (EMA)
I was working for EI at LHR at the time.
ASN Aircraft accident Shorts 360-100 EI-BEM East Midlands Airport (EMA)
That doesn't change the fact that Irish Airlines are perfectly entitled to base aircraft with Irish registrations at UK airports under EU openskies policy. Unless either Ireland or the UK leave the EU, or the EU changes its Open Skies policy, then the UK CAA have no power to stop Irish registered aircraft being based in the UK
Agreed 
In fact long before they got that far they'd have to do something about the N reg a/c based in the UK ... while that appears more likely from time to time it's not happened yet.
That doesn't change the fact that Irish Airlines are perfectly entitled to base aircraft with Irish registrations at UK airports under EU openskies policy. Unless either Ireland or the UK leave the EU, or the EU changes its Open Skies policy, then the UK CAA have no power to stop Irish registered aircraft being based in the UK
In fact long before they got that far they'd have to do something about the N reg a/c based in the UK ... while that appears more likely from time to time it's not happened yet.
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Samsonite Avenue
Posts: 1,538
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
As for using the UAE as an example, I could not think of a worse one to use to illustrate your point.
The mind boggles when you see the number of Ilyushin and Antonov aircraft that are registered in Central Asia and yet are based in the UAE.
What you are seeing now has been going on for decades and it is part and parcel of aviation. Perhaps some of you might remember the days when Pan Am had some short haul aircraft based in Berlin back in the 80s and they operated European routes to feed its US routes? All their aircraft wore 'N' registrations but were based in Europe!!!
The mind boggles when you see the number of Ilyushin and Antonov aircraft that are registered in Central Asia and yet are based in the UAE.
What you are seeing now has been going on for decades and it is part and parcel of aviation. Perhaps some of you might remember the days when Pan Am had some short haul aircraft based in Berlin back in the 80s and they operated European routes to feed its US routes? All their aircraft wore 'N' registrations but were based in Europe!!!
/nerd mode on/
The Pan Am aircraft operating German domestic services were doing so under the rights that the US had under the post-war Four Powers Agreement that divided the governance of Berlin between the US, UK, France and Russia. I don't think West German aircraft were allowed to fly to Berlin, so the UK, US and France maintained air links between West Berlin and West Germany. BEA had a fleet of BAC One-Eleven 500s built for their German routes (G-AVMH-Z).
/nerd mode off/
The Pan Am aircraft operating German domestic services were doing so under the rights that the US had under the post-war Four Powers Agreement that divided the governance of Berlin between the US, UK, France and Russia. I don't think West German aircraft were allowed to fly to Berlin, so the UK, US and France maintained air links between West Berlin and West Germany. BEA had a fleet of BAC One-Eleven 500s built for their German routes (G-AVMH-Z).
/nerd mode off/
BEA had a fleet of BAC One-Eleven 500s built for their German routes (G-AVMH-Z).
What they did have, though, was a greatly toned down version of the BEA colour scheme at the time as they were operated on the IGS routes in conjuction with Air France so the BEA titling was VERY small and no speedjack on the tail.
Ryanair have never had an accident
However, I think most people would define the incident at Ciampino on 11/11/08 as an accident.
Not anti-RYR, but I do like to let facts get in the way of a good arguement...
Thread Starter
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: England
Posts: 367
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
There seems to be a focus on Ryan air, I am raising the arguement in principle. ryan air are not a target or focal point though they do fall into the criteria.
With regards to serious incidents ryan air have had more than their fair share for example.
1) approach to a closed runway - Ireland
2) CIA
3) Sweden
There may be more, and on top of this have attracted the close attention of the press namely the sunday times with regards to a leaked memo warning pilots not to carry more that 4 tonnes reserves.
Could it be that ryan air pilots are feeling the management squeeze and could this pressure lead directly or indirectly to air safety compromises or risks? If yes then the oversight of the CAA could only be a good thing?
Merry Christmas
EM
With regards to serious incidents ryan air have had more than their fair share for example.
1) approach to a closed runway - Ireland
2) CIA
3) Sweden
There may be more, and on top of this have attracted the close attention of the press namely the sunday times with regards to a leaked memo warning pilots not to carry more that 4 tonnes reserves.
Could it be that ryan air pilots are feeling the management squeeze and could this pressure lead directly or indirectly to air safety compromises or risks? If yes then the oversight of the CAA could only be a good thing?
Merry Christmas
EM
Thread Starter
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: England
Posts: 367
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
747Boy. This is the incident to which is was refering
Irish minister demands report on dangerous landings by Ryanair The Guardian
In the Knock incident the IAA were not informed for several weeks after the incident. This supports my arguement for oversight by the CAA of foreign operators whose main business activities are centralised in the UK
Ryanair - too cheap to be safe?
Irish minister demands report on dangerous landings by Ryanair The Guardian
In the Knock incident the IAA were not informed for several weeks after the incident. This supports my arguement for oversight by the CAA of foreign operators whose main business activities are centralised in the UK
Ryanair - too cheap to be safe?
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Ireland
Posts: 130
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I for one am no Ryanair supporter, but this thread is absolute b...ox. The one thing I admire about Ryanair is their standards, flightdeck and maintenance. Regarding the IAA, they are absolute sticklers (and rightly so) in relation to operational standards. They are no flag of convenience! If you adopt the philosophy that one states oversight is better than another, you may as well throw EASA ops out the window now. This thread needs closing!
Thread Starter
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: England
Posts: 367
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
When Air Atlanta started an aviation operation of major significance from the UK. They were "encouraged" to apply for a UK AOC. The single reason for this was air safety, yet according to you any dodgy operator can set up camp in the UK any enjoy the business benefits of a very large market and lower operating costs than UK AOC holders have to bear because they are exempt of the more stringent safety requirements of the UK CAA.
We can enjoy and share our opinions here and enter into debate about arguements that may or may not agree with us. So why would you want this thread stiffled? As I have said before there is no need to become focused on Ryanair, they just happen to fit as an example at the moment, look at the principle of the arguement.
Happy new year.
EM
We can enjoy and share our opinions here and enter into debate about arguements that may or may not agree with us. So why would you want this thread stiffled? As I have said before there is no need to become focused on Ryanair, they just happen to fit as an example at the moment, look at the principle of the arguement.
Happy new year.
EM
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: 14 days away 14 at home
Posts: 699
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Dear Epsilon
Let me say it more SLOWLY because you seem not grasp the real world: we ALL operate to the same JAA standard it is just that the CAA charges more...
I have flown on a number of different AOC's in different countries including an AOC covered by the good old CAA (where I also did my initial training): there is no good or bad country just some authorithies that are better in SOME areas than others and to claim that the CAA is so much better is pathetic....
So get of your patriotic high horse and wonder why UK AOC's have been stuck with long haul FTL's for years while this made regional airlines bleed financially or why the governement wanted the CAA act like a commercial organisation and make money versus cover cost as is the case in most countries....
That is why an AOC might have been more expensive in the UK.
The principle of your argument is floored and should be in the spotters corner...
and lower operating costs than UK AOC holders have to bear because they are exempt of the more stringent safety requirements of the UK CAA
I have flown on a number of different AOC's in different countries including an AOC covered by the good old CAA (where I also did my initial training): there is no good or bad country just some authorithies that are better in SOME areas than others and to claim that the CAA is so much better is pathetic....
So get of your patriotic high horse and wonder why UK AOC's have been stuck with long haul FTL's for years while this made regional airlines bleed financially or why the governement wanted the CAA act like a commercial organisation and make money versus cover cost as is the case in most countries....
That is why an AOC might have been more expensive in the UK. The principle of your argument is floored and should be in the spotters corner...
Thread Starter
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: England
Posts: 367
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
EU-OPS
Alleviations to EU-OPS in respect of FTLs is granted in EC treaty EC1899/2006 see para 6. EU-OPS is binding on all member states as per EC859/2008.
May I remind you that the regulations or EU-OPS are not the issue here it is the oversight regarding and enforcing compliance. Maybe you missed that important bit.
as for
It's flawed not floored. I'll let you choose which corner you would like to stand in.
Regards
EM
Alleviations to EU-OPS in respect of FTLs is granted in EC treaty EC1899/2006 see para 6. EU-OPS is binding on all member states as per EC859/2008.
May I remind you that the regulations or EU-OPS are not the issue here it is the oversight regarding and enforcing compliance. Maybe you missed that important bit.
as for
The principle of your argument is floored and should be in the spotters corner
Regards
EM
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Europe
Posts: 1,416
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Epsilon Minus
The point you seem to be missing is that those of us who know the CAA SRG (Flight Ops, AS, Airworthiness and PLD) only too well also know that CAA oversight is certainly no better than any other EU State's NAA, and in many instances is so "light touch" as to be invisible.
This is against the background of commercialising their regulatory functions, and the inevitable consequences of this stupid, unnecessary and damaging approach to government. (Has Mrs Thatcher died yet? I hope so, but if so her terrible misguided legacy lives on to destroy the United Kingdom.)
It is not the fault of most of the many excellent and dedicated front-line Inspectors, Surveyors and the like, who have to work within the parameters set for them by a largely incompetent management with very limited skills.
Sorry...carried away for a moment......the fact is that under CAA oversight Ryanair's very high maintenance standards at least would only be preserved if Ryanair made sure of that, as it would. The CAA would be irrelevant.
I get the impression that there's a lot you don't know about both Ryanair and the CAA.
The point you seem to be missing is that those of us who know the CAA SRG (Flight Ops, AS, Airworthiness and PLD) only too well also know that CAA oversight is certainly no better than any other EU State's NAA, and in many instances is so "light touch" as to be invisible.
This is against the background of commercialising their regulatory functions, and the inevitable consequences of this stupid, unnecessary and damaging approach to government. (Has Mrs Thatcher died yet? I hope so, but if so her terrible misguided legacy lives on to destroy the United Kingdom.)
It is not the fault of most of the many excellent and dedicated front-line Inspectors, Surveyors and the like, who have to work within the parameters set for them by a largely incompetent management with very limited skills.
Sorry...carried away for a moment......the fact is that under CAA oversight Ryanair's very high maintenance standards at least would only be preserved if Ryanair made sure of that, as it would. The CAA would be irrelevant.
I get the impression that there's a lot you don't know about both Ryanair and the CAA.
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: 14 days away 14 at home
Posts: 699
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
EM Thanks for pointing out my error of floored vs flawed. For once you where right.....
The point on the FTL's is that they only changed because of Europe and not because of your favored authority from heaven...... until then UK AOC's where losing lots of money...
Enjoy spotters corner, I understand that there is a lot of spotters on top of the carpark at terminal 3 who will agree with your observations
The point on the FTL's is that they only changed because of Europe and not because of your favored authority from heaven...... until then UK AOC's where losing lots of money...
Enjoy spotters corner, I understand that there is a lot of spotters on top of the carpark at terminal 3 who will agree with your observations
Thread Starter
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: England
Posts: 367
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Capot
Thank you for your comments. I do not agree with your opinions regarding the CAA and, as you put it, their light touch. I do know a lot about the CAA in particular the SRG though I know little of Ryan air other than the fact that they attract a lot of negative attention (Channel 4, Sunday Times) and have a record of air safety incidents that most would not be envious of.
The IAA is a small authority which employs approximately 600 odd staff 77 of which man the safety regulation office. It took ryanair several weeks to report a serious air safety incident to the IAA is this a measure of regard that the operator holds for its aviation authority?
Anyway this isn't a debate about ryanair but about foreign operators with high frequency operations within the UK. I think the CAA should be entitled to inspect and audit any foreign carrier that meets the above, don't you? This does not include SAFA inspections either.
EM
Thank you for your comments. I do not agree with your opinions regarding the CAA and, as you put it, their light touch. I do know a lot about the CAA in particular the SRG though I know little of Ryan air other than the fact that they attract a lot of negative attention (Channel 4, Sunday Times) and have a record of air safety incidents that most would not be envious of.
The IAA is a small authority which employs approximately 600 odd staff 77 of which man the safety regulation office. It took ryanair several weeks to report a serious air safety incident to the IAA is this a measure of regard that the operator holds for its aviation authority?
Anyway this isn't a debate about ryanair but about foreign operators with high frequency operations within the UK. I think the CAA should be entitled to inspect and audit any foreign carrier that meets the above, don't you? This does not include SAFA inspections either.
EM
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Europe
Posts: 1,416
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Epsilon
Ireland has a population of about 4m, last time I looked, that is 1/15th of the UK. It has 2 major airports, and a very small number of airlines. 600 sounds just about right to me; in fact I cannot imagine how they all keep occupied. The 77 in the safety regulation office sounds about right too.
I don't know how many the CAA employs; is it more than 9,000?
To me, the number is irrelevant. It's whether or not they fulfil their role effectively that counts, and the Irish do that, whether or not your apparent chauvinism allows you to admit that.
Sensationalist reports developed by journalists from unverified information sent to them by unqualified people are not to be taken seriously, and I am surprised that you do take them seriously.
What exactly is this "record of air safety incidents" that you make so much of? Few if any of the reports that anti-Ryanair people love so much have any substance, and several show the airline in a very good light, from an aviation safety angle. Or are you going to blame Ryanair for an airport's failure to provide proper warnings about bird flocks to a landing aircraft? You won't be the first, if you do.
You may also be falling into the trap of missing the fact that if you operate as many sectors as Ryanair do every day, they could (and do) have the lowest number in Europe of incidents of all kinds per sector, and still have more than any other airline.
Of course I don't think that. The CAA is not the agency responsible for safety in UK, EASA is, whether you like it or not. It would be absurd if a member state started auditing other member states' airlines. Easyjet has a large operation in Europe; do you believe that they should be audited by the French and Germans? Or indeed, why shouldn't those countries start auditing BA, which has a high frequency of operations there? It's no less logical than your idea that the CAA should audit Ryanair, as though they are somehow superior to the Irish NAA.
Ireland has a population of about 4m, last time I looked, that is 1/15th of the UK. It has 2 major airports, and a very small number of airlines. 600 sounds just about right to me; in fact I cannot imagine how they all keep occupied. The 77 in the safety regulation office sounds about right too.
I don't know how many the CAA employs; is it more than 9,000?
To me, the number is irrelevant. It's whether or not they fulfil their role effectively that counts, and the Irish do that, whether or not your apparent chauvinism allows you to admit that.
Sensationalist reports developed by journalists from unverified information sent to them by unqualified people are not to be taken seriously, and I am surprised that you do take them seriously.
What exactly is this "record of air safety incidents" that you make so much of? Few if any of the reports that anti-Ryanair people love so much have any substance, and several show the airline in a very good light, from an aviation safety angle. Or are you going to blame Ryanair for an airport's failure to provide proper warnings about bird flocks to a landing aircraft? You won't be the first, if you do.
You may also be falling into the trap of missing the fact that if you operate as many sectors as Ryanair do every day, they could (and do) have the lowest number in Europe of incidents of all kinds per sector, and still have more than any other airline.
I think the CAA should be entitled to inspect and audit any foreign carrier that meets the above, don't you?
I know little of Ryan air other than the fact that they attract a lot of negative attention (Channel 4, Sunday Times) and have a record of air safety incidents that most would not be envious of.
Detail the ones that you believe are a problem.
