Does anyone know the result of the 'no confidence in Aurigny' vote which was happening tonight in Alderney
'

Channel TV are reporting that it has been withdrawn

Thankyou Ayline

The requette failed to get enough support, but a very good debate was had. Basically States Members thought it was the wrong time to do this and if passed would halt meaningful discussions with Aurigny. Clearly nobody was happy with Aurigny, but this was not the method to say that. Some that voted against said the message to Aurigny was that this was a ‘yellow card’ and if things didn’t improve they would support a requette at a later date, October was mentioned.

The States of Alderney have really got AUR "over a barrel", haven't they !? Just think about it, 1200 or so people on a totally insignificant island, where it is impossible for any airline to make a profit, making next to impossible demands on frequency, pricing & service levels on an airline which has far "bigger fish to fry" . I bet AUR are quaking in their boots !
The only thing in the States of Alderney's favour is the political relationship with Guernsey & the importance that this might have on the States of Guernsey's thinking on what they do with their "national airline" !

The completed MoU has been signed and published. It seems strongest in establishing a framework for the States and Aurigny to communicate far more effectively; weakest as a service level agreement (targets for which come with all manner of caveats). It is explicitly not legally binding. Some of the targets seem totally pie-in-the-sky (39% of ACI-SOU one-way sales to be in the £117-£145 bracket, for instance); on the whole it does a jolly good job of enshrining the status quo into one document. The Alderney operation is formally exempted from the wider break-even objective, although the document does really very little to clarify further where financial obligations end and social obligations begin. This will remain a matter of urgency for reasons previously discussed in this forum.

I wonder why G-COBO diverted to East Midlands on the way back from Manchester this morning. Only just left EMA (19:13).

Reported a pitch control problem apparently.

Balair

COBO diversion
 

Guernsey Evening Press reported an icing problem but did not specify surface(s) affected.
Pete

COBO diversion
 

G-COBO diverted to LGW this morning on its way to GCI from LCY. I wonder what happened this time.

More tech problems again today – the only serviceable ATR's were VZON and COBO – this morning I noticed the 0830 GCILGW left at 0930 and routed GCI-LYC-LGW-GCI, with a long turnaround at LCY, I bet LGW pax were well cheesed off! This afternoons 1630 ATR rotation to LGW has also been cancelled.

Dornier Issue
 

Did something happen yesterday in GCI with the corniest shutting down on the taxiway? All the interislands were late

A Dornier evacuated at end of runway 09 due to a warning light coming on - airport was shut for about 30mins apparently

G-SAYE
 

I'm curious as to why G-SAYE is on the UK register as a Dornier 228-200 but internet searches of its previous registration D-ILFM show it as a 228-202K. I did wonder if the 228-200 on the UK register was in some way a mistake, but the Aurigny in-flight magazine also has it as this type. Has it been downgraded for some reason? If so, I'm guessing that this would have required some changes to the a/c.

The K I recall stands for keel, they are positioned on the bottom corner of either side of the part of the fuselage that slopes up towards the tail.

It is a long time since I flew the 228k but I believe with the keel you get an increase in take off weight.

Looking at pictures of G-SAYE the keel's are not present, google G-MAFI and you will be able to compare with an aircraft that has them fitted.

They may have removed the keel as they do not need the aircraft to operate at the increased weight and having a lower take off weight might bring reduced landing and navigation charges

The 202K has the ventral strakes the 200 does not. Air Wales had to have them fitted to G-RGDT before it was accepted on the UK registered to comply with CAA regs. However now aircraft have to comply with EASA regs so the 202k requirement may now not apply.

ventral strakes

Of course, that's what they are called,

G-SAYE was built as a -200 and converted at some stage to a -202k.
However, for reasons unknown, on re-registering with a G- it was unacceptable as a -202k and therefore downgraded to a -200, with the lower MTOW.
Hence, on the very occasional times that it has flown, its payload is rubbish.

Looking at pictures of D-IFLM on the internet, it didn't have the ventral strakes when operating for Manx2, but was presumably thought of as a 202K at the time. So it doesn't look as though Aurigny had them removed. What is the function of the ventral strakes?