Rynair tail strike at STN

[tvaddict]

Anone hear anything about a tailstrike at STN this week, seems like it's being kept quiet

[BOBBLEHAT]

The RYR436 EGSS outbound returned the other evening afer a loud bang on departure.......... Monday evening?

[captplaystation]

So, Flap5 instead of flap 1 didn't do it, neither did no assumed temp in a crosswind. . . guess it will have to be Flap15 and T/O prohibited in a crosswind then.

[tvaddict]

Don't know which flight, heard on the ramp that the loadsheet was grossly incorrect but i thought there would normally be a report or investigation into a matter such as this

[mill island]

What does normally mean exactly?:rolleyes:

[Routair]

Don't know which flight, heard on the ramp that the loadsheet was grossly incorrect but i thought there would normally be a report or investigation into a matter such as this


That is correct. Pilot was told but still wanted to take the a/c and dep.

Ive been told that the loadsheet was over by afew 1000'kgs. But i MUST STRESS that there is no proof of this at all.

[Georgey]

Do ryainair still have those hand written load sheets beacuse they are too tight to pay for the computerised ones?

[tvaddict]

Thanks guys, guess on time performance is worth more than the hassle of sorting it out before departure, those are just the kind of people we need in this business.

[Routair]

Do ryainair still have those hand written load sheets beacuse they are too tight to pay for the computerised ones?


Yes they do, and yes there a pain in the backside.

[slip and turn]

Please please please deny it somebody ... I'll be on one again in ten hours time and I don't have much choice other than something involving a long boat or train ride.

[manrow]

a 10000 kg loadsheet error caused the "minor strike"

This should be spotted whether load sheet is handwritten or computer calculated just by ballpark checks.

In my experience more errors were missed on computer produced than hand calculated, but that may be a question of familiarity.

[Brian Abraham]

a 10000 kg loadsheet error

Really that many zeros? Where would they put it all?

[ecj]

The question is - will the UK AAIB take an interest in this incident ??:cool:

[Blip]

How long was the runway?

With an extra 10 tons, it's not just the change in centre of gravity that they should have been worried about. I just went in to the the performance chart for a B737-800 with 24K engines and 10 tons equated to an extra 900 metres of take-off distance required! :ooh:

Maybe there was a tail scrape because they were desperate to get the thing airborne as the end of the runway was rapidly approaching and they...

Actually on second thought, I think the whole idea of the captain deliberately taking off with an overload of ten tons is just not believable. I just can't believe it!

But then again...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aWtdtuspnoM

[Night_fr8]

Anyone think it could be 10K underload, do we have to assume it was overload ?
What was the RTOW for that runway and weather conditions ?

Think of the crew and how the Pilot Flying feels.

STOP knocking people and finding guilt before the true facts are in, what gives you the right to be judge jury and executioner.

[Routair]

I know people will question me and ask if i know what im really talking about, but yes... the a/c was really 10 ton's over weight! And yes, a small 'row' did break out with the ground crew and the captain..but he still dep.

I was working this eve and was on the stand next to this a/c before it left. I walked over to see what was going on....the rest is common knowledge.

Ive since been told that both crew have been told they are no longer needed at FR...again, can anybody back this up as this is just small talk.

[slip and turn]

Well can you perhaps give some facts FR 8? I don't suppose there's any chance that the tailstrike is denied in FR circles? Precious few facts seem to have leaked so far, but no doubt the best are yet to come as you suggest ...

Meantime I suppose I am to boldly subject myself to this and a no doubt relatively harmless selection of other unknowns in the morning, based on the simple extrapolation that I didn't get a mark on my Kevlar underpants last time or the time before that, eh ? :\

[Borealis]

I´m gonna have to agree with Night fr8, it sounds like good old Ryanair spite is in the air yet again. People (who are not flying for Ryanair) don´t realize that they probably have the most stringent SOP´s and safety measures in the airline business today. Computerized loadsheet or not, this is a human error, and could have happened in any airline out there!

P.s. I am neither management nor a fan of theirs, just sick of all the "good old Ryanair" bull****.

[Night_fr8]

I too am nothing to do with Ryanair management or otherwise.
Just my nom de plume can be read that way.
I have to agree with the Borealis post, to the best of my knowledge the Ryanair SOP's are very good as is their training and operating standards.
I believe too many out here on pprune are envious or just dont have the intelligence to judge on the facts rather than rumour.

[McNumber]

I can see how one incorrect digit could lead to a 10 tonne error on a manual loadsheet...but you say the Crew saw this and departed anyway.

Surely if they spotted the error it was just a question of changing a 5 to a 6, or whatever, and, hey presto, no more error??

Or are you suggesting they knowingly did the calculations for the incorrect weight??

Sounds like BS to me.

[warrior28]

at standard weights for pax 10 tons overload would equate to approx 100 pax !! as you say BS ...
with full house , full fuel and nil cargo impossible to be overweight ....

[Gator32]

The rumour is indeed true- captain & dispatcher both suspended.
From what I know, the dispatcher inserted the dow instead of the zfw on the loadsheet. This accounted for the 10t error & the subsequent insertion of incorrect speeds, which as we know resulted in a tail strike. Truly astonishing that this error was not detected during cross checks by either the Captain & FO!

[Heffer]

with full house , full fuel and nil cargo impossible to be overweight ....

Do FR still operate differing mtow by tail number (67t, 70t or 75t respectively)?

Assuming DOW 41,000, a payload of 18,000 and max fuel of 22,000 then one could exceed mtow! Assuming FR tanker fuel, etc.

[rubik101]

The 10.000kg error would, in simple terms, make a difference to the take off speeds and the trim. Whatever the error and whether the Captain chose to ignore the TEN TON error, which I find hard to believe, the attempt to rotate 15 knots early with the incorrect trim would almost inevitably result in a tail strike/scrape.

Blip, at Stansted, there is very rarely a situation where the -800 will be limited even at Max TOW.

I can concur that RYR training and SOPs are as good as, if not better, than the industry standard, including Big Airways. In fact, BA have some rather strange procedures when you compare them to the 'industry standard'.

To Beagle, visual and others of your pathetic ilk, all I can say is that I am surprised it took you so long to get into print here. Having a slag at RYR as unsafe, badly trained, slapdash and unprofessional merely reflects on your prejudice and ignorance or simply your refusal to believe that even RYR is capable of doing anything correctly. You denigrate a large body of professional pilots who have to endure your inane and childish rantings on a regular and foreseeable basis. We all go through the same regular checks in the sim and on line that our fellow pilots have to. Don't assume that everyone passes 'on the nod' as this is not the case. Ability and standards are thoroughly examined in minute detail, just as they are in other airlines.

Don't you dare to presume that you are superior to these pilots just because you work for some airline that is registered in the UK, outside Eire or happens to be a so-called 'Flag Carrier'.

I would love to get you to EMA and put you through the LPC/OPC and see just how easily you would breeze through the 'meticulous low standard' check. You are rude and ignorant and serve no useful purpose on this or any other thread that refers to RYR. If you don't work for RYR, then kindly shut up.

You lot must be happy now, proving that ignorance is bliss!

[TolTol]

Very good post rubik101. A lot of sour graphs here on pprune.

[Agaricus bisporus]

The assumption I think we all made on reading that the a/c departed 10T "overweight" was that it was either 10T over MTOW or that the weight was calculated correctly and somehow an extra hundred pax (or equivalent) somehow got squeezed on. This is clearly not the case.

As Gator explained the DOW was incorrectly inserted on the loadsheet instead of the ZFW, so the calc was done as if the a/c was empty, yet they had c. 100 pax on board. ie pax and bags were lnot included. Pretty serious gaffe, that!

I can just picture an excessively harassed "press-on" Captain waving off a changed loadsheet saying, we're at normal weight, everything's OK, sod the paperwork, and launching with a radically incorrect C of G for the trim set, and utterly unrealistic V speeds.

The rest was hardly surprising.

It doesn't immediately sound like a systemic problem in the company - I cannot imagine any but a tiny percentage of the crew doing this, and in a company of that size there will always be a "random" or two.. But why the hell did the despatcher allow the aircraft off the stand, and why did the FO not do his job and say, "No!"? Could be a result compliance in a dictatorial system, but that is hardly an assumption that can be made from the facts at hand.

CAA, over to you...This happened on UK soil!

[rubik101]

757, pray tell how defending the reputation of those in my chosen profession, airline pilot, can in any way be seen as sycophantic to MO'L, a manager of an airline? I fail to see how you tie the two together. I have no connection, management or otherwise, not even training, to RYR and certainly hold MO'L in no greater or lesser regard than the BA pilots have for their Irish boss.
So off you go again, running down pilots just because they happen to work for RYR.
Again, please explain how defending pilots equates with sycophancy? Which superior airline do you work for?
Are you a good pilot? By whose estimation? Where do you rate yourself on a scale of one to ten? Where do you place the pilots of RYR on this scale?
The short answer will do.

[757_Driver]

i see my post has been removed anyway, ho hum.

I'm not running down RYR pilots - a goodly number of my freinds work there and I know the SOP's are very good.
All i'm saying is that various 'pressures' on the crew wether real or imagined can lead to situations such as this, or it could just be a cock up, we all make them. If you bothered to actually read my post (before it was deleted) you would see I wasn't suggesting at all that the crew were in anyway 'sub-standard'. I guess you just took one look at a negative post about FR and pressed the rant button though.

However I still think that ryanair reap what they sew. MOL and co seem to go out of their way to antagonise people both within and outside the industry - that all has to come home to roost one day, so its no surprise that people queue up to run ryanair down wenever they have an incident - after all ryanair's management spend all the rest of the time running everyone else down.
Lets also not forget that FR are running into financial dificulties with at least one major bank downgrading them warning of "potential business model failure" - and there won't me many freinds around if they need help in the near future.
pointlessly antagonising your competitors, and workforce, is never and will never be a sound long term business strategy.

[wee one]

Another example of the culture (on the line at least) of rush.
Down in the canaries the other day ryr messed up at least three pushes by obtaining a clearance to push with the fwd hold open. They were challenged by another a/c. The f/o was a mumbling mess.When they finally pushed they failed to push correctly stopping two other a/c from pushing. Reason :too rushed to relay the change of push to the driver. Reason for change of push..to allow the now inconvenienced READY a/c to push. A perfectly calm afternoon turned into a chaotic 15 mins because of the rush philosophy of this airline. Not bashing just rush. How can you push before a door is closed, arent they on the before checklist. Oh so is gross error checks of loadsheets
The gain from all this skygod bolox..nada. They were still waiting for take off as we approached the hold.

The f/o was utterly flustered in his comms with atc. Not really in the loop with regard to crosschecking departure details like loadsheets I would think.

So rubik put that in your opc. Or does ryr still subscribe to loading up the opcwith failure after failure to the point of silly in the belief that it makes better line pilots? High load or well flown lpc/opc dont make good line captains...

[SOPS]

How do you load an OPC with failures..or why would you want to do that?

[saddest aviator]

Not wishing to stray to far from the point, but........ Ryanair SOP's are the best in the industry HAH! The Ryr SOP's are only there to allow the management to quote 'Flight crew did not follow co Sop's etc etc NOT THEREFORE OUR FAULT' yes the SOP's are extensive adding to an already onerous load on the flight deck , but SOP's are meant to be about reducing workload not increasing it.
Take off briefings that sound like a recording are pointless. The famous Double Brief! Silent cockpit is a thing of the past! 'Take off power set indications normal' I only want to know when there not thank you very much.

WE NEED TO LOOK AT THE REASONS THE MISTAKE WAS MADE IN THE FIRST PLACE. ...................... NOT BLAME FLIGHT DECK DESPATCHER AND ANY ONE ELSE WHO IS IN THE VICINITY
The culture of blame at RYR is enshrined in the company
TO ANALYZE THE REASONS BEHIND THE MISTAKE IS THE ONLY WAY FORWARD WERE THE CREW ON THE LAST SECTOR OF LONG DAY WERE THEY RUNNING LATE WHICH MAY HAVE CONTRIBUTED TO THE PRESSURE TO CUT CORNERS WAS LANGUAGE A FACTOR ETC ETC
I could go on but the RYR management is a cancerous growth that need surgery, the paper work that is loaded on the crews far from necessary, all its there for is to provide avenues of blame in the event of an incident.

GROW UP PEOPLE UNLESS WE ARE VERY CAREFUL ALL OF THE INDUSTRY WILL GO THIS WAY

[wee one]

Well I cant emember an opc or lpc that had two engines throughout, or all systems operable.
For failures read non normals. my point was that a good performance on an easy or hard opc/lpc is not indictative of a good captain or first officer when out and about.
So rubiks invite to sit the ryr opc/lpc would be a pointless indicator of attitudes on line.

[skiesfull]

If the 'facts' as reported here are valid, then what a pity lessons from the Singapore Airlines Auckland tailscrape (2003?) have not been learned and the people ultimately responsible (the pilots) did not have 'ball-park figures' to run a simple cross-check of weights and speeds.

[T668BFJ]

Errors are bound to occur.

However if the pre-flight paperwork was done correctly they would have known within abouta tonne what the a/c weight should be for that leg.

I know when I fly with any of our guys the first gross error check is whether the a/c weight is anywhere near what I at the planning stage expected it to be.

Oh an d I work for RYR, wait for the facts before you condemn the pilots. Everyone makes mistakes.

[flyingdisp]

Hi guys,

I'm a flight dispatcher, and I would like to write a feeback about what happened a couple of days ago. I was really exhausted, and coming back to work after a family problem...
As I was on an FR flight, trying to deal with cargo... I made a mistake. I didn't filled in the bags, nor the number or the weight.
So were missing 1200kg in the load.
The captain, even if he had the lds well in advance, didn't see the mistake, and me neither.

Actually, to fill in cargo, you have to find the "equivalent bags weight" and fill a fictive number of bags, and write the actual cargo weight.
That means if you only take a quick look, you will see :
Adults
Children
BAGS
Wich is actually... normal ! The only thing that can make you detect the mistake is that your bags are in hold 3, instead of hold 2. But are cockpit crews in touch with loading procedures ? I'm not sure...

I'm feeling really bad after this incident.
I see so many crews just taking their figures, signing the lds, without checking it...
So more than ever, please, make a cross check next time.


For the tailstrike in STN, I found really weird the 10tons overweight... maybe they forgot to fill in the pax ?
I don't remember who was asking, but yes, FR is using different MTOW's

[757_Driver]

However if the pre-flight paperwork was done correctly they would have known within abouta tonne what the a/c weight should be for that leg.

I know when I fly with any of our guys the first gross error check is whether the a/c weight is anywhere near what I at the planning stage expected it to be.

That's is what I do, and what almost all captains I've flown with do.
Get the loadsheet (or do a manual one) and then check the ZFM and TOM agains the estimated on the plog. This does 2 things - a) it alerts to gross errors on the loadsheet, and b) if the load is really 10 tons different then the plog fuel calcs are all wrong, and you probably need a new plog.
obviously one should also do a thorough cross check of the load sheet as well, but checking it against the plog provides a 2nd line of defence.

I also have a ballpark figure in my head - I work on about 100kg per pax including baggage, and I know the DOM of my aircraft are about 60 tonnes, so If I've got 15 tonnes of fuel and 150 pax then I expect to see about 90 tonnes on the loadsheet - ain't gonna be more than a tonne or so out - so a good gross error check. The advantage of an old fashioned ASI is also that you can tell if the speed bugs 'look right' - not sure if you get that instant 'glance' feedback with a speedtape.

[Mr Good Cat]

FlyingDisp

A refreshing change to see open honesty and integrity.

We all make mistakes and hopefully an open reporting culture should ensure that we learn from these mistakes and put systems inplace to catch them before they cause any problems. Whenever I make a :mad: of something I come up with a personal safeguard procedure to make sure I don't make that mistake again, something as simple as a peg attached the APU switch during a bleeds off set-up to remind me to not let the F.O. switch it off during the before taxi scan!

As long as the guys involved were not acting negligently, and with no deliberate skipping of procedures, then we should treat it as a lesson learned the hard way, luckily with no bad repercussions.

However, what does concern me is the amount of stories from guys within RYR about the pressure to rush from management, and the temptation to skip important parts of the job to avoid having to justify a late departure. I hope it's just small-talk, but maybe some RYR guys could give us an insight into the reality of what goes on?

:ok:

[BALLSOUT]

I don't know the facts on this one but i find it all a bit strange. It would be almost impossible to be ten tons over the max gross Regulated Take off Weight.
Ryanair alter the RTOW as a paper excersise for dispatch, either 66990kg, 69990kg, or 74990kg are used. Without using the books, the aircraft is about 42250kg, 189 pax and bags is at most 17000kg. This still allows for 15000kg of fuel. Ryanair don't do long haul so i doubt if there would be anything like fifteen tons of fuel on board.
STN has a long runway so i doubt if there would be much restriction. So if there was a ten ton error, it would still be within the aircraft, and runway capability. If the aircraft is heavy, it is almost impossible to load it out of trim for pax.
The only thing that leaps out at me is if it were ten tons light, and badly trimmed you would have problems. But ten tons??
Yes, Ryanair do run a tight ship, if any of this is true, the crew are probably history by now.
Mr Good Cat.
We do 25 minute turn rounds, but that normaly isn't too difficult. If your'e late, you note the report with a delay code. Just like any other airline.
I have never had grief for being late yet.

[blue up]

Humanum est Erattum...or Errare Humanum Est (Humans make mistakes)
Marcus Tallius Cicero, Rome, circa 100BC.

To err is human....therefore put in place proceedures that accept this innevitability and catch them. The basic tennet of day-one CRM.



Not in any way trying to apportion blame, just reminding anyone where we ought to all be aiming our SOPs.

[Capt Wannabe]

ballsout- I think you will find a previous poster has already identified the probable cause which should eliminate any further speculation.


However this is almost certainly speculation as well :ugh: The original poster of the above comment mentioned something about an RTO - Is he suggesting the take-off was rejected after Vr?
My understanding was that after the minor strike on departure the aircraft returned to STN pretty soon after - hence all the flashing blue lights.

[captplaystation]

I have several times been handed loadsheets with, as in this case ZFM = DOM or fuel entered twice so ZFM = TOM etc etc. I get at least a coupla works of fiction every month.
Two points spring to mind
1- The training given to new dispatchers, certainly at some out-stations, is quasi non-existent. They circle boxes on the back of the loadsheet and fill in numbers, but in many cases don't have the faintest idea what they are filling in ( and sorry to the good uns but that is a fact). A large part of them can't even do basic mental arithmetic (no I am not joking)
2- Allied to this many of my fellow crew do what, and only what , RYR suggest they do to crosscheck the loadsheet,involving using underload to compare TOM vs RTOM.
I don't see so many of them looking at the back to read "roughly" the weight they expect to see on the front, but hey it isn't rocket science anyway. . .Boeing 42t 180 pax and bags say 18t , 8t of gas, if it's much different to 68 tons you should be asking why.
Unfortunately RYR are breeding a generation of pilot's/dispatchers/engineers? who can do the job by numbers SO well but don't have a clue what they are actually doing.
Great philosophy, nobody questions anything , and there is always an SOP handy to blame somebody when something goes wrong.
Job description - ask no questions/accept all blame by signing about 50 times a day that you have read checked and accepted everything, even if crewdock may be "temporarily" unable to display it.

[FatFlyer]

slight misunderstanding on some posts?
I don't think they are suggesting that it took off 10tons over max take off weight, rather the v speeds were set for 10 tons less than actual take off weight?

[Agaricus bisporus]

who can do the job by numbers SO well but don't have a clue what they are actually doing.

Man, and that ain't just Ryanair!

[slip and turn]

I think wee-one highlights the rush culture correctly - the rush to turnaround, or the rush to start the day with an early getaway, or the rush to get home. Is it no wonder then that commentators rush to criticise?

"Lead, follow, or get out of the way"
"Act in haste, repent at leisure."

The old one's are the best, but the trick is always to apply the correct weight and balance to each that may apply - push it too far and it may come back and bite :}

A new trend is to encourage the sheep into the pens by threat of losing the slot. On my last trip down the back we were treated to five minute countdown. We were hustled into our seats with the threat of a 30 minute delay due apparently to the danger of missing our slot "unless we take off in 4 minutes". I found it slightl odd that we were actually airborne before our scheduled departure time. Maybe the latest tactics are to book the slots 30 minutes earlier than previously now on some routes?

To the poster that said twenty-five minute turnarounds were "easy", I would suggest that no contingency time actually equals "rush".

Back to my last experience - to emphasise where we were not to sit, not only were tray tables down and belts draped, but seat cushions were up-ended like the drains might be up :ooh:. That worked. Not a single bleat of "can we sit here?" was heard :ok:

Having sat back, noted the usual frost over the fuel tanks on the wings, relaxed, and started to enjoy our flight, but then we were told that sorry but there were no sandwiches.

At the other end after a 'standard' flight time for the route, we touched down a good 15 minutes before our scheduled arrival time. Rather disappointingly we were given no trumpeted fanfare about yet another on time arrival, and as we taxied in at 40 knots we had a announcement about the type of sandwiches we could buy instead. Then we hesitated before entering the stand because no ground crew had arrived, causing a good thirty out of control passengers at the back to be up, bins open, bags out of the bins before we were even over the line!

No one said a word about that, and finally the inevitable "disembark from the front stairs only" was uttered. I suspect the cabin crew were done in by the end of their rushed day.

Then at passport control there was a big queue of course because of the number of British passport holders entering Britain. Luckily I chose a queue with a high proportion of foreign passport and plastic card holders which of course the Brit computers cannot attempt to link to 700 sundry other big brother computers, so foreigners hardly need to break stride. They certainly don't have to stand like a lemon for 10 seconds while 700 computers all check your inside leg like we Brits do. Mental note: Must get one of those foreign plastic thingies.

So anyway, my Kevlar underpants remained unscraped, I didn't die of lack of sandwiches or from a blow of any prematurely released bag hitting me on the head. I didn't have to listen to trumpet fanfares or warnings to remain in my seat until the captain switched off the seatbelt sign, immigration reminded me that Brits don't actually need to rush, and I got home on time.

Good job or what? :hmm:

[MungoP]

A lot of us might be excused for getting the impression that RYR are sending teams to Mclaren for pit-stop training.:rolleyes:

[rubik101]

Apparently the error was 10.000kg too much entered in the ZFW on the FMC. This resulted in the speeds being calculated for a weight, still well below the RTOW, of 10 tons higher than needed. The end result is that the aircraft would be travelling faster on the runway than that required for a normal lift-off. At rotation, the excess speed would be converted to over-rotation and hence a tail strike.
A single digit can make a huge difference.
Mistakes occur, accidents happen.

[Arkroyal]

Is it just me getting confused here?

I thought the DOW had been mistakenly entered in the ZFW box.

That would lead to the Vspeeds being calculated for 10 tonnes under actual TOW.

Therefore many knots slow, needing more nose up for the required lift and hence the tail strike.

Rubik, your scenario would closely replicate an improved climb profile. More speed, less attitude, no tail scrape

[Catabolic IBS]

I would have to Concur with Arkroyal. Overweight speeds would give greater V speeds than required. This would result in greater Kinetic energy at rotation which would result in greater Potential energy being available at a given angle of attack which would in effect be protective against tail strike.

[T668BFJ]

I think the point being, with the aircraft at a higher weight according to the box and load sheet.

You have higher v speeds, higher trim setting.

Therefore when you rotate the aircraft does not lift as expected, it will rotate unusually easilly, if not expected then the rotation could easilly become 5 to 6 degs per second and result in a tail strike.

It would only improve the climb profile if you indeed recognised the problem quick enough and countered it until clearing the ground and tail strike danger zone.

[tvaddict]

I started this thread a few days ago and it's interesting to read the debate that has ensued. My reason for bringing this issue into the 'public' forum was not to have a go at Ryanair, Dispatchers or anyone else involved with this flight.

The human element of preparing an aircraft for flight is always open to mistakes, oversights etc, and there should always be some type of crosscheck applied to performance and loading data. My concern was to know if it was being kept quiet by management and not reported to the relevant authorities.

It is this culture by management, and the punishing of people who make mistakes that worries me most. Ryanair, in common with other operators have had a few close scrapes lately. Will the next aircraft to have an unplanned meeting with the ground be as lucky to have soft wet grass inside the airfield boundry with emergency services moments away or are we all really holding our breaths for a major aircraft disaster.

In a professional enviornment such as this safety is everybodys responsibility, including management, and if a company gets embarrased by an 'incident' it can only help to enhance safety by incorporating these lessons into its training programme.

Thanks for your feedback,

the addict.

[Doug E Style]

Considering all that's been written about this incident, I'm surprised there's been no mention to date about what sounded like a RYR tailstrike at Dublin last December. Was there that morning and from what we heard over the RT, it sounded like a tailstrike occurred on take off and the aircraft returned for a normal landing. That's all I know.

[e.crapper]

I agree no need to bush these guys without proper info. 10t over just doesn't sound right:=

[-8AS]

TV addict, the incident would most certainly have been filed with the relevant authorities via the Ryanair internal reporting system - they just didn't sell it to the SUN.

[737]

-8AS, have a look at the following especially finding number 10. It took almost two weeks for Ryanair to inform the authorities of a serious incident.

http://www.aaiu.ie/upload/general/8545-0.pdf


Do you think every SAIR or Captains Discretion Report goes to the IAA?

'Keep them in the dark and feed them ****'