Safety issues in UK locos

[Akali Dal]

Met a couple of ex Easy and Ryan pilots now working in Asia...was curious why they had left as I have seen the salaries advertised. Seemed good money to me. They told me that there are lots of safety issues but declined to elaborate; maybe not to embarrass their 1st world compatriots to a 3rd world bloke. I find this interesting as I found 1st world blokes takes every chance to hit at 3rd world airlines and pilots; but now we have these fellas screaming to get into our poor 3rd world dowdy airlines!

[Bad Robot]

Correct me if I'm wrong but technically India is 1st World

In a nut Shell, along with USA, Australia, NZ, Singapore, France, Poland, Holland, (even Russia at the time) etc........ie anyone who was aligned with the "Allied Forces" during WW2.

2nd world was anyone allied with the "Axis Forces" during WW2 ie, Japan, Italy, etc.

All the rest were classed as 3rd World.

History lesson over!:ugh:

BR.

[Kraut]

There are no "safety issues" at EZY. They are very, very cautious to deliver a "safe" product.
Otherwise the company could run downhill very fast!!!
What could be an issue, fatique! The job ain´t easy! Don´t feel it within 2-3 years, but after that time, lot guys are looking for part time.

[Speevy]

A.D.
Are you for real?

How many sectrors have been flown in day by FR and U2 together, how many HRS? How many pax?

Don't you think that if there were safety issues something would have happened?

Speevy

[Metro man]

Salaries good but taxes and living costs VERY high, hence money saving ability not good. Lots of short sectors and high hours in busy airspace, after fifth early in a row you will be very tired, getting up at 4.30am in the middle of winter not so great.

Low cost = low benefits. Crew meals, ID travel, insurance etc

Come to India, salary paid nett of tax, free luxury accommodation, low cost of living, ID travel, 10 weeks on 2 weeks off. Spend the off time on the beach in Thailand, South of France etc

Sounds great :ok:

[taufupok]

High hours, fatigue and poor dispatch support ARE SAFETY ISSUES, are they not?

[UP and Down Operator]

High hours, fatigue and poor dispatch support ARE SAFETY ISSUES, are they not?

High hours a safety risk? - NOPE!!
Poor dispatch a safety risk? - NOPE!!
Fatique a safety risk? - YES!! - So go to bed in due time when you have 5 days early. :hmm:

I don't know aboyt RYR, but EZY is having a very safety minded culture, probably more than many airlines :ok:

[Mister Geezer]

Just a respectful reminder that Ryanair is not a UK operator! Those LoCos that do fall under the direct remit of the UK CAA will be some of the best regulated LoCo airlines that are around!

[acbus1]

Don't you think that if there were safety issues something would have happened?
I visit PPRuNe regularly in order to check if something has happened yet, although my focus isn't Easyjet or Ryanair, it's all flavours (not just low cost) of another shambles I'm very familiar with. The pressures of the low cost version must inevitably stack the odds higher, though.

Beats me why there aren't craters everywhere. There have been a few, for reasons never properly revealed, I think. They've come close on other occasions, but got away with it. Maybe it's like buses.....none for ages, then a whole bunch at once. It's certainly an ongoing mystery.

Of course, the CAA (or whatever) won't be doing anything about it. "No prangs, no problem" is the perfectly understandable easy option. Being proactive requires an incentive and the public sector doesn't work like that.

[groundhand]

Can't say much about FR but have worked with EZY and many, many other carriers over a lot of years.

You will look far and wide to find a better carrier than this in terms of their safety culture.
They have robust and challenging systmes. They do look to improve on the 'standard'. Was it not EZY that commissioned outside experts to look at pilot fatigue? Did they not change their crew rostering against the findings? Did the CAA not acknowledge the work done as thorough and competent?

I've never been employed by EZY but have worked along side their people. They have a lot of very good individuals but like all large employers, they have a few of plonkers as well. Same for BA, KLM, AF, TUI, AA, CO etc that I've experienced.

Statistics say that, sooner or later, one of these carriers will suffer a mishap. Hopefully not for a long, long time. No Doubt when it does happen the press will crucify them due to being low cost. I often wonder when the legacy people and press will understand that loco does not mean cheap; just efficient use of resources.

[Hahn]

May be they where the safety issue.....

[E. MORSE]

but now we have these fellas screaming to get into our poor 3rd world dowdy airlines!


Nope, not really

You will look far and wide to find a better carrier than this in terms of their safety culture.

Indeed, very true (this is about easyJet by the way)

There are no "safety issues" at EZY. They are very, very cautious to deliver a "safe" product.

No need to say more.

[Norman Stanley Fletcher]

Just to add to the already long list of sensible answer to foolish comments - there are no safety issues at EZY. I have worked for 5 airlines and the safety culture here is as strong as it gets. We also employ pilots from such outstanding companies as Cathay and BA, to name only a couple - they too will say the same.

Regarding the idea that "we have these fellas screaming to get into our poor 3rd world dowdy airlines" , this is somewhat innaccurate. You may be referring to the voluntary secondment of some pilots from easyJet to Indigo for the Winter season. EasyJet trawled the company for volunteers to go but could hardly get anyone to sign up - in the end 8 FOs and not a single Captain took the bait. Not exactly "screaming to get in", but there again there is nothing as boring as the truth.

[speedrestriction]

acbus1
Beats me why there aren't craters everywhere. There have been a few, for reasons never properly revealed, I think.
So you choose the tabloid view; never let the truth get in the way of some sensationalist scaremongering.

Being proactive requires an incentive and the public sector doesn't work like that
Low cost airlines are not public sector. Everyone working for a low cost airline has a stake in a continued accident-free operation. There is big investment in people and equipment to this end despite what the tabloid media would have you think.

[Flaps5speed180]

At the risk of tempting fate, wasn't it a rather high profile legacy carrier that had an aircraft sitting in a small crater at LHR recently!:rolleyes:

[rubik101]

Here we go, yet again, for the umpteenth time.
Akali Dal strikes me as yet another cheapo, too lazy to investigate, 4th estate type fishing for dirt to splurge on his red-top. Why do you dignify him with a reply, I wonder?
I hear that many Indian airlines ignore safety issues.
I hear that many Arabian Gulf airlines cut corners.
I hear many African airlines ignore safety issues.
I hear that many Asian airlines, particularly the LOCOs, cut corners.
All my statements are just as puerile and fantastic as his original post.
When will all this digging at LOCOs ever stop? As long as we reply to this rubbish, we just perpetuate the myths.
Ignore him and he might just go away, with any luck.
In the meantime Dal, try searching this forum for all the answers to your journo instincts.

[Akali Dal]

Keep on denying and hope it will go away......have it that way if it suits you.

[TartinTon]

Akali Dal - There is no issue. They are all governed by the same safety standards and if they fall short they will be grounded - end of story.
Whoever your disaffected ex-EZY/RYR friends are they are probably the same sort of person that you see all too often in this industry. People who profess to have inside knowledge of dark practices, poor procedures etc etc etc but who in reality couldn't cut it and got overlooked for promotions so resort to tall stories over a beer or 9 to impress their new and impressionable friends..like yourself!
:ugh::=:ugh::=:ugh:

[haughtney1]

Her here TT.....Akali Dal, you need to wake up and smell reality :ok:

[rubik101]

Well said, TT. You have it spot on there. ์Naysayers and doom-mongers crop up with monotonous regularity in bars all around the world. Posters begin threads on here without any research or reading of past posts on the issue. The likes of Akali Dall smell an opportunity to stir the sludge and see what rises to the top. Try reading the interminable posts on this subject stored in the archive and you will see that the issue is a non-issue, in spite of how much you would wish it to be otherwise.
AD, I still think you're a journo trying to dig up some salacious quotes from so-called, 'industry sources'.
Go back under your log and do some real research.

[FliegerTiger]

So Stan, does this fueller get to see the recommended fuel on the flight plan? Does he know if there are strong head/tailwinds involved with the journey? Does he know which alternates will be used for each flight? I fail to see how he can form a sensible argument without these details. I guess the fuel used by this particular carrier was enough to get the aircraft to their destination, otherwise we'd be hearing about it!!!!!!

[JW411]

Dear God, what on earth does a bowser driver know about steam navigation far less intricate fuel planning?

[Stan Woolley]

He knows how much other people put on for the same sectors.

You may assume that as a 'mere' refueller he just doesn't get the big picture?

I'm not a refueller and it concerns me too.Push the limits on everything and sooner or later it'll bite back!

How long before the increasing fuel price ends up costing more than we bargained for?

PS Just spotted this........I rest my case. :ugh:

crewcostundercontrol
Probationary PPRuNer


Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: UK
Posts: 1 My company has just given us the OPTION to leave the landing lights off until the final approach, they poke out into the airflow on the Airbus and I guess there will be a small saving to made! I prefer to keepem on to let other 250kt 60Ton bits of metal wizzzing around me know Im there.....

[crewcostundercontrol]

Could not agree more stan. Forgot to mention the track miles fuel reduction of 4kg per mile SIDSTAR less than plog. Combine that with the no dest alt and you end up with a very legal 1500KG in the tanks at landing. If all goes as planned........the future is very Orange!!!!!

[Stan Woolley]

Sounds about right.....;) I'm too yellow for that malarky.

[shaun ryder]

So who is saying that carrying minimum fuel is a safety issue?

[Ennie]

Some of you seem to assume that only LOCO's carry the minimum fuel required on a sector. Having worked for a major/legacy carrier myself, I assure you we do exactly the same, I have even heard the odd ground engineer say to me "XYZ wouldn't go with that problem" or "is that all you want?" and I'm talking with regard to a couple of companies mentioned here.

I agree that a re fueller may think, blimey they arn't taking much, the others took far more, but did he know of pax loads, tankering, deficiencies, weather en route etc etc?
I think....no he didn't.

[Dani]

For the history lesson:

1st world is the developed world, i.e. the industrialized countries, or also called the OECD countries (that's Northern America, Westeurope and Australia/NZ).

2nd world was the communist block - doesn't exist anymore

3th world are the developing countries.

These blocks have changed somewhat since then but that's where it comes from.

Concerning the safety issues I can guarantee that Asian Locos (except a few run by 1st world management) don't come close to any Western Loco. And you mention India? Well, I'm speechless.

Keep discovering...

[U 2]

Well this is getting really silly now.

Stan Woolley does not know what he is talking about.

Shame shame to drag our fuel providers through the dirt like this !

By the way : are you (Stan) aware what fuel required means anyway ?

[Bad Robot]

I stand by my original post regarding 1st, 2nd and 3rd World classifications. They may well have been modified somewhat since the original though.;)

BR.

[Stan Woolley]

U2

I do know what I'm talking about regarding these fuel figures, I have a lot of relevant experience on the same routes,types and even airline.

I guess I'm old fashioned not being comfy with plog fuel every sector?

[U 2]

Well, Stan

your posts are either removed or edited and edited again,

so,

for the viewers at home it is hard to follow,

but anyway,

you did avoid a question

[Airline Pirate]

nice history lesson...:rolleyes:




1st World are developed, technologically advanced democratic countries.

"the western world"




2nd World countries are/were communist-socialist stated with semi-developed/developed economies.


3rd World countries were developing nations whose infrastructure was not advanced enough to be considered developed, nor were they aligned with either of the First and Second World powers...

[Geragau]

Recent incidents involving Ryan Air makes me think Akali Dal was onto something until the cube started on his " cheapo ", 4th estate rant and drivel.

[Captain Planet]

Bad Robot said

Correct me if I'm wrong but technically India is 1st World

In a nut Shell, along with USA, Australia, NZ, Singapore, France, Poland, Holland, (even Russia at the time) etc........ie anyone who was aligned with the "Allied Forces" during WW2.

2nd world was anyone allied with the "Axis Forces" during WW2 ie, Japan, Italy, etc.

All the rest were classed as 3rd World.

History lesson over!:ugh:

BR.

Bad Robot, I do believe your "history lesson" is in fact flawed. I'm being pedantic here but what about neutral countries????

PS to be even more pedantic, it's a socio-economic lesson, not a history lesson:E.

And by the way, I'm correcting you.

CP.

[Tooloose]

Unfortunately, Bad Robot, the concensus of opinion here appears to be that you are wrong. The concensus is correct. The three worlds is/was a socio- economic convention and, as described by several others, referred to 1. western and industrial countries 2. communist bloc countries and 3. less developed/ under developed/ developing countries. The terms never had anything to do with alignment during WW2.

[rubik101]

Great to see how Alki Dali's thread has been hijacked and taken over by the PC brigade with a discussion of definitions of 1st, 2nd and 3rd world countries. I think maybe now he can see how seriously we take his original, puerile post.
Fishing expeditions by 3rd rate hacks deserve what they get.....ignored.

[Speevy]

I fly for U2, and I feel no pressure when I decide the fuel uplift!

If I need more I take it if I don't, I am not a tanker Am I ?

Speevy

[Hahn]

After all it is an airline, not a fuel shipping company...:)

[Bad Robot]

My Caveat was " In a Nut Shell" ie not getting into too great a detail. I still stand by the WW2 allegiances.;)
And the partiton of Europe there after.

There has obviously been a great deal of "Modifications" since, hence I started the paragraph with, "In a Nut Shell"

You 2 must be a real delight to fly with.............:rolleyes:

BR.

[Golf_Seirra]

1st World - place where all third world pilots are trying to get to so they can have supposed job security and upgrade path...

2nd World - place where all first world pilots retire to escape the rat race and back stabbing....or got tired of waiting for upgrade.

3rd World - overflow from 1st world because 2nd was full...

Begs the question, if third is such a dump, why are they paying better and offering better opportunities. Methinks third is getting ready for a name change....:)