Siemens boycotts Ryanair

[box]

The Swedish Svenska Dagbladet reports:

The German industrial group Siemens, with 400,000 employees worldwide, has decided for a global boycott of Ryanair. But Ryanair has threatened legal action.
Siemens Group Management took the decision after Ryanair suffered a number of accidents and incidents in recent times and is a signal to the entire aviation industry.
Ryanair does not look at the decision with approval. ”If this story is true, then Ryanair will take legal action against Siemens” said Stephen McNamara, spokesman for Ryanair, to DN.se.

Just five days ago a Ryanair flying from Alicante in Spain to Gothenburg had to make an emergency landing in Denmark. Two Ryanair flights were cancelled at the previous weekend in Spain because of technical problems.

These are just some of the high-profile incidents that budget airline Ryanair has suffered recently. And now, Siemens, manufacturers of white goods, computers and nuclear reactors, has had enough. At a board meeting of the Group Management in Germany, the decision was taken to boycott Ryanair until further notice. The decision applies worldwide for all employees in190 countries worldwide. The boycott applies to all business flights that the Group’s 400,000 employees may need to take.

Mary Baldin, Information and Sustainability manager at Siemens in Sweden, says that the decision taken was with regard to the safety of the employees of Siemens. Baldin referred to recent events including those where Ryanair planes were forced to land because they did not have enough fuel.

With its many employees, Siemens is a major business travel customers. Thus, a boycott could be significant. Does Siemens use Ryanair often? “No, Ryanair is not on the list of the airlines we usually employ. The decision to avoid Ryanair altogether is not only to protect our employees, but is also a signal to the entire aviation industry. We do not accept that safety can be jeopardised to save money”.

[763 jock]

I will never use Ryanair either. Nor would I book any of my family on Ryanair.

”If this story is true, then Ryanair will take legal action against 763 jock” said Stephen McNamara, spokesman for Ryanair......

Grow up and shut up McNamara. If Siemens don't want to use your product then that is their choice. There are plenty of us who feel the same way.

[hval]

”If this story is true, then Ryanair will take legal action against Siemens”

Surely a company has the right to make the decision as to what airlines it uses, or are we missing information? Perhaps McNamara is saying he will sue Siemes for making it public?

[KiloB]

If it's the airline's safety record that is worrying them, I wonder how they feel about Air France's recent track record?

[Momoe]

Don't get this - What's Siemens angle on this?

Ryanair aren't on their preferred list and anyway if I was going to not fly with any airline it would probably be AF, you may not like MOL or his business model but it's demonstrably safe. (Some on would say in spite of!)

[bylgw]

There are business travel consultants that advise on these matters. They do the risk analysis for the clients. Siemens may just be acting on good advice.

[Shytehawk]

O'Leary is going to throw his fridge and washing machine out of the pram.

[merlinxx]

Spin speed ? Wonder have fast Tony Ryan is spinning in his after life :confused:

[Ambient Sheep]

I wonder... could this be the first in a line of dominos? Especially if it's the result of advice from risk analysis consultants that may be advising more than one company.

I can't understand how Ryanair could sue Siemens though, unless it was for some sort of defamation perhaps. Whatever happened to "all publicity is good publicity", though? (Yes, the clichéd line, but someone had to say it and it might as well be me.)

[FANS]

”If this story is true, then Ryanair will take legal action against Siemens” said Stephen McNamara, spokesman for Ryanair, to DN.se.

The usual, highly aggressive approach of a bully. Am I still allowed to say that on the internet without fear of reprissal?

If this story is true, I will definitely be only buying Siemens appliances going forwards.

[TurboTomato]

Threatening them with legal action is a really, really bad move as well.

[Tableview]

Let's be fair. I dislike Ryanair intensely and would never fly on them nor allow any of my family to do so.

This statement is untrue :

Siemens Group Management took the decision after Ryanair suffered a number of accidents and incidents in recent times and is a signal to the entire aviation industry.

I am not aware that they have had a single accident. There may be grave concerns over how safe they are, but is untrue and unfair to say they have 'suffered a number of accidents'. Perhaps it on that basis that they are considering suing.

[TurboTomato]

Which is what I thought as well but this article doesn't categorically say that Siemens made that statement.

[OLNEY 1 BRAVO]

Incidents is perhaps more accurate than accidents.

[wiggy]

FWIW here's a link to what I think is the original report,


Siemens bojkottar Ryanair - som hotar med "rättsliga åtgärder" | SvD (http://www.svd.se/naringsliv/branscher/handel-och-tjanster/siemens-bojkottar-ryanair_7533172.svd)

The Swedish speakers amongst us it might clarify who said what - I got as far as working out what "Siemens" "bojkottar" and "Ryanair" meant in English, awarded myself 10 out of 10 and gave up.

I am not aware that they have had a single accident

Just asking - Did the Rome multiple birdstrike and resultant very hard landing get treated/classified as an accident or an incident by the authorities?

(slow) edit to add : FB beat me to it...

[Flying Beancounter]

Accident: Ryanair B738 at Rome on Nov 10th 2008, engine and landing gear trouble, temporarily departed runway (http://avherald.com/h?article=40fc7579&opt=0)

[Tableview]

Here is the 'offending' sentence :

Siemens koncernledning har fattat beslutet sedan Ryanair drabbats av ett antal tillbud och incidenter den senaste tiden och är en signal till hela flygbranschen.

My knowledge of Swedish is very basic but it is a Germanic based language and I speak German. With a bit of help from Google, it seems that 'tillbud' means incident, and the word for 'accident' (olycka) does not appear. So somewhere the original report appears to have lost something in översättning.

Any Swedish speakers around before I pop next door to ask the Swedish au pair!

[dmcna]

Siemens is a huge multi-national company, well known and respected the world over. If Ryanair choose to take them to court they really are going to bite off more than they can chew

[ShyTorque]

Sounds to me that the announcement has rattled that cage to the point of panic and the representative opened his mouth without applying some common sense!

I let my wife book our holidays because she enjoys doing so and is a better organiser than I. The only rule I made about this is that she never books flights on that airline. Why? Because as a paying customer, I have a CHOICE.

Irrespective of alleged safety issues, I won't use any company if I don't like their attitude towards their customers. "Take it or leave it" arrogance seems to be their attitude, so in this case I'm simply going along with their own mantra.

[EEngr]

Surely a company has the right to make the decision as to what airlines it uses, or are we missing information?I'm not at all familiar with EU laws/regulations. Here in the USA, your statement is generally true, with some serious exceptions: Entering into some contracts (as a GSA supplier, for example) obliges you to adopt certain business practices and policies. Among these are standards for bidding and requesting quotes to and from 'qualified' vendors. Part of these regulations define who may be or may not be 'qualified'. If similar regulations exist within the EU (and Siemens is obliged to follow them), then Ryanair may still have the right to bid for contracts.

Someone knowledgeable on EU regs will have to step in and comment on this.

[hampshireandy]

So Siemens are (dish)washing their hands of Ryanair? :D

[GlueBall]

The larger issue would really be about why a reputable company as Siemens would send its valued employees on such el cheapo flights. :ooh:

[hval]

EEngr,

I don't know either. Siemens could get out of that by letting Ryanair bid, but by never letting them win the bid due to "safety" issues.

[jackharr]

Ah, the truth is out:

http://cphpost.dk/news/international/drunken-mid-air-fight-leads-emergency-landing-billund

They were no doubt arguing about respective merits of Siemens and Hotpoint appliances

[Dannyboy39]

How many of Siemens' 400,000 employees are going to be travelling for business? Not many. 1%? If that.

Joe Public are just going to look for the cheapest fares, regardless of reputation.

Not sure Mike and Steve should be that worried to be honest.

[DaveReidUK]

Just asking - Did the Rome multiple birdstrike and resultant very hard landing get treated/classified as an accident or an incident by the authorities?

An accident is defined (ICAO Annex 13) as:

"An occurrence ... in which ... b) the aircraft sustains damage or structural failure which adversely affects the structural strength, performance or flight characteristics of the aircraft, and would normally require major repair or replacement of the affected component".

It would be hard to argue that poking a MLG leg up through the wing doesn't fit that criterion - therefore it's technically as accident, not an incident.

[hetfield]

During the second World War, Siemens supported the Hitler (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hitler) regime, contributed to the war effort and participated in the "Nazification" of the economySiemens - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Siemens#1939_to_1945)

Hey, wondering nobody is already bashing with this amunition.

But let's wait until the anglian press kicks in....

[FI-A]

Tableview, translation follows below:

the board of executives at Siemens has made this decision due to the fact that Ryanair has had a number of recent incidents (tillbud and incident means the same) and it is a signal to the entire aviation industry.

Edit: no sign here of Siemens mentioning anything about an accident (olycka) :)

[fireflybob]

It will be interesting to see how this one plays out.

Am not surprised but still amazed by Ryanair's public reaction. If I was the CEO I would be contacting Siemens for a meeting to find out the reason for the embargo and then show them the statistics (especially compared to other operators) and even offering some sweetener to keep them.

[Crazy Voyager]

Here is the 'offending' sentence :

Quote:
Siemens koncernledning har fattat beslutet sedan Ryanair drabbats av ett antal tillbud och incidenter den senaste tiden och är en signal till hela flygbranschen.
My knowledge of Swedish is very basic but it is a Germanic based language and I speak German. With a bit of help from Google, it seems that 'tillbud' means incident, and the word for 'accident' (olycka) does not appear. So somewhere the original report appears to have lost something in översättning.

Any Swedish speakers around before I pop next door to ask the Swedish au pair!


"Tillbud" and "incident" (singular form of "incidenter" used above, which is the same as incidents) are nuances of the same thing. An "incident" (spelling is the same in English and Swedish) is the same thing, how ever a "Tillbud" is something that could have developed into an incident, but isn't as severe. In Swedish we often use "tillbud" as you would use "incident" (as something that could have lead to an accident).

Literally translated it means "to"-"bid". Till being "to" and bud being "bid". But the word "bud" can be interpeted not only as a bid at an auction but also something taking place. Hence "something that was (potentially) going to happen".

I'm not sure if this made you any wiser but it was worth a try I guess :rolleyes:

[Wiggly Bob]

re post 21.

With my knowledge of contracting (admittedly mainly in UK) you can put anything you want in a contract as long as both parties agree (with exception of those deamed penalty clauses or illegal terms). If Seimens has an explicit term relating to risk management, and the recent "incidents" trigger some review, then yes, they may well be able to terminate the contract. Having said that, I doubt the contract is with Ryanair directly, probably with a "Travel Agency / consultant" as stated in a post above.

What is interesting is why they chose to go public (if indeed it was choice). Contracts are generally not discussed outside of the 2 parties.

[Wiggly Bob]

No mention of who else is on the "do not fly" list?

[cwatters]

Siemens wind turbines have also had a few "incidents" ...

Man killed when wind tower collapses | News | KATU.com - Portland News, Sports, Traffic Weather and Breaking News - Portland, Oregon (http://www.katu.com/news/9383316.html)

Siemens extends 2.3MW turbine investigation amid 'defect' concern | Windpower Monthly (http://www.windpowermonthly.com/news/994789/Siemens-extends-23MW-turbine-investigation-amid-defect-concern/)

Given many wind turbines are located near or even over public footpaths should there be an industry safety regulator as there is for airlines?

[Fogie]

All companies have a duty of care for their employees and the methods of transport utilized for/during work . The same principles would apply with the boards responsibility of workers re intoxicants etc .
Ipso Facto

[ECAM_Actions]

Show me an airline that HASN'T had an incident?

On top of that, if you assume there was only one mega huge global airline that operated all the aircraft ever to fly/crash/not look right/get cancelled, flying is STILL safer than the trip to the airport, even if you choose to fly with the carrier with the worst safety record in the world.

'nuff said, and the risk analysts want to analyze their risk to the public. :=

[kick the tires]

The reality is that Ryanair have one of the best safety records in the world let alone Europe over nearly a 30 year period.

But with many many near misses, like this one, it makes chilling reading.....



Report: Ryanair B738 at Rome on Sep 7th 2005, loss of situational awareness and terrain clearance (http://avherald.com/h?article=41a5f274)


... and in another way, very sad reading for the personal circumstances of the Captain.

But thats the Ryanair culture, one of creating fear amongst employees.

[BikerMark]

"Am not surprised but still amazed by Ryanair's public reaction. If I was the CEO I would be contacting Siemens for a meeting to find out the reason for the embargo and then show them the statistics (especially compared to other operators) and even offering some sweetener to keep them. "

O'Leary? A sweetener?!

Saltener more like.

[DaveReidUK]

I suspect you simply have an agenda when it comes to Ryanair.

What a ridiculous statement.

The discussion was about what are the criteria that define an accident. If you have a problem with those definitions, take it up with ICAO.

Feel free to search the history of my posts on PPruNe for any evidence of an anti-Ryanair agenda.

Over to you.

[B Fraser]

”If this story is true, then Ryanair will take legal action against Siemens”

Probably to avoid that sort of stain on their character.

[Depone]

Oh come on!

The discussion is about Siemens not ICAO definitions.

[ZeBedie]

I would like to know how many European airlines have an agreement with their pilots that they won't be rostered to fly on Ryanair?

[hetfield]

I would like to know how many European airlines have an agreement with their pilots that they won't be rostered to fly on Ryanair?

I guess NONE, 'cause their destiniations are mostly in the middle of nowhere:8

[wiggy]

Depone

Just to be clear I was the one who asked the question about the definition of an accident (post #15) - DaveReid kindly answered with the ICAO definition. I don't think either of us has criticised Ryanair and I'd certainly agree the crew on that flight did an excellent job.

Hope that helps.

[Depone]

It does, thank you.

[Krueger]

Will Siemens start putting stickers on their appliances saying "Bye, Bye Ryainair"?:E

[LGS6753]

Do Siemens produce any equipment likely to be used by Ryanair?

[fireflybob]

Do Siemens produce any equipment likely to be used by Ryanair?

...or anywhere in Ireland!

[racedo]

Somehow I think its better to wait until the official statement from Siemens main board rather than one permeating from a unit in Denmark / Norway.
It may be very different.

Somehow I doubt Siemens main board may not be enamoured about the companys name getting brought up in a manner like this.

[glad rag]

Siemens use KLM and their associated "group" of airlines. :ok:

[BEagle]

It is also in my standard letter of agreement, as a consultant, that I will not travel with Ryanair under any circumstances whatsoever.

Not that my position will cause Mikey-the-Pikey many sleepless nights....:uhoh:

[racedo]

Siemens use KLM and their associated "group" of airlines.

Some stories really don't need writing

BBC NEWS | Europe | KLM accused of helping Nazis flee (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/6635677.stm)

KLM accused of helping Nazis flee

http://newsimg.bbc.co.uk/media/images/42898000/jpg/_42898029_eichmannap203b.jpg Many Nazis were given refuge in Argentina, including Adolf Eichmann

The Dutch airline KLM is facing calls for an inquiry into reports that it helped Nazi war criminals escape to Argentina after World War II. According to papers found by Dutch journalists, KLM asked Switzerland to let Germans cross its borders and fly to South America without proper papers.
Suspected war criminals were forbidden from leaving Germany by the Allies.
KLM acknowledges some of its passengers may have been fleeing justice, but denies it sought to help them escape.

[grafity]

Siemens use KLM and their associated "group" of airlines.

Haha would that be the "Air France"/KLM group. Great to see how overpaid executives continuing to make great decisions in the interest of their employees.:D

[MPH]

Antonov09: Agree, I think that for the amount of flights this airline does per day the statistics show that infact it is a safe airline. Whether, Siemens or any company does not want to fly with brand X, Y or Z that's up to them and their employees. I feel uncomfortable with this constant bashing of FR. I know personally numerous captains that fly there and are all high time with excellent records. And according to them the standard of training and procedures get's a good to high score. To look at unreliable airlines and even at those that have been banned from flying in certain airspace's. One just has refer to a whole published list, which is well documented and is of public knowledge

[DaveReidUK]

It does, thank you.

You're welcome.

[alicopter]

Over the years, I flew three times with Ryanair... twice to Marseille-Provence and once to Jerez de la Frontera, from Stansted and three times the experience was VERY negative. Not the flights themselves ( even though their bad reputation did make me nervous every time...) but the departures and the CUSTOMER SERVICES... APPALLING
Like Brittanny Ferries, or Tesco, Monsanto, Total, BP, MacDo and a few more that I boycott for similar reasons, Ryanair will never see another penny of mine or my family's and I do advise all my mates to avoid these companies...

[boguing]

Whilst I think that Siemens have got it a bit wrong, in that Ryan don't seem to have killed anybody yet, it is a fact that any sensible organisation will look at risks.

In the late '60s and early '70s RR [jet engines] didn't allow two senior bods travel on the same flight, irrespective of whose engines hung on it.

ps. After a rubbish experience with one airline, I immmediately vowed 'never again'. Commonsense then kicked in and I realised that I was making an absolutely stupid error. The fact is that every flight that I have taken has got me to where I wanted to be. Safely. From my father flying me in gliders and seps to major carriers about the place.

In truth, airlines have left me with good and bad impressions. Airports, however... I cannot forgive.

[Shack37]

Do Siemens produce any equipment likely to be
used by Ryanair?



They produce an excellent range of hearing aids.

[cwatters]

Do Siemens produce any equipment likely to be used by Ryanair?

Siemens - Green and Efficient Baggage and Cargo-Handling and Airport Integration Systems - Airport Technology (http://www.airport-technology.com/contractors/baggage/siemens2/)

"Siemens - Green and Efficient Baggage and Cargo-Handling and Airport Integration Systems"

[jabird]

why a reputable company as Siemens would send its valued employees on such el cheapo flights.

For the simple reason that there are certain times that when you want to get from C to D without going via A and B, Ryanair are the fastest option - price doesn't always come into it.

Siemens supported the Hitler regime

A remarkably rapid descent of this thread into invoking Godwin's law, we're normally extremely good at avoiding this one here!

Seimens has an explicit term relating to risk management

Well you'd have thought they'd actually get a calculator out and do the maths. Ryanair have distinctly not got OO status - billions of miles, no kills. One hulls loss, bird strike, beyond control of airline - in fact, with both engines disabled, was that not a great credit to pilots and their training to save all passengers and crew?

flying is STILL safer than the trip to the airport

Well if I take the local service to BHX, that will be using Siemens trains. I'm sure they'd jump up and down with anger if people suggested their trains (rather than the contracts to build them) were dodgy, especially if claims were based on other incidents on the UK rail industry that occur from time to time, but which don't involve their stock.

I can see why someone might want to take a cheap shot at the one aspect of Ryanair management that you can't really fault them on, but given that Siemens make all kinds of highly sophisticated equipment, I'm not sure I'd want to be spreading ill-advised safety claims against a company which is highly likely to retaliate.

In the late '60s and early '70s RR [jet engines] didn't allow two senior bods travel on the same flight

Is that not still policy in various companies, based on various incidents in which there have been no survivors? The 2010 Polish crash being a case in point?

[Burpbot]

Good for Siemens!

[mini]

None of us enjoy the FR experience, but they get you there...

There is no statistical reason to boycott FR...

[Momoe]

IF and it is a big if, this is down to FR CRM rather than risk, it could be argued that Siemens are shooting themselves in the foot as by boycotting FR, they could well be forcing their employees to take two flights instead of one.

Risk analysis on that would be interesting, plus factoring in the additional time and stress for the employee(s).

Strikes me that Siemens is coming out of this in a worse light than FR, I've flown FR on occasion and I found them no worse than any other LoCo.
Some EGAE approaches especially were quite interesting in that I was very aware that the plane was being flown rather than directed, given the general concensus on lack of hand flying skills this is a positive for FR IMO.

BTW, Hepone, you seem somewhat smaller to my eyes.

[Mr Mac]

I would suggest that maybe the discounts Siemens get from trad carriers and the location of plants make using Ryanair not that attractive. Also the " Look" of flying LOCO with some clients may not fit with their image, combined with Ryanair customer service, which I suffered on a trip tio Stockholm last year from Liverpool. 1 day late as plane went Tech and no back up so never again for me or my company.

[BRE]

As someone who has worked for 15 years at a German technology multinational that is somewhat smaller than Siemens (about 50,000 employees worldwide) but culturally similar (down to the fact that we had a CEO who came from Siemens, ushered the company that was still revelling in its 19th and 20th century glory fast-forward into the 21st century and brought quite a few executives with him from Siemens), I have seen my fair share of corporate travel policies, and I suspect that the newspaper story is plain bullocks, or that the local Siemens executive was dreaming about what he'd do if he were king.

We don't typically use LoCos, but, as someone pointed out, if they happen to fly from A to B and no legacy carrier happens to serve that route, we are not forbidden to do so.

The only safety-related action I ever saw was after 9/11, and even that was evident only to an avid observer: we used to have a pretty good contract with United and were required to use them on flights to North America unless it resulted in really absurd routings. After 9/11, management felt it was not wise to force people to fly on N-registered planes, so the rule was no longer enforced, but there wasn't even an internal memo to all employees about it, and the contract eventually expired due to lack of volume.

We also used to have an on-site travel agency at headquarters that was staffed by company employed travel agents. Like all good travel agents in the good old days, these folks had a fair amount of travelling experience of their own, owed to a decent salary, a IATA discount card and also some company sponsored travel to IATA meetings.

These days, we use a large travel agency that specializes in corporate travel and operates a large office and call center in Frankfurt. Unfortunately, those guys are pretty clueless about the geography and quirks of American and Asian hubs and about discounts that airlines offer on certain routings or days, and they will gladly try to book you on a MUC-CDG-NCL or FRA-INC-NRT routing if it appears slightly cheaper than the negotiated rate with LH, even if this makes no sense whatsoever when you consider total travel time, risk of delays and the track record of the carriers involved. The way I usually deal with them is that I select my routing, airline and travel days based on my own experience, and when as usual I am not happy with their suggestion, I simply email them the rate I researched on the internet, and they are happy to book it for me.

[crewmeal]

Whilst browsing through the college library the other day I came across a customer service guide for dummies.

Customer Service For Dummies Cheat Sheet - For Dummies (http://www.dummies.com/how-to/content/customer-service-for-dummies-cheat-sheet.html)

Maybe Ryanair should adopt this for their 'manuals ' both on the ground and in the air!

[clunk1001]

in case they ever had to cancel or reschedule an appointment

Personally, if I want to be late for an important meeting, or miss it altogether, I will fly with BA. They are consistently late, and always have a 'we don't really care we're late, you should be grateful you are flying BA, this aircraft is older than you are, the stewardess is older than your mum - so show some respect' attitude.

When i have flown RYR they get me there on time. That's all I really care about.

Being served a free **** sandwich, by an overly made up stewardess with a superiority complex, doesn't make up for being late and loosing business.

[racedo]

None of us enjoy the FR experience,

Can you highlight who exactly you are speaking for ?

[alicopter]

I do not think that any of this FLAK (Fliegerabwehrkanone) in this thread is directed towards Ryanair pilots (who are to be praised and whom I admire for doing a good job in such an unpopular company!) but towards its policies and customer services ammounting to (in my own experiences) people not only not getting what they are not paying for but ending up paying just as much as people paying for what they are getting.......... get it? (you're good then!) with the aggro of bad customer and luggage handling/bullying etc... plus the unsecurity feeling of not knowing what they will short circuit in order to save themselves some cash..... (sorry but I love litotes...) Safe flying all. Al

[eireoflot82]

Maybe it's because Ryanair don't fly to Iran?
Siemens probed over exports to Iran | Germany | DW.DE | (http://www.dw.de/dw/article/0,,5008891,00.html)

[ATNotts]

In recent weeks the German media seems to have been campaigning against Ryanair. Hardly a day goes by without a story on ARD teletext about "another Ryanair incident".

Is it because Germany aren't happy about Ryanair's (predictable) reaction to Germany's new air travel tax, or because Ryanair are retrenching in the German market? who knows.

Personally I won't use Ryanair, having used them twice, but I would never think of them as being unsafe - just unsavoury!

[sitigeltfel]

the stewardess is older than your mum - so show some respect' attitude.

Personally, I would value experience over youth.

[Mr Angry from Purley]

Shame Siemens didnt say the FR ban was because of the way FR treats it's employee's .............:\

[jabird]

Shame Siemens didnt say the FR ban was because of the way FR treats it's employee's .............

Why would they? That might be an issue for a consumer boycott or one of the trade unions, but can't see what relevance it has to another company, unless they have a very specific ethical policy (eg the Co-op).

[racedo]

Shame Siemens didnt say the FR ban was because of the way FR treats it's employee's ....


Would be a bit rich from a company who used Slave Labour in WW2 and worked them to death.

[bartonflyer]

if Siemens care so much for the safety of their employees while travelling presumably they are stopping them driving to work?

[Sunnyjohn]

According to the World Health Organization, road traffic injuries caused an estimated 1.26 million deaths worldwide in the year 2000. and that total has increased year-on-year. So I assume, on that basis, that Siemens do not allow its staff to drive.

[Furia]

It is really funny to see here all Ryanair worshippers moaning and blaming anyone that does not like their beloved airline.
First it was Spain, the ATC, the media, Iberia, the goverment conspiration, now it is Siemens, the German media, Merkel........ A true worldwide conspiration :yuk:

Wake up. Ryanair image to the public and to the aviation professionals is very low.
The juicy nice numbers they make are based in transporting scores of people that for 10 pounds will fly in a kite no matter what.

I like Siemens attitude, their care for their employees, something Ryanair does not.

I do not fly with Ryanair even if the only other option is to take a train, and as professional pilot I have recommended my family and friends to avoid it at all cost. :=

[BEagle]

Wake up. Ryanair image to the public and to the aviation professionals is very low.


I'm not sure it's as high as that, is it?

[Narrow Runway]

Siemens vs. Ryanair.

I am glad to see that a real company has standards.

[Depone]

Pprune has been traditionally very hostile towards Ryanair and its pilots, so any comments redressing the balance are hardly 'worshipping', which is a term that denotes blind faith.

Look, we pilots who fly for Ryanair also dislike many aspects of the company but to label us all as unprofessional and unsafe operators is patently absurd given the Airline's overall safety record.

It is also a slur on the many very competent and dedicated flight crew at
Ryanair who operate safely in trying circumstances, many of whom have worked at other Airlines who curry favour with some of the bigots on here.

[Momoe]

In reply to the professional pilot whose principles won't allow him to fly Ryanair, I can only say you must like trains.

£10 flights are few and far between, however must have been good advertising because you still remember them!
Are all the pilots that fly for Ryanair and maintain their excellent safety record any less professional than you? (1984 stylie?)
Ryanair/MOL are running a successful airline in today's very difficult marketplace, think of it as a glorified coach with wings and not a pared down BA/LH/UA flight and maybe it'll make sense.
However, their advertising and prices obviously appeal to enough folk that MOL isn't going to lose sleep over all the principled Ryanair bashers.

[dwshimoda]

think of it as a glorified coach with wings and not a pared down BA/LH/UA flight and maybe it'll make sense.

You really do not have a clue, and denigrate all pilots, whoever they fly they for.

We need to remove the PP from the first part of this website.

[Hobo]

Ryanair image to the public and to the aviation professionals is very low.

I do not fly with Ryanair even if the only other option is to take a train, and as professional pilot I have recommended my family and friends to avoid it at all cost.

Furia

Exactly which aviation professionals are you talking about here?

Are you prepared to tell us which company you fly for - clearly one that does not require fluent English?



.

[Dualbleed]

Definitely going to buy Siemens after this. :ok:

[Thunderbirdsix]

There is no doubt in my mind that pprune is totally anti Ryanair as are some of the posters, its jealousy all round because Ryanair one of the biggest airlines in the World is an Irish Company and its clear it upsets a lot of people on this board if it was a British company you would never see the sh..e thats written here, I am surprised the MOL has not taken action like another airline here and puts a stop to the rubbish posting.

I know a lot of aircrew in Ryanair they love the job and conditions and are pissed off reading the constant anti Ryanair posting here, guys get real there is not an airline in the World that does not have incidents of course if you have 300 aircraft you are bound to have a few.

[Icelanta]

Just bought myself a new SIEMENS dishwasher, to support their hoycot.

I am also boycotting Ryanair, and so does my family. so sue me FR:mad:

Just read the incident report by then IAA... The whole issue started because all 3 crews did not take enough fuel.nImwould NEVER take less than 1500kg. Extra for a MAD flight when TS is a possibility. and I would divert with at least 500kg. Over the min. Diversion fuel. That is what my c ompany wants,that is safe and Good Operator Practice. Fuel policy is not on how much extra you take, it is about how you burn it.

[Burpbot]

It is a bit low bringing up Siemens alleged actions re slave labour during ww2! I suspect if true they were given little option!! Ever seen schindlers list? It's based on a true story and was not the only story of its kind! I would have expected the moderator to have had a word about the nazi comments as been quite abusive in my opinion!

On the other hand those that work for Ryan have a choice, although many would regard it as slavery if some posters on here are to be believed!

Jeolousy? Not at all and never will be!

Dislike? Yes I think that would be a fair assumption ;)

[grafity]

Just bought myself a new SIEMENS dishwasher, to support their hoycot.

I am also boycotting Ryanair, and so does my family. so sue me FR

Just read the incident report by then IAA... The whole issue started because all 3 crews did not take enough fuel.nImwould NEVER take less than 1500kg. Extra for a MAD flight when TS is a possibility. and I would divert with at least 500kg. Over the min. Diversion fuel. That is what my c ompany wants,that is safe and Good Operator Practice. Fuel policy is not on how much extra you take, it is about how you burn it.

Is your company the one that left a wheel lying on the runway, which could have been a major hazard to other aircraft?

It's quite ironic really that everyone has suddenly picked an argument with Ryanair over it's safety record. It's safety record is probably about the one thing it has going for it. Unless you're a share holder.

[Icelanta]

Flight plan fuel is a Minimum, it is normal to take more, in case of an airport like MAD in summer, it is normal to take A LOT more. it doesn't make a difference really anyhow, for the B737, an extra ton of fuel result of a burn that is a mere 30 to 50 kg. Higher per hour. :ugh:
The company culture of not being absolutely free how much fuel to take, and having to defend yourself for doing,is at fault, not the crew who is brainwashed into O Leary Ryanair Borgs without a spine. Proof is the 2 previous posts, both by coincidence seem to live in Ireland...:rolleyes:

[BerksFlyer]

There is no doubt in my mind that PPRuNe is totally anti Ryanair as are some of the posters, its jealousy all round because Ryanair one of the biggest airlines in the World is an Irish Company and its clear it upsets a lot of people on this board if it was a British company you would never see the sh..e thats written here, I am surprised the MOL has not taken action like another airline here and puts a stop to the rubbish posting.

You would be hard pressed to find a more irrational and illogical conclusion than this.

Most of the negativity around Ryanair on this forum tends to stem from the way the CEO conducts himself, the way in which the company treats its 'service-providers' and its often questionable employment practices.

[Say Mach Number]

I think Siemens are asking the wrong question. Forget Ryanair what about Air France.

They are off my list big time. With an attitude of they taught the birds to fly and their current accident rate I am staying well clear.

[Momoe]

dwshimoda

Quote
Are all the pilots that fly for Ryanair and maintain their excellent safety record any less professional than you?

Denigrating all pilots? The glorified coach was from a pax perspective, in that they want to get from A-B as quickly and cheaply as possible.

If you review previous posts, I think you'll find I'm not in the habit of denigrating all pilots (Only the ones who have been less than PP) and you've taken this out of context, might be that my Mitt Romney SOH is alien to you.

[crewmeal]

What a shame that the professionalism of pilots has been mentioned when it has nothing to do with that. They too have to take 'orders' from the top and I'm sure they always take safety into consideration regardless of what the chief pilot says. O"Leary dictates what he wants and it filters through the company. It's the old story, do it or go elsewhere. My guess is Siemens personal have been on the end of bad service all round which of course will include handing agents who do not work for the airline, along with cabin crew with attitude. Maybe the 'accidents' have been misinterpreted as incidents with all the stories of fuel shortages in such a short space of time.

Many carriers have been caught short of fuel, but not for the reasons Ryanair have.

[CargoOne]

I'm not flying Ryanair because I don't like their service and comfort level, and unlike majority of passengers I'm always prepared to pay extra. Same time, I don't have a doubt about their safety and it would be stupid to deny that FR is a very successful company and MOL shall be respected for this.

[BEagle]

Perhaps the vein of feeling running through this thread is simply that people are concerned that the Ryanair management's well-known attitude towards customer service is now beginning to pervade flight operations, including influencing commanders' decisions?

[Momoe]

Beagle, IMO it's more that MOL is a very public CEO and that persona is indelibly associated with Ryanair in the public's eyes.

Trying to mentally disassociate MOL from Ryanair is always going to be difficult and this polarizes the arguments, we've got the principled I'll never fly Ryanair posters who only see MOL and the take a look at the safety record and what the airline offers.

MOL's legacy is imprinted on Ryanair and will be long after he's gone, all you can hope for is that at some point - objectivity will win.

[glad rag]

Perhaps BEagle, perhaps.

Anyway, you could not compare two diametrically opposed organisations if you tried!

Have a read.

About Siemens - Siemens Global Website (http://www.siemens.com/about/en/index.htm)

und..

History - Siemens Global Website (http://www.siemens.com/about/en/history.htm)

[grafity]

Flight plan fuel is a Minimum, it is normal to take more, in case of an airport like MAD in summer, it is normal to take A LOT more. it doesn't make a difference really anyhow, for the B737, an extra ton of fuel result of a burn that is a mere 30 to 50 kg. Higher per hour.
The company culture of not being absolutely free how much fuel to take, and having to defend yourself for doing,is at fault, not the crew who is brainwashed into O Leary Ryanair Borgs without a spine. Proof is the 2 previous posts, both by coincidence seem to live in Ireland...

I don't work for Ryanair if that's what you are implying. What I am implying is that you seem to have particular view of the Ryanair operation and you're making some pretty outlandish claims, can you tell us how you know this or are you just repeating the media? I happen to know a few Ryanair pilots and ex-pilots and non of them happen to be borgs or without a spine.
I think the real problem here is that there's too many borgs of the sensationalist media. :ugh:

I'll say it again if you don't like Ryanairs business strategy fair enough bitch about that. But, on the hand if you want to look stupid and play Ryanairs strongest hand by all means attack them on their safety record.

[Lyman]

Siemens is at the forefront of "sustainability"; a political ideology that is global in scope and widespread in influence buying/selling/trading.

Connected with "Communitarianism", look for an example in your town, village, rural area.

My best guess is that Siemens and affiliates are doing real world testing of political power and corporate enforcement results as relates to market exposure and public opinion.

Purely political. Safety shmafety....

In Lyman's considered opinion....

[CargoOne]

Flyingpicket

But to say someone shall be respected simply because he keeps the shareholders happy, is akin to saying the sugar cane plantation owners of the last century, or the clothing outlets who have profited from the use of Asian child labour, are also to be respected.

Let me tell you one thing which may help you to understand industry better - airlines are not charities and their only mission is to MAKE MONEY. There are few exceptions to that like small national carriers etc but those are not really commercial airlines. Also you need to understand that pilots, technicians, dispatchers, cleaners etc are only there because airlines not yet figured how to get a rid of them (well cleaners and caterers already got their hit). In that sense what passengers thinks is only important as long as it turns more profit, it is not a value per se. I recall old Swiss Air was quite decent in customer service but they still went bust, while MOL model pays off so far.

So yes airlines are only to make shareholders happy and sooner you realize it better you adapt to be successful in this industry.

Yet I am not flying Ryanair.

[AirResearcher]

I've lost count how many times I've pointed this out to various authorities and interested parties: http://www.ryanair.com/doc/investor/MaintenanceRepairs.pdf , note the use of the word 'endeavors' in the first paragraph

And then read: Terrifying Ryanair 21,000ft emergency descent 'forced by maintenance errors' - AOL Travel UK (http://travel.aol.co.uk/2012/09/12/ryanair-21-000ft-emergency-plummet-was-forced-by-maintenance-er/)

and: BBC News - Ryanair emergency descent 'forced by maintenance errors' (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-nottinghamshire-19543673)

Maybe this, and similar incidents have something to do with Siemens decision?

[Momoe]

AirResearcher,

A little more research (about 25 seconds) would have shown you that the two separate loss of pressure incidents appear to be the SAME incident.
Subsequent investigation noted that part installation could be improved and recommendations have been made to Boeing.
Ryanair have responded appropriately.
Congratulations, you've reduced your Ryanair serious incident list by 50%.

Little more attention to detail might get you taken seriously by the "various authorities and interested parties".

[radeng]

BRE questions how many Siemens employees fly. I don't know, but of the relatively limited number of European committees I go to (8), 6 of them have at least one regular Siemens attendee, two of them have two attendees and one has three. So 1% may well be a bit low.


I had the argument with our purchasing department about Ryanair. First, it didn't fly to Arlanda, which was the right side of Stockholm for our plant. Second, it didn't fly from Heathrow, adding at least an hour or an hour and a half to the journey. Thirdly, if you needed a flight within 72 hours, it was rarely any cheaper! Getting it into the heads of people in purchasing or corporate travel that the total cost must include the time taken is hard, as they all feel you travel in your own time. Which we did, but it had to go on the time sheet, and so was charged against the project.


The final stupidity was when we were told that the corporate agent charged £30 to get us a ticket. When I was able to show that I could get the same ticket at the same price on BA, but only costing £4.50, I was told to go and do it.

Many years ago, at a certain large company, the company travel agent changed and it was mandatory to use them. The travel company CEO was the wife of the Finance Director of the large company..........

Travel agents - I avoid them, just as I avoid Ryanair, and for the same reasons - I don't get the service I want.

[AirResearcher]

Momoe -I was pointing to 2 independent reports of the same incident -standard research practise.. The rhetorical question I was asking was : COULD this be why Siemens have introduced this policy, bearing in mind the German report was only issued a couple of weeks ago? Hope this clarifies any confusion.

[Momoe]

AirResearcher

Quite why you do this, I don't know. When writing papers, referring to independent and separate sources for verification/references are de rigeur but you're on an aviation forum and should post accordingly.

I would have thought that the interim report by the German "AAIB" would have been more relevant (Cause, effect and conclusion?). Especially as Boeing procedures were found to be wanting.
Aside from this, it's an isolated instance of a mistake in maintenance procedures which isn't a Ryanair monopoly as you well know, other depressurisation situations have had far worse outcomes.

None of this alters the fact that Siemens logic appears to be flawed, you don't blacklist an airline because you believe an accident will happen because of it's culture.

Air France should be on Siemens list as the general concensus is they have a culture problem and an unenviable safety record. Perhaps Siemens would like to explain why they consider Ryanair statistically less safe then Air France?

[Orvilles dad]

It always seems to me that there are 2 main aspects to any discussion regarding FR, and that sadly, many folks mix them up.

One main aspect is that the FR aircraft are flown by a skilled group of pilots, and maintained by engineers, who clearly have a high level of ability - they fly so far with so few incidents so they must be doing something/many things right.

The other main aspect is the unspeakable arrogance of the man who heads the airline. He treats his pilots and attendants with distain, won't give many of them a permanent employment status and generally uses every opportunity to denigrate them in the media - "we don't need 2 pilots etc."

Yet despite it all, the FR flight crews are professional enough to ignore all this and do an outstanding job - despite, rather than with the help of, their management.

That's the underlying bed rock in this argument. But then, because it is FR, it gets overlain by 3 other layers:

1. the FR lovers who put up with anything provided it is cheap - an entirely human characteristic for some folks. So on any discussion about FR, whatever it is, they always post "FR is brilliant, the best invention since sliced bread" etc.

2. the opposite gang, the FR haters, who abhor the airline for its complete lack of customer service. They expect more for their money, and are willing to pay slightly more to secure better service. This is the group that chimes in with the "I'd never fly on FR if it was the last airline in the world" argument.

But, as we all know, in life, there will always be choices. If you need a car to get from A to B, some folks will buy a beat up old car and others will buy a new BMW. - Different strokes for different folks.

3. the third group adding to this complex situation are those who are able to convince themselves that any everything that happens on the flight deck is directly down to FR management, and MOL in particular. That the very professionalism that FR pilots display is somehow influenced by the unspeakable MOL.

So they ignore the fact that 4 aircraft captains independently chose to make decisions that, with the benefit of hindsigh MAY be debatable, regarding fuel is not down to each Captains own choice, but is directly because they were ordered or compromised into it by MOL or edicts from management.]

In my mind, it's this third group that have lost the plot. They no longer have the ability to differentiate between being wise after the event and blaming everything on FR and MOL in particular.

Maybe, with the benefit of hindsight, or a bit more foresight, the Captains should have chosen to take more fuel - but it WAS their choice, nobody else's, and certainly not Mr. O'Leary's or his minions.

But wouldn't it be nice if we always had the benefit of hindsight before we made every decision?

A final disclaimer - I don't work for FR and I'd say I fall into tier 2 above - the FR haters - i.e. I hate their service and don't use them, but I admire the professionalism of their flight crews. And Orville was offered a job with them, but turned 'em down and went on to bigger and better things with another airline.

[OFSO]

Can we add to the praise for the guys flying the FR's, the guys maintaining them ? There is an interview in the Catalan newspaper "El Punt" today talking about Ryanair's "lost reputation in Spain": an interview with somebody high up in flight safety is quoted in saying Ryanair's maintenance is to the very highest standards possible.

Not sure if MOL is "unspeakable" in a text thread. "Unmentionable" ? Whatever, quite agree.

[GrahamO]

Knowing nothing about the practicalities of the role etc could I ask a question ?

So they ignore the fact that 4 aircraft captains independently chose to make decisions that, with the benefit of hindsight, MAY be debatable,

If there are a large number of aircraft all following the same basic guidelines on calculations on fuel loads, for broadly similar routes etc, what are the chances that the only four aircraft to 'have an issue' are from the same airline ?

So, are there so many such occurrences such that the incidence of Ryanair 'events' are statistically insignificant ?

Or is it that Ryanair are having these incidents at a rate which is statistically more significant which would indicate different factors being used in the calculations than other airlines?

Once is happenstance, twice is coincidence, third is enemy action as Ian Fleming once said. Four times he didn't cover

[CargoOne]

flyingpicket

Many small (and sometimes big too) national carriers are in fact Government sponsored charities - they never made a profit and nobody really expects them to make a profit in current shape and form. If they were commercial airlines they will be bust decades ago.

So SR perfect service had nothing to do with going bust, same time FR rude service has nothing to do with their profits. As long as FR can have industry-record profits without spending a penny on customer service, they shall continue to do so. Being a nice chap will not buy you a yacht, however healthy dividends will do.

Thousands of people in this industry shall respect MOL for creating their jobs. They wouldn't be there without him, as FR has made European car, bus and train passengers to fly, others just followed the suit.

If somebody thinks that FR pays too little or conditions are too bad, there is an easy answer - take another job, slavery has long gone in this part of world. If you are contractor to FR like handler etc - refuse the contract at the price FR offered and keep going, there are very few cases when handling company can be enforced by law to handle the carrier, and this never comes at rock bottom rates. We are living in a free world, so enjoy goods and bads about it.

[AviatorDave]

I'm avoiding Ryanair and Air France whenever I can.

I don't like Ryanair's business philosophy and their "passenger = paying cattle" attitude. That's enough to make me run far away from them.

Air France I simply don't trust in terms of safe operation. Too many negative headlines lately which make me believe that there's a serious problem with this airline.

There are many more airlines which I wouldn't trust, but it's a lot less likely that I'll ever have to use one of those.

[Sober Lark]

It strikes me that the most hostile here appear to be individuals who have an unfavourably simplistic on non existent understanding of the composition of the company that is Ryanair.

[ExXB]

Many of the individuals also seem to have followed this thread from another forum. Not typical of SLF.

Perhaps a nice Mod would move it elsewhere, it really isn't SLF stuff.

[TightSlot]

Perhaps a nice Mod would move it elsewhere, it really isn't SLF stuff.

Well, we might not like the game being played, but at least we know where they are playing it, and can keep an eye on them from out of the kitchen window while we have a nice cup of tea and a choccie biscuit.

I'm always surprised at the endless hamster-wheel nature of FR discussions. I don't like FR, for lots of reasons and so I quietly exercise my consumer choice by refusing to fly with them and flying with others instead. I am in a minority and recognise that - they are the most successful airline in Europe and surely don't lie awake nights worrying about the loss of my business. Those are the facts, and there's not really much else useful to say.

[ExXB]

Well, we might not like the game being played, but at least we know where they are playing it, and can keep an eye on them from out of the kitchen window while we have a nice cup of tea and a choccie biscuit.

I'm always surprised at the endless hamster-wheel nature of FR discussions. I don't like FR, for lots of reasons and so I quietly exercise my consumer choice by refusing to fly with them and flying with others instead. I am in a minority and recognise that - they are the most successful airline in Europe and surely don't lie awake nights worrying about the loss of my business. Those are the facts, and there's not really much else useful to say.

:ok: In my case I've never flown them, but they don't fly here.

[Tableview]

Richard Branson is a nice chap, and he has plenty of yachts.

Many people would question the first part of that statement.

[ukc_mike]

The larger issue would really be about why a reputable company as Siemens would send its valued employees on such el cheapo flights

When I worked for Siemens we weren't even suppossed to use upgrade vouchers. The travel office told me I should always sit in an economy seat, regardless of what the airline or ticket stated, 'because I worked for Siemens'.

[Ancient Observer]

I really do not understand the fuss about MOL and Ryannair in this thread.

It is very simple. MOL wants to run a cheap bus company that happens to fly.
He knows that a hull loss is expensive, so he does all that is necessary to avoid a hull loss. Fine.

He knows that losing a pax, or even thousands of pax, is cheap, so he doesn't care less about that. There are plenty of others to fill the seats.

If folk are happy to take a very cheap bus from a very cheap airport to another very cheap airport, often miles from their destination, they will fly with MOL. Otherwise they will not fly with MOL.

Simples.

[10bob]

Ancient Observer has got it spot on. I'm just SLF but I have very good SLF credentials. I hold gold status with BA, gold with *A, gold with Skyteam and status (but not yet gold) with Emirates. If RYR had a loyalty programme, I would be gold with them too. I will board over 100 different planes this year, just like I did last year. And the year before.

I don't like O'Leary, but he offers a service to an airport I need to go. The planes are new, they're clean, and they are invariably on time. The crew are unfailingly polite (even when pushed to distraction by some of my fellow passengers).

I make my point about MOL by not paying for the extras - I carry my baggage, I don't pay for priority boarding or reserved seats, and I never buy anything on board. And I won't approve the expenses for any of my team who do so either ;)

But I don't spite my face by flying to a different destination further away just to use a different carrier. That would be bizarre.

Ryanair offer value and service. I've flown some airlines with a more interesting safety record and approach to maintenance, and Ryanair stand head and shoulders above. Yes, I don't see what goes on in the cockpit, but you can see more than enough to get a good or a bad feeling when you board your flight. The airports sometimes leave a little to be desired (I'm looking at you, Stansted) but that's not the airline's fault. I've flown about 40 times with them this year and I think I have been late twice. And each time, the problem has been promptly and politely explained by the Captain. If only the more mainstream airlines could boast such a record.

Most of those who criticise them go on to say they have never flown with them. How they can form a view on the product offered when they have never used it confuses me?

[radeng]

10bob

If the product offered isn't what you want, then you won't use it. In my case, it isn't, so I won't.

[glad rag]

Most of those who criticise them go on to say they have never flown with them. How they can form a view on the product offered when they have never used it confuses me?

Well I was a regular user [ beat megabus, just] and I CAN tell you a few things about the way they treat their fare payers.

[10bob]

Radeng - Presumably you've decided that based on trying for yourself, and not just listening to the hysteria on here?

Glad rag - as I say, I've flown RYR 40 times this year alone, so i call it as i have extensively seen it. Ive also flown BA FIRST/CW about 20 times this year, so i have high expectations! RYR have been invariably polite, prompt, clean and safe. I genuinely don't understand the hysteria. I can't have been so lucky so many times.

[Hotel Tango]

Nothing to do with hysteria etc. I'm the same as radeng. Ryanair does not provide the product I want, so I don't use them. Simple.

[radeng]

10bob,

When they don't offer a flight at the time I want to the place I want to go to, they aren't offering the product that I want. When I want to go to Frankfurt, that's where I want to go - not Hahn.

Understand that I travel on my business, so time is money. Plus, I'll be honest, I want the comfort of Business Class, and even leaving that aside, every time I've looked at the Ryanair product, it is neither at the times or to/from the places I want to use.

[Tableview]

Last summer Ryanair had a flight from an airport 60 kilometres from where we were in Spain to an airport 40 kilometres from where my son wanted to go in Sweden. It was cheap (or at least it appeared cheap.......) and the flight times were convenient.

I would not allow him to use it as I despise their business ethics and I have concerns about their safety. I don't bitch and moan about the airline, I acknowledge that there are enough suckers, or people who don't give a damn about standards, out there to make it highly successful, but my choice is not to use it and not to allow my family to use it. Why is the fact that Siemens do the same generating so much debate?

[10bob]

Fair enough re Frankfurt. I wouldn't want to go to Hahn either. But Frankfurt is an extreme case.

I'll give another example. Krakow. RYR flight leaves at 6am and gets me into there at 9.30 in the morning. EZY fly only in the middle of the day - this is a business trip so as you say, time is money. No-one else flies direct. If you want business class, its the Luftwaffe via Munich or Frankfurt. There is no closer Krakow airport to the city centre.

RYR are therefore the only airline offering the product required. Would those who "despise" the product waste their own time and money to avoid? For what is a perfectly safe operation, such a decision seems irrational to me.

[ExXB]

As I said I've never flown FR but I didn't criticism them either.

From what I have gleaned here and on other aviation sites, when things go well, say 99.5% or more of the time, you will be a happy camper.

But in the less than 0.5% when things go pear shaped you are on you own. I'm not referring to safety issues but when they have to cancel a flight. They could care less about assisting you to complete your journey. "Here's your money back" is their idea of customer service.

Now this probably wouldn't matter at Krakow where there are other options (albeit expensive) but at Hahn?

I'm not saying it has never happened but have you ever heard of FR rerouting/rebooking on another airline?

You are unlikely to encounter a problem with FR, and I don't think there are any questions about their safety. But any FR traveller should expect to be left high and dry if/when things go wrong.

[pwalhx]

I fly Ryanair if they happen to be going to the right place at the right time and there is no alternative. I have no issue with their punctuality or the safety of their aircraft. However I do not enjoy the flying experience with them and I must be unlucky as the 40 odd times I have flown with them I have rarely had a friendly crew. Having said that when will people realise it is a case of you get what you pay for.

However I agree some Ryanairports are distant from their host cities but then again this year I have been to Incheon for Seoul and KLIA for Kuala Lumpur both of which could easily be viewed in the same way as they are not that close to the cities themselves.

[dui]

I've been flying Ryanair since 1998,picking up tickets at Luton before flying to Dublin (£6.50)each way,could not believe it and buying Duty Free fags and booze.
Continue to use them up 12 times a year and will defend them everytime based on the fact that they go to where i want to go at prices i want to pay.This weekend Bournemouth to Girona 2 adults £98 return all in you cannot beat the value.
Why do people think that flying LoCo should be any different than catching a train or bus?
Why do people think the easy to follow T&Cs don't apply to them?

[GrahamO]

I'll ask the simple question again as nobody seemed to know the answer last time.

Is the rate of incidence of these events statistically higher with Ryanair, or lower than the average you would expect from similar aircraft on similar routes carrying fuel determined by the allegedly same calculations?

If all pilots are using the same calculations etc, why would one company have four events, but all the others have none ? Are these just four events amongst many and therefore nothing statistically ? Or are they a statistical anomaly which indicates something is being done differently at the airline ?

There may be four different pilots but what is the statistical likelihood of four pilots having events such as these being from the same airline when others at other airlines are not ?

Just asking !

[Sober Lark]

Some people hear but do not listen. Ryanair's risk profile gains them a more competitive aviation insurance premium than many of the airlines some here prefer to fly with.

[fireflybob]

If all pilots are using the same calculations etc, why would one company have four events, but all the others have none ?

Ryanair "incidents" seem to attract more high profile media coverage - all airlines have incidents from time to time.

But it's quite fair to ask those questions.

[Dick Fisher]

In an effort to be fair let's just take a look at one recent example of Siemens' prowess as a global business.

DMI was contracted out to the technology services provider Siemens with consulting by Deloitte. Costs of the project rose after a number of technical problems and delays, and in 2009 the BBC terminated the contract with Siemens. BBC losses were estimated to be £38.2m, partially offset by a £27.5m settlement paid by Siemens, leaving a loss of £10.7m to the BBC

Siemens great, Ryanair rubbish? Think again.

[GrahamO]

Siemens great, Ryanair rubbish? Think again.

Siemens - 73 billion Euros revenue, 7% growth, 12% profit (EBITDA), worldwide presence, coverage in all major markets, immunity from individual market failures - high.

Ryanair - 4 billion Euros revenue, 21% growth, 10% profit (EBITDA), small worldwide presence, coverage mainly in one (bankrupt) continent, complete dependence upon one market sector, wholly dependent upon price of fuel.

Yes, in relative terms Ryanair is not a good investment.

Pointing out one failed Siemens contract amongst tens of thousands of successful ones is like pointing out that Ryanair has aircraft failures and trying to suggest that it is normal for all their aircraft to be that way. Fortunately, there are more balanced views of each company out there - those with some sense clearly.

[paulkelly580]

I love the way everyone has jumped on the FR bashing bandwagon zzzzzz facts are facts... FR do what they do very well... These stories in the press re fuel etc are typical of media scaremongering anyone who is or has an affiliation with the aviation industry knows the ins an outs of these kind of stories... Siemens are typically jumping on said bandwagon.. It was proven and stated that FR flights were NOT below their regulated and safe fuel reserves an the aircraft landed with sufficient fuel reserves and that in actual fact Spanish authorities at Madrid were in fact somewhat to blame for mismanagement causing prolonged delays...

[cavortingcheetah]

Siemens has a well established in house talent management philosophy which is in turn driven by a concept of performance management. This might not be compatible with a perception that an airline's management, instead of providing its employees with guidance and support, instead dictates on matters affecting safety of flight, which would have been better left to the initiative and expertise of the airline employees.