Ryanair loses name battle

[Anti-ice]

Ryanair cannot use the word "Dusseldorf" for an airport 70 kilometres (42 miles) from the city.

The court in Cologne said that Ryanair's term "Niederrhein (Dusseldorf)" was deceptive advertising because the airport was too far from the city.

Dublin-based Ryanair from London Stansted airport to the former military airfield at Weeze in the Niederrhein, or Lower Rhine, region.

Ryanair normally flies to smaller airports outside major cities, where airport fees are less expensive and aircraft turnaround times are quicker.

Ryanair continues to call the airport it uses 120 kilometres (70 miles) from Frankfurt "Frankfurt-Hahn".



Low-cost airlines are often criticised for suggesting their destinations are closer to major cities than they actually are.

[Bezi l]

From what I can tell, most of the city destinations are determined by IATA. IATA had decided that the airports of LCY, LGW, LTN & STN are all grouped under the same city code of LON - LONDON. Simalarly, PIK is also classed as Glasgow, even though it is miles away.

Neiderrhein, however, is not classed as being part of the Dusseldorf metropolitan area, but in the Frankfurt example, Hahn (HHN) is clased as being part of the Frankfurt city area and therefore its use is justified.

This is an old argument, that effects many of the low-cost airlines.

bl
xx

[Pirate]

He could do a lot worse than calling it Flugplatz Laarbruch. There must be gazillions of serving and retired RAF and army types who know exactly where it is and how nicely placed for the German and Dutch autobahn structures.

Now if he can only arrange for the cheap cars, petrol, booze, fags etc that were such a feature of the place in those halcyon days....

[AJ]

Perhaps a better idea would be for Ryanair to advertise the actual airports they fly to, and accompany this with a map or details of X number of destinations within a reasonable distance or to which public transport is available. That would probably solve the legal problems Ryanair keeps getting into with regards to naming of airports.

Having said this, and judging by numbers, most pax are happy with the airports being used.

[brabazon]

The IATA issue is interesting as they approved Hahn's link to Frankfurt well before Ryanair turned up- in fact I believe Lufthansa Cargo were involved as they were trying to develop Hahn as a Cargo hub.

I think potential Ryanair passengers just need to read the small print about where they are flying too and research coaches/trains etc otherwise pay the extra and go with another airline.

Oh and don't forget to take out travel insurance - just in case!

[In trim]

Brabazon's point re the cargo connection is a good 'un. For a cargo operator it may well be valid, and the time and cost involved in clearing cargo through freight sheds, etc. at Hahn would presumably be significantly less than FRA, and more than make up for the additional transit time by road.

Unfortunately passengers tend to complain more than cardboard boxes, and whilst there may be valid justification for a "city code" being applied for a cargo operation, would this always be the same for passengers?

[virginblue]

The main reason why the German courts allowed the use of Frankfurt for Hahn was not so much the IATA area code but the fact HHN is majority-owned by FRA - unlike NRN, which DUS does not own (they own MGL, by the way).

[WestWind1950]

@virginblue,

that's more like it... Hahn was taken over by FRAPORT, the company that runs FRA... the name of the airfield was officially named Frankfurt-Hahn, thus Ryanair could legally use it.... it was a big controversy, though (and I think it's ridiculous!! ) .
There are no autobahns leading there, the main road is under construction, there are no trains leading there... suggestions have been made to have the Transrapid magnetic train built between FRA and HHN, but the environmentalist keep attacking that idea.... besides the usual money problems.... So, by the time the passengers drive or take a bus there they pay almost as much as if they'd taken a normal flight... (and why does Ryanair not have to pay landing fees, but the "little guys" like Cessnas, etc. do?? It's really not fair... :mad: )

http://www.click-smilie.de/sammlung/aktion/action-smiley-072.gif Westy

[BEagle]

The idea that 'where-the-Hell-is-Hahn' is anywhere near Frankfurt is totally ludicrous. Perhaps if it was on a direct rail connection to Frankfurt, then fair enough. But it isn't - it's B£OODY MILES AWAY by indifferent and infrequent public transport. 76 miles from Flugplatz Hahn to Frankfurt Hauptbahnhof, in fact... That's further than from Brize Norton to Paddington!

Handy for the Mosel though. So why not 'Mosel International', a bit of honesty and drop the Frankfurt pretence?

[antonovman]

its actually written on the terminal building - Frankfurt-Hahn

[GroupCaptain]

Bezi l

For the record, PIK is closer to Glasgow than STN is to London and like STN benefits from a rail link.

[Bezi l]

Group Captain,

note taken - but if I was going to Glasgow, I would rather fly to GLA than to PIK.

BL :ok:
xx

[Joe Curry]

>>For the record, PIK is closer to Glasgow than STN is to London and like STN benefits from a rail link.<<

One would imagine the train being quicker into central Glasgow
from PIK than from GLA in busy periods?

[EGPFlyer]

Joe,

One would imagine the train being quicker into central Glasgow from PIK than from GLA in busy periods?

The train from Prestwick takes between 44mins and 1 hour 8mins (depending on which one comes along). They operate every half hour (hourly on sun). These trains actually all stop at Paisley Gilmour St, the closest station (for the moment) to Glasgow Airport, on their way into Glasgow.

The trains from Paisley take between 11 and 15 mins and there are 8 an hour (5 on sun). There is a 2 minute bus service from the airport to the station whose price is included in the rail ticket.

I think the above may change your opinion.

[GroupCaptain]

EGPFlyer:

The 44 minute service operates half hourly to/from PIK; the other service to which you allude routes via Kilmarnock and is additional.

30% of PIK pax use the rail service - you will find this considerably more than use rail to access GLA.

It takes at least 5 minutes more to get to the bus stop at GLA than to the station at PIK. Assume a 2 minute wait for the bus and your 2 minutes transit to Gilmour Street (very optimistic); 2 minutes to get to the platform; say 6 minute average wait for a train and 11 minute rail journey = 28 minutes. Quicker than PIK perhaps but not the huge time advantage you imply.

[EGPFlyer]

GroupCaptain

30% of PIK pax use the rail service - you will find this considerably more than use rail to access GLA.

This is because Glasgow is easier to get to by car for most of the people in the west of Scotland than Prestwick is. The long term car parking is cheaper and a taxi from the city centre is a lot cheaper than one to PIK. Most folk when they are off on their hols will usually get a friend or relative to drop them off. This is less common at PIK as it is further to drive for most. I doubt many folk actually know about the rail bus link (which agreed, takes more than two mins... I read it wrong from the BAA web site) as the BAA would rather people parked in their nice new car park instead.

It takes at least 5 minutes more to get to the bus stop at GLA than to the station at PIK.

I dont know how you work this out. The bus stop is directly outside the front of the terminal, compared to the 5 min walk along the walkway to the station at PIK.

I think the best way to work it out would be to work out maximum times for both for a typical weekday.

Glasgow
Mins wait for bus 12
bus journey 10
wait for train 7.5
train journey 11
total 40.5

Prestwick
wait for train 30
train journey 44
total 74

I have missed out the walk to the station for both cos I reckon it is the same.

Apologies for the maths but i've been sitting around all day and I had to use my brain for something!!

[GroupCaptain]

EGPFlyer:

OK, OK - you've had more time on your hands than me today (more than enough to use PIK!).

Your train waiting time at PIK should be more like 15 mins as this would be the average length of wait given a 30 minute frequency.

My point about the GLA distance to the bus stop was taking the size of the terminal into account - if you walk from the BA shuttle gates to the bus stop and compare than to walking from a PIK gate to the train, you'll find the PIK walk considerably shorter - I estimate 5 minutes but perhaps that's an exaggeration?

I think the point remains that, in the context of the overall journey time, the extra few minutes incurred using PIK (assuming Glasgow City centre is the o/d point) is not than significant particularly when the lower fares available at PIK and the single ground journey are taken into account.

[Bezi l]

boys, boys, boys!!!!

How far off the thread can you get?????

I didn't realise that the importance of Ryanair losing it's battle with airport names had such significance on the merits of ease of getting to PIK and/or GLA!!

BL
xx
:E

[brabazon]

Getting back to the point of the topic, what should be the basis of Ryanair's airport naming - should it be the IATA definition of the City that the Airport is linked to (as with Hahn and Frankfurt) and/or the official name of the airport (again the owners of Hahn call it Frankfurt Hahn) or can they call it what they like?