Ryanair: approach incidents in the news
Why haven't the RyanAir crews gone on strike?
Why do they continue to fly for Leo even after he has done such a miserable job on here blaming everyone BUT himself for what is happening around him.
Egomaniac or what.
This airline is a slow burning fuze...a victim of its own masters' success.
Why do they continue to fly for Leo even after he has done such a miserable job on here blaming everyone BUT himself for what is happening around him.
Egomaniac or what.
This airline is a slow burning fuze...a victim of its own masters' success.
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Euroland
Posts: 2,814
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Quite amusing that when Danny remarked in the other Ryanair bashing thred that he has evidence indicating other operators were involved in operating below minima at the same airport and the same time as Ryanair..........the thred drops like a hot potatoe.
Now, there is also evidence in the CAA's own occurrence reporting system that minima are busted at one (if not more) other UK airport and many of the reports are about established UK operators.
Perhaps Flight should do a little homework and ask the CAA just how many safety reports have been made of UK operators operating below minima at UK airports and what is being done about that?
When they are at it why not also ask why the UK CAA permits pilots not qualified to the minimum European or International ICAO standards to operate IFR in IMC in controlled airspace with frequent commercial passenger carrying flights in close proximity while not being able to comply with established ATC procedures and in many cases not flying aircraft that are appropriately equipped?
At least elsewhere in Europe when flying in a commercial passenger aircraft in cloud in controlled airspace, any happy Harry weekend flyer in the cloud with you will have demonstrated the minimum European or International standard required to be there and be safe. The same is not the case in the UK. Is the UK less safe?
The French Authorities have also reported some UK aircraft for flying below minima in France are they safe?
The problem with digging for sh1t is that everyone standing round the hole get's it up their nostrels not just the one standing with the shovel!
Perhaps some ATCOs from St Mawgan international could explain why they love making reports of pilots operating below minima?
No doubt that they would answer that they have done so in the interest of safety.
Perhaps the CAA, the operators, BALPA and comentators here do not see it in the same way because despite being published these reports regarding UK operators are simply never mentioned?
Those pilots have to be far more unsafe than Ryanair pilots. After all they would have been well rested, well looked after, with a nice happy clappy management system and of course no pressure to perform short turn rounds...........but they broke the law and put passengers at risk according to the reports! Why?
Regards,
DFC
Now, there is also evidence in the CAA's own occurrence reporting system that minima are busted at one (if not more) other UK airport and many of the reports are about established UK operators.
Perhaps Flight should do a little homework and ask the CAA just how many safety reports have been made of UK operators operating below minima at UK airports and what is being done about that?
When they are at it why not also ask why the UK CAA permits pilots not qualified to the minimum European or International ICAO standards to operate IFR in IMC in controlled airspace with frequent commercial passenger carrying flights in close proximity while not being able to comply with established ATC procedures and in many cases not flying aircraft that are appropriately equipped?
At least elsewhere in Europe when flying in a commercial passenger aircraft in cloud in controlled airspace, any happy Harry weekend flyer in the cloud with you will have demonstrated the minimum European or International standard required to be there and be safe. The same is not the case in the UK. Is the UK less safe?
The French Authorities have also reported some UK aircraft for flying below minima in France are they safe?
The problem with digging for sh1t is that everyone standing round the hole get's it up their nostrels not just the one standing with the shovel!
Perhaps some ATCOs from St Mawgan international could explain why they love making reports of pilots operating below minima?
No doubt that they would answer that they have done so in the interest of safety.
Perhaps the CAA, the operators, BALPA and comentators here do not see it in the same way because despite being published these reports regarding UK operators are simply never mentioned?
Those pilots have to be far more unsafe than Ryanair pilots. After all they would have been well rested, well looked after, with a nice happy clappy management system and of course no pressure to perform short turn rounds...........but they broke the law and put passengers at risk according to the reports! Why?
Regards,
DFC
Last edited by DFC; 13th Feb 2007 at 22:58.
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Essex
Posts: 51
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Checked on my way home tonight with Ryanair crew control in STN. Exactly 8 FR Captains and 19 FR First officers are resigned and leaving the company in the next 12 weeks - and that is compnay wide. That is from all 1500 pilots. So 2% in a quarter.
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Here there and everywhere
Posts: 122
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Why haven't the RyanAir crews gone on strike?
....exactly 8 FR Captains and 19 FR First officers are resigned and leaving the company in the next 12 weeks - and that is compnay wide. That is from all 1500 pilots. So 2% in a quarter.
More to the point is the question: why is Ryanair so very keen to ensure that this truth gets no traction? And by the way, this will not divert attention here from the key safety debate which is taking place on this thread - but it does emphasise the importance of "image/media management" which seems to dominate Ryanair's approach to most things, including safety issues.
DFC,
there was ONE easyjet who supposedly landed following a report of RVR's below minimums.
easyJet have since reviewed the ATC tapes and found that the RVR report was given AFTER the aircraft has passed the marker.
there was ONE easyjet who supposedly landed following a report of RVR's below minimums.
easyJet have since reviewed the ATC tapes and found that the RVR report was given AFTER the aircraft has passed the marker.
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: UK
Posts: 160
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
DFC,
Sad little post really.
With typical RYR style your argument defending RYR is based on finger pointing in the opposite direction. Reminds me of school - "But teacher! He did it too!". Quite sad really. Rather than accept that there is even the slightest possibility that something could be wrong in RYR, you like so many before you will try to say it's OK because others have done it too. Remember this thread is not just about RVRs and STN. It is about many other incidents too and a publicly violent management style.
I suppose it is just a conspiracy between the airports, CAA, IAA, Flight International, BALPA, IALPA, the Queen, Tony Blair, Mary McAleese, Bertie Ahern and Dermot Mannion and whoever else you can think of? RYR are right and the rest of the world is wrong. Fair enough.
Once again I qoute James Hotson of the CAA discussing the STN incidents.
Sad little post really.
Perhaps the CAA, the operators, BALPA and comentators here do not see it in the same way because despite being published these reports regarding UK operators are simply never mentioned?
I suppose it is just a conspiracy between the airports, CAA, IAA, Flight International, BALPA, IALPA, the Queen, Tony Blair, Mary McAleese, Bertie Ahern and Dermot Mannion and whoever else you can think of? RYR are right and the rest of the world is wrong. Fair enough.
Once again I qoute James Hotson of the CAA discussing the STN incidents.
"No other airline was involved,"
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Various
Posts: 217
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
DFC you start your "defence by attack" post with the words
Suggesting that this is about Ryanair bashing is really just part and parcel of the "£100,000 a year for 18 hours work a week" approach to issues of fact.
The issue is not Ryanair bashing, even if some do indeed bash Ryanair from time to time. The issue is where or not there are real and verifiable safety issues which, for whatever reason, either do not see the light of day or, on the other hand, are exaggerated in an unfair way against Ryanair. I am definitely in the former camp - but my point is that using the media to spin, or using PPRuNe to counter-spin is really missing the point.
Flight has suggested that there are reasons to suspect that an independent investigation is merited. I think that such an investigation would put a lot of matters to bed once and for all. But you are talking tripe if you think that attacking others or suggesting that "everybody does it" is an adequate response to repeated reports coming from all areas of Ryanair about, shall we say, "strange goings on".
Quite amusing that when Danny remarked in the other Ryanair bashing thred ...
The issue is not Ryanair bashing, even if some do indeed bash Ryanair from time to time. The issue is where or not there are real and verifiable safety issues which, for whatever reason, either do not see the light of day or, on the other hand, are exaggerated in an unfair way against Ryanair. I am definitely in the former camp - but my point is that using the media to spin, or using PPRuNe to counter-spin is really missing the point.
Flight has suggested that there are reasons to suspect that an independent investigation is merited. I think that such an investigation would put a lot of matters to bed once and for all. But you are talking tripe if you think that attacking others or suggesting that "everybody does it" is an adequate response to repeated reports coming from all areas of Ryanair about, shall we say, "strange goings on".
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: right behind you
Posts: 523
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
So inveritas,who is lying to you now,crew control,pb or me.pb bids at 10,crew control says 27,you will find that i am correct.not that it matters a hoot but 129 is the real number.ask to see the spreadsheet.by the way crew control can only see for the next 7 days in their system.keep searching,the truth is out there.
Well said, Grim ! I am in to my last few weeks.. Inveritas, the numbers you came up with are so far off ! I know of 9 F/O's in STN alone that are on the way out. Now back to the subject of landing below the RVR limits....
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Euroland
Posts: 2,814
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
captainpaddy and Aloue,
Perhaps you guys should check some simple facts properly before posting.
I am not in any way defending Ryanair.
If I was rising to the defence of Ryanair then I would hardly highlight a series of safety reports from a UK airport regarding operators breaching minima when one of those reports was regarding as Ryanair flight. Several others related to UK operators.
What I am doing is simply asking why when other UK operators have been reported to the CAA for breaches of minima is this matter put forward as simply a Ryanair matter or a situation caused by management style, pressure etc etc.
If you people were not so determined to attack Ryanair and take everyone who puts forward a differene view as being in defence of Ryanair you would have time to get your facts right.
Go read the CAA incident reports from the last while and then tell us it is a Ryanair issue.
Minima are busted in the UK on probably a more frequent basis than you would expect. Most times ATC don't notice and nothing gets reported. Is that safe? Is that Ryanair's fault?
Finally, we are talking safety here. Without centerline lights, CAT3 landings would be unsafe due to the lack of visual references in the rollout unless the RVR is 550+.....agreed?
Why then is it more safe for one operator to know that the RVR is less than 550m and land CAT3 and for another to do the exact same but be unsafe....simply because they received the information earlier. If landing in less than 550 CAT3 with no centerline lights is unsafe then everyone who did that regardless of when the RVR reading was received was unsafe. The only debating point is the technical issue of when with that information available the approach should be discontinued?
Regards,
DFC
Perhaps you guys should check some simple facts properly before posting.
I am not in any way defending Ryanair.
If I was rising to the defence of Ryanair then I would hardly highlight a series of safety reports from a UK airport regarding operators breaching minima when one of those reports was regarding as Ryanair flight. Several others related to UK operators.
What I am doing is simply asking why when other UK operators have been reported to the CAA for breaches of minima is this matter put forward as simply a Ryanair matter or a situation caused by management style, pressure etc etc.
If you people were not so determined to attack Ryanair and take everyone who puts forward a differene view as being in defence of Ryanair you would have time to get your facts right.
Go read the CAA incident reports from the last while and then tell us it is a Ryanair issue.
Minima are busted in the UK on probably a more frequent basis than you would expect. Most times ATC don't notice and nothing gets reported. Is that safe? Is that Ryanair's fault?
Finally, we are talking safety here. Without centerline lights, CAT3 landings would be unsafe due to the lack of visual references in the rollout unless the RVR is 550+.....agreed?
Why then is it more safe for one operator to know that the RVR is less than 550m and land CAT3 and for another to do the exact same but be unsafe....simply because they received the information earlier. If landing in less than 550 CAT3 with no centerline lights is unsafe then everyone who did that regardless of when the RVR reading was received was unsafe. The only debating point is the technical issue of when with that information available the approach should be discontinued?
Regards,
DFC
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: Egcc
Posts: 1,695
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Minima are busted in the UK on probably a more frequent basis than you would expect.
Finally, we are talking safety here. Without centerline lights, CAT3 landings would be unsafe due to the lack of visual references in the rollout unless the RVR is 550+.....agreed?
Why then is it more safe for one operator to know that the RVR is less than 550m and land CAT3 and for another to do the exact same but be unsafe....simply because they received the information earlier.
PP
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: UK
Posts: 160
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Quite amusing that when Danny remarked in the other Ryanair bashing thred
The problem with digging for sh1t is that everyone standing round the hole get's it up their nostrels not just the one standing with the shovel!
Finally, we are talking safety here. Without centerline lights, CAT3 landings would be unsafe due to the lack of visual references in the rollout unless the RVR is 550+.....agreed?
Why then is it more safe for one operator to know that the RVR is less than 550m and land CAT3 and for another to do the exact same but be unsafe....simply because they received the information earlier. If landing in less than 550 CAT3 with no centerline lights is unsafe then everyone who did that regardless of when the RVR reading was received was unsafe.
Perhaps you guys should check some simple facts properly before posting.
aka Capt PPRuNe
Join Date: May 1995
Location: UK
Posts: 4,541
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Obviously there are too many Muppets who have problems dealing with facts. These same Muppets seem to have a habit of being unable to differentiate between reality and the unstinting bravado of some anonymous posters on this thread.
I will close this thread because this is not the Muppet show. Before I do so, I will point out a few facts, for what they're worth, in the vain hope that those Muppets get the reason that it is almost impossible to have a thread on here that mentions Ryanair without their (Muppets) ill informed and excitable contributions.
This thread was about the approaches by Ryanair aircraft that made the news over the last year or so where there were gross breaches of safety. They included those at Ciampino, Skavsta, Cork amongst others.
This thread was NOT about the numerous approaches made into Stansted last year during LVP's by many aircraft from four different airlines. There is a separate thread about those incidents.
Finally, there are a few very excitable types on this forum that do honestly believe that Leo Hairy Camel is indeed Michael O'Leary. Well, I know you don't want to hear this but prepare yourselves for a let down... it isn't him. It is just a Ryanair line captain who would love to be him and just loves it when the Muppets fall for his point of view and get all frothy thinking that they're actually debating with the real Michael O'Leary.
So with those few points above having been made, I will now close this thread so that the Muppet show can finally be laid to rest.
I will close this thread because this is not the Muppet show. Before I do so, I will point out a few facts, for what they're worth, in the vain hope that those Muppets get the reason that it is almost impossible to have a thread on here that mentions Ryanair without their (Muppets) ill informed and excitable contributions.
This thread was about the approaches by Ryanair aircraft that made the news over the last year or so where there were gross breaches of safety. They included those at Ciampino, Skavsta, Cork amongst others.
This thread was NOT about the numerous approaches made into Stansted last year during LVP's by many aircraft from four different airlines. There is a separate thread about those incidents.
Finally, there are a few very excitable types on this forum that do honestly believe that Leo Hairy Camel is indeed Michael O'Leary. Well, I know you don't want to hear this but prepare yourselves for a let down... it isn't him. It is just a Ryanair line captain who would love to be him and just loves it when the Muppets fall for his point of view and get all frothy thinking that they're actually debating with the real Michael O'Leary.
So with those few points above having been made, I will now close this thread so that the Muppet show can finally be laid to rest.
