Ryanair: approach incidents in the news
Ian, one of your problems is pilots live in a different world and march to a different drummer.
Two suggestions. Get hold of a Ryanair pilots roster and book your self on all their flights for a tour. Take the days off and do it again. This will give you an idea of what 900 hours per year means. It is not the same as 18 hrs per week.
Second, take a few flying lessons. Do it at a busy regional field with commercial passenger traffic, not your local farm strip etc. (This is work, not an expense account doddle)
After that the information you are collecting will look very different.
20driver
Two suggestions. Get hold of a Ryanair pilots roster and book your self on all their flights for a tour. Take the days off and do it again. This will give you an idea of what 900 hours per year means. It is not the same as 18 hrs per week.
Second, take a few flying lessons. Do it at a busy regional field with commercial passenger traffic, not your local farm strip etc. (This is work, not an expense account doddle)
After that the information you are collecting will look very different.
20driver
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Ireland
Age: 52
Posts: 115
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Ian, sorry for jumping into your thread.
The Professional Pilots Rumour Network (PPRuNe) is a community of professional pilots and people who work in aviation, both experienced and inexperienced.
Ok, so posts from pilots/ATCers/techies/engineers etc, those who know a lot, those who know a little, those who are new to the industry, others who want to comment, including passengers, enthusiasts (esp. with genuine questions etc) even, but I think the line has to be drawn somewhere. Are we supposed to believe that information obtained from a source found on a forum on which anyone can register will be used for the purposes of "journalism". (Rhetorical question!) So much for verifiable sources/information. I've seen the frustration level of some over the ill-informed, self-appointed experts (thankfully the minority) on threads such as the 'BA B744 engine out and continued flight'. With this in mind, and considering the 'wheat and chaff' point made by J-Class, I can imagine the type of waffle that would result from a production based on some of the posts on that (and some other) thread(s). That is without an industry expert standing beside the author to indicate what is probably accurate/believable, possible accurate or downright piffle. Let's not forget the Bristol issue; specifically the world of difference between opinions voiced by many pilots flying into Bristol at the time - and how some of the media just kept allowing a certain person to nullify (frankly IMO bull####) the slippery runway factor totally unchallenged. And that was after similar requests for 'insider' information on this forum. Who could blame the general public for thinking there was nothing wrong - it's just that SOME of the pilots/operators are a bit "panicky' when it rains.
As has happened all over the world, notably the USA, the regulatory authority makes their money from those who they regulate. That kind of system will never work 100 % correctly
). A read of some of the submissions made on individual AD's can sometimes be quite educational/entertaining
.
Join Date: May 2002
Location: In a nice house
Posts: 981
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I have no problem with journalists being here if they do some digging and finish with a report that is full of fact.
Personally I have seen a couple of very interesting approaches by Ryanair aircraft, unbelievable, have joked when seeing an aircraft turning finals at about 300', stable at around 50' !!!
I think any journalist should be digging around at the IAA. I believe a while back (might have been reported on here somewhere) Ryanair were found to be not carrying some required documents, might have been approach plates or notams or something, can't remember. I seem to recall it was the CAA that discovered it, despite the IAA supposedly doing their regular audits. And now the IAA have not jumped on Ryanair when some of their pilots have, allegedly, been doing approaches below minima? And I'm sorry, but NOTAMs don't have to "emphasise" that the reduction in approach lighting = higher minimas. That is what us pilots have to know.
I often wonder whether there has ever been a case of an Aviation Authority (not necessarily Irish) having a close relationship with an airline boss? I guess in theory it could happen.
Personally I have seen a couple of very interesting approaches by Ryanair aircraft, unbelievable, have joked when seeing an aircraft turning finals at about 300', stable at around 50' !!!
I think any journalist should be digging around at the IAA. I believe a while back (might have been reported on here somewhere) Ryanair were found to be not carrying some required documents, might have been approach plates or notams or something, can't remember. I seem to recall it was the CAA that discovered it, despite the IAA supposedly doing their regular audits. And now the IAA have not jumped on Ryanair when some of their pilots have, allegedly, been doing approaches below minima? And I'm sorry, but NOTAMs don't have to "emphasise" that the reduction in approach lighting = higher minimas. That is what us pilots have to know.
I often wonder whether there has ever been a case of an Aviation Authority (not necessarily Irish) having a close relationship with an airline boss? I guess in theory it could happen.
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: UK
Posts: 160
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
theamrad,
You're entitled to have your own opinion. No, no, there's no need to thank me. i insist.
I have joined PPrune to get advice on problems I have encountered, to see what the rest of the aviation community think and fell about certain issues, and to get some idea of how things may change in the future. I am very aware however, that many on these forums are opinionated and incorrect.
Nontheless, if there is any chance for the reality of the RYR situation to come out officially (whether it is good news or bad), I welcome it. I agree that many reports in the past have been badly informed and misleading, but I also believe that they were not deliberately misleading. Aviation is a very difficult business for the public to get their heads around. For a majority of the general public, you could tell them what you like about how a plane flies or what our job entails and they would have no choice but to believe it.
In that respect I am delighted that journalists would take the time to come to forums like these and make an attempt to understand the details of the argument. Any presssure on the IAA is good pressure. Any pressure of RYR to listen to their pilots is good pressure.
You have two choices:
Either accept that these journalists are trying to establish the truth, even if they don't actually get there.
Or accept that every report will be as poor as the previous ones and there is no point in trying again, so we might as well continue to moan forever on our sad little forum where at least there are other people like us crying into our coffee.
Airbus Girl,
I agree with you. I also remember something about paperwork (I have Jeppesen manuals or something like that in my head). And when I think of how many times the IAA have had 'mystery shoppers' on other airlines hiding packages under seats and in overhead bins to see if cabin crew do there security checks. I have never once heard of a case in RYR. One such check on a small operator which was leased in on behalf of another apparently failed the check when somone missed a package in a seat pocket. The IAA threatened to stop them flying immediately until they audited their security procedures. I can not, under any stretch of the imagination see how the same would not happen in RYR when I think of the sandwich packets, sick bags and other rubbish I have been greeted with each time I sat in a RYR aircraft. These checks simply must not be happening or are being notified in advance.
You're entitled to have your own opinion. No, no, there's no need to thank me. i insist.
I have joined PPrune to get advice on problems I have encountered, to see what the rest of the aviation community think and fell about certain issues, and to get some idea of how things may change in the future. I am very aware however, that many on these forums are opinionated and incorrect.
Nontheless, if there is any chance for the reality of the RYR situation to come out officially (whether it is good news or bad), I welcome it. I agree that many reports in the past have been badly informed and misleading, but I also believe that they were not deliberately misleading. Aviation is a very difficult business for the public to get their heads around. For a majority of the general public, you could tell them what you like about how a plane flies or what our job entails and they would have no choice but to believe it.
In that respect I am delighted that journalists would take the time to come to forums like these and make an attempt to understand the details of the argument. Any presssure on the IAA is good pressure. Any pressure of RYR to listen to their pilots is good pressure.
You have two choices:
Either accept that these journalists are trying to establish the truth, even if they don't actually get there.
Or accept that every report will be as poor as the previous ones and there is no point in trying again, so we might as well continue to moan forever on our sad little forum where at least there are other people like us crying into our coffee.
Airbus Girl,
I agree with you. I also remember something about paperwork (I have Jeppesen manuals or something like that in my head). And when I think of how many times the IAA have had 'mystery shoppers' on other airlines hiding packages under seats and in overhead bins to see if cabin crew do there security checks. I have never once heard of a case in RYR. One such check on a small operator which was leased in on behalf of another apparently failed the check when somone missed a package in a seat pocket. The IAA threatened to stop them flying immediately until they audited their security procedures. I can not, under any stretch of the imagination see how the same would not happen in RYR when I think of the sandwich packets, sick bags and other rubbish I have been greeted with each time I sat in a RYR aircraft. These checks simply must not be happening or are being notified in advance.
Join Date: May 2003
Location: france
Posts: 194
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
notams
hello ,airbus girl,
notams would be easier to read & important information would less likely be overlooked by having all the irrelevant information(90% or more), filtered out. ours are filtered, but still contain hughes amounts of non essential info. but, i agree, to decide what's relevant & what it is not is a subjective matter & in any way, the relevant authorities have to have their sixes covered. a high glow marker might be the answer to beat the system.
kind rgards,
bm
notams would be easier to read & important information would less likely be overlooked by having all the irrelevant information(90% or more), filtered out. ours are filtered, but still contain hughes amounts of non essential info. but, i agree, to decide what's relevant & what it is not is a subjective matter & in any way, the relevant authorities have to have their sixes covered. a high glow marker might be the answer to beat the system.
kind rgards,
bm
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Dre's mum's house
Posts: 1,432
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
captainpaddy, the vast majority of Ryanair aircraft do not have seat pockets; hiding something in a non existent seat pocket is impossible. Again, the vast majority of aircraft do not have lifejacket stowage under the seats which precludes anything being hidden there. Security checks are carried out rigorously: Ryanair are subject to the same rules, regulations and inspections as any Irish carrier and also are subject to SAFA inspections, the same as any other carrier.
Airbus Girl, the reason so much effort has been put in to the process of education and re-affirming the need to stick to the SOPs - if the approach is not stable by 500ft - GO AROUND - is to avoid any recurrence of a rushed or unstable approach. There is absolutely no point in bolting the stable after the event; taking action to avoid the event in the first place is surely both sensible and laudable. A new 500ft call was introduced recently; PNF calls either "500ft - continue" or "500ft - go around". If the call is "go around" from either the Captain or FO as PNF a go around must be executed.
As to the problem with Jepp docs, that could simply have been the crew picking up a doc which was out of date by accident. All the plates are available in the crewroom and a further complete set of plates etc are in the ship's bag and all the other required documentation in the ship's library. NOTAMs are automatically generated when the weather for the departure, destination and alternates is printed; if a plate for an obscure alternate isn't available that too can be printed from the Jepp site at briefing, along with performance data and an airfield brief. If we need performance data at short notice Dublin Ops can provide it instantly, over the phone, using hot data on the Boeing Laptop System.
Airbus Girl, the reason so much effort has been put in to the process of education and re-affirming the need to stick to the SOPs - if the approach is not stable by 500ft - GO AROUND - is to avoid any recurrence of a rushed or unstable approach. There is absolutely no point in bolting the stable after the event; taking action to avoid the event in the first place is surely both sensible and laudable. A new 500ft call was introduced recently; PNF calls either "500ft - continue" or "500ft - go around". If the call is "go around" from either the Captain or FO as PNF a go around must be executed.
As to the problem with Jepp docs, that could simply have been the crew picking up a doc which was out of date by accident. All the plates are available in the crewroom and a further complete set of plates etc are in the ship's bag and all the other required documentation in the ship's library. NOTAMs are automatically generated when the weather for the departure, destination and alternates is printed; if a plate for an obscure alternate isn't available that too can be printed from the Jepp site at briefing, along with performance data and an airfield brief. If we need performance data at short notice Dublin Ops can provide it instantly, over the phone, using hot data on the Boeing Laptop System.
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Ireland
Posts: 53
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Reading, Berks, UK
Age: 84
Posts: 1
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Prevent or punish
I have nothing to with aviation professionally; just a fascinated and occasional SLF, with a career behind me in academic Computer Science.
When I was a student (and that's MANY years ago) I read a book entitled "Road Accidents: Prevent or Punish?". Its author, the County Surveyor for Dorset (in the UK), made a very strong case that a blame-and-punish mindset will never get to the bottom of why road accidents happen, and so will never result in the safer environment everyone wants. He was professionally concerned with issues like junction design and signage, surface dressing and so on.
I was very impressed at the time, and suggest that the same quality of thinking should be the norm for flight crew, boardrooms, engineering operations and regulators, right across the board.
Most of you guys whose office is the flight deck put your lives on the line every day, so I guess this pattern is deeply embedded in the way you operate. Others need to take it on board too!
When I was a student (and that's MANY years ago) I read a book entitled "Road Accidents: Prevent or Punish?". Its author, the County Surveyor for Dorset (in the UK), made a very strong case that a blame-and-punish mindset will never get to the bottom of why road accidents happen, and so will never result in the safer environment everyone wants. He was professionally concerned with issues like junction design and signage, surface dressing and so on.
I was very impressed at the time, and suggest that the same quality of thinking should be the norm for flight crew, boardrooms, engineering operations and regulators, right across the board.
Most of you guys whose office is the flight deck put your lives on the line every day, so I guess this pattern is deeply embedded in the way you operate. Others need to take it on board too!
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Ireland
Posts: 53
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Last Sunday in ORK
Anyone know anything about the FR aborted landing in ORK last Sunday, from London? (don't know if it was STN or LGW..)
A friend of mine (non-aviation enthusiast) was on board and she said the second attempt was "very scary".. I stress she is the merest of mere SLF and knows nothing about aviation.. furthermore, any go-around tends to spook those down the back, presumably increasing the perceived 'terror' of the second attempt!
JBS
A friend of mine (non-aviation enthusiast) was on board and she said the second attempt was "very scary".. I stress she is the merest of mere SLF and knows nothing about aviation.. furthermore, any go-around tends to spook those down the back, presumably increasing the perceived 'terror' of the second attempt!
JBS
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: UK
Posts: 160
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Slim,
Ya got me there! Just shows how long it's been since I flew with RYR! T'was back in the good old days and black smoke and seat pockets!
Could you just explain the bit about the vast majority of aircraft not having lifejacket stowage under the seats? Every machine I have ever been on has had them there. Not challenging you, just asking.
As I remember it the Jeppe thing was regarding a large number of RYR aircraft flying with out of date plates.
Ya got me there! Just shows how long it's been since I flew with RYR! T'was back in the good old days and black smoke and seat pockets!
Could you just explain the bit about the vast majority of aircraft not having lifejacket stowage under the seats? Every machine I have ever been on has had them there. Not challenging you, just asking.
As I remember it the Jeppe thing was regarding a large number of RYR aircraft flying with out of date plates.
I call you back
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Alpha quadrant
Posts: 355
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Eminem
Ryanair are subject to the same rules, regulations and inspections as any Irish carrier and also are subject to SAFA inspections, the same as any other carrier.
Airlines are self regulating. They submit an Operations Manual outlining their own rules and regulations for approval by the relevant authority and when approved they ( are supposed to) operate accordingly. The airlines have different Operations Manuals and as such operate to different rules. Obviously there will be many similarities ( mainly to stay within manafacturer and JAR regs ) but your statement is deliberately misleading.
There are a tiny number of audits carried out by the IAA. It is not unknown for an IAA audit to consist of an IAA officer flying as the Captain of a line flight with only a Ryanair co-pilot in the cockpit. This system is completely insane. The flaws are many but it is worth pointing out the conflict of interests where the IAA officer is effectively completely responsible for the operation he is supposed to be impartially auditing. It is also worth pointing out that this does not happen with other carriers.
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: last time I looked I was still here.
Posts: 4,507
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Is it true at an IAA officer flies as a Captain on line flights with RYR, but not with any other Irish AOC holder? Or do they also with other Irish AOC holders? Or is the answer No to both the above?
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: E97
Posts: 2
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Cityjet on occasion have an IAA inspector flying with them. However an incident involving this person is revealing.
Said person was sick on the flight and absented herself from the flight deck for the approach. Such is the life. However:
Captain in question (a senior training capt) continued the approach, made no mayday call or otherwise informed ATC of the situation and landed in CDG. Apart from the poor airmanship in not notifying that the flight was operating under severely degraded conditions, no calls made is in total contravention of the ops manual.
The result: captain shortly promoted to check captain. Not a word from the IAA. No incident report, no investigation, no nothing.
You can decide for yourself how effective IAA auditing is if this is the outcome when the IAA are on hand to personally view the cock-up.
Said person was sick on the flight and absented herself from the flight deck for the approach. Such is the life. However:
Captain in question (a senior training capt) continued the approach, made no mayday call or otherwise informed ATC of the situation and landed in CDG. Apart from the poor airmanship in not notifying that the flight was operating under severely degraded conditions, no calls made is in total contravention of the ops manual.
The result: captain shortly promoted to check captain. Not a word from the IAA. No incident report, no investigation, no nothing.
You can decide for yourself how effective IAA auditing is if this is the outcome when the IAA are on hand to personally view the cock-up.
I am a professional pilot by trade (rotary) but I am writing in light of feedback I get when I fly with Ryan Air as a passenger.
I bought a house in Italy not so long ago (12 months) and because of that had to fly about 6-7 times to Rome from Liverpool. Each time with RA.
I also fly during normal hol periods with other airlines (mainly BA).
EVERY time I have flown with RA without fail, the landings have given me some cause for concern. Normally I wouldn't blink but when my family question the landings and then the passengers break out in nervous laughter, clapping hands and cynically commenting that the pilot needing L plates/Co-pilot under trng etc...and on two separate instances individual passengers trying to get to the toilet to throw up!!! Something has to be up.
Add to this the fact that they landed at the wrong airport not so long ago and shortly before that, misidentified the wrong airfield on finals....and now this news report, what is going on?
I have a theory:
From an employee perspective (having innumerable colleagues flying other airlines), no-one wants to fly RA because of the life style and working conditions they offer. O'Leary gets his money's worth and then some, everyone knows he is ruthless. [Is it true that the crew don't even get fed onboard (they even have to find their own bottled water)?
My assumption therefore is that only the lower echelons are attracted to RA either to get on the FW ladder and clock up hrs, or just to get a job flying!
Co-pilots have to practice, so combine the two and the flying standards in that cockpit cannot surely be on a par with the average airline?
It wouldn't surprise me if I saw RA on the News one evening suffering something a lot more serious than a heavy landing.
I bought a house in Italy not so long ago (12 months) and because of that had to fly about 6-7 times to Rome from Liverpool. Each time with RA.
I also fly during normal hol periods with other airlines (mainly BA).
EVERY time I have flown with RA without fail, the landings have given me some cause for concern. Normally I wouldn't blink but when my family question the landings and then the passengers break out in nervous laughter, clapping hands and cynically commenting that the pilot needing L plates/Co-pilot under trng etc...and on two separate instances individual passengers trying to get to the toilet to throw up!!! Something has to be up.
Add to this the fact that they landed at the wrong airport not so long ago and shortly before that, misidentified the wrong airfield on finals....and now this news report, what is going on?
I have a theory:
From an employee perspective (having innumerable colleagues flying other airlines), no-one wants to fly RA because of the life style and working conditions they offer. O'Leary gets his money's worth and then some, everyone knows he is ruthless. [Is it true that the crew don't even get fed onboard (they even have to find their own bottled water)?
My assumption therefore is that only the lower echelons are attracted to RA either to get on the FW ladder and clock up hrs, or just to get a job flying!
Co-pilots have to practice, so combine the two and the flying standards in that cockpit cannot surely be on a par with the average airline?
It wouldn't surprise me if I saw RA on the News one evening suffering something a lot more serious than a heavy landing.
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: UK
Posts: 2
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
This thread kinda smells of RYR bashing but just a couple of points.
The first post is misleading, at least to me, it reads as if anyone not in the landing gate by 500' is going to be demoted. This is not the case.
The reality is you would be asked to explain yourself to the OFDM liason. The demotion/sacking applies to approaches that have not met the 500' gate and continue to land having generated GPWS hard warnings (i.e PULL UP aural).
Thats a big difference, and of course not quite so dramatic reading.
The missing documentation you speak of probably refers to isolated incidents of crews not taking the correct in-date charts. Or it could be related to RYR aircraft not previously carrying lists of effective pages (LOEP's) which give the correct dates of jeppy charts (hardly saftey related).
Those of us who work for RYR having previous experience of other operators (in many cases UK operators) are well aware of the safety focus that RYR SOP's take. The small number of incidents and no hull loss in 21 years of operations isnt by luck...
The first post is misleading, at least to me, it reads as if anyone not in the landing gate by 500' is going to be demoted. This is not the case.
The reality is you would be asked to explain yourself to the OFDM liason. The demotion/sacking applies to approaches that have not met the 500' gate and continue to land having generated GPWS hard warnings (i.e PULL UP aural).
Thats a big difference, and of course not quite so dramatic reading.
The missing documentation you speak of probably refers to isolated incidents of crews not taking the correct in-date charts. Or it could be related to RYR aircraft not previously carrying lists of effective pages (LOEP's) which give the correct dates of jeppy charts (hardly saftey related).
Those of us who work for RYR having previous experience of other operators (in many cases UK operators) are well aware of the safety focus that RYR SOP's take. The small number of incidents and no hull loss in 21 years of operations isnt by luck...
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: the edge of my seat
Posts: 79
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The IAA also sends inspectors on Aer Lingus flights, however the inspector is under the supervision of a Training Captain (who remains the PIC I believe) AND a safety pilot is carried.
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: uk
Posts: 51
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
A few things for the record.
Ryanair is very big on constant descent approaches (CDA). If I don't do a CDA (even if its to comply with ATC) I get a letter from my chief pilot asking me to explain why I did not do a CDA. The letter will normally refer to a flight about 3 months previously. These letters put undue pressure on some pilots. To avoid this hassle some pilots delay may their desent in order to ensure a CDA. This often is the beginning of a high energy approach.
Most of the airfields we fly to are small and have no ATIS. We have been told not to contact the tower above 5000ft to avoid blocking freqs.. We do not have a data link. Essentially we are guessing the R/W in use and hoping the weather has not changed from the forcast. If things change we can of course go to the hold and set up and brief. However the temptation is to continue. Again this can be another factor in a rushed approach. Easy and many other airlines in Europe with a real interest in safety carry this equipement.
Last week I did a 11.30 duty, followed by 11.30 duty, followed by 10.30 duty and then 2 shorter 9 hour duty days. The first 3 days were like being asked to fly to new York, go to bed, get up in the morning go back to Europe, bed, and then back to New York. The main differance is that I had to do 4 approaches, landings, tunarounds and take offs a day. The long haul pilot has to do one of each a day. Still it is within FTL's so I was not legally tired.
In the last month I have only flown with 2 F/O's with more than 500 hours experiance. When things are busy most are understandably not quite up to speed. Now if I'm tired and things start to go wrong again the ingrediants are there for a rushed approach.
There are reasons behind Ryanairs high energy approaches, I have given a few. A professional organisation would pick up this trend and analyse the reasons behind these approaches. They would alter SOP's and training and certainly stop sending harrassing letters to captains. Not Ryanair, out with the big stick, well its cheaper.
Ryanair is very big on constant descent approaches (CDA). If I don't do a CDA (even if its to comply with ATC) I get a letter from my chief pilot asking me to explain why I did not do a CDA. The letter will normally refer to a flight about 3 months previously. These letters put undue pressure on some pilots. To avoid this hassle some pilots delay may their desent in order to ensure a CDA. This often is the beginning of a high energy approach.
Most of the airfields we fly to are small and have no ATIS. We have been told not to contact the tower above 5000ft to avoid blocking freqs.. We do not have a data link. Essentially we are guessing the R/W in use and hoping the weather has not changed from the forcast. If things change we can of course go to the hold and set up and brief. However the temptation is to continue. Again this can be another factor in a rushed approach. Easy and many other airlines in Europe with a real interest in safety carry this equipement.
Last week I did a 11.30 duty, followed by 11.30 duty, followed by 10.30 duty and then 2 shorter 9 hour duty days. The first 3 days were like being asked to fly to new York, go to bed, get up in the morning go back to Europe, bed, and then back to New York. The main differance is that I had to do 4 approaches, landings, tunarounds and take offs a day. The long haul pilot has to do one of each a day. Still it is within FTL's so I was not legally tired.
In the last month I have only flown with 2 F/O's with more than 500 hours experiance. When things are busy most are understandably not quite up to speed. Now if I'm tired and things start to go wrong again the ingrediants are there for a rushed approach.
There are reasons behind Ryanairs high energy approaches, I have given a few. A professional organisation would pick up this trend and analyse the reasons behind these approaches. They would alter SOP's and training and certainly stop sending harrassing letters to captains. Not Ryanair, out with the big stick, well its cheaper.