Ryanair: approach incidents in the news
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: UK
Posts: 160
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
BBT,
Surely you realise that Leo is actually the man himself? Our wonderfully charming Mullingar boss?
Bacardi,
Eirjet was indeed responsible for Derry and Ryanair shouldn't be blamed for it. The real list for the last two years is:
SKAVSTA
ROME
KNOCK
CORK
STANSTED
STANSTED
STANSTED
STANSTED
At least I would like to think the IAA made some attempt at treating the four STN violations as seperate events. No doubt, they agreed with Ryanairs spin that the STN notam was misleading and have decided all four flights were the result of this one problem. Not four crew with a poor understanding of requirements. Not a training department which has overlooked this area of LVP's which would then mean 1,500 pilots inadequately trained. Just four crew mislead by one notam.
Surely you realise that Leo is actually the man himself? Our wonderfully charming Mullingar boss?
Bacardi,
Eirjet was indeed responsible for Derry and Ryanair shouldn't be blamed for it. The real list for the last two years is:
SKAVSTA
ROME
KNOCK
CORK
STANSTED
STANSTED
STANSTED
STANSTED
At least I would like to think the IAA made some attempt at treating the four STN violations as seperate events. No doubt, they agreed with Ryanairs spin that the STN notam was misleading and have decided all four flights were the result of this one problem. Not four crew with a poor understanding of requirements. Not a training department which has overlooked this area of LVP's which would then mean 1,500 pilots inadequately trained. Just four crew mislead by one notam.
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: UK
Posts: 160
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: UK
Posts: 160
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Almost every large jet operator I can think of uses Flight Data Monitoring. It is in widespread use as it's benefits are many. Those that don't use are probably considering it.
This is why the RYR statement is incorrect. It is designed to deliberately mislead the public who do not know any better.
This is why the RYR statement is incorrect. It is designed to deliberately mislead the public who do not know any better.
Keeping Danny in Sandwiches
Join Date: May 1999
Location: UK
Age: 76
Posts: 1,294
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Isn't the whole idea of Flight Data Monitoring to have a pilot who has the confidence of his peers together with the Flight Safety Officer monitoring the data and having a quiet word with the individuals.
What is important is to ingrain safety into the pilot community. The threat of the sack is not the right way to do that, there really needs to be a top down review of the culture within the company.
What is important is to ingrain safety into the pilot community. The threat of the sack is not the right way to do that, there really needs to be a top down review of the culture within the company.
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: UK
Posts: 160
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Just a thought that has crossed my mind:
If the IAA believe that the STN notam was misleading, then shouldn't they refer the problem back to the UK CAA to ensure that STN improve the information contained in future notams? Is this just more evidence of the IAA's incompetence and their desire to sweep it all under the carpet?
If the IAA believe that the STN notam was misleading, then shouldn't they refer the problem back to the UK CAA to ensure that STN improve the information contained in future notams? Is this just more evidence of the IAA's incompetence and their desire to sweep it all under the carpet?
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: limbo
Posts: 181
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Inveritas
Who published what where? Ryanair themselves now want to make their Pilots look like idiots and have now published operational memos on their Public website. Link
Bacardi Walla If you had bothered to do even the smallest amount of research on this you would know that it was Eirjet who landed an Airbus A320 in an Air Force base close to the City of Derry airport.Link
Who published what where? Ryanair themselves now want to make their Pilots look like idiots and have now published operational memos on their Public website. Link
Bacardi Walla If you had bothered to do even the smallest amount of research on this you would know that it was Eirjet who landed an Airbus A320 in an Air Force base close to the City of Derry airport.Link
Join Date: May 2002
Location: In a nice house
Posts: 981
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If the STN NOTAM was misleading then how come all 4 violations were by Ryanair pilots?
How come all the other airlines diverted? Everyone received the same NOTAMs - or should have done. No doubt the info about the lighting was also on the ATIS?
How come all the other airlines diverted? Everyone received the same NOTAMs - or should have done. No doubt the info about the lighting was also on the ATIS?
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: UK
Posts: 160
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Sorry to do this everyone. Just wanted to show how simple a problem this is. My LVP training with two different companies placed quite an emphasis on this. A quick 20 minute scan of JAR OPS 1 shows 5 seperate entries thus: (there may be more)
JAR OPS 1.225 Aerodrome Operating Minima
(c) The minima for a specific type of approach and landing procedure are considered applicable if:
(1) The ground equipment shown on the respective chart required for the intended procedure is operative;
JAR OPS 1.430 Aerodrome Operating Minima – General
(b) In establishing the aerodrome operating minima which will apply to any particular operation, an operator must take full account of:
(4) The adequacy and performance of the available visual and non-visual ground aids; (See AMC OPS 1.430(b)(4).)
JAR OPS 1.455 Low Visibility Operations – Operating Procedures
(b) The commander shall satisfy himself that:
(1) The status of the visual and nonvisual facilities is sufficient prior to commencing a Low Visibility Take-Off or a Category II or III approach;
Appendix 1 to JAR OPS 1.450 Low Visibility Operation – Training and Qualifications
(c) Flight Simulator training and/or flight training
(1) An operator must ensure that Flight Simulator and/or flight training for Low Visibility Operations includes:
(i) Checks of satisfactory functioning of equipment, both on the ground and in flight;
(ii) Effect on minima caused by changes in the status of ground installations;
Appendix 1 to JAR-OPS 1.455 Low Visibility Operations – Operating Procedures
(2) An operator must specify the detailed operating procedures and instructions in the Operations Manual. The instructions must be compatible with the limitations and mandatory procedures contained in the Aeroplane Flight Manual and cover the following items in particular:
(ii) Effect on minima caused by changes in the status of the ground installations and airborne equipment;
I accept that some of the references may be referring to navigation aids specifically, nonetheless it is clear that lights will have an effect on minima. AMC OPS has plenty more.
With regard to time taken to report incidents, can Leo explain what the exceptional circumstances were?
JAR OPS 1.420 Occurrence Reporting
(3) Reports must be despatched within 72 hours of the time when the incident was identified unless exceptional circumstances prevent this.
JAR OPS 1.225 Aerodrome Operating Minima
(c) The minima for a specific type of approach and landing procedure are considered applicable if:
(1) The ground equipment shown on the respective chart required for the intended procedure is operative;
JAR OPS 1.430 Aerodrome Operating Minima – General
(b) In establishing the aerodrome operating minima which will apply to any particular operation, an operator must take full account of:
(4) The adequacy and performance of the available visual and non-visual ground aids; (See AMC OPS 1.430(b)(4).)
JAR OPS 1.455 Low Visibility Operations – Operating Procedures
(b) The commander shall satisfy himself that:
(1) The status of the visual and nonvisual facilities is sufficient prior to commencing a Low Visibility Take-Off or a Category II or III approach;
Appendix 1 to JAR OPS 1.450 Low Visibility Operation – Training and Qualifications
(c) Flight Simulator training and/or flight training
(1) An operator must ensure that Flight Simulator and/or flight training for Low Visibility Operations includes:
(i) Checks of satisfactory functioning of equipment, both on the ground and in flight;
(ii) Effect on minima caused by changes in the status of ground installations;
Appendix 1 to JAR-OPS 1.455 Low Visibility Operations – Operating Procedures
(2) An operator must specify the detailed operating procedures and instructions in the Operations Manual. The instructions must be compatible with the limitations and mandatory procedures contained in the Aeroplane Flight Manual and cover the following items in particular:
(ii) Effect on minima caused by changes in the status of the ground installations and airborne equipment;
I accept that some of the references may be referring to navigation aids specifically, nonetheless it is clear that lights will have an effect on minima. AMC OPS has plenty more.
With regard to time taken to report incidents, can Leo explain what the exceptional circumstances were?
JAR OPS 1.420 Occurrence Reporting
(3) Reports must be despatched within 72 hours of the time when the incident was identified unless exceptional circumstances prevent this.
Last edited by captainpaddy; 12th Feb 2007 at 10:56. Reason: Clarification
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Ask the tower !
Posts: 1,030
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Carmoisine I've done my research thank you. Who said I was referring to the Eirjet incident 
No need for me to elaborate. There are enough investigations ongoing as it is. What bothers me is that on the surface, nothing appears to be happening in terms of addressing these issues apart from Ryanair blaming someone else. They are accountable overall for their actions however good or bad.
I for one won't fly with them any more.
No need for me to elaborate. There are enough investigations ongoing as it is. What bothers me is that on the surface, nothing appears to be happening in terms of addressing these issues apart from Ryanair blaming someone else. They are accountable overall for their actions however good or bad.
I for one won't fly with them any more.
Last edited by bacardi walla; 12th Feb 2007 at 11:22.
Paxing All Over The World
Airbus Girl This is quoted from the owner of this board in a post yesterday 11th Feb (#145)
As I tried to point out in the thread that relates to the Minima busting approaches at STN last year, it was not only Ryanair that had a/c break the rules.
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: UK
Posts: 160
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Who were the other operators then? Who else was referred to the CAA? Who else was subsequently referred to their own authorities by the CAA?
As Danny was trying to point out in the post you have referred to, if indeed there are other companies involved, the RYR and Leo response is very telling. If many other operators made the same mistake, there is little, if any, defense needed.
Incidentally,
"No other airline was involved," said James Hotson of the CAA.
As Danny was trying to point out in the post you have referred to, if indeed there are other companies involved, the RYR and Leo response is very telling. If many other operators made the same mistake, there is little, if any, defense needed.
Incidentally,
"No other airline was involved," said James Hotson of the CAA.
Last edited by captainpaddy; 12th Feb 2007 at 11:49.
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: the forest from which little acorns do big oak trees grow.
Posts: 63
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
wasn't there a dodgy orbit on finals followed by a go-around that nearly took out the control tower at beauvais not so long ago too?
I call you back
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Alpha quadrant
Posts: 355
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Sorry to go back to an earlier issue.
RSS if I open a business driving golf balls off a cliff top or piercing cows ear I must ensure that it remains within the laws of the land. That applies to everyone and every business in the State.
When Ryanair state the above, as they frequently do, that is all they are saying.
However the impression they want to give the media and the general public is that all carriers operate to the same procedures and standards. That is not the case in Ireland nor is it the case globally. That is not to point the finger but just to highlight that it is inevitable there will be some variation in standards, therefore the statement is misleading.
For the attention of RSS and RYR-738-Jockey who wrote:
This is just a couple of paragraphs from Statutory Instrument 140 of 1964:
While I realise that there will have been legislation since then, not least the introduction of JAR OPS that will affect the above, the fundamental that procedures and rules ( call them what you like ) contained in an Ops Manual are mandatory under Irish law still applies.
Ryanair are subject to the same rules, regulations and inspections as any Irish carrier
When Ryanair state the above, as they frequently do, that is all they are saying.
However the impression they want to give the media and the general public is that all carriers operate to the same procedures and standards. That is not the case in Ireland nor is it the case globally. That is not to point the finger but just to highlight that it is inevitable there will be some variation in standards, therefore the statement is misleading.
For the attention of RSS and RYR-738-Jockey who wrote:
"@ R.S.S.
You are wrong, your ops manual is the law, your policies and directions are rules and regulation and you had better adhere to them.
now back on topic...."
???? Are you for real? I believe you are just trying to make a point regarding the importance of adhering to your ops manual, but you have lost the plot if you regard it as being the law.
Rules, regulations, requirements, company policies. That is the order of it. Of course sticking to your ops manual will keep you out of trouble, but it does not by any means form the basis of other documentation.
You are wrong, your ops manual is the law, your policies and directions are rules and regulation and you had better adhere to them.
now back on topic...."
???? Are you for real? I believe you are just trying to make a point regarding the importance of adhering to your ops manual, but you have lost the plot if you regard it as being the law.
Rules, regulations, requirements, company policies. That is the order of it. Of course sticking to your ops manual will keep you out of trouble, but it does not by any means form the basis of other documentation.
(2) The operator shall provide for the use and guidance of the flight crew members and operations pesonnel a document which shall be known, and in this Order is referred to, as the Operations Manual, which may comprise one or more than one volume and shall contain the following particulars—
(a) in respect of scheduled airline services—
(i) such instructions as will clearly define the duties and responsibilities of each flight crew member and of every other person concerned with flight operations,
(a) in respect of scheduled airline services—
(i) such instructions as will clearly define the duties and responsibilities of each flight crew member and of every other person concerned with flight operations,
(v) the method by which aerodrome meteorological minima shall be determined in accordance with Article 24 of this Order,
The operator shall establish a system (which shall be known, and in this Order is referred to, as a flight check system) which shall be used by the flight crew prior to take-off, on take-off, in flight, on landing, and in case of emergency, for the purpose of ensuring that the operating procedures specified in the Operations Manual and in the flight manual or other documents acceptable to the Minister as equivalent to the flight manual are followed exactly.
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: UK
Posts: 15
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Anyone know what was going on with RYR112G at LGW about 0900 this morning?
Tower couldn't raise them on a 3 mile final for 26L despite multiple calls. When they broke cloud around 700ft they were well north of C/L, more aligned with 26R/AN on which a queue of us were holding for departure. Strong southerly cross so doubt it was a drift illusion.
Approach continued with no apparent attempt to regain the LLZ even though visual. Eventually called 'going around' somewhere over the North Terminal...
Tower couldn't raise them on a 3 mile final for 26L despite multiple calls. When they broke cloud around 700ft they were well north of C/L, more aligned with 26R/AN on which a queue of us were holding for departure. Strong southerly cross so doubt it was a drift illusion.
Approach continued with no apparent attempt to regain the LLZ even though visual. Eventually called 'going around' somewhere over the North Terminal...
Well perhaps THAT got the attention of the Belgranists?
Going as public as Ryanair have on their website would lead one to ponder the old statement "There's no smoke without fire"!
Going as public as Ryanair have on their website would lead one to ponder the old statement "There's no smoke without fire"!
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Timbuktu
Posts: 638
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I think we all fool ourselves on this. The public will still fly with Ryanair, the stockmarket will still support Ryanair, MOL will just have an even more entrenched view on pilots pay and the only people who will suffer in all this spin are the collective Ryanair pilot's reputations. I feel very bitter as as a Ryanair pilot that a small number of Aer Lingus Union Reps and their spin have caused me to get nasty questions and innuendo about me and my work at Ryanair during social functions over this past weekend.
Many of us working for other companies have been getting it for years - usually it revolves around Ryanairs imminent world domination!
It is your very own boss - Leo Hairy Camel - who has (and will in future) exposed you to the backlash you are now receiving. He has blamed YOU and your colleagues for FR's recent 'difficulties', and you knew all along that come the day when (god forbid) one of your colleagues splashes an aircraft - the blame will be focused squarely on HIM (the dead pilot) and YOU and all your colleagues. Not on Leo, and NEVER on the organisation.
All I can do now is offer you the advise you and Leo often offer any pilot who dares raise a word against the 'unfairness' of the FR culture:
To Whit.....If you don't like it - why don't you just LEAVE.
Pride comes before a fall they say.
Enjoy the trip.
Last edited by maxalt; 12th Feb 2007 at 20:25.
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Cartoon strip
Posts: 181
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Well I feel sorry for Leo. His smug spin on all things FR is starting to look a shade tired under duress. He may have fancied himself as some sort of spinmaster but right now it's all falling apart.
Attacking David Learmount and Danny Fyne appears to be the act of a desperate man. If Leo thinks this is useful in increasing his credibility, then I suggest he thinks again. It is not. I and many others have questioned his credibility many times in the past principally because he appears to occupy a parallel universe when it comes to defining what is success and what is failure when it comes to the Irish legal system. We've all raked through the growing number of cases that have had to be abandoned, re-tried or just plain lost by Ryanair, so let's not rake them up again. But fair to say each and every one is counted as a monumental victory by Leo.
We've also questioned his credibility when it comes to his McCarthyite zeal when it comes to unions. To some observers this entirely entrenched position defies reason. To others it may just be the views of man very badly hurt, perhaps in his childhood, by some union related activity. Whatever the reason for this fundamentalist outlook, it comes across as someone not exactly open to debate on the subject.
As an outsider looking in who happens to know a few FR pilots, I know there is more than one side to this story. By attacking everyone who does not agree with his version of all events FR related, Leo does himself no favours.
As my old Latin teacher used to say "alenda lux ubi orta libertas". I don't know why he said it, he just did...
Attacking David Learmount and Danny Fyne appears to be the act of a desperate man. If Leo thinks this is useful in increasing his credibility, then I suggest he thinks again. It is not. I and many others have questioned his credibility many times in the past principally because he appears to occupy a parallel universe when it comes to defining what is success and what is failure when it comes to the Irish legal system. We've all raked through the growing number of cases that have had to be abandoned, re-tried or just plain lost by Ryanair, so let's not rake them up again. But fair to say each and every one is counted as a monumental victory by Leo.
We've also questioned his credibility when it comes to his McCarthyite zeal when it comes to unions. To some observers this entirely entrenched position defies reason. To others it may just be the views of man very badly hurt, perhaps in his childhood, by some union related activity. Whatever the reason for this fundamentalist outlook, it comes across as someone not exactly open to debate on the subject.
As an outsider looking in who happens to know a few FR pilots, I know there is more than one side to this story. By attacking everyone who does not agree with his version of all events FR related, Leo does himself no favours.
As my old Latin teacher used to say "alenda lux ubi orta libertas". I don't know why he said it, he just did...
Last edited by RogerIrrelevant69; 12th Feb 2007 at 21:47.
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: UK
Posts: 450
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Ryanair to be investigated for dangerous approaches
Just been on the BBC that Balpa is calling for a UK led investigation into Ryanair on the way they treat there crews. Can't find anything else at the moment.