Ryanair B738 off runway in Limoges (LFBL/France)
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Doue la Fontaine, France
Posts: 65
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RYR-738-JOCKEY; did the FA's know that the aircraft was going to depart the runway? I suppose the captain did it slowly in order to give them time to brief the passengers and run through their SOS drill!
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Europe
Posts: 211
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
PJ2 Ryanair have a very public policy about using their FDM analysis for punitive purposes (demotion or firing of pilots). Information about this has been provided in public statements and was defended at a recent conference by the Ryanair Chief Pilot. Apparently their goal is to demonstrate a "no bull-****" approach to safety. This policy is approved by Ryanair safety gurus and the airline's Board. This approach is at some variance to what the rest of the aviation industry does. (I do hope that somebody notices my "masterful understatement"!).
On the other hand I am not aware of Ryanair ever producing a safety initiative on the basis of FDM analysis, though I do stand to be corrected. On the other hand we do know from a newsletter that Ryanair did identify an interesting trend from FDM in the past. While they said at the time that they would do something, nothing was ever done. I am referring to the interesting spike in "high speed" or "high energy" approaches which seems to have occurred in most Ryanair bases around 6 months after the introduction of the B737-800.
In this case nothing was done. No training initiative followed the public identification (in a Newsletter) of this operational problem. What actually happened is that action was only taken after the B737-800 was introduced at the final base when, following two separate incidents punitive action was taken against the Dublin based crews.
So, in summary, it might be worth paying attentions to "FDM reality" and "FDM Public Relations". In Ryanair's case there seems to be a difference.
On the other hand I am not aware of Ryanair ever producing a safety initiative on the basis of FDM analysis, though I do stand to be corrected. On the other hand we do know from a newsletter that Ryanair did identify an interesting trend from FDM in the past. While they said at the time that they would do something, nothing was ever done. I am referring to the interesting spike in "high speed" or "high energy" approaches which seems to have occurred in most Ryanair bases around 6 months after the introduction of the B737-800.
In this case nothing was done. No training initiative followed the public identification (in a Newsletter) of this operational problem. What actually happened is that action was only taken after the B737-800 was introduced at the final base when, following two separate incidents punitive action was taken against the Dublin based crews.
So, in summary, it might be worth paying attentions to "FDM reality" and "FDM Public Relations". In Ryanair's case there seems to be a difference.
RYR-738-JOCKEY
Are you serious? Is this legal with the IAA? Is this really the SOP, or have you just made this up as a troll?
If so, then in any "unplanned" emergency (typically a landing accident), then all the pax by the emergency exits are unbriefed and clueless, leading to another potential Manchester scenario.
Lethal.
Briefing the pax on how use the emerg exits will only be done during an emergency where an evacuation may or will be required.
If so, then in any "unplanned" emergency (typically a landing accident), then all the pax by the emergency exits are unbriefed and clueless, leading to another potential Manchester scenario.
Lethal.
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: London
Posts: 516
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
"Briefing the pax on how use the emerg exits will only be done during an emergency where an evacuation may or will be required."
Really?! You brief DURING the emergency? Why not do the safety demonstration then too?
Really?! You brief DURING the emergency? Why not do the safety demonstration then too?
That is why all other airlines brief the pax.
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 140
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
"If you do any different, I don't want to be in the back the day you land in":-
Derry - 6076 ft
Altenburg - 2235 ft
Bournemouth - 7450 ft
Bristol - 6598 ft
Limoges - 8202 ft
Interesting selection of runways. You do realise that Limoges is longer than Luton (7087 ft)! I don't hear many pilots complaining about runway length for normal narrow bodied aircraft at Luton.
And Altenburg is in altogether different territory and not able to be served by any regular commercial jet.
Scary in a 738 would surely be Skiathos (5281 feet), especially on those rare occasions when the runway is wet for landing.
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: SW Scotland
Age: 49
Posts: 17
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I was flying back from BHX to GLA last week with BE (Q400) and the two pax in row 2 (front row on the RHS of that particular aircraft) were briefed on the operation of the emergency exit in some detail.
As my last few trips have seen me sat nearer the back (I am sadly just regular SLF and not an occupant of the coveted Row 0
), I could not say if this was the norm... perhaps somebody from BE could confirm or refute this.
I do also recall the cabin crew on EZY pointing out to pax sat on the exit rows that they were indeed sat at exit rows and would be required to assist in an emergency, but I am fairly certain that they were directed to read the safety card for the actual operation of the exit.
Just thought I would...
a) share what feels like a relevant experience and
b) post instead of just lurking!
Cheers,
G-BHZO.
As my last few trips have seen me sat nearer the back (I am sadly just regular SLF and not an occupant of the coveted Row 0
), I could not say if this was the norm... perhaps somebody from BE could confirm or refute this.I do also recall the cabin crew on EZY pointing out to pax sat on the exit rows that they were indeed sat at exit rows and would be required to assist in an emergency, but I am fairly certain that they were directed to read the safety card for the actual operation of the exit.
Just thought I would...
a) share what feels like a relevant experience and
b) post instead of just lurking!
Cheers,
G-BHZO.
On the other hand I am not aware of Ryanair ever producing a safety initiative on the basis of FDM analysis, though I do stand to be corrected. On the other hand we do know from a newsletter that Ryanair did identify an interesting trend from FDM in the past. While they said at the time that they would do something, nothing was ever done.
Do you suppose they're afraid of what's in the data? Do you think perhaps they see data as a liability (but they still collect it anyway)?
Perhaps the question is redundant given all, - I knew some Asian carriers did this, but how could real "safety" people at Ryanair actually get their head around using FDM as a tool for punishment? Wow. Anyway, thanks again.
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: France
Posts: 21
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
"...then in any "unplanned" emergency (typically a landing accident), then all the pax by the emergency exits are unbriefed and clueless..."
This is precisely my concern as a passenger on the flight. An emergency evacuation, by definition, must mean getting all the passengers off the plane as fast as possible using all available emergency exits. There is NO time for briefing in an emergency. Four overwing exits were not used at Limoges. Why? Some passengers brought bags and hard flight cases down the slides with them, which could have damaged the slides, but nobdy prevented them. Nobody removed their shoes, as is suggested on the safety 'cards' stuck to the seat backs.
If our landing and evacuation at Limoges were staged as a safety excercise it would have to be counted as a completely shocking failure.
Factor in even a small fire or physical damage to the cabin and the consequences would have been horrendous.
This is precisely my concern as a passenger on the flight. An emergency evacuation, by definition, must mean getting all the passengers off the plane as fast as possible using all available emergency exits. There is NO time for briefing in an emergency. Four overwing exits were not used at Limoges. Why? Some passengers brought bags and hard flight cases down the slides with them, which could have damaged the slides, but nobdy prevented them. Nobody removed their shoes, as is suggested on the safety 'cards' stuck to the seat backs.
If our landing and evacuation at Limoges were staged as a safety excercise it would have to be counted as a completely shocking failure.
Factor in even a small fire or physical damage to the cabin and the consequences would have been horrendous.
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Germany
Posts: 19
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Blackpool - 6001 ft
Derry - 6076 ft
Altenburg - 2235 ft
Bournemouth - 7450 ft
Bristol - 6598 ft
Limoges - 8202 ft
Interesting selection of runways. You do realise that Limoges is longer than Luton (7087 ft)! I don't hear many pilots complaining about runway length for normal narrow bodied aircraft at Luton.
And Altenburg is in altogether different territory and not able to be served by any regular commercial jet.
Derry - 6076 ft
Altenburg - 2235 ft
Bournemouth - 7450 ft
Bristol - 6598 ft
Limoges - 8202 ft
Interesting selection of runways. You do realise that Limoges is longer than Luton (7087 ft)! I don't hear many pilots complaining about runway length for normal narrow bodied aircraft at Luton.
And Altenburg is in altogether different territory and not able to be served by any regular commercial jet.
will be about 7333 ft...
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 140
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Your Altenburg lenght is 2.235m, not ft. ...
will be about 7333 ft...
will be about 7333 ft...
Correct elsewhere:-
eg www.azworldairports.com/airports/a1600aoc.cfm
An emergency evacuation, by definition, must mean getting all the passengers off the plane as fast as possible using all available emergency exits
Originally Posted by testpanel
So, fly KLM (i´m getting annoyed being briefed all the time...)
The related accident investigation report includes some interesting analysis of the evacuation process. Regarding the pre-flight safety briefings, see pages 98 and 99.
Last edited by xetroV; 8th Apr 2008 at 17:57.
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: FUBAR
Posts: 3,348
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Capvermell, the relevant distances which make me quote Limoges and Bournemouth are the distances with respect to Glide Path, 2170m at Limoge, and not quite so long particularly on Easterly, at BOH where the threshold is well displaced. And it seems we can take as read that Limoges is slippery when wet.
Length (as they say) isn't everything, and some places we operate to, which are fine on paper, have combinations of surface/local topography/slope/expected up or down drafts etc which mark them out as places not to p@ss around. We have a fair few of these in RYR, "flap 30 My @rse" is my favourite response to those who say. . . "but it is the standard flap setting", Yeah and stopping on the paved surface is the standard way to complete a flight m'boy.
Altenburg is sure as hell in Metres not feet, we are sometimes landing on limiting runways, but we are not that clever to operate a 738 onto 2200ish feet. . . Yet.
As regards safety briefings, I don't recall in the last 30 years when flying in the back from time to time ever being instructed how to operate an exit, merely being informed that I was next to one, asked if I was willing / able to operate it if required, and being directed to familiarise myself with the safety card. I believe, rightly or wrongly, this is the industry norm and I have never flown with a carrier that went one stage further. Don't dispute that in an ideal world it wouldn't be a sound idea though.
Length (as they say) isn't everything, and some places we operate to, which are fine on paper, have combinations of surface/local topography/slope/expected up or down drafts etc which mark them out as places not to p@ss around. We have a fair few of these in RYR, "flap 30 My @rse" is my favourite response to those who say. . . "but it is the standard flap setting", Yeah and stopping on the paved surface is the standard way to complete a flight m'boy.
Altenburg is sure as hell in Metres not feet, we are sometimes landing on limiting runways, but we are not that clever to operate a 738 onto 2200ish feet. . . Yet.
As regards safety briefings, I don't recall in the last 30 years when flying in the back from time to time ever being instructed how to operate an exit, merely being informed that I was next to one, asked if I was willing / able to operate it if required, and being directed to familiarise myself with the safety card. I believe, rightly or wrongly, this is the industry norm and I have never flown with a carrier that went one stage further. Don't dispute that in an ideal world it wouldn't be a sound idea though.
Last edited by captplaystation; 8th Apr 2008 at 16:40.
I think the psychologists will tell you that part of the challenge with operation of exits in an emergency is that when passengers enter the cabin with the intention of flight they expect to be told what to do. When it comes to an emergency (even if they have been told to get out on the PA) they have change from being passive to active. If you don't quite get this watch people when then get in or out of a lift (elevator) - you need someone to take charge of the selection of the floors!
Even if the pax at the overwings are "able-bodied" they may not be mentally prepared to operate the exits when required unless there is a urgent reason to get out (fire in the cabin?). Obviously airline technical staff (aircrew or cabin crew) would I suggest have little hesitation in operating the exits if this was clearly required.
So in summary it is all very well briefing pax as to HOW to operate the exits but that does not mean they are necessarily capable of making a "command decision" to open the exits.
Even if the pax at the overwings are "able-bodied" they may not be mentally prepared to operate the exits when required unless there is a urgent reason to get out (fire in the cabin?). Obviously airline technical staff (aircrew or cabin crew) would I suggest have little hesitation in operating the exits if this was clearly required.
So in summary it is all very well briefing pax as to HOW to operate the exits but that does not mean they are necessarily capable of making a "command decision" to open the exits.