Ryanair Taxi incident Carcassonne
Slip & Turn,
FFS If you actually bother to read my posts I only mentioned questionable marshalling at Carcassone once and that was in relation to the RYR guys who had brought it up. Hardly banging on about it!
FFS If you actually bother to read my posts I only mentioned questionable marshalling at Carcassone once and that was in relation to the RYR guys who had brought it up. Hardly banging on about it!
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Sonoma, CA, USA
Age: 79
Posts: 143
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
738 v the rest of he 73 fleet
"it’s a very slippery aircraft to handle, more so than the earlier 737-3/4/5 etc. the wing doesn’t allow slow down and go down. ... in the 738 its tricky, also if your familiar with the approach into STN, 220 kits from 6000 down to 3000, level in 8 miles, speed brake or flaps required!."
I've got friends who fly for a rather large line here in the States that operates only 73Xs
Many wonder how the 738 got included in the type rating with the previous 73s.
I've got friends who fly for a rather large line here in the States that operates only 73Xs
Many wonder how the 738 got included in the type rating with the previous 73s.
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: In my head
Posts: 694
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Right Way Up, I am sorry I singled you out but actually I have followed this thread in some detail. So I'd got the impresssion rightly or wrongly that you'd already side-swiped the airport or small airports like it three times on this page, not once.
I am annoyed with all those that dismiss these avoidable incidents as simply collateral damage in a busy airline business that is somehow limited in its sphere of influence when it decides to go somewhere a bit avant-garde.
If an airline, decides to start taking Boeings into a small airport then the airline owes everyone a special duty of care in how they manoeuvre their kit in less than ideal spaces. That doesn't mean leave it to the pilots and/or men on the ground and woe betide the first to mess up. It means the airline needs to have a continuing meaningful relationship with the airport and ground handlers (if different) which includes conducting, updating and heeding proper risk assessments, and communicating some good ground rules to the otherwise hapless aircrews.
I mean how hard can it be for an airline's risk assessor to identify exactly how many ways their 737-800 can be safely driven on and driven off that apron in the presence of other aircraft and equipment? Shall I get my clipboard and consult Google Earth, or do I actually need to go there and talk to some people, do you think?
Trouble is, talking safety always costs new money, so I suppose there is a natural reluctance for any accountant to be pro-active in the peripheral aspects once the operation has started.
BTW, as an aside, ssg (of the V1 / flex power debate) might note that CCF is not one of those facilities with 100 miles of flat Iowa cornfields at the end of the runway, either. So we might guess that it's not just wingtips that get a battering at this one.
Whilst I remain pleased to have been 'plonked', on time, just 30 minutes from my upcoming lunch within the walls of the Cité, I'd already decided last summer that using CCF is a tad on the adventurous side of ideal at the best of times. But hey, that's just my take on it ...
Personally I'll be trying a different Ryanair venue this summer with what looks like an extra 4000 feet between the piano keys and a spare 12500 footer next door
... but then I always was a bit of a tarmac jockey 
.
F14 indeed...oh, he's popped orf ...
I am annoyed with all those that dismiss these avoidable incidents as simply collateral damage in a busy airline business that is somehow limited in its sphere of influence when it decides to go somewhere a bit avant-garde.
If an airline, decides to start taking Boeings into a small airport then the airline owes everyone a special duty of care in how they manoeuvre their kit in less than ideal spaces. That doesn't mean leave it to the pilots and/or men on the ground and woe betide the first to mess up. It means the airline needs to have a continuing meaningful relationship with the airport and ground handlers (if different) which includes conducting, updating and heeding proper risk assessments, and communicating some good ground rules to the otherwise hapless aircrews.
I mean how hard can it be for an airline's risk assessor to identify exactly how many ways their 737-800 can be safely driven on and driven off that apron in the presence of other aircraft and equipment? Shall I get my clipboard and consult Google Earth, or do I actually need to go there and talk to some people, do you think?
Trouble is, talking safety always costs new money, so I suppose there is a natural reluctance for any accountant to be pro-active in the peripheral aspects once the operation has started.
BTW, as an aside, ssg (of the V1 / flex power debate) might note that CCF is not one of those facilities with 100 miles of flat Iowa cornfields at the end of the runway, either. So we might guess that it's not just wingtips that get a battering at this one.
Whilst I remain pleased to have been 'plonked', on time, just 30 minutes from my upcoming lunch within the walls of the Cité, I'd already decided last summer that using CCF is a tad on the adventurous side of ideal at the best of times. But hey, that's just my take on it ...
Personally I'll be trying a different Ryanair venue this summer with what looks like an extra 4000 feet between the piano keys and a spare 12500 footer next door
... but then I always was a bit of a tarmac jockey .F14
indeed...oh, he's popped orf ...
Slip & Turn,
I agree with you that just because it is a small airfield that the airline should just roll with the punches. However the problem is that the risk will always be higher at some places than others. Being vigilant is the answer but it only needs someone to take their eye off the ball for a second and voila an incident.
I agree with you that just because it is a small airfield that the airline should just roll with the punches. However the problem is that the risk will always be higher at some places than others. Being vigilant is the answer but it only needs someone to take their eye off the ball for a second and voila an incident.
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: USA
Age: 66
Posts: 2,183
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Being vigilant is the answer but it only needs someone to take their eye off the ball for a second and voila an incident
I would have thought that european standards would have had a more consistent feel to them.
EGAC Ramper. I apologise for posting as I am not a professional pilot just an ATCO with 30 years experience.
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Dre's mum's house
Posts: 1,432
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Byalphaindia
The standard FR turn round time is 25 minutes.
It is not unusual to turn the aircraft round in 17 minutes where the ground handling services are slick: the most common difficulties in turning the aircraft round are normally related to problems with the ground handling services e.g missing passengers, baggage search, security delays, non availability of GSE, airport congestion etc.
Turning a 738 round in 25 minutes is neither difficult or stressful: it just requires teamwork and everyone getting on an doing their job.
Operating in to CCF is challenging, but landing performance is not a problem. There are other airfields we all operate to which are far more challenging, in my opinion, than CCF. Salzburg is a point in case, where we blithely arrive and depart into the cul de sac valley at night; Skiathos is fairly sporty with the end of 02 overhanging the cliff; Ajaccio is another strip where you have to eye on the ball and Corfu is just a bundle of laughs, especially at night in bad weather.
We are all, regardless of which company we work for, operating large, high performance aircraft into airfields which were built to cope with turboprops and haven't been developed to keep pace with the growth of air services and equipment.
Let's not be to harsh on each other and keep some perspective here.
It is not unusual to turn the aircraft round in 17 minutes where the ground handling services are slick: the most common difficulties in turning the aircraft round are normally related to problems with the ground handling services e.g missing passengers, baggage search, security delays, non availability of GSE, airport congestion etc.
Turning a 738 round in 25 minutes is neither difficult or stressful: it just requires teamwork and everyone getting on an doing their job.
Operating in to CCF is challenging, but landing performance is not a problem. There are other airfields we all operate to which are far more challenging, in my opinion, than CCF. Salzburg is a point in case, where we blithely arrive and depart into the cul de sac valley at night; Skiathos is fairly sporty with the end of 02 overhanging the cliff; Ajaccio is another strip where you have to eye on the ball and Corfu is just a bundle of laughs, especially at night in bad weather.
We are all, regardless of which company we work for, operating large, high performance aircraft into airfields which were built to cope with turboprops and haven't been developed to keep pace with the growth of air services and equipment.
Let's not be to harsh on each other and keep some perspective here.
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: In my head
Posts: 694
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Woa, Real S. Shady!
that'd only be where the ground handling services are slick and the load factor was either real slim or real sick 
I am all for a bit of well motivated teamwork, but I think you are getting a little carried away with your optimism
You'd certainly amaze me if I saw you doing chocks in to chocks out in 17 with any meaningful load e.g. 160<pax<=189. Totally impossible for all reasonable intents and purposes I'd say.
As for your claim that 25 mins therefore isn't stressful, well on a good day, with a good team, and no detracting factors, and not counting a healthy background level of team adrenalin, endorphins and sweaty armpits all round, and on the basis that practice makes perfect, I'd just about allow that
, but how many real days actually fit the ideal on every sector 
? It's that robbing of Peter to pay Paul that surely creates the stress?
And then before you know it, ding! (oops!)
It is not unusual to turn the aircraft round in 17 minutes where the ground handling services are slick
I am all for a bit of well motivated teamwork, but I think you are getting a little carried away with your optimism
You'd certainly amaze me if I saw you doing chocks in to chocks out in 17 with any meaningful load e.g. 160<pax<=189. Totally impossible for all reasonable intents and purposes I'd say.
As for your claim that 25 mins therefore isn't stressful, well on a good day, with a good team, and no detracting factors, and not counting a healthy background level of team adrenalin, endorphins and sweaty armpits all round, and on the basis that practice makes perfect, I'd just about allow that
, but how many real days actually fit the ideal on every sector ? It's that robbing of Peter to pay Paul that surely creates the stress?And then before you know it, ding! (oops!)
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Dre's mum's house
Posts: 1,432
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Slip,
I've managed a stress free 17 minute turn at LDY with around 130 pax in and out; we were the only aircraft n the ramp tho!
Equally, at CIA with 150 ish I've had 1 hr + caused by poor ground handling ( there is no IATA delay code for Italy) but I've also had a 25 minute turn in Berlin with a full house each way: but hey, they are German!!
Essentially, a great deal of the ground time is down to the handling, not FR crews: the culture of the country makes a huge difference.
I've managed a stress free 17 minute turn at LDY with around 130 pax in and out; we were the only aircraft n the ramp tho!
Equally, at CIA with 150 ish I've had 1 hr + caused by poor ground handling ( there is no IATA delay code for Italy) but I've also had a 25 minute turn in Berlin with a full house each way: but hey, they are German!!
Essentially, a great deal of the ground time is down to the handling, not FR crews: the culture of the country makes a huge difference.
Join Date: Dec 1999
Location: Both sides of 40W
Posts: 219
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
ASFKAP What a load of b...s... I wonder what those exec´s would have said if, they had been on the BA B777 short landing at LHR or the LH incident at HAM or the A340 of Af at Toronto etc... if, comfort and service are their cup of tea ok. But, please do not imply that a company (ie FR) in your case is, cuestionable because of saftey issues!!!!
Join Date: Dec 1999
Location: Both sides of 40W
Posts: 219
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Fair enough ASFKAP. Reliability as in ón time´or as you mentioned tech. related? Well, in EUR to get around most of the countries and to some of the places they fly to, not much option price wise and frequency wise (that includes Easy, Air Berlin etc.)
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: LATLONG
Posts: 169
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
With these 17min turn arounds, I assume you board and fuel? If so does somebody not have to be downstairs on a headset or such? This leaves about how much time for other cockpit duties and briefings to be done correctly?
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Ireland
Posts: 166
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
ASFKAP, what exactly do you mean by reliability grounds? That they might not get you there on time? Putting Ryanair's own claimed puncuality stats aside, on average they still tend to perform at least as well if not quite a bit better than other European carriers.
This company you talk of just sounds like yet another willing to waste cash on portraying a particular image. I don't see how this is relevant to any claimed reliability or safety issues regarding Ryanair.
It's interesting you claim that you 'personally don't use them because of safety concerns, but thats because I worked there.' If anything I would of thought that you'd be relatively happy to continue using Ryanair if you were able to see their pilot training and approach to saftey from the inside.
To me what people seem to overlook is that a major incident is quite likely to have a much greater impact on Ryanair (or any other LCC) than on the likes of BA. If the BA 777 Heathrow accident was a Ryanair aircraft my guess is the Ryanair sales would've taken a much greater hit than whatever BA have experienced making safety arguably even more important to Ryanair - certainly from a cold-hearted accountant's point of view!
This company you talk of just sounds like yet another willing to waste cash on portraying a particular image. I don't see how this is relevant to any claimed reliability or safety issues regarding Ryanair.
It's interesting you claim that you 'personally don't use them because of safety concerns, but thats because I worked there.' If anything I would of thought that you'd be relatively happy to continue using Ryanair if you were able to see their pilot training and approach to saftey from the inside.
To me what people seem to overlook is that a major incident is quite likely to have a much greater impact on Ryanair (or any other LCC) than on the likes of BA. If the BA 777 Heathrow accident was a Ryanair aircraft my guess is the Ryanair sales would've taken a much greater hit than whatever BA have experienced making safety arguably even more important to Ryanair - certainly from a cold-hearted accountant's point of view!
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: North Cornwall
Age: 73
Posts: 428
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
ASFKAP, are you for real? Do you understand large company requirements and in house travel agents in large companies? I think not. I have worked in the past for a multinational company, and for the past ten years flown round Europe and Africa as a contractor for various multinational companies.
In house travel agents will only sell tickets where they get commission - when I last asked neither Ryanair or Easyjet pay agents commission.
Many business travelers require a flexibility in their travels that only a fully refundable fully changeable ticket can deliver. I have lost count of the number of times I have had to change one or more legs of a trip to another airline.
I have no qualms about flying Ryanair, my last flight was delayed on the return trip by a technical problem, at no time was safety compromised. We regularly use the low cost airlines for leisure flying. For business I choose major airlines, not for safety, not for reliability but quite simply the ticketing choice.
A happy Ryanair SLF....
In house travel agents will only sell tickets where they get commission - when I last asked neither Ryanair or Easyjet pay agents commission.
Many business travelers require a flexibility in their travels that only a fully refundable fully changeable ticket can deliver. I have lost count of the number of times I have had to change one or more legs of a trip to another airline.
I have no qualms about flying Ryanair, my last flight was delayed on the return trip by a technical problem, at no time was safety compromised. We regularly use the low cost airlines for leisure flying. For business I choose major airlines, not for safety, not for reliability but quite simply the ticketing choice.
A happy Ryanair SLF....
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Aylesford, Kent.
Posts: 14
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Srobarts: I currently work for a small business travel agent. I can assure you that the vast majority of carriers pay 0% comm to us agents..We derive most of our income from booking and service fees.
For that reason, we'll book whatever our customers wants us to book - as long as within their company policy. Put simply, we get £25 per ticket whether its LTN/GLA on loco or LHR/NYC in F on BA
We have to keep an eye on the pax though - amazing how many will book outside of policy in order to rack up those miles...
For that reason, we'll book whatever our customers wants us to book - as long as within their company policy. Put simply, we get £25 per ticket whether its LTN/GLA on loco or LHR/NYC in F on BA
We have to keep an eye on the pax though - amazing how many will book outside of policy in order to rack up those miles...
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Thailand
Posts: 942
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Fiction Rules.
ASFKAP, would you care to quote your source for these 'reliability' statistics? Most of us base our decisions and choices on experience, information, recommendation or plain instinct.
You appear to base your decision to ridicule and avoid Ryanair on a baseless theory that Ryanair are less reliable than other airlines. Show us the facts.
How many flights failed to reach their destination over a few days out of LHR a few weeks ago? Hundreds.
How many Ryanair flights were late arriving at their destination in the last year? A handful.
You and your ilk, and there are many of you, write such absolute drivel that I just wonder what you would do if you had a decision to make based on fact rather than rumour. You are writing fiction for heaven's sake!
Before you write rubbish, ask yourself how you will answer the question; where did you find that 'fact' from?
Writing 'industry sources' or 'I am told' mean you are making it up. You are writing lies unless you can quote a reliable and verifiable source.
But as someone said, why let facts get in the way of a good story?
By the way, 25 minute Turn Rounds are accomplished by Ryanair and other efficient airlines on a daily basis without sweaty armpits or pumping adrenalin, (yet more rabid and uninformed hyperbole from an ignorant onlooker) on about 98% of the more than one thousand flights every day.
You appear to base your decision to ridicule and avoid Ryanair on a baseless theory that Ryanair are less reliable than other airlines. Show us the facts.
How many flights failed to reach their destination over a few days out of LHR a few weeks ago? Hundreds.
How many Ryanair flights were late arriving at their destination in the last year? A handful.
You and your ilk, and there are many of you, write such absolute drivel that I just wonder what you would do if you had a decision to make based on fact rather than rumour. You are writing fiction for heaven's sake!
Before you write rubbish, ask yourself how you will answer the question; where did you find that 'fact' from?
Writing 'industry sources' or 'I am told' mean you are making it up. You are writing lies unless you can quote a reliable and verifiable source.
But as someone said, why let facts get in the way of a good story?
By the way, 25 minute Turn Rounds are accomplished by Ryanair and other efficient airlines on a daily basis without sweaty armpits or pumping adrenalin, (yet more rabid and uninformed hyperbole from an ignorant onlooker) on about 98% of the more than one thousand flights every day.
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: In my head
Posts: 694
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
FRiction Rules
Nice of you to comment in such friendly tones rubik101
I think we'd all have to agree that before we learned of the 'new 17', here in this thread, that the 'old 25' had most definitely reached the public consciousness as some kind of accepted normalcy to be found somewhere between FRn scheduled arrival time and FRn+1 scheduled departure time on the next sector.
That said, I suppose that no great shakes causing no heightened adrenal activity and no sweaty armpits should not surprise us. It is afterall a 'full 7' (years) since someone on PPRuNe wondered about the 'lost 53' (minutes again):
http://www.pprune.org/forums/showthread.php?t=62936
May we assume that 980 flights a day do not require a cooling off period or is that pushing statistics a bit too far?
I think we'd all have to agree that before we learned of the 'new 17', here in this thread, that the 'old 25' had most definitely reached the public consciousness as some kind of accepted normalcy to be found somewhere between FRn scheduled arrival time and FRn+1 scheduled departure time on the next sector.
That said, I suppose that no great shakes causing no heightened adrenal activity and no sweaty armpits should not surprise us. It is afterall a 'full 7' (years) since someone on PPRuNe wondered about the 'lost 53' (minutes again):
http://www.pprune.org/forums/showthread.php?t=62936
May we assume that 980 flights a day do not require a cooling off period or is that pushing statistics a bit too far?
ECON cruise, LR cruise...
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: MIRSI hold - give or take...
Age: 52
Posts: 568
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
s&t,
Before you bring brake cooling into the equation - I assume that you know the difference between "2 engine reverse" & "no reverse" brake cooling schedules?
63 T, 20 deg. C, 140 kt brake-on-speed, A/B 3 and 2 engine reverse gives me 20 min. brake cooling turn-around time, but hey, what do I know? I'm just an overpaid busdriver!
Before people launch into more uninformed speculation - could we please leave it to the 73-drivers to comment on specific operational procedures and problems and leave the general comments to everyone else?
Before you bring brake cooling into the equation - I assume that you know the difference between "2 engine reverse" & "no reverse" brake cooling schedules?
63 T, 20 deg. C, 140 kt brake-on-speed, A/B 3 and 2 engine reverse gives me 20 min. brake cooling turn-around time, but hey, what do I know? I'm just an overpaid busdriver!
Before people launch into more uninformed speculation - could we please leave it to the 73-drivers to comment on specific operational procedures and problems and leave the general comments to everyone else?