Crash-Cork Airport
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: uk
Posts: 913
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
MANX 2 on BBC R4
Just listened to BBC R4's Face the Facts programme re. the Cork Manx2 crash.
Well worth a listen on BBC Iplayer if you missed it.
An appalling indictment of our industry.
Unusually, the R4 has been factual and un-sensational in their reporting.
BBC iPlayer - iPlayer Radio Home
Well worth a listen on BBC Iplayer if you missed it.
An appalling indictment of our industry.
Unusually, the R4 has been factual and un-sensational in their reporting.
BBC iPlayer - iPlayer Radio Home
I listened as well, makes me curious as to what they couldn't or were told not to broadcast.
When I flew to the IOM, some years ago, the tickets said flybe but the aircraft (BAE 146) was french registered but marked up in Flybe logo, crew and seat pocket documentation were all Air France logo. That made me wonder at the time.
When I flew to the IOM, some years ago, the tickets said flybe but the aircraft (BAE 146) was french registered but marked up in Flybe logo, crew and seat pocket documentation were all Air France logo. That made me wonder at the time.
Guest
Posts: n/a
Admiral,
I was giving the poor guy the benefit of the doubt and assuming he wasn't intending to bust minimums.
Perhaps I have said "To mind mind this doesn't make sense Unless of course he was intending to bust minumums."
I was giving the poor guy the benefit of the doubt and assuming he wasn't intending to bust minimums.
Perhaps I have said "To mind mind this doesn't make sense Unless of course he was intending to bust minumums."
At about 20:45 minutes into the broadcast they discuss the airlines marketing strategy where they compare their punctuality statistics with easyJet when the weather is poor.
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: ***
Posts: 350
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
27/09,
You are right.
The quoteation above just made me assume, he was saying that he could handle the fog. It can be read that way, but it could also be interpreted differently.
I was too quick in assumption and judgement.
Nic
You are right.
He believed it would never have happened if he was at the controls, as he was familiar with foggy conditions in Cork.
I was too quick in assumption and judgement.
Nic
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: uk
Posts: 913
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Sunnybunny, all airlines from time to time use 3rd. party carriers for various reasons, such as a tech aircraft. This is just a sub-contract on an ad-hoc basis. I seem to recall that Flybe did lots of work for AF and had some of their own aircraft painted in AF colours. BA do the same, just look for the 'operated by' label painted somewhere on the fuselage.
This is not the same as MANX2 which was posing as an airlines but in reality was little more than a travel agent.
The comment that the general public should think about who's up the pointed end, is very pertinent.
This is not the same as MANX2 which was posing as an airlines but in reality was little more than a travel agent.
The comment that the general public should think about who's up the pointed end, is very pertinent.
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Little Britain
Posts: 18
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It's all very well saying you need to know who's up front.
However if the "virtual" airline doesn't tell you which operator is actually flying the plane until you get on to the apron and see it, so what chance do you have? I assume that if you said as you boarded, I don't like the look of this aircraft/crew etc, the chances of a refund would be nil.
The case of Mr Lee is indeed very sad. I wonder what his real issue was - whether he knew that approaches were flown illegally and that he felt he would not have allowed the Captain to have taken the executive desision to continue? Or perhaps whether he was all too aware of the practices within Flightline and the broader Manx2 operation which could have led to the crew feeling so pressured as to make the decsions which ultimately appear to have led to the incident.
I would hope that he did not, as reported in some publications, feel that he could have done better flying the approaches, as it is incontrovertibly shown that by commencing all three, the crew were in breach of legislation.
Well done to Radio 4 for a balanced piece of work, very thought provoking. It's interesting to note that R4 have picked up on the fact that the crew made 3 illegal approaches, a fact which the IOM media seemed to be reluctant to report.
The quote about EasyJet (and inference to Flybe also) about being able to land in lesser visibility was quite an insight into the thought processes of those at the helm of Manx2.
However if the "virtual" airline doesn't tell you which operator is actually flying the plane until you get on to the apron and see it, so what chance do you have? I assume that if you said as you boarded, I don't like the look of this aircraft/crew etc, the chances of a refund would be nil.
The case of Mr Lee is indeed very sad. I wonder what his real issue was - whether he knew that approaches were flown illegally and that he felt he would not have allowed the Captain to have taken the executive desision to continue? Or perhaps whether he was all too aware of the practices within Flightline and the broader Manx2 operation which could have led to the crew feeling so pressured as to make the decsions which ultimately appear to have led to the incident.
I would hope that he did not, as reported in some publications, feel that he could have done better flying the approaches, as it is incontrovertibly shown that by commencing all three, the crew were in breach of legislation.
Well done to Radio 4 for a balanced piece of work, very thought provoking. It's interesting to note that R4 have picked up on the fact that the crew made 3 illegal approaches, a fact which the IOM media seemed to be reluctant to report.
The quote about EasyJet (and inference to Flybe also) about being able to land in lesser visibility was quite an insight into the thought processes of those at the helm of Manx2.
From 9 June 2010 (ie well before the accident):
EASYJET has responded to criticism from Manx2.com, saying that safety takes priority when it comes to making decisions about flight cancellations.
Spokesman Andrew McConnell said, "We apologise for the disruption that the cancellation caused. This was due to fog at Ronaldsway Airport, meaning that it was not safe to land the aircraft."
The statement comes after Manx2.com claimed scores of passengers had their TT holiday plans “ruined” by easyjet’s third cancellation in two weeks at the weekend, caused by fog. Manx2.com laid on two extra flights to cope with the problem and said the situation demonstrated the different operating philosophies of a locally based operator and a big operator from the UK.
Chairman Noel Hayes said it was the ability of a locally-based company to react quickly which saved the day for more than 100 passengers, many of which otherwise faced missing onward flights to Europe later that day.
He added, “The different operating philosophies of a locally based operator and a big operator from across were clearly demonstrated again on Saturday. easyJet's new service, with more than 100 passengers on-board, was unable to land so returned to Liverpool where the flight was abruptly cancelled."
EASYJET has responded to criticism from Manx2.com, saying that safety takes priority when it comes to making decisions about flight cancellations.
Spokesman Andrew McConnell said, "We apologise for the disruption that the cancellation caused. This was due to fog at Ronaldsway Airport, meaning that it was not safe to land the aircraft."
The statement comes after Manx2.com claimed scores of passengers had their TT holiday plans “ruined” by easyjet’s third cancellation in two weeks at the weekend, caused by fog. Manx2.com laid on two extra flights to cope with the problem and said the situation demonstrated the different operating philosophies of a locally based operator and a big operator from the UK.
Chairman Noel Hayes said it was the ability of a locally-based company to react quickly which saved the day for more than 100 passengers, many of which otherwise faced missing onward flights to Europe later that day.
He added, “The different operating philosophies of a locally based operator and a big operator from across were clearly demonstrated again on Saturday. easyJet's new service, with more than 100 passengers on-board, was unable to land so returned to Liverpool where the flight was abruptly cancelled."
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: FUBAR
Posts: 3,348
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Premonition ? Arrogance ? A realistic public statement of what they "really" expected from their pilots?
Reading it now with the benefit of hindsight does tend to invoke a feeling of
One of the golden rules of airline advertising is never to cast aspertions on anything safety related on the record of the other guys, as you don't know if/when your time will come.
Unless you have a Cat3 operation & the other guy doesn't (as was the case years ago when BA used to promote this capability with the Shuttle which BM couldn't match with the "Diesel9") claiming you can get in when the other guy can't is tantamount to saying "Yeah mate, we are like , just a bunch of effin cowboys" IMHO
And so indeed it came to be realised.
Reading it now with the benefit of hindsight does tend to invoke a feeling of
One of the golden rules of airline advertising is never to cast aspertions on anything safety related on the record of the other guys, as you don't know if/when your time will come.
Unless you have a Cat3 operation & the other guy doesn't (as was the case years ago when BA used to promote this capability with the Shuttle which BM couldn't match with the "Diesel9") claiming you can get in when the other guy can't is tantamount to saying "Yeah mate, we are like , just a bunch of effin cowboys" IMHO
And so indeed it came to be realised.
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: 'An Airfield Somewhere in England'
Posts: 1,094
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I do not think that easyJet are any different from any other credible airline in Europe - we do not bust minimums. If we cancel flights because the weather is below legal limits, then that is the way it is. Manx2 have been weighed in the balance and found desperately wanting - perhaps a cancelled flight is a small price to pay for getting there alive a day or two later. I would list Manx2 as the exception here - they were just a 2-bit rock-bottom turboprop operator with slack standards and pressure from above to 'get the job done'. I have worked for such outfits myself, and am profoundly grateful to never have that sort of pressure from my own employer now. I am not holding easyJet up as higher than anyone else - we are just the same as the vast majority of serious airlines that exist around the UK today. Until you have experienced what passes for normality in some of these smaller airlines, you cannot really imagine what pressures their pilots work under. If ever there was a case for corporate manslaughter investigations this was it.
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: out west
Age: 84
Posts: 17
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Local operator flexibilty
Without in any way taking sides in the Manx2 versus EasyJet et al performance comments. Is there not case that a locally based operator - without the schedule demands that a larger company may have - might well be better placed to take advantage of changes in the weather – and still operate within the appropriate weather limits? A delay to an EasyJet programme, for example, may have considerable knock-on effects whereas the local operator may have more flexibility and more capable of responding quickly when situations change.
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: FUBAR
Posts: 3,348
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Yes. . . . but I doubt if that was where they sought, or found, their "local advantage"
If we look at the result, and reading further back here, take account of comments from those familiar with the company's "history" of incidents , and arriving at the same time as others are diverting, we are more likely to find their "advantage".
That is in no way thanks to flexibility or exceptional piloting skills, it is merely due to ignoring the MINIMUM part of minimum descent altitude, & commencing an approach with no respect either for the word MINIMUMS as it is applied to RVR.
If we look at the result, and reading further back here, take account of comments from those familiar with the company's "history" of incidents , and arriving at the same time as others are diverting, we are more likely to find their "advantage".That is in no way thanks to flexibility or exceptional piloting skills, it is merely due to ignoring the MINIMUM part of minimum descent altitude, & commencing an approach with no respect either for the word MINIMUMS as it is applied to RVR.
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: uk
Posts: 913
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
SAINT ALLED - yes, its easy in the UK. Pick a brand you know and the chances are you will be as safe as its ever likely to be in the air.
If you picked the well known brand then turn up at the airport and find the A/c has a different paint job from that expected, then you have a reasonable expectation that your 'well known brand' has subbed out to a reasonably reliable and safe outfit. Its their brand reputation at stake as well as your life.
If you have to fly on a non-uk operated flight, there are still plenty of well known brands in Europe and N.America you can reasonably rely on.
Once you outside Europe - N. America, pick the FLAG CARRIER for that country. Best option, but not 100%. Remember Lo Cost outside Europe is not the same as EasyJet.
If you are in the back of beyond in a small turboprop, LOOK at it before you board even in the 3rd. world a well maintained, clean aircraft speaks volumes, chances are you will see the pilots, do they look professional? If you arn't happy, DON'T GO. Take some responsibility for your own life. Even though we treat aircraft like buses these days, they are not.
These are, of course HUGE generalisations, but I've used them up to the point of not flying on one occasion. I'm also very picky at what airline I send my family on. I'd rather not save £100 and fly with Air SomewhreWeird!
All this leads to Manx2, which would seem to escape the above rules, up to the point whrere it would say Fairchild Metro, at which point I would have got myself an Avis hire car and driven to Cork.
NSF +1
If you picked the well known brand then turn up at the airport and find the A/c has a different paint job from that expected, then you have a reasonable expectation that your 'well known brand' has subbed out to a reasonably reliable and safe outfit. Its their brand reputation at stake as well as your life.
If you have to fly on a non-uk operated flight, there are still plenty of well known brands in Europe and N.America you can reasonably rely on.
Once you outside Europe - N. America, pick the FLAG CARRIER for that country. Best option, but not 100%. Remember Lo Cost outside Europe is not the same as EasyJet.
If you are in the back of beyond in a small turboprop, LOOK at it before you board even in the 3rd. world a well maintained, clean aircraft speaks volumes, chances are you will see the pilots, do they look professional? If you arn't happy, DON'T GO. Take some responsibility for your own life. Even though we treat aircraft like buses these days, they are not.
These are, of course HUGE generalisations, but I've used them up to the point of not flying on one occasion. I'm also very picky at what airline I send my family on. I'd rather not save £100 and fly with Air SomewhreWeird!
All this leads to Manx2, which would seem to escape the above rules, up to the point whrere it would say Fairchild Metro, at which point I would have got myself an Avis hire car and driven to Cork.
NSF +1
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Wor Yerm
Age: 68
Posts: 4
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
NSF - Manx2 isn't even an operator, let alone a two bit one. Despite the moniker "Airline," they are in their own words "just ticket sellers." And a "ticket seller" which doesn't operate aircraft probably doesn't understand that the take-off minima are different to landing minima which is maybe how they unsurprisingly managed to depart when EasyJet, quite reasonably, diverted.
Moving on and accepting the fact that Manx2.com are just "ticket sellers," it would be reasonable for them to disclose the penalties they impose on their carriers following non-performance due weather and technical related issues. Like who pays for diversions? Like who pays for associated AOG costs? How do Manx2 ensure, not being an airline, that their "operators" are are worthy organisations and are compliant with all relevant regulations and so on, like they did with Flightline?
There was a time when flying a European registered aircraft meant that you were reasonably safe. Now the likes of Manx2 have moved into the market, we now have to be a little more choosy about who we even buy our tickets from.
Moving on and accepting the fact that Manx2.com are just "ticket sellers," it would be reasonable for them to disclose the penalties they impose on their carriers following non-performance due weather and technical related issues. Like who pays for diversions? Like who pays for associated AOG costs? How do Manx2 ensure, not being an airline, that their "operators" are are worthy organisations and are compliant with all relevant regulations and so on, like they did with Flightline?
There was a time when flying a European registered aircraft meant that you were reasonably safe. Now the likes of Manx2 have moved into the market, we now have to be a little more choosy about who we even buy our tickets from.
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Hotel Gypsy
Posts: 2,821
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Since when does a ticketing agent that apparently has no role to play in a fatal accident take an interest in 'operating philosophies'? Surely they just engage the services of an AOC company and leave it at that? 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Girona
Posts: 230
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Reply to Daerman ATC
I tried on the net to find the source of the BBC radio documentary claim, similar to the one in your Spanish link, that AEAS/EASA were concerned about the safety record of FlightlineBCN but I drew a blank.
I decided to approach AESA direct by email but they replied to the effect that "SAFA data" is confidential and not theirs to release but is the property of the country organisation which generates it.
They did however inform me that in recent years FlightlineBCN has been inspected within the EU as follows:
2009 Belgium
2010 France X2 and Germany
2011 France and Ireland.
I decided to approach AESA direct by email but they replied to the effect that "SAFA data" is confidential and not theirs to release but is the property of the country organisation which generates it.
They did however inform me that in recent years FlightlineBCN has been inspected within the EU as follows:
2009 Belgium
2010 France X2 and Germany
2011 France and Ireland.
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Girona
Posts: 230
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Alphabet soup correction above.
My first reference above should be to AESA/EASA...and my second reference to EASA whom I approached by email and who gave the the EU-wide statistics which I quoted.
Apologies
Apologies
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Spain
Age: 82
Posts: 490
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Flightline and Eurocontinental info
You need to search under Google.es. Here are some links:
Aviation Safety Network > ASN Aviation Safety Database > Operator index > Spain > Euro Continental Air
This summarises the suspension of Eurocontinental's AOC in December 1999 on 'Safety grounds" pending a hearing. Their AOC was revoked. Their aircraft then appeared under Flightine BCN. Eurocontinental's office was in Valencia but they also had a shipping and forwarding office in Barcelona - where Flightline BCN are based. I am unable to find company director information but it would be interesting to see whether The directors of Eurocontintal and flightline BCN are one and the same . . .
This link takes you to a Spanish site and give more detail regarding Eurocontinental's suspension and subsequent removal of their AOC:
Economía/Transportes.- Euro Continental Air, suspendida como organización de gestión de la aeronavegabilidad - 2007095 - elEconomista.es
This link will give Flightline company information as at 2011 where it states that they have three aircraft for cargo only (!) and six full time pilots.
FLIGHTLINE
This link dated March 2011 (!) states that Flightline has been put on the EU blacklist for reasons of security:
UE pide a pequeñas aerolíneas de Alemania y España mejorar seguridad | telediario.mx
And finally here is the fullest details I've yet seen of investigations into Flightline prior to the Cork accident from www.flightglobal.com
Spanish authorities have disclosed that they took preliminary action last month to suspend the air operator's certificate of Flightline, the carrier linked to February's fatal Manx2 Fairchild Metro III crash at Cork.
Documentation detailing the breakdown of the newly-revised European Union blacklist states that the European Commission discussed Flightline's situation with Spanish air security agency AESA on 14 March.
The documentation says that AESA "initiated the process" to suspend Flightline's AOC and also stopped it from operating Metro IIIs as part of "precautionary measures to address the immediate safety concern".
Flightline had entered an arrangement to operate two Metro IIIs which, the documentation says, had previously been operating under the AOC of another Spanish carrier, Eurocontinental.
But following ramp inspections and "significant safety incidents" with the operation of the aircraft, AESA had suspended the Eurocontinental AOC.
Flightline's arrangement to operate the Metro IIIs was made with a company identified as Air Lada - not a certified carrier but a company which would provide pilots for the two aircraft.
The documentation says that Flightline carried out conversion training of the pilots, as well as quality checks on the Isle of Man regarding the aircraft operation.
Flightline could not immediately be reached for comment on the discussions.
But the documentation says AESA confirmed to the Commission's air safety committee that Flightline had drawn up a corrective plan and taken action to address the issue.
At a subsequent meeting with committee on 5 April, it adds, Flightline said it had revised pilot selection, training and control procedures - particularly for services operating away from the carrier's main base - and amended its operations manual to include guidance on use of alternate airports.
Irish investigators are still working to determine the reasons behind the 10 February crash at Cork, where a Flightline service on behalf of Manx2 was attempting to land in poor weather conditions.
The documentation states: "In light of the actions undertaken by the competent authorities of Spain in resolving the identified safety deficiencies of Flightline...it is assessed that, at this time, no further action is necessary.
"However, the Commission underlined that if such actions are ineffective in improving the performance of air carriers certified in Spain, action would be necessary to ensure that identified safety risks have been adequately controlled."
So why was Manx2 still using Flightline . . .?
Aviation Safety Network > ASN Aviation Safety Database > Operator index > Spain > Euro Continental Air
This summarises the suspension of Eurocontinental's AOC in December 1999 on 'Safety grounds" pending a hearing. Their AOC was revoked. Their aircraft then appeared under Flightine BCN. Eurocontinental's office was in Valencia but they also had a shipping and forwarding office in Barcelona - where Flightline BCN are based. I am unable to find company director information but it would be interesting to see whether The directors of Eurocontintal and flightline BCN are one and the same . . .
This link takes you to a Spanish site and give more detail regarding Eurocontinental's suspension and subsequent removal of their AOC:
Economía/Transportes.- Euro Continental Air, suspendida como organización de gestión de la aeronavegabilidad - 2007095 - elEconomista.es
This link will give Flightline company information as at 2011 where it states that they have three aircraft for cargo only (!) and six full time pilots.
FLIGHTLINE
This link dated March 2011 (!) states that Flightline has been put on the EU blacklist for reasons of security:
UE pide a pequeñas aerolíneas de Alemania y España mejorar seguridad | telediario.mx
And finally here is the fullest details I've yet seen of investigations into Flightline prior to the Cork accident from www.flightglobal.com
Spanish authorities have disclosed that they took preliminary action last month to suspend the air operator's certificate of Flightline, the carrier linked to February's fatal Manx2 Fairchild Metro III crash at Cork.
Documentation detailing the breakdown of the newly-revised European Union blacklist states that the European Commission discussed Flightline's situation with Spanish air security agency AESA on 14 March.
The documentation says that AESA "initiated the process" to suspend Flightline's AOC and also stopped it from operating Metro IIIs as part of "precautionary measures to address the immediate safety concern".
Flightline had entered an arrangement to operate two Metro IIIs which, the documentation says, had previously been operating under the AOC of another Spanish carrier, Eurocontinental.
But following ramp inspections and "significant safety incidents" with the operation of the aircraft, AESA had suspended the Eurocontinental AOC.
Flightline's arrangement to operate the Metro IIIs was made with a company identified as Air Lada - not a certified carrier but a company which would provide pilots for the two aircraft.
The documentation says that Flightline carried out conversion training of the pilots, as well as quality checks on the Isle of Man regarding the aircraft operation.
Flightline could not immediately be reached for comment on the discussions.
But the documentation says AESA confirmed to the Commission's air safety committee that Flightline had drawn up a corrective plan and taken action to address the issue.
At a subsequent meeting with committee on 5 April, it adds, Flightline said it had revised pilot selection, training and control procedures - particularly for services operating away from the carrier's main base - and amended its operations manual to include guidance on use of alternate airports.
Irish investigators are still working to determine the reasons behind the 10 February crash at Cork, where a Flightline service on behalf of Manx2 was attempting to land in poor weather conditions.
The documentation states: "In light of the actions undertaken by the competent authorities of Spain in resolving the identified safety deficiencies of Flightline...it is assessed that, at this time, no further action is necessary.
"However, the Commission underlined that if such actions are ineffective in improving the performance of air carriers certified in Spain, action would be necessary to ensure that identified safety risks have been adequately controlled."
So why was Manx2 still using Flightline . . .?
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: uk
Posts: 913
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
at the risk of thread hijacking, have a look at this article, then look at the 'related articles' box on the left hand side. Chilling isn't it? This is the reason that the likes of this spanish aoc operator should be driven out of business.
Update2: Bodies Recovered After Indonesia Plane Crash | The Jakarta Globe
Update2: Bodies Recovered After Indonesia Plane Crash | The Jakarta Globe