4 Ryanair aircraft declare fuel emergency at same time
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Dublin
Posts: 415
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The Aviation Herald is reporting tonight that one of these planes *did* land below minimum reserve.
News: Thunderstorms in Madrid on Jul 26th 2012, landings, diversions, fuel emergencies and Ryanair
News: Thunderstorms in Madrid on Jul 26th 2012, landings, diversions, fuel emergencies and Ryanair
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Florence, ITALY
Age: 44
Posts: 36
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
A Ryanair Boeing 737-800, registration EI-EKK performing flight FR-2054 from Palma Mallorca,SP to Madrid,SP (Spain), estimated flight time 1:10 hours, was on final approach to Madrid's runway 18R when the crew initiated a go around from about 2700 feet MSL at 20:00Z. The aircraft climbed back to FL150 and received delay vectors until 20:27Z (27 minutes), when the crew determined they could no longer wait and needed to divert to Valencia. The aircraft climbed to FL270 and reached Valencia descending through FL100 south of Valencia at 20:59Z. When the aircraft was vectored through extended centerline to the north the crew declared emergency as landing above final fuel reserve was no longer ensured and received immediate vectors back to the aerodrome, where the aircraft landed at 21:07Z with 1029 kg/ 2266 lbs of fuel remaining below the minimum fuel reserve required of 1104 kg/2432 lbs about 67 minutes after going around in Madrid.
Ryanair confirmed in the evening of Aug 22nd that flight FR-2054 landed slightly below final fuel reserve.
Source: The Aviation Herald News: Thunderstorms in Madrid on Jul 26th 2012, landings, diversions, fuel emergencies and Ryanair
Ryanair confirmed in the evening of Aug 22nd that flight FR-2054 landed slightly below final fuel reserve.
Source: The Aviation Herald News: Thunderstorms in Madrid on Jul 26th 2012, landings, diversions, fuel emergencies and Ryanair
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: UK
Posts: 179
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Liked the comment at the foot of this article :-
More detail :-
Only Ryanair plans had fuel problems, says Aena
http://elpais.com/el...933_464978.html
21st Aug 2012 - 15:17 CET
The Spanish state-controlled airport operator Aena on Monday rejected claims by Ryanair boss Michael O'Leary That two other airlines, LAN Chile and easyJet, Were forced to make emergency Also landings in Valencia on July 26 due to adverse weather conditions at Madrid airport, When three of the Irish low-cost carrier's plans had to put in mayday calls to land in Valencia due to dwindling fuel.
LAN Chile Aena said the plane did make an emergency landing at Valencia but Because of technical problems, not a Lack of fuel. easyJet plans Said That Were two redirected to Valencia from Madrid on the same day Because of weather conditions. "The only thing for sure Is that Ryanair plans three had problems," Aena sources said.
"Silly season"
O'Leary Ryanair Acknowledged that it publishes monthly figures on pilots' use of fuel as part of its cost-containment drive, but denied the plans had run short. "It's the silly season and the Olympics are over so let's talk and write a lot of ****e About Ryanair plans running out of fuel," O'Leary Told the Irish Independent on Sunday.
"Last week in the Irish papers Michael O'Leary said three other aircraft from other airlines, two EasyJet flights and a LAN Chile aircraft, also had to call mayday landings over Valencia on the same date because of low fuel."
Michael O'Leary was economical with the truth. The local airport operator, Aena, subsequently rejected O'Leary's claim as false, and the only aircraft declaring a fuel emergency on that day were Ryanair flights.
Michael O'Leary was economical with the truth. The local airport operator, Aena, subsequently rejected O'Leary's claim as false, and the only aircraft declaring a fuel emergency on that day were Ryanair flights.
Only Ryanair plans had fuel problems, says Aena
http://elpais.com/el...933_464978.html
21st Aug 2012 - 15:17 CET
The Spanish state-controlled airport operator Aena on Monday rejected claims by Ryanair boss Michael O'Leary That two other airlines, LAN Chile and easyJet, Were forced to make emergency Also landings in Valencia on July 26 due to adverse weather conditions at Madrid airport, When three of the Irish low-cost carrier's plans had to put in mayday calls to land in Valencia due to dwindling fuel.
LAN Chile Aena said the plane did make an emergency landing at Valencia but Because of technical problems, not a Lack of fuel. easyJet plans Said That Were two redirected to Valencia from Madrid on the same day Because of weather conditions. "The only thing for sure Is that Ryanair plans three had problems," Aena sources said.
"Silly season"
O'Leary Ryanair Acknowledged that it publishes monthly figures on pilots' use of fuel as part of its cost-containment drive, but denied the plans had run short. "It's the silly season and the Olympics are over so let's talk and write a lot of ****e About Ryanair plans running out of fuel," O'Leary Told the Irish Independent on Sunday.
Last edited by Aldente; 23rd Aug 2012 at 07:48.
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Euroland
Posts: 147
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
From the Avherald:
The Spanish Airport Operator AENA's statement released to press, that only Ryanair aircraft were affected by fuel emergencies, is contradicted by evidence and is false.
On Aug 23rd The Aviation Herald learned a LAN Airlines Airbus A340-300 landed substantially below final fuel reserve.
A LAN Airlines Airbus A340-300, registration CC-CQF performing flight LA-705 from Frankfurt/Main (Germany) to Madrid,SP (Spain), estimated flight time 3:10 hours, was on final approach to Madrid's runway 18L when the crew went around from about 4000 feet MSL at 20:02Z. The aircraft climbed to FL120 and followed delay vectors until 20:22Z (20 minutes) when the crew decided to divert to Valencia. Still on a westerly heading in opposite direction to Valencia the aircraft climbed to FL280 before turning east to Valencia. On descent towards Valencia the crew declared Mayday reporting being low on fuel. The aircraft reached Valencia descending through FL100 at 21:09Z and subsequently lost an engine. The aircraft landed in Valencia at 21:16Z 74 minutes after going around in Madrid with 1300kg/2860lbs of fuel in the left wing tank and 800kg/1760lbs of fuel in the right wing tank remaining substantially below the required minimum final fuel reserve of about 2800kg/6170lbs.
News: Thunderstorms in Madrid on Jul 26th 2012, landings, diversions, fuel emergencies and Ryanair
But not let the truth get in the way of a good story...
The Spanish Airport Operator AENA's statement released to press, that only Ryanair aircraft were affected by fuel emergencies, is contradicted by evidence and is false.
On Aug 23rd The Aviation Herald learned a LAN Airlines Airbus A340-300 landed substantially below final fuel reserve.
A LAN Airlines Airbus A340-300, registration CC-CQF performing flight LA-705 from Frankfurt/Main (Germany) to Madrid,SP (Spain), estimated flight time 3:10 hours, was on final approach to Madrid's runway 18L when the crew went around from about 4000 feet MSL at 20:02Z. The aircraft climbed to FL120 and followed delay vectors until 20:22Z (20 minutes) when the crew decided to divert to Valencia. Still on a westerly heading in opposite direction to Valencia the aircraft climbed to FL280 before turning east to Valencia. On descent towards Valencia the crew declared Mayday reporting being low on fuel. The aircraft reached Valencia descending through FL100 at 21:09Z and subsequently lost an engine. The aircraft landed in Valencia at 21:16Z 74 minutes after going around in Madrid with 1300kg/2860lbs of fuel in the left wing tank and 800kg/1760lbs of fuel in the right wing tank remaining substantially below the required minimum final fuel reserve of about 2800kg/6170lbs.
News: Thunderstorms in Madrid on Jul 26th 2012, landings, diversions, fuel emergencies and Ryanair
But not let the truth get in the way of a good story...
Last edited by Tom!; 23rd Aug 2012 at 10:38.
Freight God
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: LS-R54A
Posts: 307
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
14 pages of mostly utter nonsense fuelled by whatever resentment against a certain company and in the end it turns out someone else should be asked some really hard questions regarding their fuelling policies....
So, now that we have some information as opposed to the usual uninformed hysteria from the usual incredibly well informed and well qualified idiots who seem to be allowed to talk absolute rubbish on this forum, we now discover that things were not indeed as advertised.
I pointed out in post #18 that many airfields in Europe have regulations about the use of APUs (or running engines on the ground).
Now that we seem to have established that 189 pasengers were not actually fried in a death tube for 5 hours on the ground, perhaps I can add a little bit of levity.
I arrived at a Scandinavian airfield in the middle of the night in the winter and, after a few minutes, a Jobsworth came out in his Land Rover, stormed into my flight deck and made it quite clear that if I did not shut my APU down, then I was going to go no further.
It was -20 centigrade outside and we were not going to be there for very long so this seemed quite unreasonable to me. I asked him why I had to do this.
He said it was for noise regulations and, as a captain, I should already know this because it was written in their Jeppessen charts. (I had already read them and had decided to ignore this bit because of the sub-zero temperatures).
So, I closed down the APU and started up the brake fans (which I didn't need but they made more noise than the APU).
He came back quite quickly and told me to shut down the APU.
I pointed out to him that the APU had indeed been shut down but my Brake Fans were now on and when he managed to get orders about the use of brake fans in his airport's Jepessens, then I would be very happy to oblige.
For those IDIOTS out there who think that those of us up front are not trying to do the best for you in the cabin, I have no comment.
I pointed out in post #18 that many airfields in Europe have regulations about the use of APUs (or running engines on the ground).
Now that we seem to have established that 189 pasengers were not actually fried in a death tube for 5 hours on the ground, perhaps I can add a little bit of levity.
I arrived at a Scandinavian airfield in the middle of the night in the winter and, after a few minutes, a Jobsworth came out in his Land Rover, stormed into my flight deck and made it quite clear that if I did not shut my APU down, then I was going to go no further.
It was -20 centigrade outside and we were not going to be there for very long so this seemed quite unreasonable to me. I asked him why I had to do this.
He said it was for noise regulations and, as a captain, I should already know this because it was written in their Jeppessen charts. (I had already read them and had decided to ignore this bit because of the sub-zero temperatures).
So, I closed down the APU and started up the brake fans (which I didn't need but they made more noise than the APU).
He came back quite quickly and told me to shut down the APU.
I pointed out to him that the APU had indeed been shut down but my Brake Fans were now on and when he managed to get orders about the use of brake fans in his airport's Jepessens, then I would be very happy to oblige.
For those IDIOTS out there who think that those of us up front are not trying to do the best for you in the cabin, I have no comment.
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Girona
Posts: 230
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Admiration for "Ryanair's unique business model"
This has been expressed on this thread a few times; sometimes "full-tilt" other times "grudgingly."
Never having undertaken an MBA, I would be intrigued to have this concept explained in some detail.
Until I receive further information, I remain firmly of the opinion that a business based squarely on massive subsidies from regional EU governments as well as bullying passengers into paying outrageous extra charges on arrival at their airport whether at 9am at a local airport on a sunny morning or at 10pm on a dark winter's night at a remote snowed-in airport on the other side of the continent on pain of not travelling if they fail to cough up owes far more to Gerald Ratner than to Bill Gates or to Henry Ford.
Never having undertaken an MBA, I would be intrigued to have this concept explained in some detail.
Until I receive further information, I remain firmly of the opinion that a business based squarely on massive subsidies from regional EU governments as well as bullying passengers into paying outrageous extra charges on arrival at their airport whether at 9am at a local airport on a sunny morning or at 10pm on a dark winter's night at a remote snowed-in airport on the other side of the continent on pain of not travelling if they fail to cough up owes far more to Gerald Ratner than to Bill Gates or to Henry Ford.
Last edited by PPRuNe Towers; 1st Sep 2012 at 04:33.
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Spain
Age: 82
Posts: 490
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
14 pages of mostly utter nonsense fuelled by whatever resentment against a certain company
An Aer Lingus spokesman told the Sunday Independent: "The statement made by Michael O'Leary in the Sunday Independent of August 19 that an Aer Lingus flight from Cork to Spain on March 14 last 'had to call mayday' is totally incorrect. Due to adverse weather conditions, there was in fact what is known as a 'fuel pan' call. For clarification, a fuel pan call signifies a state of urgency, but no immediate danger, whereas a mayday call signifies a state of emergency and imminent danger."
In Madrid, Mr O'Leary admitted that one of the aircraft which landed in Valencia was left with just 28 minutes of fuel -- below the minimum level of 30 minutes.
In Madrid, Mr O'Leary admitted that one of the aircraft which landed in Valencia was left with just 28 minutes of fuel -- below the minimum level of 30 minutes.
Freight God
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: LS-R54A
Posts: 307
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
What I am waiting for is for the significantly longer discussion about why the LAN flight arrived in the same place with definitely lower than minimum fuel. Ah, forgot, it is not Ryanair...
And I think it was discussd at length, Spain does not react to PAN calls? So Aer Lingus was in the same situation as Ryanair, no?
And I think it was discussd at length, Spain does not react to PAN calls? So Aer Lingus was in the same situation as Ryanair, no?
Last edited by Hunter58; 27th Aug 2012 at 17:21.
Per Ardua ad Astraeus
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: UK
Posts: 18,579
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
And I think it was discussd at length, Spain does not react to PAN calls? So Aer Lingus was in the same situation as Ryanair, no?
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Ireland
Posts: 13
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
With respect, it's not the same at all. The Aer Lingus aircraft declared a Pan, the Ryanair lads declared Maydays. The law is clear as to the distinction between the two calls. The Aer Lingus aircraft landed with comfortably over the minimum fuel, and obviously never expected to land with less, hence the call. All of the Ryanair aircraft did have an efob under the 30 mins, and whether they eventually landed with more or not does not change the legal responsibility they had to declare a Mayday. I'm not a Ryanair fan(as a company), but personally, I think that the pilots discharged their responsibilities well, and that anyone who says they couldn't end up in a similar situation is extremely naive. However, it's extremely galling that that prat O' Leary jumped straight in with a denial, and an immediate offensive on unions/competitors, without the decency of just giving the truth, with which he had obviously been furnished. Why does it take a flagrant bunch of lies, spoken with his usual arrogance, or another load of bluster from his flunky McNamara, before someone has to defend themselves, and the facts are allowed to surface. It's embarrassing for professional pilots, both Ryanair and otherwise.
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Cloud 10
Posts: 34
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Yet again, a classic example of regulators asleep at the helm in ireland....
As for the 'Accountable Manager' in Ryanair.........carrying out his duties as per the AOC.....well....
As for the 'Accountable Manager' in Ryanair.........carrying out his duties as per the AOC.....well....
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: UK
Posts: 179
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Interesting letter in today's Irish Independent from an ex Ryanair Training Captain :-
Normal 'mayday' - Letters, Opinion - Independent.ie
Some of the comments below it make interesting reading too!
Normal 'mayday' - Letters, Opinion - Independent.ie
Some of the comments below it make interesting reading too!
Last edited by Aldente; 30th Aug 2012 at 02:10.
Interesting letter in today's Irish Independent from an ex Ryanair Training Captain :-
Normal 'mayday' - Letters, Opinion - Independent.ie
Some of the comments below it make interesting reading too!
Normal 'mayday' - Letters, Opinion - Independent.ie
Some of the comments below it make interesting reading too!
An interesting clip from You Tube here given by one of the shuttle astronauts:-
Longer explanation here:-
Last edited by fireflybob; 30th Aug 2012 at 15:31.
Per Ardua ad Astraeus
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: UK
Posts: 18,579
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
While no defender of FR's mangement style, I do think a rational look at this event is worthwhile. Based on what we think we know, they all seem to have abandoned the MAD approach around 8000' so they would be about 500kg or so above div fuel. Into a hold to review the prognosis, and decision made to divert. Reasonable?
What is crucial now is when LAN declared the MAYDAY - as I have said before, there will inevitably be a 'ripple' effect on other a/c inbound to VLC on diversion once this happens, since they will become number 2+ and will be seeing 'Reserve' or less on landing on the FMC. Ipso Facto, and correctly, a MAYDAY call follows for the first FR a/c. Put yourself in the cockpit of the second FR a/c. What would you see on your FMC, and expect? Off goes your MAYDAY. Reasonable?
In aviation we have never planned to take 'extra' fuel for a div into a field just in case an emergency is in progress.
It may not have happened this way, but think about it - before you condemn out of hand the FR Captains' fuel decisions.
What is crucial now is when LAN declared the MAYDAY - as I have said before, there will inevitably be a 'ripple' effect on other a/c inbound to VLC on diversion once this happens, since they will become number 2+ and will be seeing 'Reserve' or less on landing on the FMC. Ipso Facto, and correctly, a MAYDAY call follows for the first FR a/c. Put yourself in the cockpit of the second FR a/c. What would you see on your FMC, and expect? Off goes your MAYDAY. Reasonable?
In aviation we have never planned to take 'extra' fuel for a div into a field just in case an emergency is in progress.
It may not have happened this way, but think about it - before you condemn out of hand the FR Captains' fuel decisions.
BOAC, agree with your analysis there - the more I think about what we know so far the more I feel that the Spanish authorities will have great difficulty in finding any fault with these flights.
My "normalisation of deviance" post refers more to comments by the Board that declaration of Mayday for fuel emergencies is "normal".
My "normalisation of deviance" post refers more to comments by the Board that declaration of Mayday for fuel emergencies is "normal".