Ryanair secrets?
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Cartoon strip
Posts: 181
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
As an ex-pilot (got to MECPL 10 years ago but that was it for me), the fuel thing really did not surprise or indeed shock me. Especially the specific incident that led to 3 RYR a/c diverting to Alicante and then all calling fuel emergencies. That was just a mixture of a perfect storm (literally) and an (approved) company policy which I'm guessing is not miles off other similar low-cost outfits. It hasn't crashed an a/c yet. I'd have to look at the documentary again - but was there anything in it that specifically said "this is unsafe and is going to cause a crash"? It might have put that idea in potential passengers minds, but I doubt that on its own is actionable.
What really disturbed me was the pretty clear evidence (90% of 1000 pilots views is evidence I believe) that there was no one in the company or the regulatory authority (the IAA) there to listen or be prepared to listen. If true, this is shocking stuff. From my dim and distant memory of studying aircraft accident investigations and CRM, this is a recipe for disaster. In the 70's and 80's when the skies really started to fill up with lots of jets, a goodly number of aircraft accident investigations clearly identified poor airline management with real culture problems that caused the opposite of an open and transparent safety culture. I do hope Ryanair is not heading down that route.
So anyway, I'd be intrigued to find out how Ryanair is going to sue Ch4/Dispatches. What did they do? They reported the outcome of a survey? They reported the outline of the company fuel policy? They strongly hinted it's a really unpleasant company to work for whether you are flight or cabin crew? Tough stuff to contest and in the case of the last one, I'd say impossible....
What really disturbed me was the pretty clear evidence (90% of 1000 pilots views is evidence I believe) that there was no one in the company or the regulatory authority (the IAA) there to listen or be prepared to listen. If true, this is shocking stuff. From my dim and distant memory of studying aircraft accident investigations and CRM, this is a recipe for disaster. In the 70's and 80's when the skies really started to fill up with lots of jets, a goodly number of aircraft accident investigations clearly identified poor airline management with real culture problems that caused the opposite of an open and transparent safety culture. I do hope Ryanair is not heading down that route.
So anyway, I'd be intrigued to find out how Ryanair is going to sue Ch4/Dispatches. What did they do? They reported the outcome of a survey? They reported the outline of the company fuel policy? They strongly hinted it's a really unpleasant company to work for whether you are flight or cabin crew? Tough stuff to contest and in the case of the last one, I'd say impossible....
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Finland
Posts: 294
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I take no position on the claims, but the correspondence was interesting.
One notices the sarcasm "this letter was received at x, i.e. long after office hours had closed" yet no doubt if the item was delayed until 8am the next day they'd still whinge.
And the first documentary which they claimed they'd sue over apparently didn't go forth to "legal" according to the production company despite the bluster, so has any legal proceedings been filed this time, despite the bluster and threats.
Talking to my solicitors, taking legal advice or even getting a nastygram is a lot more than actually filing a claim. I guess they didn't file nor get an injunction to stop transmission either, else we'd have heard about it. Odd, as if I was such a big player and being so clearly defamed, would I wait until transmission had happened.... not on your nelly.
One notices the sarcasm "this letter was received at x, i.e. long after office hours had closed" yet no doubt if the item was delayed until 8am the next day they'd still whinge.
And the first documentary which they claimed they'd sue over apparently didn't go forth to "legal" according to the production company despite the bluster, so has any legal proceedings been filed this time, despite the bluster and threats.
Talking to my solicitors, taking legal advice or even getting a nastygram is a lot more than actually filing a claim. I guess they didn't file nor get an injunction to stop transmission either, else we'd have heard about it. Odd, as if I was such a big player and being so clearly defamed, would I wait until transmission had happened.... not on your nelly.
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Ireland
Posts: 596
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I'd be intrigued to find out how Ryanair is going to sue Ch4/Dispatches.
Tough stuff to contest and in the case of the last one, I'd say impossible....
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Dublin
Posts: 987
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
In reality it would be Channel 4's insurers that would take it from here and yes, Ryanair would have to prove their reputation or good name was damaged by false information. When you are a company of their size carrying that number of passengers you can't be seen to take it lying down least it gives out the wrong message. On the other hand if a wrong has been done you can't allow a repeat. Channel 4 acquired the information and used it in their subsequent dissemination to the public. Of course they have a responsibility.
In passing, does anyone know how they got on with the Sun in 2007 or was it 2013?
In passing, does anyone know how they got on with the Sun in 2007 or was it 2013?
Last edited by Sober Lark; 14th Aug 2013 at 13:49.
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Finland
Posts: 294
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Defamation law, especially that in the UK, is a complex, funny beast that is for sure. It is not always just a case of "proving" that X happens, or not, either.
It would be interesting to note the bluster and match it against actions though, for sure, in line with what has previously been written.
It would be interesting to note the bluster and match it against actions though, for sure, in line with what has previously been written.
Join Date: Feb 1999
Location: UK
Posts: 1,091
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I watched the program last night, and I couldn't help thinking that the fuel thing was a bit of a red herring. Final reserves should not of course be used, but getting near to them, or thinking you will be using them due to diversions, for example, can and does happen not just at RYR. When I was at Jet2, an edict from management also required a reason as to why extra fuel was carried. Although my current airline will never question a fuel decision.
The real reason of intimidation, bullying, cost-cutting and undue pressure on crews to operate no-matter-what, and the subsequent implication on flight safety, is surely the real story.
I can't see MOL will get anywhere suing either. It seemed all pretty black and white, with enough evidence to make each claim. I'm sure Channel 4 had it legally cleared before transmission.
The real reason of intimidation, bullying, cost-cutting and undue pressure on crews to operate no-matter-what, and the subsequent implication on flight safety, is surely the real story.
I can't see MOL will get anywhere suing either. It seemed all pretty black and white, with enough evidence to make each claim. I'm sure Channel 4 had it legally cleared before transmission.
A Runyonesque Character
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: The South of France ... Not
Age: 74
Posts: 1,209
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
If there were a sudden, downward blip in the share price, then the 'damage' might be quantifiable. That, I suggest, would matter much more to Ryanair than passenger perceptions.
Join Date: Jan 2000
Posts: 639
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
This programme told us nothing that we don't know already, but the general public may be more informed.
We can discuss legal minimums until the cows come home, but for me when the CEO is questioning the need for FOs, this undermines their role and hence the overall value of a 2 man decision making cockpit. i.e. basic CRM that has been built up over the last 30 years.
RYR are outstanding at many things and a brilliant business that has shaken up the market, but they do sail close to the wind with some pretty unhappy crew members.
We can discuss legal minimums until the cows come home, but for me when the CEO is questioning the need for FOs, this undermines their role and hence the overall value of a 2 man decision making cockpit. i.e. basic CRM that has been built up over the last 30 years.
RYR are outstanding at many things and a brilliant business that has shaken up the market, but they do sail close to the wind with some pretty unhappy crew members.
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: Woodbridge, Suffolk
Age: 71
Posts: 91
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
From a "marine" CRM perspective, this suggests a "Townsend Thoresen" (i.e. "Herald of Free Enterprise") - type company culture. A very successful, aggressively growing, business, started and run by a dominant personality.
Which is not to say that an accident will happen; the holes in the cheese still have to line up...
Which is not to say that an accident will happen; the holes in the cheese still have to line up...
Last edited by Methersgate; 14th Aug 2013 at 17:45.
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: L.A.
Age: 56
Posts: 579
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Atom:
But would it be our much-loved CAA? After all, FR are not exactly British, are they?
But would it be our much-loved CAA? After all, FR are not exactly British, are they?
Spitfire:
The CAA have no juristriction over Ryanair. It's the IAA
The CAA have no juristriction over Ryanair. It's the IAA
The UK is responsible for overseeing all aircraft that use UK airports, and they have de-facto primary responsibility for aircraft that are permanently based and operated in the UK - even if they are nominally on the Irish register.
You cannot register 737-800s in Bongo-Bongo land (to coin a well-known phrase) and permanently base those aircraft in the UK, and then claim that the Bongo-Bongo CAA allow 5-minute turnarounds, only 2 cabin-staff, and servicing of the aircraft at 10-year intervals. That, is not how aviation works, and any attempt to circumnavigate the rules could and should prompt a rash of Ramp Checks. (Or with Ryan, should that be SAFA checks?)
Grafity:
So you've landed below reserve fuel 3 times!! Without declaring an emergency?? And, you're worried about Ryanairs safety culture???
So you've landed below reserve fuel 3 times!! Without declaring an emergency?? And, you're worried about Ryanairs safety culture???
JO:
I have personally watched 30 minute turnarounds as a flight deck observer with another operator and have found them to be well executed, safe and professionally handled. The notion that any CAA would have the authority to legislate a minimum turnaround time "just because" is hilarious. Unfortunate as it may be, the making of new rules, particularly those which restrict operations, is largely done in response to a tragedy. There is absolutely zero evidence that shorter tunraround times has led to a narrowly averted tragedy, never mind an actual one. Including that notion in your rant makes the rest of your rant of little value.
I have personally watched 30 minute turnarounds as a flight deck observer with another operator and have found them to be well executed, safe and professionally handled. The notion that any CAA would have the authority to legislate a minimum turnaround time "just because" is hilarious. Unfortunate as it may be, the making of new rules, particularly those which restrict operations, is largely done in response to a tragedy. There is absolutely zero evidence that shorter tunraround times has led to a narrowly averted tragedy, never mind an actual one. Including that notion in your rant makes the rest of your rant of little value.
I find your view very disturbing, especially being a (senior?) check-captain. You are suggesting that it would be "hilarious" for a CAA to discover and pre-empt an unsafe situation, and legislate to prevent it. Sorry, but in aviation terms, that is Complacency Central. And then you go on to say that the CAA should rely instead on "Tombstone Engineering" (ie: only changing something after someone has died). Frankly, that is the most disturbing thing I have heard in 27 years of aviation. Shame on you.
You go on to say that: "there is absolutely zero evidence that shorter tunraround times have led to a narrowly averted tragedy". Yet I posted half a dozen instances were the multitude of problems had become so serious they got into the BBC news (plus we have had two Channel 4 documentaries), and all these problems/events were caused by pilots being too rushed (ie: trying to make up time, due to short turnarounds). How many similar incidents and problems were there, I wonder, that did not get onto the BBC or Channel 4?
And yet still there is "zero evidence"?
Mickyman:
I think their is a distaste for the success of this 'Irish' outfit among many of the contributors here due to inbred racism/jealousy or plain idiosy.
I think their is a distaste for the success of this 'Irish' outfit among many of the contributors here due to inbred racism/jealousy or plain idiosy.
No, Micky O'Reily, the problem is that we have a new airline pushing every rule and regulation to the very limits and sometimes beyond, and thus debasing and destroying the established regulatory and safety culture of European aviation. I am sure that the first European car manufacturer to use slave labour would do equally as well as Ryan has, and would equally undercut its competitors, but that would not make the automotive newcomer morally right or a bastion of good employment practice.
And nor would a complaint about such a new company constitute racism - it would merely be a complaint about poor commercial practice. I note that people on Pprune love to play the race card at every opportunity - but as the Micks are of the same Caucasian stock as most of the peoples of Europe, there is NOTHING racist in these complaints at all. Or are you mixing up racism with nationalism?
SSK:
If there were a sudden, downward blip in the share price, then the 'damage' might be quantifiable.
If there were a sudden, downward blip in the share price, then the 'damage' might be quantifiable.
RYANAIR HOLDINGS Share Price Chart | RYA.L - Yahoo! UK & Ireland Finance
So, a half-dozen crews ran into issues by rushing themselves when trying to make up time. Let's say that in actual fact there were 100. This means there were tens of thousands of RYR flights during that same time frame when the crew didn't get into such trouble. Crews from other airlines that have done 90 minute turns have got themselves into trouble when rushing as well. So where would your new regulation draw the line? What's the safety margin?
By your asertion, CAAs should write a regulation that requires pilots to never accept an approach unless there is an absolute certainty that they will never, ever have to go around. Fatal accidents have occurred during badly executed go-arounds, so shouldn't we strive to ban them too?
New regulations are not the answer. We already have thousands of regulations, yet accidents still occur. If rule making were truly the answer, we'd only need one - don't crash. Fostering a positive safety culture has a much better chance of success. That is the message that should be taken from this story - people are raising questions about the safety culture. I would much rather see the regulators focussed on addressing that aspect.
By your asertion, CAAs should write a regulation that requires pilots to never accept an approach unless there is an absolute certainty that they will never, ever have to go around. Fatal accidents have occurred during badly executed go-arounds, so shouldn't we strive to ban them too?
New regulations are not the answer. We already have thousands of regulations, yet accidents still occur. If rule making were truly the answer, we'd only need one - don't crash. Fostering a positive safety culture has a much better chance of success. That is the message that should be taken from this story - people are raising questions about the safety culture. I would much rather see the regulators focussed on addressing that aspect.
quick turnarounds
back at british midland AW years ago in the 70's amd 80's we often turned the a/c around in 30 minutes (scheduled) or less, was not a big issue for anyone
back then...no one threw their toys or got sweaty ...
viscounts dc-9
707 was abit longer admittedly...
had a dc-9 one evening we did in 5 mins...85 pax off and 85 on...
splash of fuel hardly any bags load sheet ta ta pushback, feet up coffee and a meal off the inbound
back then...no one threw their toys or got sweaty ...
viscounts dc-9
707 was abit longer admittedly...
had a dc-9 one evening we did in 5 mins...85 pax off and 85 on...
splash of fuel hardly any bags load sheet ta ta pushback, feet up coffee and a meal off the inbound
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: FUBAR
Posts: 3,348
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Sorry,post #117 they fired John Goss. . . .again ? 
Oh well, no surprises there, but (unlike the other union guy, whose name - annoyingly - escapes me, Ah, came back , Martin Duffy, who the pilots allowed to be hung, and the famous ex Chief Pilot (Jim Duggan ? . . . must keep drinking Red Wine, it is SO good for the memory 
) with the very "forthright" daughter. . . . this time guys . . YOU MUST GROW A PAIR ! ! ! or you will be SCREWED for eternity ( & the rest of us by association ) If this news is correct, react Goddam ! REACT ! ! !
Oh well, no surprises there, but (unlike the other union guy, whose name - annoyingly - escapes me, Ah, came back , Martin Duffy, who the pilots allowed to be hung, and the famous ex Chief Pilot (Jim Duggan ? . . . must keep drinking Red Wine, it is SO good for the memory ) with the very "forthright" daughter. . . . this time guys . . YOU MUST GROW A PAIR ! ! ! or you will be SCREWED for eternity ( & the rest of us by association ) If this news is correct, react Goddam ! REACT ! ! !
Last edited by captplaystation; 14th Aug 2013 at 22:41.
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Dublin, Ireland
Posts: 169
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: FUBAR
Posts: 3,348
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Given how close he is to retirement, this may be a very astute move by John & the RPG . . . . .wishing them the best with the outcome/fallout, & hoping this is (yet another) own goal by the "evil empire".