Ryanair incident at Stanstead?
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: England
Posts: 1,955
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Isn't it because the 800s are so slippy they're harder to slow down...?
Join Date: Sep 2013
Location: UK
Posts: 730
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
800s are slippery in flight, but that doesn't really affect taxi speeds in my experience. 
There used to be a few rogues that threw the 200s around, but the OFDM will catch just about anything you can think of and you will get chased up. It's not a QADR system like EZY had on the 700s, it's a mobile phone based system which downloads the whole aircraft's operation that day into a computer "wash" system that looks for just about any anomaly and every measurable excedence, which is then assessed by a pilot who will interpret what was going on. Basically, you can't hide anything, so it has long since caught any cowboys.
There used to be a few rogues that threw the 200s around, but the OFDM will catch just about anything you can think of and you will get chased up. It's not a QADR system like EZY had on the 700s, it's a mobile phone based system which downloads the whole aircraft's operation that day into a computer "wash" system that looks for just about any anomaly and every measurable excedence, which is then assessed by a pilot who will interpret what was going on. Basically, you can't hide anything, so it has long since caught any cowboys.
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Dublin
Posts: 987
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Greenlights, your post isn't an 'incident' you can edit or delete it.
What happened at Stansted is not uncommon or unprecedented. Worldwide there are an estimated 27,000 ramp incidents each year and they are phenomenally expensive for the industry.
What happened at Stansted is not uncommon or unprecedented. Worldwide there are an estimated 27,000 ramp incidents each year and they are phenomenally expensive for the industry.
Last edited by Sober Lark; 3rd Jul 2014 at 10:38.
Join Date: Sep 2013
Location: UK
Posts: 730
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
How do you know who's fault it was, Greenlights? It could have been the pilots of either aircraft, the ground crew and possibly an ATC foul-up that triggered it. But hey, it's RYR, so just blame the pilots anyway, huh?
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: UK
Posts: 816
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Yes, this sort of thing never happens to other airlines does it. Tug driver twonked the wingtip because the F/O had to pay for his type rating. Imagine how much worse it could have been if the F/O had a tiller on his side.
Join Date: Sep 2013
Location: UK
Posts: 730
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Greenlights, you are quite astonishingly stupid. The pilots don't push the aircraft back, the ground crew do. They have control and they're the ones who can see what's happening around them. As for the taxying a/c, they would almost certainly have had clearance all the way on to stand and expect the aircraft waiting for push to hold until they were cler, as per the likely ATC clearance.
Now, it is POSSIBLE that ATC didn't issue a conditional clearance to the pusher, orr that the pilots failed to pass that on correctly to the ground crew, or the ground crew may have not understood it correctly. That is what the investigation will find out and has yet to be released, but they are trigger factors, not causal - the causal factor is the ground crew pushing an aircraft infront of a taxying one. So, Greenlights, you owe the pilots an apology.
Now, it is POSSIBLE that ATC didn't issue a conditional clearance to the pusher, orr that the pilots failed to pass that on correctly to the ground crew, or the ground crew may have not understood it correctly. That is what the investigation will find out and has yet to be released, but they are trigger factors, not causal - the causal factor is the ground crew pushing an aircraft infront of a taxying one. So, Greenlights, you owe the pilots an apology.
