Toilets & Jump seats
 

First of all from what I can gather after reading all these six pages of very informative material, I don't think that Ryan Air's management has anything to do with that the captain did. I don't suppose the captain radioed HQ for permission to carry these so-called "swowaways", and if he did and permission was granted, then he should be absolved.

Second point. I don't know about recently, but about 10 years ago our favorite airline, Aeroflot, still adhered to the policy of strap-hangers for those passengers who could not run fast enough from the gate to the plane and find a seat.

Working in a Russian world as a foreign journalist, I was on plenty internal flights that used to carry not only passengers, but also their intimate belongings -- like chickens, pigs, goats and sheep, in addition to the TV sets and stereos in packaged cartons scattered along the isle. You wouldn't dare check the item, because someone would likely steal it at chek-in or before luggage retreival.

If someone cares to correct me, fine. I was thrown out of the Soviet Union and haven't been back, but from what I understand, the internal flight system has not changed much.

Saskatoon, I think you may have misunderstood the role of the CAA in the operation of any airline not holding a UK AOC. They have no authority to inspect or legislate, unless acting on behalf of the Department for Transport, when carrying out a 'Safety Assessment of Foreign Airlines' at the DFT's request. The responsibility for overseeing the safety regulation of any airline rests entirely with the Aviation Authority of the given airline's State of registry. Provided that said Authority is satisfied that the airline complies with JAR OPs etc etc - then that's it.

People often remark 'what are the CAA doing about it?' - Well, the answer is that they have no authority, and are not empowered, to act. No doubt all sorts of 'conversations' go on between the authorities, but that's another matter.

In this "news report", PPRuNe evens gets a mention. :uhoh:

Off-duty crew sacked after sitting in toilet on packed flight

By Kevin Done, Aerospace Correspondent

Published: July 24 2004 5:00 | Last Updated: July 24 2004 5:00

Ryanair may be searching for new ways of cutting costs and increasing revenues, but it moved swiftly to flush away rumours flying around the aviation industry that its latest wheeze was to have passengers seated in the aircraft toilets to add capacity.

It issued a statement yesterday confirming that two passengers - off-duty cabin crew returning to Ireland from a week's leave - travelled back on its flight FR7039 from Barcelona-Girona to Dublin last weekend in the rear toilets, because the flight was full.

The airline said the employees did so - in breach of the carrier's boarding and operating procedures - with the approval of the captain, a senior pilot with more than 30 years' flying experience.

The captain had tendered his resignation with immediate effect and the two cabin crew, who had refused to resign, had been dismissed for gross misconduct.

The Irish Aviation Authority, which regulates all Irish-registered aircraft, said it was conducting its own investigation after being alerted to the incident by a member of the public.

"We take this very seriously because of the safety implications," it said.

Ryanair said that it had conducted its own investigation for the past five days, and had co-operated fully with the IAA.

It said it operated "to the highest international standards" and any breaches would "be dealt with with the utmost speed and gravity".

As news of the incident spread in the airline community including across pprune.org, the website of the Professional Pilots Rumour Network, opinions varied among contributors on the gravity of the incident.

One suggested that the normal stampede to board a Ryanair flight would take on a new urgency with the command: "Quick with the boarding now, else you'll be sitting in the bog."

However, another contributor said: "Ryanair should be hammered for this. It is a gross breach of all international safety regulations and something akin to behaviour that existed in remote parts of Africa 20 years ago."

Ryanair's own recent ideas for cutting costs include aiming within a couple of years to ban passengers from checking in hold baggage with travellers to be restricted tocarry-on baggage only - it recently raised the maximum cabin baggage allowance - as a way of reducing costs at airports.

One contributor to the pprune.org website suggested that it could also provide a solution for excess passengers. "There will be plenty of room in the holds of Ryanair aircraft soon . .

Brilliant!

That made me laugh - but sobering too - so we really do have to be suspicious of certain questions.........Journalists are lurking in the shadows.:uhoh:

Isn't it sad that journos take comments like mine - seriously !! :p :p :p :p

Even The Times is reporting this - brilliant headline 'Budget Aircrew go from jump seats to dump seats'.....and The Independent has a piece on MOL's scrap with BAA over Stansted....including some choice quotes from himself:

there was a question on another page, I think from DX Wombat, about taking off duty crew, etc. So, here a short view for those readers who aren't in the business or don't know about these things.

Off-duty crew and/or family members fly, either free or with reduced rates, as so-called "stand-by" passengers. They wait at the gate and hope that, when all regular passengers are aboard, there will be some extra seats available (sometimes due to pax not showing up, for whatever reasons). These waiting people will then, usually according to seniority or status, be alloted these free seats. If the flight is completely full, then extra jump- or crew-seats may, at the discretion of the captain, be alloted these folk. These seats are all equipped with proper seat belts so it's really no problem. Of course, the "head-count" and weight must also fit. I flew as a stand-by years ago and there were many empty seats, even though there were still stand-bys waiting that weren't allowed on. The reason: so much cargo that the weight limit had to be considered!!

I'm amazed that such a senior captain would have done this... as mentioned enough already, it was against all regulations to allow this and the risk wasn't worth it. Another point about safety: in case of an accident, no one would have expected someone in there.

The outcome of all this should be quite interesting... and more difficult in the future for stand-bys to be taken along. So again, this incident may have far reaching consequences for all.

Westy

Apart from the obvious danger to life spoken of earlier in the thread ,I wonder what the insurance company would say to a claim should an accident have occurred?
unrestrained pax
overloaded
incorrect loadsheet
flying outside of jar ops / ANO
crew complicit in deceit

they usually find any excuse not to pay up, here they would have a choice!

It doesn't bear thinking about. I heard from a source that the Spanish Police have been making investigations into this incident by interviewing handling staff at Girona Airport.

(Purely for my own interest, can anyone confirm whether the aircraft was a B732 or B738? Does FR still have 732's in service?)

AVIACO,

Ryanair still operates the 737-200 but I don't know whether it was one of these or an -800 on this occasion.

OK, I don't know which bit about NO abuse and insults some of you didn't understand but I'll reiterate it here for those of you with IQ's that are deficient due to DNA inheritence from the shallow end of the gene pool:

Also, as a warning to the Ryanair bashing brigade... You need to realise that this thread, and many others, are about technical and/or safety issues that apply equally to most JAA airlines and not just Ryanair. Ie. they are of interest to professional pilots and the day to day running of the airline is not of concern here. In light of that knowledge, I ask that those with a mental impediment that somehow causes them to burst a blood vessel and start typing out their venom contaminated rhetoric of anything that is remotely to do with any business that Mr O'Leary is involved with, please consider that this is about an operational issue. If you feel that hand wringing, knicker wetting, eye rolling, teeth gnashing etc. at the mention of Ryanair because you don't agree with their destination naming policy, their passenger handling methods or whatever, then please do me and most others a favour and vent your spleens in the appropriate Pax & SLF, Spotters Balcony or Airlines, Airports & Routes forums. :rolleyes:

Toilet Seats
 

I don't think I can remember reading so much self-righteous tripe on this
web site for a long time.
It really resembles schooldays and "teachers pets". Lots of prissy little ne'er-do-wells without an ounce of gumption between them.
> "We wouldn't allow that now" <
> "what does he think he was doing"<

What he was doing was to exercise a Captain's (old-fashioned?) prerogative to help out a fellow company employee.
Sure he was breaking the rules. Do you think for one minute he didn't realize that?

Some will remember in the days of the Dak, Seven seas, Viscount even 111 when Captains were actually allowed to be totally responsible for their aircraft.

An extra passenger or two would be well within the tolerance of the loadsheet. After takeoff, they would be instructed to stay out of the way and to use the now-unoccupied cabin staff jump seats fot the rest of the flight i.e.strapped in. It used to be called "ghosting".

Usually it was only resorted to in order to help someone who'd already been away on duty for 5-6 days, the flight deck jump seat was occupied by a fare-paying passenger and he/she had been "bumped" off a couple of flights already.

So, when enough became enough,the Captain used his considerable judgment to enable a staff member to at least get home for his/her "days off".
Do you seriously think he would knowingly endanger his aircraft and his pax ??

As used to be allowed before the days of political correctness, he was weighing up all the factors, as he did every day, and making a calculated decision.
In this situation,
a) the f/d jumpseat not insured for a fare-paying pax.i.e. should be staff only ;the Company were preventing an employee from enjoying their contracted days off at home.
b) in the event of an EMC, there was an extra fully qualified staff member available in the cabin.

Talking about f/p pax. on the jumpseat, BTW, a great Skipper I used to fly with, used to say :-
"Why should I have to have a punter on my jumpseat?
I don't sit on his desk when he's working. Why should he :mad:-well sit on mine !!"

Sleeve. :} :E

Looks like the jury has already ruled on this.

Despite all the bashing and slagging that Danny mentions, the fact of the matter remains; what this CREW did is ILLEGAL and that should be the end of the story. It really doesn't matter who's to blame and who is not. It's done now and the CREW have paid the penalty.

Think maybe it's time for this thread to be offloaded.......:\

How did a small albeit illegal incident turn in to 7 pages of FR Bashing?. I dont particulary like this outfit myself but some Ppruners really pull out all the stops. Are you all ex FR staff or how exactly did you develop this Ryanair Bashing Syndrome?

“who hasn't driven their car or riden(sic) his bike at 100mph along the M4?” Well not me for a start, and I mean the dangerous offence, not that particular motorway. My guess is that the expression “cutting corners” comes from the driving world where cutting across a corner can save you time or effort. Of course, on occasion, something comes the opposite direction on that corner, and shows you the real cost of cutting corners.

Let’s face it, someone at some point cleared this overcapacity. Presumably the CC would have had little choice but to cooperate once that decision had been made. My presumption is that the CC don’t have the ability/authority to let onboard any “extras”.

I couldn’t care whether this was Ryanair or whoever - according to the RTE articles, the staff weren’t stranded, they had been “on leave”, and according to a poster above, were under no immediate pressure to return.

Concerning the “bashing”, I think it’s mostly a case of LCC bashing. When I’ve dared to mention good things about LCCs in my threads or posts, it’s not long before a basher emerges to have a pop.

While accepting the admonitions not to engage in Ryanair bashing over this matter, may I just point out that it would be unwise to assume that the particular nature of the said airline’s unique corporate way of doing things will not be discovered to have played a role in this event.

For example, just to titillate you all, it looks like there almost certainly was a telephone call from a “passenger” at the outstation to someone in an office and that a call was made in return to someone else at the outstation. What role, if any, this played we will have to wait and see. But remember, while captains take responsibility, airlines differ in who has “power” over access to jumpseats, or who can block access or encourage access or whatever. For example consider the tensions that might one day be caused by Ryanair’s practice of sometimes issuing standby tickets to pilots travelling to a simulator checkride, while simultaneously making it clear that the pilot is expected to be there on time. (The trick is to “make things clear”, without putting it in a form that will cause the management a problem. If there is anyone left out there who has not worked out that this is a Ryanair trademark …. well… ).

I am not aiming here to diminish the role of the captain. But breaking the rules always takes place in a context. In the case of Ryanair, we have a very particular context – this is not Ryanair bashing, it is a statement of fact.

It is, of course, pissing in the wind to suggest that people involved in a rumour network would wish to go through the tedium of actually waiting for all the facts before spinning their theories, outrage and perfectionistic notions of how others should behave.

However, having some years ago taxied behind an aeroplane with an appreciable covering of snow on the wings, its crew having been advised of same by three other aircraft and ATC before it took off, I am inclined to have a different view of what is a terminally serious safety issue than some contributors to this forum.

Correct me Ryanair pilots if I am wrong but I believe that O Leary
has banned Captains from giving jumpseats to staff on Spanish flights to make the staff pay something for the flights.

This may be a factor. Where jump seats empty on this flight?

Well I would rather be in the toilet in an abnormal landing...
no baggage to fall on your head, no flying seats to dismame you,
a nice bulhead to protect you and a nice handle to hold on to
cant see what all the fuss is about, unless of course, it's insurance problems

This is definitely NOT a Ryanair bashing thread, so relax MOL. For once. Even though the resultant publicity is a bit on the negative side.

The large number of posts is probably due to the fact that many of us are just amazed that, in this day and age, such a flagrant breach of ANRs is not seen for what it is. The captain made a huge error of judgement and paid the price. So what ?

I venture to suggest that a large-scale collusion between all the crew must have taken place. Surely they all knew about it ? That’s where the problem might have started.

Sleeve, I think you might have missed the point. It is not a good idea to break the rules, even if some military outfits might think so. No particular arm in mind of course, perish the thought.

oTd

I don't know why people always get worked up the way they do on this forum!

The crew (CPT) made the wrong decision of permitting them to use the toilet for t/o and landing. Completely wrong!
But he tried to help out some fellow company people to get back to the UK. They got "caught" in the act and they pay the price for it. Well I'm sorry that this guy has got a heart and decided to listen to it, he shouldn't have done it.

Unfortunate!
Best regards to the crew that got fired and need to apply somewhere else, good luck to you guys.

SZ
happy flying

I asked a question 6 pages back , which has not yet been answered.

Precisely what regulation (or law) [ excepting Ryanair ops manual ] was infringed ?

OK. Here’s your fodder. I’m not involved with Irish, British, or Spanish aviation, and therefore I don’t know for certain that this is going to cover this issue. However, I’m getting the impression that you’re waiting for somebody to mention this so you can blow them out of the water. Well, here you go:

********
STATUTORY INSTRUMENTS
S.I. No. 437 of 2002
IRISH AVIATION AUTHORITY
(OPERATIONS) ORDER, 2002

(28)
(2) The operator of a commercial transport aircraft shall ensure that all passengers
on board that aircraft are briefed in accordance with the applicable Joint
Aviation Requirements and the pilot-in-command of an aircraft shall ensure
that…(c) prior to and during each take-off and each landing and whenever, by
reason of turbulent air conditions or any emergency during flight, the
precaution is considered necessary, all passengers on board an aircraft are
secured in their seats by means of the seat belts or safety harnesses
provided.
******

If I'm wrong and yours was a sincere question, then I apologize.

Dave

Probably not answered cos it was an idiotic question

Toilet Seats
 

oTd.
Ref: your final para., understand totally.
Just playing Devil's Advocate in protection of an obviously otherwise first-class Captain and also remembering the days when Captains were allowed to be fully responsible for the operation of their aircraft without interference.

With regard to "comments military", also true. Some services actually allowed their officers to take responsibility for their actions,.... and for the repercussions if you got it wrong !!
Quote : "Rules are for the guidance etc....."

Felicitations, Sleeve. :ok:

Having read this thread from start to finish a couple of times it seems clear that the general feeling is

1. this used to happen quite regularly in the past. I personally heard of a 747 that left EDI one day after a rugby international with (allegedly) 14 people in the cockpit!!

2. The Captain made an unfortunate error of judgement and has paid a severe price

Anyone who knows this man will vouch for the fact that he is one of the nicest, most decent, helpful pilots who ever wore wings. That this should happen after such a long and distinguished career and within a couple of weeks of retirement is such a shame. If he was an :mad: the situation would never have happened. It happened simply because he is such a decent genuine guy who would do anything to help a fellow crew member.

Why dont all you 'holier than thous' just leave it be. I, for one, would just like to wish Capt X a very happy retirement.


ps It must be time to chop this thread at this stage.

At some stage in the dim and distant past, some aircraft had toilets equipped with padded seat covers and backs, and seat belts.
I once worked for an outfit that bought 2 DC-6Bs that were either of Pan-Am Pacific or Western Air Lines descent, and the local Civil Aviation made the first item for certification, "removal of toilet seat belts".
Cant remember toilet door config, but in those days there was plenty of aisle space so egress was probably not the problem, more likely the risk of pax trapped in toilet.
Many a wistful sigh over the loss of the potential "get-you-home" seats for staff.

Similar incident about 15 years ago in the Caribbean had almost identical outcome, except F/O lost his job too, plus several "Management " employees who were on the actual aircraft, (some on legal seats, some bog-riders).
Same syndrome, "nice" well -liked Capt, helping staff to get home in time to go to work after "Cultural Convention"(Carnival).
This misguided favour sadly benefitted no-one.

Murphy quote?
"No good deed ever goes unpunished."

aviaco, u need to chill a bit... i am ex crew for FR, and i knew the girls operating the cabin on that flight, and the CPT... they were bullied by those staff!! i live with 2 of the girls, and i couldnt believ it when i heard it! those 2 staff in the toilets knoew what they were doing, they didnt care! and the CPT allowed it... thus overruling the SCCM in the cabin... thye deserved to be sacked! and as for the operating crew, thye need to find a decent airline where crew, operating or deadheading, dont take such liberites!

For reasons I mentioned earlier, I find it difficult to chill at such an incident taking place in this day and age.

Ou Trek dronkie's second para in his/her post above just about sums it up for me - how could something like this have happened in Europe in 2004.

Please don't get me wrong, everyone, who has replied above. I am not an FR basher, and nor have I ever participated in FR bashing before.

Some of the things I posted above were out of sheer frustration and, I suppose, anger over the incident that occurred.

Sorry if I offended anyone. Heat of the moment, and all that.

AVIACO

Phew! Got to the end...

Few points:

Sleeve Wing

Yes, back in the "good old days", captains had a little more latitude. This was because everybody assumed that they would never break the rules, or that if they did, the consequences would be minor. Sadly, history is replete with examples of captains that not only broke the rules, but endangered (or killed) pax in the process. So along came greater regulation. And lawyers. Break the rules in the current climate, well, be prepared to hand in your ID card.

Second, a positioning crew member is a pax. End of story.

Third, the buck doesn't stop with the captain. It stops with the responsible person in the company (usually the Operations Director), and then ultimately with the directors of the company, who end up facing the corporate manslaughter charge if it all goes wrong (Herald of Free Enterprise, for example).

Fourth, it is wrong to blame FR management for this, or MOL, unless it can be shown that either the captain was pressured into doing what he did (and there surely would have been witnesses, and no resignation), or that there is an endemic disregard for safety within FR (which I doubt).

Fifth, it is completely clear that carrying anybody in the WC is unsafe, irrespective of what used to go on in them "good old days".

Sixth, anybody that thinks you can carry 14 pax or crew in the flight deck of any modern airliner, is clearly completely uninvolved in this industry. Or just plain daft.

Seventh, for the person wondering what law the captain broke... the Ops Manual IS the law. Once the CAA (or whoever) sign off on it, it becomes an addition to the aviation legislation of the country, and is a legal document. If you break the provisions of the Ops Manual, you are in fact breaking the law (in most western countries at any rate).

All those feeling sorry for this captain - well, he might be a top bloke, but part of being a captain is making the correct decision 100% of the time. Part of the job is the danger that if you screw up, you may well lose that job. This guy didn't make a mistake, he made a conscious decision to break the law. In other words, he rolled the dice, and lost.

I have a hard time feeling sorry for a guy who chose to do what I have spent my entire career making absolutely sure I didn't do.

That isn't arrogance, or condescension. More disbelief.

What puzzles me is how did these two standby crew even board the aircraft without the collusion of the ground handlers.

The Captain was a fool but he should never have been put in a position to be able to make the decision.

I think one or two heads are still to roll.

Condolences to those concerned but FR STN crew be sure to boycot the THM meetings with MOL on wed!! JOIN BALPA BEAT THE B@"S>TRD

Is it just me or are there any other professional pilots out there getting a just a little bit tired of Mr AVIACO banging on and on and on and on and on?

He has made his point a thousand times over but it still does not seem to be enough.

He quotes as his raison d'etre that he lost his best mate in the BA 737 accident at Manchester. I carried my first coffin containing a best mate in the Air Force when I was 19 and have carried God knows how many more since then.

However, I don't bang on and on about it just because two people, who should have known better, travelled in a Ryanair bog from Barcelona to Dublin!

If Ryanair employed more ex RAF pilots they would get people who know how to obey a rule and not make gross errors of judgement.

Breeding and training. Sadly lacking it would seem.

LF

Quite so old boy; there does seem to be more than just a whiff of LMF about the place nowadays don't you think (especially in the latrines)?

From a post on the CC Forum...

If this is indeed true, then I'm afraid the Captain deserves everything he got. Why would a person who has spent considerable time and thousands of pounds on training, risk his career in such a stupid way? It beggars belief.

I have to admit that when I heard the story a couple of days ago, I didn't believe it. I'm sure that this is not a reflection of FR's standards of safety and SEP but it will certainly do them some serious damage in the eyes of the airline community and the general public.

MOL seems to believe that "there's no such thing as bad publicity" so I'm sure he'll deliver an interesting response to this fiasco...

I wonder if the CC involved will be sueing for wrongful dismissal.

If over-ruled and ignored they would seem to have a pretty strong case.

Flaps, the sacked crew were the 'stowaways' not the operating crew. LOD also wrote if anything had happened at least there were two extra crew on board. Well there may have been, but they also may well have been trapped/incapacitated in the bogs. As a pax would you believe/accept instructions from someone who has just stepped out of the bog and says they're cabin crew?, I certainly wouldn't and I can't imagine any of my friends who are not in the industry would either. I imagine pretty much all pax know you're not supposed to sit in the bogs during t/o and landing, hence the original pax's comments, so I can't see how they would have been able to exert any authority under those circumstances. If a rampy has also colluded in getting them on the plane, then their companies next contract renewal might be worth sitting in on! :E

Thanks jumpseater, I'd got the wrong end of the stick!

Hi Folks, CHILL !!!

Why all the fuss, the crew knew what they were doing,yeah it was unsafe, but hey lots of unsafe things happen , they were not fare paying public, they knew the risks, so must have been happy to take them. We as a society must let people make decisions about risk themselves, too much nanny state at the moment

Very unfair to have been sacked, at worst a severe reprimand.

It was almost standard practice in most of the world until recently, toilets,underfloor gallyey L1011, flight deck,anywhere to get a seat, soory position on the plane.