Ryanair pricing... new costs or computer error?
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Dublin
Posts: 987
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
You want to be punctual just extend the journey time.
To be on time just have a journey time of 1 hour 20 mins instead of 55 mins. That way you’ll nearly always arrive early and exceed expectations of the passenger. If you’re late you give a bigger buffer to avoid compensation,
Still what a fantastic success this company is. Wish I had those ideas but I didn’t and that’s why he’s brilliant and I’m slogging through life making ends meet and availing of cheap flights so congratulations to him.
To be on time just have a journey time of 1 hour 20 mins instead of 55 mins. That way you’ll nearly always arrive early and exceed expectations of the passenger. If you’re late you give a bigger buffer to avoid compensation,
Still what a fantastic success this company is. Wish I had those ideas but I didn’t and that’s why he’s brilliant and I’m slogging through life making ends meet and availing of cheap flights so congratulations to him.
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: London, UK
Posts: 23
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Ryanairs punctuality is largely because they fly to an airport that no one else uses and is 80Km from where you actually want to go to. But many of these airports suit quite a lot of people who are not near a major airport. So that alone gives them a good on time departure record and a decent market from people who dont want to travel to a big city airport.
When you've got 570 aircraft to schedule - you need to fly to both primary and secondary airports.
https://www.airfleets.net/flottecie/...gs%20Group.htm
What I admire is their ground processes perfection. Like clockwork. Passengers lined up already behind the final door when the inbound flight arrives.
compare with legacy airlines
What's often forgotten is one of the basic planks of the low cost model - the transfer of responsibility for and costs of disruption from airline to individual passengers. About 6 years ago I wrote this to the CEO of the Consumers Association when he complained about the effect on passengers of airline cancellations. Didn't get a reply of course..... Anyway, here's what I said then, with a few additional thoughts.
"Bad weather, ATC strikes, aircraft technical problems, etc., always have and always will disrupt air travel. Airlines are probably unique in having a "product" - moving seats from A to B - made on a "production line" where a huge range of aspects are, and will always be, completely outside their control. While the airline industry can predict and plan for disruption on a long timescale - e.g. "there will some fog at Heathrow and Milan in November" we can't do it at the detail level - which day in November? Which days are French ATC on strike this month? So exactly which flights disruption will affect can't be predicted.
Historically, airlines accepted that it was THEIR responsibility to deal with these issues. They had standby crews and aircraft, and airports were pressed to install bad weather landing systems. But having such people and equipment available "just in case" was regarded by many as inefficient and it cost money, which was reflected in higher fares for all passengers. And of course passengers (and consumer associations) complained about these high fares, especially after SouthWest started competing with legacy carriers in the US, with a network where a lot of factors that disrupt European shorthaul operations are absent. (E.g. for its first 12 years I believe SWA only operated within Texas and hence was not subject to Federal regulations, as well as not experiencing much freezing fog and having a unified ATC system!
Since only a tiny minority of flights are actually affected by disruption, if new airlines wanting to copy SWA simply abandoned any obligation to resolve it themselves they could offer the vast majority of most passengers lower fares, without ever explaining where much of the reduction has come from. But disruptions - and their associated cost - never went away. However, instead of being shared among all passengers, the entire cost (not just financial but emotional and organisational) is just dumped on the tiny minority of individuals directly affected - now including Mrs Vicary-Smith, the Consumer Association CEO's wife. And for some people these associated costs may be extremely high - e.g. the consequences of missed hospital appointments or life events. (And of course now they have transferred many other "cost-incurring" elements to the individual).
These lower "headline" fares result in organisations such as the Consumer Association now wanting legislation to make airlines compensate passengers, because they no longer do what was absolutely normal in the "bad old days" of fares they thought were too high. Beware of unintended consequences!"
As I said, no reply back then, and the situation has, for a growing minority, got a lot worse ....
"Bad weather, ATC strikes, aircraft technical problems, etc., always have and always will disrupt air travel. Airlines are probably unique in having a "product" - moving seats from A to B - made on a "production line" where a huge range of aspects are, and will always be, completely outside their control. While the airline industry can predict and plan for disruption on a long timescale - e.g. "there will some fog at Heathrow and Milan in November" we can't do it at the detail level - which day in November? Which days are French ATC on strike this month? So exactly which flights disruption will affect can't be predicted.
Historically, airlines accepted that it was THEIR responsibility to deal with these issues. They had standby crews and aircraft, and airports were pressed to install bad weather landing systems. But having such people and equipment available "just in case" was regarded by many as inefficient and it cost money, which was reflected in higher fares for all passengers. And of course passengers (and consumer associations) complained about these high fares, especially after SouthWest started competing with legacy carriers in the US, with a network where a lot of factors that disrupt European shorthaul operations are absent. (E.g. for its first 12 years I believe SWA only operated within Texas and hence was not subject to Federal regulations, as well as not experiencing much freezing fog and having a unified ATC system!
Since only a tiny minority of flights are actually affected by disruption, if new airlines wanting to copy SWA simply abandoned any obligation to resolve it themselves they could offer the vast majority of most passengers lower fares, without ever explaining where much of the reduction has come from. But disruptions - and their associated cost - never went away. However, instead of being shared among all passengers, the entire cost (not just financial but emotional and organisational) is just dumped on the tiny minority of individuals directly affected - now including Mrs Vicary-Smith, the Consumer Association CEO's wife. And for some people these associated costs may be extremely high - e.g. the consequences of missed hospital appointments or life events. (And of course now they have transferred many other "cost-incurring" elements to the individual).
These lower "headline" fares result in organisations such as the Consumer Association now wanting legislation to make airlines compensate passengers, because they no longer do what was absolutely normal in the "bad old days" of fares they thought were too high. Beware of unintended consequences!"
As I said, no reply back then, and the situation has, for a growing minority, got a lot worse ....
To comment on the original question of pricing.
Maybe it is time for government to mandate that prices quoted include "necessities." eg. You have to have a seat so the price of a seat has to be included in the quoted price.
Even legacy airlines are now offering fares that have little to do with the final cost. We are flying United Airlines this month for a trip gifted from our son's points. The cost of "extras" like actually having a seat and a single hold bag each is mounting alarmingly
Obviously it is a little horses for courses. Another son and his partner flew all over Europe for weekends away when he was working in London and for short haul weekends it is quite possible to fly with only a carry on. However for Canada to Australia it is a bit stupid to expect people to travel without a hold bag! Now it seems it is just another way of advertising an unrealistic price and making it up with bags and expensive food.
Maybe it is time for government to mandate that prices quoted include "necessities." eg. You have to have a seat so the price of a seat has to be included in the quoted price.
Even legacy airlines are now offering fares that have little to do with the final cost. We are flying United Airlines this month for a trip gifted from our son's points. The cost of "extras" like actually having a seat and a single hold bag each is mounting alarmingly
Obviously it is a little horses for courses. Another son and his partner flew all over Europe for weekends away when he was working in London and for short haul weekends it is quite possible to fly with only a carry on. However for Canada to Australia it is a bit stupid to expect people to travel without a hold bag! Now it seems it is just another way of advertising an unrealistic price and making it up with bags and expensive food.
I wouldn’t fly Ryanair unless I absolutely had to. Other airlines’ (such as EZY) under seat volume allowance is usually 60% more. That is the clincher for me. I always book my seat so the airport check in issues are irrelevant.
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Finland
Posts: 299
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
[QUOTE=bobbytables;11551671]I thought that having a policy of children being seated together with accompanying adults was required to get your operator certificate. Another one is that an adult cannot be seated in an exit row if they are responsible for a child on the aircraft (no matter where the child is seated). Of course, having a policy and consistently implementing it are not the same thing.
/QUOTE]
I am presuming it is the Irish regulator that looks after Ryanair? Are they vigorous or a bit tame, as the tax authorities seem(ed) to be in Ireland for companies such as Apple, or the data protection watchdog (in the past at least) for Meta/Facebook.
Or could the mad bloke just go regulator shopping if he doesn't get his way, as he tries it on with regional airports to contribute to his billion dollar profit business or something?
/QUOTE]
I am presuming it is the Irish regulator that looks after Ryanair? Are they vigorous or a bit tame, as the tax authorities seem(ed) to be in Ireland for companies such as Apple, or the data protection watchdog (in the past at least) for Meta/Facebook.
Or could the mad bloke just go regulator shopping if he doesn't get his way, as he tries it on with regional airports to contribute to his billion dollar profit business or something?
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Finland
Posts: 299
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I have flown, as captain (not in RYANAIR), with many FOs who had been trained by RYANAIR and found their skills and knowledge to be excellent. I believe that their training dept to be very good indeed, that makes them a safe airline to fly with. The rest is money and expectations.
I admit I might have been subject to anti-RYR propaganda within this hallowed place, but I got the impression RYR would charge for the steam of one's urine should it be possible.
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: London, UK
Posts: 23
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I am presuming it is the Irish regulator that looks after Ryanair? Are they vigorous or a bit tame, as the tax authorities seem(ed) to be in Ireland for companies such as Apple, or the data protection watchdog (in the past at least) for Meta/Facebook.
Or could the mad bloke just go regulator shopping if he doesn't get his way, as he tries it on with regional airports to contribute to his billion dollar profit business or something?
Or could the mad bloke just go regulator shopping if he doesn't get his way, as he tries it on with regional airports to contribute to his billion dollar profit business or something?
https://corporate.ryanair.com/wp-con...-1024x543.webp
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Finland
Posts: 299
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
[QUOTE=FarTooManyUsers;11553921]I suspect the Irish regulator may be a bit tame ... but Ryanair also has AOCs in the UK, Austria, Poland and Malta ... and none of the regulators seem willing to enforce safe family seating rules.
Ah, so in the EU there is not the principle of local regulators but some "master" regulator usually takes control for multinationals. If you understand what I mean, as regulation is not my forté.
Ah, so in the EU there is not the principle of local regulators but some "master" regulator usually takes control for multinationals. If you understand what I mean, as regulation is not my forté.
I don't want to pick hairs, but does RYR actually train pilots? I may have misunderstood, but I thought prospective pilots paid an "arm's length" agency a King's Ransom for the privilege of possibly getting to fly for O'Leary at a [?] below market rate and be in debt for quite a long time. Even before the fun and games of rostering, base shuffling and the like.
I admit I might have been subject to anti-RYR propaganda within this hallowed place, but I got the impression RYR would charge for the steam of one's urine should it be possible.
I admit I might have been subject to anti-RYR propaganda within this hallowed place, but I got the impression RYR would charge for the steam of one's urine should it be possible.
Join Date: Feb 2018
Location: Aalborg
Posts: 134
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
[QUOTE=luoto;11553925]
If you go on the website and try to book a seat for an adult and an under 12 then you get sat together for free. Another adult wanting to sit with them would have to pay. There’s many many many things people can have ago at Ryanair for but Training and Safety aren’t two of them.
An example, Ryanair recently recruited a load of experienced pilots. The minimum requirements for a type rating is 32-36 ish hours in the sim. FR elected to put them on the cadet course and they did 12 fixed base sims and 7 FFS which is approximately 80 hours inc test. My point is FR could have given them the minimum but didn’t.
I suspect the Irish regulator may be a bit tame ... but Ryanair also has AOCs in the UK, Austria, Poland and Malta ... and none of the regulators seem willing to enforce safe family seating rules.
Ah, so in the EU there is not the principle of local regulators but some "master" regulator usually takes control for multinationals. If you understand what I mean, as regulation is not my forté.
Ah, so in the EU there is not the principle of local regulators but some "master" regulator usually takes control for multinationals. If you understand what I mean, as regulation is not my forté.
An example, Ryanair recently recruited a load of experienced pilots. The minimum requirements for a type rating is 32-36 ish hours in the sim. FR elected to put them on the cadet course and they did 12 fixed base sims and 7 FFS which is approximately 80 hours inc test. My point is FR could have given them the minimum but didn’t.
Last edited by Jamie2009; 10th Dec 2023 at 12:44.
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: London, UK
Posts: 23
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
[QUOTE=Jamie2009;11554346]
If you go on the website and try to book a seat for an adult and an under 12 then you get sat together for free. Another adult wanting to sit with them would have to pay. There’s many many many things people can have ago at Ryanair for but Training and Safety aren’t two of them.
An example, Ryanair recently recruited a load of experienced pilots. The minimumrequirements for a type rating is 32-36 ish hours in the sim. FR elected to put them on the cadet course and they did 12 fixed base sims and 7 FFS which is approximately 80 hours inc test. My point is FR could have given them the minimum but didn’t.
It's not just children under 12 that are the issue. If you are on a plane when an evacuation is ordered, you will likely try and find your partner / teenage children / relatives before evacuating - which is a problem.
To quote the Royal Aeronautical Society report: "Operators should not charge for family members to sit together. This is especially important in an emergency situation such as evacuation, decompression or air turbulence when adult assistance and supervision of children is likely to be of paramount importance."
https://www.aerosociety.com/media/14...-june-2020.pdf
If you go on the website and try to book a seat for an adult and an under 12 then you get sat together for free. Another adult wanting to sit with them would have to pay. There’s many many many things people can have ago at Ryanair for but Training and Safety aren’t two of them.
An example, Ryanair recently recruited a load of experienced pilots. The minimumrequirements for a type rating is 32-36 ish hours in the sim. FR elected to put them on the cadet course and they did 12 fixed base sims and 7 FFS which is approximately 80 hours inc test. My point is FR could have given them the minimum but didn’t.
To quote the Royal Aeronautical Society report: "Operators should not charge for family members to sit together. This is especially important in an emergency situation such as evacuation, decompression or air turbulence when adult assistance and supervision of children is likely to be of paramount importance."
https://www.aerosociety.com/media/14...-june-2020.pdf
Join Date: Feb 2018
Location: Aalborg
Posts: 134
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I can see your point.
However, if it was such a safety risk wouldn't at least one of the aviation regulatory bodies have made the sitting together of family members mandatory, after analysing the the data and evidence from the numerous evacuation events over the years.
I do agree that the Cabin Crew should be asking questions of the kid and parents if they see a juvenile sat by themselves, especially at take off and landing - that is a safety issue.
However, if it was such a safety risk wouldn't at least one of the aviation regulatory bodies have made the sitting together of family members mandatory, after analysing the the data and evidence from the numerous evacuation events over the years.
I do agree that the Cabin Crew should be asking questions of the kid and parents if they see a juvenile sat by themselves, especially at take off and landing - that is a safety issue.
I am presuming it is the Irish regulator that looks after Ryanair? Are they vigorous or a bit tame, as the tax authorities seem(ed) to be in Ireland for companies such as Apple, or the data protection watchdog (in the past at least) for Meta/Facebook.
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Finland
Posts: 299
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The in-house training department conducts regular, periodic training and mandatory examination alongside rigorous monitoring of SOPs. They set and maintain the professional standards. Any sloppy approach from them leads to an unsafe culture and a dangerous attitude to safety. Training is not the same as teaching.
Ryanair operates its own training program for pilots through the Ryanair Pilot Training Programme. Traditionally, pilots are required to cover the cost of their training, known as self-sponsored or "pay-to-fly" programs. However, the specifics can change over time, so it's a good idea to check with the airline or their current pilot recruitment information for the most up-to-date details on their training program and any associated costs or agreements.
Your answer may be lost in translation. So does RYR pay "people who are not yet qualified to be pilots, to be pilots" yes/no Are those in the aforementioned group required to contribute any more for this privilege? yes/no.
I do not think I actually commented on legally required operational practices and recurrent training for those who are already qualified. Mostly on the grounds I don't know.
