Ryanair Taxi Tactics
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: London, England
Posts: 95
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I'm sure most of the people that work in the tower at EGLL would agree that if we use "give way to...." we would expect you to hold and wait until the other aircraft has passed. After all, you are in Class A airspace, and the ANO states that you will "Comply with ATC instructions at all times". Come to think of it, that applies to Class D as well.
What you have to bear in mind, is that a lot of controllers nowadays are extremely busy when doing GMC and there is a very strong tendency to file 1261s at the drop of a hat. Please don't become the "accused" by trying to be a smartass and cutting somebody up against contrary instructions. Paperwork is very time consuming and not a lot of fun for anybody involved
The other option of course, is to make the effort to visit the VCR at a unit and find out just how busy the GMC controller is, then maybe you will think twice before trying to be too clever!!
What you have to bear in mind, is that a lot of controllers nowadays are extremely busy when doing GMC and there is a very strong tendency to file 1261s at the drop of a hat. Please don't become the "accused" by trying to be a smartass and cutting somebody up against contrary instructions. Paperwork is very time consuming and not a lot of fun for anybody involved
The other option of course, is to make the effort to visit the VCR at a unit and find out just how busy the GMC controller is, then maybe you will think twice before trying to be too clever!!
Join Date: Dec 1999
Location: UK
Posts: 2,584
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Happy, perhaps they should replace the "analysts" who "thought" tyre wear was caused by fast taxiing.
Or suggest pilots went a bit easier on the brakes. That would account fot 95% of ecxess tyrewear, surely. Or try a diretive to use autobrake only down to 30kts and no extra braking to make the "earlier" turnoff. That should sort it!
Or suggest pilots went a bit easier on the brakes. That would account fot 95% of ecxess tyrewear, surely. Or try a diretive to use autobrake only down to 30kts and no extra braking to make the "earlier" turnoff. That should sort it!
I have been trying to figure out why the Ryanair crew got confused in the first place. I have just reread the original posting by ddt and I wonder if the following had anything to do with it.
It is not that long ago that Channex crews were indeed flying TNT A300s painted orange and white. Not only that but they still frequently sub-charter their own A300s to TNT and use TNT callsigns.
Being charitable, could this have been part of the confusion?
It is not that long ago that Channex crews were indeed flying TNT A300s painted orange and white. Not only that but they still frequently sub-charter their own A300s to TNT and use TNT callsigns.
Being charitable, could this have been part of the confusion?
Halo
With respect, it is irrelevent whether the location is in Class A or D or any other class of airspace. The discussion is centred on an instruction from an air traffic CONTROL unit (in whatever class of airspace) and the interpretation thereof.
2 S
With respect, it is irrelevent whether the location is in Class A or D or any other class of airspace. The discussion is centred on an instruction from an air traffic CONTROL unit (in whatever class of airspace) and the interpretation thereof.
2 S
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: California USA
Posts: 719
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Well, here I am joining the thread a month or more late...
IMHO, Rule 37's Section 2 "controls" here. Section 4 is subject to Section 2 which begins,
Note that I am not speaking to the meaning of the phrase "give way" here. I am only pointing out that Section 4 does not apply in this case because it was superceded by an air traffic control clearance (assuming that "give way" is an air traffic control clearance).
However, if I have missed the point here (as I am so often wont to do), and the quote is really speaking to the meaning of "give way," well, them I'm going off about nothing. In that case, carry on and just call me "Flame Bait."
I shall now seek other very old threads to comment upon.
Dave
I suggest you read Rule 37 Right of Way on the Ground 4 (b) which states:-
when the two flying machines are on converging courses, the one which has the other on its right shall give way to the other and shall avoid crossing ahead of the other unless passing well clear of it;
By issuing a 'Give Way' instruction you are telling the pilots which one has the right of way (as it may not be the one on the right). However, the last part of the paragraph still stands.
when the two flying machines are on converging courses, the one which has the other on its right shall give way to the other and shall avoid crossing ahead of the other unless passing well clear of it;
By issuing a 'Give Way' instruction you are telling the pilots which one has the right of way (as it may not be the one on the right). However, the last part of the paragraph still stands.
(2) Notwithstanding any air traffic control clearance ...
However, if I have missed the point here (as I am so often wont to do), and the quote is really speaking to the meaning of "give way," well, them I'm going off about nothing. In that case, carry on and just call me "Flame Bait."
I shall now seek other very old threads to comment upon.
Dave
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 112
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
doggynotsotrained - or whatever you call yourself
"or just going to damn fast to stop."
Couldn't be bothered to read the rest of this post. In case noone else pulled you up:
Suggest you get a few lessons in English before running down anyone else.
Too or to: that is the question!
"or just going to damn fast to stop."
Couldn't be bothered to read the rest of this post. In case noone else pulled you up:
Suggest you get a few lessons in English before running down anyone else.
Too or to: that is the question!
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 79
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Well now. Back to taxi "speeders."
I had the misfortune, I say misfortune because I was dismayed, to endure the complete disregard shown by the FD to 'proper' taxi speed when taxying out to 05 at STN on a Ryanair flight to PIK just recently in a 732 (Jaguar).
I assessed the speed to be between 30 and 40kts! 30 because it was certainly NOT less, and 40 because it was probably nearer to that.
There really is no excuse for it.
I had the misfortune, I say misfortune because I was dismayed, to endure the complete disregard shown by the FD to 'proper' taxi speed when taxying out to 05 at STN on a Ryanair flight to PIK just recently in a 732 (Jaguar).
I assessed the speed to be between 30 and 40kts! 30 because it was certainly NOT less, and 40 because it was probably nearer to that.
There really is no excuse for it.
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: EU
Posts: 413
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Perhaps the real lesson in English should be in respect of the word notwithstanding ; in this case I would suggest that it means "in spite of" which in turn would mean that the requirement to give way to the right stands, regardless of what ATC have told you.....
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: California USA
Posts: 719
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Perhaps the real lesson in English should be in respect of the word notwithstanding ; in this case I would suggest that it means "in spite of" which in turn would mean that the requirement to give way to the right stands, regardless of what ATC have told you.....
First, I agree that "notwithstanding" quite reasonably means "in spite of."
Second, I agree that this phrase means that regardess of whether or not you've gotten some sort of ATC clearance that seems to give you the right to run into someone else, "it shall re
Perhaps the real lesson in English should be in respect of the word notwithstanding ; in this case I would suggest that it means "in spite of" which in turn would mean that the requirement to give way to the right stands, regardless of what ATC have told you.....
First, I agree that "notwithstanding" quite reasonably means "in spite of."
Second, I agree that this phrase means that regardess of whether or not you've gotten some sort of ATC clearance that seems to give you the right to run into someone else, "it shall remain the duty of the commander of an aircraft to take all possible measures to ensure that his aircraft does not collide with any other aircraft or with any vehicle."
However (and this is where I think I went wrong!), 37(4), in its entirity, says:
(4) Subject to the provisions of paragraph (3) and of rule 17(7)(c), in case of danger of collision between two flying machines:
(a) when the two flying machines are approaching head-on or approximately so, each shall alter its course to the right;
(b) when the two flying machines are on converging courses, the one which has the other on its right shall give way to the other and shall avoid crossing ahead of the other unless passing well clear of it;
(c) a flying machine which is being overtaken shall have the right-of-way, and the overtaking flying machine shall keep out of the way of the other flying machine by altering its course to the left until that other flying machine has been passed and is clear, notwithstanding any change in the relative positions of the two flying machines.
(a) when the two flying machines are approaching head-on or approximately so, each shall alter its course to the right;
(b) when the two flying machines are on converging courses, the one which has the other on its right shall give way to the other and shall avoid crossing ahead of the other unless passing well clear of it;
(c) a flying machine which is being overtaken shall have the right-of-way, and the overtaking flying machine shall keep out of the way of the other flying machine by altering its course to the left until that other flying machine has been passed and is clear, notwithstanding any change in the relative positions of the two flying machines.
I say again, "in case of danger of collision..."
To ME this means that you follow the clearance until you discover that the clearance is less-than-skillfully-consructed and apt to have you embedded in someone else's airframe in the near future. It says, "In case of danger..." This is the funamental "pilot in command" concept that addresses deviating from an ATC clearance.
What is the alternative? ALWAYS going with the "rules of the road" instead of a clearance? Well, Rule 17 starts out by saying:
Notwithstanding that the flight is being made with air traffic control clearance....
Then, 17(3) goes on to speak to:
(3) Approaching head-on
When two aircraft are approaching head-on or approximately so in the air and there is danger of collision, each shall alter its course to the right.
When two aircraft are approaching head-on or approximately so in the air and there is danger of collision, each shall alter its course to the right.
So, back to the original issue. Two aircraft on the ground. Controller tells the one which WOULD have the right of way under the rule to stop and then follow the one who would NOT have the right of way under the rule. I'm curious as to how many pilots would disregard the ATC instruction and follow the rule. If it is not exactly 100% or 0% (follow ATC or follow the Rule), airplanes are going to run together on the ground.
Perhaps I should start checking PPrune BEFORE having the wine. That might be easier on everybody...
Have I put my foot in it again?
Dave
Grim Sleeper
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 179
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Why bother giving FR pilots taxi speeds? Their ability to count goes "1... 2.... a few.... more than 5....loads."
I think the SOPs require an ASI check during taxi.......
I think the SOPs require an ASI check during taxi.......
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Europe
Posts: 5
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I think a lot of you are just jealous they're not flying a nice 738 and being paid (a lot) for doing a nice job. I can count more than just 1,2,3.. and sorry,English is not my native language but I speak 5 languages in total and yes I do fly for Ryanair. I'm proud to work for a company that sets high standards for their pilots. You have always individuals who don't follow the SOP's, but this doesn't mean we're all cowboys. Stop being frustrated! You would better stop your energy in finding a job, instead of writing all this crap about Ryanair.
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: World
Posts: 35
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Interesting comments. Again turned into a Ryanair bashing by some, on which I have commented more than once. However, (note the comma!) there is absolutely no doubt that SOME Ryanair pilots do taxy much too quickly and it is only a matter of time before one comes to grief as a result. If one turns in to the stand at 25 - 30 knots as I have seen on more than one occasion, then even bucketloads of reverse won't save you if the brakes quit. The huge majority of Ryanair Captains that I have seen taxy at correct speeds but there are clearly some who demonstrate appalling airmanship in their taxy technique. Do they have any feeling for the aircraft or the passengers? Or is it a sign that the pressure is getting into the cockpit? If so, watch out guys. It's only a short step from there to a bigger mistake which we're all prone to. Any monitoring system should easily pick out the regular offenders. A spell in the RHS for one or two would sort it out very quickly.
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 5
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Most of the pilots at Ryanair follow the SOPs and I do not know of anyone who intentionally does not follow them. The Boeing 737 Flight Crew Training Manual allows as to to maintain speeds upto 30 Knots. :
737NG Flight Crew Training Manual Chapter 2 page 2.5
"....."Normal taxi speed is approximately 20 Knots, adjusted for conditions. On long straight taxi routes speeds up to 30 knots are acceptable, however at speeds greater than 20 knots use rudder pedal steering only..."
I personally do not taxi that fast, but there have been times at Stansted when ATC has requested me to increse speed during taxi, especially for Runway 05. If someone is landing at that time and has not been on ground frequency they will say surely, look at Ryanair taxiing fast again.
I assure you that the company does provide us and requires to obey the speed limits, max 10 knots in the approns, max 20 knots between the terminals and the fire station, and to this day I do not know of anyone in Stansted been reported for fast taxiing, or in that matter for unsafe or un-comfortable opperations.
737NG Flight Crew Training Manual Chapter 2 page 2.5
"....."Normal taxi speed is approximately 20 Knots, adjusted for conditions. On long straight taxi routes speeds up to 30 knots are acceptable, however at speeds greater than 20 knots use rudder pedal steering only..."
I personally do not taxi that fast, but there have been times at Stansted when ATC has requested me to increse speed during taxi, especially for Runway 05. If someone is landing at that time and has not been on ground frequency they will say surely, look at Ryanair taxiing fast again.
I assure you that the company does provide us and requires to obey the speed limits, max 10 knots in the approns, max 20 knots between the terminals and the fire station, and to this day I do not know of anyone in Stansted been reported for fast taxiing, or in that matter for unsafe or un-comfortable opperations.
I cannot help but think that there are more than a few hypocrites posting on this thread. Can all of you out there put your hands on your hearts and swear that you have never done 40 mph in an urban 30 mph limit? Personally, I doubt if any of you could.
How many hundreds of pedestrians get killed every year because of this? How many passengers have been killed or injured by Ryanair crews taxiing at 30 or even 35 knots?
I am personally not prone to fast taxiing but I have little doubt that I have probably exceeded 30 knots on a long unobstructed taxiway somewhere in the world on more than one occasion and I'll bet a lot of you out there have too. If I had considered it in any way dangerous, I would not have done it!
How many hundreds of pedestrians get killed every year because of this? How many passengers have been killed or injured by Ryanair crews taxiing at 30 or even 35 knots?
I am personally not prone to fast taxiing but I have little doubt that I have probably exceeded 30 knots on a long unobstructed taxiway somewhere in the world on more than one occasion and I'll bet a lot of you out there have too. If I had considered it in any way dangerous, I would not have done it!
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Earth (just)
Posts: 722
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Well said Jay Doubleyer.....
and Xfeed says:
Had yer speeding gun out did yer? Perhaps a slight exaggeration although if you saw it "more than once" it musta happened.......
Jeez - worlds full of 'em ain't it?
and Xfeed says:
If one turns in to the stand at 25 - 30 knots as I have seen on more than one occasion
Jeez - worlds full of 'em ain't it?
Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 398
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Also came across this thread late.
I can't see how "give way" to could possibly be misinterpreted to mean slip in front of if you think you can.
However......
The Radiotelephony Manual is quite clear about the correct phraseology...
"G-CD follow the Seneca coming from your left taxi to holding position B1 runway 14"
UK ATC is usually pretty hot on correct phraseology. Perhaps room for improvement here until "give way to" is incorprated. Might stop a stupid person having an accident.
I can't see how "give way" to could possibly be misinterpreted to mean slip in front of if you think you can.
However......
The Radiotelephony Manual is quite clear about the correct phraseology...
"G-CD follow the Seneca coming from your left taxi to holding position B1 runway 14"
UK ATC is usually pretty hot on correct phraseology. Perhaps room for improvement here until "give way to" is incorprated. Might stop a stupid person having an accident.
