Ryanair 'r' scum

dahamsta

Ah, I'd forgotten about that. Well done Eurorunner.

Occidental

Originally posted by dahamsta
I thought it was about Ryanair crew paying for training. Was until the Ryanair *hugz* crew came along anyway. *shrug*

Okay Adam, lets try the more direct approach then.

You know someone who works in SIFCO who has serious concerns about Ryanairs safety and the components they use. I have a few friends who work for the IAA in Hawkins Street including one who is a safety officer. How about we get them together.

PhoenixRising

It's quite obvious that there are two polarised groups of people here. Some don't like Ryanair (myself included) and some do. Each, I'm sure, have their own reasons. Neither group will succeed at convincing the other of the merits of their argument. It's just a difference of opinion - let it go.

I don't think it would be the worst thing in the world if this thread was locked now.;)

Specky

I don't think I've ever seen a debate resolved on boards, more often than not they descend into two intractible positions with two groups who refuse to budge.

We're there.

As often as not (and I think this is another of these cases) I think the two groups end up arguing with each other over two different points though.

The anti-Ryan air team seem to be just....anti-Ryan air. The reasons seem to be somewhat anecdotal and not particularly well supported (unless Adams disgruntled plane fixer comes forward with a bit of evidence).

The pro-Ryab air team however seem to have made accomodations for the anti-Ryan air team, rationalising their opponents points or asking for some sort of substantiation.

I don't think boards is a debating media anyway, it's just spleen venting on the internet. A sequence of missunderstandings and missinterpretations to tire the fingers and perplex the unwary. Noone will start or stop flying Ryanair as a result of this load of hot air.

PhoenixRising

Specky, I don't think that people are "just anti-Ryanair". I certainly have my reasons, and I'm sure that others do as well. I agree with the rest of what you said. Ah....now we're getting somewhere.;)

Specky

Oh dear...agreement...something horrible must have gone wrong here somewhere.

Maybe if I go off on a complete tangent now and accuse you of having your ears too close together or your eyes too far apart we can get the ball rolling again??:D

dahamsta

Originally posted by Occidental
You know someone who works in SIFCO who has serious concerns about Ryanairs safety and the components they use. I have a few friends who work for the IAA in Hawkins Street including one who is a safety officer. How about we get them together.

I don't see them very often, but I'll be happy to pass it along.

adam

Specky

I don't see them very often, but I'll be happy to pass it along.

This seems like a very blase thing to say given the extreme concerns your friend has raised regarding Ryanair safety. Are you not concerned that an aircraft will fall from the sky tonight or tomorrow or some time between now and when you get around to bumping into this person? He won't fly Ryanair but is happy to watch others do so and in no particular rush to bring his concerns to the relevant authorities.

Makes me more than a little suspicious about the authenticity of the claims or the strength of your convictions.

dahamsta

I'm afraid you're stretching the imagination now specky.

daveirl

This post has been deleted.

Specky

I'm afraid you're stretching the imagination now specky.

...and you're running away from what you've said.

You made some very serious allegations regarding the safety of Ryan air aircraft, suggesting that members of the maintenance crew will not fly on these planes because they fear for their safety. If that is true then it is your responsibility and that of these people in the service crew to bring it to the attention of the authorities. There are hundreds of people being put at risk if this is the case and it must stop immediately before someone is injured.

I don't see how you can possibly dissagree with this if what you say is true.

If you do not see that you need to take this matter further then you must not take this very seriously and hence my conclusion must be that it isn't true, otherwise how could you allow people to be put at such risk and continue to say nothing? A channel of communications with the IAA has been offered to you in this thread through which you can raise your concerns so it isn't even as if you don't know who to tell.

As it is I do not believe anyone would knowing allow a situation such as this to go on if they truly did have evidence of a problem so I have to conclude you're making it up.

WhiteWashMan

interesting debate on semantics.

Sarsfield

Originally posted by Muck
I was on a Ryanair plane last year , fully loaded for takeoff, when the GROUND STAFF noticed a hole in the tail about the size of a grapefruit.

OK, I'll bite. What date & flight number? I don't work for Ryan or the IAA, but I know some people who do.

spongebob

Originally posted by Sarsfield
OK, I'll bite. What date & flight number? I don't work for Ryan or the IAA, but I know some people who do.

It was a 737-200 EI-COX

About 12/09/2003 .

M

Specky

EI-COX

Isn't that an aer lingus plane??

Don't airline carriers prefixes go with the aircraft identities...like british airways is BA so all their flights start with BA and all their aircraft are called BA-xxx ?

I'm not contradicting or critisizing in this post I'm just asking the question.

luckat

There's a plan in America to weigh *passengers*, never mind their luggage!

I generally take only carry-on luggage with me on any trip shorter than a fortnight; I hate queueing up at those carousels, major stress watching like a mother hen for a lost chicken.

What strikes me as truly crazy is that we buy duty-free at the airport of *departure* rather than that of *arrival*. It would be much safer for passengers if people weren't carrying big bottles of drink and electronic gear - if I wanted to hijack a plane, I'd have a ready-made weapon just by smashing two bottles of whiskey or gin together! And it would save airlines a fortune not having to carry all that shopping.

Having the duty-free in the arrivals area rather than the departures would also give the tourist destination a chance to make dosh from incomers, and then to suckle off them again as they toured - rather than their relying on duty-free at departure to buy a few mingy presents and things.

Sarsfield

Originally posted by Specky
Isn't that an aer lingus plane??

Don't airline carriers prefixes go with the aircraft identities...like british airways is BA so all their flights start with BA and all their aircraft are called BA-xxx ?

I'm not contradicting or critisizing in this post I'm just asking the question.

You're mixing up flight numbers with aircraft registrations.

Flight numbers begin with EI (Aer Lingus), BA (British Airways), FR (Ryanair)

All Irish aircraft registrations begin with EI, all UK begin with G.



Thanks Muck. Do you have the flight number (or origin-destination even)?

ArphaRima

I've been on Aer Lingus, British Midland and British Airways planes that have had problems on the ground, I've even been on an Aer Lingus plane that was turned back to the terminal whilst taxiing out because of a problem.

The problem is the corporate attitude to these incidents. Whereas the BM and AL plane returned to stand, a Ryanair captain will be made to justify himself at great lengths for delaying a flight. This results in an Aer Lingus captain returning to stand if he is unhappy with the aircraft as opposed to the Ryanair captain who will return only if the management will be unhappy if he goes. Get the difference?

The IAA regulate the industry's maintenance practises, but how it is regulated will surprise some. Basically the companies themselves formulate their own rules as to when a/c are unserviceable and need fixing, schedules for maintenance etc, but the IAA has to approve them. Then IAA inspections are just to ensure that the company keeps to their own approved rules.
Whereas BM BA and AL etc have pilots and engineers involved in the rulemaking, Ryanair's table more than likely has more accountants than trained staff making these decisions.

Some of the more disconcerting factors have been touched on in this argument like the lack of pilot awareness to the state of the aircraft because of a lack of a walkaround. The reason there was no walkaround was because of time pressure, and the reason there is such a level of time pressure is because of commercial interests. You take any man and make him do 6 flights in a day, with the minimum of a break, even as a passenger, and see how attentive he is to detail. TBH the weakest link in all of this wont be the a/c falling out of the sky because of maintenance more than likely; it may be a contributing factor, but the human factor will always let you down. I can imagine a perfectly serviceable a/c hitting a mountain first.

Safety is a cost in some airlines. A must in most.

drane2

Even airlines that are perceived to be safer than Ryanair can fall victim to visual defects not being noticed. For example, an Air France concorde once took off with a giant hole in one of it's wings. Or the famous Aloha 737 crash where cracks in the paintwork of the fuselage went un noticed for ages.

In the past, I think Ryanair's biggest danger was the fact that it's fleet was so old (mainly 200's) but now O' Leary is upgrading to new 800's (not because they're safer but because they are more economic).

The whole airline industry is such a dodgy area when it comes to safety. Generally safety improvements are only brought it if an airline can do it for free or minimal cost. This applies to all airlines, not just Ryanair.

spongebob

Originally posted by Sarsfield
You're mixing up flight numbers with aircraft registrations.

Flight numbers begin with EI (Aer Lingus), BA (British Airways), FR (Ryanair)
Thanks Muck. Do you have the flight number (or origin-destination even)?

FR106 or FR107, now cancelled. Afternoon flight Shannon-Stansted around 2PM.

EI-COX had a hole in the leading edge of the starboard tail , found by Servisair at the last minute and never noticed by the pilots. The passengers were then decanted from the plane.

M

Sarsfield

Originally posted by fluffer
The problem is the corporate attitude to these incidents. Whereas the BM and AL plane returned to stand, a Ryanair captain will be made to justify himself at great lengths for delaying a flight. This results in an Aer Lingus captain returning to stand if he is unhappy with the aircraft as opposed to the Ryanair captain who will return only if the management will be unhappy if he goes. Get the difference?

This common misconception is complete and utter rubbish.

Specky

EI-COX had a hole in the leading edge of the starboard tail , found by Servisair at the last minute and never noticed by the pilots. The passengers were then decanted from the plane.

Shrug...doesn't really prove anything though does it. Maintenance crew did what they're supposed to and noone was put in any danger. The amount of time prior to take off that the hole was spotted is really neither here nor there. It was spotted.

Who's to say the same wouldn't have happened with any other aircraft on any other airline.

It's probably possible to pluck specific incidents from the records of any airline in order to support any theory you like really.

The "straight from the horses mouth" evidence of a member of serviceair's maintenance crew with specific details of the lack of safety on Ryanair planes has not been forthcoming so this anecdotal stuff is just.... shrug stuff.

Gunther_Gloop

I just wanted to post to this thread because I like the heading and I like to see it stay on top for as long as possible.

Hairy Homer

Originally posted by Specky
you could also fly into one of Dublin's other international airports....they're called Shannon and Cork.....


On the off subject topic of Shannon, what a kip.

On the way back I came via Heathrow. I used to fly through Heathrow about once a fortnight and always found it just fine...on my recent journey everyone said to me before hand "oh you poor thing, having to go through heathrow is a nightmare..."

To be honest I'd much rather have a 2 hour stopover in Heathrow than one in Shannon.

You misunderstand. The worst thing about Heathrow is getting there, or getting away from there in the first place.

The only comfortable way into Heathrow is by plane. That's not as daft as it sounds. Sooner or later you have to get to or go from the airport, unless you're one of these space age hobos who lives on the seats in the meeting areas.

The tube is a nightmare if you've got any meaningful luggage, which one tends to have on plane journeys. The only train service goes to Paddington in West London, not very good if you live north south or east of there. And if you go by road you have the M4/M25 junction to contend with. For those bucholic souls whose experience of traffic is limted to the Long Mile Road (cue Trainpsotting accent: "Think of the Red Cow Roundabout on Monday morning. Multiply it by a thousand and you're still nowhere near it.'

Heathrow is the prostate colon of England. Clogged, uncomfortable, supposedly performing a useful function but in truth you'd be a lot happier if it just wasn't there.

BuffyBot

Heathrow is the prostate colon of England. Clogged, uncomfortable, supposedly performing a useful function but in truth you'd be a lot happier if it just wasn't there.

Actually I've never had a problem getting to Heathrow, with or without meaningful luggage. I've regularily use both the Tube, and the Heathrow Express and haven't had any problems.

ArphaRima

Actually I've never had a problem getting to Heathrow, with or without meaningful luggage. I've regularily use both the Tube, and the Heathrow Express and haven't had any problems.

Ditto.
Public transport in London is amazing, despite the fire it takes from the media, public and politicians. Not perfect, (think fire/bomb alerts, broken trains/tracks, and maintenance) but still amazing.

spongebob

Originally posted by Hairy Homer
The tube is a nightmare if you've got any meaningful luggage, which one tends to have on plane journeys. The only train service goes to Paddington in West London, </quote>

The tube IS a train. Numbnut!

M

jd

I'd fly Ryanair direct point to point - no connections.
O'Leary did say that Ryanair would get into trouble "if we start believing our own bull****" -whatever that exactly means
One thing though, I do worry about how far ryanair and other low cost operators can go in cutting costs- there comes a point where I would have reservations about about 1) safety and 2) (unfashionable though it is too say it these days) labour exploitation etc

Specky

Heathrow is the prostate colon of England. Clogged, uncomfortable, supposedly performing a useful function but in truth you'd be a lot happier if it just wasn't there.

Is this one of those "I have nothing to contribute to the argument so I'll just whine about something instead" posts?

How in the name of Holy Bejesus can you keep a straight face and complain about either Heathrow or the public transport in London??? Or do you just complain about everything???? I can't even be bothered to start explaining all the reasons why you're wrong.

dmeehan

this "disabled" guy that was involved in the ryanair court case actually walked to the check-in desk and checked in and then decided that he wanted a wheelchair to bring him to the gate

imo it should be the responsibility of the airport operator to provide a wheelchair in this case.

if someone has their own wheelchair ryanair do not charge any extras