British Media: Vendetta against Ryanair

PhoenixRising

therecklessone wrote:

Ryanair's explanation of events is available in Apendix 11 of this document (PDF). If they are to be believed, the pilot only cited fatigue after his duty ended, following a request for a report from him on the incident.

I'm sorry but I don't believe a word that MOL/Ryanair utters and I'm sick of listening to their constant spin. I have a different version of events from a colleague who flys for them. Guess we'll have to wait for the outcome, but the whole thing stinks to high heaven and is a disgrace that they have set this precident to the once untouchable issue of a responsible pilot stepping down from duty due to feeling fatigued. Does this turn of events make you feel any safer as a passenger?

Any conclusion from either of us on his decision would be supposition.

The dogs in the street know what the Ryanair management response would have been. Please spare me the bull****.

Point being? Near miss for Aer Lingus aircraft. I suppose US ATC is dangerous because of that?

That is completely disingenuous and a poor attempt to deflect from the seriousness of the Ryanair event. You should know that the Aer Lingus event in Boston was caused by an air traffic controller's error. The Ryanair incident was caused by pilot error. You cannot even attempt to compare these two incidents.

Point being?

Have you even read the report and it's recommendations? This incident was caused by pilot error, non-existent CRM and gross professional negligence. What don't you get?

The first two points aside, there is nothing to suggest that Ryanair's management culture is a contributory factor in any of the incidents you mention. Supposition is not sufficient. And I'm aware of all of them thanks you very much, like I said earlier, I'm involved in the industry.

You say you work in the industry. I'm an airline pilot by profession, so feel I can speak on these issues a little more authoritively than Joe Public. Every airline pilot in Europe knows that the Ryanair management culture is a danger to the high safety standards demanded by the industry and the professionals who work in it. I could line up ten of my colleagues and they would all tell you the same thing. Take your head out of the sand. In what capacity are you employed? I've told you my background so tell us yours so we can see where you are coming from. You might be taken accidently for a Ryanair apologist.

woody

I would'nt fly with this Scum and give arogant c*nts like O'Leary a penny... They charge staff for training, pay them ****e, their service and timetable is ****e and altogether is a crappy service...

Oh here I am unsuspecting muppet looking for a flight to Brussells ah look ryan air have one to brussells mmmmmmmmmmmm I look a little closer it is Charleoi about 30 miles from brussels, okay I will get the bus or train then to the city centre ahh another 10 euros one way ah another back...

Oh now the buses are scamming they leave me outside the city, basically like dropping me in Coolock and saying it is the city centre...ah have to get a taxi now....another 15 euros in and then out.....


I flew once their staff with ignorant f*cks they tried to charge me 5 euros for a roll and a piece of cheese, even Ron Blacks is not that expensive...

Flight was 1 hour late going out and 2 hours late coming back....

Now altogether it cost me 150 euros to get to brussells.... If I went with Aerlingus I would have went straight to Brussells central airport and train would have got me in, in around 15 mins or less to the centre of brussells...

Just because it is cheap does not mean it is good... Lesson learned you get what you pay for, so I would rather pay 200 euros to get to a location in realtive comfort and time and with an allocated seat and be treated nice by staff...Instead of paying 60 or 70 quid for abuse and a 4 hour each way journey....I would love to see ryanair put out of business and set that ar5hole O'Leary given two big fat fingers to:mad: :mad:

therecklessone

PhoenixRising wrote:

I'm sorry but I don't believe a word that MOL/Ryanair utters and I'm sick of listening to their constant spin. I have a different version of events from a colleague who flys for them. Guess we'll have to wait for the outcome, but the whole thing stinks to high heaven and is a disgrace that they have set this precident to the once untouchable issue of a responsible pilot stepping down from duty due to feeling fatigued. Does this turn of events make you feel any safer as a passenger?

It makes me wish you'd wait for the outcome rather than jump to conclusions.

PhoenixRising wrote:

The dogs in the street know what the Ryanair management response would have been. Please spare me the bull****.

Please show me some respect. Any conclusion you want to draw from that incident (in the absence of an independant investigation from either the IAA, AAIU, or the Italian CAA) is supposition. I'm surprised that an airline pilot is so willing to categorise an incident without being in full possession of the facts. Would you appreciate similar judgement being applied to an incident you were unfortunate enough to be involved in?

PhoenixRising wrote:

That is completely disingenuous and a poor attempt to deflect from the seriousness of the Ryanair event. You should know that the Aer Lingus event in Boston was caused by an air traffic controller's error. The Ryanair incident was caused by pilot error. You cannot even attempt to compare these two incidents.

I should shouldn't I. Maybe thats why I posed the question::

therecklessone wrote:

I suppose US ATC is dangerous because of that?

PhoenixRising wrote:

Have you even read the report and it's recommendations? This incident was caused by pilot error, non-existent CRM and gross professional negligence. What don't you get?

Eh, your point.

AAIU Report Conclusions

(a) Findings

1. The Captain and First Officer were properly licensed in accordance with Joint Aviation Authorities (JAA) requirements.
2. The aircraft was serviceable in accordance with JAA requirements.
3. ATC communications were normal.
4. Weather was not a factor.
5. On engines shutdown neither the Captain nor the First Officer made techlog entries that might have called up investigation of any structural limit exceedances during the latter phase of the flight to Skavsta. This is contrary to the Operator’s SOP’s.
6. No verbal or written report was made to the Operator’s Operations Department by either pilot. This is contrary to the Operator’s SOP’s.
7. The unavailability of ATC audio tapes from Skavsta Airport is not in conformity with ICAO Annex 11 (Air Traffic Services) and ICAO DOC 9426, Air Traffic Services Planning Manual (ATSPM), requirements. This technical lapse needs to be urgently addressed by the Swedish Authorities.
The SHK/Swedish AIB advised the investigation that as a result of this incident, new modern recording equipment has been installed at Skavsta.
8. The continuation of the flight in ALT HOLD by the PF led to the delayed commencement of the descent, which led to the use of non-normal procedures by the PF to recover the situation.
9. What occurred in the cockpit, over a period of some fifteen minutes in the descent phase to Skavsta Airport, did not conform with the Operators Standard Operating Procedures (SOPs) and CRM requirements.
10. The Captain, by his frank admission, was so concentrated on flying the airplane that he lost his situational awareness of the evolving scenario.
11. This serious incident highlights the need for pilots to take decisive steps where necessary to ensure their own physical and mental well being before undertaking any flying duties.
12. This Investigation was hampered as the full DFDR data set was not available to it.

(b) Cause
This serious incident was precipitated by the temporary aberrant behaviour of the PF in disregarding the Operator’s SOP’s/CRM requirements and compounded by the inability of the PNF to counteract this behaviour in the unusual circumstances of the approach to Skavsta.

It appears you're right on two counts, pilot error and gross professional negligence. On the third charge, the findings of the report state clearly that what occured during this incident did not conform with the Operators CRM requirements So use of the term non-existent CRM is unjustified, and frankly (to borrow a term used by yourself) disingenuous. If anything, it suggests that CRM training at Ryanair is incomplete.

The safety recommendations back this up:

It is recommended that:
1. The Operator develop a CRM training module, emphasising the insidious nature of stress as it affects the performance of a pilot’s flying capabilities. This should also include the recognition of pilot subtle incapacitation and intervention, to highlight the necessary level of assertiveness required, particularly on the part of first officers when the captain is the pilot flying. (SR No. 014 of 2005)
Response: Immediately after this event the Operator began this process.
2. The Operator reinforces to aircrew the necessity of a comprehensive briefing for all approaches, including visual approaches. (SR No. 015 of 2005)
3. The Operator reinforces to aircrew the requirement to re-brief where the type of approach is changed, e.g. from ILS to Visual Approach, or other.
(SR No. 016 of 2005)
4. The Operator reinforces to aircrew the necessity of reporting possible structural limit exceedances to ensure the continued airworthiness of an aircraft, regardless of how the exceedances may have occurred. (SR No. 017 of 2005)

PhoenixRising wrote:

You say you work in the industry. I'm an airline pilot by profession, so feel I can speak on these issues a little more authoritively than Joe Public. Every airline pilot in Europe knows that the Ryanair management culture is a danger to the high safety standards demanded by the industry and the professionals who work in it. I could line up ten of my colleagues and they would all tell you the same thing.

You and I both know nothing will change with a 14 page thread on PPRUNE or a 4 page thread on boards. Unless people are prepared to put their money where their mouth is and present evidence to the relevant safety authorities of Ryanair management's willful disregard for safety standards then nothing will change. How many times do I need to say this, it is incumbent upon anyone involved in the airline industry to report their concern re. the erosion of safety standards.

PhoenixRising wrote:

In what capacity are you employed? I've told you my background so tell us yours so we can see where you are coming from. You might be taken accidently for a Ryanair apologist.

I see no reason to reveal my profession on this board. Take that as you will. I am no fan of Ryanair management, particularly MOL. In my previous position (with Aer Rianta) I was on the receiving end of plenty of hassle from his operation. My concern is that people are more concerned with bad mouthing MOL and his airline than they are with ensuring safety standards are adhered to within the European aviation industry.

PhoenixRising

therecklessone wrote:

I'm surprised that an airline pilot is so willing to categorise an incident without being in full possession of the facts. Would you appreciate similar judgement being applied to an incident you were unfortunate enough to be involved in?

My opinions are based on watching how they have operated for years now, numerous conversations with close friends who work for Ryanair who have candidly told me about what goes on in there, and official reports, not just idle speculation on isolated events as you insinuate. Do you know any of the details of the Beauvais incident?

Eh, your point.

You asked for evidence to support one's views in an earlier post. I was providing the evidence. I thought that would have been clear, no?

It appears you're right on two counts, pilot error and gross professional negligence. On the third charge, the findings of the report state clearly that what occured during this incident did not conform with the Operators CRM requirements So use of the term non-existent CRM is unjustified, and frankly (to borrow a term used by yourself) disingenuous. If anything, it suggests that CRM training at Ryanair is incomplete.

As a professional pilot, in my opinion, CRM was severely lacking in this incident. There were so many glaring deficiencies in CRM in this incident that they would be too numerous to discuss and unsuited to this forum.

How many times do I need to say this, it is incumbent upon anyone involved in the airline industry to report their concern re. the erosion of safety standards.

I am in total agreement with you on that one. I think you'd be hard-pressed to find any responsible airline pilot who disagrees with those sentiments.

therecklessone

PhoenixRising wrote:

Do you know any of the details of the Beauvais incident?

Simple answer: no. Until details are in the public domain I can't comment.

BuffyBot

PPRuNe isn't going to hold any weight here. Thats just a bunch of pilots mouthing off. Unless you can show an official report of an incident from AAIU or AAIB it never happened.

It's not that it wouldn't "hold any weight", but that it should be taken with a liberal sprinkling of salt. While there are some sensible and logical folk over there, there is just as much ill-informed speculation, rabid dislike "just because" and a rainbow of other views/feelings there as anywhere else. The history of some peoples dislike is also worth knowing - most of which your average visitor isn't likely to be able to take into account.

I would'nt fly with this Scum and give arogant c*nts like O'Leary a penny... They charge staff for training, pay them ****e

Poor staff, not told any of this in advance. It must be terrible to be sold into such slavery, especially when Ryanair is the only airline out there.

their service and timetable is ****e

Did they ever promise you "service" (a term which has as many definitions as as there are people using it). I think anyone who doesn't know how Ryanair operates by now has been living on some other planet for the last 15 years.

As for their timetable - their whole timetable is sh*te? Every flight, across the Europe is badly timed..according to you. Eh, great - where did you get your MA in Airline Timetabling?

Oh here I am unsuspecting muppet looking for a flight to Brussells ah look ryan air have one to brussells mmmmmmmmmmmm I look a little closer it is Charleoi about 30 miles from brussels, okay I will get the bus or train then to the city centre ahh another 10 euros one way ah another back...

Oh no, they make people read. And they fly into other airports - shocking!

Oh now the buses are scamming they leave me outside the city, basically like dropping me in Coolock and saying it is the city centre...ah have to get a taxi now....another 15 euros in and then out.....

Indeed. Must be awful for the thousands of bus passengers who seem to not have any such problems..

I flew once their staff with ignorant f*cks they tried to charge me 5 euros for a roll and a piece of cheese, even Ron Blacks is not that expensive...

Imagine that - selling you overpriced food on an airplane. Cos that doesn't happen anywhere else. It must have been terrifying for you, when the cabin crew pinned you to the seat and forcibly took the money from you...

Now altogether it cost me 150 euros to get to brussells.... If I went with Aerlingus I would have went straight to Brussells central airport and train ..blah blah blah

As rants go, that was pretty woeful.

democrates

Ther seems to be an awful lot of anti-ryanair posts here.
I have flown with them once.
The stewards were selling customers items from the usual catalogue.
I read the small print at the back, and had to correct the steward that the price for the item I was buying was in punts, not sterling. Sweet scam.

LiamD

From what I'm reading, the people that work in the airline industry are having a big willy measuring contest over who really is right and I amn't going to listen to either side anymore.The Irish media and two state bodies are behind Ryanair so that gives me confidence in them.The programme seemed very tabloid and full of inaccuracies.This gives me more confidence in Ryanair's position.Finally I have received no information to discourage me from flying Ryanair, so I'm going to take my chances.


On that point, is safety the primary factor for people choosing who to fly with?I haven't heard of any European flights being involved in any harmful accidents recently.When you think about it, an aeroplane, like any machine has a set number of things to be maintained and checked.It's the engineers job to make sure that's done.Why would airlines want the bad publicity and losses associated with a plane crash or a minor accident which will cost them in both declinign passenger numbers and the cost of repair/replacement.I could be unlucky on any aeroplane that something was missed and a fault occured.Ryanair hasn't killed anyone lately, neither has Aer Lingus or anyone else that flies through Ireland.Therfore to me, seeing as air travel is probably the safest way to travel, safety isn't the deciding factor.


What is?Price and location.I'm going to London this summer and up to Global Gathering from there but I won't be flying with Ryanair for the simple reason they won't bring me to Heathrow.They'll bring me to a less convenient airport and it will probably cost a fair bit to get to central London from there.I'm considering flying BMI or Aer Lingus because they'll both fly me to Heathrow and back for €75 incl. taxes and charges.I'm not going to go reading their safety records now though.

Sleepy

If Ryanair are so unconcerned with safety how come they have the newest fleet of any airline operating in Europe?

TempestSabre

Sleepy wrote:

If Ryanair are so unconcerned with safety how come they have the newest fleet of any airline operating in Europe?

The old ones are shagged.