Aer Lingus and The Aviation Herald

Mebuntu

I was just over at the Aviation Herald website and noted that Aer Lingus had taken umbrage but have been given short shrift.

https://avherald.com/h?article=4adc5300&opt=0

dogmatix

A lot of the posters where accusing Aer Lingus of being petty. But I think Aer Lingus was correct – they just wanted to ensure the “Aer” was included in any future articles. It’s not as if a strongly worded missive from Aer Lingus was sent threatening immediate legal action. Seems to me it was the other posters who were being overly sensitive.

Bussywussy

"performing an alternate gear extension" straight away bull****...

John_Mc

Bussywussy wrote: »

"performing an alternate gear extension" straight away bull****...

Why is that BS? You can see in the video that the main gear doors are hanging down so there's clearly a hydraulic issue.

I don't know much about the airbus hydraulic systems though

Bussywussy

John_Mc wrote: »

Why is that BS? You can see in the video that the main gear doors are hanging down so there's clearly a hydraulic issue.

I don't know much about the airbus hydraulic systems though

Because the gear didn't retract in the first place

John_Mc

Bussywussy wrote: »

Because the gear didn't retract in the first place

The Aviation Herald is not some sensationalist publication - they publish the facts, or try to at least.

How do you know the gear didn't retract in the first place? Could it be that the gear unlocked but didn't retract so they had to use alternate gear extension to put back into locked position?

Bussywussy

John_Mc wrote: »

The Aviation Herald is not some sensationalist publication - they publish the facts, or try to at least.

How do you know the gear didn't retract in the first place? Could it be that the gear unlocked but didn't retract so they had to use alternate gear extension to put back into locked position?

But they don't have the facts of what happened,nor are they privy to them....

L1011

Simon's dropping of Aer is pointless adherence to a nonsensical "style guide" that doesn't actually work in English. That's what EI are complaining about.

john boye

Mebuntu wrote: »

I was just over at the Aviation Herald website and noted that Aer Lingus had taken umbrage but have been given short shrift.

https://avherald.com/h?article=4adc5300&opt=0

I'm a bit sceptical about this. Surely somebody in EI would just contact the site privately if they had a (pretty uppity) complaint instead of just posting it in the comment section where any Joe Soap can contribute?

Check out any EI story on AVH and there's pretty much always somebody moaning about Simon referring to them as Lingus. Wouldn't be surprised if this is just one of the usual posters taking it too seriously

John_Mc

Bussywussy wrote: »

But they don't have the facts of what happened,nor are they privy to them....

It's the go-to publication for all people interested in the industry and many would disagree with you on that.

Are you going to share any information or just criticise the AV Herald?

Mebuntu

I've had a further look and it seems that the website only shortens the names of the airlines in the heading of each article. The airlines' full name is shown in the body of the article.

Definitely much ado about nothing - if, indeed, the comment was made by Aer Lingus at all.

Bussywussy

John_Mc wrote: »

It's the go-to publication for all people interested in the industry and many would disagree with you on that.

Are you going to share any information or just criticise the AV Herald?

Wouldn't be in a position to share any more info...

kona

John_Mc wrote: »

It's the go-to publication for all people interested in the industry and many would disagree with you on that.

Are you going to share any information or just criticise the AV Herald?

Hes right, tge av herald have their facts wrong there. No alternate extension was performed.

faoiarvok

Bussywussy wrote: »

Because the gear didn't retract in the first place

Thought I read in another thread here that the mains retracted but not the nose, could it be procedure to use the backup extension system in such cases?

nsa0bupkd3948x

faoiarvok wrote: »

Thought I read in another thread here that the mains retracted but not the nose, could it be procedure to use the backup extension system in such cases?

That was my understanding as well.

It's only a small thing but it comes across as petty by Aer Lingus for complaining. Its the same for all airlines and designed to keep the title as short as possible. Air India is India for example in the title. The full Aer Lingus name is used in the body.

Surely EI have more important things to be worried about - maybe concentrate on fixing the Aer Club disaster? If it was such an important issue, she should have contacted AV Herald using the contact link. I'm not sure why her comment annoys me but it does.

Possibly the stupidest site rule by a mile. According to his FAQs he should therefore be shortening British Airways to British and Air France to France but he doesn't so why shorten Aer Lingus to Lingus ? Also he defends the misidentification of New South Wales NSW as NS because of some obscure ISO thing. Frankly yes people who complain have every right to complain because they have very valid points.

nsa0bupkd3948x

Deleted User wrote: »

Possibly the stupidest site rule by a mile. According to his FAQs he should therefore be shortening British Airways to British and Air France to France but he doesn't so why shorten Aer Lingus to Lingus ? Also he defends the misidentification of New South Wales NSW as NS because of some obscure ISO thing. Frankly yes people who complain have every right to complain because they have very valid points.

Could just British not be confused with British Midland/BMI Regional? As far as I can tell Air France is shortened to France.

I'm not necessarily defending their choices, I would prefer it to be Aer Lingus but they do seem to be consistent in their usage.

JCX BXC

Referring to Aer Lingus as Lingus has always been a pet peeve of mine, it's pointless and to be honest would probably cause a few people not to recognise the airline as a result.

I note a few people discussing the trade mark, which I think is reasonable, however is there actually anything the airline can do if they don't use the full name of the airline.

Simon has an account on here, hopefully he will rectify this, as it is rather strange and cannot see why you can't just call the airline by its name.

EchoIndia

JCX BXC wrote: »

Referring to Aer Lingus as Lingus has always been a pet peeve of mine, it's pointless and to be honest would probably cause a few people not to recognise the airline as a result.

I note a few people discussing the trade mark, which I think is reasonable, however is there actually anything the airline can do if they don't use the full name of the airline.

Simon has an account on here, hopefully he will rectify this, as it is rather strange and cannot see why you can't just call the airline by its name.

I think his approach is "my website, my rules". Why he has adopted a naming convention that is unique to AVH, I have no idea.

pepe the prawn

I think it's petty on the website owner/editors part. It cheapens the overall value of the website and undermines the validity of its reporting.

Locker10a

pepe the prawn wrote: »

I think it's petty on the website owner/editors part. It cheapens the overall value of the website and undermines the validity of its reporting.

Not to mention it's complete pointlessness

duskyjoe

Bussywussy wrote: »

"performing an alternate gear extension" straight away bull****...

They would have had to use the Alt landing gear extension procedure irrespective of the gear down to ensure continuity with the ECAM procedures as laid out for a Hyd Green system failure.

Minister

Simon has explained his rationale previously. No biggie imo. He does great work, I think.

Is English his first language?

billie1b

Minister wrote: »

Simon has explained his rationale previously. No biggie imo. He does great work, I think.

Is English his first language?

No German is his first, he's Austrian

JCX BXC

Minister wrote: »

Is English his first language?

Does that matter? Nobody doubts the work Simon does, it's the little things.

Minister

billie1b wrote: »

No German is his first, he's Austrian

Maybe that is why it is written the way it is, so?

Let's just accept this and enjoy the privilege of the content........

Buffman

This is a bit of a storm in a teacup IMO, just one of the nuances of AVH which doesn't warrant a complaint.

john boye wrote: »

I'm a bit sceptical about this. Surely somebody in EI would just contact the site privately if they had a (pretty uppity) complaint instead of just posting it in the comment section where any Joe Soap can contribute?

Agreed, if that really was their 'Director of Marketing and Digital experience' who left that comment, it does come across as unprofessional to not use the 'contact' function or email and keep the communications private.

Q: Why do parts of airline names like Air, Airline, Airways, Aer, ... not get used in the headlines?

Headlines are kept as short as possible without losing information. Airline Name parts like Air, Aer, Airline, Airways, ... are therefore being omitted where the airline is unambiguously being identified nonetheless. Such parts of the airline names are used only where a potential confusion with another airline exists.

Deleted User wrote: »

According to his FAQs he should therefore be shortening British Airways to British and Air France to France but he doesn't so why shorten Aer Lingus to Lingus?

There were numerous airlines which began with 'British', so presumably AVH are using the full name in this case in order to avoid potential confusion as per their FAQs.

Air France is referred to as 'France' in the headlines.

Incident: France B772 near Halifax on Aug 10th 2017, severe turbulence believed to be wake from a B744

There do seem to be some 'Airs' that do slip through.

Accident: Air Canada A320 at Halifax on Mar 29th 2015, touched down short of runway

Incident: Canada A319 at Toronto on May 17th 2016, trapped fuel