rdc1000I like the fact that they’re proposing a white fuselage, I think that’s very original for AF! :diablo::diablo::dev2:
rdc1000I would expect the Cityjet livery and the Air France livery where made up by the same agency at the same time. It’s just that they introduced the Cityjet livery first, maybe to test the reaction of the public and employees? Not that long ago all Cityjet planes carried full Air France livery. Therefor I think it is rather presumptious to assume that AF is copying Cityjet, instead of Cityjet doing what AF told them to do.
I was being a little sarcastic in what I said, more highlighting that the logo has been around for a couple of years now.
For your info….Cityjet aircraft continue to carry the AF livery on some of their aircraft, those dedicated to Paris – LCY and Paris – DUB routes (accepting that some of the Paris aircraft do other rotations). Their own livery was introduced when the decision was taken to expand at LCY, although ironically all of these flights operate only on an AF/KL code anyway, so they may aswell just have gone the whole hog.
rdc1000Hmmmm, now let me think, where have I been seeing that logo for a couple of years now??? :confused::confused::confused::confused:
Oh yes….
SO it cost them a lot of money to use their subsidiary’s livery to inspire their own new logo? Do you think the agency staff were sat at LCY thinking “So what could we do for the new AF logo?!?!?!”:rolleyes:
rdc1000I hope the nimbys win. My husband works for the company handling these flights at Stanstead. So long live nimbys. He will lose his job and many others like him who give their all to this company.
I’m sorry to hear that, this sort of thing is always awful I guess. Unfortuately BAA aims to maximise their income at Stansted regardless of the airlines they are charging or the operating conditions and this is having an adverse effect on their traffic, both freighter and passenger.
rdc1000I think there is a better example than the Hudson River incident (bearing in mind whilst the plane was physically floating, the rear of the cabin was under a few feet of water, but overall once the landing was made safely the pax had quite some time to evacuate) and that is the Air France – Toronto incident, whilst not at the maximum permitted capacity for the aircraft type, the individual aircraft was full and all evacuated safely, old grannies and all 😀
I think this little article is interesting on it…
FEA – Life and death played out for real – almost
Flight International (22Aug08, 505 words)EXPERIENCE MAX KINGSLEY-JONES LONDON
LIFE AND DEATH PLAYED OUT FOR REAL – ALMOST
In the wake of the tragic 1985 British Airtours Boeing 737 accident at Manchester in which 55 people died following an engine fire on take-off, Cranfield University undertook a detailed study into aircraft evacuations on behalf of the UK Civil Aviation Authority.
The research effort in the late 1980s, led by Professor Helen Muir, saw a retired Hawker Siddeley Trident used for a series of evacuation trials with volunteers – including on one occasion, me. Most of the 60 participants for my trial were (poor) students who had been paid £10 ($20) to turn up, with the promise of a further £5 for each evacuation in which we were in the first 50% to escape – with the cash bonus handed over as soon as we had run down the ramps outside. For already competitive young people, this cash bonus was to prove as compelling an incentive to escape as life itself.
Wearing numbered vests for analysis purposes, we were allocated a different seat for each run to ensure that each participant had at least two chances to be within the first 30 people to get out and claim their £5 bonuses. The available escape exits were also varied to add to the realism.
Each time the evacuate command came the desperation to escape quickly was quite alarming as volunteers battled to be the first through the exits. On at least one of the runs I found myself being carried with the throng across the seats and crashing against a bulkhead. I then struggled to pull myself through the narrow passage way into galley area and out into the fresh air. Some around me were less fortunate, being crushed under seats or in the corners of the cabin between the sidewalls and the bulkheads, with no chance of that extra fiver.
Beating the odds
After two runs I was rather pleased to be £10 up – having probably beaten the odds on at least one of the evacuations – and found myself sat next to the over-wing exit for the next one. But as the evacuate command came and I turned to remove the hatch, I was faced with a marshal signalling through the window that this route was unavailable (as it would be if the fire was on that side of the aircraft). So instead of being first in line to safety I now had 40 people in front of me, and faced little chance of another £5. As I headed down to join the melee a whistle blew signalling that the trial had been aborted after people had became wedged in aisles and were being crushed.
While I am told that in trials where there was no financial incentive, volunteers were more co-operative and escaped in an orderly manner, sadly the fact is that the behaviour on my trial was a closer reflection of reality. That is why ever since, I’ve always worked out two alternative escape routes from my seat before every take-off.
Source: Flight International
rdc1000As I stated, “Could it ever”
You can’t. But improving the certification process would mean using GenPub
All we can hope for is that on the pax list there are enough sensible people that DID pay attention to the evac procedure, enough dinner ladies to shout and guide you (If you can’t see the floor lights) and then launch ppl out of the door feet first…..and a whole lot of luck.
re the Hudson incident, the crew of that must have done their duty exceedingly well. The pax walking out onto the wing were not in panick mode as far as I could see.
I think there is a better example than the Hudson River incident (bearing in mind whilst the plane was physically floating, the rear of the cabin was under a few feet of water, but overall once the landing was made safely the pax had quite some time to evacuate) and that is the Air France – Toronto incident, whilst not at the maximum permitted capacity for the aircraft type, the individual aircraft was full and all evacuated safely, old grannies and all 😀
rdc1000Just curious how you would propose to get people into a real-life “emergency” state of mind for a practice drill?
The same way they currently do, offer the first 50% out a financial incentive. Isn’t that what they do?
rdc1000This contract comes up for tenter every few years and they also look at LHR, LGW (Knowing they will not go to either),so they will probaly just stay at Stansted anyway.This is just paper talk !!
G-ANPK
I genuinely don’t think it is just paper talk. I’m not saying that they absolutely will go to MSE, but it is a rumour that we’ve been picking up through several very reliable sources for a while now.
rdc1000I’m also curious about how long it would take to mass evacuate a triple-decker during emergencies too. 🙂
Just think of how steep the top slides would be! It’s be like the Barclaycard Advert slide!!!
rdc1000I admit I saw this elsewhere, but my gut feeling was, if he spent less time complaining about being put in the co-pilot’s seat and more time getting on with the job he may just have worked it out! :rolleyes::confused:
rdc1000Of course, Ryanair have another “cheat” with the latter by sometimes cancelling flights that don’t make sense for them economically, whilst the legacy carriers tend to tough it out more when demand is low (another reason IMHO to stick with legacies).
Andy
I’m not sure where you count FlyBe on the legacy/LCC scale, but my friend who is a pilot for them says he (grudgingly) looses more hours on a Friday morning and Monday afternoon than any other times because if the loads are low then BE do this, and those are the two lowest demand periods. I know Deano flies for them too and may deny this, but I’m only passing on what I’ve been told.
rdc1000I’m very aware of the yield management and ancillary revenue (the whole essence of the low cost model), but the price you stated above (£330) proves the point, the model isn’t working in this economic climate because they now have to charge £330 return on higher yield seats. This seems over and above the usual Ryanair ticket pricing. I’ve never flown them, and I never will so long as I have a hole in my backside so maybe others can confirm what a “typical” return ticket set them back let’s say, a year ago?
Not at all, this has always been the policy of Ryanair, day before tickets have always been extremely high, I have the yield data sat on my laptop to show that (although obviously cannot use this, but it does inform my comments). When on work business with RYR these days they just provide us with the seats, but in the early days we paid and recharged back and it was regularly in excess of £250-£300 for a fare.
As B77W points out, if they can return the yields they need with their top end fares matching those of the legacy carriers (on their good days!), then it is a more efficient system than any of the other airlines if they can still charge 1p for a proportion of the tickets.
rdc1000Somehow those financial figures don’t strike me as ‘beating the recession’…
Well, Ryanair lost about €90m in the third quarter, but what you have to bear in mind about aviation is that a quartely loss of €90m is small fry, bearing in mind some airlines have in recent years been posting annual losses in the billions. So long as the year overall is good then a single or couple of quarterly losses is fine. By comparison, BA is forecasting a £150m loss for the year (whereas RYR should be profitable for the year overall), KLM/Air France lost €200m in the third quarter. In the third quarter, Delta Airlines (of the USA) lost $1.4billion, although $900m of this was to do with aqcuisition costs associated with its merger with Northwest. American Airlines had a fiscal year ending 31st Dec, so we know that in 2008 they lost a whopping $2.1billion….so overall you can see why Ryanair are very succesful in the current trading conditions.
That’s the flaw in their their business model unfortunately, it doesn’t matter if you have a full aeroplane if they only pay £0.01 for their flight.
Because their model is so streamlined and refined as soon as there is a downturn they have nowhere to go with it. Oh, and they did hedge their fuel at $128 per barrel. My heart bleeds for MOL
You must misunderstand their business model then because if you want to book from Manchester to Dublin (as an example) on Monday for a day return then it’ll set you back £330 (as of the search I just did) so you need to remember that Ryanair do yield manage, just like your airline does. The reason they sell 1p fares is to hit load factor targets and website hits, both to drive ancillary revenue.
rdc1000Actually, in fairness, the booking system would do that automatically…..although once is bad, twice is just bad luck haha. Anyway, you know yourself when you check-in online the system automatically selects seats and then you have to reselect, so I’m not sure this is really such a big deal, I think she’s just trying for free seats for life!
rdc1000I think that’s a little unfair Grey Area, not least because my partner, a Doctor, would medically back up the comment you deleted and it was a very true statement. But this is your playground not mine, so I have to accept it.
Sign In
