SkymonsterIts strange how KLM seem to value UK regional links where as BD/BMI do not. In the end money leaves the country and is spent in Holland, the UK and LHR looses out.
Huh? AMS have five runways (one built in recent times) to serve less traffic than LHR handles. LHR has two runways, and is slot constrained to the point where bmi (and/or Lufthansa) feels it can make more money using those slotes to serve other routes than it can serving LBA or MME. Maybe bmi would, if slots were not an issue, like to keep the routes, but unfortunately good business practice and UK aviation policy rather put an end to that opportunity. In any case, revenues have undoubtedly been diluted on these routes since the “glory” days (110 pax on a DC-9-30 and a full hot meal and drinks served on these routes – anyone else remember that?) as the trains have got better – MAN-LHR is also massively down for the same reason and it would not surprise me to see it’s link to London go the same way in the more distant future. To be honest, I have little sympathy for those moaning about the loss of the route – its just repeating what happened to EMA-LHR and BHX-LHR in the past, and as I said I would not be surprised to see it happen to MAN-LHR (or at least further significant reductions in frequency) in the future.
In any case, people SHOULD use the train – its less hassle, its more environmentally friendly, and if in the long run we can get rid of these short domestic services aviation can be seen to be doing something to counter the climate change lobby.
Andy
SkymonsterOn to the point, I think RYR have gone a bit too far with this latest free-publicity media gag. In the queue for both flights I overheard several people saying “Did you know they’re going to start charging for the toilet now?” , “My son/mum/friend flew Ryanair last week and had to pay for the toilet!”, “If they do start charging then that’s the final straw, I won’t be flying them again”
As I said before, it was his way of diverting people’s attention from the REAL issue he’s trying to implement:
I suspect its just the Irish harp-playing devil being himself… Interviewed about getting rid of check-in desks and baggage fees, he raises something even more contravertial. So what are people talking about now? Not the checkin desks and baggage charges, but paying to use the loos. And whilst everyone is getting outraged about the loos, the checkin desks and baggage fees – the REAL issue – just subsides into nothingness.
I’m feeling it hasn’t quite had the desired effect?
So all he now has to do is go on telly again in the not too distant future and say “We’ve decided not to charge to use the bogs” and the controversy goes away… But by then everyone has, as I said, forgotten that he’s going to do away with check-in desks and charge even more for checked bags.
I hate the man, I hate the airline, and I hate what they’ve done to the airline industry. But I have to admit he’s clever – cleverer than many of his passengers, and that’s the problem! Chalk another one up to the Irish harp-playing devil!
Andy
SkymonsterFlew in G-MEDN last week LHR-CAI – it was delivered after bmi bought out BMed and so was delivered from new in full bmi colours. Quite nice inside too – PTVs and selection of movies in all seats, J and Y class.
Andy
Skymonsterthere has got to be some ‘human rights’ issue attached to this
There is no legal requirement for there to be toilets on aeroplanes. Thus, hyman rights don’t come into it.
Andy
SkymonsterI quite like the Q400 – I’ve flown on a few, all Augsberg/Lufthansa. If you want a good view, I would go either for the very front, or towards the rear – the engines are quite large and restrict the view substantially, particularly on the ground. The forward cabin other than the very front is also a bit noisier, particularly in line with the prop disks (IIRC there is one row where there is no proper window view due to the props).
SkymonsterThe wireless and telegraphy act makes it illegal to use a radio/scanner to listen to air broadcasts in the UK unless in posession of a licence. However, in practical terms, this part of the law is overlooked here. It is often said that trouble for the listener would only be likely if the listener passed on any sensitive information – say to the media (and these days even that might not be so as it seems that transcripts of r/t conversations from incident flights are regularly exposed in public). I have an air radio licence associated with my pilot’s licence, but IIRC even with that I’m only meant to listen to air broadcasts in direct connection with my flying and not for other purposes.
As to the original question, listening to an audio stream over the internet (whether originating in the UK or abroad) is not going to be illegal. If anything (and this will be down to the law in the country the audio stream is coming from) the person streaming the audio could be in trouble – and that’s why some ATC audio streams have indeed been shut down.
Andy
SkymonsterOn reflection, I suspect its just the Irish harp-playing devil being himself… Interviewed about getting rid of check-in desks and baggage fees, he raises something even more contravertial. So what are people talking about now? Not the checkin desks and baggage charges, but paying to use the loos. And whilst everyone is getting outraged about the loos, the checkin desks and baggage fees – the REAL issue – just subsides into nothingness.
Problem the Irish devil has is that he risks people believing he’s going to charge to use the toilets. Sooner or later, people might actually start to understand what a nasty, penny-pinching, nickel-and-diming sort of airline Ryanair really is – that the supposedly “low” fare is only the first thing that they have to put their hand in their pocket/wallet for on Ryanair. Sooner or later, people might start to be put off by it. Come the glorious day…
Andy
SkymonsterAlready mentioned in the “Ryanair closing checkin desks” thread.
I saw the interview with the Irish-harp-playing-devil on BBC Breakfast news this morning and he didn’t particularly appear to be joking. Maybe he was? Trouble is, I would not put anything past him.
A
SkymonsterOh please wake up and smell the roses…they have an appalling safety record!!!
Yeah, I suppose you’re right – NOT!
Using that database, it appears that Turkish have had 13 accidents since the 1950s. But American Airlines have had 16, Northwest/Northwest Orient/Northwest Airlink 16, and United 21. I guess that means American, Northwest and United have an even worse safety record. If you want to interpret the figures that way, go ahead. Don’t fly at all – that’s the safest way. Don’t drive either – because if someone bumps into your car and you were totally not at faul, that’d be sure to chalk you up as have a bad driving record.
Andy
SkymonsterIt doesn’t matter how or why or what the circumstances are for an accident…the fact remains that this Airline has a very dubious safety record no matter how you look at it!!!
If you want to believe a newspaper hack when most industry experts are saying TK have a pretty good safety record, then I guess that’s your choice. I’ve flown with them recently, and I’d do so again any day. In any case, safety is a relative thing. Until it is known why the aircraft ended up in a field, then its totally inappropriate apportion blame directly to Turkish Airlines.
Andy
SkymonsterOn BBC Breakfast TV this morning, responding to criticism of the closure of check-in desks, the Irish harp-playing devil actually said that was considering charging passengers £1 to use the lavs on the aircraft!!! He siad that if they do it in public places like stations – which they do – then why not on aircraft? Anything to bring the fares down, apparently… Yeah right!
Andy
SkymonsterJOb losses?
Well, closing checkin desks saves the airline money in three main ways:
For the sake of this argument, I think it reasonable to assume Ryanair is interested in all three either directly or as a reductions in the amount they have to pay to a handling agent. Thus I think that job losses are ultimately inevitable if this goes ahead.
One other interesting fact to consider… Airports actually make the facilities available to handling agents like Serviceair, who pay for them. The handling agents then charge their airline customers in turn. Most airports take a share in revenues made by their tenants – including handling agents. Thus, if a handling agent makes less money (because it is doing less handling, a la Ryanair in the future), then the airport’s revenue share take declines. This means that Ryanair’s actions will not only reduce the activities (and staff levels) of their handling agents, but will reduce the amount of money the airport actually ultimately makes from Ryanair. Does anyone think that, if an airport makes less money from actually having Ryanair operate, then they may become less likely to offer Ryanair such strikingly low deals in future?
A
SkymonsterNot wanting to be defeatist, but ff the money isn’t forthcoming soon, I think its time to look at something like ferrying it to AMARG at Tucson in the USA, spraylatting it up, and putting it on “celebrity row” for a couple of years. Whilst the paint might fade a bit in the sunshine, at least there it won’t rot at quite the rate it would do outside here in the UK and I’m sure that some sort of deal could be done – maybe with the help of the MoD putting some pressure on the USAF – to securely store it there more cheaply than at Bruntingthorpe. Then, when the economty picks up in a year or two and if sponsorship can then be secured, go fetch it back – sure some restoration would be required, but again not as much as if it is left outside in UK weather.
A
SkymonsterI must admit, I’m a bit unsure where I stand on this one… which may come as a surprise to those on this forum who think I diss everything that Ryanair does! I can see the benefit… flight running later (oh, I forgot, Ryanair never run late, do they!) and you’ve got something important at destination – someone meeting you who isn’t in the terminal, a meeting to get to, etc – and a quick call will solve any problems (and one quick call won’t break the bank, even at 5p per second!). But as a regular long distance train user, I am certainly aware of how irritating someone shouting into their mobile can be – and its not the same as passengers sitting next to each other talking, because they typically talk at the minimum volume necessary whereas cell phone users tend to shout to the extent where they believe the person at the other end can hear.
I do actually question the viability of the service – if people are aware of the cost, I do wonder how many will use it for anything more than a few very short calls, particularly on such short flights. If it goes anything like Connexion (in-flight internet) did, it won’t last because people won’t pay the premium rates. Of course, I’d be willing to bet that if the idea fails it won’t have cost Ryanair anything – I suspect they’ll have got OnAir to pay for the kit on the aeroplanes and will just be taking a [significant] cut of any money made.
Andy
SkymonsterThink about the bigger picture. Ryanair isnt a struggling airline.
But they’re moving that way… They posted a significant loss for the last quarter, and whilst the Irish harp-playing devil can blow sunshine up people’s a**es about how things will improve, less and less people are believing him.
He has no choice but to continue to try to cut costs. The economy and the pound-euro exchange rate are having a huge impact on travel (mitigated to come extent by inward travel to the UK on the back of the favourable aspects of the exchange rate), but moving capacity to new routes that are less averse to exchange rate fluctuations is costly. Ryanair also has a huge aircraft delivery program that they can’t get out of – cheap acquisition locked Ryanair into deliveries whilst other carriers paying higher prices have more room to defer new aircraft, and the depression in the industry means that they can’t get rid of older aircraft as easily as they thought they could. Ryanair thus has a capacity problem based on further aircraft deliveries and declining demand, and can only try to further reduce its costs in order to maintain profitability (or stem losses). The problem comes when cost reductions bring about further declines in customer service standards – when that happens such policies can become a spiraling self-serving decent. Its coming to Ryanair – not total closure, but they need a very rapid upturn in the economy to maintain their position in the market, let alone grow further.
Andy
Sign In
