How would you react to this situation?

[Tortuga]

LiveLeak.com - Ryanair Flight 8347

Hard to know all the facts but I would definitely be annoyed, especially with the airline not supplying basics like bottled water on board or even cups.

 

[EJAir]

I would be very keen to know the reasoning behind keeping passengers on board even though they had to be aware the airport was closing. Did they think they would all just happily sleep on the plane, without food or water for themselves or their children? I find it astonishing that the person in charge would not consider the ramifications of what they were doing. Did they have a very good reason?

 

[dajop]

What's more appalling is that you expect this sort of thing at some tin pot airport miles from anywhere - but no - this happened at one of (if not the) busiest airport for Ryanair operations -STN.

I am sure it could happen on other airlines, but I don't know, so far I've drawn the line at Ryanair, easyjet yes, but Ryanair no.

 

[kpc]

I would never have to react to this situation as I would NEVER fly Ryanair, even if the flights were very cheap / free!

 

[Cossie]

I would never have to react to this situation as I would NEVER fly Ryanair, even if the flights were very cheap / free!

I have tried to fly ryanair once as it fitted my plans, Faro to Milan. 3 weeks out from the flight, they cancelled it. I had to then get up to Lisbon and fly via Madrid, just as there was French air traffic controllers industrial action. A flight that should have been less than 2 hours turned out to be a 15 1/2 hour trip all up.

I know you should "never say never," but if at all possible I'll never fly them.

I have some flights with easyjet in June, hope they turn out ok. Didn't want to fly them either, but Sardinia is a difficult place to get to.

Sorry off topic......

 

[smit0847]

Another reason I will never fly Ryanair.

 

[kiwitripper64]

I wonder what would have happened if someone conveniently "passed out" from dehydration, stress or hypoglycaemia and required medical attention. Would the crew call an ambulance. If not what would the response be from a passenger call? Once off the plane with a drink of water and fresh air they may well have a miraculous recovery.

 

[Alanslegal]

It would be very very very very annoying that's for sure, however I am sure there is "more" to it than just the video. I am going to guess that the plane was delayed, and after multiple pushing back of the delay, the airport became closed and then the passengers could no longer exit the aircraft. Logically the pax are going to say they were mislead and lied (about the timing of departure) especially if every departure estimate did not come to fruition.

The people on board would be fuming no doubt and 200 of them won't ever fly Ryanair again but the truth is, LCC are a booming business, passengers want BFOD and there will be 100x many more passengers who would fly them. Even after all the negative publicity that Ryanair gets, and no doubt all valid complaints, people still choose to fly them. I know I would, if it gets me from A to B at the best fare of the day, I will book onto them. They fly hundreds of flights daily and they have one poor performance. As a number's man, that's less than 1%. I can accept that level of risk.

 

[casanovawa]

I've flown them before, prefer EasyJet if i can as RyanAir are a bit tacky with advertising up everywhere and really do fly form some of the out-in-the-stix airports...

 

[CamDownUnder]

FYI Scoot don't provide cups either, if you want water you buy it, or you take your BYO bottle to a water fountain tap in the plane and fill it up. Oh, you didn't bring your own water bottle? Then you can buy a bottle of water from Scoot. I had to insist they bring me a cup so I could fill it with 'free' water from that tap, and they did so only begrudgingly after I insisted they take my request to the cabin supervisor.

 

[Jack_OC]

I'm no fan of Ryanair either, but it looks like this video has wildly misrepresented the situation. It has since been revealed that the fault actually lay with Swissport, not Ryanair. Swissport themselves have acknowledged that: http://www.thejournal.ie/ryanair-stansted-delayed-flight-1327985-Feb2014/

Since the problem lay with Swissport, this could have just as easily happened to people flying with any number of other airlines.

 

[RooFlyer]

I'm no fan of Ryanair either, but it looks like this video has wildly misrepresented the situation. It has since been revealed that the fault actually lay with Swissport, not Ryanair. Swissport themselves have acknowledged that: Company regrets that “extreme pressure” and no fueling delayed Ryanair flight

Since the problem lay with Swissport, this could have just as easily happened to people flying with any number of other airlines.

Looks to me that the original video exactly represented the situation. The pax were boarded a plane that wasn't re-fueled and then the fuel didn't come. Pax then held in a plane without food or water for almost 3 hours and it required the police to come to break into the terminal so they could get off.

I wouldn't care who some 'handling agent' ("Swissport") was - never heard of them. Ryanair was the plane I was on and Ryanair was the plane I was being held on. They would have had some water on board - but chose not to give any out. LCC or no, you can't mistreat pax like that.

It was ALWAYs Ryanair's responsibility to make sure the pax were allowed basic amenities and to have a 'backup plan' when the plane couldn't be refueled / couldn't depart (or gee, was that the first time a plane couldn't be refueled?). We are not talking about Ouagadougou - it was Stansted airport, London!

ps someone mentioned about some-one going 'ill' (to get the doors opened) - this had always been my personal back-up plan if trapped on a plane for many hours in Nth America during ice conditions (In think the record was 6 hours?). But now they have changed the law there to stop that sort of stuff.

 

[Jack_OC]

Looks to me that the original video exactly represented the situation. The pax were boarded a plane that wasn't re-fueled and then the fuel didn't come. Pax then held in a plane without food or water for almost 3 hours and it required the police to come to break into the terminal so they could get off.

I wouldn't care who some 'handling agent' ("Swissport") was - never heard of them. Ryanair was the plane I was on and Ryanair was the plane I was being held on. They would have had some water on board - but chose not to give any out. LCC or no, you can't mistreat pax like that.

It was ALWAYs Ryanair's responsibility to make sure the pax were allowed basic amenities and to have a 'backup plan' when the plane couldn't be refueled / couldn't depart (or gee, was that the first time a plane couldn't be refueled?). We are not talking about Ouagadougou - it was Stansted airport, London!

ps someone mentioned about some-one going 'ill' (to get the doors opened) - this had always been my personal back-up plan if trapped on a plane for many hours in Nth America during ice conditions (In think the record was 6 hours?). But now they have changed the law there to stop that sort of stuff.

I agree it would be disgraceful if they were not provided with water, but Ryanair issued a statement saying this claim was false. Ryanair also denied the claim that the air conditioning was not turned on, and denied the claim that passengers called the police. Ryanair said it was in fact the captain who called police (and that's how they eventually got off the plane), that the air con was turned on and that water was provided while they were on the plane, plus food vouchers to use in the terminal were handed out as they disembarked. That's why I said it looks like the video wildly misrepresented the situation.

With regard to Swissport, I'm surprised you haven't heard of them. It's a massive company. Have you heard of Servisair? Servisair is a subsidiary of Swissport.

 

[RooFlyer]

I agree it would be disgraceful if they were not provided with water, but Ryanair issued a statement saying this claim was false. Ryanair also denied the claim that the air conditioning was not turned on, and denied the claim that passengers called the police. Ryanair said it was in fact the captain who called police (and that's how they eventually got off the plane), that the air on was turned on and that water was provided while they were on the plane, plus food vouchers to use in the terminal were handed out as they disembarked. That's why I said it looks like the video wildly misrepresented the situation.

With regard to Swissport, I'm surpriseed you haven't heard of them. It's a massive company. Have you heard of Servisair? Servisair is a subsidiary of Swissport.

Not arguing the toss with you here - just reading the links supplied and giving an opinion.

No doubt a lot of he said / she said. Pax say the aircon was turned on and off several times. Airline says aircon was turned on. Probably a fact. But when? I didn't / can't see where the airline claims they did supply water. Pax say they called the police; Captain says he did. Both can be correct. But doesn't it strike you as strange that an airlines flight Captain, at one of the airline's major airports, has no other contacts / recourse to a closed airport than phoning the police? Presumably all the Ryanair ops people were tucked up in bed with their phones off?

The Swissport statement (in part):

Swissport staff were under extreme pressure dealing with an unprecedented level of flights and whilst we accept we should have unloaded the passengers sooner we simply had no one available to unload when contacted by the Captain.

Swissport regret any delay to passengers and to Ryanair. However, in extreme circumstances, our staff worked tirelessly to ensure that diverted flights were dealt with as soon as possible.

In other words, we were too busy managing diverted flights in very hectic circumstances and we sorta forgot about this flight.

OK, I can accept that in extremis, things get overlooked. But how could all Ryanair's ground people not notice that they had an aircraft full of people still parked at the gate before they turned off the lights and went home?

Never heard of Swissport. Have heard of Servisair, but couldn't tell anyone what their actual business was.

 

[Jack_OC]

But how could all Ryanair's ground people not notice that they had an aircraft full of people still parked at the gate before they turned off the lights and went home?

What Ryanair ground people? Like most airlines, they don't necessarily have any of their own ground staff at many airports, instead they rely on service providers such as Swissport to provide ground services in most airports they use.

You have acknowledged you don't know what Swissport do, but with all due respect, that is key to understanding the whole incident.

Obviously you can say that Ryanair is still responsible for the service providers they use, and that's clearly true. However, some of the best regarded airlines in the world use exactly the same service provider at many airports (e.g. Singapore Airlines). As such, you can't put this down to the "LCC" factor.

 

[Jack_OC]

PS: here is the link to the actual Ryanair statement:

https://www.ryanair.com/en/news/ryanair-s-statement-on-fr-8347-14th-february-2014

Either Ryanair's statement contains barefaced lies, or the video misrepresented the facts.

 

[RooFlyer]

Well, I guess that's the LCC model - outsource everything to contractors, and if the contractors cough up - too bad for those involved.

Yes, I had assumed without knowing that there was some actual Ryanair staff / management at the airport. But on the other hand - are you sure there isn't any ... not any at all? Do they let their contractors make all the operational and expenditure decisions for them (say with IRROPS) , without any presence at all? And is there no "in emergency, call xx_" ?

However, some of the best regarded airlines in the world use exactly the same service provider at many airports (e.g. Singapore Airlines). As such, you can't put this down to the "LCC" factor.

Certainly can! I bet if you go to any major airport that SQ flys into there is someone in the core organization SOMEWHERE that a Captain could call and say "cough is happening - the hired help have abandoned us ... HELP!!" Would SQ risk their reputation by off-loading all responsibility to act in a significant problem situation, or in a crisis, at one of their major airports, to a single contractor like Swissport? I would hope not.

 

[Jack_OC]

Well, I guess that's the LCC model - outsource everything to contractors, and if the contractors cough up - too bad for those involved.

As I said, most airlines outsource ground handling at at least some airports, and many use exactly the same service providers as Ryanair. Based on Ryanair's statement, their staff did what they could, and of course their statement also apologised to the people affected, so what's the basis for your claim that their attitude is "too bad for those involved"?

 

[RooFlyer]

I think we're getting a bit precious here about Ryanair. And in the bit you quoted, I'm obviously talking about LCCs, not Ryanair in particular.

And of course that's in the LCC model. "You don't pay much, we will get you from A to B, but if there's a problem (and shhhhh ... if the load factors aren't good enough), we'll put you on a flight of our choosing, at a time of our choosing and we won't go out of our way to help you out. You just have to suck it up until we sort it out the way we want. If that means getting stuck for hours - or days - then "too bad and have another look at our T&Cs." " (That said, I assume the EU regulations offer some thing by way of financial compensation, but it doesn't apply universally of course).

Its why I call Jetstar my airline of last resort. I will fly them if there is no other choice for the time I want to fly (maybe 2 or 4 flights out of 80 or 90 per year) and only for single point to point - no connections. They have stranded whole classes of school kids in Tasmania when they cancel flights and the next flight offered is in a couple of days! Tiger I would never travel on. Ryanair I would never travel on. I think there's something called Scoot, but with a name like that I've never been troubled to investigate it further.

But sure, they suit a lot of people. Good luck to 'em. Spend hours with one's knees up against your chin and pay for the oxygen you breath. And mainline carriers sometimes have woeful performances in delays/cancellations. But with all their many failings, I don't think QF, UA, SQ, AA, BA, LH, NZ etc would leave a plane full of pax parked at an airport gate after the terminal shuts down and leave then to their own devices.

Here is the ABC news:

We are getting reports that a Qantas 737, with 150 people on board spent the night parked on the apron at Sydney airport. A passenger told us that after they missed their departure time due to the curfew, they taxied back to the terminal, only to find that the airbridge people had left, and by the time the Captain could figure out what was happening, the terminal lights had gone out and everyone, including Swissport and Elvis had left the building. But we also understand Qantas has apologized to everyone, so that's all sorted then"

:mrgreen:


(ps I once did land at an airport where the terminal was shut. It was in northern Quebec, and our charter plane landed routinely at the airport - maybe the size of Rockhampton or Devonport, say - to find that no-one was there! They had 'forgotten' we were arriving (about 2 hours after the final scheduled flight)! Fortunately we had out own stairs, so we de-planed, walked around a bit, found a place in the fence we could climb over, got in our cars and drove off. Swissport? Who needs 'em?

'night. I'm happy to now vacate the thread to you Jack and hope that Ryanair gets you to where you want to go safely and on time.

 

[straitman]

As I said, most airlines outsource ground handling at at least some airports, and many use exactly the same service providers as Ryanair. Based on Ryanair's statement, their staff did what they could, and of course their statement also apologised to the people affected, so what's the basis for your claim that their attitude is "too bad for those involved"?

Jack3193,

I have to agree you that the immediate responsibility is with Swissport however ultimately Ryanair are Swissport's employer and as such it is up to their people to be monitoring the contractors actions. i.e. ultimately the buck stops with Ryanair as it was them that people had paid to travel with and so it is them who should be providing the oversight.