Boards.ie uses cookies. By continuing to browse this site you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Click here to find out more x
Post Reply  
 
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
22-02-2007, 06:00   #1
Victor
Moderator
 
Victor's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Dublin
Posts: 64,159
[PR] Cullen concern over Ryanair landings

http://www.rte.ie/news/2007/0221/ryanair.html
Quote:
Cullen concern over Ryanair landings
Wednesday, 21 February 2007 16:56

The Minister for Transport, Martin Cullen, has confirmed that he asked the British Ministry of Transport for details of dangerous landing approaches made by Ryanair.

This relates to the issue of Ryanair pilots landing planes too fast at some English airports.

Launching an €86m grants scheme for regional Irish airports, the minister said he was also anxious to know if the same had happened in Ireland.

The minister said aircraft and passenger security is central to good practice in the aviation sector and he hoped a recent incident involving a Ryanair flight from Stansted to Cork was the exception rather than the rule.

He said he would only call for a formal investigation by the Irish Aviation Authority when he has all of the facts.

He said the IAA carried out 'regular audits of all airlines, including Ryanair'. Mr Cullen said that it was his understanding that to date, the IAA has been satisfied with the procedures that have been in place.

He added that he was anxious to find out if it was possible that what happened at British airports had happened in Ireland.

The British Air Line Pilots Association has claimed that the reported incidents are due to Ryanair's low-cost culture and fast turnaround times, but Ryanair Chief Executive Michael O'Leary blames 'jet jockeys' for attempting irregular manoeuvres.

He added that pilots would be demoted if they failed to follow safety procedures.

Last month, the Irish Air Accident Investigation Unit issued a report on a 'serious incident' involving a Ryanair plane attempting to land at Cork Airport in June last year.
Victor is offline  
Advertisement
22-02-2007, 09:08   #2
FlutterinBantam
Banned
 
FlutterinBantam's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Horsehead Nebula
Posts: 12,178
I would be very surprised if Mr O'leary does not take steps to ensure that any hint of these practices is put away for keeps.

There is no doubt that when the fleet consisted of the smaller 737-200s they seemed to adopt a much more "urgent" approach to landing and taxying ,not dangerous mind you, just seemed more urgent than the "sedate" approach speeds and taxying of other carriers.

Thats just from observation-no technical basis whatsoever.
FlutterinBantam is offline  
22-02-2007, 09:41   #3
Gurgle
Closed Account
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Posts: 5,016
Quote:
He said the IAA carried out 'regular audits of all airlines, including Ryanair'. Mr Cullen said that it was his understanding that to date, the IAA has been satisfied with the procedures that have been in place.
That should be good enough, why go ask the British Ministry what they think?

Quote:
The British Air Line Pilots Association has claimed that the reported incidents are due to Ryanair's low-cost culture and fast turnaround times, but Ryanair Chief Executive Michael O'Leary blames 'jet jockeys' for attempting irregular manoeuvres.

He added that pilots would be demoted if they failed to follow safety procedures.
Too bloody right.

Pilots are very highly trained and well paid employees. It is entirely their responsibility to get the plane down perfectly safely, every time, even if it interferes with the 20 minute turn-around target. Any pilot who prioritises on-time landings over passenger safety should be sacked & his license revoked, not demoted.
Gurgle is offline  
22-02-2007, 09:56   #4
kmick
Registered User
 
kmick's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 3,338
This is the same Martin Cullen who screwed up on E-voting. Its like as that minister from the UK said '...being savaged by a sheep'. I'd say Michael O'Leary is quaking in his boots.

If that idiot Cullen got up off his skinny bony buttcheeks and did something about road deaths he might be remembered for something more than being the most incompetent minister of the 1990's/2000's; and that is saying lot considering the field of halfwits who currently occupy the dail.
kmick is offline  
22-02-2007, 17:02   #5
PhoenixRising
Registered User
 
PhoenixRising's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Dublin
Posts: 789
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gurgle
That should be good enough, why go ask the British Ministry what they think?
In an ideal world that would be the case. Unfortunately, the fact is that the IAA are Ryanair's poodle. The IAA have explicitly failed to take any action against Ryanair despite mountains of AAIU incident reports and confidential reporting by pilots and pilot unions over safety concerns. They are utterly useless, and should the unthinkable happen, will be just as culpable as Ryanair for letting it happen. Never mind an audit of Ryanair, we need an audit of the IAA...
PhoenixRising is offline  
Advertisement
22-02-2007, 17:42   #6
Bards
Registered User
 
Bards's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Waterford City
Posts: 2,294
Quote:
Originally Posted by kmick
This is the same Martin Cullen who screwed up on E-voting. Its like as that minister from the UK said '...being savaged by a sheep'. I'd say Michael O'Leary is quaking in his boots.

If that idiot Cullen got up off his skinny bony buttcheeks and did something about road deaths he might be remembered for something more than being the most incompetent minister of the 1990's/2000's; and that is saying lot considering the field of halfwits who currently occupy the dail.
need I mention extra penalty point offences.. random breath checks... that in my book says he is doing something...

people giving out that it is no longer safe to drink and drive becuase you might get caught... some people are never happy...they want to be able to drink and drive but never get caught and then blame the Govt for road deaths

Michael Martin is worse than cullen... need I mention Dempsey...
Bards is offline  
22-02-2007, 22:52   #7
Metrobest
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Amsterdam
Posts: 1,041
Quote:
Originally Posted by kmick
This is the same Martin Cullen who screwed up on E-voting. Its like as that minister from the UK said '...being savaged by a sheep'. I'd say Michael O'Leary is quaking in his boots.

If that idiot Cullen got up off his skinny bony buttcheeks and did something about road deaths he might be remembered for something more than being the most incompetent minister of the 1990's/2000's; and that is saying lot considering the field of halfwits who currently occupy the dail.
Witness how the constant drip feed of negative stories about Martin Cullen produces ignorance and how he cops the blame for things that are not his fault.

Burnt your toast this morning? Blame Martin Cullen.

For your information, road deaths in Ireland are at their lowest level in decades, and this despite traffic volumes multiplying. That's quite an achievement, so if we're going to blame Cullen for things that aren't his fault, let's give him credit for successes on his watch.

Quote:
Electronic voting in Ireland
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


The Irish government had made plans to introduce nationwide electronic voting for the local and European Parliament elections in 2004. The proposed change was under the supervision of the current Minister for the Environment & Local Government, Martin Cullen, however the scheme was committed to under the previous minister, Noel Dempsey. The proposed system lacked any Voter Verified Paper Audit Trail, and after a campaign by Irish Citizens for Trustworthy EVoting (ICTE) and opposition parties in Dáil Éireann, the government set up the Commission on Electronic Voting (CEV), to examine the proposed system.

The Commission's report stated that it was unable to verify the accuracy and secrecy of the proposed system. Due to the report the government was forced to postpone the introduction of the electronic voting system. Since the system was not used, many members of the public feel that it was a waste of money.

The government has spent €52 million on electronic voting machines and spends €800,000 per annum to store the machines. They do not work reliably[1] and can be interfered with to affect the outcome of an election and the software proposed is inadequate for the task[2]. The prime issue is the lack of verifiability by the absence of an audit mechanism or paper trail. Bertie Ahern defended the flawed system and has said in the Dáil, that elections after 2007 should be done without stupid old pencils.

The voting machines bought by the Government from Dutch firm Nedap are in storage as the cabinet ponders what to do after the Commission on Electronic Voting said it could not recommend the system. Approximately €0.5m is expected to be spent improving the software. Ahern has defended the system despite public scepticism and opposition from within his own party[1] on the basis that having spent the money, it would cause loss of national pride if the system were scrapped.

In October 2006, a group of Dutch hackers, including Rop Gonggrijp, showed how similar machines to the ones purchased in Ireland could be easily modified.[2] [3] This is contentious as in the Netherlands, 10% of voting machines are to be abandoned in the November 2006 Dutch elections and the Dutch Government is is to reintroduce paper ballots in those locations and to review the system in the other 90% of cases after the elections in November 2006.[4]
Note that the scheme was the brainchild of Noel Dempsey, but Dempsey emerged scott free from the whole thing.

The machines deemed unsafe were used in the 2002 elections in Ireland in three constituencies and produced a result nobody doubted.

E-Voting operates successfully in many of the world's most advanced countries and nobody doubts the validity of their election results, yet in Ireland a shrill and parochial motley crew of media commentators, point-scorin' politicians and "concerned citizens" joined forces to kill off E-Voting. And then they had the nerve to shift the blame onto Martin Cullen.
Metrobest is offline  
22-02-2007, 23:46   #8
Zoney
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Limerick
Posts: 1,568
Quote:
Originally Posted by Metrobest
E-Voting operates successfully in many of the world's most advanced countries and nobody doubts the validity of their election results, yet in Ireland a shrill and parochial motley crew of media commentators, point-scorin' politicians and "concerned citizens" joined forces to kill off E-Voting. And then they had the nerve to shift the blame onto Martin Cullen.
Yes, but also anyone who knew anything much about computer systems. As for other countries, it is well known that several systems used in other countries are as full of holes as Swiss cheese. Managing security in computer systems is a heck of a more complicated job than having secure paper ballot boxes and counting. Not to mention that you need to treat the physical systems with the same security (as ballot boxes) and even more as well (indeed without countermeasures, you can for example detect the RF output from these machines and detect remotely who someone is voting for).

I can assure you as a computer expert, e-voting is not something that our politicians are competent enough to implement. Also, those they might consult would be salespeople selling systems, not competent impartial experts. I just about trust the politicians with managing traditional elections (although haven't they managed to run out of booths somehow!)

Apologies for going OT - but part of the problem with the govt. getting away with nonsense is people not being well enough informed. We are very fortunate indeed that we escaped the Irish version of e-voting by the skin of our teeth. Nobody should be doubting this, and we are not out of danger yet. It is one of the current threats to democracy in Ireland.
Zoney is offline  
23-02-2007, 02:27   #9
secret_squirrel
Registered User
 
secret_squirrel's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: A Nuclear Submarine off the coast of Sweden
Posts: 3,313
Quote:
Originally Posted by Metrobest
E-Voting operates successfully in many of the world's most advanced countries and nobody doubts the validity of their election results, yet in Ireland a shrill and parochial motley crew of media commentators, point-scorin' politicians and "concerned citizens" joined forces to kill off E-Voting. And then they had the nerve to shift the blame onto Martin Cullen.
Really? Name the countries. 2 of the heaviest users of E-voting are the US and the Netherlands, and both Nedap (N) and Diebold (US) machines have been proved both to be easily hackable, bug ridden, and unable to match the selected candidate to the actual candidate.

The only good e-voting story I have heard of is from Australia who use an open source, easily verifiable system. The fact is whilst E-voting software remains unaudited and uncheckable, the potential for corruption or even bugs outweights any potential usefulness the systems may have.


Quote:
Originally Posted by gurgle
Pilots are very highly trained and well paid employees. It is entirely their responsibility to get the plane down perfectly safely, every time, even if it interferes with the 20 minute turn-around target. Any pilot who prioritises on-time landings over passenger safety should be sacked & his license revoked, not demoted.
Rubbish!
Pilots are just doing a job the same as the rest of us.

And what about the people who put pressure on the pilots?

Last edited by secret_squirrel; 23-02-2007 at 02:32.
secret_squirrel is offline  
Advertisement
23-02-2007, 04:31   #10
Metrobest
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Amsterdam
Posts: 1,041
Quote:
Originally Posted by secret_squirrel
Really? Name the countries. 2 of the heaviest users of E-voting are the US and the Netherlands, and both Nedap (N) and Diebold (US) machines have been proved both to be easily hackable, bug ridden, and unable to match the selected candidate to the actual candidate.

The only good e-voting story I have heard of is from Australia who use an open source, easily verifiable system. The fact is whilst E-voting software remains unaudited and uncheckable, the potential for corruption or even bugs outweights any potential usefulness the systems may have.?
Hmmm.. let's see.. taken from wikipedia..http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/E_voting#Belgium

Quote:
Electronic voting examples

[edit] Australia
In October of 2001 electronic voting was used for the first time in an Australian parliamentary election. In that election, 16,559 voters (8.3% of all votes counted) cast their votes electronically at polling stations in four places. [10] The Victorian State Government introduced electronic voting on a trial basis for the 2006 State election. [11]


[edit] Belgium
Electronic voting in Belgium started in 1991. It is widely used in Belgium for general and municipal elections and has been since 1999.


[edit] Brazil
Electronic voting in Brazil was introduced in 1996, when the first tests were carried in the state of Santa Catarina, Brazil. Since 2000, all Brazilian elections have been fully electronic. By the 2000 and 2002 elections more than 400 thousand electronic voting machines were used nationwide in Brazil and the results were tallied electronically within minutes after the polls closed.[10] Joao Abud Jr. who was with the original Brazilian company and has served as president of Diebold Procom Industria Electronica since April 2003, has been promoted to vice president of the company's Latin American Division.


[edit] Canada
Electronic voting in Canada has been used since at least the 1990s at the municipal level in many cities, and there are increasing efforts in a few areas to introduce it at a provincial level.

In the Canadian Province of Ontario, from November 5 to November 10 2003, 12 municipalities from the Prescott Russell and Stormont Dundas & Glengarry Counties held the first full municipal and school board electronic elections in North America using either the Internet or the phone but no paper ballots.[10]

Peterborough, Ontario will use Internet voting in 2006 in addition to the paper ballots.[12]


[edit] Estonia
Electronic voting in Estonia began in October 2005 local elections when Estonia became the first country to have legally binding general elections using the Internet as one means of casting the vote and was declared a success by the Estonian election officials.

In the 2007 elections of the Riigikogu (the parliament of Estonia) electronic voting is done during the time of the advance polls: February 26th to February 28th.[13]


[edit] EU CyberVote Project
In September 2000, the European Commission launched the CyberVote project with the aim of demonstrating "fully verifiable on-line elections guaranteeing absolute privacy of the votes and using fixed and mobile Internet terminals".[10]

Trials were performed in Sweden, France, and Germany.[14]


[edit] France
Elections in France utilized remote Internet voting for the first time in 2003 when French citizens living in the United States elected their representatives to the Assembly of the French Citizens Abroad. Over 60% of voters chose to vote using the Internet rather than paper. The Forum des droits sur l'Internet (Internet rights forum), published a recommendation on the future of electronic voting in France, stating that French citizens abroad should be able to use Internet voting for Assembly of the French Citizens Abroad elections.[15]


[edit] Germany
In Germany the only accredited voting machines for national elections are the ESD1 and ESD2 from the dutch company Nedap. About 2000 of them have been used in the 2005 Bundestag elections covering approximately 2 million voters.[16] These machines differ only in certain details due to different voting systems from the ES3B hacked by a dutch citizen group and the CCC on 5. October 2006.[17][18] Because of this, additional security measures have been applied in the municipality elections on 22. October 2006 in Cottbus, like reading the software from the EPROM to compare it with the original and sealing the machines afterwards.[19] The city Cottbus later decided not to buy Nedap voting computers.[20]

At the moment there are several lawsuits in court against the use of electronic voting machines in Germany.[21][22] One of these reached the Federal Constitutional Court of Germany in February 2007.[23] The plaintiffs are missing the transparency if the voting computers store the votes as intended by the voter and the possibility of a recount because the certified Nedap machines are DRE systems without a paper trail.

In the 2008 state elections of Hamburg an optical scan voting system based on digital paper will be used.[24][25]


[edit] India
Electronic voting in India was first introduced in 1989 and used on experimental basis. In 2003, all state elections and by-elections were held using EVMs.[10]


[edit] Ireland
Ireland bought voting computers from the dutch company Nedap for about 50 million euro. The machines were used on a 'pilot' basis in some constituencies in two elections in 2002. Due to campaigning by ICTE, Joe McCarthy, and the work of the Commission on Electronic Voting, the machines have not been used since, and their future is uncertain. [26]

See also Electronic voting in Ireland


[edit] Italy
Italy experimented in the 2006 elections with electronic voting machines from Nedap in Cremona Municipality. 4 machines were used by 3000 electors. The pilot had good results and Cremona Municipality asked for a change in the law in order to use Nedap machines. During the same elections (April 2006) the Ministry of New Technologies in cooperation with two big american companies organized a pilot only concerning e-counting. The experiment involved four regions and it cost 34 million of euro. Negative comments from the general public about the uselessness and the high costs of the pilot drove the italian government to suspend any experiments concerning e-counting for the upcoming years. [27]


[edit] Netherlands
Since the late nineties, voting machines are used extensively during elections. Most areas in the Netherlands use electronic voting in polling places. The most widely used voting machines are produced by the company Nedap.[28] In the parliamentary elections of 2006, 21,000 persons will be using the RIES Internet voting system to cast their vote.

On 5. October 2006 the group "Wij vertrouwen stemcomputers niet" ("We do not trust voting machines") demonstrated on dutch television how the Nedap ES3B machines could be manipulated in 5 minutes. The exchange of the software would not be recognisable by voters or election officials. [29] [30]

Apparently there was a case of an election official misinforming voters of when their vote is recorded and later recording it himself during municipality elections in Landerd, Netherlands in 2006. A candidate was also an election official and got the unusual amount of 181 votes in the polling place where he was working. In the other three polling places together he got 11 votes. [31] Only circumstantial evidence could be found because the voting machine was a direct-recording electronic voting machine, in a poll by a local newspaper the results were totally different. The case is still under prosecution.[32]

Van Eck phreaking might also compromise the secrecy of the votes in an election using electronic voting. This made the dutch government ban the use of computer voting machines manufactured by SDU in the 2006 national elections, fearing that secret ballots may not be kept secret. [33]

See also: Dutch general election, 2006: Voting machine controversy

[edit] Norway
The Ministry of Local Government and Regional Development of Norway carried out pilots in three municipalities at local elections in 2003 on voting machines in the polling stations using touch screens.[10]


[edit] Romania
Romania first implemented electronic voting systems in 2003[34], on a limited basis, to extend voting capabilities to soldiers and others serving in Iraq, and other theaters of war. Despite the publicly stated goal of fighting corruption, the equipment was procured and deployed in less than 30 days[35] after the government edict passed.


[edit] Switzerland
Several cantons (Geneva, Neuchâtel and Zürich) have developed Internet voting test projects to allow citizens to vote via the Internet [3] or by SMS.


[edit] United Kingdom

[edit] England
Voting pilots have taken place in May 2006, June 2004, May 2003, May 2002, and May 2000.


[edit] Scotland
Scanners supplied by DRS Data Services Limited of Milton Keynes, in partnership with Electoral Reform Services, the trading arm of the Electoral Reform Society, will be used to electronically count paper ballots in the Scottish Parliament general election and Scottish council elections in 2007.[36][37]
The simple fact of the matter is that electronic voting is no more or less safe then paper voting - both systems could be tampered with if the correct procedures were not in place.

The biggest mystery is the Green Party's attitude to all this - think of all the trees that E-Voting would save from destruction!
Metrobest is offline  
23-02-2007, 08:11   #11
Calina
Registered User
 
Calina's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: at the end of a lens
Posts: 5,560
I'm sorry. I realise I'm very busy lately and quite tired but can someone drag this thread back on topic which I thought was uhem....something to do with landings of aircraft and not electronic voting or a Martin Cullen witch-hunt? Electronic voting belongs in politics.

*****

I have absolutely no doubt that Ryanair's paperwork will be perfectly in order as it relates to questionable landings and approaches and in practice, very often, that is what regulatory authorities look at. That being said, if you have a couple of incidents of questionable landings - which it appears that there might be, then occasionally, it might be worth looking at the culture within a company as well.

Ryanair is a big airline. It spans a lot of Europe. To be honest, I think it would be no harm to have a European-level aviation authority which might be better placed to spot trends on a Europe level. I'd imagine that the number of Ryanair landings in Ireland is a miniscule subsection of the total number of Ryanair landings.
Calina is online now  
23-02-2007, 17:14   #12
Gurgle
Closed Account
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Posts: 5,016
Quote:
Originally Posted by secret_squirrel
Rubbish!
Pilots are just doing a job the same as the rest of us.

And what about the people who put pressure on the pilots?
Their job is to take off, fly and land aeroplanes safely and intact every time.

Their targets may include 20 minute turn-arounds. Even if their christmas bonus depends on this, it doesn't override their job description.
Gurgle is offline  
24-02-2007, 00:31   #13
jackofalltrades
Registered User
 
jackofalltrades's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Ireland
Posts: 694
Quote:
Pilots are very highly trained and well paid employees
I don't know about the well paid bit, certainly not compared to the level of debt they would have.


Quote:
Their targets may include 20 minute turn-arounds. Even if their christmas bonus depends on this, it doesn't override their job description.
I doubt you'd last long at Ryanair espically in terms of ever getting promoted if you didn't make, or at least get near to their tight turn around times.

MOL and his management team need to stop bullying the pilots and try a more realistic turn-around time instead.
jackofalltrades is offline  
24-02-2007, 11:03   #14
Gurgle
Closed Account
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Posts: 5,016
Quote:
Originally Posted by jackofalltrades
I don't know about the well paid bit, certainly not compared to the level of debt they would have.
You've lost me.
Why are pilots further in debt than the rest of us, despite their higher salaries?

Quote:
Originally Posted by jackofalltrades
MOL and his management team need to stop bullying the pilots and try a more realistic turn-around time instead.
Maybe he should circulate a memo stating that anyone failing to follow safety procedures will be demoted.

That should clarify the point.
Gurgle is offline  
24-02-2007, 13:41   #15
Calina
Registered User
 
Calina's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: at the end of a lens
Posts: 5,560
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gurgle
You've lost me.
Why are pilots further in debt than the rest of us, despite their higher salaries?
I suspect it depends on who paid the cost of their flight training which is not always the airline.
Calina is online now  
Post Reply

Quick Reply
Message:
Remove Text Formatting
Bold
Italic
Underline

Insert Image
Wrap [QUOTE] tags around selected text
 
Decrease Size
Increase Size
Please sign up or log in to join the discussion

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search



Share Tweet