Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Hi there,
There is an issue with role permissions that is being worked on at the moment.
If you are having trouble with access or permissions on regional forums please post here to get access: https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058365403/you-do-not-have-permission-for-that#latest

Ryanair Diversion options

  • 15-06-2015 12:09pm
    #1
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,029 ✭✭✭


    FR2412 from Dublin to Memmingen diverted into Frankfurt Hahn yesterday evening due to heavy localised thunder showers. I'm curious as to why neither Stuttgart nor Munich could have been used, as they would both have been far better options for getting the passengers to the final destination. Is it perhaps the case the Ryanair can only divert into an airport which they normally operate out of?

    Also, the fact that it took 4.5 hours for the diversion buses to pull off after landing at Hahn probably deserves a thread in it's own right :pac:


Comments

  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 16,382 ✭✭✭✭greendom


    skallywag wrote: »
    FR2412 from Dublin to Memmingen diverted into Frankfurt Hahn yesterday evening due to heavy localised thunder showers. I'm curious as to why neither Stuttgart nor Munich could have been used, as they would both have been far better options for getting the passengers to the final destination. Is it perhaps the case the Ryanair can only divert into an airport which they normally operate out of?

    Also, the fact that it took 4.5 hours for the diversion buses to pull off after landing at Hahn probably deserves a thread in it's own right :pac:

    knowing Ryanair the choice was probably driven by cost implications


  • Moderators, Motoring & Transport Moderators Posts: 10,052 Mod ✭✭✭✭Tenger


    Diverting into an airport where you have no infrastructure in place is seen as more trouble than going further away but where you know you have ground/flight Ops in place.

    Bus delay could be down to none avail earlier or perhaps other airlines got in before them and booked the nearby operators. Airlines don't have buses on standby.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 72,192 ✭✭✭✭L1011


    greendom wrote: »
    knowing Ryanair the choice was probably driven by cost implications

    In the case of non-emergency diversions every airline will be driven by cost implications. If they had the fuel to get to multiple diversionary airports it makes more sense to use one where they have ground equipment, handling contracts, etc, etc.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 18,474 ✭✭✭✭JCX BXC


    skallywag wrote: »
    I'm curious as to why neither Stuttgart nor Munich could have been used, as they would both have been far better options for getting the passengers to the final destination.

    The fact that they fly to Memmingen and not Munich should answer that for you. And who's to say that the Final Destination isn't Memmingen for some?


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,029 ✭✭✭skallywag


    Carnacalla wrote: »
    And who's to say that the Final Destination isn't Memmingen for some?

    I'm not getting you there, of course Memmingen was the final destination for many on the plane, myself included?

    Edit : OK, I see now that you could actually mean the opposite to what I had interpreted depending on how one reads your sentence.


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 18,474 ✭✭✭✭JCX BXC


    I'm quite confused now.

    I misread your post actually, I thought you were saying that the final destination for people was Munich.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,029 ✭✭✭skallywag


    Carnacalla wrote: »
    I'm quite confused now.

    I misread your post actually, I thought you were saying that the final destination for people was Munich.

    Planned destination was Memmingen, and diverted to Frankfurt-Hahn. But, that said, it would always actually be the case that many on the same plane would indeed be heading for Munich, it's about an hour or so away by shuttle bus etc. Though I myself was in the other camp, i.e. those how would be heading towards the other direction, i.e. Southern Germany & Austria, etc.

    What is interesting though is that the same flight definitely does divert into Friedrichshafen on occasion, which no longer operates any Ryanair flights, e.g. there was a divert due to fog in January of this year.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 10,179 ✭✭✭✭fr336


    greendom wrote: »
    knowing Ryanair the choice was probably driven by cost implications

    Evil Ryanair have always provided me a fine service on a lovely plane with a nice smooth flight and views. Evil Ryanair have given me the opportunity to fly to many places I wouldn't have bothered with before, and those places I went to before far more. Bad Ryanair, should keep the commoners off the planes and let the monopolies continue! :rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes:


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 16,382 ✭✭✭✭greendom


    fr336 wrote: »
    Evil Ryanair have always provided me a fine service on a lovely plane with a nice smooth flight and views. Evil Ryanair have given me the opportunity to fly to many places I wouldn't have bothered with before, and those places I went to before far more. Bad Ryanair, should keep the commoners off the planes and let the monopolies continue! :rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes:

    Bit of an over the top reaction no? I think you're reading a lot more into that than I actually posted (bit of an over-use of the old roll eyes there too imo)


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 10,179 ✭✭✭✭fr336


    greendom wrote: »
    Bit of an over the top reaction no? I think you're reading a lot more into that than I actually posted (bit of an over-use of the old roll eyes there too imo)

    Probably, sorry. Wasn't personally. Just amuses / bemuses me just HOW MANY people follow a trend, in this case taking the p out of Ryanair. It's like, do I think to myself too much cos everybody around me seems to just follow stuff?


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 16,382 ✭✭✭✭greendom


    fr336 wrote: »
    Probably, sorry. Wasn't personally. Just amuses / bemuses me just HOW MANY people follow a trend, in this case taking the p out of Ryanair. It's like, do I think to myself too much cos everybody around me seems to just follow stuff?

    Yes I got the impression I touched a bit of a nerve.

    Ryanair deserve a lot of praise for what they have achieved. They are also big and bold enough to be able to take a bit of criticism from time to time.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,351 ✭✭✭basill


    Without the captain to explain their rationale its impossible to know why...But here are some factors to consider:-

    - planned alternates might not have been those listed and hence the crew wouldn't have had any fuel data, notams etc
    - wx at alternates might not have been favourable
    - pilots might not have been familiar with those airports
    - notams might have indicated that hahn was a better bet
    - Hahn could well have been the commercial alternate for FR
    - FR might have sent the crew an ACARS (if they have it) asking crew to go to Hahn in order to minimise delay.

    Just because those diversion airports you listed might be geographically closer to the original destination it doesn't necessarily mean that the delay will be minimal. Unless you understand the contracts that FR have in place for ground staff, security, bus companies etc then its impossible to second guess their approach here. There is no point landing somewhere and then having the pax stuck onboard for hours on end whilst arrangements are negotiated and then dumping people in a terminal when you take them to a base where there is a better chance of being looked after. And then leaving an aircraft which is out of petrol on the ramp whilst you try and organise a refill. Meanwhile the knock on effects to the entire network can be significant.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 527 ✭✭✭de biz


    Lets see how good you guys really are.....who can guess the designated alternates for Memmingen....in house exclude yourselves!

    Rgds Anita.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 10,817 ✭✭✭✭Jamie2k9


    Diverting into an airport where you have no infrastructure in place is seen as more trouble than going further away but where you know you have ground/flight Ops in place.

    Bus delay could be down to none avail earlier or perhaps other airlines got in before them and booked the nearby operators. Airlines don't have buses on standby.

    Fair point however airlines can and do have agreements in place for such purposes.
    In the case of non-emergency diversions every airline will be driven by cost implications. If they had the fuel to get to multiple diversionary airports it makes more sense to use one where they have ground equipment, handling contracts, etc, etc.

    Generally yes however if Ryanair want to improve customer service such decisions from the past have to change also. Diverting over 400km away is not acceptable unless there is no options available.
    Also, the fact that it took 4.5 hours for the diversion buses to pull off after landing at Hahn probably deserves a thread in it's own right

    And probably another 5 hours back down to southern Germany??

    I think I would rather pay the high train fares than such torture!

    While I never have, I would seek compensation under EU rules if possible. There is delays and then there is Ryanair who take it to another level.


Advertisement