stobart air.

FortySeven

Booked aer lingus to Edinburgh and noticed it was stobart franchising. When I got there last Thursday I was surprised to see they seem to be using 3 old aer Arran prop planes.

Anyway, we set off down the runway and just prior to rotate the seatbelt lights and alarms go mental and the pilot slammed on the anchors. Aborted takeoff. We sat on the plane for an engineer inspection until we were made disembark and go to another plane. Fair enough, better this than in the air with a problem.


Bit worried though when flying back we were delayed an hour, when I asked cabin crew why I was informed engineers had been on the plane in Dublin. These are old planes, seems to me stobart have been seen coming and are going to lose massively. Hopefully Not at too much expense or danger to passengers.

pepe the prawn

FortySeven wrote: »

Booked aer lingus to Edinburgh and noticed it was stobart franchising. When I got there last Thursday I was surprised to see they seem to be using 3 old aer Arran prop planes.

Anyway, we set off down the runway and just prior to rotate the seatbelt lights and alarms go mental and the pilot slammed on the anchors. Aborted takeoff. We sat on the plane for an engineer inspection until we were made disembark and go to another plane. Fair enough, better this than in the air with a problem.


Bit worried though when flying back we were delayed an hour, when I asked cabin crew why I was informed engineers had been on the plane in Dublin. These are old planes, seems to me stobart have been seen coming and are going to lose massively. Hopefully Not at too much expense or danger to passengers.

Where to begin...

Stobart operate a very modern fleet, some of which are less than one year old. They have a very small number of older aircraft (2 or 3) which are used on smaller demand routes from Dublin such as Kerry, Donegal, Doncaster and the Isle of Man. As for what happened that led to the rejected takeoff I don't know, but what I do know is that Stobart have a exemplary safety record and operate a great service which experiences minimal delays and very few unprecedented events. Those aircraft wouldn't be flying unless they were safe and passed for service. I'm sure they were not "seen coming", they have operated very well and expanded since their take over of Aer Arann.

Why would you assume they were old aircraft? After a quick look online, I can see that most of Stobart's fleet is less than three years old, with the remainder around one year old.

You must bear in mind that like anything with moving parts, sometimes faults occur with aircraft that must be remedied, the same as your watch, washing machine or car.

b757

FortySeven wrote: »

Booked aer lingus to Edinburgh and noticed it was stobart franchising. When I got there last Thursday I was surprised to see they seem to be using 3 old aer Arran prop planes.

Anyway, we set off down the runway and just prior to rotate the seatbelt lights and alarms go mental and the pilot slammed on the anchors. Aborted takeoff. We sat on the plane for an engineer inspection until we were made disembark and go to another plane. Fair enough, better this than in the air with a problem.


Bit worried though when flying back we were delayed an hour, when I asked cabin crew why I was informed engineers had been on the plane in Dublin. These are old planes, seems to me stobart have been seen coming and are going to lose massively. Hopefully Not at too much expense or danger to passengers.

Old?

2016-09-01 Dublin (DUB) Edinburgh (EDI) AT76 (EI-FAU) 06:40 IST 06:53 07:55 BST Landed 07:46
2016-09-01 Dublin (DUB) Edinburgh (EDI) AT76 (EI-FAT) 09:55 IST 10:26 11:10 BST Landed 11:21
2016-09-01 Dublin (DUB) Edinburgh (EDI) AT76 (EI-FAU) 13:10 IST 13:46 14:30 BST Landed 14:36
2016-09-01 Dublin (DUB) Edinburgh (EDI) AT76 (EI-FAV) 14:35 IST 14:54 15:50 BST Landed 15:48
2016-09-01 Dublin (DUB) Edinburgh (EDI) AT76 (EI-FAV) 18:00 IST 18:28 19:15 BST Landed 19:22

2016-09-01 Cork (ORK) Edinburgh (EDI) AT76 (EI-FNA) 07:00 IST 07:04 08:40 BST Landed 08:23

You were either on one of those flights, doesn't seem to be any delays. Plus, the oldest aircraft you were on was 3.2 years old.

Yes, delays occur. **** happens, just because you had a bad experience doesn't mean you have to scaremonger. Stobart has a very good safety record, things are bound to happen. Just be glad the engineers/pilots were competent and made sure you and the rest of your passengers were safe.

Peregrine

Thursday September 1st?

Could you post the flight number? We'd all like to look into this story a bit more.

FortySeven

My apologies. Aborted take off flight was Tuesday. EI3256 - Tue 30 Aug 2016.

It seems I may have assumed a bit about the planes, I flew aer arran plenty a long time ago and I assumed these were the same planes, I suppose they have been changed for newer, they certainly look and feel old and I don't mean due to design or being turboprop.

EI-FAU 1ST FLIGHT 15/07/2013 this was the original aircraft

30 Aug Dublin (DUB) Edinburgh (EDI) AT76 (EI-FAV) 0:52 2:35 PM 3:52 PM 3:50 PM Landed 4:44 PM

http://www.airfleets.net/ficheapp/plane-atr-1105.htm

First flight date 26/08/2013

VG31

FortySeven wrote: »

It seems I may have assumed a bit about the planes, I flew aer arran plenty a long time ago and I assumed these were the same planes, I suppose they have been changed for newer, they certainly look and feel old and I don't mean due to design or being turboprop.

I've been on Stobart twice in the last year and the aircraft have always felt very modern; more modern than most of EI's A320s.

L1011

Deleted User wrote: »

EI-FAU 1ST FLIGHT 15/07/2013 this was the original aircraft

30 Aug Dublin (DUB) Edinburgh (EDI) AT76 (EI-FAV) 0:52 2:35 PM 3:52 PM 3:50 PM Landed 4:44 PM

http://www.airfleets.net/ficheapp/plane-atr-1105.htm

First flight date 26/08/2013

And leased under stobart control at that - not being left with it like implied

FortySeven

I do stand corrected and now realise I have made an error of assumption.

My concerns appear to be unfounded, I accept that and thanks to those more knowledgeable than I for clearing this up.

Bloody scary it was, I seem to have overreacted. My bad.

sparrowcar

FortySeven wrote: »

I do stand corrected and now realise I have made an error of assumption.

My concerns appear to be unfounded, I accept that and thanks to those more knowledgeable than I for clearing this up.

Bloody scary it was, I seem to have overreacted. My bad.

A very mature and honest response. In your defence, many people here are passionate about aviation and we regularly see "daily mail" style posts which your original post sounded like a bit.

No harm done, let's all hug it out.

FortySeven

sparrowcar wrote: »

A very mature and honest response. In your defence, many people here are passionate about aviation and we regularly see "daily mail" style posts which your original post sounded like a bit.

No harm done, let's all hug it out.

I'm not sure what scares me more. Aborted takeoffs or hugging it out with a bunch of anoraks.

Are aborted take offs common? It seemed extreme and the amount of jeeps swarming around us after seemed concerning.

It didn't help that after landing in Dublin as we were taxiing back to terminal there was a fire engine beside us with the blues going. (Return flight, which was also delayed due to engineers inspection earlier)

The_Wanderer

FortySeven wrote: »

Booked aer lingus to Edinburgh and noticed it was stobart franchising. When I got there last Thursday I was surprised to see they seem to be using 3 old aer Arran prop planes.

Anyway, we set off down the runway and just prior to rotate the seatbelt lights and alarms go mental and the pilot slammed on the anchors. Aborted takeoff. We sat on the plane for an engineer inspection until we were made disembark and go to another plane. Fair enough, better this than in the air with a problem.


Bit worried though when flying back we were delayed an hour, when I asked cabin crew why I was informed engineers had been on the plane in Dublin. These are old planes, seems to me stobart have been seen coming and are going to lose massively. Hopefully Not at too much expense or danger to passengers.

It's a prop plane = it must be ancient! :eek::eek::mad:

colbarr

The_Wanderer wrote: »

It's a prop plane = it must be ancient! :eek::eek::mad:

Nice to see you read the whole thread before commenting on the OP!

Tenger

FortySeven wrote: »

I'm not sure what scares me more. Aborted takeoffs or hugging it out with a bunch of anoraks.

Are aborted take offs common? It seemed extreme and the amount of jeeps swarming around us after seemed concerning.

It didn't help that after landing in Dublin as we were taxiing back to terminal there was a fire engine beside us with the blues going. (Return flight, which was also delayed due to engineers inspection earlier)

Hugging anoraks can be interesing. Mature response OP.


Aborted take-offs are not very common, just to throw out a possible scenario. As they were building up speed an engine temp warning light may have come on, indicating something. Crew decided to abort based on that sensor indication. As they were taxiing back in the jeeps were 'swarming' as that temp warning could have been a faulty sensor, a slight issue with a part or an indication of the start of an engine fire.
Flight crew will always err on the side of caution. I have lost count years ago of the number of delays, cancellations and diversions which once investigated end up being the result of faulty sensor equipment rather than actual faulty essential equipment. But you cant disregard those 90% in case they are the other 10%.

As for the lights on landing, some spotters standing outside the perimeter get very excited when they see these following an aircraft in. Again 90% of the time its a precaution (or even a special event) rather than something ominous.

0lddog

I've not flown Stobart ( the last turboprop I flew in was a Viscount ) so I'm wondering if they name their planes in the same sort of style as they name their trucks ( "Jessica Elsie" , "Louisa Alice" etc. etc. ) ?

Growler!!!

0lddog wrote: »

I've not flown Stobart ( the last turboprop I flew in was a Viscount ) so I'm wondering if they name their planes in the same sort of style as they name their trucks ( "Jessica Elsie" , "Louisa Alice" etc. etc. ) ?

"He who pays the piper, calls the tune!"

Stobart aircraft have Irish saints names taken from the Aer Lingus list.

The vehicles in Southend Airport (owned by Stobart) have individual names like their road trucks.

PukkaStukka

The one occasion I flew on a Stobie resulted in a return to our departure airport with a landing gear issue. After we landed, I got to chat with the FO for a few minutes who said it probably wasn't much of an issue but they are duty bound to err on the side of caution, hence the landing. A replacement aircraft was sent out from Dublin and we were home with a delay of only 2 hours which was no mean feat. Delay apart, it was no big deal and I'm booked in to fly again with them next month. Their newest ATR's are nice aircraft and a welcome change to flying an FR 737 . (Not that there's anything wrong with FR either!!)

JCX BXC

Stobart do Shannon-EDI also.

People do generally have an awful fear of the small props (and small aircraft too a lot). I'd say its alot do with how much of the flight they "feel".

b757

Carnacalla wrote: »

Stobart do Shannon-EDI also.

People do generally have an awful fear of the small props (and small aircraft too a lot). I'd say its alot do with how much of the flight they "feel".

"When I got there last Thursday I was surprised to see they seem to be using 3 old aer Arran prop planes. "

When was the last time there was 3 Stobart ATRs in SNN. 😂

Growler!!!

b757 wrote: »

When was the last time there was 3 Stobart ATRs in SNN. 😂

The day after BYO fell over in high winds. Two operating and one grounded:D:D:D:D:D

The_Wanderer

colbarr wrote: »

Nice to see you read the whole thread before commenting on the OP!

It was more of a general comment on the fact how many times have we seen this sort of post before....and no doubt will again into the future.

oakshade

While we are on the subject of AerLingus regional and ATRs, how do they handle bad weather, turbulence etc when compared with an A320 or a 737?

I consciously avoid AL Regional because of the turboprop (nervous flyer during turbulence), are my fears unfounded?

Chris_5339762

Part of me quite likes the ATRs, they're so quick to board... taxiing feels quicker and they're just a different way to fly than the jets.

Only problem is they are more prone to diversions because they can't land in as much of a crosswind as the bigger jets.

BeardySi

Carnacalla wrote: »

Stobart do Shannon-EDI also.

People do generally have an awful fear of the small props (and small aircraft too a lot). I'd say its alot do with how much of the flight they "feel".

Aye, they tend to get battered about a bit more by winds as they're that much lighter than a bigger jet. Flying into Belfast City on a gusty day can be a pretty hair raising experience (Dash not ATR, but they're similarly sized). I can see why theres a greater perception of safety of bigger jets.

I'm just a sucker for props, turbo or otherwise - love anythign with a spinny bit on the front!

Brians Collection

Chris_5339762 wrote: »

Only problem is they are more prone to diversions because they can't land in as much of a crosswind as the bigger jets.

The ATR has similar crosswind limitations to 737's and A320-21.

Growler!!!

oakshade wrote: »

While we are on the subject of AerLingus regional and ATRs, how do they handle bad weather, turbulence etc when compared with an A320 or a 737?

I consciously avoid AL Regional because of the turboprop (nervous flyer during turbulence), are my fears unfounded?

Your fears are unfounded! They fly lower than jets but most bad weather is shown on radar and can be avoided.
They can be a bit more susceptible to turb on approach due to their lower speed but nothing untoward.

Chris_5339762 wrote: »

Part of me quite likes the ATRs, they're so quick to board... taxiing feels quicker and they're just a different way to fly than the jets.

Only problem is they are more prone to diversions because they can't land in as much of a crosswind as the bigger jets.

While they can't land in as high crosswinds as jets they have the added advantage of being able to use shorter runways.
For example I've often landed on the cross runway in Cork with a headwind while the jets have struggled on the main runway with its strong crosswind.

Brians Collection wrote: »

The ATR has similar crosswind limitations to 737's and A320-21.

Similar but lower all the same. 30kts for landing dry and 28kts for landing wet.

Brians Collection

[quote="Growler!!!;100992956

Similar but lower all the same. 30kts for landing dry and 28kts for landing wet.[/quote]

Those speeds may be specific to a company but are not the max demonstrated cross winds for the aircraft.

Growler!!!

Brians Collection wrote: »

Those speeds may be specific to a company but are not the max demonstrated cross winds for the aircraft.

They are specific to a company. The company to which this thread is about:D

Brians Collection

Growler!!! wrote: »

They are specific to a company. The company to which this thread is about:D

My bad 👠So in that case 35 kts dry runway and 28 kts wet .

Growler!!!

Growler!!! wrote: »

Similar but lower all the same. 30kts for landing dry and 28kts for landing wet.

As stated the above are for landing.

Brians Collection wrote: »

My bad 👠So in that case 35 kts dry runway and 28 kts wet .

Correct for take off.

Brians Collection

Growler!!! wrote: »

As stated the above are for landing.



Correct for take off.

No they are limiting speeds for both takeoff and landing.

Growler!!!

Brians Collection wrote: »

No they are limiting speeds for both takeoff and landing.

Interesting. Can you give me the date of publication of the OM-B that's stated in? In case I've an older version:)

Brians Collection

Growler!!! wrote: »

Interesting. Can you give me the date of publication of the OM-B that's stated in? In case I've an older version:)

I don't have the exact date of the latest omb but I heard it was updated this year .

Growler!!!

Brians Collection wrote: »

I don't have the exact date of the latest omb but I heard it was updated this year .

No update since the last issue I'm afraid. Confirmed from 2 sources.

exaisle

FWIW I flew EI3390 DUB-LBA on Stobart/Aer Lingus Regional on Thursday morning....blustery in Dublin but I'd have no complaints at all. The aircraft (EI-FCZ) seemed relatively new...and on checking I discovered that it's just over two years old.

The flight was thoroughly enjoyable....it had the occasional bit of turb, which i tend to enjoy anyhow :-) but nothing major, and the pilot made a super cross-wind landing in Leeds Bradford. Well done all...I'd have no hesitation in using the service again...

JCX BXC

Flew Stobart on the 5th of November NCL-DUB, no problems at all, but both the cabin crew seemed very unhappy (but were helpful), seemed to be like neither of them wanted to get up that morning! (Flight was a Saturday morning)