DALCE From Netherlands, joined Feb 2007, 1768 posts, RR: 7
Reply 2, posted (2 years 5 months 3 weeks 6 days 1 hour ago) and read 4429 times:
@KL911 I asume you also think that 9/11 was iniated by the Us governement and that the landing of the moon did take place in a Hollywood basement?
You are always defending FR to such an extend that you exactly reach the opposite than what you aim for.
Sure engine failures happen at every single airline, but saying that this was a diversion and not an emergency is simply a false statement.
What is also a fact, is that there seems to be an increase in 'issues' with FR at the moment.
Quoting shufflemoomin (Reply 2):
No need to become a fanboy about anything. Someone posted a simple informative fact about an incident that occurred and it just happened to involved Ryanair. No one mentioned negativity or picking on the airline until you did.
Okay - since there are only 3 replies in this thread (4 counting mine) - I must assume shufflemoomin is replying to rfields5421 - and I'm baffled. rfields... was complimenting the FR crew. What is shufflemoon reading?
Quoting DALCE (Reply 3): Sure engine failures happen at every single airline, but saying that this was a diversion and not an emergency is simply a false statement.
And now I'm extremely baffled.
Are there replies missing
Mods - did you removed some replies but miss replies that are referring to them?
Maybe somebody should contact support ... - oh....
shufflemoomin From Denmark, joined Jun 2010, 480 posts, RR: 2
Reply 8, posted (2 years 5 months 3 weeks 5 days 10 hours ago) and read 3644 times:
Quoting rcair1 (Reply 4): I must assume shufflemoomin is replying to rfields5421
Yeah, there was a trolling post about how people only post negative info about Ryanair and ignore all other airlines. All the other posts relating to it are gone but mine remains. I assume they missed it by accident. I've requested it be removed to avoid confusion.
According to Oxford dictionnary this is the definition of a diversion:
[mass noun] the action of turning something aside from its course: the diversion of resources from defence to civil research.
So it was a diversion due to an emergency which occured mid-flight. I believe when a flying aircraft loses one of its engines it is quite serious otherwise they would not feel the need to divert into Bergamo.
MD11Engineer From Germany, joined Oct 2003, 14365 posts, RR: 62
Reply 11, posted (2 years 5 months 3 weeks 5 days 2 hours ago) and read 3526 times:
An inflight shutdown is a reportable incident (it has to be reported to the relevant aviation authorities within IIRC 24 hours).
The QRH says for an inflight shutdown to land at the next suitable airport, which the pilots did. As obviously you don´t want to hang around in the air with only one working engine on a big jet, the crew declared an emergency to get priority assistance by ATC.
As I don´t know what caused the engine shutdown and how it manifested itself, there exists the possibility that the engine gave up it´s ghost with a loud bang and vibrations. In this case the crew, who could not in the air assess the possible damage, most likely treated it as serious damage and wanted to get back on the ground ASAP.
pelle From Denmark, joined Apr 2012, 65 posts, RR: 0
Reply 12, posted (2 years 5 months 3 weeks 4 days 2 hours ago) and read 3453 times:
Yes, some weird modding has been done in this thread. I'd also say that loosing an engine mid-air counts as a but more than a diversion, although diverting to BGY was part of the solution to this emergency.
I also want to make it clear that I did not post this because I have anything against Ryanair (because I don't), I would have posted this no matter which European airline was responsible for the flight.