Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Ryanair Pax To Sue For Emergency Descent!  
User currently offlineLeej From United Kingdom, joined Apr 2001, 293 posts, RR: 0
Posted (5 months 3 weeks 5 days 9 hours ago) and read 7852 times:

Make of it what you will
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-26756468
I guess we have gotten to the times where people forget the 'risks' involved in flying. Whatever next? Forget the plunge, we'll just die of hypoxia......

29 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlineflyingturtle From Switzerland, joined Oct 2011, 2404 posts, RR: 13
Reply 1, posted (5 months 3 weeks 5 days 9 hours ago) and read 7692 times:

"The plane was just north of Lugano, Switzerland, when oxygen masks were released and the crew started the emergency descent of about four miles in five minutes.

...

It levelled out at 10,000 feet before being diverted to Frankfurt, from where passengers were flown to the UK on a different flight. "

Flying at 10'000 ft north of Lugano, and further to Frankfort on that level? I would pay Ryanair even more for this gorgeous scenery flight... but these pax...  


David

[Edited 2014-03-27 03:03:28]


Keeping calm is terrorism against those who want to live in fear.
User currently offlineStTim From UK - England, joined Aug 2013, 767 posts, RR: 0
Reply 2, posted (5 months 3 weeks 5 days 9 hours ago) and read 7633 times:

I really hope they lose. As far as I see the flight crew followed internationally accepted procedures for a loss of cabin pressure. Yes it must have been unnerving but they are all safe.

It would seem that we in the UK are heading down the same litigious route that there is in the US.


User currently offlinegabo787 From United Kingdom, joined Sep 2006, 157 posts, RR: 0
Reply 3, posted (5 months 3 weeks 5 days 8 hours ago) and read 7516 times:

This is absolutely ridiculous, I also hope they loose and have to pay the cost of the proceedings as well.
Next time take the bus.


User currently offlineeuropean742 From United Kingdom, joined Apr 2010, 112 posts, RR: 0
Reply 4, posted (5 months 3 weeks 5 days 8 hours ago) and read 7501 times:

This is just stupid! I guess they would have preferred if they kept the plane up and everyone died!

I remember another Ryanair aircraft suffering a loss of cabin pressure, passengers comments after were:

When the masks came down there was no announcement on what to do
Some of our masks did not work

1 - Yes there was, it's called the safety demo, if you had listened you would have known what to do
2 - did you pull down on the mask before placing it over your nose and mouth? probably not because again you didn't pay any attention.

And now this, an emergency happened and rather than just being grateful for being alive and applauding the flight deck crew for getting them down safely, all they can see is £££ in their eyes.


User currently offlinePhilBy From France, joined Aug 2013, 649 posts, RR: 1
Reply 5, posted (5 months 3 weeks 5 days 2 hours ago) and read 7313 times:

Generally, in the UK people can only sue for actual loss. If they suffered no financial loss they have no case. If they are claiming negligence or lack of safety they can make a case to the Health and Safety Executive or perhaps CAA (does this still exist as part of EASA) who can give the airline a fine (not a penny of which goes to the PAX).
In the UK we don't normally have punitive damages, just actual damages plus fines.


User currently offlineaerdingus From Ireland, joined Dec 2006, 2835 posts, RR: 15
Reply 6, posted (5 months 3 weeks 5 days 1 hour ago) and read 7063 times:

Quoting european742 (Reply 4):
1 - Yes there was, it's called the safety demo, if you had listened you would have known what to do
2 - did you pull down on the mask before placing it over your nose and mouth? probably not because again you didn't pay any attention.

Thank you!!!

Seriously I hope this court case is a joke....



Cabin crew blog http://dolefuldolegirl.blogspot.ie/
User currently offlineMir From United States of America, joined Jan 2004, 21630 posts, RR: 55
Reply 7, posted (5 months 3 weeks 5 days 1 hour ago) and read 6905 times:

Quoting flyingturtle (Reply 1):
"The plane was just north of Lugano, Switzerland, when oxygen masks were released and the crew started the emergency descent of about four miles in five minutes.

...

It levelled out at 10,000 feet before being diverted to Frankfurt, from where passengers were flown to the UK on a different flight. "

So they had a pressurization issue over southern Switzerland and flew on all the way to Frankfurt? Passing up Zurich, Stuttgart, and Karlsruhe? That's a bit puzzling.

-Mir



7 billion, one nation, imagination...it's a beautiful day
User currently offlineeicvd From Ireland, joined Mar 2008, 2163 posts, RR: 4
Reply 8, posted (5 months 3 weeks 5 days 1 hour ago) and read 6812 times:

Quoting Mir (Reply 7):

Not really, with a base at Frankfurt Hahn they would of had an aircraft available & probably have a mechanic on hand too.


User currently offlinerutankrd From United Kingdom, joined Sep 2003, 2995 posts, RR: 7
Reply 9, posted (5 months 3 weeks 5 days 1 hour ago) and read 6802 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting Mir (Reply 7):
So they had a pressurization issue over southern Switzerland and flew on all the way to Frankfurt? Passing up Zurich, Stuttgart, and Karlsruhe? That's a bit puzzling.

Was it Frankfurt or Hahn through?

Hahn is a Ryanair base


User currently offlineart From United Kingdom, joined Feb 2005, 3382 posts, RR: 1
Reply 10, posted (5 months 3 weeks 5 days ago) and read 6722 times:

I also hope they lose. The crew did what was required after depressurisation.

From the BBC webpage:

Quote:
Patricia Bertin, a PHD student at Loughborough University, in Leicestershire, was travelling with her husband and two children.

The Brazilian national said the effects of the ordeal were "devastating" and she now finds it difficult to fly.

"It's been two years now since the accident and it just changed my life completely," Mrs Bertin said.

Unfortunate consequences indeed. However if a problem arose during the flight and was countered correctly, the carrier is not liable IMO.


User currently offlineMD11Engineer From Germany, joined Oct 2003, 14026 posts, RR: 62
Reply 11, posted (5 months 3 weeks 5 days ago) and read 6606 times:

Quoting aerdingus (Reply 6):
Quoting european742 (Reply 4):
1 - Yes there was, it's called the safety demo, if you had listened you would have known what to do
2 - did you pull down on the mask before placing it over your nose and mouth? probably not because again you didn't pay any attention.

Thank you!!!

Seriously I hope this court case is a joke....

I think it would be quite difficult for the cabin crew to make an announcement while wearing their own masks.

Quoting rutankrd (Reply 9):
Was it Frankfurt or Hahn through?

Hahn is a Ryanair base

It went to HHN.


User currently offlineaerdingus From Ireland, joined Dec 2006, 2835 posts, RR: 15
Reply 12, posted (5 months 3 weeks 4 days 23 hours ago) and read 6465 times:

Quoting MD11Engineer (Reply 11):
I think it would be quite difficult for the cabin crew to make an announcement while wearing their own masks.

It is difficult to hear but has to be done. In our recurrent training the pilot simulates warning us of an emergency descent through the P.A. while wearing his quick don 02. All we can do is shout to the pax to put their mask on, sit down & strap in. When we get to a safe altitude no smoking P.A's etc are done normally.



Cabin crew blog http://dolefuldolegirl.blogspot.ie/
User currently offlineMir From United States of America, joined Jan 2004, 21630 posts, RR: 55
Reply 13, posted (5 months 3 weeks 4 days 23 hours ago) and read 6358 times:

Quoting eicvd (Reply 8):
Not really, with a base at Frankfurt Hahn they would of had an aircraft available & probably have a mechanic on hand too.

They could have found a mechanic at any of the airports I mentioned (especially ZRH with SR Technic there). And they could have flown in another aircraft to pick up the passengers as well. Who's to say that the source of the pressurization issue wasn't something structural that you wouldn't want to keep flying with?

-Mir



7 billion, one nation, imagination...it's a beautiful day
User currently offlineart From United Kingdom, joined Feb 2005, 3382 posts, RR: 1
Reply 14, posted (5 months 3 weeks 4 days 23 hours ago) and read 6246 times:

Quoting Mir (Reply 13):
Who's to say that the source of the pressurization issue wasn't something structural that you wouldn't want to keep flying with?

How often has structural failure been the cause of depressurisation (I'm not talking about sudden, catastrophic failures)?


User currently onlineEagleboy From Niue, joined Dec 2009, 1834 posts, RR: 2
Reply 15, posted (5 months 3 weeks 4 days 20 hours ago) and read 5932 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting art (Reply 10):
From the BBC webpage:

Quote:
The Brazilian national said the effects of the ordeal were "devastating" and she now finds it difficult to fly.

"It's been two years now since the accident and it just changed my life completely," Mrs Bertin said.

Unfortunate consequences indeed. However if a problem arose during the flight and was countered correctly, the carrier is not liable IMO.

Would have "changed her life" a lot more if the crew had not initiated the emergency descent. At least she is still here 2 years later able to complain. I would like clarity on "difficult to fly"..so is she is now a nervous pax? Like so many others......
Throw this case out of court.


User currently offlineUSAirALB From United States of America, joined Sep 2007, 3079 posts, RR: 2
Reply 16, posted (5 months 3 weeks 4 days 19 hours ago) and read 5753 times:

I thought that modern aircraft today were delivered with an system that is supposed to call out announcements automatically should the masks drop, no?


E135/E140/E145/E70/E75/E90/CR2/CR7/CR9/717/732/733/734/735/73G/738/739/752/753/762/772/319/320/321/333
User currently offlineStabilator From United States of America, joined Nov 2010, 710 posts, RR: 0
Reply 17, posted (5 months 3 weeks 4 days 19 hours ago) and read 5621 times:

Lucky for the pax, Ryanair didn't charge THEM for the o2 masks or the descent  ! Some people feel so entitled these days. Lets hope they lose.


So we beat on against the current, borne back ceaselessly into the past.
User currently offlinepvjin From Finland, joined Mar 2012, 1261 posts, RR: 3
Reply 18, posted (5 months 3 weeks 4 days 19 hours ago) and read 5544 times:

"Mrs Bertin said: "[The legal proceeding] is not going to repair what we have been through, but people need to be responsible for their actions."

Maybe Mrs Bertin would have preferred a calm death from hypoxia then, at least after that there would be no fear of flying to suffer anymore.

Absolutely ridiculous.



"A rational army would run away"
User currently offlineMir From United States of America, joined Jan 2004, 21630 posts, RR: 55
Reply 19, posted (5 months 3 weeks 4 days 19 hours ago) and read 5291 times:

Quoting art (Reply 14):
How often has structural failure been the cause of depressurisation (I'm not talking about sudden, catastrophic failures)?

It happened not too long ago with a 737 on a Southwest flight. That one was easily visible, and probably worse than this, but one doesn't really know in the moment. And while it's not a "get the plane on the ground as soon as possible" scenario, I'm not sure I'd be comfortable overflying an airport clearly capable of handling the flight such as ZRH just to get to a base unless weather was a factor - the WN flight in question diverted to Yuma, which isn't even served by the airline.

-Mir



7 billion, one nation, imagination...it's a beautiful day
User currently offlinebueb0g From United Kingdom, joined Jul 2010, 643 posts, RR: 0
Reply 20, posted (5 months 3 weeks 4 days 18 hours ago) and read 4930 times:

Quoting Mir (Reply 19):
I'm not sure I'd be comfortable overflying an airport clearly capable of handling the flight such as ZRH just to get to a base unless weather was a factor - the WN flight in question diverted to Yuma, which isn't even served by the airline.

Well by the time they were at 10k they were well north of the Alps, and flying to Frankfurt probably only took another 15 minutes or so than commencing an approach to Zurich would have taken. Once down at 10k with no further indication of problems, I can't exactly say it was a bad decision to go to somewhere with better technical support for the airline; the decision was most likely made with consultation from the airline anyway. Obviously different crews are going to make different calls but I don't think there was anything inherently wrong about flying to Frankfurt.



Roger roger, what's our vector, victor?
User currently offlineBoeing744 From Canada, joined Jun 2005, 1835 posts, RR: 23
Reply 21, posted (5 months 3 weeks 4 days 18 hours ago) and read 4930 times:

There is a lot of the story missing from this article, I think.

First and foremost, we do not know whether the legal challenge actually results from the Ryanair pilot undertaking an emergency descent (which would be ridiculous), or some other issue that made that descent necessary (which would make somewhat more sense). If Ryanair was somehow at fault for WHY the cabin depressurised in the first place (e.g. pilot error, mechanical, etc.), then I can see how this group of passengers may have a case for any (alleged) injuries arising from the rapid descent caused by Ryanair's negligence. The sincerity of their injuries, however, is definitely a legitimate question even if Ryanair was at fault for this event.

The line that makes me think there's more to this is "Ryanair has admitted liability." However, this is from the passengers' lawyer, so I'll take it with a grain of salt.


User currently offlineMir From United States of America, joined Jan 2004, 21630 posts, RR: 55
Reply 22, posted (5 months 3 weeks 4 days 17 hours ago) and read 4502 times:

Quoting bueb0g (Reply 20):
the decision was most likely made with consultation from the airline anyway.

That does concern me, yes.

-Mir



7 billion, one nation, imagination...it's a beautiful day
User currently offlineMaverickTTT From United States of America, joined Mar 2014, 45 posts, RR: 0
Reply 23, posted (5 months 3 weeks 4 days 14 hours ago) and read 3576 times:

Quoting Mir (Reply 22):
That does concern me, yes.


As much as it pains me to defend Ryanair...I have no problem with this if, indeed, they were only fifteen minutes further from FRA than other fields. "Nearest Suitable" does not always mean "Land At Closest Airport". As long as the situation is under control and it is determined that safety will not be compromised by the additional fifteen minutes, there's nothing wrong with taking passenger convenience into consideration when deciding on a suitable airport for diversion.


User currently offlineblueflyer From United States of America, joined Jan 2006, 4001 posts, RR: 2
Reply 24, posted (5 months 3 weeks 4 days 13 hours ago) and read 3376 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting Mir (Reply 22):
That does concern me, yes.

It's sad that I think those concerns are valid when it comes to Ryanair, but it's difficult to assess where they could/should have landed without knowing the direction of the winds.

If ZRH was on a frequently-used Northern approach and the plane made a straight-line descent from Lugano to 10,000, they would probably miss the approach and need two lengthy 180 turns to land at ZRH.

"Nearest Suitable" in that case would have been STR, SXB, SCN or LUX before HHN, but the difference between these airports is counted in handful of minutes.



I've got $h*t to do
25 PhilBy : In that case there's no real difference between flying 10mins or 30. This isn't Hollywood where another panel falls off every 30 seconds.
26 B777LRF : I was operating a B757 freighter service from BRU to BGY. Somewhere over Southern Germany we got a pressurization warning, and initiated an emergency
27 EASTERN747 : Correct me if I am wrong, but when we had printed or hand written tickets, there was a page or two of legal mumbo jumbo making that ticket a contract
28 Boeing744 : Any time money is exchanged for goods or services, you are in a contractual situation. Nothing ever needs to be written down. For example, putting mo
29 Post contains images JimJupiter : Seems like passengers and airline "deserve each other" well.
Top Of Page
Forum Index

This topic is archived and can not be replied to any more.

Printer friendly format

Similar topics:More similar topics...
Pax Had To Vote For Emergency Landing! posted Mon Mar 4 2002 12:04:30 by Lionel
Pax Had To Vote For Emergency Landing! posted Mon Mar 4 2002 12:04:30 by Lionel
Ryanair Flights To US For 10 Euro posted Tue Feb 25 2014 23:05:24 by Braybuddy
Ryanair Flights To US For 10 Euro posted Tue Feb 25 2014 23:05:24 by Braybuddy
Ryanair Pax To Be Charged 7EUR In Riga Airport posted Wed Dec 28 2011 05:31:23 by smbukas
Ryanair Pax To Be Charged 7EUR In Riga Airport posted Wed Dec 28 2011 05:31:23 by smbukas
QF Pax To Sue Airbus Over 2008 Incident posted Sun Sep 19 2010 15:47:20 by AFGMEL
AC To Sue For YTZ Access posted Wed Feb 10 2010 13:43:41 by YOWza
BA Diverted To KEF For Emergency Landing posted Sat Aug 26 2006 20:22:39 by Northernlights
Airlines Set To Sue For £300m Over Terror Losses posted Thu Aug 17 2006 05:04:29 by Clickhappy
Ryanair Pilots To Sue.......... posted Tue Aug 2 2005 10:50:06 by Eirjet
Ryanair's O'Leary To Bid For Aer Lingus posted Mon Jul 12 2004 13:23:57 by Widebody
Judge Allows Pax To Sue Thomson TUI - BY 757 Crash posted Tue May 6 2003 17:11:37 by Demoose
BA Diverted To KEF For Emergency Landing posted Sat Aug 26 2006 20:22:39 by Northernlights
Airlines Set To Sue For £300m Over Terror Losses posted Thu Aug 17 2006 05:04:29 by Clickhappy
Ryanair Pilots To Sue.......... posted Tue Aug 2 2005 10:50:06 by Eirjet