lmml 14/32
Topic Author
Posts: 2358
Joined: Tue Jan 30, 2001 2:27 am

FR @ BUD. How Legal And Safe Is This?

Fri Aug 03, 2012 4:38 pm

Ryanair at Budapest Int'l Airport, Hungary. With the collapse of MALEV, the Hungarian national airline, Ryanair stepped in as the resident airline. This is how it treats it's paying passengers - planes park at a remote stand to avoid paying the extra charge of the airbridge. The airport, being on its knees, converted one jetty into steps. Rain or shine, passengers are forced to walk 300mtrs to the plane on the tarmac, usually reserved for aicraft movements. Then they are made to wait for some 15 minutes in front of the plane, rain or shine, in the middle of the apron, few metres away from the plane as it is being re-fuelled, until the crew is ready to board. This is the closest stand. Visisble to the left of the plane is a makeshift walkway for passengers to walk to other Ryanair planes which are even further. A Ryanair open air terminal was created with metal barricades. This is what happens when Ryanair moves in where there is no national airline.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vLd43nf3SXQ
 
kaitak
Posts: 8934
Joined: Wed Aug 18, 1999 5:49 am

RE: FR @ BUD. How Legal And Safe Is This?

Fri Aug 03, 2012 4:49 pm

Not really surprising; it's Ryanair's way or the highway. Bad enough in high Summer, but wait until the Winter! And of course, will the airport pay for shelters to cover pax walking across the apron - it certainly won't/can't charge FR.

And of course, it's a captive audience, because if the Hungarian govt threatens to impose any obligations on FR, it'll just up sticks and leave or cut back its operations. Malev may be gone, but Ryanair is certainly streets ahead when it comes to MALEVolence ...

It's certainly food for thought given Ryanair's designs on Aer Lingus and the way it would treat pax in Ireland if it had command of the market, as it hopes to.
 
santi319
Posts: 323
Joined: Thu Dec 29, 2005 3:24 pm

RE: FR @ BUD. How Legal And Safe Is This?

Fri Aug 03, 2012 4:51 pm

Like NK in the USA it is nobody's fault but the pax that want dirt cheap fares. They chose this....
 
JU068
Posts: 2094
Joined: Thu Aug 20, 2009 8:23 am

RE: FR @ BUD. How Legal And Safe Is This?

Fri Aug 03, 2012 4:58 pm

I wonder if this will affect Ryanair since they are so price sensitive:

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-0...ne-fees-vilaggazdasag-reports.html
 
BMI727
Posts: 11093
Joined: Mon Feb 02, 2009 9:29 pm

RE: FR @ BUD. How Legal And Safe Is This?

Fri Aug 03, 2012 5:04 pm

Quoting lmml 14/32 (Thread starter):

...not to mention the guards forcing people onto the planes at gunpoint. Oh, wait, they don't have that. Those people paid to be flying with Ryanair on their own. Never mind.
Why do Aerospace Engineering students have to turn things in on time?
 
kl911
Posts: 3979
Joined: Mon Jul 21, 2003 1:10 am

RE: FR @ BUD. How Legal And Safe Is This?

Fri Aug 03, 2012 5:10 pm

Quoting lmml 14/32 (Thread starter):
Ryanair at Budapest Int'l Airport, Hungary. With the collapse of MALEV, the Hungarian national airline, Ryanair stepped in as the resident airline. This is how it treats it's paying passengers - planes park at a remote stand to avoid paying the extra charge of the airbridge. The airport, being on its knees, converted one jetty into steps. Rain or shine, passengers are forced to walk 300mtrs to the plane on the tarmac, usually reserved for aicraft movements. Then they are made to wait for some 15 minutes in front of the plane, rain or shine, in the middle of the apron, few metres away from the plane as it is being re-fuelled, until the crew is ready to board. This is the closest stand. Visisble to the left of the plane is a makeshift walkway for passengers to walk to other Ryanair planes which are even further. A Ryanair open air terminal was created with metal barricades. This is what happens when Ryanair moves in where there is no national airline.

I use it a lot, and it is really great! Pax love it as the boarding process is must faster and you can wait close to all the action instead of a hot airport building. More airlines use this btw.

Its also done on airports in Holland btw , like EIN, GRQ. Again more airlines do this. It makes the boarding process much nicer and faster for pax. No more waiting in long lines.

I dont know what your problem is with flying, but everyone agrees that the worst thing that can happen is a bus ride to your plane and wait packed like sardines till you can board.
 
kl911
Posts: 3979
Joined: Mon Jul 21, 2003 1:10 am

RE: FR @ BUD. How Legal And Safe Is This?

Fri Aug 03, 2012 5:12 pm

Quoting lmml 14/32 (Thread starter):
Ryanair at Budapest Int'l Airport, Hungary. With the collapse of MALEV, the Hungarian national airline, Ryanair stepped in as the resident airline. This is how it treats it's paying passengers - planes park at a remote stand to avoid paying the extra charge of the airbridge.

Btw, Wizzair was and is resident. before Malev collapsed. All LCC1s park remote, never noticed that on your other flights? We want to fly for 20 euro, so you get to walk, whats the problem??
 
Rdh3e
Posts: 2732
Joined: Wed Mar 30, 2011 2:09 pm

RE: FR @ BUD. How Legal And Safe Is This?

Fri Aug 03, 2012 5:17 pm

To the title of your post. It is perfectly legal and very safe.
 
User avatar
eurowings
Posts: 521
Joined: Sat Sep 10, 2011 10:40 pm

RE: FR @ BUD. How Legal And Safe Is This?

Fri Aug 03, 2012 5:18 pm

Don't see the problem really.

Looks safe enough to me and it certainly beats crammed full buses that all airlines use - they can be particularly bad for anyone who struggles to stand up on a moving vehicle like my mother.

Passengers know to expect an experience without frills on FR and that is what they get. Unless the weather is awful, I don't see many passengers having an issue with it.

The passengers are railed in and can be seen by various members of staff on the ramp.

There are things I don't like about FR, but this is a non-issue for me. No one is forced to fly with FR from BUD, you can fly direct to many European destinations with W6 along with other LCCs such as EZY, LS, DY and 4U. There is also the option of charter flights to holiday destinations and a wide choice of legacies (BA, LX, LH, AF, KL, OS e.t.c) offering services via their hubs.

[Edited 2012-08-03 10:26:56]
"Freddie Laker may be at peace with his Maker, but he is persona non grata with IATA."- HRH Duke of Edinburgh
 
Pe@rson
Posts: 16001
Joined: Sat Jan 13, 2001 6:29 pm

RE: FR @ BUD. How Legal And Safe Is This?

Fri Aug 03, 2012 5:18 pm

Quoting RDH3E (Reply 7):
To the title of your post. It is perfectly legal and very safe

And more to the point, if it wasn't it would surely be BUD's responsibility as the provider of the facilities.
"Everyone writing for the Telegraph knows that the way to grab eyeballs is with Ryanair and/or sex."
 
AA94
Posts: 648
Joined: Fri Aug 19, 2011 1:37 am

RE: FR @ BUD. How Legal And Safe Is This?

Fri Aug 03, 2012 5:26 pm

Quoting lmml 14/32 (Thread starter):
Ryanair at Budapest Int'l Airport, Hungary. With the collapse of MALEV, the Hungarian national airline, Ryanair stepped in as the resident airline. This is how it treats it's paying passengers - planes park at a remote stand to avoid paying the extra charge of the airbridge. The airport, being on its knees, converted one jetty into steps. Rain or shine, passengers are forced to walk 300mtrs to the plane on the tarmac, usually reserved for aicraft movements. Then they are made to wait for some 15 minutes in front of the plane, rain or shine, in the middle of the apron, few metres away from the plane as it is being re-fuelled, until the crew is ready to board. This is the closest stand. Visisble to the left of the plane is a makeshift walkway for passengers to walk to other Ryanair planes which are even further. A Ryanair open air terminal was created with metal barricades. This is what happens when Ryanair moves in where there is no national airline.

I'm not sure if some of this is actually what goes on. Having had the "pleasure" of flying FR on several occasions, I can say that we were never made to stand on the tarmac. The process might happen differently at different airports, but on my FR flights, the crew boarded, the plane was stocked and refueled, and then passenger boarding was called. The only waiting we did was queuing up in the terminal to board, but once out on the tarmac, we boarded the plane immediately.

It's definitely a scenario where you get what you pay for. People who take advantage of FR's cheap services shouldn't expect red-carpet boarding. I don't really see anything unsafe here, to be completely honest.
If you can't take the heat, you best get out of the kitchen
 
Birdwatching
Posts: 3573
Joined: Sat Sep 06, 2003 10:48 am

RE: FR @ BUD. How Legal And Safe Is This?

Fri Aug 03, 2012 5:36 pm

Can you please edit the title to:

"Thank you Ryanair for stepping in and providing cheap, friendly and on-time air service for my country when my expensive and often delayed national airline went bust"

Soren   
All the things you probably hate about travelling are warm reminders that I'm home
 
kl911
Posts: 3979
Joined: Mon Jul 21, 2003 1:10 am

RE: FR @ BUD. How Legal And Safe Is This?

Fri Aug 03, 2012 5:44 pm

Quoting Birdwatching (Reply 11):
Can you please edit the title to:

"Thank you Ryanair for stepping in and providing cheap, friendly and on-time air service for my country when my expensive and often delayed national airline went bust"

Soren

Thanks Soren. That's so great.

KL911
Budapest
 
lmml 14/32
Topic Author
Posts: 2358
Joined: Tue Jan 30, 2001 2:27 am

RE: FR @ BUD. How Legal And Safe Is This?

Fri Aug 03, 2012 5:53 pm

Quoting AA94 (Reply 10):
I'm not sure if some of this is actually what goes on. Having had the "pleasure" of flying FR on several occasions, I can say that we were never made to stand on the tarmac.

I also have a picture of the pax load congregated a few meters in front of the plane for about 10 minutes while the plane was being refuelled and no fire tender present. Unfortunately I cannot upload any more pics here.
 
mika
Posts: 2810
Joined: Thu Jul 27, 2000 7:53 am

RE: FR @ BUD. How Legal And Safe Is This?

Fri Aug 03, 2012 6:06 pm

One thing that you can do is to boycott FR. I myself will continue to do so.
 
kl911
Posts: 3979
Joined: Mon Jul 21, 2003 1:10 am

RE: FR @ BUD. How Legal And Safe Is This?

Fri Aug 03, 2012 6:16 pm

Quoting lmml 14/32 (Reply 13):
I also have a picture of the pax load congregated a few meters in front of the plane for about 10 minutes while the plane was being refuelled and no fire tender present.

So? At AMS for example the 747's are being refueled right next to pax in the terminal. At many airports the planes stop on the apron before the terminal. I hardly ever see a fire tender next to it, often a few 100 meters away.
 
Burkhard
Posts: 1916
Joined: Fri Nov 17, 2006 9:34 pm

RE: FR @ BUD. How Legal And Safe Is This?

Fri Aug 03, 2012 7:02 pm

I love to walk over airports, smell the aircraft, and having 15mins to watch a 737 from 50m distance is a dream.

Yes it is legal and safe.
 
spacecadet
Posts: 2788
Joined: Thu Sep 20, 2001 3:36 am

RE: FR @ BUD. How Legal And Safe Is This?

Fri Aug 03, 2012 7:16 pm

I actually wish this kind of thing happened in the US more often:



I remember once in the 1980's, flying a Hughes Airwest milk run up the west coast and stopping at 4 different airports on the way from San Francisco to Portland or Vancouver or something. At each stop, passengers were allowed to disembark for a "smoke break" - basically everybody just milled around the plane for a while at a remote stand until it was time to go again. That was a memorable experience - it was like riding a bus and getting off at each stop to stretch your legs.

Anyway, I don't see what the problem is with what Ryan Air is doing... at best it's kind of odd, but I don't see any safety or other issue. People have gotten so tight about things these days. Lots of people stand outside their car pumping their own gas, I don't see what's different about standing around a plane while actual professionals pump it full of fuel.
I'm tired of being a wanna-be league bowler. I wanna be a league bowler!
 
loveofflying
Posts: 112
Joined: Thu Jan 11, 2007 6:45 am

RE: FR @ BUD. How Legal And Safe Is This?

Fri Aug 03, 2012 7:43 pm

OK. I will never fly Ryanair and haven't yet. Sure, never-say-never. But I don't want to experience the fees, hassle, and no service. I simply fly LH or one of the other EU legacies. Prices are often very reasonable (especially coming from Canada) - 100 CAD each way?! What a bargain! Europeans see it differently. I would probably rather take the train (in 1 class) rather than fly FR. So to each his own. But you really get what you pay for.
Fly the DC10 before you can't!
 
smbukas
Posts: 289
Joined: Tue Feb 17, 2009 9:17 am

RE: FR @ BUD. How Legal And Safe Is This?

Fri Aug 03, 2012 7:43 pm

Ryanair policy is actually do not use bridges even it is provided for free. Walk on/walk offs is better also for faster turnarounds as pre-boarded passengers with free seating run to the aircraft and last passenger board in 5-7 minutes. That is not possible anyhow with a jetway.

And the thing is, that many high standarts airlines are coping Ryanair. In CPH SAS always do the same with their CRJ9. And they asking remote airports to do walk-on stands also. I know that SN, BT, OV are going forward with that also.
 
lmml 14/32
Topic Author
Posts: 2358
Joined: Tue Jan 30, 2001 2:27 am

RE: FR @ BUD. How Legal And Safe Is This?

Fri Aug 03, 2012 7:44 pm

Quoting spacecadet (Reply 17):
Anyway, I don't see what the problem is with what Ryan Air is doing

Nothing is a problem for FR because he is so powerful and exerts so much pressure that airports and CAA's bend over backwards to accommodate him. The same cannot be said for most other airlines that pay, not get paid, to operate. Fine, it's good business. But it is also unfair and many a blind eye, in this case I would say blind EYES, are sanctioned.

Quoting Burkhard (Reply 16):
I love to walk over airports, smell the aircraft, and having 15mins to watch a 737 from 50m distance is a dream

Ditto.....and I am privileged to do it all the time. But the average passenger is only interested in getting from A to B.
 
User avatar
BasilFawlty
Posts: 796
Joined: Fri Jun 05, 2009 11:23 am

RE: FR @ BUD. How Legal And Safe Is This?

Fri Aug 03, 2012 7:47 pm

What a stupid and useless topic. It is MALEV's own fault that they went bust, they deserved it, no sympathy for them!

Quoting lmml 14/32 (Thread starter):
This is how it treats it's paying passengers - planes park at a remote stand to avoid paying the extra charge of the airbridge.

So? If you don't like that you can fly other carriers which are using jetways or you can stay at home.

Quoting lmml 14/32 (Thread starter):
The airport, being on its knees, converted one jetty into steps.

So? If they're doing that, that's their own choice, nobody is forcing them.

Quoting lmml 14/32 (Thread starter):
Rain or shine, passengers are forced to walk 300mtrs to the plane on the tarmac, usually reserved for aicraft movements.

So? Are your afraid that you will melt in the rain or something? Once again, if you don't like it, choose another carrier or stay at home.

Quoting lmml 14/32 (Thread starter):
Then they are made to wait for some 15 minutes in front of the plane, rain or shine, in the middle of the apron, few metres away from the plane as it is being re-fuelled, until the crew is ready to board.

So? What's the difference of sitting on a seat in the aircraft or standing right next to it? Nothing, and it will be refuelled anyway. This is happening at many airports worldwide and it's perfectly safe.
'Every year donkeys and mules kill more people than plane crashes'
 
flashmeister
Posts: 2671
Joined: Fri Apr 28, 2000 4:32 am

RE: FR @ BUD. How Legal And Safe Is This?

Fri Aug 03, 2012 8:19 pm

Quoting BasilFawlty (Reply 21):
So? Are your afraid that you will melt in the rain or something? Once again, if you don't like it, choose another carrier or stay at home.

I won't melt, but I sure wouldn't want to be the one sitting next to the guy who didn't have an umbrella or parka and got soaked after the wait outside the aircraft in the rain. Nor would I want my neighbor's wet umbrella getting my stuff all wet once we're inside.

I fail to see the advantage that this sort of arrangement offers. Especially the back-and-forth on the walk out to the plane. It seems like Ryanair is doing this for the sake of doing it, nothing more.
 
chrisrad
Posts: 963
Joined: Tue Dec 05, 2000 7:26 pm

RE: FR @ BUD. How Legal And Safe Is This?

Fri Aug 03, 2012 11:27 pm

Quoting kl911 (Reply 5):
I use it a lot, and it is really great! Pax love it as the boarding process is must faster and you can wait close to all the action instead of a hot airport building. More airlines use this btw.

Its also done on airports in Holland btw , like EIN, GRQ. Again more airlines do this. It makes the boarding process much nicer and faster for pax. No more waiting in long lines.

I dont know what your problem is with flying, but everyone agrees that the worst thing that can happen is a bus ride to your plane and wait packed like sardines till you can board.

No offence KL911, every post I see about Malev or BUD airport you are defending Ryanair, and that there is no hole left by the demise of Malev, well there is a huge hole left. As someone who had Malev tickets purchased as a connecting flight from FRA, I was left with the only direct option of LH, who were charging the 4 times the price I paid, explain to me as an International passenger arriving at an airport which is not served by Ryanair how they are "filling the gap" left by Malev?
I had the unfortunate choice to fly with AirBerlin instead, which is hardly convenient flying via TXL to BUD.
Nearly every major international airport I could fly into from Asia/Australia is NOT served by Ryanair, either the national airline of the country I land in has only one flight a day to BUD either a 6-7 hour wait, or leaves before my flight would arrive, or go on a 8-10 hour multi connection odyssey around Europe, which is the last thing I want to do after flying 20 hours before hand.

Quoting kl911 (Reply 5):
I use it a lot, and it is really great! Pax love it as the boarding process is must faster and you can wait close to all the action instead of a hot airport building. More airlines use this btw.

What hot airport building, I was there this summer in the peak heatwave, 38c and it wasn't hot anywhere inside the airport. I would rather be sitting inside air-conditioned comfort than standing outside. I suppose pax "love this" and they will love doing it in the middle of winter when it is -18c outside......
Welcome aboard Malaysia Airlines! Winner of Best Cabin Staff 2001,2002,2003,2004,2007,2009,2012
 
RussianJet
Posts: 5982
Joined: Sat Jul 21, 2007 4:15 am

RE: FR @ BUD. How Legal And Safe Is This?

Fri Aug 03, 2012 11:58 pm

Quoting loveofflying (Reply 18):
But I don't want to experience the fees, hassle, and no service.

Fees? Fly with hand luggage and check you don't buy extras when you book. Of course if you doubt you have the mental capacity to navigate a very straightforward booking system without accidentally paying loads more than you think you are, for which you really would have to be quite dim, then fine - don't fly them. Funnily enough, contrary to popular belief, as long as you follow some very simple rules then it is genuinely the case that nobody from the airline will jump out on you at the last minute to mug you for hundreds of euros; or indeed any euros. Hassle? Haven't really experienced any myself. Not sure what 'hassle' you imagine there is. Service? Well each to their own of course, but what do you need or want on a sector of 1-2 hours, particularly at an absurdly low cost?

As to the thread title, I can't help but think that it is somewhat naive, borne from a lack of experience. The kind of setup described is hardlty unique to FR or BUD. Am struggling to understand why anyone would imagine it could be illegal or dangerous.
✈ Every strike of the hammer is a blow against the enemy. ✈
 
BE77
Posts: 360
Joined: Fri Nov 02, 2007 2:15 am

RE: FR @ BUD. How Legal And Safe Is This?

Sat Aug 04, 2012 2:13 pm

Quoting BMI727 (Reply 4):
not to mention the guards forcing people onto the planes at gunpoint. Oh, wait, they don't have that. Those people paid to be flying with Ryanair on their own. Never mind.

Does it mean I'm sarcastic if I admit liking this post?
I'll add that many (maybe not all) of the people knew exactly what theywere getting and are happy with it...at least I presume that FR has 'some' repeat customers or they would be running out of first or one time only passengers by now, wouldn't they? I've never had opportunity to fly with them, but will do so when the chance arises, just to see what the 'fuss' is all about!.

Quoting RDH3E (Reply 7):
To the title of your post. It is perfectly legal and very safe.

Absolutely true - and it is done at hundreds (thousands?) of airports the world over. Off the top of my head, in the last 5 years or so I have boarded jets (MD-83 or larger) through 'ground gates' at BGI, PBM, GEO, CUR (some gates), YLW (before the bridges were built), YNX, YOA, YQQ, YZF, NKC, and more.
Nothing like boarding a 737-200 at YOA or YZF, from the ground, in January, at 3 in the 'afternoon' in the dark (night), with the temperature at minus 40C to refresh ones spirits and remind you that you are alive.

Oh - I've never used an airbridge for boarding in my own personal flying either. I don't think they make one that would fit anything I'm allowed to fly. It is always fun when parked on a ramp near much bigger metal and never felt it was unsafe during fueling of either aircraft. I'm pretty sure it has been legal too.

Quoting Birdwatching (Reply 11):
Thank you Ryanair

Sounds pretty reasonable to me (even though I've got no first hand experience to base it on).
Tower, Affirmitive, gear is down and welded
 
vegetables2001
Posts: 94
Joined: Fri Mar 23, 2012 8:28 pm

RE: FR @ BUD. How Legal And Safe Is This?

Sat Aug 04, 2012 4:06 pm

Please change the title of the thread to "Whine, whine, whine......"
A306,319,333 ATR72 BAC113/5, B703/704,717,721,732/3/4/5/7/8,741/1/4,757,763,773/E, DC8-6,9-3/5,10-30, DC106
 
dynamo12
Posts: 48
Joined: Mon Dec 29, 2008 6:07 am

RE: FR @ BUD. How Legal And Safe Is This?

Sat Aug 04, 2012 4:21 pm

What's funny about this is that Ryanair in the free market is setting passenger records. July 2012 was their highest passenger month in their history.

Obviously, lots of folks including the thread starter want that stopped as illegal and dangerous. The interesting thing is, all those ryanair passengers are far far more likely to die in an auto accident or from poor health than they are while traveling on ryanair.

Ryanair is systematic in removing costs that they feel don't provide value to pax. Surcharges on credit cards to steer pax to lower cost forms of payments. Clearly the banks and EU politicans don't like the reduction in credit card fees to the banks making billions, but ryanair gets cheaper costs and PAX save their own money.

What this tells us is that if you surface the actual costs so they are transparent, passengers will make their own choices about what they value. And when given a choice, pax may be happy to walk 300 feet, board more quickly, and save money vs getting bused around like sardines at LHR.

Having done the remote stands things, it is crazy how much faster it is. Go to the carrib where you can claim your baggage right by the plane. While I'm sure that would be considered "illegal" somewhere, it sure is quick! Get off, they hand off your luggage, and you go.
 
flyingturtle
Posts: 4590
Joined: Mon Oct 31, 2011 1:39 pm

RE: FR @ BUD. How Legal And Safe Is This?

Sat Aug 04, 2012 4:30 pm

Stupid question of the week. We all love walking any distance on the apron!

At BSL, depending on where the U2 319 is standing, the passengers have to walk for 100 meters. Too little in my opinion. They've installed red-white plastic Jersey barriers to designate the footpath.


David
Keeping calm is terrorism against those who want to live in fear.
 
Lono
Posts: 1136
Joined: Sun Apr 04, 2004 5:47 pm

RE: FR @ BUD. How Legal And Safe Is This?

Sat Aug 04, 2012 4:38 pm

Happens every day all over Alaska....
Wally Bird Ruled the Skys!
 
BE77
Posts: 360
Joined: Fri Nov 02, 2007 2:15 am

RE: FR @ BUD. How Legal And Safe Is This?

Sat Aug 04, 2012 5:52 pm

Quoting dynamo12 (Reply 27):
What this tells us is that if you surface the actual costs so they are transparent, passengers will make their own choices about what they value.

Very nicely said!
Tower, Affirmitive, gear is down and welded
 
Viscount724
Posts: 18838
Joined: Thu Oct 12, 2006 7:32 pm

RE: FR @ BUD. How Legal And Safe Is This?

Sat Aug 04, 2012 6:06 pm

Quoting spacecadet (Reply 17):
I actually wish this kind of thing happened in the US more often:
Quoting Lono (Reply 29):
Happens every day all over Alaska....

And at many airports in Canada's north where temperatures of -40C (or colder) are common.

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/c/c2/Resolute_Bay_Airport.jpg


And note the caption of this one:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/pierodamiani/3155219792/
 
N766UA
Posts: 7843
Joined: Thu Jul 29, 1999 3:50 am

RE: FR @ BUD. How Legal And Safe Is This?

Sat Aug 04, 2012 6:17 pm

Quoting santi319 (Reply 2):

Like NK in the USA it is nobody's fault but the pax that want dirt cheap fares. They chose this....

I dunno, I mean, yes, they chose no legroom, no recline, no food, no free perks, etc. etc., but I don't think anyone expects to be corralled on the hot tarmac like so many cows.
This Website Censors Me
 
krisyyz
Posts: 1266
Joined: Thu Nov 25, 2004 11:04 pm

RE: FR @ BUD. How Legal And Safe Is This?

Sat Aug 04, 2012 6:27 pm

Quoting BasilFawlty (Reply 21):
What a stupid and useless topic. It is MALEV's own fault that they went bust, they deserved it, no sympathy for them!

Do you have any sympathy for the MA employees who woke up one morning and found out they are now unemployed, some who worked for MA for 30+ years? No doubt MA and more importantly the Hungarian Government made some very stupid decisions, but don't blame the workers for MA's demise.

Quoting kl911 (Reply 5):

I use it a lot, and it is really great! Pax love it as the boarding process is must faster and you can wait close to all the action instead of a hot airport building. More airlines use this btw.

It's not as popular as you would make it sound... Perhaps aviation enthusiast and younger people love it (as would I) but most FR pax at BUD tolerate it and have become accustom to it. When the aircraft is on the stand, no problem. But I have heard passenger having to wait up to 40 minutes on the apron for boarding. I'm sure FR and BUD has some contingency plan for extremely hot or cold weather, but as far as I know, the metal barricades are just a temporary solution. People have realize that BUD was so panicked after MA ceased that they basically had no option but to do as FR demanded.

KrisYYZ
 
krisyyz
Posts: 1266
Joined: Thu Nov 25, 2004 11:04 pm

RE: FR @ BUD. How Legal And Safe Is This?

Sat Aug 04, 2012 6:35 pm

Quoting Viscount724 (Reply 31):
And at many airports in Canada's north where temperatures of -40C (or colder) are common.
Quoting Lono (Reply 29):
Happens every day all over Alaska....

absolutely, but it is important to note that there are no other options for passenger boarding at those Canadian and Alaskan airports. While both jet bridges and buses are available at BUD.

KrisYYZ
 
Cubsrule
Posts: 11370
Joined: Sat May 15, 2004 12:13 pm

RE: FR @ BUD. How Legal And Safe Is This?

Sat Aug 04, 2012 6:37 pm

Quoting lmml 14/32 (Reply 13):
I also have a picture of the pax load congregated a few meters in front of the plane for about 10 minutes while the plane was being refuelled and no fire tender present. Unfortunately I cannot upload any more pics here.

Apologies if this is off topic, but is boarding during fueling not allowed in Europe? If so, that seems like a pointless rule - it happens all the time in the western hemisphere (both North and South America) with no trouble.
I can't decide whether I miss the tulip or the bowling shoe more
 
User avatar
mayor
Posts: 6188
Joined: Sun Mar 09, 2008 3:58 pm

RE: FR @ BUD. How Legal And Safe Is This?

Sat Aug 04, 2012 7:11 pm

Quoting Cubsrule (Reply 35):
Apologies if this is off topic, but is boarding during fueling not allowed in Europe? If so, that seems like a pointless rule - it happens all the time in the western hemisphere (both North and South America) with no trouble.

Exactly. That's why the fuel truck is grounded during fueling. Besides, jet fuel isn't nearly as volatile as gasoline.
"A committee is a group of the unprepared, appointed by the unwilling, to do the unnecessary"----Fred Allen
 
mandala499
Posts: 6458
Joined: Wed Aug 29, 2001 8:47 pm

RE: FR @ BUD. How Legal And Safe Is This?

Sat Aug 04, 2012 7:57 pm

Quoting lmml 14/32 (Thread starter):
usually reserved for aicraft movements.

Well,you should read the NOTAMs...

1. Video was taken at 03AUG12...
2. This is covered by the NOTAMs... it seems that BUD airport is doing a lot of maintenance... even at Terminal 2.
3. What you see in the video is parking stand 46, taxiway S, and the jet was parked at parking stand 74.

Let's look at the NOTAMs:
A1583/12 NOTAMN
Q) LHCC/QMXLC/IV/M /A /000/999/4726N01916E005
A) LHBP B) 1208070600 C) 1208100900
D) 07 10 0600-0900
E) TWY A5, A6, A7, A8, A9, B4, B5, K, L, N, Z, Y, X, P4 CLOSED DUE TO MAINT
CREATED: 03 Aug 2012 10:20:00
SOURCE: EUECYIYN

Taxiway P4 is what connects that remote apron to parallel taxiway A7 / A8... so this will close for 3 days... but then at that time, Runway 13L/31R will be closed for maintenance anyway.

Taxiway S, ie, the taxiway that's normally in front of the aircraft where it was parked on stand 74 is closed...

A1274/12 NOTAMR A0643/12
Q) LHCC/QMNLC/IV/NBO/A /000/999/4726N01916E005
A) LHBP B) 1206201038 C) 1210012200
E) PORTION OF APRON TAXILANE S IS CLOSED FROM INTERSECTION P4 TO STAND
73. ICAO STANDARD SIGNS AND MARKINGS ARE INSTALLED.
CREATED: 20 Jun 2012 10:38:00
SOURCE: EUECYIYN

And then, we have information on the change in taxi out from the parking stand due to the closure of taxiway S as per above NOTAM, with the following NOTAM:
A1273/12 NOTAMR A0644/12
Q) LHCC/QMPLT/IV/M /A /000/999/4726N01916E005
A) LHBP B) 1206201037 C) 1210012200
E) ACFT STANDS 74, 75, 76 AND 77 RESTRICTED. DEPARTING ACFT HAS TO FOLLOW THE PUSH BACK PROCEDURES BY THE INSTRUCTIONS OF APRON GUIDE UNAND Irtysh-Avia (Kazakhstan)">IT.
CREATED: 20 Jun 2012 10:37:00
SOURCE: EUECYIYN

There is another NOTAM that applies to stands 78, 79, 84. Then there is a NOTAM for stand 82 (between 74 and 75, offset parking)...
A1275/12 NOTAMR A0647/12
Q) LHCC/QMPLC/IV/BO /A /000/999/4726N01916E005
A) LHBP B) 1206201038 C) 1210012200
E) ACFT STAND 82 CLOSED DUE TO WALK ON WALK OFF PROCEDURES.
CREATED: 20 Jun 2012 10:39:00
SOURCE: EUECYIYN

So, they are planning to use this "walk on/walk off" since 20 June until 1 October... I assume something else will be in place.

A1272/12 NOTAMR A0640/12
Q) LHCC/QMPLC/IV/BO /A /000/999/4726N01916E005
A) LHBP B) 1206201036 C) 1210012200
E) ACFT STAND 46 CLOSED AND ABANDONED. DEDICATED FOR WALKING OF PASSENGERS.
CREATED: 20 Jun 2012 10:36:00
SOURCE: EUECYIYN

Parking stand 46 is not going to be as you remember it... yes, the jetbridge is no longer in use and a staircase in in place.

Quoting lmml 14/32 (Thread starter):
This is what happens when Ryanair moves in where there is no national airline.

Sorry, but Ryanair does this at other countries/airports where the national airlines still exist!

Quoting lmml 14/32 (Reply 13):
I also have a picture of the pax load congregated a few meters in front of the plane for about 10 minutes while the plane was being refuelled and no fire tender present. Unfortunately I cannot upload any more pics here.

I guess you missed the fire tender in the video. It left towards the end. I assume that it was needed elsewhere and that the crucial part was during the initial hookup of fuel truck to the aircraft. If you think safety was violated, then write to EASA about it!   

Quoting lmml 14/32 (Reply 20):
Nothing is a problem for FR because he is so powerful and exerts so much pressure that airports and CAA's bend over backwards to accommodate him. The same cannot be said for most other airlines that pay, not get paid, to operate. Fine, it's good business. But it is also unfair and many a blind eye, in this case I would say blind EYES, are sanctioned.

Oh the evil FR! Look, I don't like FR (am an LCC flyer, but not FR). CAAs bend backwards? Bend what? Safety rules? Can you point out which safety rules (from the safety regulations) were violated?
The airport had a choice, they could simply stick the middle finger at Ryanair's demand (and there are cases of this, to which Ryanair either pulled out, or admit they can't win and continue to operate), or the airport can simply give some or all what Ryanair demand. The airport has a choice to make decisions! If you blame this on Ryanair, you should blame this on Malev's management that made it go bust and 'make BUD airport have to give in to FR'...

Quoting RussianJet (Reply 24):
As to the thread title, I can't help but think that it is somewhat naive, borne from a lack of experience. The kind of setup described is hardlty unique to FR or BUD. Am struggling to understand why anyone would imagine it could be illegal or dangerous.

Exactly. Liverpool and Luton has this set up... so has a LOT of airports in other parts of the world... At least they got a dedicated walkway there! I've been at airports where I have to walk on the airside road with other vehicles... as a fare paying passenger.

I fail to see where what FR did in BUD in that video is illegal or dangerous as per the safety regulations.

On another note, I suspect that BUD will come up with something more permanent than the current arrangements... I suspect that stand 46 is closed permanently, and a permanent covered walkway/shed/cheap-building will be available for the passengers to go nearer to the aircraft... and then, I also suspect that in front of parking stands 74 and 75, there will be a passenger holding area (with a roof), to enable pax to wait before walking across taxiway S for the final stretch to the aircraft... or, perhaps block taxiway S altogether in front of stand 74... and taxiway S will still be available for other parking stands... for rapid movement (and cheap... since it needs no pushback truck) out of the parking stands... perhaps stand 74 will be converted into a big shed...   

Mandala499
When losing situational awareness, pray Cumulus Granitus isn't nearby !
 
Dogbreath
Posts: 169
Joined: Fri Mar 28, 2008 8:49 am

RE: FR @ BUD. How Legal And Safe Is This?

Sun Aug 05, 2012 8:30 am

Quoting lmml 14/32 (Thread starter):
Then they are made to wait for some 15 minutes in front of the plane, rain or shine, in the middle of the apron, few metres away from the plane as it is being re-fuelled, until the crew is ready to board.

Oh for crying out aloud. Harden up Princess. In answer to your question. Of course it's legal. If it wasn't, do you think that the Airport Authorities, EASA, Local Government, all those car crash lawyers, etc, etc would allow Ryanair to get away with something illegal. If you think you have a case then file a lawsuit. Get over it, toughen up.

IF YOU DON'T LIKE RYANAIR THEN STOP WHINING AND FLY SOMEONE ELSE. WE STILL LIVE IN A FREE WORLD.
Truth, Honour, Loyalty
 
GCT64
Posts: 1259
Joined: Sun Nov 04, 2007 6:34 pm

RE: FR @ BUD. How Legal And Safe Is This?

Sun Aug 05, 2012 11:32 am

Quoting Cubsrule (Reply 35):
Apologies if this is off topic, but is boarding during fueling not allowed in Europe?

Boarding during fueling is allowed in Europe, happens all the time.
Flown in: A30B,A306,A310,A319,A320,A321,A332,A333,A343,A346,A388,BA11,BU31,B190, B461,(..53 more types..),VC10,WESX
 
kl911
Posts: 3979
Joined: Mon Jul 21, 2003 1:10 am

RE: FR @ BUD. How Legal And Safe Is This?

Sun Aug 05, 2012 12:09 pm

Quoting chrisrad (Reply 23):
Nearly every major international airport I could fly into from Asia/Australia is NOT served by Ryanair, either the national airline of the country I land in has only one flight a day to BUD either a 6-7 hour wait, or leaves before my flight would arrive

Well, I dont know who you fly with from Asia-Australia but all three alliances have especially the Asian arrival banks very well covered:

LHR- BA 3x , morning, afternoon and evening, connecting to major arrival banks.
FRA- LH 5x , all over the day, connecting to most arrival banks.
MUC- LH 5x, all over the day, connecting to most arrival banks.
AMS- KL/HV 4x, all over the day, connecting to most arrival banks.
CDG- AF 3x, U2 1x, all over the day, connecting to most arrival banks.
VIE - OS 3x, most arrival banks covered morning, afternoon and evening.
HEL- AY 2x, morning and evening Asian arrival bank covered.

Ryanair , Easyjet, Norwegian and Wizzair etc.cover those main European airports:

MAD - FR and W6
BCN - FR and W6
ARN - DY
FCO - W6
MXP - W6
CDG - U2
BER - U2 , AB
LGW - U2
CPH - DY
OSL - DY
 
User avatar
BasilFawlty
Posts: 796
Joined: Fri Jun 05, 2009 11:23 am

RE: FR @ BUD. How Legal And Safe Is This?

Sun Aug 05, 2012 10:10 pm

Quoting flashmeister (Reply 22):
I fail to see the advantage that this sort of arrangement offers. Especially the back-and-forth on the walk out to the plane. It seems like Ryanair is doing this for the sake of doing it, nothing more.

It speeds up the boarding process and it's saving them money.

Quoting Cubsrule (Reply 35):
Apologies if this is off topic, but is boarding during fueling not allowed in Europe? If so, that seems like a pointless rule - it happens all the time in the western hemisphere (both North and South America) with no trouble.

It is allowed, only requirement is two usable exits, which means a jetty or stairs at the front and stairs at the back.
'Every year donkeys and mules kill more people than plane crashes'
 
lmml 14/32
Topic Author
Posts: 2358
Joined: Tue Jan 30, 2001 2:27 am

RE: FR @ BUD. How Legal And Safe Is This?

Sun Aug 05, 2012 10:19 pm

Quoting GCT64 (Reply 39):
Boarding during fueling is allowed in Europe, happens all the time.

True, but this is not boarding during re-fuelling. This is about pax congregating 10 meters in front of a plane that is being refuelled.
 
Cubsrule
Posts: 11370
Joined: Sat May 15, 2004 12:13 pm

RE: FR @ BUD. How Legal And Safe Is This?

Mon Aug 06, 2012 1:58 am

Quoting BasilFawlty (Reply 41):
It is allowed, only requirement is two usable exits, which means a jetty or stairs at the front and stairs at the back.

To be fair, that's somewhat more restrictive than in most of the rest of the world. The States have no restrictions; in many countries in South America, it's no restrictions beyond no seat belts fastened.
I can't decide whether I miss the tulip or the bowling shoe more
 
User avatar
EK413
Posts: 4328
Joined: Sat Nov 29, 2003 3:11 pm

RE: FR @ BUD. How Legal And Safe Is This?

Mon Aug 06, 2012 2:20 am

Can't FR recoup the aerobridge costs in the airfare???

EK413
Good evening, ladies and gentlemen. We are tonight’s entertainment!
 
User avatar
BasilFawlty
Posts: 796
Joined: Fri Jun 05, 2009 11:23 am

RE: FR @ BUD. How Legal And Safe Is This?

Mon Aug 06, 2012 2:44 am

Quoting EK413 (Reply 44):
Can't FR recoup the aerobridge costs in the airfare???

Do you know the basic principles of low cost carrier?
'Every year donkeys and mules kill more people than plane crashes'
 
AA94
Posts: 648
Joined: Fri Aug 19, 2011 1:37 am

RE: FR @ BUD. How Legal And Safe Is This?

Mon Aug 06, 2012 2:55 am

Quoting EK413 (Reply 44):
Can't FR recoup the aerobridge costs in the airfare???

Sure, they could. But that drives fares up, and people fly Ryanair because their fares are low. I'm not sure the cost of renting/utilising a jetway, but if Ryanair used a jetway to enplane/deplane each of their 1500 daily flights, that seems like it could definitely increase fares substantially.

Again, I'm not an expert, and I don't know the costs exactly, but I'm sure the execs at Ryanair see no need to spend more money when they're doing it well cheaply at this point.
If you can't take the heat, you best get out of the kitchen
 
BMI727
Posts: 11093
Joined: Mon Feb 02, 2009 9:29 pm

RE: FR @ BUD. How Legal And Safe Is This?

Mon Aug 06, 2012 3:07 am

Quoting EK413 (Reply 44):
Can't FR recoup the aerobridge costs in the airfare???

If they can charge X Euros as a fare, why would they want to eat up some of that in jetway fees rather than letting it be profit?
Why do Aerospace Engineering students have to turn things in on time?
 
Mir
Posts: 19092
Joined: Mon Jan 05, 2004 3:55 am

RE: FR @ BUD. How Legal And Safe Is This?

Mon Aug 06, 2012 3:23 am

Quoting krisyyz (Reply 33):
But I have heard passenger having to wait up to 40 minutes on the apron for boarding.

Passengers should not be waiting around on the ramp IMO. Walking to or from the airplane is fine, but the ramp can be a dangerous place, and time spent on it should be minimized for people who aren't trained on how to work there safely.

-Mir
7 billion, one nation, imagination...it's a beautiful day
 
krisyyz
Posts: 1266
Joined: Thu Nov 25, 2004 11:04 pm

RE: FR @ BUD. How Legal And Safe Is This?

Mon Aug 06, 2012 4:00 am

Quoting Mir (Reply 48):

Passengers should not be waiting around on the ramp IMO. Walking to or from the airplane is fine, but the ramp can be a dangerous place, and time spent on it should be minimized for people who aren't trained on how to work there safely.

Here is a video of FR ops at BUD in May. You can see the passengers standing on the apron while the FR 738 pulls onto the stand. The group of pax in the video were standing there for 15 minutes. According to the report (in Hungarian), FR is saving about 50HUF or 20 cents USD per passengers by boarding like this. The airport authority and FR says that the practice is completely safe.

http://www.hirado.hu/Hirek/2012/04/2...n_varnak_a_Ryanair_utasai__50.aspx

KrisYYZ

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Baidu [Spider], dk44, Ejazz, Kiwirob, kriskim, LY777, MrBren, NolaMD88fan, qfflyer, RickNRoll, StTim, uta999, WIederling and 219 guests