Jump to content
Coronavirus topics renamed and some locked. No new topics. ×
Manx Forums, Live Chat, Blogs & Classifieds for the Isle of Man
asitis

Interesting at the airport !

Recommended Posts

This comment on pprune sums it up:

 

I think without doubt this model of operation is broken. Its time the IOM Government woke up to their responsibilities and only allowed fully CAA licenced operators to work from the Island. All credit to the guys and gals at Citywing, they have had a good run, but this shambles should never have been allowed to continue after the Manx2 crash.

 

 

One could be forgiven for thinking that desperation to show growth in passenger figures paired with self-centered political and managerial incompetence may have led to this.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This comment on pprune sums it up:

 

I think without doubt this model of operation is broken. Its time the IOM Government woke up to their responsibilities and only allowed fully CAA licenced operators to work from the Island. All credit to the guys and gals at Citywing, they have had a good run, but this shambles should never have been allowed to continue after the Manx2 crash.

One could be forgiven for thinking that desperation to show growth in passenger figures paired with self-centered political and managerial incompetence may have led to this.

 

I disagree. As long as it is safe and reliable I don't have a problem with the model. If somebody sees a space in the market and can provide a service to the public by wet leasing aircraft because they do not have the capital or resources to do by other means then I don't have an issue. The problem seems to be for many who City Wing were using and the aircraft Van Air were operating. I expect if they had been wet leasing from Stobart Air or Eastern Airways then the vast majority would not have a problem.

 

Turn it on its head. If Van Air had sold the tickets & operated the flights then I expect many would still have the concerns expressed. If that is correct then the issue is with the parties not the model.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In many respects I agree with LL, there should be no problem with a ticket seller employing an airline to fly its brand, however !

 

In the much trumpeted days of EASA we have all been made equal in respect of regulation, and this beacon of aviation oversight means that an AOC valid wherever in their oversight umbrella is as good as any other.

 

In reality we all know that this is not the case and standards vary wildly from country to country as they have always done, in the past of course people knew what to avoid, now if the paperwork says its ok then its ok !

 

I guess it boils down to this, aviation is expensive , if a ticket seller were selling tickets as a front for say BA or Flybe (the real one not stobart) or even Easyjet there would be no issues, however the more fingers in the pie the more people have to have a profit on the operation and the thinner any slack becomes !

 

None of this of course excuses operations outside of any SOP's or even common sense !!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As stated elsewhere:

 

SP-KPR is due to position in from Warsaw overnight, arriving at 0920 as VAA200P. Its ETD from EPWA is 0510Z making it a 4hr 10min flight!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In many respects I agree with LL, there should be no problem with a ticket seller employing an airline to fly its brand, however !

 

In the much trumpeted days of EASA we have all been made equal in respect of regulation, and this beacon of aviation oversight means that an AOC valid wherever in their oversight umbrella is as good as any other.

 

In reality we all know that this is not the case and standards vary wildly from country to country as they have always done, in the past of course people knew what to avoid, now if the paperwork says its ok then its ok !

 

I guess it boils down to this, aviation is expensive , if a ticket seller were selling tickets as a front for say BA or Flybe (the real one not stobart) or even Easyjet there would be no issues, however the more fingers in the pie the more people have to have a profit on the operation and the thinner any slack becomes !

 

None of this of course excuses operations outside of any SOP's or even common sense !!

It isn't just that standards vary between country, although I'm sure they do. It is that the AOC holder may be operating a long way from the place where they are regulated, and therefore present difficulty in terms of effective regulation. They may also be in bed with the ticket seller to the extent where the chain of management becomes blurred and the operator starts to accept everyday operational decisions by the ticket seller as normal.

 

This is why I have no problem with, for example, Eastern flying BA routes. Both are 'kosher' airlines, with AOCs, with completely separate HQs and both operating within daily, indeed constant, oversight by the regulator.

Edited by guzzi
  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This comment on pprune sums it up:

 

 

I think without doubt this model of operation is broken. Its time the IOM Government woke up to their responsibilities and only allowed fully CAA licenced operators to work from the Island. All credit to the guys and gals at Citywing, they have had a good run, but this shambles should never have been allowed to continue after the Manx2 crash.

 

 

One could be forgiven for thinking that desperation to show growth in passenger figures paired with self-centered political and managerial incompetence may have led to this.

To be fair only a fucking idiot would have a view like that.

 

So, let me get this right, someone has a view that there is an agenda to get passenger numbers up by potentially flying and putting passenger lives at risk?

 

Seriously, some people need to give themselves a fucking shake.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm not defending a position.

 

Think about that comment - someone actually thinks that a politician or senior person in the airport is forcing or putting pressure on any flight to leave at the expense of the safety of passengers to add, what, 12 people to the passenger numbers?

 

It's the sort of shite GerryDandridge comes out with. Absolutely insane.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Are you suggesting that politicians aren't (or haven't) put people in potential harms way with their decisions? Regardless of whether they are in full possession of the relevant facts?

 

Do you remember the bendy buses?

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

In many respects I agree with LL, there should be no problem with a ticket seller employing an airline to fly its brand, however !

 

In the much trumpeted days of EASA we have all been made equal in respect of regulation, and this beacon of aviation oversight means that an AOC valid wherever in their oversight umbrella is as good as any other.

 

In reality we all know that this is not the case and standards vary wildly from country to country as they have always done, in the past of course people knew what to avoid, now if the paperwork says its ok then its ok !

 

I guess it boils down to this, aviation is expensive , if a ticket seller were selling tickets as a front for say BA or Flybe (the real one not stobart) or even Easyjet there would be no issues, however the more fingers in the pie the more people have to have a profit on the operation and the thinner any slack becomes !

 

None of this of course excuses operations outside of any SOP's or even common sense !!

It isn't just that standards vary between country, although I'm sure they do. It is that the AOC holder may be operating a long way from the place where they are regulated, and therefore present difficulty in terms of effective regulation. They may also be in bed with the ticket seller to the extent where the chain of management becomes blurred and the operator starts to accept everyday operational decisions by the ticket seller as normal.

 

This is why I have no problem with, for example, Eastern flying BA routes. Both are 'kosher' airlines, with AOCs, with completely separate HQs and both operating within daily, indeed constant, oversight by the regulator.

 

 

Agreed.

 

Another issue is that smaller aircraft and operators operators are less likely to have flight data analysis programmes that allow for the operation of the aircraft to be monitored and controlled. These were introduced a number of years ago and have proven a great asset in improving flight safety. It's surprising how rule based even the most 'individual' of pilots become when they know big brother is watching them!. Every day when I finish flying a data burst is sent from the aircraft to the flight safety department with all of that days flight data - they analyse it for trends and exceedances. you can be assured of a phone call at within 24 hrs if they see something they don't like. If it's of particular concern to them you'll be removed from flying duties.

 

The only problem I have with the Citywing operation is this lack of operational oversight and control of the operator they have doing their flights. Its such a shame that their crews have abused the trust put into them by the paying public time and time again, because there is a definite market for an operation such as this to serve.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Are you suggesting that politicians aren't (or haven't) put people in potential harms way with their decisions? Regardless of whether they are in full possession of the relevant facts?

 

Do you remember the bendy buses?

I'm suggesting that to say that airlines are forced/told/encouraged to fly regardless of safety to aid passenger numbers is simply insane.

 

I would draw your attention to the amount of passengers on that flight. Which was a maximum of 19 but probably nearer 10 or 12. In a wider picture of 804,000 last year.

 

I see no connection with buses to this incident.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No one has said the IoM government has urged Citywing or Vanair or anyone else to operate a flight in unsafe conditions. I don't believe that even of our amateurish government.

 

What they are saying is that the IoM Government ought to get tough with the ticket seller, Citywing, who are the only part of the layer cake that is based on the Island.

 

If unsafe practices exist and those arise or are exacerbated by something Citywing are doing, as they were shown to do within their predecessor Manx2, then the Gov have a responsibity to protect safety.

 

The attitude of Government so far has been laissez faire or even encouraging towards the Citywing set-up. Remember when Mr Bell returned in triumph from talks with the Scottish Government having brokered the restoration of Glasgow flights?

Edited by guzzi
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm not defending a position.

 

Think about that comment - someone actually thinks that a politician or senior person in the airport is forcing or putting pressure on any flight to leave at the expense of the safety of passengers to add, what, 12 people to the passenger numbers?

 

It's the sort of shite GerryDandridge comes out with. Absolutely insane.

 

That is totally not what I was saying. What I meant was very much what Guzzi said above. Latest after the Manx2 crash, a much stronger light should have been pointed in the direction of the people behind this operation. Instead IOMG and the incompetent muppets in charge were more than happy for them to do the exact same thing again, just under a different name. That shows a considerable disregard towards doing what would have been right and in the best interest of passengers flying to and from the island. Instead you can bet a sizable amount they were desperate not to cause a drop in passenger numbers by forcing mickey mouse outifts like shittywing out of manx skies. Seeing what just happened, it appears we very narrowly avoided a repeat of what happened in Cork and that simply beggars belief.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

In many respects I agree with LL, there should be no problem with a ticket seller employing an airline to fly its brand, however !

 

In the much trumpeted days of EASA we have all been made equal in respect of regulation, and this beacon of aviation oversight means that an AOC valid wherever in their oversight umbrella is as good as any other.

 

In reality we all know that this is not the case and standards vary wildly from country to country as they have always done, in the past of course people knew what to avoid, now if the paperwork says its ok then its ok !

 

I guess it boils down to this, aviation is expensive , if a ticket seller were selling tickets as a front for say BA or Flybe (the real one not stobart) or even Easyjet there would be no issues, however the more fingers in the pie the more people have to have a profit on the operation and the thinner any slack becomes !

 

None of this of course excuses operations outside of any SOP's or even common sense !!

It isn't just that standards vary between country, although I'm sure they do. It is that the AOC holder may be operating a long way from the place where they are regulated, and therefore present difficulty in terms of effective regulation. They may also be in bed with the ticket seller to the extent where the chain of management becomes blurred and the operator starts to accept everyday operational decisions by the ticket seller as normal.

 

This is why I have no problem with, for example, Eastern flying BA routes. Both are 'kosher' airlines, with AOCs, with completely separate HQs and both operating within daily, indeed constant, oversight by the regulator.

Agreed.

 

Another issue is that smaller aircraft and operators operators are less likely to have flight data analysis programmes that allow for the operation of the aircraft to be monitored and controlled. These were introduced a number of years ago and have proven a great asset in improving flight safety. It's surprising how rule based even the most 'individual' of pilots become when they know big brother is watching them!. Every day when I finish flying a data burst is sent from the aircraft to the flight safety department with all of that days flight data - they analyse it for trends and exceedances. you can be assured of a phone call at within 24 hrs if they see something they don't like. If it's of particular concern to them you'll be removed from flying duties.

 

The only problem I have with the Citywing operation is this lack of operational oversight and control of the operator they have doing their flights. Its such a shame that their crews have abused the trust put into them by the paying public time and time again, because there is a definite market for an operation such as this to serve.

I'll go wherever you're going!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...