Your browser isn't supported
It looks like you're using an old web browser. To get the most out of the site and to ensure guides display correctly, we suggest upgrading your browser now. Download the latest:

Welcome to the MSE Forums

We're home to a fantastic community of MoneySavers but anyone can post. Please exercise caution & report spam, illegal, offensive or libellous posts/messages: click "report" or email forumteam@.

Search
  • FIRST POST
    • MSE Callum
    • By MSE Callum 16th Mar 17, 6:56 AM
    • 250Posts
    • 29Thanks
    MSE Callum
    0 WOW
    MSE News: Easyjet passengers told they'll have to fly on Latvian airline's planes
    • #1
    • 16th Mar 17, 6:56 AM
    0 WOW
    MSE News: Easyjet passengers told they'll have to fly on Latvian airline's planes 16th Mar 17 at 6:56 AM
    Passengers due to fly with Easyjet this summer may end up flying on aircraft operated by Latvian-based carrier SmartLynx...
    Read the full story:
    'Easyjet passengers with summer bookings told they'll have to fly on Latvian airline's planes - your rights'

    Click reply below to discuss. If you haven’t already, join the forum to reply. If you aren’t sure how it all works, read our New to Forum? Intro Guide.
Page 3
    • richardw
    • By richardw 17th Mar 17, 5:18 PM
    • 17,475 Posts
    • 7,079 Thanks
    richardw
    OMG! easyJet have advised me of an aircraft change on my flight from Gatwick! Something different at the back of the aircraft.
    Posts are not advice and must not be relied upon.
    • agarnett
    • By agarnett 17th Mar 17, 5:25 PM
    • 1,050 Posts
    • 374 Thanks
    agarnett
    richardw, ... my original post here said (having misunderstood your now gone "... please delete" post at #40):

    OK. We can guess which side your bread is buttered


    but I can delete it now, and delete my next one or two (your choice if you also wish to delete your responses to them ... or not ... again your choice

    Apologies again for misinterpreting your intention ...
    Last edited by agarnett; 18-03-2017 at 3:37 PM. Reason: looking to retrospectively rectify misunderstanding with richardw
    • richardw
    • By richardw 17th Mar 17, 5:29 PM
    • 17,475 Posts
    • 7,079 Thanks
    richardw
    OK. We can guess which side your bread is buttered
    Originally posted by agarnett
    What are you assuming?
    Posts are not advice and must not be relied upon.
    • agarnett
    • By agarnett 17th Mar 17, 5:32 PM
    • 1,050 Posts
    • 374 Thanks
    agarnett
    I am assuming your interests are not best served by consumers questioning aviation industry practice.
    • richardw
    • By richardw 17th Mar 17, 5:40 PM
    • 17,475 Posts
    • 7,079 Thanks
    richardw
    I have no interests in any airline companies whatsoever.
    Posts are not advice and must not be relied upon.
    • agarnett
    • By agarnett 17th Mar 17, 5:48 PM
    • 1,050 Posts
    • 374 Thanks
    agarnett
    I didn't say you did. But I know for many years you have commented quite knowledgeably on many aviation issues. You don't gain knowledge like yours without some concentrated exposure at some stage in your life. Perhaps your exposure was in the travel industry. Perhaps it was a less direct connection.

    So why exactly do you want to poo poo the broad thrust of this thread? What is so essential about allowing major brand airlines and hanger-on ACMIs to operate the way they do that is of such obvious benefit to consumers that it overrides the potential concerns of or detriments to those same consumers arising from what I think many might wonder is them being 'baited and switched'?
    • richardw
    • By richardw 17th Mar 17, 6:11 PM
    • 17,475 Posts
    • 7,079 Thanks
    richardw
    I disagree that this measure is a safety problem.

    My aviation knowledge has been gained as an observer, nothing else.
    Last edited by richardw; 17-03-2017 at 6:15 PM.
    Posts are not advice and must not be relied upon.
    • agarnett
    • By agarnett 17th Mar 17, 6:25 PM
    • 1,050 Posts
    • 374 Thanks
    agarnett
    Fine, so in an attempt to reinforce your opinion, can you say:
    • in the case of an AMCI, in what ways are the control of continuing airworthiness particularly assured, despite the relatively less frequent opportunity for sight inspections by the ACMI's CAMO Airworthiness Staff, as compared to
    • the (presumably more frequent and regular) opportunities for sight inspections by the major airline's Airworthiness Staff on their own fleet operating from their own bases?
    • richardw
    • By richardw 17th Mar 17, 6:33 PM
    • 17,475 Posts
    • 7,079 Thanks
    richardw
    The respective CAAs, Smartlynx and easyJet.
    Last edited by richardw; 17-03-2017 at 6:40 PM.
    Posts are not advice and must not be relied upon.
    • agarnett
    • By agarnett 17th Mar 17, 7:03 PM
    • 1,050 Posts
    • 374 Thanks
    agarnett
    Who leads? Can you see UK CAA having much say in it? They regulate Easy, don't they? But what influence do they have over wet-lease arrangements like this where it isn't even Easy crews or engineers working on the aircraft (or is it in the latter case?).

    Have already pointed out I think that the entire Latvia register of aircraft seems only to be 300 aircraft, and the only Airbus on it seem to be Smartlynx. Is Latvia's CAA effective or is it one man and a dog?

    It seems Easyjet have already decided they can afford the reputational hit (if there is one) caused by what I would call substituting a reduced offer to a select minority of their customers. Beyond that, their logo won't be on the aircraft will it?

    So as this seems to be in support of their lo-cost strategy, and the hit was worth it, might they then only be tempted purely to protect their commercial position with tickbox CYA due diligence on the presented paper ?

    Will they, do you think, be offering their own CAMO and base staff to oversee the aircraft as a friendly offer of belt and braces or is that commercially risky because it risks blurring lines of accountability and causing ambiguity? (for example)
    Last edited by agarnett; 18-03-2017 at 2:04 AM.
    • fifeken
    • By fifeken 18th Mar 17, 6:13 AM
    • 2,085 Posts
    • 1,070 Thanks
    fifeken
    . . . .I don't have to be any kind of expert to come here to MSE . . . .

    For the avoidance of doubt, I am not employed as a licensed engineer, nor as licensed commercial pilot, nor have I ever been either . . . .
    Originally posted by agarnett
    You are stating the obvious with this, and a Google expert is no airline operations expert in my mind.

    What you think and what you prefer need have no rational basis (as with us all), and I trust the airline industry and their overseers more than I trust random musings on here.

    Look at you're preferred airlines over the years and you'll likely see similar arrangements abound.
    Last edited by fifeken; 18-03-2017 at 6:18 AM.
    • fifeken
    • By fifeken 18th Mar 17, 6:16 AM
    • 2,085 Posts
    • 1,070 Thanks
    fifeken
    OMG! easyJet have advised me of an aircraft change on my flight from Gatwick! Something different at the back of the aircraft.
    Originally posted by richardw
    I've got two of these next month. I was assuming changes in easyJet A320s from 186 seats to 180, but it could be SmartLynx planes.
    • coffeehound
    • By coffeehound 18th Mar 17, 7:14 AM
    • 669 Posts
    • 1,000 Thanks
    coffeehound
    Who leads? Can you see UK CAA having much say in it? They regulate Easy, don't they? But what influence do they have over wet-lease arrangements like this where it isn't even Easy crews or engineers working on the aircraft (or is it in the latter case?).
    Originally posted by agarnett
    I would *guess* that the contract between Easy and Smartlynx will include an arrangement where Easy handles line maintenance, so dailies, overnight and minor defect rectification under the authority of SL's CAMO. Copies of the tech log pages and maintenance paperwork will be emailed to Smartlynx CAMO department on a daily basis so that they can maintain the aircraft and engine logs and track the hangar maintenance checks, which are governed by flight hours and calendar intervals.

    Depending on the length of the lease SL might subcontract hangar inputs to Easy as well, or they might prefer to schedule these elsewhere to use cheaper labour rates in Eastern Europe (it's worth mentioning that plenty of base maintenance for UK-registered airlines is carried out at East European providers, too). Basically there'll be regular communications between Easy and SL every day.

    In terms of the regulation, EASA will no doubt be working closely with the newer members to ensure the NAAs are on top of their obligations. The operators are subject to detailed scrutiny before they are awarded e.g. their AOC, maintenance, training, and CAMO approvals, and with ongoing audits and inspections.
    • peachyprice
    • By peachyprice 18th Mar 17, 8:07 AM
    • 17,856 Posts
    • 40,662 Thanks
    peachyprice
    MSE were spot on by starting this discussion.
    Originally posted by agarnett
    So that an armchair warrior using google for a source of information can whip everyone up into a frenzy with self-indulgent ramblings? Yes, I guess that is the response they were after. Well done MSE.

    The funniest thing is the one person whose opinion you held is such high esteem in your first reponse it the person most vehemently rebutting your BS.
    Accept your past without regret, handle your present with confidence and face your future without fear
    • agarnett
    • By agarnett 18th Mar 17, 10:47 AM
    • 1,050 Posts
    • 374 Thanks
    agarnett
    I offered our richardw a pedestal, yes.

    But I discovered he mightn't like too much the light I shone on the aviation industry. Maybe he doesn't understand as much as I thought he might.

    Yes I am a pretty discerning Googler, but then most scientific, engineering and forensic minds are. It is also no accident that one of the oldest groups with common interest on the internet were aviation people. I was a BBS member of one such group long before I had a browser on my computer. Yes that long!

    We all have limits. For example, I can take simple engines apart and put them back together - have been doing it 45 years. But I daren't try it with modern cars for fear of messing up some new technology that I didn't recognise!

    Another example: Last week I picked up for nothing a second hand 40 inch 2013 Samsung TV that a friend had lost patience with and replaced. I got it working when it clearly had a fault which meant it only stayed on for 2 minutes when I got it, but then I think I have bricked it. I was over confident, thought I was on a roll and took a step too far in upgrading the firmware without really knowing what I was doing other than Googling a bit further. I was annoyed with myself but at least I learned something without it costing a penny from my pocket!

    I can usually repair personal computers software-wise or hardware-wise when owners have given up. I can even program computers in a modest way, but I can't write apps for mobile phones because I have never tried, so I haven't learned. I can sensibly instruct lawyers on a wide variety of issues without costing myself a fortune, but I can't guarantee I can win an argument on MSE on any issue.

    I believe in transparency in consumer markets. I enjoy travel, but I haven't used a travel agent for 35 years. I make my own arrangements - yes so do most people now, but I always have. Most people have been playing catch-up in that regard.

    I fly a heck of a lot. Hell, I have even flown myself, but I can't fly an Airbus.

    Message is: I am one of those unfortunates who has accumulated a lot of knowledge covering a lot of subjects. I may be no absolute expert in any. That doesn't disbar me from commenting knowledgeably on the ones I choose. Even aviation engineers and pilots make mistakes because they don't know enough sometimes to do the right thing. We all learn from it and do better next time.


    I do not own an armchair like those MSE'ers who sit in theirs and clearly cannot abide a smarta$$. Story of my life if I was bothered to tell it that way! You can get over it.


    There was a very sound consumer protection reason why MSE created this thread. It relates to the possibility of an outlawed commercial practice in play. I wouldn't go as far as to say it definitely is, but I have opened up the box for those who wish to peer in before they buy.

    Consumer law has developed in such a way that in the EU, if your flight is delayed by more than 3 hours, you can claim €250 compensation. I have said that I could claim a couple of those from Ryanair from the last few years if I was so disposed, but I still haven't, and am unlikely to now, because I like very much the way Ryanair have changed. I already get very very good service from them and I trust their current operation because I know it better than most. It would be illogical to say I trust the whole airline industry because I trust Ryanair. Especially given the amount of knowledge I have accumulated.

    A couple of years ago, I had second thoughts when I inadvertently bought a codeshare flight from a large European brand airline, but ended up too late realising the flight was with a non-EU airline I didn't much trust. So my kids came to meet me on holiday on an operation I was worried about. I thought I was buying into brand I knew. On balance I let it ride. I lived with a risk I did not intend to take, but I won't do that again so easily.

    When I choose flights, I do not choose the cheapest, although often Ryanair still is. When I buy flights I buy into a brand because I know something about its features and the benefits I can get from those.

    I know a little bit about Easyjet and have flown with them but not for a few years now. I would easily buy Easy if they were going my way. However, despite my Googling, I know very little about Smartlynx other than that Easy have allowed their name to be associated with Smartlynx. I found that surprising when I read about it on MSE, and so I have developed my thoughts.

    Perhaps there should be a new law that says passengers get €250 compensation if they find themselves on an ACMI but weren't warned when they bought the ticket that it is likely you are being flown by an ACMI company, and not by the brand itself?

    You don't like my thoughts. I get it.

    Sadly, no-one in the thread has given any logical reason why I should change my thoughts. I am open-minded. Try me with logic and reasoned argument.

    Meantime, I shall continue to agree with MSE that there is a question to be asked here about the correctness of deliberately substituting a lesser product for the one purchased at the point of delivery.

    I can live with the suggestion that it is better to avoid a long delay by getting a decent ACMI substitute to fill the gap on the day a mainline aircraft goes tech. I can even agree that an operation like Easy could even have such aircraft on standby at base to cover such eventuality if all their own were at full stretch, but to deliberately hire in a smaller outfit to cover a planned increase in normal demand doesn't strike me as right unless it is declared right up front when you book the flight.

    Such practice almost - but not quite of course because Easy have associated themselves with Smartlynx - reminds me a little (not a lot) of the operators who for decades have swarmed around, and made most of their annual income from the seasonal demand for Haj flights.

    Haj flights most definitely got generally known in the industry as the seamier side once upon a time. Maybe still are. I am not saying Smartlynx is on the seamier side. They are however not Easyjet.

    All airlines are NOT the same. Some of us are discerning buyers. You can be if you want to be.

    Some people blindly trust the NHS. I don't, but I have to use them. Eyes wide shut if you like. Your choice.
    Last edited by agarnett; 19-03-2017 at 10:20 AM. Reason: rectifying a misinderstanding with richardw
    • peachyprice
    • By peachyprice 18th Mar 17, 11:26 AM
    • 17,856 Posts
    • 40,662 Thanks
    peachyprice
    More inane ramblings..............
    Accept your past without regret, handle your present with confidence and face your future without fear
    • richardw
    • By richardw 18th Mar 17, 11:43 AM
    • 17,475 Posts
    • 7,079 Thanks
    richardw
    agarnett is making wrong assumptions about my views, please ignore all of his assumptions about my views.

    agarnett, you appear to feel very strongly about these issues, please liaise with the relevant regulatory authorities and if necessary, use FOI requests under the FOI act.
    Posts are not advice and must not be relied upon.
    • richardw
    • By richardw 18th Mar 17, 11:52 AM
    • 17,475 Posts
    • 7,079 Thanks
    richardw
    I offered our richardw a pedestal, yes.

    But I discovered he doesn't like too much light shone on the aviation industry...
    Originally posted by agarnett
    Your assumptions are wrong.

    Please stop making incorrect comments about my likes/ dislikes.
    Last edited by richardw; 18-03-2017 at 12:29 PM.
    Posts are not advice and must not be relied upon.
    • agarnett
    • By agarnett 18th Mar 17, 1:08 PM
    • 1,050 Posts
    • 374 Thanks
    agarnett
    richardw, you made a "please delete ..." comment at now gone post #40 which I took wrongly for as you suggesting the thread be deleted.

    I apologise for misinterpreting what you were trying to do which was to just delete your own post., which is now gone.

    I have been open about my level of knowledge and motive.

    It is perhaps a sad fact that most MSE'ers are disposed to blindly trust services they don't understand - like airlines, and like the NHS.

    I am not a journalist, nor am I a campaigner for any particular cause currently, so I have no need for FOI requests, thanks. I've seen all I need to see and I have tried to show MSE'ers what is there to be seen.

    I shall be flying again tonight at 11 or 12 km high and that means I shall be trusting the complex life support system I place myself into. That is what a modern airliner is. It is not just an A to B machine. If the airliner suddenly depressurises at that altitude I shall be unconscious in 15 to 20 seconds. In fact within 5 minutes from leaving the runway I am usually totally reliant on the life support system which is a critical part of the aircraft, in order to stay conscious.

    Even if I had breathing apparatus, if the machine broke up for any reason, I have no parachute and besides, I would freeze solid in moments at -56 degrees C or so. For my twenty-quid air fare I rely rather a lot on the fact that my ticket purchase will work out for me, else you mightn't see me here again next week, eh? That'd be the real tragedy for some.

    We airline passengers take a hell of a lot as granted. I understand statistics better than most, so I do not take everything as granted. Like all of us, I choose what to take note of. You choose. I choose. We choose differently but may end up in seats next to one another nevertheless. Sometimes it's good to share why we choose differently in case it helps others. Sometimes it is not good, because they get scared. That's unfortunate if they are in a plane where they do not really want to be for too much longer. If they are sat on the ground reading this, then next time they buy a ticket they will perhaps make a more informed choice.

    Back onboard the aircraft, the people whose role it is to make sure the systems are working perfectly day in day out will not be in the aircraft with me. They are not the pilots. They are those on the ground with the necessary qualifications and inspection authorities to use their stamps and pens. The ground is usually the place where people are most susceptible to commercial pressure, isn't it? It can be a difficult place.

    peachyprice, my ramblings (and I will let that much ride) do nevertheless contain some sense and meaning. If you on the other hand wish to come here repeatedly to practice an inane ability to deny it completely out of hand, and target a poster for ridicule, then at least get control of your vocabulary please.

    All airlines are NOT the same. discerning ticket buyers know that.
    Last edited by agarnett; 18-03-2017 at 3:40 PM.
    • IAmWales
    • By IAmWales 18th Mar 17, 1:39 PM
    • 65 Posts
    • 118 Thanks
    IAmWales
    I'm sorry? What was this then? Right after one of my posts?

    I could give you the benefit of the doubt that you had posted something and then withdrawn it but didn't know how to completely delete the post, so was asking for your single post to be erased, but that would be rather odd given your MSE experience! I am sure you know how to delete your own posts.
    Originally posted by agarnett
    Your badgering of richard makes you come across as a bully. Poor form
Welcome to our new Forum!

Our aim is to save you money quickly and easily. We hope you like it!

Forum Team Contact us

Live Stats

4,844Posts Today

10,177Users online

Martin's Twitter