An Open letter to RYANAIR

Woby_Tide

are you going to be sending this letter of complaint by recorded delivery or in a shipping container? I really think you're making a bad mistake by trivialising your complaint with presumptions about what happened to the flight etc, stick to the downfall in Ryanairs procedures/operations once your flight was cancelled and state what you expect from them and in what time frame as someone stated earlier, at least that way you may well get something back. The more long winded you make it the less likely they will put the effort in to establish the facts on all your points, over the costs you are aiming to claim it's not in their or your interests to devote that much time to it.

as an aside, do you have aspergers syndrome or something similar Peter?

burbs_2

i have not read every reply to be honest so this may have been said before. Ryanair are a no frills airline, if you want someone to look after you then pay for it and go with BA. if you are paying pennies to fly then you are not going to get a service to rival a company charging you hundreds.

Ryanair have been complained about many times (watchdog etc) and they state that their terms and condition sare always abidied to. i have not read them and do not fly by them but they have stated that they set out their compensation policy and they always stick to it. You agree to these terms and conditions, if you dont like them then dont use them.

If Ryanair paid out compensation all the time then their prices would have too shoot up to compensate it and then no doubt people would be on here moaning again. you get what you pay for.

peterbaker

Woby_Tide wrote:

...as an aside, do you have aspergers syndrome or something similar Peter?

Well they say we are all suffering from something! The answer to that could be yes maybe a little tiny bit, but it has never made it onto my medical notes AFAIK!

My "letter" was just the title of a thread which has taken me a little further than I first imagined ! As for what I send to Ryanair about my out of pocket expenses, I long ago took the point that it should be brief and succinct. To be honest I am just annoyed that I have to write at all, about anything to do with their operations! They should have booked my Esbjerg ticket but they didn't, they should be more careful with our ears, but they aren't, and they should be continually questioned about their modus operandi because it is continually pushing the envelope and dare I say ground-breaking, but they are not! Someone needs to do it!

The equipment they use is mercifully extremely reliable. I think it needs to be, the way they push it. I use them a lot so I feel able to comment. They have expanded enormously fast and are about to make another quantum leap judging by the recently announced new order for 70 aircraft. They ARE already our main scheduled airline into Europe and they are not even British. They are doing things far differently to the likes of the old BA. They even boast that they are 50% cheaper than Easyjet! So what kind of financial and operational model supports their lighter than air excursions? I think it is in the public interest to discuss some of what they do differently and not to allow habitual observations to be dismissed as "normal" or "similar" to other airlines when actually they are quite likely not to be so, and more likely to be as a result of their different ways.

andy88_2

Peter try this. In a car on a 1 in 8 slope on a German autobahn, drive at 82 mph. You are climbing or descending at 900 feet per minute. It is true that this will be for less time, but I never saw a speed limit of 44 km/hour in such a place. Aviation standards are stricter than most walks of life. If you don't like flying or that airline, cycle through East Anglia for your holidays.

andy88_2

... and forget about claims for accommodation or food. On low cost airlines even the captain pays for his or her sandwich.

peterbaker

Andy, I guess I just don't much like your politics. I get annoyed with anyone who dismisses criticism with "if you don't like it, go away" especially when it's a highly subsidised service that is important to well-being of the whole country that's under discussion. Ryanair is not just another business. It's a phenomenum.

For your information, aviation standards have never been under such a constant onslaught of requests for variation to accommodate fast-turnaround-growing-like-topsy-outfits as they are right now. I spent 6 months full time a year or so ago studying and discussing how they might be interpreted and applied in the present aviation scene. I didn't get all the answers I would have liked and I suspect no-one knows them all.

As you implied earlier, complacence is dangerous. Aviation is not immune from complacence caused by commercial distraction although it might have been nice to assume that by now it was...like TB in the UK, you may have thought it was eradicated before you were born but now we are dealing with a whole new ball game in demand for population movement we are having to think again on both fronts.

peterbaker

andy88 wrote:

Peter try this. In a car on a 1 in 8 slope on a German autobahn, drive at 82 mph. You are climbing or descending at 900 feet per minute. It is true that this will be for less time, but I never saw a speed limit of 44 km/hour in such a place.

Actually that's a nice little illustration Andy!

But you are so right about it being for less time than a typical 737 descent which is 20 minutes at 300 feet per minute not a simple 1 or two minutes at 900 which is the worst you can really imagine on an autobahn. Normal ears do indeed pop in a fast car going up and down hills so I am glad you got the gist of it!

Now imagine what happens if the kids ears in the back of the car don't "pop" nicely and you hit that slow bit of traffic doing 44km/h but continue to descend down your 1 in 8 autobahn from the top of an imaginery but significant alp somewhere for another 14 minutes at the slower pace. Do you think the kids would remain silent and comfortable?

Over and out for tonite!

andy88_2

People with colds or sinus problems or similar should not be flying. Anybody else is not as adversely affected as you pretend. If your kids are badly affected don't take them.

peterbaker

andy88 wrote:

People with colds or sinus problems or similar should not be flying. Anybody else is not as adversely affected as you pretend. If your kids are badly affected don't take them.

I was right, your politics stink - you are insensitive to problems that don't affect you directly. I don't understand your contrary motives or why you simplisticly think that people "with colds" shouldn't fly. Pilots with colds shouldn't fly. Are you mixing up your knowledge, or maybe basing it on some travel advisory leaflet dated 1936 perhaps?? I suppose you think a travel insurance company would pay for a cancelled holiday if a policyholder wrote claiming they didn't fly because they had a cold or sinus problems? Don't be a twit.

andy88_2

You've been whingeing for days about air pressure differences; now you're belittling the effects of it. I'm not saying people who are ill should be prevented from flying - but it might be selfish to spread the germs in an enclosed area where the air is recycled so much - I think you were the one who blamed the spread of certain diseases on increased mobility. If you don't understand friendly advice ask your doctor whether flying in that condition will do you any favours; it will badly aggravate it. Go in with a congested head cold; come out with a punctured eardrum if you wish but don't blame anybody but yourself. Then you'll be on here for days complaining that Ryanair failed to warn you of the severe head pains you'd already told us about, but seemed to have forgotten. Who is the twit?