Report: 3 Ryanair Flights Make Emergency Landings for Low Fuel-UPDATE
Ryanair Boeing 737
Ryanair’s ‘Minimum Fuel Policy’ Could Have Made Issue Worse
Three Ryanair jets were forced to make emergency landings at Valencia, Spain within minutes of each other two weeks ago when the planes ran low on fuel.
Thunderstorms on July 26th over Madrid, Spain (where the flights were due to land) caused delays and subsequent holding patterns for many flights that day.
Once the Ryanair planes ran low on fuel, they then had to issue mayday calls to Valencia Airport and land right away.
‘Ryanair spokesman Stephen McNamara confirmed the low-fuel emergencies to the Sunday Independent newspaper.
He said: “Due to thunderstorms over Madrid on Thursday (July 26), Spanish ATC (air traffic control) instructed Ryanair aircraft to divert to Valencia where they were placed in a hold pattern.
“Sometime later the aircraft advised ATC that they would not have sufficient fuel reserves to return to Madrid and were permitted to land in Valencia.
“All aircraft landed normally. Ryanair sincerely apologises to the passengers affected by these diversions, which were due to adverse weather.”’
Ryanair has adopted an ‘efficency drive’ that ‘discourages’ excess fuel being put on the planes:
A memorandum signed by Shane McKeon, deputy chief pilot and base captain at Stansted, and dated December 19, 2011, reiterates that pilots should only take on board the minimum as per the “plog” (planning log/flight plan):
“All of you are aware of our ongoing efficiency drive, particularly regarding fuel. The ‘plog+300kgs’ issue in particular has highlighted how further efficiencies are achievable and the number of ‘excess fuel carried with no explanation’ letters issued has fallen. There remain a small number of commanders who appear to have difficulty with operating with ‘plog+300′ or less.”
The memorandum then outlines some of the explanations that have been offered by flight commanders for taking on extra fuel which Captain McKeon says are not acceptable.
“The most unreasonable excuse is: ‘I like to land with three tonnes so I take the trip plus three tonnes.’ This is not Ryanair policy, this is completely unacceptable, and is not what you are remunerated to do.”
UPDATE:
Ryanair has released a statement on the incident above. You can read that HERE.
Category: Airnation
Comments (28)
Trackback URL | Comments RSS Feed
Sites That Link to this Post
- Ryanair Issues Statement on '3 Aircraft' Fuel Incident on July 26th | August 14, 2012
- Anonymous | August 14, 2012
- Ryanair Met Full EU OPS Compliance in Valencia Fuel Incident -Report | September 21, 2012
- Ryanair 'Putting Passengers at Risk' by Shaving Fuel Rules, Ryanair Pilots Claim- Report | December 31, 2012
Just the cost of doing business i suppose…
There is no excuse for getting so low on fuel that they had to make “mayday calls”. A pilot declares “Mayday” when there is an actual emergency not when he sees that he will not have enough fuel to continue to his original destination. If he’s gotten that far into trouble, he needs to get back into re-training. I’m wondering if the aviation writer, Lee Ferrara took some license with the ATC/Plane communications. More importantly is the “bust the pilots balls” attitude of the idiot Chief Pilot Shane McKeon who obviously has his nose so far up Michael O’Leary’s escape hatch that he’e willing to risk passengers’ lives for a few measly extra quid.
All aircraft are legally required to land with a specified minimum amount of fuel remaining. Ryannair has apparently calculated fuel usage to allow for optimum conditions only. Being held caused the aircraft to use more fuel, likely placing them below the legal minimum. Declaring a fuel emergency was the proper procedure. The pilots’ only fault is working for such a company in the first place.
Very well said.
THE CAA MUST SUSPEND RYANAIR’S OPERATING CERTIFICATION IMMEDIATELY. NOT SOLELY FOR THIS LATEST DEBACLE WHICH IS ANOTHER NAIL INTO RYAN AIRS COFFIN, THEIR CONTINUED ARROGANCE IN SO MANY SAFETY AREAS IS NO LONGER ACCEPTABLE. END OF!!!!!
Did they really declare “Mayday” or just declare a fuel emergency?? Airlines aren’t exactly “mandated” to carry more fuel than what they’d need, except for maybe a short holding time (not the case here).
Just the other day a Delta flight from BOS-JFK had to divert to PVD due to a ground stop at JFK. I can’t imagine they’d be required to load enough fuel to hold that long… Just as long as there are alternates and places to divert, airlines aren’t putting passengers in danger: unless the pilots neglect to keep track of the fuel. It may be an inconvenience to passengers, but i’d bet you passengers would rather divert than pony up the extra money to keep planes flying with extra fuel (weight).
Chris,
I don’t think you understand how things work in the airline business. Fuel requirements are calculated in an equation that involves number of souls, their anticipated baggage weight plus any freight that the aircraft may carry plus a reserve of 45 minutes of flight to divert to an alternate airport, in case the original destination is not available.
In this case they were running low on fuel for whatever reason, unanticipated weather etc. Sounds like they requested priority to land due to low fuel (that is not a Mayday). Passengers do not pay extra in case of diversions.
I don’t know if Europe has the same fuel reserve requirementsas we do in the US, but I suspect that they do.
Hill, i know what i’m talking about. I never suggested that passengers pay extra for a diversion. However if airlines are flying their planes heavy with extra fuel, the cost will pass onto the passenger. If the airline’s cost increase, fares do as well.
So you would rather pay less and have a risky flight than pay a bit more for security? Talk about saving at the wrong spot!
How is this “risky”? This is a VERY common occurrence. You should examine airports like JFK when there’s a ground stop! Planes divert quite frequently, and not just because they’re low on fuel. Who really wants to hold for more than 45 minutes on a domestic flight?
This flight was carrying more than enough fuel to get to it’s destination and held for as long as any flight should. This was not the only flight to divert, so i really don’t know why this story is bringing a lot of attention. Like i said above, this happens VERY frequently.
RyanAir is doing what they have to in order to stay in business, and quite frankly this is a very creative yet safe solution. You see similar carriers filing for bankruptcy, cutting on maintenance and not giving their pilots their salaries. THOSE are risky shortcuts.
suspend the operating certificate, MoL…you arent running a business that scoffs at the saftey of your passengers AS WELL AS their comfort! The Captain should carry whatever fuel he/she feels is safe. At the end of the day it is their butt and career on the line not Mr O’learys when it all falls to peices.
should have had 30 min holding over alt airfield.
Good head work by some professional pilots concerned for the safety of everyone. Leg requirment plus 45 min reserved is the fuel requirement. The 45 min reserve is for situations such as they encountered. It allows to safely devert to an alternate airport
Yeah, “it’s supposed to have .30min of fuel in what an holding concerns, however the Ryanair’s FUEL POLICY is TO RISKY. Ad last but no the least,, it’ s obvious that the Chief Pilot is a JACKASS considering the recommendation (????) written, commented and suggested!
ps: good luck RYANAIR!
This seems like a no story to me created by people who know nothing about aviation. There were probably other planes that landed at an alternate or never even left in the first place, but it makes a better story if you pick on one airline (especially one no one likes).
Planes have to divert due to weather and land at other airports all the time. The thing i am most surprised about is that they held them in the air, normally you would divert to an alternate and then go again once the weather has cleared up.
I am not backing Ryanair specifically here as I refuse to fly with them unless i absolutely have too (so far that’s only been once). I just get fed up of people scaremongering about flying when there is no need.
The same thing probably happened 100′s of times(if not more)the same day around the world for various airlines. We can control many things but the weather is not one of them. That’s just life.
I agree. This isn’t a big deal… Overseas, airlines have the discretion to carry as much or as little fuel as they want outside of the amt to reach the most distant alternate PLUS 45 minutes flying time. In this case, the plane had been holding for a very long time. The pilots were able to divert. Outside of the inconvenience for passengers, they were never in any danger.
Perhaps RyanAir should change it´s policy completely and only accept undernourished children on their flights, serve no meals (food before consumed takes up a lot of room and once consumed adds to the weight of the passengers). By the way I didn´t know that icecubes were so heavy that they add to fuel consumption. I wonder what the company´s CEO weighs and if he has his family on a strict low calory diet. As for pilots having to load just enough fuel as per `plog´, may I suggest RyanAir only fly under CAVU (ceiling and air visibility unlimited) conditions.
The legal requirement is to have enough fuel on-board at departure to fly to your destination, taking into account predicted winds, fly to an alternate airfield within a radius of 100 nautical miles of the original destination, and be able to hold for 45 minutes thereafter. The aircraft should then have 30 minutes of fuel on-board to safely land.
It was NOT a mayday, media…. If you have to go further than expected, you obviously need more fuel, this is why the piloted asked for fuel where HE WAS TOLD to land. Try to drive a car from Bright to London, then someone tell you to go Manchester, and get back to London, I guess you may need fuel in Manchester!!
True Marcos. We should have put the ‘mayday’ in quotes…as that was how it was reported.
Has anyone assembled the ATC recordings yet? I’m wondering if the crew asked to divert and if so what the “tone” of their communication sounded like.
Also most airlines don’t carry extra fuel due to the fact that you burn more carrying the extra weight. So it is very inefficient and when you factor that fuel is the biggest cost of a flight. This would be like kicking yourself in the balls just for the fun of it.
If you want to complain, wait till the airlines start kicking you off the flight because they now have to take extra fuel incase there is bad weather and might have to hold for 5 hours before they can land.
Elfyn, this happens already! People and baggage are often bumped off of flights due to weight limits.
Those news are basically paid advertising for Ryanair. We all know the marketing strategy of this company. No pilot would declare a Mayday for being low on fuel. JAA requires all IFR flights (including commercial flights) to carry additional fuel that would allow the aircraft to divert to an alternative airport and be for at least 45 minutes aloft. Valencia is about 150 NM from Madrid, that’s 20 minutes flight for a commercial airliner. If told to be on a waiting pattern for over 15 minutes, then we are getting into trouble. That would happen to Ryanair or to BA, for that matter…