AER LINGUS DELAYS

Re: Aer Ryanair !!

I really appreciate your deep concern, but don't worry about me old son. Thanks to the numerous succesful property investments I've made down the years I'm very comfortable, ta. ;)

No, its the young fellas I feel sorry for.

Errr...the superglue comment...that was a JOKE.
Then again its not scaremongery either....most modern Airbus aircraft have their wings and tailplanes glued together. Betcha didn't know that eh!

Ryanair have bought so many planes their load factors collapsed in 2004, causing the corresponding collapse in share price (which-by the way- I forecast)...which has resulted in O'Leary having to find the money elsewhere.
Where? The staff of course!

Listen...why don't you have your argument about maintenance standards with the guy who started this thread - "SwoonO". He seems convinced that Aer Lingus maintenance standards are crappy because an aircraft broke down and he got delayed.
Off you go now...SICK HIM! :lol
 
Re: Aer Ryanair !!

Tharggy,

I wish I was as sure about one thing in life as your are about EVERYTHING in life. In spite of your excellent property portfolio, your well paid job and your encyclopaedic knowledge pool you clearly have a lot of unfinished business.

I suggest that you take some time out, enjoy your wealth and give us all a break while at the same time making the skies a lot safer.

Roy
 
Re: Aer Ryanair !!

Everything?
No, just aviation - I know everything about aviation. Absolutely.
Can I quote you?

Thank you.
 
Re: Aer Ryanair !!

Of course Tharggy, sure you're quoting everyone else so why not add me to the list :)

Roy
 
Re: Aer Ryanair !!

What about Y2K then...what a load of bollix that was! Cost a feckin' fortune, all for what...IT people like Gaybo exagerated the whole thing just to make loads of money. They're all wasters and drive around in Porsches etc. Sack the lot of 'em I say!
Click to expand...
By the same logic, let's get rid of all those useless radar & air-traffic-control systems in Dublin Airport because planes never crash around Dublin. That means there is no need for them - right? :rolleyes
 
Re: Aer Ryanair !!

In the case of Airport Infrastructure (Radar/ATC etc) there is sadly no end of evidence illustrating the unfortunate consequences of any deficiency.
In the case of Y2K buggery, there is barely one iota of evidence - anywhere - to prove that it was anything more than a gigantic hoax and money making wheeze dreamed up by the IT industry. Prove me wrong.

Incidentally onekeanO, you say:
- we all know that Ryanair have reduced their maintenance costs by buying loads of new planes and Air Lingus are in the process of doing the same. There has probably never been a safer time to fly ex-Dublin.
Click to expand...
You sound just like one of those over-excited advertising blurbs on the radio. Your comment is rubbish, here's why.

Firstly, a new aircraft does not guarentee safety. In fact new aircraft are every bit as prone to failure as older ones, sometimes even more so. You've probably heard of the famous British Midland Airways crash at East Midlands airport in1989. That aircraft was less than a year old when it had its engine failure - which resulted in a crash and 47 deaths. British Midland then had a carbon copy engine failure in a sister aircraft only a week later, luckily the crew got it down safely. The aircraft were then grounded for investigation. Faults were found in the basic design of the brand new engines!
Have you ever heard of someone buying a new car and finding it riddled with faults? Same thing can happen with a new aircraft.

Secondly, accidents don't just happen because of mechanical breakdowns. Human error is the single largest factor, and it happens whether you are in a new or old aircraft.

Thirdly, the very reason that onekeanO gives for believing things are 'safer now than ever' is the exact opposite to the truth!
Air Traffic volume is increasing at exponential rates thanks to lots of new aircraft. And while more business is good for business it results in increased pressure on infrastructure that was not built to cope. That coupled with increased pressure on crews to work longer hours with poorer working conditions (not even a drink of water or food in an +8 hour day) is a simple recipe for disaster. At the very time when maximum vigilance is required we are seeing tired and over worked crews thrown into the thick of it.

Whatever you think of airline managements brilliant cost cutting ideas, you have to ask yourself - where is the benefit in refusing a crew the chance to eat something or get a drink of water??? How far does it go?

Finally, to Gabriel. You are assessing my job as somehow equivalent to yours. Sorry mate, it isn't.
If you are a software developer for nuclear power stations or somesuch then perhaps an error you make in a line of code might have serious consequences down the line. But I guess thats not what you do. You probably develope run of the mill business software, and a mistake will probably do no more than upset your client and lose a few bob for your company.

If a pilot makes a mistake it may well result in the deaths of hundreds of people on board his aircraft, the loss of a machine worth hundreds of millions of dollars, and the potential to do just as much damage to whatever or whoever is below when he prangs it.

Our job is a continual battle against dangerous weather, mechanical failure, poor infrastructure, fatigue, and human fallibility. The travelling public have been lulled into the cushy safe surface image that the airlines want you to see, and you've learned to take it all for granted, its just a bus service, and the cheaper the better.
Someday you may get your eyes opened.
 
Re: Aer Ryanair !!

In the case of Y2K buggery, there is barely one iota of evidence - anywhere - to prove that it was anything more than a gigantic hoax and money making wheeze dreamed up by the IT industry. Prove me wrong.
Click to expand...
To use your own words, Tharggy, "Your comment is rubbish, here's why"

The Y2K problem were real, very real. Of course, it didn't involve planes falling out of the sky and toasters turning into mad rampaging robots as per much of the media hype. But real problems did occur. For some examples, check out which outlined some problems that had already occured;

A state prison released prisoners from jail prematurely because the computer program that calculated release dates processed a Year 2000 release as 1900 because it used a 2-digit year. Therefore, the program determined that the prisoners had been in jail far longer than their sentences.

The Gartner Group reported that a chemical company that shipped perishable chemicals in January 1995 had a five-year expiration date. The expiration dates were printed as 1/4/00. When this date was entered into the receiving company's inventory system, it was rejected because the computer program calculated the chemicals to be 95 years old. The chemicals were returned to the manufacturer, and the production line shut down for lack of materials.

Drivers licenses that are issued with an expiration date of "00" were being rejected by several major car rental agencies because the software could not process that year.

The Gartner Group reported that a drug with an expiration date (year) of " 00" was issued to an elderly woman who desperately needed the drug. However, the elderly woman thought that the drug was expired due to the " 00" date and elected not to take the drug. Her condition deteriorated until the situation was identified and rectified. The case is still pending in court.

Major credit cards were issued to cardholders with an expiration date (year) of "00". However, most merchants' authorization devices rejected these cards at the time of purchase due to an invalid expiration date. MasterCard and Visa have reported that they fixed the Year 2000 problem in their systems, but many merchants still have not upgraded their devices to handle the Year 2000.
Click to expand...

But I'm really disspointed that you could possibly assume that absence of major problems indicates there was no problem in the first place. There is a huge flaw in your logic.

Spend 15 minutes on Google and you'll find lots more information. If any business spent money on Y2K fixes without understanding why they were spending and what they were getting for their money, then more fool them. Obviously the fact that the IT guys got the Porsche's instead of just the glorified bus drivers of the sky for a change really gets up your nose. Get over it. Console yourself that the dot com crash in 2000 sent us all scurrying back to our Micras & Fiestas.
 
Y2K Scam

...where you belong.

I took your advice and did a quick Google.
All I could find were hundreds of sites like this one: which back up my assertion.

The clever twist was that, even when nothing happened, the IT fraternity could claim they saved the day (for a hefty fee of course)...just like you do.

The whole scam ammounted to sabotage, nothing less.
Who put the (alleged) "Y2K bug" in every piece of software written before 2000?...Why...the IT developers themselves of course! :lol

The Gartner Group reported that a drug with an expiration date (year) of " 00" was issued to an elderly woman who desperately needed the drug. However, the elderly woman thought that the drug was expired due to the " 00" date and elected not to take the drug. Her condition deteriorated until the situation was identified and rectified.
Click to expand...
Is this what you think passes for serious evidence of a fictional computer bug? An old lady frightened of the numbers '00'?

Shysters!!
 
Re: Aer Ryanair !!

Sorry to see the whole issue has gone over your head. It's clear that the smart guys are the ones who write the software that now fly the planes most of the time rather than the bus drivers who sit up the front and press a few buttons.

Your facile attempts to blame the IT guys contrasts nicely with your Teflon-like diversion of blame for the wind damage at Dublin Airport. Of course, that was the fault of management and nothing to do with the pilots. But when there is a problem with the IT systems, it is all the developers fault - nothing to do with the business guys who spec'ed the systems, or the accountants who cut the costs in the hardware budget (The original rationale for use of 2 digit dates was to save disk space from the bad old days when disk space cost more than programmer time).

You really do need to think a little deeper about this one before you continue spouting off.

I presume you expect us to believe that every major corporation worldwide fell for this major hoax - right? Only you and a few internet cranks copped on - right? So why isn't Eliot Spritzer on the case and chasing down the fraudsters? Why isn't the SEC & IFSRA and the FSA chasing the fraudsters? It's easy to pump out bland conspiracy theories - a few facts would be nice.
 
Y2K Scam

Maybe Eliot (whoever he is) thought it would be unAmerican to expose the stupidity and greed of some of the major corporations of America. And pursuing every two bit IT scammer on the planet would just clog up the jails.

By the way...if you wrote any code for aircraft systems...your work truly sucks.
Couldn't get that right either!

Still its comforting to know that thanks to your incompetence, I'll never be out of a job.
 
Re: Y2K Scam

Maybe Eliot (whoever he is) thought it would be unAmerican to expose the stupidity and greed of some of the major corporations of America.
Click to expand...
Wow - you really got a belt from the flawed logic stick on your way home tonight. Elliot has been fiercly pursueing many major corporations - Merrill Lynch, Tyco, St Paul insurance etc etc without fear for years now. He's not afraid to expose their greed.
 
Re: Y2K Scam

The Caped Crusader....sounds really scary....he should defintely have pulled his knickers on outside his tights and gone after you lot. Scaring old ladies can really get you in big trouble with superheroes ya know.
 
Re: Y2K Scam

Do the words egotistical and self-obsessed mean anything to you Asi?
 
Re: Y2K Scam

Errr...lets see...um, egotistical...yep I know that word...and err, um, self obsessed...yep know that word too.
Do I win a prize?

Gabriel are you female? I sense a certain bitchiness in your persona. Miaooowww.

Well, I think I proved my point anyhow, which was - even 'IT Developers' will become boringly egotistical and self obsessed (thanks Gaybo) when goaded sufficiently. See, you're just human too, after all.
Get off your bloody high horses.
 
Re: Y2K Scam

Well, I think I proved my point anyhow, which was - even 'IT Developers' will become boringly egotistical and self obsessed (thanks Gaybo) when goaded sufficiently
Click to expand...
Ah now I get it. Apologies for being slow. And there was me thinking that you were just trying to demonstrate how little you know about IT.
 
Re: Aer Ryanair !!

As usual I find your posts very entertaining and enjoyable and find it hard to believe that you weren't smiling when you typed them but you are leaving yourself wide open with comments like "No, just aviation - I know everything about aviation. Absolutely."
If that is the case can you explain the process used to stir the aluminium sheets together that make up the wings on the new airbus super-jumbo. The normal way to join metal plates together is to weld them but as you well know this will cause stresses to form along the join line that will show up under X-ray. Airbus developed a method where the sheets could be butted up against each other and the material heated to a stage where the molecules could be stirred together without a stress joint showing up under x-ray. I don't understand how they can heat an alloy that contains materials which have different glass transition temperatures and not effect it's composition. Can you clear that one up for me?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top