Ryanair Landings

[ColCork]

The "green approach" kind of makes sense when you consider Ryanair's emphasis on keeping costs to a minimum.
But I wonder might it be a case of saving money on fuel but having to spend more on maintaining the landing gear?

Excellent point brah.

Landing gear components dont come cheap compared to a few liters of kerosene.

What would the best way to measure landing impact? A simple acceleration meter?

 

[jimmym]

did the passengers clap?

 

[BBJ]

Do ryan air still play the "Da de dah de dah" type fox hunt bugle sound after a successful "on time" landing?

Expected flight time - 1 hour
Ryan Air scheduled flight time - 1 hour 20 minutes
So even if Ryan Air land 15 minutes later than they really should they give themselves a pat on the back for being on or ahead of time :roll:

They've replaced it with another one. Last night's flight was late so we were spared it. It's an ill wind.....

 

[They]

Flights are 9.99 and people complain about landings. I fly ryanair a lot, some good experiences and some bad, but my average ticket one way is definitely under €30.

The fella in the cockpit is hardly one with 20 years flying experience, so you're not paying the big wages some other fellas would be on, and mix in all this with the other characteristics of the airline.

Flew in to Cork Monday morning in the wind, rain and fog. He landed 2nd time around, and even though it was sky/ground/sky/ground out the window for the last 20 seconds he met it bang on in fairness.

It's cheap for a reason, if ye want to be pampered with "soft" landings, fly aer lingus.

 

[menace404]

Last night, I travelled from Manchester to Dublin on Ryanair and it was my thirteenth flight this year. Twelve of them have been on Ryanair and the other was on SAS. I don't have too many grumbles with Mr O'Leary's carrier - it's inexpensive and usually punctual (although last night was an exception), but I do have a question.
Why is it that Ryanair landings are, let us say, almost inevitably much less smooth than those of other airlines? Last night's was round about regular for them - ie it loosened all my fillings but the previous couple were, frankly, a bit scary.
On the Dublin/Manchester flight the other day, the plane actually bounced. It came down with a thud, then went up again, and finally the wheels attached themselves to the tarmac with another resounding bang.
Three weeks ago, the impact was so violent that I wondered if the landing gear was about to detatch itself, especially as we swerved to one side before straightening out.

I might be wrong but its the plane manufacturer. Aer lingus use airbus planes which land very smoothly whereas Ryanair use Boeing which don't seem to have the same craftsmanship in suspension as airbus do.

 

[BBJ]

Flights are 9.99 and people complain about landings. I fly ryanair a lot, some good experiences and some bad, but my average ticket one way is definitely under €30.

The fella in the cockpit is hardly one with 20 years flying experience, so you're not paying the big wages some other fellas would be on, and mix in all this with the other characteristics of the airline.

Flew in to Cork Monday morning in the wind, rain and fog. He landed 2nd time around, and even though it was sky/ground/sky/ground out the window for the last 20 seconds he met it bang on in fairness.

It's cheap for a reason, if ye want to be pampered with "soft" landings, fly aer lingus.

If I wanted to be "pampered", I wouldn't have already flown on Ryanair a dozen times since January, and indeed hundreds of times over the years going back to when they started in the mid 1980s.
Rather than complaining, I was merely wondering whether there was a particular reason for their more "robust" approach to landing their aeroplanes.
Some of the responses on here indicate that it's to do with their cost-cutting approach and their desire to save a few bob on kerosene. That makes sense as does the fact that they fly a little slower (taking an hour to do what they previously did in 59 seconds) and carry a bit less juice in the tank. I've since heard that they also tend to slam on the brakes harder on landing in order to get off the runway quicker so that they can make their targetted 25 minute turnaround.

 

[BBJ]

I might be wrong but its the plane manufacturer. Aer lingus use airbus planes which land very smoothly whereas Ryanair use Boeing which don't seem to have the same craftsmanship in suspension as airbus do.

Isn't the airbus much more "computerised"?
In fact, I've heard that some pilots don't enjoy them as much as Boeings as there is so much less actual "flying" to do.

 

[They]

If I wanted to be "pampered", I wouldn't have already flown on Ryanair a dozen times since January, and indeed hundreds of times over the years going back to when they started in the mid 1980s.
Rather than complaining, I was merely wondering whether there was a particular reason for their more "robust" approach to landing their aeroplanes.
Some of the responses on here indicate that it's to do with their cost-cutting approach and their desire to save a few bob on kerosene. That makes sense as does the fact that they fly a little slower (taking an hour to do what they previously did in 59 seconds) and carry a bit less juice in the tank. I've since heard that they also tend to slam on the brakes harder on landing in order to get off the runway quicker so that they can make their targetted 25 minute turnaround.

"Slamming" on breaks would wear other bits of the plane harder, which in the long run would cost more surely. To my knowledge Ryanair own their planes as well, so surely they'd do all they can to increase their longevity and I'm sure "slamming on the breaks" wouldn't be the correct approach on that one for the safety of their planes and the humans inside. Also, all airport layouts are so different for exit of the runway etc, I'm sure braking to save money on kerosene is far down on the list in the pilots mind and no matter how well they do on the breaking front, they're still under the power of the lads in the towers.

Carrying less fuel is well known and once within safe limits, makes sense.

I'm sure its the pilot, and maybe their inexperience, that is the main reason for the odd hard landing.

Nevertheless, I'm speculating and it would be interesting to see if there is actually a solid reason behind it.

 

[Bennyton]

Flew in to Cork Monday morning in the wind, rain and fog. He landed 2nd time around, and even though it was sky/ground/sky/ground out the window for the last 20 seconds he met it bang on in fairness.

that's it, I've found my new quote.

B

 

[Tube a Pringles]

I might be wrong but its the plane manufacturer. Aer lingus use airbus planes which land very smoothly whereas Ryanair use Boeing which don't seem to have the same craftsmanship in suspension as airbus do.

It is. The 737 800 series landing gear system is a bit harder than the A320 equivalent. Neither Boeing nor Airbus make landing gear.

Both type pilots will manually land. They only have to log an autoland about once a month.