Yet you manage to do some three headline examples where they did have the required legal allocation of fuel to hold then divert then hold at the diverted airport(so thats a non-story) and you have a maintainance issue where the backup failed which the German investigation said was down to a bad design by Boeing and it is Boeing that needs to redesign its parts.
So its low cost Boeing that is the problem yes?

Now remind me again, what is the reason why you never travel by aircraft?:hmmm:

His local airport only do flights, with Ryanair, to your nearest airport. I don't think he'd get the warmest reception. :hmm2:

I personally believe that there is a "crisis" if you need to Ryanair, :doh:

It seems that nowadays all businesses need to keep cutting costs in order to survived and budget airlines already have little fat they can trim. It's almost inevitable they will start skimping on maintenance too.

Here in the UK they tend to get bought out by the bigger players but then comes along another fat cat with dreams of owning they're own airline, even if the medium term ambition/aim is to sell it on at a later date to said bigger player.

That's a concern throughout the airline industry. US airlines are also increasingly moving their maintenance bases to Mexico, which to me would be kind of a concern. Especially since a lot of major airlines have aging fleets. Sounds like a recipe for trouble ahead.

Its pretty widespread, if it isn't completely outsurced its often a case of getting rid of all the workers and bringing in replacements on short term contracts with part time hours.
Thats progress and pursuit of free markets for ya.

Sounds like what we are having with the construction workers. :-?

Easyjet tend to be OK. I've had a few flights with them that have been delayed without any explanation - but I think this seems to be par for the course for with many airlines these days. Charges wise, there have been more than a couple of occasions that we've gone with BA over Easyjet because the cost difference was negligible for a far better flight experience.

Having said that, our last flight with BA was a pretty horrible experience but that was less to do with the actual flight than with the people on the ground being absolutely useless.

I will never ever fly with Ryanair again, though. All three occasions I've had to fly with them have been nasty.

A crisis really?
Your right!
The less wealthy or budget minded should never have an option. I am glad we are all swimming in dough!:timeout:


America has a simlar airline called Jet Blue, who has alot of news stories written about them. But Newark Liberty to Miami for 178$ is fair. And considering they got me there and back, with all my possessions in my suitcase still, am am satisfied.

They like to nickle and dime too, but I can go 4 hours without stuffing my face, nor do I need excessive baggage.

I can give you a pass as your comparison of budget airlines is to European carriers. American carriers are vastly inferior, with our laws of having to asskiss the "stews" or else be charged with a federal crime, it gives our "flight queens" carte blanch to be rude.

I can tolerate the rudeness if I am paying 150$ less.

Plus not everyone is as wealthy as others, but still would like to do things too. Even the proles, and lesser men like to travel. Budget airlines fill a need.

More importantly the US has the original low-cost airline, Southwest, who has started this operating model. RyanAir and others are basically Southwest copycats. JetBlue had been started largely by ex-Southwest execs. JetBlue is a luxury airline compared to RyanAir - they have fairly decent service, they don't rip off on every possible item, and they even have seat-back entertainment.

North American budget airlines tend to strike a more reasonable balance between cost and service than a lot of their European counterparts, which are into stripping down all they can. North American ones have actually been introducing more conveniences over the last few years; they do that because they compete with the far more expensive legacy airlines and are striving to get not only the "broke and want to get out of here at any cost" passengers, but also the traditional mid-price customer base. And in the case of Southwest, JetBlue or Canada's Westjet, they've been succeeding at it pretty brilliantly over the last few years, growing at the expense of the old guard's troubles. European low-costs currently seem to be mostly at each other's throats, rather than gunning for the traditional carriers.
My actual flight experiences with low-cost flying in the US have been pretty good and not that different from mainline. In fact given choice, I'd probably sooner fly with one of those than with Air Canada.

The wife and daughter flew Ryanair once...plastic bucket seats without any padding and a curtain at the entrance to the flight deck/cockpit instead of a door :doh:

Was that before 9/11? I thought that all commercial flights now must have armoured and locked doors to the flightdeck?

I thought the same thing, but assume that is only restricted to American carriers. I thought the locked cockpit doors was an American thing (law), and we hold no sovereign control over foreign companies, especially ones who generally do not operate here.

My last international flight, I got manhandled on the way out, but found coming back the security process was much less invasive. (Barcelona, Spain) so I assume it is national based laws. (lol, they even let me keep a jar of olives)

5 years ago mind you.

This picture on Wikipedia clearly shows a locked door, common to what you;'d see on US Airliners, here: http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedi...-800_Cabin.jpg

However, searching, I also found this...
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/travel/72...gulations.html

Guess what airline is mentioned up front in that article :88)