Ryanair

[CM.]

Ryanair thread for Teesside.

Routes served-

Alicante (Year round)- 2 Weekly Mondays and Fridays (Tuesdays and Saturdays in Summer season)
Palma- (Summer Seasonal) 2 Weekly Fridays and Sundays
Faro- (Summer Seasonal) 2 Weekly Wednesdays and Saturdays
Corfu- (Summer Seasonal) 1 Weekly Saturday flight.

 

[CWL94]

Alicante now showing 3x weekly in the app for W23/24!

Additional Sunday flight added alongside current Monday and Friday.

 

[Sherburnflyer92]

If Ryanair add canary bases back into the network I wonder if Teeside will see a link to Tenerife initially.

 

[CWL94]

If Ryanair add canary bases back into the network I wonder if Teeside will see a link to Tenerife initially.

Ryanair reopened their bases in Tenerife and Lanzarote this summer so a year round TFS is certainly a possibility

 

[Stagman]

Good to hear positivity moving forward.

 

[pug]

FAO finally appears to be getting loaded for S24, which is reassuring that the airport is maintaining at least what it had in S23 in terms of passenger flights.

 

[LBAYORKIE]

It seems incredible during the last few weeks if storms, Ryanair seem to prefer diverting from northern airports to Scotland and even the continent rather than Teesside.

 

[Aviador]

It seems incredible during the last few weeks if storms, Ryanair seem to prefer diverting from northern airports to Scotland and even the continent rather than Teesside.

I'm not familiar with how many flights are currently operating into Teeside but could this be down to staffing? Standard crewing for ground handling would normally be seven or eight people in total. You usually have two who deal with steps and baggage handling. A pushback team of two who would usually assist with baggage handling. A couple of passenger agents to meet the passengers and to escort them to the arrivals facility. You'd also normally expect a dispatcher to meet the aircraft. So clearly, if the airport doesn't have the staffing levels to fulfil this service level then maybe that's why Teeside isn't considered as a diversion airfield at the moment.

 

[LBAYORKIE]

I'm not familiar with how many flights are currently operating into Teeside but could this be down to staffing? Standard crewing for ground handling would normally be seven or eight people in total. You usually have two who deal with steps and baggage handling. A pushback team of two who would usually assist with baggage handling. A couple of passenger agents to meet the passengers and to escort them to the arrivals facility. You'd also normally expect a dispatcher to meet the aircraft. So clearly, if the airport doesn't have the staffing levels to fulfil this service level then maybe that's why Teeside isn't considered as a diversion airfield at the moment.

It could be lack of staff. Maybe someone on the forum would know for sure.

 

[Jerry]

It seems incredible during the last few weeks if storms, Ryanair seem to prefer diverting from northern airports to Scotland and even the continent rather than Teesside.

Well they have bases in Scotland and don't have one in Teesside.

 

[Stagman]

They were able to cater diversions the other month after the Leeds TUI incident after able to scale up staff numbers and got two diverts in on the Saturday.

Just depends on what staff and stand availability, but what onward facilities available such as coaches/ mini buses etc. But with it being weather related, could be a case of same conditions expected at Teesside as it was in Leeds, so opted slightly further away for better chances of getting in and given fuel levels on board if need a few attempts. Allsorts of calculations were made by crews, where is best and gives enough fuel to get few attempts of getting in if required. Instead of attempt hopping from one airport to another with fuel dwindling all the time.

Think Teesside did get some private/ biz diversions, non airline.

 

[LBAYORKIE]

They were able to cater diversions the other month after the Leeds TUI incident after able to scale up staff numbers and got two diverts in on the Saturday.

Just depends on what staff and stand availability, but what onward facilities available such as coaches/ mini buses etc. But with it being weather related, could be a case of same conditions expected at Teesside as it was in Leeds, so opted slightly further away for better chances of getting in and given fuel levels on board if need a few attempts. Allsorts of calculations were made by crews, where is best and gives enough fuel to get few attempts of getting in if required. Instead of attempt hopping from one airport to another with fuel dwindling all the time.

Think Teesside did get some private/ biz diversions, non airline.

Well....I thought I would contact Teesside airport for a definitive response and they came back very quickly:

The airport does not have control over where airlines will choose to divert aircraft to, the airport was available and staffed to take any diverts at the time you are referring to should we have been needed

So the question remains. Why wasnt Teesside used.

 

[Jerry]

So the question remains. Why wasnt Teesside used.

Probably because it's not a Ryanair base. They tend to choose bases over non bases.

 

[LBAYORKIE]

Probably because it's not a Ryanair base. They tend to choose bases over non bases.

Its not a base but they do have a handling contract. Surely its got to be cheaper and better for the pax.

 

[Jerry]

Its not a base but they do have a handling contract. Surely its got to be cheaper and better for the pax.

Not necessarily for the airline though if they the crew and aircraft run out of time there.

 

[pug]

Its not a base but they do have a handling contract. Surely its got to be cheaper and better for the pax.

The passengers are a secondary consideration when forced to divert. It comes down to crew hours and having displaced aircraft. If an aircraft has to divert (in a non emergency) then the desired diversionary location would be a base with access to standby crew to enable a repositioning of the aircraft. This is even more important when you have a few diversions like what happened with the storm last week. Causes greater disruption to the operation with the knock on to more passengers than just those on the aircraft that was forced to divert should the aircraft be out of position without a few to reposition it back to its destination airport.

 

[LBAYORKIE]

Do they have a base at AMS?

 

[A400]

Do they have a base at AMS?

No but the weather was probably better there and that’s where they were accepted.

 

[Dale Coalbrook]

The problem now at Teesside according to local sources is they have no where to park aircraft due to scrap age and maintenance contracts.A military wide body was recently turned away because of that?
Recently opened a disused runway to store aircraft..however the terminal side is restricted to only 2 stands for non scheduled..might be one of the reasons?

 

[pug]

No but the weather was probably better there and that’s where they were accepted.

The air traffic system in the U.K. is quite poor at talking between itself, to the point where last week you had several fuel emergencies just to get into a desirable diversion airport. As we saw, quite a large number ended up on the continent with its own knock on to the operation. It’s not really possible to judge why aircraft did or didn’t go to certain airports based on the events of last week as it was an absolute cluster f… My previous post was a more generalised overview.