Airport.

[John Wright]

17 minutes ago, NoTailT said:

It sounds to me as though the PRM facility - esp given PTS - needs proper investment by DOI.

Or pay a better rate to Menzies to do the job.

[Zarley]

1 hour ago, John Wright said:

And I haven’t seen the ramp used at all for 12 months.

 

I was away to Liverpool (patient transfers) last Monday morning, back Tuesday evening. On both flights they used a ramp at Ronaldsway, first time I'd ever seen/used it. 

Personally, as someone who uses a stick* to get around, I found it more difficult than stairs as it seemed a bit steep despite its length. Particularly on the way down - I ended up going quicker than I was comfortable with. Thought I was going to go ass-over-tit! 

*No, not a broomstick. I wish! 😂

[NoTailT]

16 minutes ago, John Wright said:

Or pay a better rate to Menzies to do the job.

Or that. It doesn't really matter which.

Airport is collecting PRM fees and should be using the investment in to servicing. Either buy the kit for Menzies or do it themselves.

PTS is busy, it hinders route on time performance. They should be doing all they can to support and service PRMs properly. I've been there with a relative and it's almost embarassing and shameful feeling that you're holding up a flight, but it's not your fault.

[John Wright]

4 minutes ago, Zarley said:

I was away to Liverpool (patient transfers) last Monday morning, back Tuesday evening. On both flights they used a ramp at Ronaldsway, first time I'd ever seen/used it. 

Personally, as someone who uses a stick* to get around, I found it more difficult than stairs as it seemed a bit steep despite its length. Particularly on the way down - I ended up going quicker than I was comfortable with. Thought I was going to go ass-over-tit! 

*No, not a broomstick. I wish! 😂

Yes. The ramp isn’t easy for me, either.

[Zarley]

Just now, John Wright said:

Yes. The ramp isn’t easy for me, either.

I can't imagine it's easy for anyone with a mobility issue. I also can't imagine how you'd  get a person in a wheelchair up or down it safely either. 

They boarded the wheelchair passengers last but I was on the wrong side of the plane to see how they managed it, though I was curious. 

It makes me wonder what the point is of having it. 

[NoTailT]

5 minutes ago, John Wright said:

Yes. The ramp isn’t easy for me, either.

I've only been on it once or twice, it's super narrow isnt it and requires a change of wheelchair?

[madmanxpilot]

If you take a look at the big picture, you can see a couple of big reasons why Menzies are stretched at certain times.

It is unrealistic to have enough staff at hand to simultaneously deal with multiple aircraft that are here at two or three times per day. I don’t know, but would hazard a guess that the staff numbers would have to double for this to be the case. That means you have an awful lot of staff hanging around for long periods throughout the day with nothing to to. It’s just not efficient.

What to do about it?

First, ensure that the schedules are such that flights are more spread out throughout the day - of course difficult with open skies when the airlines dictate the schedules.

Second, ensure that aircraft can as far as possible stick to their schedules, even if they are not ideal in the first place, so Menzies can plan their resources as efficiently as possible. Chaos normally ensues when aircraft that have been holding due to poor weather suddenly all arrive when the fog lifts. Upgrading the low vis capability of the airport would obviously mitigate this.

It all comes back to the two big topics we’ve been talking about on this thread for months - Open Skies and low visibility capability.

[John Wright]

1 minute ago, Zarley said:

I can't imagine it's easy for anyone with a mobility issue. I also can't imagine how you'd  get a person in a wheelchair up or down it safely either. 

They boarded the wheelchair passengers last but I was on the wrong side of the plane to see how they managed it, though I was curious. 

It makes me wonder what the point is of having it. 

And of course the whole point of PRM boarding, apart from getting us on board, is to try and get us on board first and off last so we don’t have to be manhandled in full view of everyone else. 

Last year they couldn’t use the ambulift to board me on easyJet for some reason. I was wheeled to the steps and everyone in the tunnel watched me take 5 mins to climb the steps.

Last trip to/from Dublin I sat on the steps on the way down and shuffled one at a time. At least it was dry, and far safer than the Fire Service stair climber, which is the alternative.

[John Wright]

7 minutes ago, madmanxpilot said:

If you take a look at the big picture, you can see a couple of big reasons why Menzies are stretched at certain times.

It is unrealistic to have enough staff at hand to simultaneously deal with multiple aircraft that are here at two or three times per day. I don’t know, but would hazard a guess that the staff numbers would have to double for this to be the case. That means you have an awful lot of staff hanging around for long periods throughout the day with nothing to to. It’s just not efficient.

What to do about it?

First, ensure that the schedules are such that flights are more spread out throughout the day - of course difficult with open skies when the airlines dictate the schedules.

Second, ensure that aircraft can as far as possible stick to their schedules, even if they are not ideal in the first place, so Menzies can plan their resources as efficiently as possible. Chaos normally ensues when aircraft that have been holding due to poor weather suddenly all arrive when the fog lifts. Upgrading the low vis capability of the airport would obviously mitigate this.

It all comes back to the two big topics we’ve been talking about on this thread for months - Open Skies and low visibility capability.

I get all that. Fully understand. But 2 pm Sunday, with Liverpool already cancelled, wasn’t such a time.

Do you really believe, if we no longer had open skies,  EZY would negotiate slots at anything other than they wanted for their other rotations.  Take it or leave it, is what they’d say.

[madmanxpilot]

2 minutes ago, John Wright said:

  Take it or leave it, is what they’d say.

I know what I’d say in response  if I was in charge. 

Best have an operator who serves the interests of the Island rather than their  own.

If EZY pulled out, I’m sure Loganair would fill the void. 

Edited May 1, 2023 by madmanxpilot

[Blade Runner]

58 minutes ago, John Wright said:

Or pay a better rate to Menzies to do the job.

This.

As for the Ambulift, as a user of the same, it is shocking and sometimes bloody degrading (Being manhandled) to get on a plane here or in the UK, but most problems are IOM end in my experience.

[Nellie]

39 minutes ago, madmanxpilot said:

 

If EZY pulled out, I’m sure Loganair would fill the void. 

Do you really believe that? 

Whilst I fully respect, and enjoy, the professional insight you bring to the forum and the debate, I simply can't agree that Loganair are anywhere near being up to the job of replacing easyJet.

Time and again, Loganair have shown themselves wholly incapable of running services they are currently committed to now, even when they've got all that lovely IOMG lolly flowing into their coffers. I haven't actually checked the numbers, but close observation of what is happening most days, tells me that their OTP on IOM routes is far worse that any other operator. 

When an aircraft goes 'tech' they seem to have very little resilience, and it takes hours, or even days, to get a replacement here. There have been several cancellations yesterday and again today because 'TC' has been broken since Saturday morning. 

They currently carry less that 50% of the numbers easyJet carry, so to match that capability they'd need a huge uplift in their capacity. They have no larger aircraft, so they'd need more slots at LHR or LGW? How would they get these, and at what cost? I could go on......

If we think things are bad now, the last thing we need is to be even more reliant on Loganair. It would be a catastrophe.

Edited May 1, 2023 by Nellie

[Blade Runner]

Just now, Nellie said:

Do you really believe that? 

Whilst I fully respect, and enjoy, the professional insight you bring to the forum and the debate, I simply can't agree that Loganair are anywhere near being up to the job of replacing easyJet.

Time and again, Loganair have shown themselves wholly incapable of running services they are currently committed to now, even when they've got all that lovely IOMG lolly flowing into their coffers. I haven't actually checked the numbers, but close observation of what is happening most days, tells me that their OTP on IOM routes is far worse that any other operator. 

When an aircraft goes 'tech' they seem to have very little resilience, and it takes hours, or even days, to get a replacement here. There have been several cancellations yesterday and again today because 'TC' has been broken since Saturday morning. 

They currently carry less that 50% of the numbers easyJet carry, so to match that capability they'd need a huge uplift their in capacity. They have no larger aircraft, so they'd need more slots at LHR or LGW? How would they get these, and at what cost? I could go on......

If we think things are bad now, the last thing we need is to be even more reliant on Loganair. It would be a catastrophe.

The big problems started when EZY started on the island, it was much better before they came.

Okay no £30 tickets but a good timetable to multiple UK airports.

If you shortened the runway (artificially)  and put the lights that MMP talks about on the end of the runway you may loose EZY but more flights would land on time IMHO.

[madmanxpilot]

3 minutes ago, Nellie said:

Do you really believe that? 

Whilst I fully respect, and enjoy, the professional insight you bring to the forum and the debate, I simply can't agree that Loganair are anywhere near being up to the job of replacing easyJet.

Time and again, Loganair have shown themselves wholly incapable of running services they are currently committed to now, even when they've got all that lovely IOMG lolly flowing into their coffers. I haven't actually checked the numbers, but close observation of what is happening most days, tells me that their OTP on IOM routes is far worse that any other operator. 

When an aircraft goes 'tech' they seem to have very little resilience, and it takes hours, or even days, to get a replacement here. There have been several cancellations yesterday and again today because 'TC' has been broken since Saturday morning. 

They currently carry less that 50% of the numbers easyJet carry, so to match that capability they'd need a huge uplift their in capacity. They have no larger aircraft, so they'd need more slots at LHR or LGW? How would they get these, and at what cost? I could go on......

If we think things are bad now, the last thing we need is to be even more reliant on Loganair. It would be a catastrophe.

I honestly think that having greater frequency with smaller aircraft is the way to go. If Loganair had a larger fleet here, then perhaps a lot of the issues you describe would get better rather than worse, they may even be able to justify having a spare based here - who knows.

It used to work just fine in the Manx Airlines days.

The problems John describes with PRM assistance etc are an inevitable by product of having larger aircraft here and schedules which are designed without the best interest of the Island in mind.

[John Wright]

42 minutes ago, madmanxpilot said:

I honestly think that having greater frequency with smaller aircraft is the way to go. If Loganair had a larger fleet here, then perhaps a lot of the issues you describe would get better rather than worse, they may even be able to justify having a spare based here - who knows.

It used to work just fine in the Manx Airlines days.

The problems John describes with PRM assistance etc are an inevitable by product of having larger aircraft here and schedules which are designed without the best interest of the Island in mind.

I’ve described two different scenarios that happened to me in the last fortnight. And neither are the one you postulate and blame on EZY large planes and 3 landings at once.

First, the arrangements for smaller planes aren’t acceptable. It’s struggle or crawl or go down on your bum, or the the fire service climbing chair.

Second, even when it’s a single EZY on its own they didn’t have staffing levels to offer the service properly. I could see the ambulift, sat on just off the apron. Waiting. No driver!

I agree the Manx Airlines model worked well. But at a price. Squaring the circle of who is out there, and what they can realistically offer, and at what price, with the public demand for low price air travel is impossible. My last Manx flight to Heathrow on the I46 was £300 return. Yes, there were fare crackers, or, before that, Y fares. And Manx served “food” and allowed everyone to carry as much luggage as they could stagger with.

But Manx went due to changing market, different economies, a rape of assets, rather than being eased out by EZY.