Budget airlines: Any differences between Ryanair and Easyjet?

[Death]

Hail all!
Just a quick question, really. I'm going on a trip to Helsinki in a couple of months time after deciding last night to take a much needed break. After canvassing the airline websites last night I chose to go with Easyjet, simply because - For two quid more than Ryanair - They fly direct to Helsinki from Gatwick, as opposed to the Stansted/Tampere route which Ryanair offer. 8)

Anyhow...I've pretty much become a Ryanair veteran over these recent years (Indeed, it's been very rare for me to fly with any other airline!) and so I'm both accustomed to - And indeed, very comfortable with - The cost cutting practices that many budget airlines make use of.

However, what I'd like to know is if there are any major differences with Easyjet (From a Ryanair passengers perspective, preferably) and anything unusual or otherwise worth bearing in mind that I should be aware of when flying with them?
Also, I'd be interested to hear of peoples experiences with Easyjet - Positive, negative, downright disgusted, or otherwise.

Farewell for now, and many thanks in advance for any info!
>> Death <<

 

[gingerheid]

Easyjet are a lot better than Ryanair. The main benefit is no weight limit in your hand luggage, so you can pack as much as you like (of non prohibited articles) as long as you can carry it.

Another advantage is that they don't try and sell you stuff for quite the *whole* flight.

Overall though, they seem to be a bit more generally honest and decent than Ryanair, who will happily tell you they'll give you the fare back and that you're making your own way back from some dump in the middle of nowhere that they only fly to three times a week.

 

[Drimnagh Road]

Me being a plane crank, Ruinair have over 200 Boeing 737-800s and hundreds of airports for me to scratch off which makes flying with them that bit more interesting. Not a fan of the Airbus models.

Also, me being from Dublin I've a local Ryanair base down the road and Eazyjet don't step foot over here. They tried to operate to Cork and Knock a while ago but were quickly ousted by Ruanair.

I use Ryanair a lot for my jaunts over to the UK and I have to say I've never experienced any considerable delay, staff always friendly and professional, pilots informative. I prefer not having a pre-booked seat and not having to board a plane through an airbridge, both of which happens at Eazyjet (the latter more so in Europe than at UK airports) and adds to the faffing around on the ground.

I think a lot of the qualms people have with Ryanair are just myths and they need to experience a flight with them and then decide.

 

[jamesontheroad]

I've had fewer delays (none, in fact) with Ryanair than Easyjet, although I prefer Easyjet's more liberal hand baggage guidelines and the Airbus fleet (just a more pleasant, newer design with comfort seats than FR's 738s.

 

[DavyCrocket]

Easyjet are a lot better than Ryanair. The main benefit is no weight limit in your hand luggage, so you can pack as much as you like (of non prohibited articles) as long as you can carry it.

Another advantage is that they don't try and sell you stuff for quite the *whole* flight.

Overall though, they seem to be a bit more generally honest and decent than Ryanair, who will happily tell you they'll give you the fare back and that you're making your own way back from some dump in the middle of nowhere that they only fly to three times a week.

Totally agree. Never flown with Ryan Air though, only seen it at the gate when they check people's cabin baggage weights and charge them!

I like easyjet's luggage rules too, plus the online checkin many months in advance that saves loads of time and puts you in a higer boarding group! Oh and that's free - unlike Ryanair!

 

[Death]

Hail again!

Easyjet are a lot better than Ryanair. The main benefit is no weight limit in your hand luggage, so you can pack as much as you like (of non prohibited articles) as long as you can carry it.

Ahh, that's very handy to know...Ta very much!

I normally travel very light to save on checked baggage fees - Taking only a small steward's case with me for the week and hiring linen etc from the hotel/hostel that I'm staying at - But if there's no weight limit to hand luggage (Within reason, of course!) that means I can take my slightly bigger case if need be. If nowt else, it means I can carry a little more than 8.75Kg of luggage this time around! 8)

Sidebar: Last time I flew with Ryanair about 14 months ago, the hand luggage limit was one bag, max ten kilos. Yet personal experience has proven that Ryanair miscalibrate their baggage scales - My bag was 7.75Kg on the bathroom scales, 8.25Kg on the trade-legal parcel scale at my local GPO, and 9.15Kg on the baggage scale at Stansted gate 38 - So I always aim to pack at least 1.75Kg under limit. hock:

Me being a plane crank, Ruinair have over 200 Boeing 737-800s and hundreds of airports for me to scratch off which makes flying with them that bit more interesting. Not a fan of the Airbus models.

I'm no aviation enthusiast, admittedly (My other half, on the other hand?... 8)) but I wouldn't be surprised if I've scratched about 75% of Ryanair's 737-800 fleet by now. Like I said, I've been a satisfied passenger of theirs for years! hock:

And I don't know if it's just because I'm so used to the things (The only non-Boing vehicle I've ever had was an A340 on LHR-HAM about 15 years ago) but personally I'm looking forward to travelling in some different rolling stock this time...Assuming of course I get one of their Airbuses! 8)

Actually, I'm on EZY 8967 LGW-HEL, ex Gatwick 15:00. Would ye happen to know the stock allocation for that service, or could look it up on TRUST? :razz:

I use Ryanair a lot for my jaunts over to the UK and I have to say I've never experienced any considerable delay, staff always friendly and professional, pilots informative. I prefer not having a pre-booked seat and not having to board a plane through an airbridge, both of which happens at Eazyjet (the latter more so in Europe than at UK airports) and adds to the faffing around on the ground. I think a lot of the qualms people have with Ryanair are just myths and they need to experience a flight with them and then decide.

Like I said above, I've also been a long-standing Ryanair passenger for many years, and the only thing I don't like about them is their severely über-the-top approach to piling on the charges. On the pure operations aspect of things though, I'd rate Ryanair as 2nd best of the three airlines that I've flown with so far...IMO they're not as good as Virgin Atlantic, but they're far superior to British scAirways! hock:
Then again though, VA only operates long-haul, and I've only ever used the other two for short-haul flights under three hours...So I'd guess that VA can't be fairly counted in the same comparison.

Mind ye though, I do wonder about Ryanair's charging policy...After paying a similar charge to Easyjet for using debit card payment, I'll accept a card fee as standard practice for airlines...Yet where Easyjet issued me one charge of £3.50 for my booking, Ryanair charge a "processing fee" of about £5.00 Per passenger, per sector!
In plain English; On a booking for two passengers taking a return flight to Madrid paying debit, Easyjet would charge £3.50 in processing fees (£3.50 x1 bkg), but Ryanair would charge a whopping £20.00 ((£5.00 x2 pax) x2 sect) under the same heading! :roll:

Oh, and who can miss Ryanair's charging policy for checking in? £5.00 per pax/sector (Even where passengers transfer in-terminal!) for online check-in, and about £10-£15.00 for traditional check-in, if they still offer that. Either way, I'd be very interested to find out how one is supposed to check-in for a Ryanair flight without using one of the above chargable options - Especially as, IIRC, if a charge is made for any kind of "essential" component (Like flight check-in), they have to by law provide some kind of cost free option that passengers may avail themselves of if they choose...Though in Ryanair's case, I dread to think what that option might be! hock:

I've had fewer delays (none, in fact) with Ryanair than Easyjet, although I prefer Easyjet's more liberal hand baggage guidelines and the Airbus fleet (just a more pleasant, newer design with comfort seats than FR's 738s.

I've had a couple of delays with Ryanair in my time (Longest being 45m down ex LBC due to the pilot having been given a flight plan for MAN insted of STN! ) but given the number of times I've flown with them, that's only to be expected.

From what people say about Easyjet being a little more prone to delays, I presume they have the habit of waiting around for passengers who are known to be in the terminal building before departing, similar to BA and other mainstream airlines?
Personally, I'll be making sure I get to the gate well in time (T-45 mins being the latest I allow myself to get there) but if Easyjet wait around, I'll make sure I take a book to while away the time for that one inevitable "lost" passenger... 8)

And that's one of the things that I like a lot about Ryanair - They don't wait around for anything! No matter the situation (Late passenger, monarch on runway, fire in the cabin etc.) as long as the aircraft is in a fit state to take-off, they depart bang on time!

I like easyjet's luggage rules too, plus the online checkin many months in advance that saves loads of time and puts you in a higer boarding group!

Ahh...I didn't realise Easyjet bothered with the boarding group system (Ryanair make provisional use of it, but their boarding sequence is normally "Special passengers, Priority, Everyone else" only) but if that's the case, I'll probabally check-in for the flight as soon as I can...Online check-in for my flight opens tomorrow, as it happens! 8)

Mind ye though, I can't understand for the life of me why online check-in is often made available so far in advance. Although I'll probabally check-in tomorrow to go for a higher boarding sequence on my outward flight (And also check-in for my return flight from here so that I don't have to hunt out a public printer in Helsinki!) I'd normally prefer to leave it to a more sensible 24-48 hours prior to departure.

After all: Online check-in for a flight departing within 48 hours makes perfect sense to me...But I can't for the life of me figure out how or why an airline can benefit from passengers checking in so far in advance?

Farewell...And many thanks again for the info!
>> Death <<

 

[Pumbaa]

Having flown a fair bit with both, my loyalties lie with Squeezyjet. Two reasons:

- Airports tend to be more accessible than Ryanair destinations, ie in the City not 70km outside
- Charges and the aim of fobbing off passengers is somewhat less!

Also I far prefer Airbus aircraft and as such Easyjet wins hands down! I tend to think Easyjet offer a more honest product than Ryanair, have a satisfactory customer service record (to my eyes) and flying with them on the whole tends to be a much nicer experience.

 

[jon0844]

I've flown with Ryanair for years (not as much as above) but with the recent charges that take the p**s, I'm now happily flying with BA for not much more - and going to a better airport every time.

There are still some cheap deals to be made, but boy do you have to be flexible. And don't take luggage, and remember to check in online and pay by the right type of credit card for that week.

Cancelling flights because they're not full (then saying it's a technical fault) and giving you your money back, leaving you stranded, is another reason I'd never fly Ryanair to somewhere remote. And, seeing as this is a railway forum, if TOCs ever wanted to ensure all flights were on time - just look at the padding in the Ryanair timetables. They're always so proud of arriving on time, or early, but I fail to see how they could be late without the flight crashing en-route. Even then, it might be a few days before the downed plane is classed as late!

However, I do hear nothing but good things about Ryanair for flights to/from Ireland. I wonder why?! I guess I'd still fly with them for that - but nowhere else.

Sorry, Mr O'Leary; you've gone a bit too far with me now.

Easyjet doesn't seem to have got to the point where Ryanair is (I'm sure they're trying) but that, to me, makes them a better choice at the moment. Shame they don't fly to as many places as I'd like to go!

 

[jopsuk]

my worst flying experiences have been with Ryanair. They take the **** far more than Easyjet, and easyjet take the **** a fair bit.

 

[A60K]

Ryanair now charges £40 to check-in at the airport!

 

[jon0844]

And a surcharge for any form of payment bar one obscure prepaid credit card that I'm sure we all use.

I am surprised Michael O'Leary hasn't considered a surcharge for using any web browser other than something discontinued years ago.

All of these little tricks are to keep the headline figure down, which people still seem to fall for when comparing.

People also seem to convince themselves that they're getting an even better deal when they see a price quoted for one-way. Sure, they buy a return, but always quote the price they've paid as that headline figure. It's like all the other costs and charges don't count - even if they're up to £200 on top!

 

[33056]

I have never been a fan of Ryanair, always appear to be trying to catch you out and screw extra charges out of people. This latest thing of compulsory on-line check in is the last straw, and I will do anything to avoid flying with them.

We are provisionally planning a trip to Northern Spain later in the year and are looking into flying to Madrid a day earlier then going by train, despite the fact that Ryanair fly directly to the location that we are going to - I hate them that much

Easy Jet are tolerable, in fact using them to get to and from Portugal shortly though I was quite prepared to use BA or TAP instead - it is possible to get some very good fares from the "national carriers" if you book far enough in advance.

Other than Ryan, I will NEVER fly with Monarch (got two flights cancelled at a weeks notice twice within a few months a few years ago) and I would also prefer to avoid BA after having a huge battle with them, also a few years ago. It took a year to sort out, but we won , so they are off my personal "blacklist" but are not the first choice where there is a viable alternative.

 

[Death]

I've flown with Ryanair for years (not as much as above) but with the recent charges that take the p**s...

Ryanair now charges £40 to check-in at the airport!

...And a surcharge for any form of payment bar one obscure prepaid credit card that I'm sure we all use.

I apologise guys, but I just couldn't resist digging up the following...
[Note: Attachment only visible to logged-in RailUK users. Image sourced from http://www.softirishrain.com]

​

I am surprised Michael O'Leary hasn't considered a surcharge for using any web browser other than something discontinued years ago.

For the sake of the Gods, don't go giving him any ideas! He'd probabally take it on board, then charge ye £250.00 for the bragging rights! hock:
And just in case he does though, I've still got copies of Win95 knocking around here with IE1.1 on. In any case, ye could lawfully spoof thy browser headers to fake the relevant browser behavior on the Ryanair side anyway!

Mind ye, I have to admit that - When Ryanair asked their passengers for more cost-cutting ideas a while back - It was I who put forward the idea of standing sections at the back of the aircraft...Which Ryanair actually included in an announcement a little while after that! hock:
The really sad thing about that though is that they didn't actually implement it on their aircraft. Now I don't like additional charges for anything, but I'd be happy to pay a fiver just to experience the joys and thrills of take-off, landing and turbulance in a standing position!

All of these little tricks are to keep the headline figure down, which people still seem to fall for when comparing.

People also seem to convince themselves that they're getting an even better deal when they see a price quoted for one-way. Sure, they buy a return, but always quote the price they've paid as that headline figure. It's like all the other costs and charges don't count - even if they're up to £200 on top!

I'm fortunate in a way as I started flying with Ryanair back in 2003CE, quite a while before they threw the overcharging into overdrive. The first few times that I booked with them, taxes were the only necessary "extra" in the price of the flight (Not counting priority boarding and that crappy travel insurance policy, both of which were on the bill by default until de-selected) and most other stuff was included - Indeed, up until around Wacken 2006CE, each passenger had 15Kg of hold baggage allowance included in the cost of their flight! hock:

As a result of my early start, I was exposed to Ryanair's additional overcharging on a gradual "bit-by-bit" basis...And though many people might mistake the steadily increasing cost of their annual holiday flight as inflation, I did spot the extra charges at every turn and noted them accordingly.
What I then learned to do was: Whenever booking a flight with Ryanair, consider the full amount of the transaction being charged to my debit card, then ask myself if that amount represented acceptable value for money for the flight/distance in question, and whether or not I would be willing to pay that amount. 8)

It was my spotting the shifting of more necessities (Online check-in, mainly) into the "extras" pool and charging extra for them that made me consider using another airline when I was booking this holiday flight...And when I saw that Easyjet - Despite charging me £2.00 more than Ryanair for the return trip (I'd missed the cheap outbound flights, alas) - Flew direct from Gatwick to Helsinki, I was sold!

Although I paid £2.00 more for my flight, I've already saved about £12.00 off my rail fare as LGW is far closer to me than STN (Plus LGW is served direct from Blackwater, too!), and when I arrive in Helsinki I'll only have to pay about €3,50 Metro/tram fare to get from the airport to the hostel...As opposed to the €56-odd that I forked out last time coming via Ryanair, which meant having to overnight in Tampere and catch the train to Helsinki the next day!

my worst flying experiences have been with Ryanair. They take the **** far more than Easyjet, and easyjet take the **** a fair bit.

Speaking as one of the very few people who have endured the worst of Ryanair's service model and is still more than happy to fly with them, I get the impression that - If my usual Ryanair flight is analogous to a battered old bus from Kattowitz held together with gaffer tape - Then an Easyjet flight must be a first-class, fully decked-out Vanhool Alizeé tour-bus by comparison! hock:

If ye'll pardon me for suggesting this though, JopsUK: If Easyjet "take the P a fair bit", I get the feeling (Though this is just an observation on my part) that ye might be expecting a similar level of service from budget airlines as one finds with major carriers like BA and Lufthansa. Not that there's anything wrong in that by any means...But I would have to say that A man who hopes to get flag-carrier quality service on a budget airline will almost certainly be a man disappointed...

Addendum: Talking of Ryanair cost-cutting suggestions, I just managed to dig out the following e-mail that I sent 'em back in March last year...

Dear Ryanair,
As a regular and loyal customer of your airline for the past seven years, I have become accustomed to the nature of the ancillary charges that you levy on passengers, and have developed my own techniques for managing these charges to allow me to purchase the services that I need, without having to pay for the things that I don't.

Noting the competition that you are currently running on Ryanair.com - And the amusing suggestions (Such as the €2,50 safety card) stated therein - I appreciate that this competition may be intended more as a bit of fun than an actual request for suggestions...But as I have both serious and humerous suggestions to impart here, I shall describe my serious suggestions first, with the fun ones afterwards.
----------------------------------------------------------
Serious suggestions for ancillary charges:

* - Onboard lavatories:
Charging passengers €1,- to use the on-board toilets is a practice that I personally think unacceptable, and if this is actually implemented then I will start using another airline, as no doubt a majority of your previously loyal customers will. However, a practice that I *would* find acceptable is if two of the on-board toilets were free for passengers to use, but for those toilets passengers (Pre-warned about this practice at time of booking) would have to bring their own soap and toilet paper, as none would be provided within. "Service Packs" containing soap and toilet paper could be made available from the trolley (Price no more than €2,- please) for those who do not bring their own. Additionally, these free toilets would be cleaned to an average standard once per day, and would be comparable to the average public convenience.
Meanwhile, the third toilet (I would suggest one of the two at the rear of the aircraft as they have more space) would be provided as a "first class" facility, with the proposed usage charge applied. This toilet would be kept to the same clean and orderly standards as one would expect to find on a BA flight, with soap, toilet paper etc. provided as normal.
This would provide an "airline standard" facility for those willing to pay the extra for it, but at the same time would not cause issues for passengers like myself who have no problems with using substandard facilities comparable to a portaloo.

* - Seating:
As one who is well experienced in using various forms of public transportation, I personally find the provision of a seat on board short-haul flights to be an extra that I could easily live without. If standing areas - With strong and reliable grab rails - Were provided on board your aircraft, this would allow passengers like myself to save on flights by standing for the duration of the journey...And I myself would be happy to demonstrate to the CAA that standing areas could be safely used by passengers during take-off, landing, turbulance, and all other predictable in-flight events.

* - Reducing fuel usage:
Despite being a budget airline, I notice that you often operate your aircraft in the same fashion as most other airlines, and therefore I would presume that your aircraft consume the same volume of fuel (Thus cosing the same to run) as aircraft used by any other airline. If you had your aircraft cruise at a slower speed (Say, 250 Kts as opposed to the usual 478 Kts) during flights, then you would reduce your fuel consumption, costs and environmental impact a great deal...In the same way that a motorist saves fuel by choosing to drive at 55mph during motorway journeys insted of the legal 70mph. Although this would lead to longer journey times, as a budget airline I see no necessity for you to operate at the same speeds as other airlines.
Other potential fuel savings might be possible with the use of much steeper take-off angles (I believe that EasyJet do this), encouraging your pilots to "coast" (Glide) the aircraft whenever safely possible, and - Though it would require significant modification of landing gear - Adding an electro-hydraulic system to the landing gear to accellerate aircraft up to 60mph (52kts) on the runway prior to take-off would be far cheaper and more fuel efficient than moving the aircraft from a standing start using turbine engines alone.

* - Airport selection:
Although I am familiar with your use of lesser-known remote airports for your services in central Europe, I do wonder why you do not use similar airports within the UK. Although I appreciate that STN is the cheapest of the London airports, it is a complicated and frustrating place that - For me - Has far too many unnecessary facilities and diversions for my liking. If you were to fly from smaller airports like Fairoaks and Blackbushe, you would make a lot of savings in not paying premium BAA charges, and would be serving airports where passenger control and accounting would be much easier too.

* - Multi-point services:
Although I appreciate that Ryanair is strictly a "point-to-point" airline, I have often wondered why you run flights in the same manner as many other airlines when you could easily use one aircraft and crew to serve several airports using a route topology. As an example; A single aircraft flying STN > CDG > HHN > LBC > SXF > KRK > Warsaw would only need one crew and aircraft to operate...Which would save money, leave spare aircraft to serve other routes, would reduce environmental damage, and would allow significant savings for both yourselves and passengers like I.
Additionally, using parking stands at airports for loading/unloading (With passengers supervised by cabin or ground crew whilst walking to the terminal building) as opposed to terminal stands would increase savings even further.

* - Baggage handling:
Although I have - Wherever possible - Travelled with hand luggage alone since you introduced extra charges for hold baggage, I find that the extra waits and delays encountered whenever travelling with hold luggage are a negative factor in all such journeys. Mr. O'Leary himself has said that Ryanair is comparable to a local bus service, so I cannot see why passengers cannot be allowed to save time and baggage handling fees by loading their own baggage onto the aircraft as one would when using a train or long distance coach. This would allow baggage fees for those passengers to be relegated to simply paying for the weight of the baggage they are bringing aboard, and not for additional ground-crew services that are not really necessary.
----------------------------------------------------------
Fun suggestions for ancillary charges:

* - Provide designated smoking areas on the wings (For compliance with UK smoke-free laws) charged at £5,- per use.
* - Provide a mobile phone booth (Isolated from sensitive aircraft electronics) charged at £1,- per minute.
* - Provide on-board cuisine for an extra charge. I would suggest recruiting former BR catering employees for this.
* - Cabin/flight crew charged a £5,- administration fee per sector worked.
* - Allow passengers to reduce the cost of their flight by working as cabin or flight crew en-route.
* - Discount seating for Metalheads on top of the aircraft: We're so "Gr1m and N3cr0" that -30°C isn't a problem for us!
* - Take a tip from the railways: Introduce First, Second and Third class seating, with your current seats categorising as First.
* - Atmospheric/social climate surcharge: £2,50 charged each time a passenger passes wind on board.
* - Rollercoaster flights: Operated by ex-RAF/Red Arrows pilots at a surcharge of £25,- per passenger. (Min pax height: 1.4m.)
* - Play the "Fly Ryanair" song continuously until passengers have collectively paid £250,- to have it turned off.
* - Collective passenger surcharge of £250,- to *not* hear that annoying "on-time" announcement upon arrival.
* - Special seating for Chavs provided right behind engine exhausts. (Please consider this one! )
* - Seatbelts released by the insertion of a £1/€1 coin each time, similar to luggage lockers at theme parks.
* - Send normal luggage by rail or courier. Passengers pay an extra £15,- per bag to have luggage carried aboard.
* - Excess "baggage" charge levied upon passengers weighing over 90Kg, at £2,50 per excess kilo or part thereof.
* - When booking, passengers pay a £2,- surcharge to use the Ryanair.com GUI...Or can book using TTY/Telnet for free.
* - Have passengers bring parts of the aircraft to the airport which they construct on the stand before boarding, arguing throughout about what kind of aircraft it is that they are supposed to be building. (Google for "UNIX Airways")
* - Save fuel and costs by having passengers push the aircraft until it glides, then they jump on and let the plane coast until it hits the ground again. Then they push again, jump on again, and so on... (Google for "Air DOS")

Many thanks for providing a decent no-frills airline without all of the extra crap provided by other carriers like BA!

Farewell for now...
>> Death <<

 

[TrainBrain185]

Just had our flight from Pisa Airport retimed from a 14.50 departure to 07.00. Ryanair offered us a full refund because the change was more than 2 hours difference. This left us rather p***ed off to say the least, but we had to put up with the change and accept it. Half a day lost in Italy and a very very early wake up call! Many thanks Ryanair.....

 

[jon0844]

Yes, the full refund (which I doubt you're legally able to refuse) means they're washing their hands of you and don't need to put you up in a hotel or do anything. It's an 'old trick' that must catch plenty of people out.

One of many, many reasons not to fly with them in my opinion.

 

[jopsuk]

Does a Ryanair "full" refund include all the "optional" charges, or just the "ticket" price?

 

[Aictos]

I flown with both which was my first time flying aboard and back to which I can add I had much preferred the Ryanair flight, despite what's said about them I found my first flight aboard with them to be very reassuring and exciting to be bombing away on the runway and eventually taking off.

It's up to the OP to which airline he goes with though.

 

[A60K]

Yes, the full refund (which I doubt you're legally able to refuse) means they're washing their hands of you and don't need to put you up in a hotel or do anything. It's an 'old trick' that must catch plenty of people out.

One of many, many reasons not to fly with them in my opinion.

To be fair, BA did exactly the same when I flew to Amsterdam some years ago - after my protests they transferred me to a British Midland flight instead!

 

[jon0844]

This has become a problem since airlines sneakily decided to price things as singles, where even a return flight is still two single tickets. It means they can sever the contract on either flight without compensation. Actually, the same applies on the railway with many offers - except here you'll nearly always be able to jump on the next train anyway. Not so easy with a plane!

And ajax103, if there's ONE thing good about Ryanair it is that they don't scrimp on maintenance and have a very good flight record. I'd always feel safe on a plane in that respect, even though the cabin crew have relatively poor training that has been demonstrated when there have been incidents.

My advice would be to properly listen to the safety instructions and locate your nearest exit, and generally prepare to look out for yourself in the event of an emergency.

To be honest, like on a train, you really can't worry too much about that; both flying and using a train are so safe, it's highly unlikely to ever be an issue.

 

[jopsuk]

Aye- I think Ryanair recognise that they can't hope to run the schedule they run without s***-hot maintanence. They earn a big chunk of income from on-board sales, so cancelled flights do cost them quite a bit. One plane failure will result in a cascade of cancelations.

 

[TrainBrain185]

Aye- I think Ryanair recognise that they can't hope to run the schedule they run without s***-hot maintanence. They earn a big chunk of income from on-board sales, so cancelled flights do cost them quite a bit. One plane failure will result in a cascade of cancelations.

In my case, I don't think the drastic schedule change from the planned 14.50 departure to the re-timed 07.00 is anything to do with maintenance schedules but more rather Ryanair re-scheduling some of their internal European timetables to operate more cost effective. If the 14.50 time had remained, the plane has obviously had an early afternoon arrival from somewhere, but I assume that the 07.00 departure is a cold start with the plane having stayed in Pisa Airport overnight.....only guessing though.
On relation to maintenance. Its my understanding that aircraft companants are changed on strict overhaul cycles and if a certain componant, an engine for example, is "time expired" but not replaced within the required time, the bird does not go into the sky...as simple as that. So in essence, a 15-20 year old 737-300 seen in regular use should be equally as safe as Mr Ryanair's new 737-800's. I have incidently flown on lots of Jet2's scheduled services to Italy and back and felt just as safe on their planes and their cabin crew have proved to be better. On this occasion though, Ryanair were the only operator serving Pisa for the times we wanted to go. I have no real problem with previous Ryanair flights taken other than they do not allocate your seat number on check in thus we have seen amusing stampedes from the terminal to the plane so folk can get the seats they want and being able to have seats together. Jet2 however, have a better luggage weight limit than Ryanair and on a previous occasion we had to pay an excess baggage charge with Ryanair flight for just 1kg over their stated weight limit. Jet2 also allocate your seat numbers on check in too.

 

[gordonthemoron]

presumably, not allocating seat numbers makes boarding quicker?

I presume that Jet2 allow pre-assigned seats because they charge for them

 

[SouthEastern-465]

I went with Easy-Jet on a flight to Egypt in March lasy year, and I thought the flight was much better than I expected and there was no charge for having a s*it halfway through the flight (Which Ryan air do charge for, I think £1.00 each time you visit!).

Go with Easyjet there much better and there are no sneaky charges (Not what I know of).

 

[gordonthemoron]

having had an unfortunate experience with Easyjet a year ago, I'd rather travel by train

 

[jamesontheroad]

there was no charge for having a s*it halfway through the flight (Which Ryan air do charge for, I think £1.00 each time you visit!).

???

Nope. Michael O'Leary joked about it, but there a number of legal (either at EU level or within many of the countries FR fly to) obstructions to charging for toilet access (namely they have to provide it if they want to sell drinks and refreshments on board).

having had an unfortunate experience with Easyjet a year ago, I'd rather travel by train

All that this thread, and other threads on other travel forums confirm, is that personal experience of all low cost airlines varies immensely. Some people hate Ryanair, some people love Ryanair. Some people hate Easyjet, some people love Easyjet.

Imagine the same conversations about TOCs. I hate Virgin, but I don't have much choice about whether to use them or not, because they're the only operator on certain routes I have to travel on. It's exactly the same with airlines. I fly a lot for business, and I rarely have a choice. If I need to get from A to B, it's extremely rare for more than one low cost airline to fly on the exact same airport-to-airport route. So I don't have the luxury of turning any one negative experience into a complete boycott.

That said, tomorrow I get to compare Easyjet and FlyBe on a daytrip I'd normally do with Ryanair. So I'll finally be able to compare all three on almost identical routes...

 

[gordonthemoron]

can't say I was overly impressed with FlyBe when I used them in September, plane was tiny and, because it was a turboprop, took longer than the equivalent Lufthansa flight

 

[jamesontheroad]

can't say I was overly impressed with FlyBe when I used them in September, plane was tiny and, because it was a turboprop, took longer than the equivalent Lufthansa flight

I actually prefer BE's Q400 fleet. They're one of the fastest props on the market, so on short hops don't usually lose more than 15 minutes to a comparable jet (and use a lot less fuel). They also have a pretty sophisticated anti-vibration technology which makes them much more comfortable to fly in compared to older 'props. In fact comparing Air Canada's Q400s with Canadair and Embraer regional jets, they're sometimes more comfortable than jets: brighter cabin, bigger windows, better headroom etc.

However it may just be the long retired air cadet in me... anything with a propeller is just more fun

 

[jon0844]

Michael O'Leary is great at working the press. His £1 toilet joke (as well as the beer and blow jobs speech) were just a smokescreen to hide other things. Rather like a politician using a disaster or other big story to bury bad news.

In the case of the press talking about the £1 toilet charge, with loads of funny comments and cartoons, Ryanair was introducing a £5/£40 check-in fee. The press seemed to miss that little thing!!

And the reason for cancelling flights due to 'technical issues' is down to the fact that if an airline consistently cancels flights that aren't full enough to be economical (and said flight isn't required because the plane must get to somewhere else to continue on for another route), other airlines can appeal to take those slots. Ryanair would not want to risk losing lucrative slots at its airports, but you can't argue with a plane that isn't flying because of an implied fault. Who would even dare argue that such a flight should go ahead anyway?

Ryanair would never admit a plane is half empty, although I guess you can work it out when there are only a handful of people at the gate when they say the flight has had to be postponed.

 

[mickey]

Yes, the full refund (which I doubt you're legally able to refuse) means they're washing their hands of you and don't need to put you up in a hotel or do anything. It's an 'old trick' that must catch plenty of people out.

Erm, no actually. This situation is the alteration of flight times much in advance, so there would be no need at all for hotels or anything of that kind. Ryanair is by no means the only airline to do this, and they're actually considerably more flexible than they need to be - if it's more than two weeks in advance they can legally refuse to offer a refund and insist on acceptance of the change or rebooking to another flight. This has happened to me on other airlines, including 'proper' ones, from whom I have not received a refund. It's an entirely different story if they cancel a flight at the last minute - though, of course, even then there are people for whom a full immediate no-questions refund is a preferred option.

I assume that the 07.00 departure is a cold start with the plane having stayed in Pisa Airport overnight.....only guessing though.

Pisa is an operational base for Ryanair, meaning that it's not technically a 'night stop', it's a normal outbound flight for a plane that 'lives' in Italy.

And the reason for cancelling flights due to 'technical issues' is down to the fact that if an airline consistently cancels flights that aren't full enough to be economical [...] other airlines can appeal to take those slots. Ryanair would not want to risk losing lucrative slots at its airports, but you can't argue with a plane that isn't flying because of an implied fault.

The majority of airports Ryanair serves are not slot-controlled, so again this is complete rubbish. And do you have evidence that proves the company lies? I am quite prepared to listen to reasoned debate, even if I completely disagree with the sentiments being expressed, but I don't think it's fair to accuse a company of outright lies when there is no evidence to the contrary. Ryanair has publicly stated that in its early days it did cancel flights simply because they weren't full enough, but it says it stopped that years ago and I for one believe it. After all, I've been on Ryanair flights that have been poorly loaded but have operated regardless - the company is big enough now to take an 'overall view' of a route, not a 'hawk's eye' one of each single flight.

To the OP, I would say that the adage that easyJet tries now to be a 'cheaper BA' rather than Ryanair's competitor has a ring of truth to it, and I'd agree with the comments that (for knowledgeable people, anyway!) the Airbus planes are better. That said, I prefer the A320 and A321s to the tiny A319s. The biggest difference now though is that - especially at Gatwick - the company suffers from chronic understaffing and poor management that has led to several wet lease contracts and spurious cancellations in the past six months or so. Certainly their punctuality there is pathetic compared with Ryanair's, so bear this in mind. As is so often true, individual staff do everything they can to make it a pleasant journey but they are frequently thwarted by pathetic management. And I say all this as a fan of both easyJet and Ryanair.

 

[jon0844]

Easyjet doesn't really operate from Gatwick, it's sub-let to another company that are awful and must be the main reason for the poor timekeeping. If I flew Easyjet, I'd stick to Luton only. My only time with Easyjet from Gatwick was a disaster, and it meant flying Air France to Paris and Barcelona the next day - after an expensive hotel stay at HEATHROW to get an alternative flight - so throw in an expensive cab ride too. Easyjet washed their hands of everyone and handed out a terrible photocopied bit of paper saying how to claim - which could take 30 days (if accepted at all - clearly they weren't going to pay for my alternative which was a first class ticket too!).

I'll have to take your word for it regarding Ryanair seeing the errors of their ways, as I haven't flown with them for well over a year and never will again so will never see how good they are.

I can't wait until they try and fly with only one pilot and cabin crew trained to land a plane! Good luck with that one Michael!!

Since paying a little more, and in many cases it is just a little more, to go BA I've had stress free travel for every occasion - bar some uncertainty during the last strike. Ironically, Ryanair helped BA out on that one because they hate unions even more than BA!