RyanAir CEO Michael O'Leary on the Boeing 737 Max, oil prices and more
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 19 май 2019
- RyanAir CEO Michael O'Leary joins "Squawk Box" to discuss the airline's full year earnings, the increase in oil prices, the Boeing 737 Max issues and more.
Everyone hates Ryan air.. Until they need a flight with almost no money
Yup. They are making my European vacation cheap: Copenhagen - London $27 USD. London - Barcelona $35.
@@Jl777100 ive never used ryan air tbh but theres some tricks to making it cheaper, the main thing is booking in online, or they'll charge you almost the price of the flight just checking in and keep luggage to the minimum
@@brandonryan9582 Yeah, going to have a backpack and a small carry on. I'll probably choose a seat, thankfully it's only $5
yes ryanair is shit better easyjet workiing there haha
Not the best customer experience in my , it is vastly improved however the website now is much better and guides you through the ticketing process rather than trapping you into buying stuff you don’t need and confusing pop up nonsense they did in the past. Boarding process is nearer to schedule airlines now with seat selection. I think Boeing will end up building a new family to replace 737
You gotta love this man,he knows the industry backwards
I do not have any problem with Ryanair. The airline gave to everyone the opportunity to fly around Europe with low cost (going with the rules) and also the seats and the space is decent for 4-5 hours journey! I am flying with them and i will continue! Michael go on!
Stelios Philippides - we have a different view of what is decent. The problem of Ryanair is that they made you believe that the way they treat their is decent.
@@philippechevereau9818 ryanair is fantastic over 100 flights never a problem. Only had issues with other airlines easyjet etc
agreed they get you from A to B in time and in one piece thats all i want .... been delayed 2 times with BA for 5 hours
I'll take a 2½ maybe 3 hour flight with Ryanair. Any longer than that it's on a spacier carrier.
I will never fly Ryanair. They are to cheap. Plus pilots get just enough fuel to get to the destination. No thank you.
Say what you want .. O'Leary is an incredibly shrewd operator.
sledger2003 He is a horrible human being for treating his staff as he is treating them.
@@brandon5058 They have a choice don't they .. I have several friends who are pilots are Ryanair .. and have worked there for 20 years .. would they stay if it is as bad as you think it is ?
sledger2003 hahaha let me clear something up
Ryanair pilots get hired for hours, they pay them by themself. They work for free, as a new pilot. But sure, believe in your fairytails. :)
Niet praten 020 and trading his clients like shit!
@@brandon5058 Amazon treat their warehouse staff like crap . Are you going to stop buying goods on line because of that? No? I didn't think so. Unless you are a pilot for Ryanair.....
1) You only know what you read about.
2) Why do you give a f**k if you can fly from, say, London to Ibiza for £100 return including baggage fees. Or go on day trips to Rome or Barcelona for £50 return.
Ryanair is a type of nursery for pilots. They get valuable experience on modern 737s and reasonable pay but have to work hard. It's a kind of apprenticeship which allows them to leave for more prestigeous airlines and more pay like Qatar Airlines once they've put in the hours. Some stay, many won't. Some even return after they have had enough abroad or are nearing retirement and can get a base position close to home. Ryanair is a fantastic stepping stone so before you slag the airline off too much, think of the many hundreds of pilots with the likes of Emirates, Etihad, Qatar Airways, Cathay etc who have been given the opportunity to fly for Ryanair, cut their teeth in the 737s and go onto greater things. The airline has many faults, but it also provides many benefits .
Boeing owes O’Leary for that - that was a great pitch for them.
I would like to see all the senior directors of Boeing and their extended families travelling on the Max before I feel comfortable doing the same with my family
TradeArc Services, But what about the pilots, don't you think they want to come home to their families at the end of the day also? I think if the pilots are satisfied with the Max, I would not have a problem.
@@tomruth9487
Definitely, but the pilots aren't the ones redesigning the plane. The pilots on LionAir and Ethiopian Airlines certainly wanted to return to their families, but look at their cruel fate now.
@@Lucky8s I agree with you, I'm not standing up for Boeing, they should have made software changes and retrained pilots after the first crash.
As a matter of fact that is something theu may do.
What about now, probably safer than the 737 NG series due to so many checks
Its a very green plane when its stuck on the ground.
Just have some respect for all the victims, you or one of you family could have been there
rangermaverick85 ?
@@goonseb6456 Got triggered for no reason...
it uses petrol/disel to move around on the ground or are the trucks on batteries
Jari Haukilahti I think the trucks are diesel
Best CEO in the world. Period.
I must say, i love the way Michael O'Leary speaks with confidence. clear and straight to the point.
Obafemi Adaraloye
Charismatic as well. Good businessman foresure
@@Ryanistheone 100% heheh
Yeah he owns a sweatshop airline
@@GuinessOriginal and your pint being?
@@OladipupoAdaraloye lol
He is a smart cat . He brought cheap seats to the masses
And he keeps his money in the post office in Mullingar
I wrote my dissertation on Ryanair and O'Leary is absolutely right - the Airliners need a good fuel hedge and lowest cost base. That's all there is to it.
If it's Boeing, then I ain't going.
if its boeing an grave early your goin
Don't be daft! :) Many years ago everyone was attacking Airbus over the A320 FBW issue, then everyone was attacking Boeing over the 737 rudder issue, then attention went back to Airbus over the A380 wing issue, then all eyes were on Boeing over the 787 battery issue - and so on. It's easy to forget the millions of Boeing flights made every day that go without incident. The 777, for instance, is one of the safest airliners ever built. Its structural strength saved hundreds of lives in the San Francisco and Heathrow incidents. It's true that Boeing have made some serious errors of judgement in this process, including not providing the AOA sensor disagree warning system as standard, and not having MCAS take readings from 2 sensors simultaneously. They also should have been more transparent about the system from the outset, but they were so obsessed with trying to convince airlines that NG pilots could move straight across without retraining, because of fierce competition from the NEO. Boeing will recover from this, and they have to for the good of the industry. Boeing, Airbus, Bombardier and Embraer all feed off eachother, and it's the constant competition between them that drives progress and innovation in air travel. I won't hesitate to jump on a Boeing plane any day.
@@tjfSIM Yea the 777 is a legendary plane, but still can'tr help thinking, due to recent deviations from quality control in the production process, that some more flyers will end as smoked meat with the Max and the 787 Dreamliner could be worse
Girl please
Say what you want, O'Leary is an incredible business man and those who continue to complain about their services just remember that you're paying €10 for the flight. Want a flight with more leg room and a smoother landing? Pay €100, your choice
@Mike Eastridge you forgot the gob prefix
I've always got the service I've been expecting from Ryanair, and nothing more! Easyjet and France however...
@Mike Eastridge why?
I will happily pay extra to ride on a plane designed to fly.
@@GaryBurtka what is that supposed to mean lmao
ryanair's future rides on their new 737max of course the ceo will say it's a great plane.....
Shall CEO fly in it?
@@eudaldguell3004 You think he doesn't?
he doesn't realise that most customer will not fly those coffins
@@furiouzzzz *Every aircraft* manufactured since the *Wright Bros.* was a *flying coffin.*
Ryanair has one of the youngest fleets in the world. All 737-800's. Yes, the issue with the MAX may impact plans to increase revenue and lower ticket prices but they'll be fine.
Michael O'Leary, a true Irish legend and a very clean, successful business titan.
As sneaky as he is, I have to admire O'Leary. He runs an incredibly safe airline. The only people complaining about it are the ones who've never flown with them
lucksby bb - you're joking, right? Complaints to the industry ombudsman and the media and forums about Ryanair are VERY high in number.
@@markfox1545 I was more referring to its safety record.
@@bbhybris Well no one has died but they were caught making unnecessary emergency landings because they only fueled the planes with just enough to get to your destination which is against ICAO regulations since it requires you have enough in case of a go around so by not having enough fuel you are forcing airports to accept you first by declaring an emergency which will cause delays and serious disruption of traffic.
hahaha
If you are buying a number of discounted price planes, then you will talk up that planes apparent safety, regardless of recent reality.
He’s some character in fairness. Can’t fault the business model. Yes people moan about comfort etc etc but you can’t fault the price and that’s what the majority of people care about at the end of the day
NEVER getting on one of those planes
First Last if you’ve been on any short haul flights, chances are you’ve been on an A320. Which when first introduced, crashed as a result of the new fly-by-wire system. Boeing will fix the issue - just like many many issues have been fixed in the past.
@@Harry34186 Been on an A320...didn't like them much....too small and poky....I much like the 747....anyway...even if this is true...I just don't want to be one of the hundreds who pay with their lives to be in an 'aviation experiment' like in the early days of flying, and let me guess....neither do you. You only die once unless you are a cat
@@Harry34186 Who wants to be involuntarily included in the 'testing' of a new plane? You see....if the people on these flights knew that the plane could have issues and these would be 'worked out', would they get on the plane?. I do not care how prestigious and noted a company or their planes appear to be. My life is more valuable than all of it.
Airbus created a new engine on the 320NEO that made that single aisled aircraft more Efficient,
Naturally Boeing wanted to do the same to their single aisled aircraft but Boeing's 737 sat lower on the ground than the 320, Airbus could fit the larger engine under the wings of the 320 with ease, Boeing could not.
Making the engine stick out a little over the wing which caused problems, forcing the plane into too much of a climb, during full thrust (take off). It would cause the aircraft to stall, the system they installed to counteract this increased climb, was the MCAS, pilot's we're told the plane flies the same as the old 737, they were told this like without being trained into how to work with, or turn off this new software. From what I believe, this is why the 737 8Max we're grounded around the world.
That's about right. Both competing aircraft are beautiful designs. Boeing's management _practice_ is suspect - but they have to fix _that problem._
I don't generally watch CNBC...does that interviewer in the middle with the long nose ever let anyone finish a sentence before asking ?? He's cut off poor MoL so many times I lost count. I could barely stand to watch. What a knob.
Poor MoL? 😂
Bart Solari He presents himself intelligently enough and that’s certainly admirable...but it doesn’t really excuse his rudeness, does it??
The other host, Joe Kernan is far worse than Sorkin. Although he didn’t much in this interview, he normal cuts off everyone, laughs to himself, trails off on his thoughts and speech, and assumes everyone knows what he is talking about when he is being pretty incoherent. Kernan is terrible, second only to the pompous ass Chuck Todd on NBC.
Interesting. The More Ya Know*
Excellent interview!
If the Max has one more crash it's finished
There will be no crashes that are as a result of Boeing's design or safety/operational short-comings. If there is, I agree 737-Max 8 will be finished and Boeing in even bigger problems!
yeah they better not screw up
It's already had one crash too many!
John Mel : As bad as it looks, I think 737 Max 8 will still recover.
Can you explain to me how the dc-10 stayed around after more than three crashes
More worried about more seats and less fuel. Not about safety.
Billions of passengers have flown with Ryanair. Zero fatal accidents. Safety matters to Ryaniar.....HAVING SAID THAT.. I think Michael O'Leary is privately disgusted with the 737Max Scandal and I reckon Beoing's lawyers already know that for certain.
@@MrRugbylane Totally agree Stephen. He clearly can't go on record as slagging off Boeing but after years of watching this guy and how he operates, his subtle comments and body language would suggest he's pissed off and going to wring every drop of financial recompense from Boeing that he can.
The comment someone made about not caring about the safety as much as profits is drivel. He knows a shortcut on safety resulting in a crash will damage Ryanair far more than any stupid comments about taking a toilet out, or their constantly changing baggage policies. I work in aviation, am disgusted with Boeing, but the MAX will be made safe. It's not as complicated as the detractors think. Boeing were just too bloody stupid to realise what's they had put on the market was an accident waiting to happen.
@@pauldunn5978 Nice summary, Paul. It amuses me to read comments like "he doesn't care about safety" . That would be outright counterproductive for his business. He will do anything to optimize his business so his passengers' safety has to be one of the most important points as there's nothing more dangerous to his profits than safety issues.
@realgabrieldc i dont doubt it. I have total confidence in Ryanair and its staff. I can only just imagine what Mr O'Leary really thinks of Boeing top management right now 😉
@ckatlinga Coming from an aviation industry , yes I do trust them to fix it. Manufacturers cock up, sometimes really badly. Sometimes they discover faults that would be been hard to predict, other times errors appear to have been more predictable if testing had been carried out more thoroughly.
But saying passengers be guinea pigs? That statement makes no sense. They would only be guinea pigs if Boeing didn't test, retest, retest and test a good few more times, which, given the circumstances, they will be doing. Another MCAS related crash after re-certification may well destroy Boeing. They CANNOT let that happen . Common sense should tell anyone that. Companies, as well as individuals, learn from their mistakes.
Your'e asking me "Don't you see the problem here." Of course I bloody well do...In great detail.
Yeah, lead in flight price of $10... Oh you want to take a bag? That's $75 please.
Small bag is free. A bag that is 10cm taller and wider is £20. The amount of dummies that pay for the extra bag are beyond stupid.
Don’t take a checked in bag so ! Now you get the idea !!
The carry on bag is no longer 10kg. You have to pay a lot for that now. The only free bag must fit under the seat in front of you. (around 2kgs) so if you think you can manage with that for a week, then good luck.
@@KaptainKastle I've had 6 Ryanair flights in 4 weeks and I always put my bag up in the overhead. No one says a thing!. If you need to take everything and the kitchen sink then bloody pay the extra
@@tonightwefly well I had a similar number of flights recently and they are always very keen to check the size of my handbag. Which should be no more than 40cm x 20cm x 25cm. That's around 16" x 6"x 8" for all you Americans. Of course you can put that in the overhead locker and no one is going to be complaining. But please don't try and pack more than one change of clothes in that as it just ain't gonna happen.
O'Leary is what he is. I think he is from the same litter that included some of Boeing's senior management. Only he is more honest about being unfeeling and only concerned about the bottom line, (including Becky's). But that's what all of us are about, maximize reward for as little effort possible. So I cant knock him.
All you people saying you'll never fly Ryanair or the 737-MAX, is laughable...
The only way to guarantee that, is fly an airline that has none in their fleet! Otherwise you might be flying one, as airlines regularly swap aircraft types depending on demand/technical issues. Your ticket might say you're not flying the type, but when you get to the gate it might be a different story.
After the aircraft is deemed safe, I'd love to know how many of you will actually refuse to fly, if/when you get to the gate it is a Boeing 737-MAX you're about to board?!
Ryanair for one will refuse to swap you to another flight if you refuse to fly that type.
Also you all say how awful the CEO and Ryanair is. If you have a choice of a $25 fare with them or a $200 dollar fare with another airline, 99% of you will go for the Ryanair option!
You're all hypocrites!
Giles I’m irish and I only fly Aer Lingus - they only fly airbus
@@MA-se1iv Still they might wetlease a 737 MAX at some point. If you want to be 100% sure you should catch a train.
knuble they won’t, I’m an aeronautical engineer at an irish airport and I know that Aer Lingus have absolutely no plans to ever have a 737 max in their fleet, only A320 neo
What happens if Are Lingus stop flying the routes you travel, you might be stuck with Ryanair, who are the largest airline at Dublin! 😂
Giles I don’t travel much, I’ve only ever traveled with Aer Lingus. All my family members are Aer Lingus pilots so it’s just normal for me, I flew Ryan air once or twice and hated it in comparison, also it wasn’t significantly cheaper so I didn’t get the point
O'Leary dissing the Boeing 737 Max scandal, because the plane is doing fine in their simulator.....! :D :D :D
If the pilots are aware of MCAS and their planes have a good/functioning AOA sensor then the planes are great and flying them very safe.
because it has 4% more seats and 16% lower fuel consumption. disgusting.
@@ginger-bread_man, I agree, he said Boeing made a mistake, maybe they were slow to respond, but I think if the pilots are retrained and are confident in the Max, then the public will follow.
Jung Bolosse : There is a procedure to recover from that situation, flip the MCAS switches off. You were probably not aware of it. Boeing was also not clear about it in their training manual.
@@ginger-bread_man There's no MCAS on/off switch. You could apparently disengage the MCAS by turning off the auto stabilizer trim, which would leave the stabilizer fins bringing the plane nose down towards ground. If this happens shortly after take off, pilots have no time to bring the plane out of its nose dive state using the manuel trim; it's too slow. MCAS would also turn itself on again after 5 seconds, if the pilot engages the auto pilot. Continuously. And the pilots had no idea what was going on; they didn't even know MCAS existed, because Boeing made the decision not to inform them.
I used to have 100 reasons for not flying with Ryanair. Now I have 101.
I gather they would be ok for a short flight to avoid a ferry like Dublin to Manchester or Dublin to London.
As I understand the 737 Problem there were issues with the Co-Pilot Simulators/Training, is that right?
No. Boeing and FAA colluded to built a 1960's aircraft that would be built fast, cheap, and be cheap for airlines to operate. In other words, it's a brand new aircraft, that disguises itself as 737, and therefore doesn't require expensive pilot training. Oh, and it also hid the fact that there is a curtain software system, that at the same time is defective... To make it short: RIP 737.
@@Meeshusa IMeesh are you saying They Should Automate the 737 ?. That is Possible, but most Passengers prefer the Comfort of a Quality Crew in Charge.
@@chrisgriffiths2533 what he means is that they had to change the design of the aircraft, moving the new and bigger engines ahead. So there was a modification on the center of gravity, and they created and automation that would automatically compensante or "take control" of the airplane and move the nose down. So what happened in both crashes this system got out of control and got the nose down. And the darkest thing is that pilots werent aware of it.
@@xitoroman Xitoro, I will consider your Science. However one of the Reasons Boeing has been Very Successful is Their Engines are First Class, Genuine Excellent Engineer, Except they run on Fossil Fuels. Putting Aside the FF issue. Their Motors are that Good that if you Bolt them on the side of a Brick House that House Will Fly. So I will consider the Centre of Gravity etc, Plus More. Stay Tunned we may Fix this Problem, Save Lives.
@@Meeshusa So far from the truth.
almost 350 dead... killed by a "brand new" plane... would never board the MAX, even after "software" fix. You can't software fix an architectural design flaw. Shame they are "upgrading" the fleet with that. Enjoyed flying Ryanair until now. Sticking to Wizz Air from now on.
what car do you drive lol
from what I saw it was a software issue though..
Stephen they had an hardware probleme and try to fix it with software.
Wizzair have A320s...a better, more comfortable plane.
Stephen its the MCAS system but also the new engines on the Max put the COG off
The main nuisance is having to print the boarding pass rather than checking in online and getting it at bag drop (although many handling staff will be lenient in practice). Otherwise I don't get why the airline gets so much hate.
You can use their App. for the last 5 years.
I´m tired of the “Boeing 737 max having a software problem”. It is NOT a software problem! In simple terms, problem is: raising the new engines because they are bigger, shifted center of gravity up, thus producing an aircraft tendency to raise nose up, thus needing some software to correct that tendency by forcing nose down... software was used as a “patch” to correct an engineering problem. Software development is fast and easy. So, why bothering resolving an engineering problem and miss the comercial deadlines? Indeed, software failed in specific conditions that made the aircraft crash, but the underlying problem was the unstable physical geometry created by the need to upgrade to larger/ more efficient engines.
i and probably a lot of others will not get on a max. 2 identical crashes. fixing the problem with software? not sure what will happen.
more crashes happened from go arounds, but yet im sure you still fly.
A lot of people don't like Michael O'Leary but the man's a genius with what he managed to do with Ryanair
You have great confidence in boeing aftervthevsexond crash boeing still said the max was safe
Even worst, calling Boeing are known because they produce the best aircraft in the world. (???)
This isn’t lithium iron batteries mate...you can operate those death traps as I won’t be flying on any and I suspect the rest of the flying public will tell you the same...you can have confidence all you want!
Living in ireland i can safely say once they get the new planes I'll never fly Ryanair again. My life is more important than cheap flights.
Tomatoknuckles Agreed. I was booked from Dubai on whats now a two flight trip to Doha via Muscat just after the Ethiopian crash and we were horribly delayed as even then Oman Air were pulling the max on that route. I was though like every other passenger saying we aren’t flying the Max. What makes this different in every way is that Boeing KNEW about this so what’s to stop them taking another short cut and rushing this corrupted aircraft out again? Not getting on the bloody thing again...
@@Fsrjtyttzma That's the worst thing about this that they knew about it so like you said what else could there be?? Boeing has to be held accountable for all those deaths absolutely sickening.
diplomatic answers ... wow I'm impressed
Michael O'Leary should really be supporting Airbus after Boeings shocking incompetence.
He makes what is best for Ryanair. With Niki, he has an Airbus airline.
You really don't understand the economics of it all.
he should talk about ryanair's pilot butter
He keeps saying less fuel costs. What about more safety?
I hadn't known the Boeing 787 was grounded for battery issues, I either missed that one at the time or I had forgotten.
Doug Mammaro Yes they fitted lithium batteries without realising the dangers of fire. It burns without oxygen I think. They had several fires early on. They had to make a special container for them among other things. These batteries are so volatile passenger planes are not allowed to have them as cargo. A UPS 747 was brought down killing the two pilots because of a lithium fire in the cargo. They also give off a disabling choking gas.
The hundreds of people that died, were not even mentioned?!!
Interesting interview... he's very confident about the MAX
It's either that or their 737-8 fleet gets too old and they have to increase their prices to find a different aircraft (training, pilots, ground crew, etc.)
That's because he got them for a song! 😂
Michael is some lad; he’s really good at talking, “I’m Irish”, lol
Nothing to be proud of
Never fly B737 MAX! Those companies don’t care if you die as long as the insurance company covers everything!
@@colinsouthern some other planes have been fixed and still fell out of the sky. Many are well documented and all you have to do is research.
Yo O'leary... I'm never getting on one. Fact.
How hard can it be for Boeing to re-design it by raising the body of the plane so that the engines can be where they are supposed to be? If they do that then this will be a great plane with the 15% fuel saving and 4% extra capacity versus NG and and a safe investment but until then I'd say neither of those. It is kind of still a flying Ford Pinto just bigger in every way. Boeing is still in a good placed situation to re-design the jet to avoid further problems(minus the 346 lives lost so far.) It's great Ryanair have invested in simulators but that only goes so far. I wont be stepping on this jet with its current design.
Jonas Lundberg - There is no problem with the location of the engines. They can be placed almost anywhere as long as the pitch control surfaces can be trimmed to balance the trim forces.
@@GH-oi2jf True but the compensatory systems were so error prone they actually caused the very disasters they were trying to avoid. I know this is what Boeing are trying to fix now and probably will but my point is more, if they instead of compensating systems place the engines where such trim and rudder adjustments aren't necessary there are less things than can go wrong. Why they deviated so dramatically from the Aviation standard of not letting a single small component break everything is beyond me. This is being fixed now but there must be a recent, serious management systemic issue that allowed the single point of failure systems, probably forced it as no engineer in their right mind would have allowed it and Boeing has the finest engineers.
It's hard.
More than you expect. The gear should go somewhere, and you maybe need to move some other wiring, piping, decrease storage space, re-evaluate the airplane balance... Basically introduce MCAS 2.0 if you want to make the new plane behave the same. And it is a question if you can, because the plane will sit higher on the ground, behaviour on the tarmac will change. You'll have to re-evaluate ground speeds, pitch angles, axle load, load charts, hydraulics for the heavier gear...
Not to mention operations, the 737 is notoriously low to be easy to handle. Maybe airports and users will not have adequate equipment or trained staff to serve or maintain them. And all this with the assumption that your pilots do not need a new type rating, and with all of these changes, it is hard to avoid. With all of that, maybe they'll start considering just going for an Airbus or something other, because they need to go through the change process anyway, and move to a more future proof platform. The only thing Boeing can reasonably pull off is just new plane and hope clients will stay.
@Sandy Lee are you an engineer?
3:09 Umm love it. He has not asked them.
Is the Boeing 737 max still grounded ?
The MAX will be the safest aircraft in the world when it returns to service, most of you here in the comments just will hop on any opportunity to slam things you know very little about
Nicely said, Alex. I totally agree. A lot of people are very quick to join the "blame game" with poor judgment.
Official investigations into the causes of the 737 crashes are still ongoing, and may take months more time to complete. So, why would those aircraft go back in service until those investigations are complete?
By the Numbers - It is known that a defect in MCAS contributed to the crashes. Therefore it needs to be fixed now, before the grounding can be lifted. There is no other serious problem known or suspected to have contributed to the crashes. Therefore when MCAS is fixed to remove the known defects, it is reasonable to clear the aircraft for flight. When the final reports come out, there will be another opportunity to consider whether other changes should be required.
@@GH-oi2jf I disagree completely with this comment. To my knowledge faults have been found with the AoA sensors in that they are extremely vulnerable and have recorded over 200 incidents in the past year. They are old and unsafe technology and need to be replaced with technology which has no external component. For instance my phone knows which way is up and it has no AoA sensor. There was also an intentional fault with using only one sensor alternately left then right as input. It has not been explained how when using two sensors which one takes precedence and why. It has been suggested that MCAS will operate only once and for a shorter period when activated. But it has not been explained how Boeing will protect the airframe in the event of a real stall later in the flight if MCAS only operates once. Part of the problem with both crashes was because MCAS operated shortly after take-off when very little altitude had been obtained. What software changes have been directed at ensuring MCAS does not operate at low altitudes? There also seemed to be major issues with the fact that this was automation which was not only active in manual mode but the pilots knew nothing about it. Clearly the existing procedures cannot stay since switching off the trim switches when MCAS has activated places such force on the control surfaces that manual trim is no longer possible. How have Boeing overcome this in their new procedures. All of these issues arise due to the mismatch of engines and airframe. I do not see the 737max gaining recertification in the near future, perhaps not at all if these questions are not answered publicly. Boeing needs to be up front and declare the extent of the changes and the exact reasoning behind each change before they stand any chance of regaining public trust.
@@lightworkeight4136 the engines and airframe is not the problem. Also how confidence are you that the max won't return to services? Ain't boeing already finish the software update and the faa and other regulators have a copy?
@@lightworkeight4136 ##"For instance my phone knows which way is up and it has no AoA sensor"#
You are confusing the angle of attack with the pitch.
The angle of attack is the angle between the wing and the air flow. The pitch is the angle between the nose of the plane and the horizont. While you are pitching up, the angle of attack can be very low, because the angle between the plane and the horizont has nothing to do with the angle between the air flow and the wing. The sensor of the angle of attack must be obviously outside because the air flow is outside.
How does it work?
"An AOA vane (like what you have shown) works by aligning itself with the local airflow, like an arrow. The angle to some reference line (normally aircraft fuselage horizontal) is then measured with a potentiometer/RVDT/etc."
I don't want to be rude, but how are you able to teach to engineers how tu build planes if you don't know what is the angle of attack? You don't even have the basic knowledge.
@@ClassicalMusicAndSoundtracks I think we should ductape lightworkeight's cell phone to the front of the plane and see what happens 😁
The MAX’s engines are much bigger and long term problem than the other problem.
Clee Torres they’remore fuel efficient...
rowing in a galley is a better experience than flying with Ryanair
I'd love to see this guy talk if them Max aircraft belonged to his airline. He seems to forget the real issues here. He just comes from the same hole as the Boeing management teams.
Oh btw if you are really the best and have all those simulators then please use them and train your pilots to make better landings, I m done of not feeling my ass after every flight. Thank you
This guy is Mr Burns of aviation to me
A lot more pleasant though.
Watchin it today, still the 737 max doesnt fly. :(
This will be the end of Ryan Air.
People value their own lives more than your profits.
Dumb move betting on the 737 MAX. Should have bought the Airbus 321 NEO
Boeing 737 Max doesn't have a software problem, it has a single sensor problem. That's systemic.
If Ryan air keeps using 737 max in the future, I'd rather go to Andalucia by bus, even if from where I live it takes 24 hours!
I thought, Wizzair has the lowest costs. Does anybody know what is true?
Wizz has much higher costs. The lowest cost airlines are Emirates, Ryanair and Spirit.
The costs do not necessarily reflect fares, but Ryanair and EK have the lowest costs per economy seat in the industry.
yep O,Leary and Boeing are up each others Arseholes. both too much to lose . did he mention MCAS??
Peter Mcintosh I can’t blame you for thinking this, but if you read the prelim crash report with any knowledge of 737 procedures you’d see quite a bit more to this story than what you’re making reference to. You could have removed the MCAS system in this crash and replaced it with anything else and it’s not clear the plane would have made it back.
The issue started with the captain’s stick shaker on rotate. There is something here with either software, hardware or both to do with the erroneous stick shaker. That, combined with the pilots actions in dealing with that initial issue, had more to do with the Ethiopian crash than the MCAS did. Much more.
The max is a great plane and any 737 pilot can see what happened by reading the prelim report.
The issue I have with the media reporting on this is that no one will believe the final report when it comes out. But there is A LOT more to the crash than MCAS
@@bennyl7224
2 highly experienced 737 pilots who knew all of the problems with mcas were put in a flight simulator which repeated the Air Ethiopia take off.
Neither was able to recover before running out of altitude despite knowing what was about to happen and despite knowing the supposed solutions:
Could US pilots have saved the 737 MAX8 ?
ruclips.net/video/ZtHBz2-YpWE/видео.html
charles harper hi Charles. If you read the prelim report, the events unfolded the way they did that day for various reasons.
Before MCAS was rolling in trim, the plane was not in control for a different reason.
Using the example given doesn’t actually address this (assuming it’s a video I’ve already seen but I’ll check it out now). It’s like trying to stop an avalanche when you watched a snow ball develop from something the size of a pebble.
Having the plane already at high speed and trying to manually trim is not a recoverable situation generally. We need to ask ourselves why the plane was in that state to begin with.
By the time the MCAS appeared for the first time, the pilots were still dealing with the first problem. (ie: a pebble had developed into a massive snow ball)
The first problem appeared on rotate. The captain’s stick shaker. It’s a symptom of airspeed unreliable. As in, you are about to not know which airspeed indicators to believe.
Memory item actions:
1/ disconnect autopilot
2/ disconnect auto throttle
3/ flight directors off
4/ set 10 deg pitch and 80% thrust.
Large transport jets are all about flying with pitch attitude and thrust. You get guaranteed performance. These settings work directly after take off too if you need it. You can safely control a situation and fly the plane to a safe height and then consult more checklists.
Actions of pilots on the day:
1/ repeatedly attempted to engage autopilot
2/ thrust left at 94% (take off thrust and remained this way until impact)
3/ actively sort to follow the flight directors as evidenced by mode changes made
4/ no attempt to set any pitch or thrust.
While all attention is directed at trying to control this snowball, now quickly pushing them out of the design speed envelop, MCAS happens. When they realise that they have a stab trim runaway situation, the stab trim runaway checklist wasn’t followed properly either. They got the switches off eventually, but the checklist wasn’t followed in order to do that.
The decision by the pilots to turn the switches back on again, given the situation they were in by that stage (ie a self induced full blown avalanche) was probably the only hope they had at that late stage to save the plane, now still full thrust approaching 10-15% faster than its maximum speed. Electric trim if used properly might have helped them. But I think that the pilots were so overwhelmed by this stage with the stick shaker, the high speed warning (clacker) and possibly an autopilot disconnect alarm too.
I’ve been quite overly critical there of the pilots. It’s not my intention to do that. But I did it to highlight to you that this isn’t some big conspiracy by a capitalist pig company overseen by a corrupt administration.
This was a horrible couple of accidents, both similar actions by the pilots, both initially had a captain’s stick shaker go off on rotate and both met the same fate. The prelim report reads as if MCAS was the mouse that sank the boat. Not the main cause.
The final report looks at everything. I’m not sure if youve read a prelim and final report for an aircrash, but the investigators are very good at what they do. VERY good. They are impartial and will find all evidence, right down to a tiny screw. They will look at the MCAS of course, as they had with Lion Air. Nothing has changed since then.
They will look at why two separate crews failed to recognise that they had an airspeed unreliable event and therefore allowed the event to snowball the plane out of control, followed by retracting the flaps while the snowball developed further and finally a stab trim runaway event (MCAS) and why those same crew didn’t carry out the appropriate procedures for that also.
They will also look at why two crews who flew the lion air plane directly before it departed on its last flight had the same issues and managed to carry out the appropriate procedures and land the plane again. The two flight directly before the first crash.
They will look at what caused the captain’s stick shaker to go off erroneously too.
All these things they will look at. And impartially. Just facts.
Proper and impartial investigations into aircrashes are the reason we have such safety in aviation today. Every little piece of the puzzle has a lesson for us all. MCAS you refer to is a small piece of a large puzzle, though it may not seem that way because of how the media like to simplify things.
It's an industry that thrives on confidence. You can't take aim at your suppliers or business partners because it affects the industry as a whole. All you can do is work together behind the scenes. Boeing cannot afford another 737 Max to go down, not just for themselves but for consumer confidence in flying entirely.
@@bennyl7224 Well given Boeing have admitted there was a problem they knew about before the first crash and then admitted it again to American pilots who recorded the meeting before the second crash I think you are rather glossing over the cause of the crashes. The investigations have shown what caused the crashes: MCAS repeatedly interfered with the manual control of the aircraft even after it was disabled. Both aircraft crews reacted exactly as they should have and it is disgraceful Boeing and their apologists in the USA threw blame at dead pilots.
Sadly you seem to be doing just that.
Interesting that in the comments few fall for this crap. We know what the problem with the MAX 8 is. It hasn't gone away.
oh my lord. NEVER getting ryanair if they use those planes
Colin Southern A good ,flyable aircraft should not need any software trimming in flight . I had bad experience with software in a car while driving in heavy downtown rush hour traffic . It abruptly declare “ Fatal Error “ and proceeded to shut down engine . Now I stick to cars without fancy gizmos
Soooo.. Wien is it flying agan?
The best comments from 4:40
I wonder what Ryanair's pilot union thinks about this. Oh that's right! There isn't one.
There is no Company specific union, that is right. But the pilots are free to join the national unions like Balpa, VC, Ialpa - its not directly the same system like in the states
When a company pays you well and treats you right, you don't need a union
Like someone already pointed out, pilots normally don't unify in a company-specific union in Europe. They join pilot unions, which then have normally sub-sections for larger companies. Ryanair pilots do have a say, and they mostly voice it to their base country's union, which then coordinates it with other unions if necessary. This is why you tend to have strikes in specific countries and not all at the same time, because they are different unions operating separately.
My wife and I flew to Dublin from Bristol with Ryan air, i thought we were in a sardine tin? Talk about budget airfares, next time we will go by hot air balloon.
+1 for Green travel with an air balloon
how big are yous?
BA business class is more spacious. Try them next time
@@latorregolf he didn't reply lol ££££££. These guys want the earth dirt cheap. Ryanair is great
It is a budget airline remember. You want to pay more for a hot towel?
Customers are going to love it ... why is it the people in charge don’t have any concerns about the paying public’s safety. Boeing and now O’Leary ... I’ll be a paying passenger on the A320 neo around Europe from now on !!!
when Ryanair get the new Boeing 737 max their will be a charge of £5:00 to use the onboard toilets
Pilot training is quite good in Ireland...as long as they're not let down by the plane they're flying. Boeing will fix the max but when you see those wingtips as you board, you'll wonder is today going to be the day another one goes down.
Everyone said after 9/11 no one would fly again, Micheal went out and bought more plains. Not a great fan of all aspects of the Ryanair model but we wouldn't have got off the island of Ireland if it weren't for Ryanair.Bowing will solve the issue with max plane we'll all move on until the next glitch with some other manufacturer.
Sounds like O’Leary is Boeing’s PR I ask myself how much is he getting paid or discount of next batch of planes
He's trying to keep people flying his airline
Mr O'Leary Sir - Listen carefully and all over your Arrival halls you will hear this sound:
"If its THAT Boeing I ain't going"
You and your family will need to sit in that aircraft for 1000 hours to prove its safety.
Straight honest talking man there scarce
KING
I was on an Airbus last month, felt so much more relaxed. To quote somebody else further down - "If its Boeing - I ain't going"
.... we try not to have a blame culture in the industry .... CNBC reporters seem not to agree to this....
Considering the fact that Ryanair's service is shit This man deserves credibility!
6:30 Mr O'Leary casually said we have 3 bil in cash ( 3bil.. !!), we don't need compensation.
so, guys and girls fellow passangers, your 10 quid low cost fare gave this airline 3 bil..!!
Considering that the price of an airplane is around 120 million that means they can only buy 25 aircraft.
@@Jeevongo ha ha Jeev.. that's not how Airlines purchased their aircrafts. They don't dip their hands in the kitty and spend all their cash on aircraft purchase. A sure way to bankcrupt the Airline.
( find out also how lease works)... and, as a side note, no Airlines were ever expected to pay the full catalog price.
Does he fly business class ro USA?
Michael O'Leary didn't choose Boeing and kicked out everything Airbus because "Boeing is so good". Boeing makes him an irresistible price quote and he sells a plane after 2 years with the original price, factory price. So de facto, he almost doesn't have to pay anything for his Boeing fleet with 450 planes. Michael not only runs an airline he also runs an airplane trade
Unfortunately when great tragedies happen like what happened with the Boeing, it is time to learn. As I understand it, it was a whole bunch of problems, both software, hardware and human.
I flew on the MAX, it was a nice airplane
You're a muppet
dog guy “was”
Crazy Clown it can be a nice plane, it may not be a safe one. Muppet
@@mjstafford758 right lol, I just liked the legroom especially sense it was a southwest flight
Why not asking him why they have the lowest costs?
Because they pay shit salaries and offer nothing to their employees. Worst employer on earth probably
I fly often, domestically and internationally, but if I knew, even at the gate, that I was going to board a 737 max I'd walk, even if it meant forfeiting my ticket.
Looking nice...
Have never seen an honest O'Leary
One of the smartest guys in town.
'"4% more seats, 15% less fuel" - great that it makes you more money, but what % more crashes? And no-blame "Learning" is great for survivors, but not victims. How are they going to fix fundamental engine placement design flaws that endanger actual humans?
Omg I’m ashamed that I live in Ireland I will not get on that aircraft and put my family in danger if my life depended on it I did travel with their company I have a friend that works in Ryanair but I won’t get on that max aircraft since I’ve lost faith in their aircraft when they knew the problem but let the aircraft fly.
Why are you ashamed of living in Ireland ???.
@@zeppirl If Laimis Kondratas is ashamed to live in Ireland, he/she can always take a cheap flight back home.
@@feargach2107it just makes no sense to be ashamed to live in Ireland because a CEO of an airline company based in Ireland comes across as an asshole. Its not the nation of Ireland's fault 😂.
Ryanair don’t own any Max’s at the moment they are on order the only aircraft Ryanair own is the 737-8AS
More seats, better fuel efficiency. No mention of the lives lost on the 737 800 Max.
I am very proud to have never flown on Ryanair the walmart of airlines.
The horror stories from friends who have about drunken passengers people who would never be on a plane unless Ryanair offered cheap seats and have no idea how to behave.
Hard landings, shit service, getting stuck on airports when a flight get's cancelled, ridiculous service charges I could go on.
It's fine get over yourself
Sorry but when I am trapped in a flying steel tube the last people I want to be trapped with are those who payed 10 euros for a ticket.
Minimum 200 euros a ticket or I aint going.
@@thatnorwegianguy1986 paid not payed
Solution is to put 10.tons of pb on the rear side
Low cost …means more consumers…
The customers, meaning the flying public will dictate whether They feel safe and use it..... Airlines ordering a large number are taking a huge gamble public confidence will be back.. CEOs can say what they want.. Would u book Ur family on an Airlines soley with 737 maxs?
Ive had around 70 + flights on ryanair, but o'leary would have to fly every day for a year in a max 8 to convince me its safe
I DONT WANT TO FLY WITH 737 MAX THEY DO NOT SOLVE THE PROBLEM