Charleroi Brussels South closed by fog

[pressman]

Brussels Airlines ,

Ryanair crews are all trained up to CAT III , as are the planes , always have been for as long as I can remember - that goes back 9 years .
How would you explain landing in LGG otherwise ?
I ssem to remember correcting a few others on this as well , People , CAT III is nothing special , it is simply an autoland in low vis conditions - to be trained to do this requires 1 sim session which is done every 6 months along with 3 actual or simulated landings in the plane - I did all mine in the last week .
As for the discussion as to why FR dont use the better equipped Liege or another airport - the answer is very simple - Business .
Another interesting fact is that CRL airport must pay all the diversion costs when an FR diverts - this will continue to be the case until the Airport gets upgraded to CAT III .

[LX-LGX]

... since all the flights are fully booked, the earliest opportunity might be days away, so all passengers ask for a refund...

"Days away" is forbitten by the Belgian trade law. If someone promises clients to fly them from A to B on ../../.. at ..h.., they have to do so. Regulation 261/2004 even mentions re-routing as possibility for stranded pax, which means: if a flight to/out of CRL is not possible but a flight to/out LGG can be done at that time, an airline HAS to take that opportunity.

Belgian trade law forbits that a company amends a law from public order ("een wet van openbare orde") into own policy, even it's clearly announced to the public. Example: many countries forbit smoking on domestic flights. Even if airline Smoke Air clearly advises all passengers that smoking is allowed - and even promoted - smoking on domestic flights remains forbitten. Same applies to Ryanair: Belgian trade lawas are public order, so if Ryanair announces a flight, it has to execute that flight. From CRL to ... or from CRL via LGG to ...

[Jense]

Duh, everybody knows that Ryanair flies to CRL because thanks to some Walloon government support (with Flemish money I tell you ) they pay few landing rights. We all know that Jense...

I know very well, but I think it's better not to start the discussion about the money from the governments and where it comes from...

But if you see every year that you experience fog problems at CRL, you must admit that it will cost you money too, and a lot of unhappy passengers who may never fly FR again.

I agree on the first one, but I disagree with the whole sentence... If it was that expensive and that bad for FR's reputation and business, then they would already be moved to LGG, don't you think? At least that's the most logical solution on our first sight, not to talk (off-course...) about the financial injection of "some" government(s).

LGG isn't a lot more expensive for landing rights I guess, so why not making a hub there? Might attract a new public from The Netherlands and Germay as well.

Almost the same story as my previous quote: if it was THAT less expensive, then they would be operating there...

Whether you like Ryanair or not, you must admit that an airport without Cat III in a foggy valley is not a good idea to base 10 aircraft.

It's not only a matter to cancel the flights or not. Cancelling a flight is quite easy, I guess. But after the cancellation, handling the passengers, the catering (in flight shop, with FR), etc. Those things are difficult, but "hey?" what was FR's strategy? Low cost = no frills.

And after all, once more: you pay what you get. It's strange that always the same people try to react against FR and its strategy. But if they were that bad, if they couldn't get a plane off the ground, etc.: why do they make so much money and why are they one of Europe's biggest low-cost airlines (if not the biggest)?

[Koenie666]

I also don't really understand what the fuzz is about.

I don't have much mercy for those moaning their planned christmas holidays are ruined. If you wanted that much to be there.. you would have booked a flight ex-BRU on a non-LCC.

If you use an LCC out of charleroi you know the risk is there that fog will cancel your holiday. (same thing on other regional airports... you have to take the pro's with the contra's.. my niece had to wait three extra ours in Ostend to fly to Alicante because they didn't have de-icing there....)

This is exactly the reason why I don't plan flights with FR or Wizzair... in january.....

[L-1011]

When the strike at CRL was still planned for 21/12/06 they (FR) stated on their website that all diversions would be done via LFQQ (Lille) not LGG At that time I did not understand why they preferred to ask everybody to take the train or bus to Lille instead of Liège... (because of course with FR you have to pay for your "diversion")

[Cartman]

Whether you like Ryanair or not, you must admit that an airport without Cat III in a foggy valley is not a good idea to base 10 aircraft.

It's not only a matter to cancel the flights or not. Cancelling a flight is quite easy, I guess. But after the cancellation, handling the passengers, the catering (in flight shop, with FR), etc. Those things are difficult, but "hey?" what was FR's strategy? Low cost = no frills.

When I wrote this, I was just wondering how much it would cost if those 10 aircraft based in CRL (not yet 10, but it is their long-term vision) cannot take off (not even empty) because of fog. That's not just a dozen of cancelled flights from CRL, but also a whole lot of other flights through europe that would be operated by one of the ten aircraft. As you say, there is no doubt that this is only a 'financial collateral damage' for FR, but it does show how much they care about their passengers when it comes to the service/money dilemma.

And when someone says 'you get what you pay for', take in consideration that FR also sells tickets of about 250€ to e.g. Gerona. For that money (or even less) you can fly SN or VY as well, and you'll get a whole lot more in case of cancellations...

[airazurxtror]

I don't have much mercy for those moaning their planned christmas holidays are ruined. If you wanted that much to be there.. you would have booked a flight ex-BRU on a non-LCC.

If you use an LCC out of charleroi you know the risk is there that fog will cancel your holiday.

There can be fog everywhere, and being booked on a legacy carrier doesn't prevent it. Quite a few British have just had their Christmas holiday ruined because of fog at Heathrow and British Airways flights cancelled !

[airazurxtror]

@Atlantis:

no, i dont think money is the reason. LGG is as cheap as CRL, but as said before, it's not close enough to brussels to be called brussels south. That's the basic thinking because brussels is 40min away by bus from charleroi or 40min away by high speed train from liege... it looks like they didnt think far enough.

Charleroi airport is 40 minutes away (by bus) from Brussels Midi- Zuid railway station.
Liège airport (Bierset) is a good 20 minutes away (and I am not sure there is a direct bus line) from Liège Guillemins railway station, where you still have to wait and take the train to Brussels.

Besides, the Walloon Region has decided that CRL would be developped mainly for passengers and LGG for freight.

[Acid-drop]

With a train station in LGG, it's only maximum 40 min away from brussels.

But yeah, they decided, and i completely agree with them, to split the benefits : pax for charleroi and freight for liege.

In charleroi, once the new terminal is over, once they get ILS catIII and once, maybe, they get a train station, it will be a fantastic airport.

Now the airports in wallonia are a big advantage, like the harbours in flanders (made with walloon money many years ago, of course ).

[Zenfookpower]

With a train station in LGG, it's only maximum 40 min away from brussels.

But yeah, they decided, and i completely agree with them, to split the benefits : pax for charleroi and freight for liege.

In charleroi, once the new terminal is over, once they get ILS catIII and once, maybe, they get a train station, it will be a fantastic airport.

Now the airports in wallonia are a big advantage, like the harbours in flanders (made with walloon money many years ago, of course ).

Is all what you write (hope) driven by "economics" or partisan believes.. I still cannot figure out the "Flemish - 'Walloon" venom I sense in this thread...
Anyway.. Have a Merry Christmas,,

[Acid-drop]

of course my sentence was made to show how stupid this is ...
But hey, Belgium IS actually stupid so

[sn26567]

When the strike at CRL was still planned for 21/12/06 they (FR) stated on their website that all diversions would be done via LFQQ (Lille) not LGG At that time I did not understand why they preferred to ask everybody to take the train or bus to Lille instead of Liège.

Because the strike was planned in Liège as well as in Charleroi.

[SFo]

And CRL is one of the worst ever planned airport, build in a valley.

CRL is not in a valley - it's clear you have never been to that airport.
I hear LHR also has had some problem with fog lately...

I was many times at CRL to cut off some people and its build in a valley, thats clear when you drive to and from the airport.

Have you ever actualy flown to EBCI? I do from time to time but everytime they probably had deflated the hills before my arrival (not because of my landing skills, I hope). The surroundings are flat as a snooker table, except for several small 'terrils'.

There can be fog everywhere, it's just that incredibly heavy HP that's not moving an inch (we had QNHs above 1040). Saturday I couldn't take off from EBNM (even with non-controlled minimas being 1500/500) while EBSH was almost CAVOK.

[stefanel]

Cat III is the only solution, but it will take two years and, don't forget LHR has Cat III but was still seriously paralized.

I met Romanian friends who were in the Blue Air flight on 24/12 that was diverted to Brussels. Do you know that the screens in Charleroi were displaying "landed" and that no info whatsoever was provided during one hour after the supposed landing in Charleroi... what a shame!

Fog is a problem, but lack of professionalism is another one...

[dre]

CatIII caused delay in LHR because the airplanes cannot land as close behind each other as they usually do. That is something different than in CRL where there would ne nearly no disruption.

Earlier on somebody said that if ten planes couldnt take off from CRL, it would be a problem for the rest of the schedule in europe: most of the planes going out of CRL come in again later and secondly, there is a big difference between take off minima and landing minima. You need much less visibility for take off than for landing.

greetz
Dre

[Tommypilot]

Brussels Airlines ,

Ryanair crews are all trained up to CAT III , as are the planes , always have been for as long as I can remember - that goes back 9 years .
How would you explain landing in LGG otherwise ?

CATIII is the kind of approach if I can remember well, not stating an autoland.
There are even situations when pilots let the plane land automatically in CATI/II situations, as you know that as well I assume... (without fog off course)

I am not 100% sure if RYR's pilots are trained up to CATIII. (shouldn't be surprised with their 737NG's)

My question is, was the fog as heavy in LGG as it was in CRL?
Probably not...

[Acid-drop]

Yes, the pilots are trained for CATIII, as said before.

And yes, the fog was as heavy in LGG, but LGG has CATIII, and like said before, only the distance between planes is important then.

[stefanel]

CatIII caused delay in LHR because the airplanes cannot land as close behind each other as they usually do. That is something different than in CRL where there would ne nearly no disruption.

Earlier on somebody said that if ten planes couldnt take off from CRL, it would be a problem for the rest of the schedule in europe: most of the planes going out of CRL come in again later and secondly, there is a big difference between take off minima and landing minima. You need much less visibility for take off than for landing.

greetz
Dre

Yes, but to be accurate, there are 4 planes based at Charleroi.