(full site)
Fark.com

Back To Main
   Budget airline Ryanair plans $2 tickets for trans-European air travel by cutting out the seatbelt and sitting down thing

08 Nov 2012 06:37 AM   |   9190 clicks   |   Telegraph
Showing 1-50 of 119 comments
Refresh Page 2
View Comments:
shanrick    [TotalFark]  
plonkers

07 Nov 2012 08:50 PM
Dead for Tax Reasons     
Watch out for the $20 gangway access fee (both boarding and disembarking), $50 inflight oxygen surcharge and $40 'you're stupid' fee

07 Nov 2012 09:14 PM
I_Am_Weasel    [TotalFark]  
Those wishing to fly on holiday should instead be permitted to stand at the back on a plane, which he considers to be "just a b----- bus with wings".

A what with wings?

biatch?
bastard?
bar mitzvah?

07 Nov 2012 09:22 PM
slayer199    [TotalFark]  
The libertarian in me says they should be able to offer that option. Anyone that would fly on a plane without seatbelts would accept the risk, but they'd also be total idiots. Darwin in action. After all, it isn't like anyone has ever been saved by a seatbelt on a plane. So when it happens and Ryanair is sued, castigated by the press and public, and run out of business...it would be glorious.

/sarcasm

Yes, I'm a libertarian, but I think eliminating seatbelts is stupid. I think a better solution to removing seatbelts would be for Ryanair to actually innovate and find ways to save weight on a plane without sacrificing safety.

07 Nov 2012 10:11 PM
slayer199    [TotalFark]  
Also, can't they set up seats vertically so they can pack people in like sardines?

07 Nov 2012 10:13 PM
Elegy     
I saw a legit proposal for SRO flights a few years ago, maybe in PopSci. Basically, you'd get a saddle seat, like you would on a amusement ride.

And somebody tell this dumbass that those seat belts he wants to get rid of come in real handy when you hit bad turbulence.

07 Nov 2012 10:15 PM
dletter     

slayer199: The libertarian in me says they should be able to offer that option. Anyone that would fly on a plane without seatbelts would accept the risk, but they'd also be total idiots. Darwin in action. After all, it isn't like anyone has ever been saved by a seatbelt on a plane. So when it happens and Ryanair is sued, castigated by the press and public, and run out of business...it would be glorious.

/sarcasm

Yes, I'm a libertarian, but I think eliminating seatbelts is stupid. I think a better solution to removing seatbelts would be for Ryanair to actually innovate and find ways to save weight on a plane without sacrificing safety.


It has nothing to do with weight, they just want to pack more people into the planes. Stupid seats taking up valuable space.

07 Nov 2012 10:18 PM
Jamdug!     
Fine by me. I hate the airlines enough as it is, may as well try something different.

07 Nov 2012 10:18 PM
slayer199    [TotalFark]  

dletter: It has nothing to do with weight, they just want to pack more people into the planes. Stupid seats taking up valuable space.


Which is why I added my 2nd post after re-reading TFA.

07 Nov 2012 10:28 PM
dletter     

slayer199: dletter: It has nothing to do with weight, they just want to pack more people into the planes. Stupid seats taking up valuable space.

Which is why I added my 2nd post after re-reading TFA.


Didn't catch that, just reacted to the Boobies....

And I believe Ryan Air did propose "vertical seats" originally... Link

But, I guess they decided, why not just go all the way...

07 Nov 2012 10:36 PM
doglover    [TotalFark]  
The millitary does this, don't they?

07 Nov 2012 10:51 PM
BarkingUnicorn     

I_Am_Weasel: Those wishing to fly on holiday should instead be permitted to stand at the back on a plane, which he considers to be "just a b----- bus with wings".

A what with wings?

biatch?
bastard?
bar mitzvah?


"Bloody," referring to menstrual blood. Brits find the word as offensive as "shiatty."

07 Nov 2012 11:29 PM
coco ebert     
Having flown with Ryanair once... NEVER AGAIN.

07 Nov 2012 11:31 PM
SpaceyCat    [TotalFark]  

doglover: The millitary does this, don't they?


Kinda sorta. Depending on the flight, they have web seating. No seat belts still though.

07 Nov 2012 11:39 PM
skinbubble    [TotalFark]  
img811.imageshack.usView Full Size

08 Nov 2012 12:15 AM
Bathia_Mapes    [TotalFark]  
Ryanair's CEO makes proposals like this frequently, even though he knows full well that none of them are remotely acceptable in terms of aviation safety. In fact, a lot of his suggestions are in jest and not to be taken seriously.

08 Nov 2012 01:18 AM
GreenAdder    [TotalFark]  
Didn't Lewis Black make a joke like this?

08 Nov 2012 02:22 AM
ElPresidente     
Michael O'Leary is a greedy troll. Do not feed the troll. Thank you.

08 Nov 2012 06:40 AM
sycraft     
Ryan Air: Run by retards.

Seriously. Yes I'm sure in a full out, uncontrolled, "plane slams in to the ground face first" kind of crash seatbelts do fark-all. That isn't why they are there. They are there for far more common things. One is simply turbulence. In heavy turbulence, a seatbelt can be the difference between being in the seat and smacking your head on the ceiling. Yes, really planes can bounce around that much and no it isn't any fun. Also in a controlled sort of crash, like the flight ditched in to the Hudson, you can have an acceleration shock when stopping, but one mild enough the seatbelts do plenty to keep everyone safe.

It is the same shiat as a car really. If you hit a solid concrete wall, head on at 90 mph, there really isn't shiat your car can do, the acceleration will kill you. Seatbelts, airbags, etc all are more or less useless. However that is not a normal accident. Normally things are much more sedate, lower speeds, softer targets, and less acceleration. In those cases, seatbelts often are the difference between life and death, or serious and minor injury.

08 Nov 2012 06:46 AM
lucksi     
Standing on a plane?

Buses can crash all the time or simply brake hard to rearrange the passengers inside and we don't have seat belts in most of those (only long distance highway buses have them here)
Trains also can go really fast and we don't have seat belts on them either.
So we don't really need them on planes.

But seats? Every flown through a storm or had the plane excitingly drop a couple of hundred feet due to an airhole or what they are called? I do not want to do that while standing.

08 Nov 2012 06:48 AM
OniExpress     
If other airlines proposed this, I might take it up.

I don't fly Ryanair anymore after me and my fiance almost died on a sketchy takeoff last year.

08 Nov 2012 06:48 AM
farkingismybusiness     
This idea is retarded. Now excuse me, I have to drop my kids off at the bus stop. They are late for school.

08 Nov 2012 06:50 AM
gsiofa     

Bathia_Mapes: Ryanair's CEO makes proposals like this frequently, even though he knows full well that none of them are remotely acceptable in terms of aviation safety. In fact, a lot of his suggestions are in jest and not to be taken seriously.


Not so much in jest, but rather to get free publicity. Giving ridiculous interviews like this firm his brand's reputation as a cheap-at-all-costs airline where.

08 Nov 2012 06:51 AM
HenryFnord     

I_Am_Weasel: Those wishing to fly on holiday should instead be permitted to stand at the back on a plane, which he considers to be "just a b----- bus with wings".

A what with wings?

biatch?
bastard?
bar mitzvah?


bloody bus with wings.

08 Nov 2012 07:00 AM
moothemagiccow     
So... catapult?

//wish we had budget airlines

08 Nov 2012 07:00 AM
FenixStorm1     
This was Ryanair's (and other airlines) idea a few years ago:

caveviews.blogs.comView Full Size

urbanglobetrotter.squarespace.comView Full Size

08 Nov 2012 07:02 AM
generallyso     

lucksi: Standing on a plane?

Buses can crash all the time or simply brake hard to rearrange the passengers inside and we don't have seat belts in most of those (only long distance highway buses have them here)
Trains also can go really fast and we don't have seat belts on them either.
So we don't really need them on planes.

But seats? Every flown through a storm or had the plane excitingly drop a couple of hundred feet due to an airhole or what they are called? I do not want to do that while standing.



How are you proposing to keep people in the seats during turbulence without seat belts?

08 Nov 2012 07:02 AM
theresnothinglft     
I stopped at the part where he compared trains to planes.

Yes you can stand on a train... know why? No turbulence. The track is solid and the train's movements are extremely subtle. On an airplane it isn't uncommon for the plane to drop 10-20 ft in a matter of milliseconds due to turbulence. Guess what that will do to standing passengers? Airplanes bank to turn as well. Sometimes the banking is up to 30 degrees. Also takeoff and landing aren't exactly smooth all the time.


I guess we should just assume that Ryanair CEO is just a troll.

08 Nov 2012 07:03 AM
Prank Call of Cthulhu    [TotalFark]  

Elegy: Basically, you'd get a saddle seat, like you would on a amusement ride.


Maybe they could partner with Sybian and make it suck even worse (or improve it, I guess, depending on your point of view).

t2.gstatic.comView Full Size

08 Nov 2012 07:05 AM
PrinceOfPersia     
The farker doesn't even fly on his own airline, and he does consider his own customers idiots. He says shiat like this every now and again as publicity and to figure out public reaction (like his infamous idea of charging for the toilets on planes.)

He is to be ignored nad you tend to deserve what you get when you fly on this Irish right-wing coont's line.

08 Nov 2012 07:07 AM
HotIgneous Intruder     
Nope. Not going to work.
FAA is going to ban these planes from landing in the USA, most likely.
It's a stupid, stupid, stupid idea.

If you think it's just fine, then you need to watch this show, Plane Crash, on Discovery.

08 Nov 2012 07:11 AM
Enemabag Jones     
May I also suggest warm clothing and oxygen tanks so customers to fly in the luggage space.

08 Nov 2012 07:12 AM
jfivealive     

I_Am_Weasel: Those wishing to fly on holiday should instead be permitted to stand at the back on a plane, which he considers to be "just a b----- bus with wings".

A what with wings?

biatch?
bastard?
bar mitzvah?


bigass!

08 Nov 2012 07:15 AM
KrispyKritter     

BarkingUnicorn: I_Am_Weasel: Those wishing to fly on holiday should instead be permitted to stand at the back on a plane, which he considers to be "just a b----- bus with wings".

A what with wings?

biatch?
bastard?
bar mitzvah?

"Bloody," referring to menstrual blood. Brits find the word as offensive as "shiatty."


thanks to BarkingUnicorn, i've been awake maybe 11 minutes and i already learned something. it's gonna be a good day, tater.

08 Nov 2012 07:15 AM
p4p3rm4t3     
Bang B__.

08 Nov 2012 07:16 AM
moothemagiccow     

HotIgneous Intruder: Nope. Not going to work.
FAA is going to ban these planes from landing in the USA, most likely.
It's a stupid, stupid, stupid idea.

If you think it's just fine, then you need to watch this show, Plane Crash, on Discovery.


I have a feeling the ban is unnecessary considering RyanAir doesn't fly west of ireland

08 Nov 2012 07:16 AM
Pista    [TotalFark]  
Good old Ryan Scare.
So where does all the additional carry-on baggage go then?
Do we balance it on our heads?
& how am I supposed to play with my iPad/ games console when I'm hanging onto a strap?

08 Nov 2012 07:18 AM
moothemagiccow     

KrispyKritter: BarkingUnicorn: I_Am_Weasel: Those wishing to fly on holiday should instead be permitted to stand at the back on a plane, which he considers to be "just a b----- bus with wings".

A what with wings?

biatch?
bastard?
bar mitzvah?

"Bloody," referring to menstrual blood. Brits find the word as offensive as "shiatty."

thanks to BarkingUnicorn, i've been awake maybe 11 minutes and i already learned something. it's gonna be a good day, tater.


Too bad it's not actually true. Like most etymologies for old slang or curses, no one knows the word's origin for sure http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bloody#E tymology

08 Nov 2012 07:21 AM
farkingatwork     
so they want to make taller airplanes allowing 6' and above people to actually stand up? that would hopefully be a requirement here, otherwise people are going to have back pains just from crouching over on an airplane flight.

08 Nov 2012 07:22 AM
poorjon     
I didn't know that seatbelts contributed to the bulk of the cost of a plane ticket. Seems like its about time we reviewed this technology.

08 Nov 2012 07:23 AM
Crewmannumber6     
When do they start their transatlantic flights?

08 Nov 2012 07:24 AM
brukmann     

I_Am_Weasel: Those wishing to fly on holiday should instead be permitted to stand at the back on a plane, which he considers to be "just a b----- bus with wings".

A what with wings?

biatch?
bastard?
bar mitzvah?



I assume with the sweaty standing-room only nightclub experience he wants to create at the back of the plane, he means Bang Bus.


/he said "bloody"
//i'm starting to really like this guy, he's spot-on in some ways

08 Nov 2012 07:27 AM
eyefarkno     

Bathia_Mapes: Ryanair's CEO makes proposals like this frequently, even though he knows full well that none of them are remotely acceptable in terms of aviation safety. In fact, a lot of his suggestions are in jest and not to be taken seriously.

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
THIS

O'Leary must have noticed he wasn't getting much press lately.

08 Nov 2012 07:31 AM
GBB    [TotalFark]  
t2.gstatic.comView Full Size

Seatbelts are not for the crashes, genius.

08 Nov 2012 07:32 AM
brukmann     

FenixStorm1: This was Ryanair's (and other airlines) idea a few years ago:

[caveviews.blogs.com image 377x236]
[urbanglobetrotter.squarespace.com image 458x365]


What do seats look like in monster trucks, so the driver is best protected from shock? Anyone? Yeah, they look almost exactly like these farking seats, you jackasses.

08 Nov 2012 07:34 AM
SpectroBoy     
Those wishing to fly on holiday should instead be permitted to stand at the back on a plane, which he considers to be "just a b----- bus with wings".


Hey, farkwit, buses don't suddenly change altitude and toss people around to the ceiling.

08 Nov 2012 07:41 AM
stickymichael     
Michael O'Leary is a publicist pure and simple.

The chances of this passing are slim to none - and he knows it. But you know what, he'll keep on saying it until the papers stop printing it.

08 Nov 2012 07:42 AM
SpectroBoy     
If they really want to pack people in like chord wood why not highly stacked bunk bed style cots? It would be more comfortable for passengers and safer.

08 Nov 2012 07:44 AM
MythDragon     

Elegy: I saw a legit proposal for SRO flights a few years ago, maybe in PopSci. Basically, you'd get a saddle seat, like you would on a amusement ride.

And somebody tell this dumbass that those seat belts he wants to get rid of come in real handy when you hit bad turbulence.


That's why you pack a shiatlaod of people in there. The ones around the edge act as sort of an ablative armor for those in the middle. You get a nice ring of fatties around the group, and it basicly becomes like a bouncy-castle. And if you're packed in there dick-to-butt , you can't go flying about the cabin due to the meat-wall. Of course you have to deal with the neck-beard who has a raging boner stuck in the back of your spine and Mr Fun-yun sweat smearing his body-gravy all over your left arm. But small price to pay for a 1 eruo ticket. And maybe you'll get lucky and be some hot chick's neck-beard boner in the back.

08 Nov 2012 07:47 AM
dittybopper    [TotalFark]  
Airbus has already come up with a new passenger arrangement concept for it:

i48.tinypic.comView Full Size

08 Nov 2012 07:51 AM
Showing 1-50 of 119 comments
Refresh Page 2
View Comments:
This thread is closed to new comments.


Back To Main

More Headlines:
Main | Sports | Business | Geek | Entertainment | Politics | Video | FarkUs | Contests | Fark Party | Combined