http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-12...use-toilet.htmlMy only thing to say about this is, "ah fer cryin out loud". At least they are blocked by safety regulations.

this 'idea' ... more of a brainstorm idea ... is over two years old. i guess 'the mail' had a slow news day.now, there are a vocal few that LOVE to attack the successful budget airlines like ryanair, southwest ... or budget retailers like walmart. these companys make LOTS OF MONEY for a reason - a LOT of people find the service provided more than fine and spend their hard earned money with these businesses again, again and again.yes these companies all have a history of abusing employees, the environment and customers. but ... 'customers' keep going to these places time again, and again and again.--

Seems like more of a means to get the airline in the papers. Michael O'Leary sure knows how to do that. But I've got a better idea for him. How about he offers a 'fly it yourself' option? Two quid a ticket, but all the passengers have to take turns at driving the aircraft themselves. That way he won't even have to employ professional pilots. Imagine the savings; currently commercial pilots have to have expensive regular medical checks, which is sensible when there are only two on board, but with 185 drivers on the thing, what are the chances of them all having a heart attack? Genius.After all, as Bob Hawke famously noted, they're just a bunch of overpaid bus drivers, aren't they? :( Or how about a 'work your passage' option? Just one quid a ticket, but you have to serve coffees to all your fellow passengers. Ticket costs dropping to just 50 pence if you know how to do a safety briefing and put the doors to manual on a 737.Alternatively, how about an option where you can volunteer to fuel the aircraft for a week prior to traveling, and then you get to fly for free? After all, you put petrol in your car, so how hard can it be?Finally, how about rationalising their fleet by selling all the 737s and replacing them with cheap and plentiful ex-military C-130s? There must be tons of them sat at Mojave doing nothing now that the average air force budget is about six quid, and with the C-130, it is possible to avoid expensive landing fees altogether, by simply placing all the passengers on low altitude extraction pallets and kicking them out of the back whilst doing a low pass over the runway.With ideas like this, I'm expecting Michael on the phone at any moment.Al

Ryanair made a profit of

Budget carriers make more money because they don't charge as much, it's as simple as that. Money is tight in this economy and you see a lot of people taking cheaper flights because they can't afford things like BA and KLM.

Seems like more of a means to get the airline in the papers. Michael O'Leary sure knows how to do that. But I've got a better idea for him. How about he offers a 'fly it yourself' option? Two quid a ticket, but all the passengers have to take turns at driving the aircraft themselves. That way he won't even have to employ professional pilots. Imagine the savings; currently commercial pilots have to have expensive regular medical checks, which is sensible when there are only two on board, but with 185 drivers on the thing, what are the chances of them all having a heart attack? Genius.After all, as Bob Hawke famously noted, they're just a bunch of overpaid bus drivers, aren't they? :( Or how about a 'work your passage' option? Just one quid a ticket, but you have to serve coffees to all your fellow passengers. Ticket costs dropping to just 50 pence if you know how to do a safety briefing and put the doors to manual on a 737.Alternatively, how about an option where you can volunteer to fuel the aircraft for a week prior to traveling, and then you get to fly for free? After all, you put petrol in your car, so how hard can it be?Finally, how about rationalising their fleet by selling all the 737s and replacing them with cheap and plentiful ex-military C-130s? There must be tons of them sat at Mojave doing nothing now that the average air force budget is about six quid, and with the C-130, it is possible to avoid expensive landing fees altogether, by simply placing all the passengers on low altitude extraction pallets and kicking them out of the back whilst doing a low pass over the runway.With ideas like this, I'm expecting Michael on the phone at any moment.Al

I have to agree, at this point I suspect Ryanair is just looking for media attention, as no press is bad press. Or to put it in a more internet fashion: Ryanair is trolling.

Budget carriers make more money because they don't charge as much, it's as simple as that. Money is tight in this economy and you see a lot of people taking cheaper flights because they can't afford things like BA and KLM.I have to agree, at this point I suspect Ryanair is just looking for media attention, as no press is bad press. Or to put it in a more internet fashion: Ryanair is trolling.

Or as the story suggests, they are trying to divert media attention away from there upcoming fee hike of 80 pounds to check a bag of luggage!

Or as the story suggests, they are trying to divert media attention away from there upcoming fee hike of 80 pounds to check a bag of luggage!

The media are already aware of it.http://www.telegraph.co.uk/travel/travelne...at-a-price.html

Keep in mind that the 'story' appeared in the Daily Mail 'newspaper'. For those of you not from the UK, here is a fairly accurate appraisal of the Daily Mail:http://uncyclopedia.wikia.com/wiki/Daily_MailAl

I cannot believe in any way that Ryanair's idea would ever be certified not least with the UK CAA! Their idea makes a nonsense of all the safety regulations concerning passengers and crew! How many of you have travelled on a busy commuter train or bus whilst standing?! Remember what happens when the bus/train starts or stops suddenly. It would be safer for Ryanair to have 2 or 3 rows of three abreast bunks!!!vololiberista

Add to the C130, that you dont need a regular airfield, so it can land on a highway exit.Hmm, maybe he will eventually pay you to fly Ryanair!

Budget carriers make more money because they don't charge as much, it's as simple as that.

any company makes money by controling costs and charging more than it 'costs' to providing the service. customers, yes, buy 'cheap'. this is why the quality of most marketed goods (service and material) are so poor.for airlines the greatest costs are the planes and fuel. these are not 'an option' as both are needed to provide the service. but, business see the employee as a 'flex cost' and so cut wages, bennefits, etc to the lowest level possible. customers (as a GREAT MAJORITY) don't care that the employees at a place of business (or the cabin crew, pilots, ground and servicing) make a living wage. most customers don't care if the person 'serving them' lives below the poverty level (just look at the income of the CRJ accident co-pilot in the USA a few years ago). the GREAT MAJORITY of customers want a service at the 100% lowest cost (and then many complain that this extra low cost service isn't perfect, 1st class cabin with 2-3 people to give them 100% attention to their personal, and special, needs).--

Finally, how about rationalising their fleet by selling all the 737s and replacing them with cheap and plentiful ex-military C-130s? There must be tons of them sat at Mojave doing nothing now that the average air force budget is about six quid, ...

many an airline got their start in the 1940s with an 'extra' DC3. it is fair to see that commerical airlines wouldn't have 'got off the ground' without all the WWII surplus being made available at almost no cost (excluding the cost of a world war).--

How many of you have travelled on a busy commuter train or bus whilst standing?! Remember what happens when the bus/train starts or stops suddenly.

In the article, it shows a backboard, with a roller-coaster style harness to hold you in place and a small perch to "sit" on. It's not like the handrails on a bus or train where you're hanging on for dear life really, is it?To be honest, despite the haters, I'm quite a fan of Ryanair. If your're paying, what,

Yup, I quite like the value Ryanair offer, and I can tell you that I got good service from them too. I flew with them from the UK to Finland and back for approximately 130 quid, which is about a two and a half hour flight, so that would be what, 1,200 miles maybe? Plus 1,200 miles back again of course. By comparison, I got a single train ticket from Manchester to Oxford, which is about 150 miles, and that was over 50 quid.2,400 miles for 130 quid, or 150 miles for 50 quid. Incidentally, on that flight, some plonker picked my luggage up by mistake in Tampere, Finland, and didn't return it to the airport until after I flew back to Stansted, from where I had to drive back home to Manchester. When that dipstick eventually returned my luggage to Tampere airport, Ryanair flew my luggage back to Stansted from Finland and then flew it up to Manchester airport for me so I could pick it up - for free, even though it was not their fault.Al

The only thing that concerns me would be how to get out of that contraption in an emergency. Seat belts are easy enough, but this would be a mechanical restraint system, that could easily get jammed, and trap the passenger!

Al, I do like the way you think! :(

Seems like more of a means to get the airline in the papers. Michael O'Leary sure knows how to do that. But I've got a better idea for him. How about he offers a 'fly it yourself' option? Two quid a ticket, but all the passengers have to take turns at driving the aircraft themselves. That way he won't even have to employ professional pilots. Imagine the savings; currently commercial pilots have to have expensive regular medical checks, which is sensible when there are only two on board, but with 185 drivers on the thing, what are the chances of them all having a heart attack? Genius.After all, as Bob Hawke famously noted, they're just a bunch of overpaid bus drivers, aren't they? :( Or how about a 'work your passage' option? Just one quid a ticket, but you have to serve coffees to all your fellow passengers. Ticket costs dropping to just 50 pence if you know how to do a safety briefing and put the doors to manual on a 737.Alternatively, how about an option where you can volunteer to fuel the aircraft for a week prior to traveling, and then you get to fly for free? After all, you put petrol in your car, so how hard can it be?Finally, how about rationalising their fleet by selling all the 737s and replacing them with cheap and plentiful ex-military C-130s? There must be tons of them sat at Mojave doing nothing now that the average air force budget is about six quid, and with the C-130, it is possible to avoid expensive landing fees altogether, by simply placing all the passengers on low altitude extraction pallets and kicking them out of the back whilst doing a low pass over the runway.With ideas like this, I'm expecting Michael on the phone at any moment.Al