Team travel

[SpursManChris]

Has anyone ever heard anything about the number of groups of players travelling in separate planes? Ever since the Munich disaster with Man United, teams started to think differently about travel, but I wonder just how careful they are as risk assesment is a big thing nowadays. Perhaps some teams split into 5 or more for the long distance flights.

 

[Nine while nine]

I once went to a conference overseas with a group of colleagues and, when someone pointed out the risk in so many experts in our field travelling together on the same plane, I replied: 'Hey, the team that flies together dies together'.

I didn't get asked to the conference again...

 

[SpursManChris]

I once went to a conference overseas with a group of colleagues and, when someone pointed out the risk in so many experts in our field travelling together on the same plane, I replied: 'Hey, the team that flies together dies together'.

I didn't get asked to the conference again...

LOL. Yeah, it's the same for many companies too, not flying all personal to a place on the same plane.

 

[scoobydoo]

Yeah we have that too, where top execs or specialist experts are purposely split across a number of flights.

Perhaps they think the benefits of travelling as a team, outweigh the small risk of crashing. Or maybe they have insurance coming out of their ears and don't care.

 

[nidge]

Has anyone ever heard anything about the number of groups of players travelling in separate planes? Ever since the Berlin disaster with Man United, teams started to think differently about travel, but I wonder just how careful they are as risk assesment is a big thing nowadays. Perhaps some teams split into 5 or more for the long distance flights.

Wasn't it in Munich that the United plane crashed?

 

[beats1]

Planes are the safest form of travel, they are more likely to die statically from a coach crash. Flying in separate is a waste and if that scared sit behind the engines and you have more chance of living in a crash

 

[scoobydoo]

Planes are the safest form of travel, they are more likely to die statically from a coach crash. Flying in separate is a waste and if that scared sit behind the engines and you have more chance of living in a crash

Guess, the point is that lots of other companies do it with high value individuals, so why not football.

Also there is a high profile case of a crash wiping out a hugely successful team.

 

[SpursManChris]

Wasn't it in Munich that the United plane crashed?

Yep, my mistake

 

[SpursManChris]

Perhaps they think the benefits of travelling as a team, outweigh the small risk of crashing. Or maybe they have insurance coming out of their ears and don't care.

Who's they? No one has mentioned yet that football teams DO travel as one whole team. I would be absolutely flabbergasted if this was the case. If something went wrong, well kiss the Premier League goodbye for a couple of centuries. It would be unforgivable. They definatel DO split up I'm 99.9% convinced, but I'm just wondering if it is more than just in halves.

 

[SpursManChris]

Planes are the safest form of travel, they are more likely to die statically from a coach crash. Flying in separate is a waste and if that scared sit behind the engines and you have more chance of living in a crash

Not entirely true. First of all, no one has said in this thread that planes are dangerous and teams should travel by coach instead. It's asking about how they split up.

Yes planes are the safest form of travel and while there is more likely to be a coach incident, it is very much NOT likely that there will be 100% fatalities. When something DOES go wrong with a plane, all of a sudden flying is the most dangerous form of travel and the chances of survival are poor, with 100% fatalities much more likely than in a coach crash. The same of course can not be said for a car crash.

So while you are much more likely to survive plane travel and die from coach travel you are much more likely to die from a plane crash and survive a coach crash.

Flying in separate is a waste and if that scared sit behind the engines and you have more chance of living in a crash

Well it's obviously not a waste, how can it be? What do you mean, a waste of money? Team travel expenditure is peanuts for a PL club. Split travel is actually pretty easy to achieve.

Also there is a high profile case of a crash wiping out a hugely successful team.

Yeah, that was in 2011 in which a russian hockey team was on board. There was only 1 survivor. I bet they wish they had've split up, now they will be regretting it.

 

[beats1]

Not entirely true. First of all, no one has said in this thread that planes are dangerous and teams should travel by coach instead. It's asking about how they split up.

Yes planes are the safest form of travel and while there is more likely to be a coach incident, it is very much NOT likely that there will be 100% fatalities. When something DOES go wrong with a plane, all of a sudden flying is the most dangerous form of travel and the chances of survival are poor, with 100% fatalities much more likely than in a coach crash. The same of course can not be said for a car crash.

So while you are much more likely to survive plane travel and die from coach travel you are much more likely to die from a plane crash and survive a coach crash.

Not necessarily, while everything you said isnt wrong but commercial air travel from a major airline is very safe with very few deaths with a notable example that comes to mind in the last 10 years is Air France which stalled mid air whilst on autopilot iirc.

In terms of spurs if we use a major european airline the chances of a crash are tiny especially if its a budget airline(they have the latest planes are serviced very well). Alot of crashes happen in airports that have flaws already so if the club were that paranoid they would then avoid certain places on a risk assessment. Alot of plane failures happen and nothing is mentioned of it because they safely make it back or even to a airport. We only hear about it when it goes wrong or if there is a pattern(e.g.batteries catching on fire)

Well it's obviously not a waste, how can it be? What do you mean, a waste of money? Team travel expenditure is peanuts for a PL club. Split travel is actually pretty easy to achieve.

LOL, we have a chairmen who told our player after signing him, to get ready to run to get a good seat when catching a EasyJet flight. Then he spent our record transfer amount on Soldado and brought him back on Ryan Air.

Yeah, that was in 2011 in which a russian hockey team was on board. There was only 1 survivor. I bet they wish they had've split up, now they will be regretting it.

Firstly it was Russia, they haven't got the best record in aviation since the Soviet Union fell

Secondly, that crash happened because the pilot faked documents to hide the fact he nerve damage and he didnt know that he was pressing the brake which caused the crash. So essentially it was Russia

The plane it self was a Yakovlev Yak-42, which was a soviet plane from the 70's. So essentially it was Russian

I jest of course, I love to visit Russia one day and the Antonov 225 is one the greatest planes ever, they just need to sort their act since the fall of the soviet union but I guess they have bigger issues at the moment

 

[SpursManChris]

Not necessarily, while everything you said isnt wrong but commercial air travel from a major airline is very safe

Actually, it's very, very VERY safe. But like I said, it's when something DOES go wrong that it can go badly. And when I say "go wrong" I do mean something major that will affect the planes flight and not something trivial.

In terms of spurs if we use a major european airline the chances of a crash are tiny especially if its a budget airline(they have the latest planes are serviced very well)

LOL, do you actually think that's the case? Ryan Air, and Easy Jet are safer than British Airways and Air France? They're called "budget" for a reason; because they're on a very tight one. [budget]

LOL, we have a chairmen who told our player after signing him, to get ready to run to get a good seat when catching a EasyJet flight. Then he spent our record transfer amount on Soldado and brought him back on Ryan Air.

Hey, they're the best aren't they?

 

[beats1]

LOL, do you actually think that's the case? Ryan Air, and Easy Jet are safer than British Airways and Air France? They're called "budget" for a reason; because they're on a very tight one. [budget]

Check out their business plan and you will probably be shocked and yes they are safer since their airplanes are newer

 

[SpursManChris]

Check out their business plan and you will probably be shocked and yes they are safer since their airplanes are newer

Well then what was wrong with Soldado and that other player (Who?) using them then?

 

[SpursManChris]

Check out their business plan and you will probably be shocked and yes they are safer since their airplanes are newer

...not according to this: http://lowcostaccidents.wordpress.com/category/easyjet/

Why would someone actually make a bullshit page like that?

 

[SpursManChris]

Firstly it was Russia, they haven't got the best record in aviation since the Soviet Union fell

and speaking of Russia's fantastic aviation record... 50 dead. RIP.

http://www.skynews.com.au/world/article.aspx?id=925456&vId=4232188

 

[SpursManChris]

So does anyone actually have any inside knowledge about how teams travel? So far it's only been speculation.

 

[beats1]

...not according to this: http://lowcostaccidents.wordpress.com/category/easyjet/

Why would someone actually make a bullshit page like that?

To be fair there is probably worse cases for the other airlines.

To keep costs they only use new planes and have them regular service them by the manufacturer and then sell him on. The way the costs are kept down is the planes are only from one provider so everything should be the same whereas other airlines use a host of different planes and different service plans. They also have the latest planes because they are more fuel efficient and have lower maintenance costs. Since they buy from one manufacture they then buy in bulk and get huge discounts. Then they sell not long after in service(couple of years) at a high price(in relation to the price they paid for the single aircraft and how much it would depreciate)


You notice Ryan Air and Easy jet all tend to have the same aircraft throughout the fleet with some model variations for busy flight plans but same manufacturer. They follow the Southwest airlines business model(which of course has evolved over time).

 

[beats1]

So does anyone actually have any inside knowledge about how teams travel? So far it's only been speculation.

They all go on the same plane, Man City have their private jet and Arsenal do the same and for a £70k season ticket you can join them on the plane.

 

[SpursManChris]

To keep costs they only use new planes and have them regular service them by the manufacturer

Don't most airlines have their own internal maintainence? Only handing back to the manufacturer for the big overhauls every few years?

They all go on the same plane

How do you know this exactly? If it's true, then I am actually astounded. Less so in the private jet cases, but for teams going by regular airlines, it's actually stupid. Yes it's unlikey, but if something happened and it was 100% fatality, just imagine the devistation to a club. People would be questioning why they didn't split up the team. Hasn't anyone learnt anything from Munich????