Vueling - "sorry door problem at front, have to tape it off, but it's ok honest "

[Julian Hensey]

MADRID (Reuters) - A pilot told nervous passengers travelling with a low-cost Spanish airline that nearly half the seats on their plane were out of use due to a safety problem but it was nothing to worry about, a Spanish newspaper reported.


As passengers took their seats on the Lisbon to Madrid flight operated by Vueling Airlines on Sunday they noticed that all but three of the 32 rows on one side of the plane were taped off, according to an El Mundo reporter among the travellers.


The captain told them on the intercom: "We will not be able to use that part of the plane because we have a safety problem with the door at the front. Don't worry, it's only a safety problem", the newspaper reported.
Some passengers took photos of the taped-off seats but staff stopped them saying it was against company rules.


Others became nervous including one passenger who asked whether the plane could tip over in mid-air by flying with a heavier load on one side.
The safety problem was with the slide on one of the plane's eight emergency exit doors, a spokeswoman for Vueling said.


The firm followed aviation guidelines which allow the door to be used but oblige a reduction in passenger numbers because it cannot fulfil its emergency function, she said.

[TURIN]

Standard MEL procedure with a goosed door. So what's the problem?

[4potflyer]

Just goes to show what a bunch of hysteric passengers know about weight and balance.

[Floppy Link]

Where in......noticed that all but three of the 32 rows on one side of the plane were taped off..."We will not be able to use that part of the plane because we have a safety problem with the door at the front..."does it saysorry door problem at front, have to tape it off, but it's ok honest "

Today's misleading thread title award goes to....:=

[TotalBeginner]

Yaawwwnnn :hmm:

[apaddyinuk]

DOnt worry... I assume the other 3 or 4 doors would have been adequate enough to evacuate half a plane load of passengers!!!

Damn, why do these people check in their brains with their bags?

[SLFguy]

"Damn, why do these people check in their brains with their bags?"
Oh forgive us oh Great One. For those that have no knowledge of such matters and are nervous we humbly apologise. We will sit like sheep and query no more lest we offend thee.

[55yrsSLC_10yearsPPL]

4potflyer and apaddyinuk presumably do not rely on an income derived from bunches of hysteric pax who have checked in their brains.

on the other hand : working successfully in a service industry presupposes a certain understanding of the customers and keeping them in the belief that they receive value for money.

Not everyone who is not a commercial pilot is necessarily an idiot.

The operator and crew on this particular flight acted professionally in reducing the number of passengers in accordance with SOP and explained the circumstances to their customers. Thank you.

Calling your customers brainless hysterics will do nothing to reassure them - they might wonder if their service providers lack perception.

[Few Cloudy]

Yes of course - we pros understand the procedures.

There is more to it than that, however. A professional crew should inform the pax as soon as anything seems unusual, so that such panic making publicity is avoided before it starts.


FC.

[A4]

Ok. For the benefit of those not "in the know". When an exit door on an aircraft becomes unusable the Captain HAS to, by law, consult a document called the MEL (Minimum Equipment List). Within this document will be details of the procedures and actions to be applied in the event that certain parts of the aircraft are inoperative. Some inoperative items are called "no go" items which means the aircraft is AOG (Aircraft On Ground) and it cannot dispatch with passengers until fixed. Sometimes an aircraft can dispatch without pax to get back to a maintenance base.

With respect to doors, the MEL will dictate which seats have to be blocked off and the maximum number of pax that can be carried. So an overwing exit inop is not the same as a main door inop for example. From memory a main door inop on the A320 reduces the max load by about 40% and the seating in the general area (but very specific seats) is blocked off.

It is a responsibility of the Captain to make it very clear to all passengers the implications of an inop exit and again to emphasise that safety is not being compromised (by reducing the number of pax and blocking off seats). This appears to have been done on this occaision. Can't comment on the "all pax seated on one side" aspect because I don't have access to Vuelings MEL (which has to be approved by the Spanish CAA by the way).


I can understand why passengers get nervous - they don't understand and that's not their fault (I don't know anything about medical research - but I don't get criticised for that). However what they should realise is that we, as pilots, also have a vested interest in the safe operation of the aircraft! Not only from the point of view of safety but also from the point that if we knowingly break the rules we could lose our licence (livelyhood). So no right minded pilot is going to try and "fudge it" or "try and get away with it". Even though most pilots are pragmatic and goal orientated, it's too risky from a safety and professional point of view.

Hope this goes some way to explaining things.

A4 :)

[Julian Hensey]

The thread title was indeed meant to be tongue in cheek, as a pilot who is in the know also told me this is standard practice - it was to indicate just how the press will take anything on board, write it up, not check, assume. I would have thought Reuters and Vueling press office would have had a little discussion and at least Vueling would have right of reply - be interesting to know from any insiders if Vueling at least got contact by the journo before he/she rushed to his editor and said they had a great scoop.....

[paull]

I would have been worried unless this was explained properly because our natural fear is not that the door won't open or there is no slide, but that it might just not stay closed. You see I have had the dubious privilege of sitting in Row 2 in a small turboprop with a door seal that appeared to be causing trouble before we left and I was told not to worry my silly little head about it. It failed in the climb. So sorry, if you guys are professional at the flying bit I expect you to be professional about how you explain the issues and since that is the only chance we get to form opinions on your competence, do not be suprised if when you screw up the small stuff, we worry about the big stuff.

[transilvana]

The problem started when they let the pax decide which one should stay and which one should leave, of course everybody wanted to leave and war started.

Pax nowaday are not the same as 10 years ago, and company service is also not the same. Crew followed the MEL but the company did not do his job, you pay low cost you get low service, that´s all.

[4potflyer]

55yrsSLC_10yearsPPL:

You are right one two counts (i) My income is not derived from flying sadly, and (ii) you are quite right about customer service and it seems to me that the captain triggered some nerves by a 'lost in translation' announcement that made it sound like there was a safety issue with the plane.

It was not my intention either to belittle passengers who are nervous, or to imply that those who care for passengers daily would make such a statement. My comment was poorly thought out.

[ChristiaanJ]

Assuming the press report was based on something....
The ultimate hilarious part is of course taping off one SIDE of the cabin.
To get out in an emergency, you first have to get into the aisle anyway, never mind from which side.
And then the "crime scene" tape.... :=
RyanAir has a very simple system... they just drop the tables in front of the seats they don't want people to sit it when the a/c isn't full (usually back and front). Keeps the pax closer to the c/g, and probably simplifies service too.

[adverse-bump]

Oh forgive us oh Great One. For those that have no knowledge of such matters and are nervous we humbly apologise. We will sit like sheep and query no more lest we offend thee.

good, because people like you who dont have a clue shouldnt be in here. We know what we're doing.

How would these people feel if we went to there work and started telling them what is and isnt allowed even though we dont have a b**dy clue. :ugh::ugh::ugh::ugh:

[Ancient Mariner]

Quote:
Oh forgive us oh Great One. For those that have no knowledge of such matters and are nervous we humbly apologise. We will sit like sheep and query no more lest we offend thee.

adverse-bump:
good, because people like you who dont have a clue shouldnt be in here. We know what we're doing.

How would these people feel if we went to there work and started telling them what is and isnt allowed even though we dont have a b**dy clue. :ugh::ugh::ugh::ugh:


Priceless, this from a 22 year old kid posting on a site where "trained professionals" spend page after page disagreeing on what would be the correct procedure on dealing with mostly "non-events". As a world wide frequent flyer for close to 40 years I have no idea on how to fly an airplane, but I start to get an idea on how some of you consider us SLC. Not that it comes as much of a surprise. Do carry on though, I find PPRUNE more than mildly amusing.;)
Per

[ChristiaanJ]

Per, I have no idea on how to fly an airplane, but I start to get an idea on how some of you consider us SLC. Not that it comes as much of a surprise. Do carry on though, I find PPRUNE more than mildly amusing.You'll find a bit of everything here, from the mildly amusing to the absolutely hilarious.
You'll also find exchanges, where "hi-tech" questions get an almost instant "hi-tech" answer. If you "have no idea on how to fly an airplane", most of those will make little sense to you, but they are part of what makes PPRuNe useful.
The nice thing about PPRuNe is you can take your pick, and enjoy, ATPL license, SLF, or "mere" spotter.
(The spotter forum will now come down on me like a ton of bricks... that too is PPRuNe... :ok:).

[Ancient Mariner]

Christiaan. Too right and that's what I like about this place.
Per out.

[adverse-bump]

I think if you read the pages and pages of "non-events" you will find that most of the discussion comes from spotters trying to show off to there little buddies, when in reality they have no idea what they are talking about. If you read, for example the oman air engine failure most of the professionals are saying well done to the crew regardless of how they did it, they got on the ground. the rest is just dribble (I may be wrong, but i normally give up reading after the spotters get in a conversation.

And just so you know, I am not a 22 kid. I am a 22 year old who didnt sit on his arse after he finished school, he got a job, worked every shift he could find to pay to put him self through a PROFESSIONAL pilots course. Ask anyone who I have worked with and they will tell I am no kid.

[YesTAM]

With the greatest of respect, there is something mildly pathetic about "Professional" Pilots who constantly attempt to boost their fragile egos by making derogatory remarks about passengers (sorry, "Self Loading Freight") and anyone who is NOT a Professional Pilot, for example airport screeners.

There are some real ego saving pearlers in various Pprune threads, my favourite being

We all know that many of the so called security staff are failed crew. The closest they can get to our game is to feel you up with some trumped up security ploy.

Just be aware that if you openly display contempt for the travelling public, and "lesser" airline staff, they will one day return the favor, and then when your employer attempts to cut your wages and calls you "glorified bus drivers" you will have no one to turn to.

To put it another way, grow up.

[SLFguy]

"good, because people like you who dont have a clue shouldnt be in here"

Really? Says who, certainly not you a spotty youth. I fly weekly and have been SLF across 5 decades, (ok I was but a babe when I started), and know for a fact that there are aviation professionals, (and yes I know that excludes you), who appreciate the SLF side of the argument being put forward.

I know my place, I don't post on tech issues or other topics/threads where I have no valid contribution to make and I suggest you do likewise.

[adverse-bump]

Really? Says who, certainly not you a spotty youth. I fly weekly and have been SLF across 5 decades, (ok I was but a babe when I started), and know for a fact that there are aviation professionals, (and yes I know that excludes you), who appreciate the SLF side of the argument being put forward.

ow dear. I think we can leave it at that.

[hobie]

Per,
The nice thing about PPRuNe is you can take your pick, and enjoy, ATPL license, SLF, or "mere" spotter.
(The spotter forum will now come down on me like a ton of bricks... that too is PPRuNe... :ok:).

Fear not Christiaan, there are some very pleasant and helpful chaps over there including some Professional Pilots for whom I have the greatest respect …. :)

.... mind you there are one or two who drop in looking for a fight, but you soon learn to pop them into your “ignore list” …. :p

[Tom Sawyer]

Quote; "RyanAir has a very simple system... they just drop the tables in front of the seats they don't want people to sit it when the a/c isn't full"

Slightly off topic but....... isn't there a placard that states that tray tables must be stowed for take off / landing. Is it really OK to overide this, and on whose authority, and have tables out and potentially flapping around in these flight phases? Or is it the case that the tables are only out for whilst boarding in progress?
As for the door, as an engineer I have taken the decision on the basis of the MEL in conjuction with flt ops / maintrol to lock doors out and redistribute pax load. Never had to ask the captain though, only made him and the FSM aware of the situation.:E

[ChristiaanJ]

Tom Sawyer,
Just two quick answers, since I'm not an expert....
- I doubt leaving the tables down in a row of empty seats constitutes a safety risk.
- I just observed it as a simple and nifty idea; I didn't look if they actually flipped up the tables after boarding, at the last few minutes before take-off. They may have done so.

[matt_hooks]

Four words.

DON'T FEED THE TROLL!

[SLFguy]

"ow dear. I think we can leave it at that."

Thank you. Perhaps I misjudged you. :cool:

[Beausoleil]

How would these people feel if we went to there work and started telling them what is and isnt allowed even though we dont have a b**dy clue.

If there's a job you can do that doesn't suffer from clueless people telling you what is and isn't allowed, let me know and I'll apply.

[Dogma]

I don't think any one has pointed out that this is a comunication issue.

Lets face it, if there is any sort of tech problem, the Pax want an Indiana Jones up the front to reunite them in one peice with the old terra'cotta. If you have a problem like this, be careful in your use of language (particularly non-first) and do your PA standing in the Cabin in front of your adoring public!

Vuelling - Pay peanuts - get monkeys.

[cammron]

There is defineatly a greater group of educated intelligent and wise pilots who love to impart knowledge and im sure that any non pilot could spend hours listening to.Then there are intelligent pilots who are not born to teach and will with irritation lament the "non informed".Its just human nature and its fun to observe as all mankind wants to voice his or her "educated opinion"

[paull]

Dogma is right, this is a communication skills issue and if it were a doctor we would criticize his "Bedside Manner". Doctors have to explain the issues and put the patient at ease, I guess for you guys it is the same.

Is "how to talk to passengers" specifically called out as a component of pilot training, and could anyone actually fail to qualify on the basis of being a dissaster at it? Based on this thread I guess the answer to the last part is "No" :)

[DX Wombat]

I was just having one of my occasional wanderings through this forum and saw this thread. I was on a BA flight many moons ago where the Captain informed us that those sitting on the right would probably notice that there was a piece of wing missing but that it wouldn't affect the aircraft's ability to fly safely. It was a useful bit of information which put minds at rest. Providing proper information DOES help. I have good memories of a certain BA 747 captain who gave an excellent welcome speech with lots of detail - some humorous, about the forthcoming flight, which included the immortal words "We will be flying over xxxxxx so there WILL be some turbulence" Lots of giggles all round and passengers more prepared for it. That must have been the only time I flew back from Oz and had a turbulence-free trip from Singapore to Heathrow. I have a feeling even the weather did as it was told for him. :)
How would these people feel if we went to there work and started telling them what is and isnt allowed even though we dont have a b**dy clue Probably the same as I used to when faced with Health / Midwifery / Childcare amateurs trying to tell me how to do my job. Most times I would smile sweetly and either ignore them, or, if what they were suggesting was downright dangerous, calmly disabuse them of their daft ideas. ;)

[Whiskey Zulu]

Surely the PA, if quoted accurately, would hardly reassure the pax?

"A safety problem with the door?"

I think a little more detail would have been more appropriate rather than leave pax thinking that the door might open in flight!

[flash2002]

Tom sawyer As for the door, as an engineer I have taken the decision on the basis of the MEL in conjuction with flt ops / maintrol to lock doors out and redistribute pax load. Never had to ask the captain though, only made him and the FSM aware of the situation.

Well you might have done that, just like the captain would have wanted. Only he still needs to check the MEL that you have done it correctly. I guess the captain was very happy indeed since it saved him from delays.

On the other hand if he did not want you to lock out the doors, you would need to change everything back. No matter what ops/maintenance says. Its his airplane.

[FIMbar the Furious]

Flash

I have never had a captain inspect my work to see if its done correctly, thats because I am a licenced aircraft engineer who is given the authority via EASA and my maintenance organisation to issue a certificate of release to service.

I do though when required discuss with crew what deffects we have had and what MEL items have been applied. One of the most important parts of my job is comunication. Debriefing an incomming crew to get all the facts of the deffect they have entered and briefing the outbound crew as to what has been worked on the aircraft.

A captain is perfectley entitled to refuse any aircraft but will need good cause if it has been released by a licenced engineer following legaly issued documents.

I work with crews every day of my working life and see their professionalism in action, they see mine. I come across crews who are idiots some times but then I come across engineers, dispatchers etc who are also idiots.


I would say that an atribute of good captain is somone who knows he does not know it all but knows where to look or who to talk to when he needs to.

[Filler Dent]

Flash, you said "On the other hand if he did not want you to lock out the doors, you would need to change everything back. No matter what ops/maintenance says. Its his airplane."

I don't really think you will find many Captains who would go against what a Licenced Engineer has done. If it's broke and it can't be fixed - that's it mate. No matter what the Captain wants, until the aircraft has it's Certificate of Release to Service signed by an engineer it ain't going anywhere. Hence, this is where the MEL steps in, we have a chat with the pilots and come to some agreement based within the limitations allowed and everyone (well nearly everyone) is happy.

As FIMbar says, if the plane is offered for service in accordance with the MEL, the Captain can still refuse to take it with due consideration to other defects the aircraft may have, destination, weather etc. but it certainly isn't his airplane. It's the banks normally. :)

[FHA]

I was wondering how long it would be before the engineers would have to pitch in, to stop everyone talking b#ll*cks. :)
Guys, let's leave them to it and we'll carry on quietly with our business. Oh, and when it comes the MEL, let me explain the loop dear ppruners: Captain, Engineer, ...errr, thats it folks, we'll take it from there.:ok:

[flash2002]

Guys I know that no captain in his right mind would go against the advice of a licenced engineer.

But still before accepting the aircraft like that, the captain must satisfy himself that everything has been done according to the regulations. e.g. having a look at the MEL. Just like pilots engineers make mistakes as well.
The captain is still responsible.

I have seen captains check the MEL, even after an engineer said it was OK. "Honest." Just to make sure everything was dealt with. Not because he didn't trust the engineer.

[Filler Dent]

Well of course Captains check the MEL.

It's a document to be used by flight crew and engineers.

Each MEL reference has specific maintenance and operational restrictions which are applicable to both of us. For me, it may be a simple thing like placing a sticker somewhere or locking a valve closed, and for the crew a speed restriction, pax limit or just to ignore certain messages.

We work together to minimise mistakes, it's a team thing.

[Dogma]

Bit of a simple view of the MEL

I have massive respect for our Ginger Beers, they are very professional and a good laugh when in "PP Bananas" Nagoya Batam or such like.

There are many things that dispite what the MEL says....I would not take. "Captain, I have done what I can, its up to you":ok:

[Filler Dent]

"There are many things that dispite what the MEL says....I would not take."

Then you get that call from the flight crew manager and suddenly you're going. :rolleyes:

Seriously though, the significant defects often generate a good chat about what should be done - and that's the way it should be. :ok:

[TURIN]

Look, this is just not on!

This thread is starting to descend into a mutual appreciation society debate between engineer and pilot.

That is not what the industry leaders want.

It is not 'Proon' either.
Stop it at once before something good comes of it! :ok:

[Ankaput]

4potflyer - really! these 'hysteric passengers' you refer to probably know nothing of aeroplanes at all - simply that they are a bus with wings with you at the pointy end driving it. And why should they know? I am actually quite pleased they asked questions.

I very much doubt that you have the knowledge a great proportion of the passengers behind you have either - from brain surgery to cooking a decent lamb roast - hey, everyone has skill areas!

And we pay your wages. So, if we ask a question or two - what's so bad about that? Try passing on your expensively acquired knowledge and win some friends. I am sure if you asked us - we do have brains and knowledge even though we are amusingly referred to as SLF - we probably have the courtesy to acknowledge your interest and give you a straight answer, not a sneer.

Try it some time. Freight thinks and speaks.

[Pedro]

This "revelation"about taped off seats (standard procedure) occurred a long time ago early in the airline's life. To their credit they used this event as a training example of how extra careful one has to be in the presentation of anything unfamiliar to the passengers. Not really much of a story - furthermore there was more than a hint of malicious intent in the original reporting of the story in the press.

[cwatters]

Look at it this way... You arrive at the dentist, and get sat in the chair, the loacal anesthetic is applied ready for your filling. As the drill bit approaches you notice it's a funny shape and the dentist says "We're having a bit of a problem with the drill bits at the moment but it's ok honest". :}

[Pugilistic Animus]

Maybe--- I don't know if the pilot's were misquoted---the word 'safety' or 'problem' were involved, that wording, is what stirred up the pax---so many phrases --I learned should be avoided---and some are seemingly harmless---but once they here safety I've sat on flights near nervous pax and they really think ---there's imminent danger--at all times ---every--- sound every sight---but since the announcement was perhaps in Spanish something may have been lost in the translation---Can anyone can post a link GOOD news article in Spanish so that I can see if the nuances were correctly translated?---some of the translations I've seen in the US are pretty silly:ugh:


PA

[1DC]

Flew from Nice to Douala once and the front door of the French DC8 was taped up, no problem from the passengers apart from one African chap who went crazy because he was travelling first class and was being made to board from the rear door. He stuck by his guns and refused to board, we left without him..