QuestionsIf you are a professional pilot or your work involves professional aviation please use this forum for questions. Enthusiasts, please use the 'Spectators Balcony' forum.
In our airline this is covered in the legal part of the command training course. The passenger has entered a contract with the airline to fly him from A to B. The airline are carrying out their side of the deal. To return to the gate would delay the flight and the other passengers. The stand may now be occupied. The passenger's baggage, if he had any, would have to be located and offloaded. At a busy airport with a widebodied aircraft this could be a delay of over an hour and a considerable cost.
The Captain is perfectly in his right to continue. I have had a nervous passenger want to get off before takeoff and have been back to discuss it with the passenger and discuss the consequences of going back to the gate. It becomes difficult when the aircraft is delayed considerably due to a very lengthy slot or if the temperature in the passenger cabin becomes uncomfortable. Each situation has to be judged on its own merits.But in reply to the original question if someone has just changed their mind about travelling it is too late.
that s why I asked,because of many opinions in respect of this situation. I will come back to stand if the involved pax is ill or has suffered a panic attack or so....
A passenger having a panic attack is ill by definition. They dont want to have a panic attack and its largely involuntary.
For a passenger who is on the aircraft when it is taxiing and wants to take another course and isnt ill by any definition its too late. The process has started of getting him from his point of embarkation to his destination. Imagine a passenger pointing out a city in the distance during flight and saying - " I want to land there, its closer to my home" .............If the passenger wants to make a fuss then its they who endanger the aircraft and should be dealt with as such. I can recall several passengers on the same flight as me whose behaviour was disgraceful. In the average public house it would have resulted in them getting a good slapping but because its on an aircraft we depend on the cabin crew to deal with it.
For a passenger who is on the aircraft when it is taxiing and wants to take another course and isnt ill by any definition its too late. The process has started of getting him from his point of embarkation to his destination.
Yup.
Unless in physical distress, he/she is to be cuffed, and deposited in the lower galley, forthwith.
Once there, shown the grub on order.
If this doesn't slow 'em down, nothing will.
Now...we did have an incident last Hajj, wherein one pax objected to their baggage being left behind (sorry dear, no spacetough luck) and...they still might be in jail in Saudi, due to the problems caused.
Saudi police marched on, malcontent pax frog-marched off...end of story.
SLF on flight out of DBX. Had not taxied a couple of hundred yards and came to a stop. Sat idling for a good 20 minutes or so, then back to the ramp, shutdown, off load one pax, refuel and away again. Told young lass sick, she looked OK on boarding. Horses for courses.
Archaeoligists digging in the deserts (where the fossilised remains of many of them are to be found) refer to them as the 'Tristar-asaurus Rex'........
What is this nonsense about offloading someone because they changed their mind? 'Only an hour late'? Can you imagine 400 people on a 747, having to negotiate a gate to return to, having to get full groundstaff plus unloading equipment installed at the gate, get holds open, start unloading containers one by one, rummage through them looking for a single baggage tag? Then reload, get new ATC clearance, possibly top up fuel, and try again...after hours of delay? Then, because of the disruption, what are you going to do when someone else, disturbed by all this commotion, then decides that they are panic striken and tell you you cannot leave and they must get off! Insanity! So Mr. Captain, what are you then going to do, do it all again and let them off and hunt for their bags, or make them travel? IF you are going to then make them travel, why did you not make the first person travel? If need be, I would be kind and have them restrained so they then have no choice. Their panic would not last longer than the After Takeoff
This needs joined-up thinking, rather than pandering to what is considered an individual's 'human rights'! Sorry, but an individual's 'human rights' to get off do not overide the rights of the other 400 or so other passengers to continue their journey as scheduled and agreed in their travel contract. I always go back and see these people- such situations call for firm control. They have entered into a contract and bought a ticket. Nobody can claim 'kidnapping' or that nonsense. If need be, I would be kind and have them restrained so they then have no choice. Their panic would not last longer than the After Takeoff Checklist, then they would become a normal human being again.
Hint- it helps to volubly let the surrounding passengers know the consequences of such a return and the likely delay that will ensue to their journey! A technique I have found extremely effective.
Tritanic and Tristarasaurus Rex are lovely new words for me. In a spirit of reconciliation, I'd dare merge the two into Trtanasaurus Rex.
If one gets legal, the ticket is a contract, so both parties have to "perform": carrier has to get SLF from A to B; SLF has to let itself be moved from A to B.
Then there's intuition. It was nice to see Puglilistic Animus ask, out of character for his pseudo), "where are you?" For a given issue in one place, you call in the anti-terrorist unit and in the next place, you just kick out the door and party pooper in the same gesture.
Security, yes? It's great when it works, but it looks awfully ridiculous when applied with strict disregard for common sense and intuition.
You'll all need to dig into PPRuNe but I'm pretty sure this came up a few years back and I seem to recall a legal opinion was that the Captain could be found guilty of 'unlawful detention' or some similar charge. (I'd take the risk)
I object! That is a little extreme for nervous passengers! There is a spark of kindness in me........somewhere. Not sure where! We are talking about a drop in standards, people with mullets, who travel in singlets, flip flops, and those running shorts with wide open flappy bits so that looking from the side (if you should be so unfortunate as to glance their way involuntarily), you are treated to the unedifying sight of their pork sausage and long hairy legs. Yes, they get packed and check in and get on a plane like that! The poor cabin crew, who have spent ages slapping slap on and making their hair nice and looking really smart in a clean uniform then have to actually serve them and call them 'Sir'! And their obese fake blonde partners have metallic facial jewelry and folds of lard-like flabby arms and white, bare midriffs spilling out asunder, all covered with tattoes- they have to be called 'Madam'! And the only interest is in alcohol, and lots of it.
It seems so unfair to foister them on foreigners to spend a week vomiting and shouting up their High Streets, but if they have got £119 to flash, who are we to argue?
I fly smart people now who get dressed up for flying and have a wonderful attitude. As a result, they get top class treatment all the way through. What a difference!
Last edited by Rainboe : 19th October 2009 at 14:03.
tough luck) and...they still might be in jail in Saudi, due to the problems caused.
Linear Mode
