BRISTOL - 4
Join Date: May 2013
Location: Bristol.
Posts: 207
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I would have used my common sense e.g. tow the aircraft away from the terminal then deploy some sniffer dogs and perform a thorough search, absolutely no need to close the airport at all, do you think LHR would shut in the same circumstances ?
StandupfortheUlstermen
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Peoples' Democratic Republic of Wurzelsetshire
Age: 53
Posts: 1,182
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
And where exactly would you have towed the aircraft to? Please, give us the benefit of your undoubted experience.....
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: United Kingdom
Age: 39
Posts: 700
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
And , more importantly who would move the plane? Ground staff are paid WAY too little to be dealing with planes that potentially have an explosive device. You can move it anywhere. If it were a 737 with a device and a couple of tonnes of fuel on board if it goes up there's a very good chance the debris would end up on the runway. The descision to close was the right one.
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Northern skyport
Posts: 113
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Crackling Jet and FA2fi.
No doubt that you are both security experts having decided that the decision was a correct one.
If someone scribbles a bomb threat note on the underground by your logic you would close the whole system? Same on a London Transport bus?
With such paranoid thinking we have to congratulate the bad boys......they have definitely won.
No doubt that you are both security experts having decided that the decision was a correct one.
If someone scribbles a bomb threat note on the underground by your logic you would close the whole system? Same on a London Transport bus?
With such paranoid thinking we have to congratulate the bad boys......they have definitely won.
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: herefordshire
Posts: 192
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Bomb threat
At the outset let me say i have no specialist knowledge as regards bomb threats and, in the absence of that, believe that the authorities at Bristol took the right decision to evacuate the airport.
However, there are questions that i would ask which might be important to the decision as to whether or not to evacuate.
When was this note found, was it immediately after the passengers disembarked or was it much later?, or was this note seat identifiable, ie was it on a seat, under a seat, in a seat pocket or was it left somewhere else, ie a toilet.
I ask this because if the note was found immediately after the passengers disembarked, it could mean that whoever left it would still be within the airport terminal and he/she and the rest of the passengers on that plane could be evacuated into a separate area. Also, if the note was seat identifiable and found immediately, could not that person be stopped by either passport control or at another point before they left the airport?
It is the timescale of this incident that interest me, not the decision to evacuate the airport
However, there are questions that i would ask which might be important to the decision as to whether or not to evacuate.
When was this note found, was it immediately after the passengers disembarked or was it much later?, or was this note seat identifiable, ie was it on a seat, under a seat, in a seat pocket or was it left somewhere else, ie a toilet.
I ask this because if the note was found immediately after the passengers disembarked, it could mean that whoever left it would still be within the airport terminal and he/she and the rest of the passengers on that plane could be evacuated into a separate area. Also, if the note was seat identifiable and found immediately, could not that person be stopped by either passport control or at another point before they left the airport?
It is the timescale of this incident that interest me, not the decision to evacuate the airport
Brunel to Concorde
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Virtute et Industria, et Sumorsaete Ealle
Posts: 2,283
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The bottom line is that someone had to make a decision on the facts available at the time, and I doubt that any of us know what information was available to that person. We seem to know about the note but not of any current background information that the police/security services might have possessed. For example, they might have had credible intelligence that some sort of attack was being planned somewhere. I'm not saying that they did - of course I don't know, but does anyone on here know either? If they do they won't be telling us and quite properly so.
The airport/airline authorities would almost certainly have acted on police advice who will always err towards caution because they have many lives to consider.
It's by no means unknown for terrorists to alert authorities to the presence of a planted device by means of a note or, more often, by a telephone call. They have many reasons for so doing.
If you're going to respond to a 'bomb call' you either do it properly or ignore it and who in their right mind would want authorities to ignore it? If doing it properly was an evacuation and diversion of flights then that was the judgement of the person charged with the decision: the person on the spot possessed of all the information available at the time. We armchair experts can criticise with the benefit of hindsight as much as we feel the need but we do so without having to bear a shred of responsibility.
Would some of you really have taken the risk of moving the aircraft with the chance of it exploding and causing numerous deaths and injury in a nearby terminal filled with incoming passengers whose flights continued to land?
The analogy of a London bus or the London Underground system is not a true parallel but I have no doubt that if it was felt circumstances warranted it then whatever was considered necessary, including a full closedown of the system, would be done. The same would apply at Heathrow if it was felt it was the proper action to take.
What no-one seems to have mentioned is the responsibility of the idiot or idiots who wrote what now appears to have been a hoax note. If he/she/they are caught they should be dealt with very severely by the courts. It undermines the fight against terrorism: every time a hoax call is made it takes up a huge amount of 'authority' time and sows the idea in the minds of the public that every call is a hoax. One day it won't be.
The airport/airline authorities would almost certainly have acted on police advice who will always err towards caution because they have many lives to consider.
It's by no means unknown for terrorists to alert authorities to the presence of a planted device by means of a note or, more often, by a telephone call. They have many reasons for so doing.
If you're going to respond to a 'bomb call' you either do it properly or ignore it and who in their right mind would want authorities to ignore it? If doing it properly was an evacuation and diversion of flights then that was the judgement of the person charged with the decision: the person on the spot possessed of all the information available at the time. We armchair experts can criticise with the benefit of hindsight as much as we feel the need but we do so without having to bear a shred of responsibility.
Would some of you really have taken the risk of moving the aircraft with the chance of it exploding and causing numerous deaths and injury in a nearby terminal filled with incoming passengers whose flights continued to land?
The analogy of a London bus or the London Underground system is not a true parallel but I have no doubt that if it was felt circumstances warranted it then whatever was considered necessary, including a full closedown of the system, would be done. The same would apply at Heathrow if it was felt it was the proper action to take.
What no-one seems to have mentioned is the responsibility of the idiot or idiots who wrote what now appears to have been a hoax note. If he/she/they are caught they should be dealt with very severely by the courts. It undermines the fight against terrorism: every time a hoax call is made it takes up a huge amount of 'authority' time and sows the idea in the minds of the public that every call is a hoax. One day it won't be.
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: United Kingdom
Age: 39
Posts: 700
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Well it wasn't just a little note that someone had scribbled. It was accompanied by a package that was apparently deliberately made to look suspicious. I was not there and didn't see it so don't know exactly what it means. But it was a note along with the package.
I work on the aircraft based out of BRS. I'll fully support any descision that keeps me, my colleagues and our passengers safe. I didn't make the descision, but I support those who did. 100%.
Regards.
I work on the aircraft based out of BRS. I'll fully support any descision that keeps me, my colleagues and our passengers safe. I didn't make the descision, but I support those who did. 100%.
Regards.
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: herefordshire
Posts: 192
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
fa2fi
Thanks for your post, and of course the information you divulge does paint a totally different picture, and one that any and every airline would take immediate and drastic action on.
This was a deliberate premeditated act designed to cause panic, it was plainly not a silly prank and, as MerchantVenturer states, those responsible deserve a severe custodial sentence.
Let us hope that with forensics now available a collar or collars will be felt by the police before too long.
This was a deliberate premeditated act designed to cause panic, it was plainly not a silly prank and, as MerchantVenturer states, those responsible deserve a severe custodial sentence.
Let us hope that with forensics now available a collar or collars will be felt by the police before too long.
who left it and caused all the inconvenience.
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Cardiff
Posts: 798
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
And another...?
Police investigate potential 'security threat' at Bristol Airport | Bristol Post
There was no package last week, just a note.
Police investigate potential 'security threat' at Bristol Airport | Bristol Post
There was no package last week, just a note.
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: United Kingdom
Age: 39
Posts: 700
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Well I checked in for work just a few hours after it all kicked off. I was told that it was a package and a note. Numerous news stories reported a package also.
It may have turned out the 'package' was innocent. It could have been anything. I wasn't there. But certainty at the time that they were discovered it was thought that there was a suspicious package onboard.
It may have turned out the 'package' was innocent. It could have been anything. I wasn't there. But certainty at the time that they were discovered it was thought that there was a suspicious package onboard.
Brunel to Concorde
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Virtute et Industria, et Sumorsaete Ealle
Posts: 2,283
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Security incident
Bristol Airport bomb hoax suspect is arrested by police | Bristol Post
It's been reported that a man has been arrested 'on suspicion of making a bomb hoax and communicating false information' following an alleged incident at BRS over the weekend.
It's been reported that a man has been arrested 'on suspicion of making a bomb hoax and communicating false information' following an alleged incident at BRS over the weekend.
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: SOUTH WEST
Posts: 257
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Bar None.
Every one working on or around a/c have a great deal of training towards security at the airport, so not being a security expert though do have a thorough knowledge of the proceedures involved, once the call is made the ball starts rolling and these proceedures kick in, to what degree depends on the the viability of the threat and then is met with the corresponding degree of response.
Gone are the days where someone walked up looked at it, kicked it, picked it up and shook it before pornouncing 'NAH it's OK.
My previous post was not mean't to be derogatory, just an observation from someone who faces this situation at times when around the airport/aircraft.'
Every one working on or around a/c have a great deal of training towards security at the airport, so not being a security expert though do have a thorough knowledge of the proceedures involved, once the call is made the ball starts rolling and these proceedures kick in, to what degree depends on the the viability of the threat and then is met with the corresponding degree of response.
Gone are the days where someone walked up looked at it, kicked it, picked it up and shook it before pornouncing 'NAH it's OK.
My previous post was not mean't to be derogatory, just an observation from someone who faces this situation at times when around the airport/aircraft.'
Brunel to Concorde
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Virtute et Industria, et Sumorsaete Ealle
Posts: 2,283
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Security incident
http://www.bristolpost.co.uk/Man-app...ail/story.html
A man has now been charged with 'making a bomb hoax' and appeared in court today.
A man has now been charged with 'making a bomb hoax' and appeared in court today.
Man due to appear in court following bomb hoax at Bristol Airport | Bristol Post
A man has now been charged with 'making a bomb hoax' and appeared in court today.
A man has now been charged with 'making a bomb hoax' and appeared in court today.
Hopefully the court will make an example of this prat "to encourage (discourage) the others".
Join Date: May 2013
Location: Bristol.
Posts: 207
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
38 year old Robert Boyd-Stevenson pleads guilty to the bomb hoax.
http://www.thewestonmercury.co.uk/ne...hoax_1_4219037
http://www.thewestonmercury.co.uk/ne...hoax_1_4219037
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: South West
Age: 35
Posts: 204
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Wizz Air announce Warsaw-Bristol flights in Summer '16
17/09/2015 - WIZZ AIR ANNOUNCES 6TH AIRCRAFT FOR WARSAW
The new aircraft will serve four new routes from Warsaw to Aberdeen, Bari, Bristol and Reykjavik.
Two of the A320s based in Warsaw will also be replaced with new larger A321 aircraft.
The link to the press release is below:
https://wizzair.com/en-GB/about_us/news/wizzen348
The new Warsaw-Bristol route will operate twice weekly on Wednesday and Sunday starting on the 13 May 2016
The new aircraft will serve four new routes from Warsaw to Aberdeen, Bari, Bristol and Reykjavik.
Two of the A320s based in Warsaw will also be replaced with new larger A321 aircraft.
The link to the press release is below:
https://wizzair.com/en-GB/about_us/news/wizzen348
The new Warsaw-Bristol route will operate twice weekly on Wednesday and Sunday starting on the 13 May 2016
UK airlines receive bomb threats several times a day, every day, all year. It's absolutely routine and the vast vast majority are quickly classed as not credible by the many trained bomb threat evaluators employed 24/7 for this routine everyday task.
To shut a runway for 6 hours for a misspelled anonymous note may be perceived as disproportionate.
On a superficial level it appears at least to have the merit of being the safest thing to do. However thus ignores the risks you've now introduced. Aircraft will have to unexpectedly divert, another airport will have to cope with a sudden large increase in workload. Aircraft will be making approaches with lower reserves of fuel, pilots will be working deeper into the night getting more tired. The next day the disruption and delays to getting the aircraft back to the reopened runway will see flight duty hours reaching or exceeding normal limits. Stressed and delayed passengers will be confrontational all day.
Sure, this stuff happens and the system copes. Nevertheless shutting a runway at a major airport does drill all sorts of new holes in the Swiss cheese safety slice. It adds links to the error chain. It erodes safety margins in quite tangible ways.
It would be good if that didn't happen again
WWW
To shut a runway for 6 hours for a misspelled anonymous note may be perceived as disproportionate.
On a superficial level it appears at least to have the merit of being the safest thing to do. However thus ignores the risks you've now introduced. Aircraft will have to unexpectedly divert, another airport will have to cope with a sudden large increase in workload. Aircraft will be making approaches with lower reserves of fuel, pilots will be working deeper into the night getting more tired. The next day the disruption and delays to getting the aircraft back to the reopened runway will see flight duty hours reaching or exceeding normal limits. Stressed and delayed passengers will be confrontational all day.
Sure, this stuff happens and the system copes. Nevertheless shutting a runway at a major airport does drill all sorts of new holes in the Swiss cheese safety slice. It adds links to the error chain. It erodes safety margins in quite tangible ways.
It would be good if that didn't happen again
WWW