UA Plane forced to return to Sydney

[Wirraway]

AAP

Plane forced to return to Sydney
18:08 AEST Tue Jul 27 2004

A United Airlines flight was forced to return to Sydney International Airport as a precaution because of a problem on board, the airline said.

The flight, which took off about 3pm (AEST), was 90 minutes into the flight when the pilot made the decision to return to Sydney, the spokesman said.

He would not detail the nature of any problems onboard and refused to confirm whether there were any problems with the plane's landing gear or in the cockpit.

The flight landed at about 5.45pm (AEST).

NSW Fire Brigades and the NSW Ambulance Service had multiple vehicles on the scene, and police closed roads leading to the airport.

Channel Ten news reported the incident was classified as a Category 3 emergency - the highest type ever at the airport.

©AAP 2004

=============================================
from Sydney Airport Message Board

Posted: Tue Jul 27, 2004 5:55 pm Post subject:

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

from radio 2ue, supposedly a note was found in the international termainal saying a bomb is on board.

also found a note on board, pilot made desision to go to sydney.

=============================================

[giddy up]

Have to love the channel 10 reporting. In 15 minutes, the emergency went from;

1) Landing gear problems, then;
2) Somebody had broken into the cockpit, then;
3) Cabin Crew had pressed a silent alarm warning of a security breach in the cabin; then
4) a bomb scare

Never let the facts get in the way of a good story..... :} :yuk:

[Wirraway]

news.com.au

Emergency closes airport
July 27, 2004

SYDNEY International Airport has been shut down under a Code 3 security alert after a United Airlines plane returned to the airport this afternoon due to a security breach.

The pilot of the Los Angeles-bound flight UA840 decided to return 90 minutes after taking off when threatening notes were reportedly discovered at both the Sydney terminal and on the aircraft.

The aircraft was cordoned off by emergency vehicles and all 246 passengers and crew were being disembarked.

The airline said the decision to return was made when "an object which raised some security suspicions was found was found on board".

United said passengers were expected to fly out again at 11am tomorrow.

Sydney radio 2UE said reports from Canberra said the emergency was "some kind of bomb hoax".

Radio 2GB reported a fire in the hydraulics might have caused the flight to be aborted.

The plane landed about 5.45pm (AEST).

NSW Fire Brigades and the NSW Ambulance Service had multiple vehicles on the scene, and police had closed roads leading to the airport.

AAP

===========================================

[Capt Claret]

Kerry O'Brien (7:30 Report - ABC TV) spoke with John Anderson this evening. As best I can remember:

Note made of pasted characters, possibly on a sick bag presented to pilot 1.5 hrs ex SYD
Note did not say "bomb on board", rather it alluded to the possibility.
Captain liaised with UA mgmnt and decided to return to SYD
Mass disruption @ SYD and throughout network as SYD closed for UA 747


I wonder if they'll relax the curfew @ SYD tonight to allow disrupted pax & aircraft to get to where they need to be?

[Uncommon Sense]

Captain Claret:

Also noted on the 7.30 report was praise from the missing in action minister to the effect of how fortunate it is to have pilots of such high calibre willing to make decisions in the interests of safety.

He seemed to forget that very point when criticising the same profession as they spoke out against aspects of the NAS didn't he?

Random Quote: "I think everyone should be encouraged to go after these terrorists, and to fight terrorism. Now watch me hit this drive"http://messagebank.port5.com/gwb.jpg

[Don Esson]

News reports say that the aircraft was 90 minutes out of YSSY, and there doesn't appear to be any disagreement on this. The captain and his company decided that the flight should be terminated and return to YSSY. If he was 90 mins out of YSSY, surely he would have been closer to YBBN than YSSY? If a 'return' was warranted, then surely he should have diverted the nearest suitable airport. Would that have been YBBN? If so, why was YSSY chosen? Diversion to the nearest available airport would surely have been in the best interests of the passengers and crew but perhaps not to the operator? It would also have caused less havoc on the eastern seaboard.

Have we again seen commercial interests put ahead of safety and security? :(

[AIRWAY]

G'day,

This is what i got on my e-mail from John Howards media dep, re: the UA incident:

27 July 2004



TRANSCRIPT OF THE PRIME MINISTER
THE HON JOHN HOWARD MP
DOORSTOP INTERVIEW, KARRATHA





Subjects: United Airlines incident


E&OE................................


JOURNALIST:

Prime Minister, can we just ask you about this incident with United Airlines - what you know of it and what you make of how the incident was handled?

PRIME MINISTER:

Well, I've been fully briefed on what happened and I totally support the decision taken by the pilot - it was the right thing to do in the circumstances. The pilot has to make the ultimate call. He or she is ultimately responsible for the safety of the passengers and he did the right thing.

JOURNALIST:

Is there any information at this stage as to whether it was a hoax or not. Is that still being looked at - where do you go from here?

PRIME MINISTER:

There are still investigations being carried out in relation to that. Obviously that is a possibility but I don't have enough information at this stage to express a view either way. I don't think anybody does but I understand that thorough searches have been conducted and no doubt when all of that's been completed and all the assessments have been made the police will express a view about that but obviously a hoax is a very strong possibility.

JOURNALIST:

And what of the passengers that I guess have been inconvenienced. They've been brought back and are staying in Sydney overnight. Any words for them at all?

PRIME MINISTER:

Well, obviously they would have had a stressful time, but the question of looking after them is a matter for the airline. But the important thing is that nobody has been hurt, that's the important thing. We have to maintain a sense of perspective about these things. We live in a more dangerous, more stressful period and incidents like this where people are ultra cautious and I applaud pilots of aircraft who are ultra cautious. I'd far rather with a pilot who's ultra cautious than one who's cavalier and I think everybody would feel the same way and we have to maintain a sense of proportion, it's an incident but nobody's been hurt, the right procedures have been followed, the pilot has done the right thing and I'm very grateful that nobody's been injured.

Thank you.

-------------

PS - By the way, im not a journalist.

[Wirraway]

Wed "Sydney Morning Herald"

http://www.smh.com.au/ffximage/2004/07/27/ua_gallery__550x367,0.jpg

Bomb note forces jet back to Sydney
By Joseph Kerr, Malcolm Brown and Ben Cubby
July 28, 2004

Ninety minutes out of Sydney the pilot of United Airlines flight 840, bound for Los Angeles, was handed a note written on a sick bag warning of a bomb on board.

With 264 passengers and crew, he judged the threat serious enough to turn the jumbo jet around and head back to Sydney.

"It had nothing to do with the Australian authorities," the American pilot told reporters later at the airport. "It was my decision alone to turn the plane around."

The plane dumped fuel to land back at Sydney Airport at 5.50pm.

"We saw it streaming away into the night," said Leah Bronddus, a passenger from Wilmington, Indiana. "They dropped 133,000 pounds of fuel over the sea.

"All they said was that there was a threat to the plane. Of course, it was very frightening. It was terrifying ... but there was one man who slept right through it."

Ms Bronddus did not know the problem was a bomb threat until told by reporters at the airport.

Another passenger, Roger Campbell, an Australian, said: "They just announced there was a threat to the plane. We ... thought there might be a bomb. Then within 10 minutes we were back talking like nothing had happened, so it was a weird experience actually. In the end it wasn't much different from a normal flight."

Four hours later, after a search of the passengers and plane, an anxious evening for relatives and delays to many other flights, it was declared a hoax.

The federal Transport Minister, John Anderson, told ABC television

the pilot "took what he believed to be the right course of action, and we entirely respect that and our security arrangements at Sydney Airport, and really right throughout the nation swung into action".

"Safety comes first. It does say something though about the sick minds that we occasionally have to deal with."

The Prime Minister, John Howard, praised the pilot's actions. "I totally support the decision taken by the pilot," he said.

Mr Anderson later said the note had not stated in "black and white terms" that there was a bomb on board.

Reports on ABC television said the sick bag had the letters "BOB" on it. The program said the crew believed the letters represented "bomb on board".

Superintendent Peter O'Brien, the local area commander of Botany police, said police had no indication of who had written the note, which was discovered by a crew member in a first-class toilet.

UA840 was about 500 nautical miles north-east of Sydney when the note was found at 4.15pm.

As it returned to Sydney the airport was put on an emergency footing and fire and ambulance crews were alerted.

After landing, the plane was isolated from other aircraft on the southern end of the runway. As sniffer dogs checked the plane, passengers were screened for several hours before being allowed to leave the airport about 9pm.

Wayne Stremski, from California, said passengers were upset by the lack of information, particularly after landing. The captain would say, "I'll let you know something when I know something". Relatives of passengers who returned to the airport also complained of being kept in the dark.

A spokeswoman for Sydney Airport said other planes were delayed by five to 10 minutes. "There was no closing of the airport," she said. However, authorities had warned passengers at interstate airports and on inbound flights that Sydney was closed.

Some people landing at Sydney on other flights said they had been delayed by up to 30 minutes.

The passengers are expected to fly out at 11.30am today.


===========================================
Wed "Sydney Morning Herald"

Confusion and frustration for anxious relatives
July 28, 2004 - 12:09AM

A hoax threat which forced a Los Angeles-bound plane to return to Sydney yesterday afternoon left anxious relatives confused and frustrated.

Many relatives of passengers aboard the United Airlines flight returned to Sydney International Airport just a few hours after farewelling their loved ones.

Despite a massive security operation at the airport, the relatives were left milling around the arrivals hall for hours waiting for news.

The scare was sparked after a hoax threat written on a sick bag found aboard the plane.

While security plans swung into action allowing the flight to land safely about 5.45pm (AEST), relatives and friends of some of the 264 people on board were left wondering what was going on.

The passengers on board the United Airlines flight were also unsure of what was happening.

No official announcements were made by the airline, the airport or security personnel, according to those on the scene.

Elaine Sander said she had rushed back to the airport shortly after 6.30pm (AEST) to meet her 18-year-old American niece Alissa Hornyak, who had been returning home after a two-week holiday in Australia.

Ms Sander expressed frustration at not knowing when her niece would emerge into the arrivals hall.

Passenger reaction to the incident was mixed when they started emerging into the arrivals hall shortly after 9pm (AEST).

Some were frustrated about the lack of information they received, while others praised airline staff and emergency authorities.

After a reunion with her aunt, Ms Hornyak said the ordeal made her nervous about flying again today, when the passengers will again board a flight to Los Angeles.

"Everyone was real nice, they did all they could," she said.

"The plane turned around and I was scared, it was all a bit crazy.

"All they said was that there was an emergency and were heading back. The plane was too heavy so we had to get rid of the fuel.

"I'm a bit more nervous than usual about getting back on the plane tomorrow."

George Tihanyi, from Harbord, had also returned to the airport to wait for wife Astrid and 14-year-old daughter Gabriella, who had been on the plane.

"I spoke to someone at the United Airlines office and they haven't said anything, but to return to here and wait for the plane," he said.

"There should be someone here from the airline explaining what is going on because there are too many people not knowing."

After an emotional reunion, Gabriella, who was on her first plane flight, said she wasn't worried, but wished she had known what was going on.

"They didn't tell us anything at all," she said.

"They just made us keep calm, they just didn't tell us anything urgent.

"The captain said some of us might notice we were turning around and he said there was a threat, but it was only minor."

Melbourne resident Moshe Cyrulnik (Moshe Cyrulnik) said the ordeal was draining for him as it was the Jewish fast day and he hadn't eaten all day.

But he backed the airline's actions, saying the spectre of the September 11 terrorist attacks made returning essential.

"It's been a little hard," Mr Cyrulnik said.

"My personal opinion is that it's good to know the security is very good.

"You saw in September 11 there was not enough security, so I think better to have more security than not enough.

"Better to be safe than sorry. You only live once."

Canadian Sondra Baier said after the message came across that the plane was turning around the flight attendants said nothing, and carried on as usual.

"They just calmly said the plane was going to turn around because there was a threat on the plane," Ms Baier said.

"We had to wait 45 minutes on the runway and that was probably the most disheartening part about the whole adventure.

"Everyone just kept looking around and looking at each other, the expression on the faces of everyone was just unreal.

"The flight attendants weren't saying anything, it was just like everyday business to them."

AAP

============================================

[The_Cutest_of_Borg]

QF cabin crew regularly scour the pax ranks for "Bob"- Best On Board"; usually a good looking male passenger.

I wonder if United do the same thing and this sick bag was some honorary award made to "Bob" on a previous flight.

Would be funny if it was.

I won't criticise the Captain for his decision, he is the man on the spot. But if I found a sickbag with "Bob" written on it on a QF flight, I doubt if I would be too concerned for that reason.

[TopperHarley]

What if the bag had BEVAN's name on it ??

Im sure given some thought we could all work out a scary acronym for BEVAN........

Big
Explosive
Vial (of)
Anthrax
Nearby


Sheeeeeeet!!!! Turn the plane around, were all going to die.

Am I missing something ??

[BankAngle50]

Why close the whole airport?

[Desert Dingo]

It is obvious innit?

Terrorists all know that if they put a bomb on an aircraft they must leave a note as well to let everyone know about it. Then as well, the bomb must have big red numbers counting down to zero, and at least 3 wires only one of which is the correct one to cut to disarm the device.

It gives everyone involved a chance to panic or act heroically, and use the drama to close airports etc.
Some people may just have too much imagination. :p

[Ron & Edna Johns]

Yes. I hope that all the Bob's in the world don't have their names on their briefcases from now on. Maybe security will now require they remove aforesaid nametags before boarding a flight. That'll fix the terrorists!

[Cessnadude]

Seems to be a lot of 20/20 hindsight in some of these later posts, reality is that the crew were in doubt so they did the right thing - the reality of it all is that its a sign of the times these days and the possible threats that exist - which is sad

[engine out]

Terrorists have known (and I am not in anyway saying this was an act conducted by any such organisation) that the threat is far greater than the action, and that all such threats must be taken with seriousness. Any person who grew up in london during 70's and 80's would know how often railway stations etc were closed due to the threat of a bomb. The chaos caused by the suggestion is nearly as bad as the act with far less casulaties involved. The Captain made the correct choice in the situation he was presented. If this indeed was the act of the cabin crew awarding a BOB (which I really hope it wasnt) then people need to have a real hard look at themselves and the environment that we work in. As for Sydney instead of Brisbane, I doubt this was overly a commercial decision probably they thought more along the lines of which area is best equipped to deal with such a scenario. I saw the Captain on TV maintaining a very dignified no comment, good to see that he wouldnt be baited by the journalists into some soundbite they could play over and over again.

[wingman]

Any one got any idea how much it costs an airline to cope with these sort of hoaxes, esp involving a 747-400, given the pilot dumped thousands of dollars of fuel.
Also system disruptions must cost a fair amount, along with putting up pax, etc etc:hmm:

[Uncommon Sense]

The pilot, you know, a highly responsible individual, and I'm sure his decision was the right one.

We all feel very thankful that, you know, that people of that calibre accept responsibility for our safety in the air.

[gaunty]

Just listening to the quarterbacking on the World at Noon on this and the representative of the AIPA, whilst supporting the right of the Captain to make the "call" also added the IMHO entirely gratuitous and innapropriate comment to the effect "I would/may have handled it differently".

He wasn't there so how does he "know" and it also infers a less than "proper" outcome, not very professional.


And whilst I'm at it I hear what the critics say about landing a "bomb enabled " aircraft at Sydney carries the finite risk of taking out more than just the aircraft, but where else can they go, that would have the facilites to handle the emergency including the possibility of it coming unravelled on landing with a large number of casualties??..
Although the approach to Sydney 34 is largely overwater.

Tulla, is sufficiently remote from a large city, Williamtown??, maybe even Canberra, Brisbane???.

Who makes the decision to where?

What distance penalty from the turn back point??

[Desert Dingo]

Gaunty,
I think that there has to be a lot more to this incident than has been told so far, possibly a non-specific threat to the airline that we may never be told about. There has to be something else to make "B.O.B" written on a sick-bag into something significant enough to cause the reaction that it did.
I am sure that the Captain did the correct thing knowing all the facts, but from what we have been told, to divert just because of some letters found written on a sick-bag to me is simply unbelievable.
1. Why should it have to mean "Bomb on Board"? It could just as easily mean "Battleship off Boston" or "Bugger off Bruce". (although that would be more likely to apply to QF ) :D
2. Does anyone seriously believe a terrorist would put a bomb on board, and then leave a note to tell the world about it?

[Hempy]

Galley rats :rolleyes:

[gaunty]

Desert Dingo

I'm sure you are right.

What I was really trying to say was that the second guessing by the AIPA rep on another operators procedures was innapropriate.
AND
3 hours fuel, maybe a red face and the rest is as nothing compared to the alternative.

I have been directly in the middle of a couple of these and they are not at all fun, you gotta give the man on the spot the "call".

They are still up there as one of my carriers of choice.

[Capt Claret]

I too though of Best on Board this morning when I heard what was written on the sick bag, though I only heard of the term a week or so ago.

I think it a little unfair to criticize some one who may have innocently written B.O.B., be it an F/A, or someone leaving a loved-one behind and doodling. I don't think I would have come up with BOB = Bomb On Board in a month of sundays.

[capt.cynical]

" B.O.B."

"Bimbo's Overly Bored"
:p :{

[hoss]

and if you come across a sickbag with HOSS written on it, you'll know I've tried to put the hard word onto a female FA.

Heaps
Of
Sex
Sweetheart :)

[pug munter]

Given this is a rumour mill.......

Any truth to the story on ABC radio that there was a US VIP on board, a senior consular figure, who was removed immediately and separately from the pax?

Just repeating what I heard!

BOB= Bugger off Bush?

Pug

[Wirraway]

Thurs "Melbourne Age"

http://www.theage.com.au/ffximage/2004/07/28/united_x2907.jpg
Boring Bob the Barfbag, who may have played a role in the bomb scare.
Picture:Reuters

Did a sick joke on sickbag ground flight?
By Brendan Nicholson, Farrah Tomazin, Daniel Ziffer
July 29, 2004

The decision to turn around an airliner 90 minutes into a Sydney-Los Angeles flight on Tuesday night may have been caused by a "gigantic misunderstanding", according to federal Transport Minister John Anderson - but it was the right decision, even if there was no bomb on board.

The pilot of United Airlines flight 840 decided to return to Sydney 500 nautical miles into the flight after cabin staff brought to his attention a sickbag found in the toilets with the letters "B O B" on it. "Bomb on board" was one meaning the letters may have carried - but the letters are also an in-joke among flight attendants meaning "best on board", referring to particularly attractive passengers.

Mr Anderson said he was sure the pilot would have taken that into account. "We cannot run risks," Mr Anderson said. "The pilot was right in my view not to run risks."

That view was seconded by Prime Minister John Howard. "I totally support the decision taken by the pilot," he said.

A United Airlines spokesman also backed the pilot's decision - which could have cost the airline up to $1 million. "The pilot made the right choice in doing what he did yesterday," the spokesman said.

Overnight accommodation in Sydney for the 246 passengers, including a senior US diplomat, plus 18 staff had to be found; 150,000 litres of extra fuel to that used in flight, plus any charges for an extra landing and take-off.

Another theory for the letters emerged yesterday, with reference to a comic website, www.vomitorium.co.uk, which details the imaginary travels of "Boring Bob the Barfbag".

The website features pictures of Bob the Barfbag as he travels the world - and opens the possibility that a passenger tried to share the joke by writing "Bob" on a sickbag and leaving it in the toilet for another to find.

Police have interviewed the crew and some passengers. A Federal Police spokeswoman said last night the investigation was continuing.

Mr Anderson said the mystery may never be unravelled. "It may very well even be that even now it may have been a genuine and serious misunderstanding. None the less someone has been irresponsible at least and horrendously selfish and stupid at worst, and every effort will be made to find the person responsible."

Mr Anderson and Sydney Airport Corporation chief executive Max Moore-Wilton both said the response showed that Australia was well prepared to deal with such an emergency - but that it offered lessons as well.

Airport security procedures are likely to be speeded up after security officials examine why passengers remained aboard the plane on the tarmac - at a distance from the terminal - for about 45 minutes after landing.


The wait was difficult for some passengers. Jeff Lupinacci, a 36-year-old project manager from Oregon, said: "People did question why we were being kept on the plane so long after it landed. If there's really a bomb on the plane, why were we just sitting there?"

Mr Anderson's spokesman said factors that were considered included the need to search the plane's doors and exterior for bombs, the need to preserve evidence and the possibility of passengers being injured if escape slides were used.

Airline spokesman Patrick Weaver explained that once the aircraft landed the pilot handed over authority to airport security.

The other issue was the vexed question of what to tell passengers in the air - which Mr Anderson said was under review.

That was an issue for passengers. Deborah Faulks, an Australian living in New York, was happy with the information provided. "I don't think (the amount of information given) was bad because I don't want to get people panicked or anything or cause hysteria."

Chris Cornelio, 19, of Kew, would have preferred more disclosure afterwards. After landing, "we were all locked in a room with all our bags, sniffer dogs came, and we had to write down all our names and bring our passports out. But they didn't say anything. It was a bit worrying."

Dr Jim McLennan, a senior research fellow at Latrobe University's School of Psychological Science, said the situation led to conflict between the right to know and the responsibility to protect life.

"That second principle of responsibility takes - rightly or wrongly - just simply takes absolute primacy. I imagine that he (the pilot) would have, in that situation, been very concerned about the possibility of panic amongst the passengers."

But Chris Poulson of California was not too bothered either way. "You can't be too safe. I didn't have any problem with it. It gave me an extra night in Sydney." Chris, and 245 others, finally left at 1.15pm yesterday.

And if any passenger was a fan of Bob the Barfbag, they weren't admitting to it.

==========================================

[amos2]

So, let me get this straight...

A 744 departs SYD for the USA, and about 90 minutes out a crew member/flight attendant/pax, visits the first class/business class/economy class toilet, and finds a sickbag/piece of paper, with my mates name Bob on it?

Some one decides that this is a bomb warning and declares an emergency. But, instead of landing at the nearest suitable, a decision is made to return to SYD.

So, it's not really an emergency is it?

However, on arrival at SYD a full scale emergency set up is established, so it is an emergency, right?

And this is confirmed when the airplane proceeds to the designated remote area well away from the terminal.

But then, the pax are kept on the airplane for 45 minutes, we are told, before they are deplaned, so it's not really an emergency after all, is it?

And then the Minister for Pretty Faces and Aviation appears on TV and goes into overkill mode telling us how it was a hoax but it had to be done this way. And we all know what that means in polly talk!

Shortly after this the Minister for Terror also goes on TV and says the same thing! And we all know what that means too!

But, you see, every body has missed the point.

This wasn't an emergency, is wasn't even a hoax, it was just the name Bob written on a sick bag!

Somebody please tell me this is not for real!

[Blip]

This is not for real.:p

Being serious now...

Airline spokesman Patrick Weaver explained that once the aircraft landed the pilot handed over authority to airport security.

I\'m surprised that it was even possible for the PIC to do that. Surely while the passengers and crew are still onboard, the PIC remains responsible for their safety and wellbeing.

[Woomera]

amos2 me old ;)

I can't remember who first said it, but it is a fact that we are;

a world divided by a common language

hopefully the positive that will come out of this is a review of all the procedures, but I fear an overreaction too much the other way.

We are in a dangerous new world, where nothing is what it seems and it is equally dangerous to assume that anything is seemingly innocuous.

There is someone out there either feeling really really dumb or .............. Either way the terrorists had a win.

How do we deal with that?

[amos2]

Common sense comes to mind!

[Woomera]

Can't argue with that, but I suspect you, the UA Capt and I are refugees from a saner world where that was easier to work out than it is now.

Now about programming that VCR? :\ :{

[Deaf]

Is it true that UA domestic carry money defined as "Bought On Board" and this is frequently carried in a (marked) chuck bag.

Possibly wrong forum, but not being UA

[LateNightOps]

The note was written in black texter with the capital letters BOB gone over many times.

It was also found in the drawer of the first class toliets... and a UA FA swore she checked it prior to departure.

There was one suspect, but with no proof nothing could be done and they were not detained.
(or maybe they could be sent to guantanimo bay for 2.5 years with no charges laid against them!!)

In any case it is troubling times we are living in... who really would want to risk calling a pranksters bluff?

LNO

[Kaptin M]

Under the circumstances - an American airline, departing Australia..a country that has within the last week or so, be warned by Muslim extremists that its streets will run red with blood, because of its involvement in the Iraq (Bush) invasion..and a sick bag with B O B scawled in texta, and left in a conspicuous place (rather than in the disposal bin) - must surely lead to only ONE conclusion. A threat to the safety of the aircraft, and its occupants.

For those who suggest that "BOB" might refer to something else, and try to make light of it, why not try this little experiment next time you're at an airport, and relate back to us how you fare.
When YOU are passing through security, either (a) carry a sick bag with BOB scawled on it, in a location where the security officers will see it;
or.
(b) when you are asked if you have any knives, etc with you, answer, "Bob".

(With some 25 years in airline flying, I have NEVER heard of bob being used in the context suggested here - and perhaps neither had this Captain, nor his crew!)

In my point of view, I would have expected no lesser decision than that made on the day, and as an earlier poster noted for another pilot to indicate that he would have made a different call, is entirely INAPPROPRIATE and totally UNPROFESSIONAL.

We (pilots) really are our own WORST enemies, aren't we?
Trying to put other pilots down, in the mis-perception that it will enhance oneself in others' eyes.
United we stand - divided we have fallen!

[Desert Dingo]

par·a·noid
1. Relating to, characteristic of, or affected with paranoia.
2. Exhibiting or characterized by extreme and irrational fear or distrust of others: a paranoid suspicion that a bomb may be on board the aircraft
n.
One affected with paranoia. (pr-noid)

As Amos 2 writes:This wasn't an emergency, is wasn't even a hoax, it was just the name Bob written on a sick bag!
Somebody please tell me this is not for real!

It is game, set and match to the terrorists then.

[Kaptin M]

it was just the name Bob written on a sick bag! That being the case, why didn't the author just put his hand up and say so?
par·a·noid It's a shame the pax on the aircraft that were hijacked on Sept 11 weren't a little more "paranoid", isn't it.
If there are some who feel that the Captain of thie flight in topic over-reacted, and that they would have ignored the message, then, imho, the terrorists HAVE had a win.

Test (c), for the Dingoes out there;
Next time you fly on an aircraft, write BOB on a sick bag, and leave it in the toilet where it can be found, then when the questions are asked as to WHOM, and WHY, put your hand up and..................wear the consequences. :}

[HotDog]

par-a-noid

June 15th, 1972. VR-HFZ CV880M, disintegrated at FL290 over Pleiku in Vietnam and crashed into the jungle; due to a BOB. 81 lives perished, including some close friends and colleagues.

Desert Dingo, have you ever suffered the loss of friends and colleagues in an air crash before?

Full marks to the UA captain for a professional command decision.

[Chris Higgins]

Yep! Gotta agree with Kaptin M on this one. Someone starts identifying a security threat onboard and are you suggesting as pilots we just ignore it?

I can look down either one of my shoulders while in uniform and count...1,2,3,4 reasons to divert and land anytime safety is questioned.

It's a license to fly an aircraft...not a license to kill!

[amos2]

I wouldn't suggest for one moment that a security threat should be ignored, but just what security threat are we talking about here?

I would also think that someone other than the Captain made this decision!

[amos2]

"I can look down either one of my shoulders while in uniform and count...1,2,3,4 reasons to divert and land anytime safety is questioned.
It's a license to fly an aircraft...not a license to kill!"

...and, I gotta tell you Chris...love all this 007 talk!

You know, you are rapidly becoming the US of A's answer to Dickie Smith! :ok:

[Taildragger67]

Woomera,

Would that be the Betamax or the Super-8?

Now, to get that cartridge player in the Edsel working again...




Hot damn! my first 8 track cartridge was Neil Diamonds "Hot August Night" thank goodness they brought it out on CD, as it's nearly worn out ;) W

[Wirraway]

Mon "The Australian" Latest News

United Airlines plane evacuated
From correspondents in Bangkok
August 02, 2004

A UNITED Airlines jet aborted takeoff at Bangkok International Airport early today after a bird got caught in one of its engines, and four passengers suffered minor injuries as they evacuated the plane, the company said.

Flight UA838 headed for Tokyo also "experienced a tyre blow-out" during the aborted takeoff, United Airlines said in a statement. It wasn't clear what caused the tyre to burst.

"The takeoff was aborted due to a bird ingested into one of the engines," the company said. "For the safety of passengers and crew members, the pilot activated an immediate evacuation."

The Boeing 747's two pilots, 15 crew members and 346 passengers slid down evacuation chutes onto the tarmac, the statement said.

Four passengers who suffered minor injuries during the evacuation were treated by a medical team at the airport and two of them were later hospitalised, the statement said.

A control tower official earlier said that 20 people had been injured.

The passengers will be put up at a local hotel and flown to Tokyo on another plane tomorrow morning, the company said.

===========================================

[OperationsNormal]

What if on my jetstar flight I cant sit next to me mate...

He's three rows back and I wanna have a yarn to him about how grouse that topless bird at the strippy was last night and how many beers we drank.

If I screem "BOB" to get his attention away from trying a line on the FA, am I going to end up in court ??