View Full Version : 4th Cathay return

3rd Dec 2004, 12:47
I hear that a another CX flight was forced to return after takeoff, this one SF to HKG. Only this time is wasn't an engine, it was a dog! Apparently a pax brought a small dog on board, not discovered until after takeoff.

Does this say anything about SF security? Anyone got any details?

3rd Dec 2004, 15:15
Does this say anything about SF security?

Maybe they hid it in a body cavity:}

3rd Dec 2004, 16:45
Clearly, the TSA should raise the Terrier Threat level to orange...:E

3rd Dec 2004, 18:04
Wonder who pays the bill, suppose the airline fronts it up in cases like these. I guess around 100 tonnes of fuel to bring a 744 back to 285 tonnes Max landing weight would be instant bankrupcy for the passenger involved. :ugh:

Who knows more about cases like these? :hmm:

3rd Dec 2004, 19:57
I would have thought that its cheaper for the airline to publicise that in these circumstances, they'll throw the animal out of a window, but buy another one to compensate the owner at destination!


4th Dec 2004, 01:58
Is Cathays inflight catering that poor?

Ignition Override
4th Dec 2004, 06:42
RRamjet-good one. That would do the public more good than the ridiculous non-classified system that they have now. Maybe have a corporate raider scale set up soon.

With so many problems reorganizing our intelligence agencies and shortage of analysts who are fluent in certain tongues, plus the supposed need to keep the economy (including anyone except SWest, JetBlue, Airtran?), what good is the [email protected]^^#d system anyway?

They might as well tell people to drive 500 miles in their car and just chatter non-stop at 80 miles/hour on their cellphones as they maneuver their high-speed Sherman tanks between fuel trucks and Honda Civics.

Oh yeah-many do that already in the US without a second thought. And flying is so dangerous....what language was spoken by the late Timothy McVeigh in Ok. City? He was not alone, and had many sympathizers. But they speak Amerikun, so that just dont count one bit. Even with an Idaho 'accent'.:suspect:

4th Dec 2004, 08:06
We have very strict rules governing the carriage of gerbils in body cavities Mr Gear :p

4th Dec 2004, 09:21
I think you're all barking mad.

Onan the Clumsy
4th Dec 2004, 13:42
That's a bit mean of you to say his girlfriend was small.

4th Dec 2004, 14:06
Why not just carry on and have the dog put down on arrival, surely the cheapest option, or is a big fine involved?
Perhaps some revision of standing orders is appropriate, " If dog noticed on board don't officially notice until just before landing."

4th Dec 2004, 22:54
Seems like turning back a 747 just for a small dog is a little excessive to me. After all, doesn't CX allow dogs in the cabin?

I've taken several passengers with seeing-eye dogs before. Since they already had departed, why not keep it quiet and let it slide with a fine or something. Unless the dog went ape-shitt and started bitting people and became a safety concern, why not tell the passenger to keep it quiet and low profile, and press on.

I don't know, maybe I'm passing judgement without all the details. Just an observation.

4th Dec 2004, 23:00
Sqwak, I think they're worried it might be a dog-bomb and want to get on the ground asap. Also consider the weight and balance implications of the unaccounted mass.

4th Dec 2004, 23:16
That will be a cur ly one for their legal beagles. Most of the dogs seem happier on the US carriers anyway, unusual for CX to have a dog in the cabin.

Gareth Blackstock
5th Dec 2004, 00:41
is that not what quarrantine is for?

Doug E Style
5th Dec 2004, 12:16
I'm glad they had it removed; there aren't many lamp posts on a 744 and I doubt that poop scoops are part of the standard equipment.