America turning back carriers

[luoto]

Has America suddenly stopped finding suspicious passenger flights from foreign carriers (I don't recall one of its own fleet being sent back to parts foreign) or have they just got less newsworthy and the media have found a new bone?

It seemed only yesterday (sic) that such occurences were happening every week or so, causing problems to many passengers and crew alike, yet no credible evidence of wrongdoing was ever found.

[captjns]

To fulfill your curiosity concerning the subjet is very simple. Log on the the US Department of Homeland Security's Website, and look up TSA requirements concerning APIS for carriage of passegers/crews from foreign countries. US carriers are complience with this requirement which is why the have a very low incident in inflight diversions. I am sure foriegn carriers do their best to. But they don't always follow the protocols which then results in these embarrassing sutiuations.

[Oshkosh George]

Don't you mean they don't tell airlines that a certain passenger is not allowed in until the aircraft is actually airborne en route to the US,as happened fairly recently to a KLM flight,which was turned back?:confused:
In fact,this aircraft was not even landing in the US---merely an overflight!

[captjns]

No. Here's how it works. As Passengers check in, their passport information is put into a computer file. For e-ticket passengers their passport informatio is put into a similar file and transfered to an active file once the boarding pass is issued. The compiled data is then transmitted to a designated point where the list is compared via electronic means to ensure that there are no undesirables on the aircraft, even if the aircraft has an overfly permit to transit US airspace. That is merely a precaustion should an unscheduled landing be required during such transition. It used to be that such APIS transmission had to be complete within one hour of wheels up. I am not sure of the time now. In any event however, with enough adavnced notice prior to push back, even take off the affected airline could take appropriate action if required. That's why the term Advance Passenger Information System, is named as such. Other countries have similar programss too.

[Oshkosh George]

So what happened in the KLM case then? I believe the aircraft had crossed the Atlantic before being turned back.Correct me if I am wrong. I think Canada also refused it landing permission.

[Turn It Off]

It used to be that such APIS transmission had to be complete within one hour of wheels up. I am not sure of the time now. In any event however, with enough adavnced notice prior to push back, even take off the affected airline could take appropriate action if required.

Surely if it is airborne it is too late? It would then result ina diversion of some kind, even if it is a return to departure aerodrome.

And if you are talking transatlantic a return is far from ideal because the a/c will probably be well above Max Landing Weight.

TIO

[Newforest]

Don't you mean they don't tell airlines that a certain passenger is not allowed in until the aircraft is actually airborne en route to the US,as happened fairly recently to a KLM flight,which was turned back?:confused:
In fact,this aircraft was not even landing in the US---merely an overflight!

And don't forget the Air Transat flight recently from Totonto to Mexico which had a suspicious name on board. The plane was followed by US jets until over Mexico and the passenger was arrested and put in jail overnight. The Canadian citizen was then returned by flying out over the Atlantic. Apparantly the businessman knew a Middle Eastern person 'of interest' to the MIB.

[PaperTiger]

So what happened in the KLM case then? I believe the aircraft had crossed the Atlantic before being turned back.Correct me if I am wrong. I think Canada also refused it landing permission.No, Canada was willing to accept the flight. Because it was carrying some horses as cargo which would have been stuck in quarantine, the Captain elected to return to AMS.

[PaperTiger]

And don't forget the Air Transat flight recently from Totonto to Mexico which had a suspicious name on board. The plane was followed by US jets until over Mexico and the passenger was arrested and put in jail overnight. The Canadian citizen was then returned by flying out over the Atlantic. Apparantly the businessman knew a Middle Eastern person 'of interest' to the MIB.It was never made public as to exactly where the interception took place, but some (that is me :hmm: ) speculate that APIS didn't work particularly well in this case and the flight was well into US airspace. Since normal practice is to turn back such flights, it seems possible the plane was over halfway (at least) before it was 'detected', meaning there was less risk(sic) in letting it continue.
The POI may or may not have been a member of Hamas at some previous point in his life - he seems disingenuous about it. In any case the story seems to have died. He was returned to Canada in a private jet escorted by police (presumably at Canadian taxpayers' expense :* ) which followed a normal routing.

[rhovsquared]

I do remember hearing on Nightly News??? about US airmarshals that have had KNOWN (to there employers) criminal records and drug addiction problems but we let them overfly the US. without trying to be too political the US govt's security and natural disaster policies (Huricane Katrina) as well as the NSA's violations of federal laws, Seem to be a disaster in and of themselves... this from a proud US citizen:sad: