Continental's embarrassment - or is it?

[Grunf]

Please read the article. I am aware that journalists like to spice things up but this is, IMO, embarrassment fro Continental Airlines.

In short, on their flight from Newark, NJ to New Delhi there was a known fugitive (a killer and a potentially suicidal person). Since the case was 'fresh" just few hours from the crime occurrence the whole mess was created.

Was it up to the captain? What about COs policies?

Here is the story...

http://www.phoenixnewtimes.com/2007-06-14/news/snake-on-a-plane/1

[PaperTiger]

To them, it's not the point that Raju Grewal was taken into custody without incident by New Delhi authorities when Flight 82 landed at Indira Gandhi International Airport, about 14 hours after takeoff.What is their point then ? Dirtbag's in custody.Mary Schiavo, a respected aviation law attorney, author, and former inspector general for the U.S. Department of Transportation under George H.W. Bush and Bill Clinton, says that "beyond the altruistic motivation of helping law enforcement because they pleaded for help, we're talking here about an airline that aided and abetted the flight of a felon, and possibly hindered an ongoing investigation.Ah, Scary Mary, long time no see. STFU.

[PAXboy]

Someone has to get the blame and so they might as well start with the airline. If they manage to dodge, someone else will be lined up. No story here.

[newbie1972]

Well excuse me. If any of this is accurate, CO should be taken to task over this. I, as a Captain, would want to know if there was any potential threat on board. I would like to think that any commercial considerations would not override common sense in allowing an alleged criminal to flee jurisdiction. The fact that he was taken into custody at the other end is neither here nor there. What if he had got away? What about the extradition issues?

[PaperTiger]

If any of this is accurate, CO should be taken to task over this. I, as a Captain, would want to know if there was any potential threat on board.Big IF. We have the Phoenix cop's side of it and commentary from uninvolved parties; although it does say the Capt. was informed.

The FAA and DHS have the authority to order a plane to land (return in this case), local law enforcement does not. Don't know about the FBI - suspect not - but they were not involved. Or, they were involved :confused:

Peering through the journalese, my guess would be that this was simply a timing thing - not enough to go through the various channels needed to get to someone with the right authority. I hope you're not suggesting that any cop should be able to recall a flight because an alleged (your word) fugitive is on board ?

[Blues&twos]

Just a thought, maybe the crew decided that it would be safer for all on board not to spook the guy by turning back? It wouldn't take a genius to realise that, on breaking through the clouds, that wasn't New Delhi below...better to deal with him realising he's been rumbled on the ground in the terminal rather than in the air.

Perhaps.

[lang409]

you also have to consider where the article came from......A –FREE- mostly entertainment rag that is subsidized by heavy advertisements is not what I call class A journalism

[55yrsSLC_10yearsPPL]

If we could leave aside the quality of journalism and look at the alleged incident in principle ?
There are cases on record where flights originating from Europe were denied access to American airspace because the passenger manifest contained a suspect's name. I presume that the same authorities would not want a flight with a potentially suicidal passenger back in their airspace. Much better the problem be exported to somewhere else!
Unless we hear (not that I expect to) the captain's side of the story, we may surmise that he had not much choice in the matter and quietly complied with instructions and that he heaved a big sigh of relief when he deposited a quiet fugitive in New Delhi.
The travelling public contains a certain percentage of violent criminals just like every other segment of society - its just that in most cases we don't recognize them.As yet we do not have to submit a police clearance when we check in.
They were lucky on that flight. As we often are.

[con-pilot]

Very simple to fake problems that would convince any and all passengers, including any dead-heading pilots that there is a mechanical problem that would necessitate a return.

I will not give any examples here, however, any airline/professional jet pilot will be able to figure it out.

Also, just in case, I would request that there not be any speculation on this subject here on an open website.




(Okay one example; Have the Captain run down the aisle crying, screaming and fall to the floor sobbing saying "We are all going to die" could work. ;))

[Sallyann1234]

"Also, just in case, I would request that there not be any speculation on this subject here on an open website."

Exactly the point I was making. Standard procedures are well known, but less orthodox methods are best kept quiet.

[KATLPAX]

The problem as I see it is why CO thought it safe to continue from EWR to DEL with this guy on board...how did anyone know what his intentions were? was it as 'simple' as a murder and thats it? How in the world did anyone know that it ended there? and that his bags were well screened? that he was not now suicidal and wanted to take everyone with him or a few sitting next to him? Could it be handled on board (w a marshall?) Why not land asap?

As pilots here, if you were in this position not knowing anything except what 'the authorities' knew at that time ie that this guy murdered two people, what would you do? How much pressure would company interests play. My guess is that going back or diverting would cost the airline lots of dollars. Was that a factor and how big?

I will say without knowing the full details...I do hope the pilot made the final call, his responsibility, but I think company interests may have played too big a role here. Thoughts?

[brian.crissie]

I imagine that the best course of action (without second guessing law enforcements' standards) would be to


identify the problem and location of the fugitive on board
determine if any air marshals are on board
if so, continue on to final destination to arouse the least suspicionI imagine that this is the likeliest scenario that occurred and led to the continuation of the flight

[PaperTiger]

The problem as I see it is why CO thought it safe to continue from EWR to DEL with this guy on board...how did anyone know what his intentions were? was it as 'simple' as a murder and thats it? How in the world did anyone know that it ended there? and that his bags were well screened? that he was not now suicidal and wanted to take everyone with him or a few sitting next to him?He had been screened by the TSA at EWR, or are you saying you don't trust that process ? He'd also flown from PHX without incident.if you were in this position not knowing anything except what 'the authorities' knew at that time ie that this guy murdered two people,I don't believe there was an arrest warrant at the time, so the most the 'authorities' knew was that he was a suspect; albeit pretty much a slam dunk. We haven't seen (and probably never will) exactly what the captain was told - actually, informed about since there was no voice comm involved AIUI.

[SeniorDispatcher]

>>>I don't believe there was an arrest warrant at the time, so the most the 'authorities' knew was that he was a suspect; albeit pretty much a slam dunk. We haven't seen (and probably never will) exactly what the captain was told - actually, informed about since there was no voice comm involved AIUI.

You make a good point, and I also wonder what was said per ACARS. Scary Mary aside, there's something to be said as far as continuing have been a calulated risk. If they had turned back to EWR (irrespective of the reason announced) might the perp have suspected something was up and taken some other action? The police's assertion that he was suicidal could have been assessed as an assumption--and that the gent's earlier plan had been superceded, as evidenced by the trip back to India. That's certainly not the only interpretation possible, but like you said, we'll probably never know the details.

As a dispatcher, I'd have given him the full scoop (sans any management filtering) and discussed options with him, as I'm sure COA's dispatcher did. There's always an economic consideration involved somewhere (and fuel ain't cheap these days), but my hunch is that the collective decision was to let sleeping dogs stay asleep, and nab him without risking the other pax once he deplaned.

I also think the much of the PHX LEO's frustration was self-induced, namely assuming one airline employee is interchangeable with any other, and that everyone knows everything and anyone can do anything. US FAR Part 121 airlines have these things called "Dispatch Offices" and the operational control emanates from there. You can really blame the LEO though--an FAA inspector didn't realize it either some years ago when he tried to stop that NWA flight from departing FAR-MSP with the crew he suspected as being intoxicated.