Ryanair bomb scare

[felixthecat]

A Captain in Ryanair was 'bollocked' by the deputy chief pilot (Base Captain at a southern UK major London airport:cool:) for diverting an aircraft due to a bomb threat made in flight last year by a passenger during a flight from Lubeck to Stansted.

The captain was told in no uncertain terms that 'Its impossible to get a bomb on an aircraft in Europe' and what as he doing. :=

[Capt Ted Crilly]

that is the usual behaviour of "big mac" i am afraid.

what a shame ryr has sunk so low,i really enjoyed my "apprentiship" there. sadly thats all ryr will ever amount to a training grnd for the big boys

[itinerant]

Had a gf many moons ago that worked for Laker (Skytrain). They got a bomb threat radioed through and she was asked by the captain to have a look round..... How times change, or not as the case may be. :ugh:

[bia botal]

'Its impossible to get a bomb on an aircraft in Europe'

oh yer! what about the crew vans in dublin?

[talent]

Bia Botal,
What about the crew vans in Dublin?
Talent

[student88]

To be honest, who doesn’t see lapses in security at airports? There have been countless times at Stansted when I’ve been working that I’ve realised that if you really wanted to, you could’ve done something. If a terrorist wanted to get something airside I’m sure he/she could. Countless times have I seen people walk through the arches at security with bottles of drink in their hands un challenged.

S88:ok:

[Mercenary Pilot]

Its impossible to get a bomb on an aircraft in EuropeI'm not going to go into details of airport security across Europe but IF that quote is accurate and those are REALLY his views, then the man needs retraining in security matters.

Suffice to say, the airline I work for (and probably every other British carrier) continues to emphasise the importance of vigilance and through security checks during first flights, hand-overs and turn arounds.

[fireflybob]

I really do not think that potential lapses in security at airports should be advertised via postings on these forums! Obviously if anybody in the professional aviation community is aware of such they should report the facts to the relevant authorities.

Mods - do you think these postings should really remain on this forum?

[snapper1]

Bia Botal,
Thank you for this valuable information.
best regards
Osama.

[HZ123]

As someone delivering security training such behaviour from a senior figure is unacceptable as parts of the EU regeme are poor. Why an admonishment may have been given perhaps was in relation to the level / degree / source of the threat, which may have been lacking in fact. It may be that Ryan's threat assessment is made by an Ops D/M and as this does not happen very often its a difficult call.

[kick the tires]

Fireflybob,

I hear what you are saying but anyone can simply sit and watch the actions of security posts and gleam the same viewpoint as posted by bia botal.

[RAT 5]

Felix,

May I ask, politely, what has motivated this thread 3 months into the new year. You said this happened last year.

[Mozart21]

I have twice recently travelled with my leatherman knife in my barbour jacket pocket, when in civvies. On one occasion I had some unused shotgun cartridges after a weekend away. I am confident that security in the air is a function of statistics, not search. The overwhelming majority of passengers are as keen to get to their destination alive as I am. So it is all a question of probability....

[old,not bold]

Anyone who thinks that if information about airport weak points should not be posted here because the terrorists will thus find out where they are and use them has very little understanding of how sophisticated the serious terrorists' intelligence network is.

There is, on the contrary, a great benefit to posting the information here, which is that those responsible for security, eg the Dept for Transport, Police, airlines, airports and so on, may be forced to come out of their comfort zones where "Its impossible to get a bomb on an aircraft in Europe", put down the cup of tea, and actually do something about weak points that the terrorists know much more about than they do instead of pretending they don't exist so as not to rock the boat.

And in that spirit, let's have all have a good look at places where heavy maintenance is carried out in conditions of no effective security, and cargo brought on board by "trusted" shippers.

[PaperTiger]

And the terrorists, having successfully got a b*** aboard, will then phone you and tell you about it of course.

[Starbear]

This of course , is very easily resolved. If airline managers (not just Ryan) are so sure there is never any danger from such threats, then a simple line in the Ops Manual, stating that crews must not heed any such threats "'cos we know better" will suffice.

Now step forward just one manager , with suitably sized gonads to write and support that line..........no?.......not even one? .......but surely its not a problem

[Catabolic IBS]

Starbear

"This of course , is very easily resolved. If airline managers (not just Ryan) are so sure there is never any danger from such threats, then a simple line in the Ops Manual, stating that crews must not heed any such threats "'cos we know better" will suffice"

eeerrr it already is in Ops Manual Part A Chapter 10. So perhaps by not following this the crew were "reminded" in a "gentle" manner.

[kick the tires]

I dont think thats quite what star bear meant!

[Starbear]

Catabolic IBS

I don't have access to the Ryan Ops manual (I assume its that to which your refer?) but it is certainly not in my company's ops manual or any of the other rather numerous airlines I have worked for. Also my post did refer to all airline managers not just Ryan's.

Are you saying the manual states that crews must not heed any such threats? That would greatly surprise me but if indeed it is in Ryan's manual and exactly as I said (or near enough in exact meaning) then I would agree with you.

[Catabolic IBS]

Starbear and others. I would be surprised to hear that an airline will not have guidelines in place for terrorist threats, especially in today’s political climate. In all probability they do have guidelines and perhaps do not make it clear to us. The original thread started with

“A Captain in Ryanair was 'bollocked' by the deputy chief pilot (Base Captain at a southern UK major London airport) for diverting an aircraft due to a bomb threat made in flight last year by a passenger during a flight from Lubeck to Stansted.

The captain was told in no uncertain terms that 'Its impossible to get a bomb on an aircraft in Europe' and what as he doing. ”

On the face of it this would read to be a very unjust treatment of a professional. However, as with all things PPRUNE as it appears here may not be inline with actual facts hence the caption on the bottom of the website.


“As these are anonymous forums the origins of the contributions may be opposite to what may be apparent. In fact the press may use it, or the unscrupulous, to elicit certain reactions.”



There are guidelines in place for security threats and they are there for a very good reason. Although I am a professional pilot I do not know it all, or always hold hard and fast beliefs/opinions. Sometimes here on this forum you seem to get very polarized views and opinions.

As an example you are flying along and the Cabin crew reports that one of the passengers has verbally told him/her that “there is a bomb on board”. The individual voicing this is a young student amongst a group of school kids. Do you divert because there has been a threat made to your aircraft? Another scenario a written a note and left it on a seat/left in the toilet saying there is a bomb on board. Do you divert? Or finally ATC inform you that a coded threat has been received against your flight. Do you divert?

My point is there are many shades of grey and command responsibilities have to be taken in context. I prefer guidelines written by a security expert, endorsed by the state of register of the aircraft and signed by the chief pilot. That, to me, is as good as a manager putting:

“…..a simple line in the Ops Manual, stating that crews must not heed any such threats "'cos we know better" will suffice.

Now step forward just one manager , with suitably sized gonads to write and support that line..........no?.......not even one? .......but surely its not a problem”

If these guidelines are available and have not been followed by the Commander then I think it entirely fair that the Chief Pilot, Base Captain or one of the Managers questions the decision and reprimands accordingly if necessary.

I think if you look carefully or ask questions in your company you may be surprised that there is indeed guidelines available to you. If not then hey there should be.

[Starbear]

Catabolic

Everything you say is true and of course my company has guidelines but I feel you are being slightly disingenuous as you now are generalising whereas the original posting contained this line:
The captain was told in no uncertain terms that 'Its impossible to get a bomb on an aircraft in Europe' and what as he doing. ”


My point in replying was that I don't believe any manager would put such a line in an ops manual (he would be a very brave individual indeed or a fool) therefore there is no point in quoting such a line to a pilot after the event.

Guidelines are just that and for very good reason.

[stator vane]

i've seen them walk through several times and all the bells and whistles go off and all ignore it---

[50west]

Impossible eh??

and the Titanic was unsinkable

This manager is just a fool

50W

[Basil]

if you look carefully or ask questions in your company you may be surprised that there is indeed guidelines available to you.

I really do not think that a captain should have to go looking for such advice.
It should be proactively made clear by flt ops. If it ain't then, of course, refer to above by Catabolic IBS.

(just learnt a new word - wonder if our body builders know that anabolic can have catabolic effects - where least desired :suspect:)

[nosefirsteverytime]

There is, on the contrary, a great benefit to posting the information here,

As a worker in that field, I stongly, strongly disagree. Security matters are not for discussion in public discourse. End of.

As for Ryanair's security, if you want to bring a lifejacket with you in hold luggage, fly Ryanair.

[Catabolic IBS]

By Nosefirsteverytime

As a worker in that field, I stongly, strongly disagree. Security matters are not for discussion in public discourse. End of.

As for Ryanair's security, if you want to bring a lifejacket with you in hold luggage, fly Ryanair.

Good case of kettle, pot and black arrange in an order, I forget, with a few additional words!

[Piltdown Man]

As a worker in that field, I stongly, strongly disagree. Security matters are not for discussion in public discourse. End of.
I'll discuss whatever I want, when I want. End of.

Until I am treated as part of the solution and not part of the problem, I'll be a little more gracious. But until then, I have greater chance (probably by several orders of magnitude) of losing my job because I haven't followed some stupid rule than by any terrorist action. The muppets guarding the magnetic arches are making the lives of the travelling public and operating crews more difficult purely for (expensive) window dressing reasons. Unfortunately, "Security" confuses action with achievement.

PM

[mintsauce]

This story does not surprise me at all!! The guy has a bad rep amongst the pilots at FR and is just another example of an inept Capt put into a position of authority in this company who does not deserve to be there. He and a few others in similar positions of authority in FR are the guys that most FOs HATE flying with due to their belief that they are Gods and general/complete lack of CRM. As an FO do you ever feel you can speak up against these people?? Of course not!!

Sorry, but a bomb threat from whoever and when ever IS to be taken seriously and I don´t think that the Capt should ever be castegated for taking the safe option. However, as much as I dislike this guy and many others at FR (bit like the who´s who of the Nazi party!) I really can´t believe that he would say this!!

Just the views of someone who does know a fair bit about the workings of this airline!

MS

[NARVAL]

My point is there are many shades of grey and command responsibilities have to be taken in context. I prefer guidelines written by a security expert, endorsed by the state of register of the aircraft and signed by the chief pilot.
Not quite agreeing with you there...You have the responsibility of the flight and your passengers, and unless you are in direct contact with the great Truth which is maybe resting her head on a cumulus above, you certainly cannot assess anything, balance the risks, try to understand...There is a bonb threat, you land ASAP, and that is all there is to say about it. It does not happen often, and it is part of the costs of operating an airline. I never gave a thought to what managers, chief pilots (close to the managers) or anybody else could tell me...I made the decision, and it's very easy when you have understood that you have no choice whatsoever.

[felixthecat]

As much as people on here dont want to believe it was said I assure you it was 100%, no question about it.

[PaperTiger]

There is a bonb threat, you land ASAP, and that is all there is to say about it.Any bomb threat, or just the credible ones ?

[BlueTui]

I myself have(without realising) taken a 2ltr bottle of water onto the aircraft from left over from a previous flight - unchallenged!!

but its ok, I can't take on my 110ml bottle of (anything!!!) in case I try to take over the plane or blow it up :ugh: