View Full Version : Frankfurt Terminal Evacuation (Again)

8th Aug 2018, 01:45
Surprised this hasnt received attention on here as yet, so here goes.

This morning FRA Terminal 1 was evacuated due to a security breach. Not the first time it's happened, and it happened at Munich just last week. A French family of 4 were allowed to pass security despite having provoked a positive result for explosives. The family were subsequently traced airside and released after questioning, an airport security employee has apparently been held liable. Cue an all day maelstrom of thousands of people left with little information and nowhere to go, all because of one ****.

Since someone close to me (lets call her Girlfriend) is caught up in this as pax, I wonder if anyone on here can clear up a few points so I might better understand the aftermath.

Girlfriend was sitting airside in transit at FRA when the terminal was evacuated. I believe some pax who had already boarded were even taken off. In spite of the freeze on boarding, Girlfriend's flight still apparently operated, if a little delayed, with most if not all pax unable to board. Would they (Lufthansa) still operate in that circumstance? I can understand they still need to position for the return leg, but whats the point if your flying out empty? Why not hold for a few hours whilst the pax have a chance to re-screen, board and try to go loaded? If youre only going out a few hours late, all you have to dole out is sandwich chits so surely it incurs less liability?

As it is, Girlfriend + many others have just had to endure an all day queuefest, just to eventually be told we're shutting up at 2200 hours, you're on your own. Unimpressive. Whilst I can appreciate airlines do not possess a magic wand, I'd like to understand why they couldnt have informed pax several hours previous what must have already been obvious, a lot of people werent going to fly that day so should think about sorting out accomodation or alternative transport where practical.

I'd also like to understand where the liability lies since technically Girlfriend's onward connection wasn't cancelled, it did fly, it's just that the pax were denied boarding. I'm aware of EU261 regarding airline liability, but where does one stand when its the airport at fault? Girlfriend has now had to find a taxi/hotel at her own volition/expense with vague promises of reimbursement, but still left unconvinced the airline has any responsibility to still fly her let alone pay compo.

After an exhausting transatlantic trip, then the all-day clusterf@rk at FRA, she has been left clueless so now has to wake at Stupid Oclock to see whether a resheduling email and possible early departure is going to appear or not.

So waddaya all reckon? Btw the route involved is Tampa-FRA-HEL-TKU with Lufty

Cheers for any input


8th Aug 2018, 02:43
Easy one - airlines are trying hard to operate on the schedule. In case of irregularity it is always the pax on the first affected sector who will suffer the most. It may look unfair but it is the best option from operational perspective to deal with rerouting100-150 pax on the first sector and carry the rest more or less in time than to have a domino effect. A320 family aircraft within a major airline environment is operating an average of 6 sectors a day, so 150 pax irregularity is always much better than 900 pax irregularity. Ref EC261 it is again only the original outbound sector pax who will not get anything in compensation due to force majeur factor but all other sectors will be eligible for compensation - proven many times in different courts.

8th Aug 2018, 03:08
If GF Pax had already checked in and been accepted for the flight surely thereafter what happens is the airlines responsibility? Used to work that way, the crucial fact was had the pax checked in and been accepted for the flight.

8th Aug 2018, 07:13
Well I'm left wondering whether the airline can legitimately get away with saying GF didnt present herself at the gate as required, so they can wash their hands of her essentially as a no-show. Even though it was technically impossible to do so as the terminal was closed.

And I still find it incredible that a flight can operate from a "closed" terminal.

Cheers for the input

8th Aug 2018, 21:06
As someone else said, better to have 100 left behind pax than 900 angry pax throughout the whole day. Also, due to curfew issues if the aircraft sat around waiting for pax for a couple of hours then it might miss the final stops curfew and divert, causing the next days flights to all be out of sync with huge delays or cancellations.