United A320 returns to ORD due to a message on a lavatory mirror

[draglift]

A United A320 Airbus flying from Chicago O' Hare to Washington Reagan National airport declared an emergency after takeoff and asked to return to O'Hare due to a flight attendant finding a message written on a mirror in a lavatory stating that there was a bomb on board the aircraft.

Now I don't know about United but in my airline if a bomb message was found on a mirror as long as the flight attendants had checked the lavatories before departure it was deemed the message was written by a passenger and after a check with company security the flight would continue to destination. Writing a bomb message on a mirror is a well known hoax perpetrated by attention seekers, similar to making a fake 911 call. Genuine bombers do not advertise their activities. (Statistically you are safer on an aircraft with a bomb message written on the mirror than on an aircraft without a bomb threat on the mirror!.)

So I am surprised the pilots turned back in this situation. However maybe this is United policy?

Details below


https://abc7chicago.com/ohare-emergency-united-airlines-flight-265/14668533/

[Duck Pilot]

Better to be safe than sorry, good decision.

Safety must be a higher priority than cost or commercial impact in my humble opinion.

[FlightlessParrot]

...
Safety must be a higher priority than cost or commercial impact in my humble opinion.

Possibly a commercial decision. A risk analysis might have suggested that whilst the risk of a bomb was negligible, the possibility of someone having seen the message, and causing a world of (expensive) pain for the crew and the airline for ignoring it, was not to be discounted. Not excluding the passenger who wrote the message: there seems to be a fad for "auditing" public services in the US these days.

[Schroedinger]

I know that weight is a penalty, but could there be a cam at the door entrance?

[TURIN]

I know that weight is a penalty, but could there be a cam at the door entrance?
Most airlines these days have cameras around the forward galley/toilet/cockpit door area. Rear and mid toilets, not so much.

[Ant T]

……(Statistically you are safer on an aircraft with a bomb message written on the mirror than on an aircraft without a bomb threat on the mirror!.)……

Fairly creative use of “statistics” there I would say. A little bit like Blackadder series 4, the episode where Baldrick thinks that writing his name on the bullet and carrying it in his pocket would keep him safe…😄

[DaveReidUK]

Fairly creative use of “statistics” there I would say. A little bit like Blackadder series 4, the episode where Baldrick thinks that writing his name on the bullet and carrying it in his pocket would keep him safe…😄

A bit like the guy who felt safer when he carried his own bomb on board, because the odds against having two bombs on board were astronomical ...

[340drvr]

I thought this was going to be "REDRUM" painted on the door.

[Bergerie1]

This is probably an unwelcome comment, but I think if you examine the statistics, as a passenger, you are more likely to be killed by a pilot making a mistake than by a bomb exploding on board your aircraft. I don't have a tin hat but I may need to borrow one!!

[Skywalker89]

A United A320 Airbus flying from Chicago O' Hare to Washington Reagan National airport declared an emergency after takeoff and asked to return to O'Hare due to a flight attendant finding a message written on a mirror in a lavatory stating that there was a bomb on board the aircraft.

Now I don't know about United but in my airline if a bomb message was found on a mirror as long as the flight attendants had checked the lavatories before departure it was deemed the message was written by a passenger and after a check with company security the flight would continue to destination. Writing a bomb message on a mirror is a well known hoax perpetrated by attention seekers, similar to making a fake 911 call. Genuine bombers do not advertise their activities. (Statistically you are safer on an aircraft with a bomb message written on the mirror than on an aircraft without a bomb threat on the mirror!.)

So I am surprised the pilots turned back in this situation. However maybe this is United policy?
With all the hoopla going on in the airline industry these days, it’s better to be safe than sorry. I’m sure United has policy that enforces safety first and foremost and that is what the pilot and their crew chose to do. Some, like yourself and who you work for may side differently but it seems their decision was based on safety of that aircraft and its passengers regardless of what others may do. To question that is the only issue I see.

[Mr Good Cat]

Has there ever been a case of a terrorist notifying those on board that there’s a bomb? How courteous.

And what about the hysteria when passengers are detained for using the ‘b-word’? Has there ever been a case of a terrorist getting as far as security only to be foiled by answering the question ‘Anything suspicious in your luggage today Sir?’, with ‘Oh, just my bomb… Dammit!’.

[blind pew]

Has there ever been a case of a terrorist notifying those on board that there’s a bomb? How courteous.

And what about the hysteria when passengers are detained for using the ‘b-word’? Has there ever been a case of a terrorist getting as far as security only to be foiled by answering the question ‘Anything suspicious in your luggage today Sir?’, with ‘Oh, just my bomb… Dammit!’.
Check in for El Al at Zurich used to be closed an hour early in the 80s to give the staff time to ask the above and a few other questions whilst luggage a]was being x-rayed. A Swiss German check in “girl” asked one of her countrymen in his early 20s a similar series of questions whose inconsistent answers led to his suitcase going through a second series of x-ray checks then taken to the bomb building in the middle of no where which was shortly to loose it’s roof. He had been given a free holiday supposedly to take in a suitcase full of clothes dodging the massive import taxes (my previous airline had a hostess imprisoned for similar).

[OvertHawk]

This is probably an unwelcome comment, but I think if you examine the statistics, as a passenger, you are more likely to be killed by a pilot making a mistake than by a bomb exploding on board your aircraft. I don't have a tin hat but I may need to borrow one!!

may be true but utterly irrelevant to the topic under discussion.

[Bergerie1]

OH,

It is highly relevant to such a situation. As others have intimated on this thread, how likely is it that there really is a bomb on board when a bomb threat note has been discovered written on a toilet mirror, or for that matter anywhere else in the aircraft? The risk is absoluely negligible. Whereas the risk of crew error can increase (albeit only very slightly) if they decide to divert to an unfamiliar airport in bad weather in what may feel like a stressful situation. You are right to say in this case that returning to ORD was not an issue, I know that, because they knew the airfield well.

My reason for making that statement was to ask readers of this thread to consider very carefully the real balance of risk. In a previous life I was involved in improving the procedures and advice for crews following a bomb threat. We spent a lot of time evaluating the balance of risk between, on the one hand, there really being a bomb on board versus, on the other, the flight risks that might be incurred by diverting to an unfamiliar airfield in bad weather.

Imagine yourself somewhere, say in mid-Atlantic, and such a message is found as in the UAL case. Are you better off continuing calmly to destination, or returning to your departure airfield, as opposed to diverting to an emergency airfield in Greenland or northern Canada?

It is worth sitting down and thinking about this. That is all I ask.

[blind pew]

We had a specific bomb threat in the 70s out of home base, depressurised, returned to Heathrow where we were directed to a remote area near to the perry oaks sewage farm. The ex ww2 skipper decided not to evacuate using our ****e slides because of the risk of injuries to pax but the ground ops couldn’t find anyone brave enough to position steps up to the aircraft for half an hour.
Management lied to us and there were several devices found on our aircraft apparently including one where the aircraft diverted into Manchester. The file on this was till frozen after 40 years. Apparently warnings went through special branch; a time when “snake knife” was working inside the IRA for the security forces; recently it has been suggested that he was responsible for more murders than he saved.
In my last company all pilots had direct access to the company’s security department and briefings; an eye opener and needed. The company had lost one aircraft in flight and another on the ground. We carried armed guards but occasionally some absolute idiot would secretly breach the laws as happened to me with a station manager who allowed some gangster president’s security detail to wear their arms in my aircraft.
There had been a fad during that time especially in fine weather and a Friday lunchtime for UK office workers to phone in spurious warnings to start the weekend early.
There are enough disasters where warnings are ignored as apparently happened in Israel 6 months ago.

[OldLurker]

United A320 returns to ORD due to a message on a lavatory mirrorClearly important to headline the story with a mention of the aircraft type. This wouldn't have happened if it had been a 737.

Better to be safe than sorry, good decision.
Safety must be a higher priority than cost or commercial impact in my humble opinion.Not only safety, but CYA. Suppose something happens to the flight after this warning has been ignored. Imagine the media- and lawyer-fest that would ensue.