737 diverted to CWL

[Ranger One]

The two press releases relating to this incident are now gone from Astraeus' website.

Nope, they're still there. Just the *links* have been removed, so they're not immediately visible. Check out:

http://www.flyastraeus.com/News/PressRelease13Dec2002.html

and

http://www.flyastraeus.com/News/PressRelease14Dec2002.html

Wonder why they're hiding them? Will be interesting to see if they disappear completely after this post :rolleyes:

On a point of order, does anyone know if the cabin was secured in the normal way prior to landing? Was 'cabin secure' communicated to the flight deck?

R1


Oh no they're not ! ;)

R1 - Thanks for the heads-up, I've since tidied up the site and removed the actual press release pages - rather than just the links to them.

Grantm - The links to the press releases were removed under the premise of them being 'old news' and no-longer pertinent, in as much that a 'press release' is just a mechanism for someone to promulgate information to all and sundry at a particular moment in time, and as such they have a 'shelf-life', of sorts.

There's certainly no skulduggery at play here, and should anybody retrospectively require copies of them please contact the Astraeus press-office(r) who'll gladly supply PDF'd versions.

One hopes this helps to answer your concerns regarding this.


Crashdive - fair do's, it certainly does - thanks for the explanation :)

R1

[BDiONU]

In general in non airworthy situations a request for priority may suffice. I believe an atco would be of assistance in order not to clog up his airspace. failure to get the necessary would entitle and upgrade to pan and so on.

In the UK there is no 'request for priority' just as there is no 'fuel priority'. It follows that there can be no 'failure to get the necessary' because a procedure already exists to 'get the necessary' this is what the states of emergency are for! As I have previously stated in this thread there were only two options and they were Pan or Mayday. In this instance the pilot required immediate assistance, by the definition I had already posted that equals a mayday.

Roghead:
The ARCC is ALWAYS informed of all emergencies in UK airspace, its part of the D&D controllers checklist. The rescue choppers are invariably scrambled 'just in case'. Little point in having rescue teams available sitting in the crewroom awaiting a call when there's potential that they'll be required instantly.

[Zeppelin]

So, there we have it then...

Stick 150 odd pax in an aluminium tube, surrounded with fuel that can fly at 500 mph, 5 miles high. Try and give the pax a safety demonstration and they respond with a moving rendition of YMCA. Gimme a break.

Maybe air travel is percieved as safe and taken for granted by many.

And i wonder if something had gone seriously wrong how many of these harmonic jokers would have been bleating about the need for compensation 'cos they had'nt been properly informed/ how they had been terribly wronged....

[rupetime]

Just going back a few pages, apparently there were stewards (not the cabin crew type) onboard this aircraft. They would of
introduced themselves to the crew from the outset and so the
crew should of known they were "available".

Why, if this situation was serious enought to benefit from a mayday call, were these stewards not involved to cool the situation ?


The postings here have really brought home to me how much
the average airline pilot or cabin crew member overrates their position not just in this industry but in society as a whole.

Yes the operating Captain did a good job getting everyone (maybe even the undeserving) on the deck safely
but its the finer points of cabin announcements and Mayday calls that perhaps have to be investigated but thats Astraeus' business not ours.

rt

[Roghead]

quote.

The ARCC is ALWAYS informed of all emergencies in UK airspace, its part of the D&D controllers checklist. The rescue choppers are invariably scrambled 'just in case'. Little point in having rescue teams available sitting in the crewroom awaiting a call when there's potential that they'll be required instantly


BDiONU
Agreed-However that's my point entirely.This was not a Mayday/Pan/Securitie situation but a diversion requiring police and medical assistance not SAR helicoptors.

[2lo4zero]

This was not a Mayday/Pan/Securitie situation but a diversion requiring police and medical assistance not SAR helicoptors.

This is your personal opinion. You were not there and you do not know what actually occured on board nor what information the Captain had been given/was aware of.
The Captain felt the situation warranted an emergency and the ground organisation responded appropriately.

[feet dry]

Just a thought......

As the debate seems to be concentrating on the alleged inflammatory PA announcement.....if a statement along the lines of "no passenger will be allowed to disembark at Glasgow until police attend the aircraft" was made via the PA, this could be misinterpreted as the alleged threat regarding detention.

If this were the case, a defence of unreasonable behaviour on the grounds of unreasonable provocation would not hold water.

The public at large are invariably poor observers, ask a lawyer how much credence they give to an eyewitness account if hostile to their client...

[Octopussy]

I just want to echo Mike Granby's comments a couple of pages back and express surprise and dismay at a couple of the responses he received, which were incredibly arrogant.

Leaving all the nonsense about "plummeting" aside, when an aircraft starts to lose height, the pax notice and if it happens well short of destination, with no announcement whatsoever, that must be a frightening experience (it would certainly frighten me).

I appreciate that the pilots' first responsibility is to fly the aircraft and get everyone down safely, but I can't believe that it's not SOMEONE's job to brief the passengers. It would appear that that someone failed in this instance.

I'm concerned that at least one Ppruner thinks "oh, that's ok, let's frighten them to death, teach them not to do it again" (what about the majority of passengers who had done nothing wrong?) - are you a pilot? If so, I hope I never get on your aircraft. As someone commented earlier, this thread has revealed the contempt with which some airline crew seem to regard their passengers - and it's not a pretty sight.

Most of us are only too well aware that our lives are in your hands up there and many of us find that complete lack of control a terrifying experience. In those circumstances, a little reassurance goes a long way.

Edited to clarify: I am not criticising the actions of the crew on board the flight in deciding to divert etc (I'm sure they weren't exactly gagging to go to Cardiff without good reason!) Even if it could be classified as an "overreaction", I'd rather they erred on the side of caution. I am criticising one specific failure, not conduct in relation to this incident in general.

[Grantm]

Thanks for the info on the press releases. Makes sense. I'm sure plenty of organisations have hard and soft copies. Wasn't suggesting any kind of cover-up. I was just curious.

[Remmington]

Interesting that my remarks about "holier than thou attitude" of crews to PAX was less than well recieved a few days ago...now others are coming out of the woodwork to agree that perhaps there is room for improvement...you dont need to be flight crew to understand how to handle an ugly situation, flashing the braid and shouting the orders will not cower todays punters, rather the opposite, the rule of law is the rule of the mob when you are outnumbered.

[GeneralMelchet]

Reading all of the previous posts a few points have become clear.

1/ There are no unbiased accounts of what happened - It can reasonalbly be assumed that all the supporters will stick together and all the cabin crew will stick together - and seemingly never the twain shall meet!! I expect 'not guilty' if and when a court case arrises.( If it were tried in Scotland we have the good old 'Not Proven' verdict - suitable for all weak willed jurors;) )

2/ Regardless of the events in the cabin the pilots perception of the events is key to his decision to divert. Trusted cabin crew report trouble at the back of the plane and crew assaulted and decides to land at Cardiff declaring an emergency on the way.Only the events in the cabin can be questioned - not the pilots actions.Do you really want to start second guessing when a Captain should declare and emergency?

Someone earlier on this thread mentioned that we all take air travel for granted and is perceived as safe. Well it is in both cases. Travelling by air should be no different to the passenger then getting on a bus.Any impression that it is not safe will lose you customers in droves.The fact that you get members of the public on board who dont give a damn about the safety lecture or observe common curtesies to their fellow travellers will not surprise anyone who has to deal with the general public.

[Flying Lawyer]

McIce
You say if it can't be proved someone smoked in the toilet, "the rest may not have happened." That doesn't follow at all. They are separate issues. Even if a F/A mistakenly believed someone had been smoking, it doesn't mean he/she isn't describing truthfully and accurately what happened after the 'smoking' issue arose.
If the prosecution is able to prove that an identified passenger threatened and/or assaulted a member of the cabin crew, he would be guilty of a criminal offence regardless of whether anyone had smoked in the toilet.

idgas
"Smoking in the toilet is ….. well words fail me. Prosecute."
I've made my views about abuse/threats/assaults on cabin crew very clear but, with great respect (as lawyers always say) if someone smoking in the toilet renders you speechless, I can't help wondering how you'd cope with a real emergency.
Prosecute? :eek:
"The travelling public MUST learn that the "ANO" MUST be adhered to. It is the law."
I doubt if the "travelling public" as you call them has even heard of the ANO, far less have the foggiest idea what it says.
Please correct me if I'm wrong (I haven't got time to look it up) but I don't think the ANO makes smoking on an aircraft an offence. From memory, I think the offence is smoking when the 'no smoking' signs are illuminated, or when an instruction to that effect has been given by or on behalf of the Captain.

I suspect part of the problem is that, although no passenger except a lunatic or terrorist would knowingly endanger an aircraft in which he's flying, and the overwhelming majority of passengers would not disobey a 'No Smoking' sign, there are some who will be tempted to have a quick puff in the lavatories because they think the total ban on smoking is unreasonable and they don't see it as dangerous. They know the ban was introduced for 'social' not safety reasons, and see that most aircraft have ashtrays fitted.
I am not condoning people smoking in the lavatory, merely suggesting that they see it as a 'social' rule (as in some restaurants) rather than as a safety issue. In any event, it's all academic because most airlines now prohibit smoking so passengers failing to comply with the instruction are committing an offence.

Remmington
Re your last post. Has it occurred to you that, if your earlier remarks had been expressed in a less inflammmatory and less sarcastic way, you might have got the support which others who share your view have now obtained? Instead, all your posts on this topic give the impression you have a chip on your shoulder about professional flight crews.
"Flashing the braid"? As I understand it, neither of the pilots left the flight deck - for obvious safety reasons. If you'd agued that discretion and requests are sometimes wiser than confrontation and orders when a situation is potentially volatile, people might take your posts more seriously, and some might even agree with you. Worth a try?

[dicksynormous]

I didnt say there was such a thing as a prority call, merely suggested that with the helpful professional atcos we have they are usually disposed to give you some "help" in order to not shut the airspace if their workload permits. if not by all means move it up a notch. There is no such thing as mun dct gla either but i've had that before .
the industry is pervaded by too much military commander type approach (ironically usually by people who have not been in the military), and not enuff civilian manager type attitudes.That is to say "how dare you question me , cant you see i have rank and am a professional"
Being the commander does not make you right.
End of interest. The arrogant flat earth society attitude of majority of uk pilots is infuriating. you are answerable if you get it wrong, not untouchable to the rest of the world because you got some braid.
commanders perogative gives you the tools to do your job not what you want.

[robinoflotusland]

........Eighteen pages on THIS!,

Interesting to turn up the profiles of some of the most critical commentators, hardly a one a pilot or aircrew of any sort let alone professionally connected, the thought crosses my mind as to why the hell they are on this Professonal Pilot's Rumour Network! other than to cast stones........!

I retired a long time back when the job was easier with just the occasional Hijacking to concern the professional pilot and fellow crewmembers.

Pictures of rampaging 'fans' and their violence give me the willies, if I was still flying and had a full load of 'fans' down the back end if any body reported to me there were problems with them in the cabin, I'd want to be safe on the ground - soonest. Full marks to this captain and crew and to you not a part of this business and ever critical go and find your own forum to vent your spleens.

Flying crew have always been concerned to exchange experiences and to learn from others views how to improve their perfomances with positive suggestions, that is being professional and also there are not many professions in which the individual is screened so diligently every few months for performance and health.

[Rananim]

My comments are not aimed at the crew in question and I certainly would not condone physical violence towards any crew member by a passenger.However....it does not surprise me that we see more and more of these incidents.Crew working for airlines and airports are now so seriously rude and obnoxious that it is no wonder that passengers are getting even.Of course not all passengers are angels themselves.But the decline of customer service and just plain good manners is rampant everywhere,but especially I would say the United Kingdom,which used to be a bastion of the stiff upper lip and fair play.But sad to say no more.
I have flown in the UK many times and would say their check-in staff and flight attendants are amongst the rudest worldwide.No,I would say they are the rudest.Airlines keep reiterating their primary function is that of safety,and that customer service(ie.manners and courtesy) is only secondary.Thats just b.s if you're running a top outfit.They're both equally vital.Any good airline,like Southwest,knows this only too well.
I have been a pilot for over 40 years with some of the top companies in the Far East and stateside and I've seen a gradual but steady erosion of common courtesy that you came to expect from flight attendants in aviation's heyday.Maybe its a generation thing...young people today think its sissy or uncool to be polite and courteous.
I know a couple of airlines who regularly used to go out of their way to scout Japanese/Chinese(US citizens)girls for new FA's.They had no chip on their shoulder,were NEVER rude,and always had a smile.

[lomapaseo]

Interesting to turn up the profiles of some of the most critical commentators, hardly a one a pilot or aircrew of any sort let alone professionally connected, the thought crosses my mind as to why the hell they are on this Professonal Pilot's Rumour Network! other than to cast stones........!

I think you are missing the point about who's commenting. If you are pilot or crew you live in a glass house and therfore are judged by your behavior in line with societal expectations.

If you choose to want to isolate yourself from discussion that you can react to by words of rebuttal, then you may resign yourself to reading even worse comments in the open press, without the benefit rebuttal..

[Grantm]

So what?

The problem still remains, none of us where onboard. We could be totally familiar with every piece of legislation on the planet and still not be any clearer as to how it applies in this situation.

Thank you for your enlightenment though :o

[hostie]

We're at page 19 of this and we've all given our opinions (mine is page 13 - I thought it had all been said then!)

There is one thing that we all actually agree on

This will be dealt with by the professionals who's job it is to get to the truth
The punishment will be whatever they decide to be just.

(The incident that I was involved went like this...
The police charged one person with Affray
The CPS reduced it to Assault
He was finally found guilty of Abuse, after much bargaining by lawyers, he was fined and banned from international football matches for 3 years - yes sorry I'm not adding fuel to the fire but he actually was a Chelsea supporter)

The rest really doesn't matter, because none of us were there and none of us will be dealing with this case.

There surely can't be anything else to say
(can there?)

:rolleyes:

[PaperTiger]

Article 63 Endangering safety of an aircraftA person shall not recklessly or negligently act in a manner likely to endanger an aircraft, or any person therein.Emphasis mine.

[hostie]

ooh my mistake there is more to say

There have been many comments about airline staff being rude

I would like to introduce all those who feel that way to the very hard working, friendly people that work at your regional airport
Please, go and say to hello to them
You'll be pleasantly surprised I'm sure, however you'd better be quick as they've recently been advised that they won't be around much longer

OK maybe this does belong to a different thread but let's try and put things into perspective
Some people have been told (8 days before xmas) that they don't have the job they thought they had anymore
And that is absolutely NOTHING compared to those who are ill or have lost a loved one recently.

Can we please all gather some xmas cheer and stop bickering at each other

Merry Xmas and Happy New Year to all

(including all Ebenezeers)

Hostie :)

[McIce]

Flying lawyer

Thanks for your reply. Whilst I agree with you 100% I just wanted to see what a lawyers point of viewwas. Over the last 13 years I have seen many a defence agent in a 'Scottish' court argue what I was saying and the judge agree with him.

Merry Christmas to you all

Bah Humbug:cool:

[Moneyshot]

Horatio.. you seem to have just about the right idea.
As a new captain, I just can't wait to inconvenience my first load of drunken yobs. I'll even enjoy being inconvenienced along with them. I just can't see how in the present climate, anyone can afford to behave in such an obscene manner.
As for the Cardiff case, we have yet to see the full facts emerge.
OK maybe the crew over-reacted by diverting. Maybe the Captain was not in posession of the full facts and thought there was more to it. Whatever the case, I think the Police should have been called to at least have a word with the suspects whatever the destination.
Captains are paid more than anyone else in the crew because they are in charge. The buck stops there. They make decisions which, with the benefit of hindsight, are right or wrong or a mixture of both. Once the incident is over that decision cannot be changed etc etc.

[3 Off The Tee]

Safety in our Industry is paramount.

Therefore if the skipper felt that safety was being compromised, then no one can question his decision to divert. A good call.

Spare a thought for the 140+ pax allegedly not involved
with the incident who had to endure a nine hour coach journey
back to GLA.

I'm presuming the crew were not legal ( Flight Duty Time Limitation wise ) to operate onwards to GLA with them once statements etc had been taken?

Least your team made it thru to the next round!

Cheers 3 Off The Tee :rolleyes:

[Devils Advocate]

See: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/scotland/2586329.stm

Oh what a fine example they set, indeed one might say that it speaks volumes about football, the clubs and their supporters.

I particularly like the way that the Celtic club's Board immediately try to 'spin' this around in an endeavour to move the blame away from their little-darlings ( aka. prima-donna football 'stars' <- surely some mistake ! ) i.e. "it's not their fault, they were provoked into it" ..... ah, so that must make it alright then ?! NOT ! .... and this all sounds a bit too familiar coming from people who 'follow' Celtic, doesn't it ?

Given the facts that their fans seemingly have no problem assaulting female cabin crew, that their players think nothing of brawling in the street, and that they have a propensity to duck responsibility for their actions, it might therefore be fair to say that Celtic FC seem, from top to bottom, to be little more than a bunch of thugs.

Incoming....... !

[DamienB]

Flying Lawyer:
I haven't got MS FlightSim or whatever it's called, so I don't know if a disturbance in the cabin is one of the features.

:D Depends whether your other half wants to use the internet while you're 'flying' I think. Anyway, keep an eye out for the Flightsim upgrade - "Astraeus 737 complete with Football Fan Riot adventure" (to be marketed in Scotland as "Astraeus 737 complete with mad cabin crew - can YOU prevent the aircraft landing in Wales?").

[2lo4zero]

Do you think its too late to write to Santa and ask for these upgrades? I think I could get both because I'm Scots, but I live with the auld enemy in England!!! :) :)

[DamienB]

2lo4zero - I'm afraid it England it's being marketed as "Astraeus 737 full of Jocks - can YOU make it crash?"

[2lo4zero]

OK, sounds cool! But this is a bit racist and we're excluding the Welsh! Did they really want this aircraft, filled with rabid, drink crazed Scots and flown by a megalomaniac, power crazed crew to land in their territory? I think not! So there should be a third version, for sale in Wales only, where the object is to keep them out. Chock full of the latest Ground to air missiles and Eurofighters (with or without guns) with AMRAAM's, SRAAMS the works!
In that version you could choose to be the Welsh Commander entrusted with the task of shooting the jet down, or the captain, attempting to evade being shot down (could use empty beer cans for chaff perhaps?) and having the cockpit overrun by guys who just want to give you a kiss (a Glasgow kiss that is).

I think it has potential!!

[DamienB]

Sadly, no market for it in Wales. No electricity you see.

[2lo4zero]

Ah! There's a shame now isn't it see? Well, look you, how's about equipping the Welsh with a ballista with which they could fling sheep at the plane? There's lovely isn't it!

Diolch yn fawr!

[Danny]

And on that light hearted bantering I think it's time to put this thread to bed.

There have been enough points of view aired to have made this one of the most active threads we have had here for a while.

In due course the police will complete their investigations and if charges are brought I'm sure we'll be able to start a new thread and discuss all the minutae of the case all over again.