UA Plane forced to return to Sydney
Thread Starter
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Townsville,Nth Queensland
Posts: 2,717
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
UA Plane forced to return to Sydney
AAP
Plane forced to return to Sydney
18:08 AEST Tue Jul 27 2004
A United Airlines flight was forced to return to Sydney International Airport as a precaution because of a problem on board, the airline said.
The flight, which took off about 3pm (AEST), was 90 minutes into the flight when the pilot made the decision to return to Sydney, the spokesman said.
He would not detail the nature of any problems onboard and refused to confirm whether there were any problems with the plane's landing gear or in the cockpit.
The flight landed at about 5.45pm (AEST).
NSW Fire Brigades and the NSW Ambulance Service had multiple vehicles on the scene, and police closed roads leading to the airport.
Channel Ten news reported the incident was classified as a Category 3 emergency - the highest type ever at the airport.
İAAP 2004
=============================================
from Sydney Airport Message Board
Posted: Tue Jul 27, 2004 5:55 pm Post subject:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
from radio 2ue, supposedly a note was found in the international termainal saying a bomb is on board.
also found a note on board, pilot made desision to go to sydney.
=============================================
Plane forced to return to Sydney
18:08 AEST Tue Jul 27 2004
A United Airlines flight was forced to return to Sydney International Airport as a precaution because of a problem on board, the airline said.
The flight, which took off about 3pm (AEST), was 90 minutes into the flight when the pilot made the decision to return to Sydney, the spokesman said.
He would not detail the nature of any problems onboard and refused to confirm whether there were any problems with the plane's landing gear or in the cockpit.
The flight landed at about 5.45pm (AEST).
NSW Fire Brigades and the NSW Ambulance Service had multiple vehicles on the scene, and police closed roads leading to the airport.
Channel Ten news reported the incident was classified as a Category 3 emergency - the highest type ever at the airport.
İAAP 2004
=============================================
from Sydney Airport Message Board
Posted: Tue Jul 27, 2004 5:55 pm Post subject:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
from radio 2ue, supposedly a note was found in the international termainal saying a bomb is on board.
also found a note on board, pilot made desision to go to sydney.
=============================================
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Another Desert
Posts: 70
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Have to love the channel 10 reporting. In 15 minutes, the emergency went from;
1) Landing gear problems, then;
2) Somebody had broken into the cockpit, then;
3) Cabin Crew had pressed a silent alarm warning of a security breach in the cabin; then
4) a bomb scare
Never let the facts get in the way of a good story.....
1) Landing gear problems, then;
2) Somebody had broken into the cockpit, then;
3) Cabin Crew had pressed a silent alarm warning of a security breach in the cabin; then
4) a bomb scare
Never let the facts get in the way of a good story.....
Thread Starter
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Townsville,Nth Queensland
Posts: 2,717
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
news.com.au
Emergency closes airport
July 27, 2004
SYDNEY International Airport has been shut down under a Code 3 security alert after a United Airlines plane returned to the airport this afternoon due to a security breach.
The pilot of the Los Angeles-bound flight UA840 decided to return 90 minutes after taking off when threatening notes were reportedly discovered at both the Sydney terminal and on the aircraft.
The aircraft was cordoned off by emergency vehicles and all 246 passengers and crew were being disembarked.
The airline said the decision to return was made when "an object which raised some security suspicions was found was found on board".
United said passengers were expected to fly out again at 11am tomorrow.
Sydney radio 2UE said reports from Canberra said the emergency was "some kind of bomb hoax".
Radio 2GB reported a fire in the hydraulics might have caused the flight to be aborted.
The plane landed about 5.45pm (AEST).
NSW Fire Brigades and the NSW Ambulance Service had multiple vehicles on the scene, and police had closed roads leading to the airport.
AAP
===========================================
Emergency closes airport
July 27, 2004
SYDNEY International Airport has been shut down under a Code 3 security alert after a United Airlines plane returned to the airport this afternoon due to a security breach.
The pilot of the Los Angeles-bound flight UA840 decided to return 90 minutes after taking off when threatening notes were reportedly discovered at both the Sydney terminal and on the aircraft.
The aircraft was cordoned off by emergency vehicles and all 246 passengers and crew were being disembarked.
The airline said the decision to return was made when "an object which raised some security suspicions was found was found on board".
United said passengers were expected to fly out again at 11am tomorrow.
Sydney radio 2UE said reports from Canberra said the emergency was "some kind of bomb hoax".
Radio 2GB reported a fire in the hydraulics might have caused the flight to be aborted.
The plane landed about 5.45pm (AEST).
NSW Fire Brigades and the NSW Ambulance Service had multiple vehicles on the scene, and police had closed roads leading to the airport.
AAP
===========================================
Bottums Up
Kerry O'Brien (7:30 Report - ABC TV) spoke with John Anderson this evening. As best I can remember:
I wonder if they'll relax the curfew @ SYD tonight to allow disrupted pax & aircraft to get to where they need to be?
- Note made of pasted characters, possibly on a sick bag presented to pilot 1.5 hrs ex SYD
- Note did not say "bomb on board", rather it alluded to the possibility.
- Captain liaised with UA mgmnt and decided to return to SYD
- Mass disruption @ SYD and throughout network as SYD closed for UA 747
I wonder if they'll relax the curfew @ SYD tonight to allow disrupted pax & aircraft to get to where they need to be?
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Brisbane, Queensland
Posts: 618
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Captain Claret:
Also noted on the 7.30 report was praise from the missing in action minister to the effect of how fortunate it is to have pilots of such high calibre willing to make decisions in the interests of safety.
He seemed to forget that very point when criticising the same profession as they spoke out against aspects of the NAS didn't he?
Random Quote: "I think everyone should be encouraged to go after these terrorists, and to fight terrorism. Now watch me hit this drive"
Also noted on the 7.30 report was praise from the missing in action minister to the effect of how fortunate it is to have pilots of such high calibre willing to make decisions in the interests of safety.
He seemed to forget that very point when criticising the same profession as they spoke out against aspects of the NAS didn't he?
Random Quote: "I think everyone should be encouraged to go after these terrorists, and to fight terrorism. Now watch me hit this drive"
Last edited by Uncommon Sense; 27th Jul 2004 at 12:56.
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Where people don't care
Posts: 210
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Why return to YSSY???
News reports say that the aircraft was 90 minutes out of YSSY, and there doesn't appear to be any disagreement on this. The captain and his company decided that the flight should be terminated and return to YSSY. If he was 90 mins out of YSSY, surely he would have been closer to YBBN than YSSY? If a 'return' was warranted, then surely he should have diverted the nearest suitable airport. Would that have been YBBN? If so, why was YSSY chosen? Diversion to the nearest available airport would surely have been in the best interests of the passengers and crew but perhaps not to the operator? It would also have caused less havoc on the eastern seaboard.
Have we again seen commercial interests put ahead of safety and security?
Have we again seen commercial interests put ahead of safety and security?
PPRuNe Co-Pilot
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: The Sky
Posts: 931
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
G'day,
This is what i got on my e-mail from John Howards media dep, re: the UA incident:
27 July 2004
TRANSCRIPT OF THE PRIME MINISTER
THE HON JOHN HOWARD MP
DOORSTOP INTERVIEW, KARRATHA
Subjects: United Airlines incident
E&OE................................
JOURNALIST:
Prime Minister, can we just ask you about this incident with United Airlines - what you know of it and what you make of how the incident was handled?
PRIME MINISTER:
Well, I've been fully briefed on what happened and I totally support the decision taken by the pilot - it was the right thing to do in the circumstances. The pilot has to make the ultimate call. He or she is ultimately responsible for the safety of the passengers and he did the right thing.
JOURNALIST:
Is there any information at this stage as to whether it was a hoax or not. Is that still being looked at - where do you go from here?
PRIME MINISTER:
There are still investigations being carried out in relation to that. Obviously that is a possibility but I don't have enough information at this stage to express a view either way. I don't think anybody does but I understand that thorough searches have been conducted and no doubt when all of that's been completed and all the assessments have been made the police will express a view about that but obviously a hoax is a very strong possibility.
JOURNALIST:
And what of the passengers that I guess have been inconvenienced. They've been brought back and are staying in Sydney overnight. Any words for them at all?
PRIME MINISTER:
Well, obviously they would have had a stressful time, but the question of looking after them is a matter for the airline. But the important thing is that nobody has been hurt, that's the important thing. We have to maintain a sense of perspective about these things. We live in a more dangerous, more stressful period and incidents like this where people are ultra cautious and I applaud pilots of aircraft who are ultra cautious. I'd far rather with a pilot who's ultra cautious than one who's cavalier and I think everybody would feel the same way and we have to maintain a sense of proportion, it's an incident but nobody's been hurt, the right procedures have been followed, the pilot has done the right thing and I'm very grateful that nobody's been injured.
Thank you.
-------------
PS - By the way, im not a journalist.
This is what i got on my e-mail from John Howards media dep, re: the UA incident:
27 July 2004
TRANSCRIPT OF THE PRIME MINISTER
THE HON JOHN HOWARD MP
DOORSTOP INTERVIEW, KARRATHA
Subjects: United Airlines incident
E&OE................................
JOURNALIST:
Prime Minister, can we just ask you about this incident with United Airlines - what you know of it and what you make of how the incident was handled?
PRIME MINISTER:
Well, I've been fully briefed on what happened and I totally support the decision taken by the pilot - it was the right thing to do in the circumstances. The pilot has to make the ultimate call. He or she is ultimately responsible for the safety of the passengers and he did the right thing.
JOURNALIST:
Is there any information at this stage as to whether it was a hoax or not. Is that still being looked at - where do you go from here?
PRIME MINISTER:
There are still investigations being carried out in relation to that. Obviously that is a possibility but I don't have enough information at this stage to express a view either way. I don't think anybody does but I understand that thorough searches have been conducted and no doubt when all of that's been completed and all the assessments have been made the police will express a view about that but obviously a hoax is a very strong possibility.
JOURNALIST:
And what of the passengers that I guess have been inconvenienced. They've been brought back and are staying in Sydney overnight. Any words for them at all?
PRIME MINISTER:
Well, obviously they would have had a stressful time, but the question of looking after them is a matter for the airline. But the important thing is that nobody has been hurt, that's the important thing. We have to maintain a sense of perspective about these things. We live in a more dangerous, more stressful period and incidents like this where people are ultra cautious and I applaud pilots of aircraft who are ultra cautious. I'd far rather with a pilot who's ultra cautious than one who's cavalier and I think everybody would feel the same way and we have to maintain a sense of proportion, it's an incident but nobody's been hurt, the right procedures have been followed, the pilot has done the right thing and I'm very grateful that nobody's been injured.
Thank you.
-------------
PS - By the way, im not a journalist.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Townsville,Nth Queensland
Posts: 2,717
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Wed "Sydney Morning Herald"
Bomb note forces jet back to Sydney
By Joseph Kerr, Malcolm Brown and Ben Cubby
July 28, 2004
Ninety minutes out of Sydney the pilot of United Airlines flight 840, bound for Los Angeles, was handed a note written on a sick bag warning of a bomb on board.
With 264 passengers and crew, he judged the threat serious enough to turn the jumbo jet around and head back to Sydney.
"It had nothing to do with the Australian authorities," the American pilot told reporters later at the airport. "It was my decision alone to turn the plane around."
The plane dumped fuel to land back at Sydney Airport at 5.50pm.
"We saw it streaming away into the night," said Leah Bronddus, a passenger from Wilmington, Indiana. "They dropped 133,000 pounds of fuel over the sea.
"All they said was that there was a threat to the plane. Of course, it was very frightening. It was terrifying ... but there was one man who slept right through it."
Ms Bronddus did not know the problem was a bomb threat until told by reporters at the airport.
Another passenger, Roger Campbell, an Australian, said: "They just announced there was a threat to the plane. We ... thought there might be a bomb. Then within 10 minutes we were back talking like nothing had happened, so it was a weird experience actually. In the end it wasn't much different from a normal flight."
Four hours later, after a search of the passengers and plane, an anxious evening for relatives and delays to many other flights, it was declared a hoax.
The federal Transport Minister, John Anderson, told ABC television
the pilot "took what he believed to be the right course of action, and we entirely respect that and our security arrangements at Sydney Airport, and really right throughout the nation swung into action".
"Safety comes first. It does say something though about the sick minds that we occasionally have to deal with."
The Prime Minister, John Howard, praised the pilot's actions. "I totally support the decision taken by the pilot," he said.
Mr Anderson later said the note had not stated in "black and white terms" that there was a bomb on board.
Reports on ABC television said the sick bag had the letters "BOB" on it. The program said the crew believed the letters represented "bomb on board".
Superintendent Peter O'Brien, the local area commander of Botany police, said police had no indication of who had written the note, which was discovered by a crew member in a first-class toilet.
UA840 was about 500 nautical miles north-east of Sydney when the note was found at 4.15pm.
As it returned to Sydney the airport was put on an emergency footing and fire and ambulance crews were alerted.
After landing, the plane was isolated from other aircraft on the southern end of the runway. As sniffer dogs checked the plane, passengers were screened for several hours before being allowed to leave the airport about 9pm.
Wayne Stremski, from California, said passengers were upset by the lack of information, particularly after landing. The captain would say, "I'll let you know something when I know something". Relatives of passengers who returned to the airport also complained of being kept in the dark.
A spokeswoman for Sydney Airport said other planes were delayed by five to 10 minutes. "There was no closing of the airport," she said. However, authorities had warned passengers at interstate airports and on inbound flights that Sydney was closed.
Some people landing at Sydney on other flights said they had been delayed by up to 30 minutes.
The passengers are expected to fly out at 11.30am today.
===========================================
Wed "Sydney Morning Herald"
Confusion and frustration for anxious relatives
July 28, 2004 - 12:09AM
A hoax threat which forced a Los Angeles-bound plane to return to Sydney yesterday afternoon left anxious relatives confused and frustrated.
Many relatives of passengers aboard the United Airlines flight returned to Sydney International Airport just a few hours after farewelling their loved ones.
Despite a massive security operation at the airport, the relatives were left milling around the arrivals hall for hours waiting for news.
The scare was sparked after a hoax threat written on a sick bag found aboard the plane.
While security plans swung into action allowing the flight to land safely about 5.45pm (AEST), relatives and friends of some of the 264 people on board were left wondering what was going on.
The passengers on board the United Airlines flight were also unsure of what was happening.
No official announcements were made by the airline, the airport or security personnel, according to those on the scene.
Elaine Sander said she had rushed back to the airport shortly after 6.30pm (AEST) to meet her 18-year-old American niece Alissa Hornyak, who had been returning home after a two-week holiday in Australia.
Ms Sander expressed frustration at not knowing when her niece would emerge into the arrivals hall.
Passenger reaction to the incident was mixed when they started emerging into the arrivals hall shortly after 9pm (AEST).
Some were frustrated about the lack of information they received, while others praised airline staff and emergency authorities.
After a reunion with her aunt, Ms Hornyak said the ordeal made her nervous about flying again today, when the passengers will again board a flight to Los Angeles.
"Everyone was real nice, they did all they could," she said.
"The plane turned around and I was scared, it was all a bit crazy.
"All they said was that there was an emergency and were heading back. The plane was too heavy so we had to get rid of the fuel.
"I'm a bit more nervous than usual about getting back on the plane tomorrow."
George Tihanyi, from Harbord, had also returned to the airport to wait for wife Astrid and 14-year-old daughter Gabriella, who had been on the plane.
"I spoke to someone at the United Airlines office and they haven't said anything, but to return to here and wait for the plane," he said.
"There should be someone here from the airline explaining what is going on because there are too many people not knowing."
After an emotional reunion, Gabriella, who was on her first plane flight, said she wasn't worried, but wished she had known what was going on.
"They didn't tell us anything at all," she said.
"They just made us keep calm, they just didn't tell us anything urgent.
"The captain said some of us might notice we were turning around and he said there was a threat, but it was only minor."
Melbourne resident Moshe Cyrulnik (Moshe Cyrulnik) said the ordeal was draining for him as it was the Jewish fast day and he hadn't eaten all day.
But he backed the airline's actions, saying the spectre of the September 11 terrorist attacks made returning essential.
"It's been a little hard," Mr Cyrulnik said.
"My personal opinion is that it's good to know the security is very good.
"You saw in September 11 there was not enough security, so I think better to have more security than not enough.
"Better to be safe than sorry. You only live once."
Canadian Sondra Baier said after the message came across that the plane was turning around the flight attendants said nothing, and carried on as usual.
"They just calmly said the plane was going to turn around because there was a threat on the plane," Ms Baier said.
"We had to wait 45 minutes on the runway and that was probably the most disheartening part about the whole adventure.
"Everyone just kept looking around and looking at each other, the expression on the faces of everyone was just unreal.
"The flight attendants weren't saying anything, it was just like everyday business to them."
AAP
============================================
Bomb note forces jet back to Sydney
By Joseph Kerr, Malcolm Brown and Ben Cubby
July 28, 2004
Ninety minutes out of Sydney the pilot of United Airlines flight 840, bound for Los Angeles, was handed a note written on a sick bag warning of a bomb on board.
With 264 passengers and crew, he judged the threat serious enough to turn the jumbo jet around and head back to Sydney.
"It had nothing to do with the Australian authorities," the American pilot told reporters later at the airport. "It was my decision alone to turn the plane around."
The plane dumped fuel to land back at Sydney Airport at 5.50pm.
"We saw it streaming away into the night," said Leah Bronddus, a passenger from Wilmington, Indiana. "They dropped 133,000 pounds of fuel over the sea.
"All they said was that there was a threat to the plane. Of course, it was very frightening. It was terrifying ... but there was one man who slept right through it."
Ms Bronddus did not know the problem was a bomb threat until told by reporters at the airport.
Another passenger, Roger Campbell, an Australian, said: "They just announced there was a threat to the plane. We ... thought there might be a bomb. Then within 10 minutes we were back talking like nothing had happened, so it was a weird experience actually. In the end it wasn't much different from a normal flight."
Four hours later, after a search of the passengers and plane, an anxious evening for relatives and delays to many other flights, it was declared a hoax.
The federal Transport Minister, John Anderson, told ABC television
the pilot "took what he believed to be the right course of action, and we entirely respect that and our security arrangements at Sydney Airport, and really right throughout the nation swung into action".
"Safety comes first. It does say something though about the sick minds that we occasionally have to deal with."
The Prime Minister, John Howard, praised the pilot's actions. "I totally support the decision taken by the pilot," he said.
Mr Anderson later said the note had not stated in "black and white terms" that there was a bomb on board.
Reports on ABC television said the sick bag had the letters "BOB" on it. The program said the crew believed the letters represented "bomb on board".
Superintendent Peter O'Brien, the local area commander of Botany police, said police had no indication of who had written the note, which was discovered by a crew member in a first-class toilet.
UA840 was about 500 nautical miles north-east of Sydney when the note was found at 4.15pm.
As it returned to Sydney the airport was put on an emergency footing and fire and ambulance crews were alerted.
After landing, the plane was isolated from other aircraft on the southern end of the runway. As sniffer dogs checked the plane, passengers were screened for several hours before being allowed to leave the airport about 9pm.
Wayne Stremski, from California, said passengers were upset by the lack of information, particularly after landing. The captain would say, "I'll let you know something when I know something". Relatives of passengers who returned to the airport also complained of being kept in the dark.
A spokeswoman for Sydney Airport said other planes were delayed by five to 10 minutes. "There was no closing of the airport," she said. However, authorities had warned passengers at interstate airports and on inbound flights that Sydney was closed.
Some people landing at Sydney on other flights said they had been delayed by up to 30 minutes.
The passengers are expected to fly out at 11.30am today.
===========================================
Wed "Sydney Morning Herald"
Confusion and frustration for anxious relatives
July 28, 2004 - 12:09AM
A hoax threat which forced a Los Angeles-bound plane to return to Sydney yesterday afternoon left anxious relatives confused and frustrated.
Many relatives of passengers aboard the United Airlines flight returned to Sydney International Airport just a few hours after farewelling their loved ones.
Despite a massive security operation at the airport, the relatives were left milling around the arrivals hall for hours waiting for news.
The scare was sparked after a hoax threat written on a sick bag found aboard the plane.
While security plans swung into action allowing the flight to land safely about 5.45pm (AEST), relatives and friends of some of the 264 people on board were left wondering what was going on.
The passengers on board the United Airlines flight were also unsure of what was happening.
No official announcements were made by the airline, the airport or security personnel, according to those on the scene.
Elaine Sander said she had rushed back to the airport shortly after 6.30pm (AEST) to meet her 18-year-old American niece Alissa Hornyak, who had been returning home after a two-week holiday in Australia.
Ms Sander expressed frustration at not knowing when her niece would emerge into the arrivals hall.
Passenger reaction to the incident was mixed when they started emerging into the arrivals hall shortly after 9pm (AEST).
Some were frustrated about the lack of information they received, while others praised airline staff and emergency authorities.
After a reunion with her aunt, Ms Hornyak said the ordeal made her nervous about flying again today, when the passengers will again board a flight to Los Angeles.
"Everyone was real nice, they did all they could," she said.
"The plane turned around and I was scared, it was all a bit crazy.
"All they said was that there was an emergency and were heading back. The plane was too heavy so we had to get rid of the fuel.
"I'm a bit more nervous than usual about getting back on the plane tomorrow."
George Tihanyi, from Harbord, had also returned to the airport to wait for wife Astrid and 14-year-old daughter Gabriella, who had been on the plane.
"I spoke to someone at the United Airlines office and they haven't said anything, but to return to here and wait for the plane," he said.
"There should be someone here from the airline explaining what is going on because there are too many people not knowing."
After an emotional reunion, Gabriella, who was on her first plane flight, said she wasn't worried, but wished she had known what was going on.
"They didn't tell us anything at all," she said.
"They just made us keep calm, they just didn't tell us anything urgent.
"The captain said some of us might notice we were turning around and he said there was a threat, but it was only minor."
Melbourne resident Moshe Cyrulnik (Moshe Cyrulnik) said the ordeal was draining for him as it was the Jewish fast day and he hadn't eaten all day.
But he backed the airline's actions, saying the spectre of the September 11 terrorist attacks made returning essential.
"It's been a little hard," Mr Cyrulnik said.
"My personal opinion is that it's good to know the security is very good.
"You saw in September 11 there was not enough security, so I think better to have more security than not enough.
"Better to be safe than sorry. You only live once."
Canadian Sondra Baier said after the message came across that the plane was turning around the flight attendants said nothing, and carried on as usual.
"They just calmly said the plane was going to turn around because there was a threat on the plane," Ms Baier said.
"We had to wait 45 minutes on the runway and that was probably the most disheartening part about the whole adventure.
"Everyone just kept looking around and looking at each other, the expression on the faces of everyone was just unreal.
"The flight attendants weren't saying anything, it was just like everyday business to them."
AAP
============================================
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Sydney
Posts: 731
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
QF cabin crew regularly scour the pax ranks for "Bob"- Best On Board"; usually a good looking male passenger.
I wonder if United do the same thing and this sick bag was some honorary award made to "Bob" on a previous flight.
Would be funny if it was.
I won't criticise the Captain for his decision, he is the man on the spot. But if I found a sickbag with "Bob" written on it on a QF flight, I doubt if I would be too concerned for that reason.
I wonder if United do the same thing and this sick bag was some honorary award made to "Bob" on a previous flight.
Would be funny if it was.
I won't criticise the Captain for his decision, he is the man on the spot. But if I found a sickbag with "Bob" written on it on a QF flight, I doubt if I would be too concerned for that reason.
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Aust
Posts: 123
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
What if the bag had BEVAN's name on it ??
Im sure given some thought we could all work out a scary acronym for BEVAN........
Big
Explosive
Vial (of)
Anthrax
Nearby
Sheeeeeeet!!!! Turn the plane around, were all going to die.
Am I missing something ??
Im sure given some thought we could all work out a scary acronym for BEVAN........
Big
Explosive
Vial (of)
Anthrax
Nearby
Sheeeeeeet!!!! Turn the plane around, were all going to die.
Am I missing something ??
Join Date: May 2000
Location: Here. Over here.
Posts: 189
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It is obvious innit?
Terrorists all know that if they put a bomb on an aircraft they must leave a note as well to let everyone know about it. Then as well, the bomb must have big red numbers counting down to zero, and at least 3 wires only one of which is the correct one to cut to disarm the device.
It gives everyone involved a chance to panic or act heroically, and use the drama to close airports etc.
Some people may just have too much imagination.
Terrorists all know that if they put a bomb on an aircraft they must leave a note as well to let everyone know about it. Then as well, the bomb must have big red numbers counting down to zero, and at least 3 wires only one of which is the correct one to cut to disarm the device.
It gives everyone involved a chance to panic or act heroically, and use the drama to close airports etc.
Some people may just have too much imagination.
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Brisbane, Australia
Posts: 331
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Yes. I hope that all the Bob's in the world don't have their names on their briefcases from now on. Maybe security will now require they remove aforesaid nametags before boarding a flight. That'll fix the terrorists!
Last edited by Ron & Edna Johns; 28th Jul 2004 at 01:49.
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Bankstown
Posts: 22
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Seems to be a lot of 20/20 hindsight in some of these later posts, reality is that the crew were in doubt so they did the right thing - the reality of it all is that its a sign of the times these days and the possible threats that exist - which is sad
Terrorists have known (and I am not in anyway saying this was an act conducted by any such organisation) that the threat is far greater than the action, and that all such threats must be taken with seriousness. Any person who grew up in london during 70's and 80's would know how often railway stations etc were closed due to the threat of a bomb. The chaos caused by the suggestion is nearly as bad as the act with far less casulaties involved. The Captain made the correct choice in the situation he was presented. If this indeed was the act of the cabin crew awarding a BOB (which I really hope it wasnt) then people need to have a real hard look at themselves and the environment that we work in. As for Sydney instead of Brisbane, I doubt this was overly a commercial decision probably they thought more along the lines of which area is best equipped to deal with such a scenario. I saw the Captain on TV maintaining a very dignified no comment, good to see that he wouldnt be baited by the journalists into some soundbite they could play over and over again.
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: sydney
Posts: 6
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
UA Plane
Any one got any idea how much it costs an airline to cope with these sort of hoaxes, esp involving a 747-400, given the pilot dumped thousands of dollars of fuel.
Also system disruptions must cost a fair amount, along with putting up pax, etc etc
Also system disruptions must cost a fair amount, along with putting up pax, etc etc
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Brisbane, Queensland
Posts: 618
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Missing in Action Andersons Words
The pilot, you know, a highly responsible individual, and I'm sure his decision was the right one.
We all feel very thankful that, you know, that people of that calibre accept responsibility for our safety in the air.
We all feel very thankful that, you know, that people of that calibre accept responsibility for our safety in the air.
Don Quixote Impersonator
Join Date: Jul 1999
Location: Australia
Age: 77
Posts: 3,403
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Pilots just can't help themselves
Just listening to the quarterbacking on the World at Noon on this and the representative of the AIPA, whilst supporting the right of the Captain to make the "call" also added the IMHO entirely gratuitous and innapropriate comment to the effect "I would/may have handled it differently".
He wasn't there so how does he "know" and it also infers a less than "proper" outcome, not very professional.
And whilst I'm at it I hear what the critics say about landing a "bomb enabled " aircraft at Sydney carries the finite risk of taking out more than just the aircraft, but where else can they go, that would have the facilites to handle the emergency including the possibility of it coming unravelled on landing with a large number of casualties??..
Although the approach to Sydney 34 is largely overwater.
Tulla, is sufficiently remote from a large city, Williamtown??, maybe even Canberra, Brisbane???.
Who makes the decision to where?
What distance penalty from the turn back point??
He wasn't there so how does he "know" and it also infers a less than "proper" outcome, not very professional.
And whilst I'm at it I hear what the critics say about landing a "bomb enabled " aircraft at Sydney carries the finite risk of taking out more than just the aircraft, but where else can they go, that would have the facilites to handle the emergency including the possibility of it coming unravelled on landing with a large number of casualties??..
Although the approach to Sydney 34 is largely overwater.
Tulla, is sufficiently remote from a large city, Williamtown??, maybe even Canberra, Brisbane???.
Who makes the decision to where?
What distance penalty from the turn back point??
Join Date: May 2000
Location: Here. Over here.
Posts: 189
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Gaunty,
I think that there has to be a lot more to this incident than has been told so far, possibly a non-specific threat to the airline that we may never be told about. There has to be something else to make "B.O.B" written on a sick-bag into something significant enough to cause the reaction that it did.
I am sure that the Captain did the correct thing knowing all the facts, but from what we have been told, to divert just because of some letters found written on a sick-bag to me is simply unbelievable.
1. Why should it have to mean "Bomb on Board"? It could just as easily mean "Battleship off Boston" or "Bugger off Bruce". (although that would be more likely to apply to QF )
2. Does anyone seriously believe a terrorist would put a bomb on board, and then leave a note to tell the world about it?
I think that there has to be a lot more to this incident than has been told so far, possibly a non-specific threat to the airline that we may never be told about. There has to be something else to make "B.O.B" written on a sick-bag into something significant enough to cause the reaction that it did.
I am sure that the Captain did the correct thing knowing all the facts, but from what we have been told, to divert just because of some letters found written on a sick-bag to me is simply unbelievable.
1. Why should it have to mean "Bomb on Board"? It could just as easily mean "Battleship off Boston" or "Bugger off Bruce". (although that would be more likely to apply to QF )
2. Does anyone seriously believe a terrorist would put a bomb on board, and then leave a note to tell the world about it?
