Virgin Australia Flight hijacked
So you think the Indonesians overreacted? Wait until November when the combined efforts of Fedpol, Qpol and the ADF swing into top gear for the G20. The debacle that was CHOGM will pale into insignificance.
He would already be in custody, which can be unpleasant enough.
But now the Aussie embassy up there will be working to have him represented and sent home, all expenses paid by we, the taxpayers.
Re squawking 7500 - wouldn't that be a bit excessive unless the guy had made a direct threat? Maybe for disruptive pax we need another code to get the cops to the aircraft in a hurry; batons and tasers at the ready.
But now the Aussie embassy up there will be working to have him represented and sent home, all expenses paid by we, the taxpayers.
Re squawking 7500 - wouldn't that be a bit excessive unless the guy had made a direct threat? Maybe for disruptive pax we need another code to get the cops to the aircraft in a hurry; batons and tasers at the ready.
Maybe for disruptive pax we need another code to get the cops to the aircraft in a hurry; batons and tasers at the ready.
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Australia - South of where I'd like to be !
Age: 59
Posts: 4,261
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
"But now the Aussie embassy up there will be working to have him represented and sent home, all expenses paid by we, the taxpayers."
Back Home and released by Xmas if the fluffies have anything to do with it !
Back Home and released by Xmas if the fluffies have anything to do with it !
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: over 'ere
Posts: 212
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
A couple of points come to mind.
If the cabin crew had been serving this git grog for the last 3 odd hours, surely they would have known he was two sheets. If so why wasn't this communicated to the skipper. If it was, when was the last time a successful hijack was carried out by a retard drunk?? Especially since enhanced security flight deck doors were installed. Squawking the code for a drunk bashing on a door that could take a decent explosive seems a bit harsh. But then again, I wasn't there, so who am I to judge?
If the cabin crew had been serving this git grog for the last 3 odd hours, surely they would have known he was two sheets. If so why wasn't this communicated to the skipper. If it was, when was the last time a successful hijack was carried out by a retard drunk?? Especially since enhanced security flight deck doors were installed. Squawking the code for a drunk bashing on a door that could take a decent explosive seems a bit harsh. But then again, I wasn't there, so who am I to judge?
At the risk of being 'flamed'. I ask
1. Does Virgin Australia have a 'responsible service of alcohol' policy?
2. Do Virgin Australia cabin crew regularly patrol the cabin to check that the punters are behaving and not consuming any duty free purchases?
If the flight originated from Brisvegas, the drunk punter must have gotten himself into that condition while en route to Bali. I hear on the ABC conflicting reports: one about a drunk, the other about a sick pax. How will Virgin spin out of this incident that has closed an international airport?
Is this a matter if reap what you sow?
1. Does Virgin Australia have a 'responsible service of alcohol' policy?
2. Do Virgin Australia cabin crew regularly patrol the cabin to check that the punters are behaving and not consuming any duty free purchases?
If the flight originated from Brisvegas, the drunk punter must have gotten himself into that condition while en route to Bali. I hear on the ABC conflicting reports: one about a drunk, the other about a sick pax. How will Virgin spin out of this incident that has closed an international airport?
Is this a matter if reap what you sow?
1 On what planet do you live and how on earth did you escape it?
2 Please do us all a favour and don't listen to the voices in your head.
Who would have thought there could be more than one lunatic like our mate sobering up in Bali.
At least he will be sober later today!
Jesus wept.
A couple of points come to mind.
If the cabin crew had been serving this git grog for the last 3 odd hours, surely they would have known he was two sheets. If so why wasn't this communicated to the skipper. If it was, when was the last time a successful hijack was carried out by a retard drunk?? Especially since enhanced security flight deck doors were installed. Squawking the code for a drunk bashing on a door that could take a decent explosive seems a bit harsh. But then again, I wasn't there, so who am I to judge?
If the cabin crew had been serving this git grog for the last 3 odd hours, surely they would have known he was two sheets. If so why wasn't this communicated to the skipper. If it was, when was the last time a successful hijack was carried out by a retard drunk?? Especially since enhanced security flight deck doors were installed. Squawking the code for a drunk bashing on a door that could take a decent explosive seems a bit harsh. But then again, I wasn't there, so who am I to judge?
You are not in a position to judge.
Talk about the armchair experts all vying for their 10 lines of fame on PPRuNe!
Unbelievable!
The problem with sending a message to the company to call the cops is that some tosser from the PR department, or some local manager who does not want a scene or schedule disruption, may water down or even disregard the captain's instruction.
Having an internationally-recognised code that stopped short of requiring armed intervention but still triggered official action would remove any management indecision or interference.
In certain jurisdictions, banging off the hijack code for a relatively minor incident could have unintended consequences.
Having an internationally-recognised code that stopped short of requiring armed intervention but still triggered official action would remove any management indecision or interference.
In certain jurisdictions, banging off the hijack code for a relatively minor incident could have unintended consequences.
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: Australia
Posts: 622
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Has everyone forgotten what happened on the impulse B717 flight 7-8 years ago, when a passenger with mental health issues tried to enter the flight deck. I'm sure the injured Cabin Crew on that flight haven't forgotten it. One passenger either drunk or suffering from mental health issues can be just as dangerous as any terrorist.
In certain jurisdictions, banging off the hijack code for a relatively minor incident could have unintended consequences.
From AIC H15/20
The pilot of an aircraft encountering an emergency in flight, other
than loss of two--way communications, should select code the follow codes:
The pilot of an aircraft encountering an emergency in flight, other
than loss of two--way communications, should select code the follow codes:
7700 in-flight emergency
7500 unlawful interference
7400 drunk passenger banking on door
7370 drunk passenger propositioning cabin crew
7360 sober passenger propositioning cabin crew
7350 drunk passenger being offensive
7340 drunk passenger during flight to alcohol-free country
7270 group: exhaustion of in-flight duty-free supplies, specifically
7120 crew unable to use or understand radio phraseology
7155 pilot more than 10 mins behind aircraft
7500 unlawful interference
7400 drunk passenger banking on door
7370 drunk passenger propositioning cabin crew
7360 sober passenger propositioning cabin crew
7350 drunk passenger being offensive
7340 drunk passenger during flight to alcohol-free country
7270 group: exhaustion of in-flight duty-free supplies, specifically
7271 gin
7272 rum
7273 whisky
7274 cigarettes
7100 group: flight-crew unable to perform required maneuvers, specifically7272 rum
7273 whisky
7274 cigarettes
7101 visual approach
7102 RNP approach
7103 RMP approach (Canadian aircraft only)
7104 any approach
7110 IPad batteries exhausted7102 RNP approach
7103 RMP approach (Canadian aircraft only)
7104 any approach
7120 crew unable to use or understand radio phraseology
7121 crew speaking too fast
7122 crew mumbling
7123 ATC speaking too fast
7124 ATC mumbling
7150 pilot behind aircraft7122 crew mumbling
7123 ATC speaking too fast
7124 ATC mumbling
7155 pilot more than 10 mins behind aircraft
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: over 'ere
Posts: 212
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Ad astra.. I neither seek fame here nor am I an armchair expert. I merely wished to raise these points for mature discussion, something which you are clearly incapable of doing.
What transpired led to an international airport being closed for some time and a lot of costly diversions being carried out. The authorities acted in accordance with set down procedures as they would. If the correct procedure for dealing with unruly passengers in VA is to squawk h/j , well then so be it.
As always, we can learn from these experiences without being denigrated for putting the discussion out there. Please remember the first "P" in this forum is professional .
What transpired led to an international airport being closed for some time and a lot of costly diversions being carried out. The authorities acted in accordance with set down procedures as they would. If the correct procedure for dealing with unruly passengers in VA is to squawk h/j , well then so be it.
As always, we can learn from these experiences without being denigrated for putting the discussion out there. Please remember the first "P" in this forum is professional .
The problem with sending a message to the company to call the cops is that some tosser from the PR department, or some local manager who does not want a scene or schedule disruption, may water down or even disregard the captain's instruction.
Having an internationally-recognised code that stopped short of requiring armed intervention but still triggered official action would remove any management indecision or interference.
In certain jurisdictions, banging off the hijack code for a relatively minor incident could have unintended consequences.
Having an internationally-recognised code that stopped short of requiring armed intervention but still triggered official action would remove any management indecision or interference.
In certain jurisdictions, banging off the hijack code for a relatively minor incident could have unintended consequences.
Please keep in mind this is in response to the suggestion of a new code for disruptive pax, not in any way a criticism of what happened as I don't know and therefore I'm not in a position to comment.
Last edited by RENURPP; 26th Apr 2014 at 00:48.
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: south pacific vagrant
Posts: 1,334
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
the code reported to be used is for unlawful interference which on the face of it happened.
without being there, doesnt seem to me like they over reacted at all.
alls well that ends well
without being there, doesnt seem to me like they over reacted at all.
alls well that ends well
Ad Astra manages to personally attack those who make valid and logical points. Like those of his ilk, his childish comments say more about him than anything else. His ad hominem attacks do nothing to advance his argument, if he has one. 
On publicly available information, this incident appears to reflect poorly on the professionalism of the airline concerned. Whoever has heard before of a drunk pax being responsible for the closure of an international airport with subsequent disruption and inconvenience?
If VA had the wisdom, they'd have fitted ACARS to their aircraft. As we know, this system, and the digital sat-phone, is probably the most secure way in which to communicate. A lot of issues can be easily resolved with either tool.
On publicly available information, this incident appears to reflect poorly on the professionalism of the airline concerned. Whoever has heard before of a drunk pax being responsible for the closure of an international airport with subsequent disruption and inconvenience?
If VA had the wisdom, they'd have fitted ACARS to their aircraft. As we know, this system, and the digital sat-phone, is probably the most secure way in which to communicate. A lot of issues can be easily resolved with either tool.
Whoever has heard before of a drunk pax being responsible for the closure of an international airport with subsequent disruption and inconvenience?
I think ad astra's points are well made.
ACARs is secure is it?