Hijack attempt on Malaysia Airlines
Join Date: Nov 2015
Location: Dog House
Age: 49
Posts: 779
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Well I am of the opinion that there would be a standard procedure for this type of threat. I am of the opinion that once this aircraft landed the Captain should follow instructions given from the ground.
I seems this Captain followed the regulations and followed instructions given.
One that did not and ordered an evacuation after being told to wait for further instructions could be accountable for personal injury's that would follow. These are of the type that should not be blaming the police for taking too long - but they are!
I seems this Captain followed the regulations and followed instructions given.
One that did not and ordered an evacuation after being told to wait for further instructions could be accountable for personal injury's that would follow. These are of the type that should not be blaming the police for taking too long - but they are!
Perhaps the shrinks should arrange some adjustment time for these ill people before they are allowed near heavy machinery, particularly if there is no support.
Mental health issues are the new scourge of the modern world and their is no one size fits all answer to the problem. This situation is also not helped by the many inexperienced psychologists seeking to make a nice quick buck out of this profession.
Bomb or attempted hijack.
The hijack was well controlled but not the bomb identified as not real.
There is no such thing as half emergency.
land as soon as possible.
Require and expect full ground support.
If no air stairs to disembark passengers then use the slides. This would be mentioned on the declaration of emergency , ie, require full services after landing and expect immediate aircraft evacuation .
Otherwise continue to destination airport without
emergency declaration.
There was a similar thread was on prune re SIA b777 wing fire, in Singapore when the ground staff fire services, convinced the cockpit crew only half an emergency existed. The passengers were held onboard against their will. they saw and knew a fire was raging outside in the entire right wing.
When the crew decided to return to departure airport immediately, ie land as soon as possible, to save time exposed to the threat, , they declare emergency Pan Pan call, and request high speed arrival without delay.
If there is no threat to the aircraft or passengers, then continue to destination.
No police presence is needed.
an emergency specific bomb threat, is promulgated in the regs.
Evacuate immediately after landing use air stairs if possible otherwise use emergency escape slides.
If a" specific bomb threat" is declared
the bomb was visible , take all precautions to protect passengers from an explosion.
The Bomb,s trigger could be time- clock switched, sensor movement, pressure sensor, remote trigger.all these must be taken as a serious threat to the passengers and aircraft.
No half emergency , to be considered.
The decision should be standard operating procedure.
( at any time)
If a passenger makes a " threat to the aircraft or crew " see your FAM procedures,
They MUST be removed from the aircraft, immediately .
no withdrawal of the "threat" is permitted at a later time saying "only a joke I was not serious."
The hijack was well controlled but not the bomb identified as not real.
There is no such thing as half emergency.
land as soon as possible.
Require and expect full ground support.
If no air stairs to disembark passengers then use the slides. This would be mentioned on the declaration of emergency , ie, require full services after landing and expect immediate aircraft evacuation .
Otherwise continue to destination airport without
emergency declaration.
There was a similar thread was on prune re SIA b777 wing fire, in Singapore when the ground staff fire services, convinced the cockpit crew only half an emergency existed. The passengers were held onboard against their will. they saw and knew a fire was raging outside in the entire right wing.
When the crew decided to return to departure airport immediately, ie land as soon as possible, to save time exposed to the threat, , they declare emergency Pan Pan call, and request high speed arrival without delay.
If there is no threat to the aircraft or passengers, then continue to destination.
No police presence is needed.
an emergency specific bomb threat, is promulgated in the regs.
Evacuate immediately after landing use air stairs if possible otherwise use emergency escape slides.
If a" specific bomb threat" is declared
the bomb was visible , take all precautions to protect passengers from an explosion.
The Bomb,s trigger could be time- clock switched, sensor movement, pressure sensor, remote trigger.all these must be taken as a serious threat to the passengers and aircraft.
No half emergency , to be considered.
The decision should be standard operating procedure.
( at any time)
If a passenger makes a " threat to the aircraft or crew " see your FAM procedures,
They MUST be removed from the aircraft, immediately .
no withdrawal of the "threat" is permitted at a later time saying "only a joke I was not serious."
This pilot had the right idea.
Join Date: Dec 2013
Location: Hunter Valley NSW
Posts: 169
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Commentstors say the 90 minute delay to disembarkation was so police could check the passenger list and maybe raid the guys house, to investigate the possibility of an accomplice.
Fine, but it is nonsense that the suspect device couldn't have been removed from the plane to reduce the threat, be it real or imagined both are damaging to passengers.
No doubt it's easier for the good guys to take out the bad guy when they know where he is seated so keeping passengers onboard and in their assigned seat has merit, up to the point where the accomplice detonates his bomb or a gunfight starts in a densely populated environment.
Wouldn't transferring passengers onto buses seperate them from any neferious contents of hand baggage and so further reduce the risk?
Mickjoebill
Fine, but it is nonsense that the suspect device couldn't have been removed from the plane to reduce the threat, be it real or imagined both are damaging to passengers.
No doubt it's easier for the good guys to take out the bad guy when they know where he is seated so keeping passengers onboard and in their assigned seat has merit, up to the point where the accomplice detonates his bomb or a gunfight starts in a densely populated environment.
Wouldn't transferring passengers onto buses seperate them from any neferious contents of hand baggage and so further reduce the risk?
Mickjoebill
I give a big thumbs up to the AA34 Captain, told them in clear terms.
Can't say I'd be too chuffed to sit in there for 90 mins while the Cops walked around at a safe distance with their fingers up their......
Hopefully we can all learn from AA34 and MH128 so we know what should happen in future because this won't be the last ********.
Can't say I'd be too chuffed to sit in there for 90 mins while the Cops walked around at a safe distance with their fingers up their......
Hopefully we can all learn from AA34 and MH128 so we know what should happen in future because this won't be the last ********.
Join Date: Nov 2015
Location: Dog House
Age: 49
Posts: 779
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Simply by seeing emergency vehicles surrounding his aircraft is reason to evacuate!
What if the reason was some loony running around shooting people was hiding under his aircraft.
He should do as he is told and hold, if he is not happy with that discuss it - not just not follow instructions.
I find his demand to have info given over the radio very foolish - that could be heard by a person with the detonator and then they may have pulled the trigger.
We don't know the background of this bomb threat (well I don't) but if I were asked to call that number and clearly knowing something was up, I would have clicked this is private sensitive info that they can not say over radio.
BOMBS PART 1. THREATS! WHAT TO DO? - Aviation Above
What if the reason was some loony running around shooting people was hiding under his aircraft.
He should do as he is told and hold, if he is not happy with that discuss it - not just not follow instructions.
I find his demand to have info given over the radio very foolish - that could be heard by a person with the detonator and then they may have pulled the trigger.
We don't know the background of this bomb threat (well I don't) but if I were asked to call that number and clearly knowing something was up, I would have clicked this is private sensitive info that they can not say over radio.
BOMBS PART 1. THREATS! WHAT TO DO? - Aviation Above
Join Date: Nov 2015
Location: Dog House
Age: 49
Posts: 779
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Or - There is a bomb on one those 2 aircraft that just taxied out.
* Do not tell them or I will blow it up.
* If any attempt is made for people to get off I will blow it up.
* Make what ever demand they want.
So if the Captain refuses to follow an instruction and just to get an answer over radio decides to evacuate - BANG!
There was no know reason for him to know of any possible danger that would require an evacuation - they would have had food water and air conditioning.
If you don't have all the information it is foolish to make a non standard decision - and an aircraft evacuation often leads to injury's.
* Do not tell them or I will blow it up.
* If any attempt is made for people to get off I will blow it up.
* Make what ever demand they want.
So if the Captain refuses to follow an instruction and just to get an answer over radio decides to evacuate - BANG!
There was no know reason for him to know of any possible danger that would require an evacuation - they would have had food water and air conditioning.
If you don't have all the information it is foolish to make a non standard decision - and an aircraft evacuation often leads to injury's.
Ha ha, funny. You stay onboard an Aircraft with a possible explosive device for 90 mins and then tell me how you feel during then after. 
Quite a detailed procedure contained in the QRH, maybe you should actually read it and then follow it. That's if you even have a QRH, if not then I could tell you but......
Quite a detailed procedure contained in the QRH, maybe you should actually read it and then follow it. That's if you even have a QRH, if not then I could tell you but......
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Chiang Mai, Thailand
Posts: 18
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Did not the security people learn anything from the coroner's report into the Lindt Chocolat siege?
From the time the passengers and cabin crew overpowered and secured the mentally ill man, took away his 'bomb,' and the aircraft landed, the situation altered in a subtle way. The passengers on the aircraft actually then became hostages. They were hostages locked in an aluminium tube, surrounded by 70 tonnes of jet fuel (apologies to a previous poster), not to mention being kept in proximity to what was thought could be a bomb, and fed no information, as far as can be ascertained, but could see the their aircraft surrounded by armed police.
This over a 90 minute period
I leave it to others to determine who then the hostage takers were.
The question should be not 'why did it take so long to 'storm' the aircraft.' but rather 'why did they not release the hostages immediately after landing via air stairs and opening one or more of the doors.'
From the time the passengers and cabin crew overpowered and secured the mentally ill man, took away his 'bomb,' and the aircraft landed, the situation altered in a subtle way. The passengers on the aircraft actually then became hostages. They were hostages locked in an aluminium tube, surrounded by 70 tonnes of jet fuel (apologies to a previous poster), not to mention being kept in proximity to what was thought could be a bomb, and fed no information, as far as can be ascertained, but could see the their aircraft surrounded by armed police.
This over a 90 minute period
I leave it to others to determine who then the hostage takers were.
The question should be not 'why did it take so long to 'storm' the aircraft.' but rather 'why did they not release the hostages immediately after landing via air stairs and opening one or more of the doors.'
Join Date: Nov 2015
Location: Dog House
Age: 49
Posts: 779
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Join Date: Nov 2015
Location: Dog House
Age: 49
Posts: 779
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Can I ask how much bomb threat training is given for a ATPL and/or a type rating?
Is any training ever given?
Serious question if any I expect less than an hour with zero recurrent training.
I actually expect it is only transponder code selection and a call for a sterile cabin inspection.
Is any training ever given?
Serious question if any I expect less than an hour with zero recurrent training.
I actually expect it is only transponder code selection and a call for a sterile cabin inspection.
Join Date: Nov 2015
Location: Dog House
Age: 49
Posts: 779
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Seems not ACMS. Seems not!
So don't lie. You don't even know the exact point you do or do not have legal responsibility.
But a bomb course from behind a locked door - You are a Super Hero!
After way over 30 years in the industry - I would have heard some of this type of training - but no never!
So don't lie. You don't even know the exact point you do or do not have legal responsibility.
But a bomb course from behind a locked door - You are a Super Hero!
After way over 30 years in the industry - I would have heard some of this type of training - but no never!
Last edited by Band a Lot; 2nd Jun 2017 at 11:09.
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Melbourne,Vic,Australia
Posts: 423
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes
on
2 Posts
Police officer has said something like
Immeadiste offender is tied up by crew/passingers. After plane has landed and sitting there we think there might be someone else with a real bomb (source you peasants can't know) Our solution with a bomb threat (real or imagined) is hold 350 people on to of 70 tons of fuel until fancy boys can get there and the press are there to film our heroics
Idea of one stair at the rear immeadiatly, 2 cops go on and pull people out few at a time, no baggage other cops quick search and onto transport (or left right). That wouldn't allow the ego trip
Legal types tonight suggested that the OIC (given above) was nudging Attempted Murder
Immeadiste offender is tied up by crew/passingers. After plane has landed and sitting there we think there might be someone else with a real bomb (source you peasants can't know) Our solution with a bomb threat (real or imagined) is hold 350 people on to of 70 tons of fuel until fancy boys can get there and the press are there to film our heroics
Idea of one stair at the rear immeadiatly, 2 cops go on and pull people out few at a time, no baggage other cops quick search and onto transport (or left right). That wouldn't allow the ego trip
Legal types tonight suggested that the OIC (given above) was nudging Attempted Murder
Join Date: Jun 2017
Location: Sydney
Posts: 28
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The cops better have a damn good reason for suspecting there was an accomplice. The publicly available facts at the moment don't give any reason to support that presumption.
Be interesting to see if any ambulance-chasing lawyers now try a "mental anguish" claim against Victoria Police for their decision to hold the passengers on board...Unfortunately I wouldn't put it past 'em.