Go Back  PPRuNe Forums > Misc. Forums > Passengers & SLF (Self Loading Freight)
Reload this Page >

Soaking up Security in Switzerland.

Wikiposts
Search
Passengers & SLF (Self Loading Freight) If you are regularly a passenger on any airline then why not post your questions here?

Soaking up Security in Switzerland.

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old 5th Jan 2007, 11:01
  #1 (permalink)  
Está servira para distraerle.
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: In a perambulator.
Posts: 6
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Soaking up Security in Switzerland.



A strange rumour with far more truth in it than one might like to hear has come down the jungle drums.
On New Year's day a certain airline had a scheduled departure from Switzerland to South Africa. The scheduled departure time was, so one hears, 22.30LMT.
A group of seven family members checked in their ton of baggage and six of them went through security.
Subsequently those six members of the family boarded the aircraft. The seventh, arriving late, from the land side bar at security, was held at security for being drunk. This he was, totally. The matter was reported to the Captain who, quite rightly, refused to take the passenger southwards that night. (The airline in question however, very decently honoured the punter's ticket and shipped the chap out on the next day's flight.)
All fairly straightforward so far, I think?
However, it would appear that no baggage whatsoever was off loaded from this Africa bound flight. All the family had checked in together and so the baggage tag receipts were all on one ticket, as it were. One presumes that the presumption was made that the detainee was neither playing nor acting drunk with the motive of avoiding the flight, having already possibly placed something nasty in one or more of the many checked in bags?
Perhaps it would have been a better idea to off load either all of the family members (which would not have been very politic) or all of their baggage, which would, given the physological possibilities, have been sensible and could have been achieved surreptitiously.
(With a wary eye on the flack farm, little cheetah has tried very hard to make sure that this story is correct in every pertinent way before posting.
The details are correct, to the best of his belief - for what they are worth, of course!)
Toodle Pip!!
cavortingcheetah is offline  
Old 5th Jan 2007, 11:28
  #2 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 1999
Location: UK
Posts: 367
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Had s similar problem with a larger group once.

A few passengers failed to join, lost in the shops, but had given their briefcases to friends who had joined. Coupled with people repacking their bags in front of checkin staff to get under the baggage restrictions it was a complete nightmare. Took ages to sort out, and we didn't get it quite right then. Nothing sinister, but you have to be very very careful.

If in doubt, offload the entire group, bags and all. Simple swift (relatively) but above all, SAFE :
Nubboy is offline  
Old 5th Jan 2007, 14:49
  #3 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Somewhere between the Airfield ops and 26L
Posts: 122
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Hence the requirement in the EU for 100% HBS
howflytrg is offline  
Old 5th Jan 2007, 17:01
  #4 (permalink)  
F4F
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: on the Blue Planet
Posts: 255
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Don't really see what the excitment is about

Luggage were screened... for all of 'em... flying or not... (and pax o/b sure is no security garantee)
F4F is offline  
Old 5th Jan 2007, 22:38
  #5 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: way out west
Posts: 124
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Ah, that's only been true since we got the screening process 100% right, right?
Once there's sufficient reason for concern, as it seems there was in this case, it's all about eliminating risk, be that pax or bags.
theWings is offline  
Old 5th Jan 2007, 22:51
  #6 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: EGNS
Posts: 4
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
The bags were ok to travel as the AAA regs state if a family is traveling together and all of there belongings are mixed together in the same bags then if 1 member fails to join and the rest of the family are traveling then there is no need for a baggage offload.
couch pilot is offline  
Old 6th Jan 2007, 04:44
  #7 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Zürich, Switzerland
Age: 64
Posts: 123
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Furthermore, in this case, the passenger actually wanted to travel and was offloaded by third parties. In a case where the passenger had purposefully chosen to miss the flight or offload him/herself, the situation may have been resolved differently.
Snoopy is offline  
Old 6th Jan 2007, 05:05
  #8 (permalink)  

Grandpa Aerotart
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: SWP
Posts: 4,583
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes on 2 Posts
And how many times have you been told by ground staff that the missing pax didn't have any check in baggage?

Yeah right!

Pax checks in to go half way around the planet, fails to board and is offloaded...and when ground staff are asked how long to find/offload his/her baggage they look you straight in the eye and say there is none...and then ask what delay code you think might be ok...and then try and negotiate a delay code that puts the blame anywhere else except at their feet.

Off course I could just be getting a little cynical.
Chimbu chuckles is offline  
Old 6th Jan 2007, 09:55
  #9 (permalink)  
Está servira para distraerle.
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: In a perambulator.
Posts: 6
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post


Just to draw attention to a teeny point in all this.
It is the easiest thing in the world to actually imbibe enough alcohol and to behave in such an obvious drunken way as to be refused embarcation onto an aeroplane.
In fact, it could be a jolly decent way of ensuring that wife and irritating parents in law were blown to smithereens, as they winged wherever, all baggage together in hold, booby trap primed and set. Forever afterwards, the surviving family member would be justified in extolling the benefits of alcohol, for truly, without its effect; he too would have boarded and been blown up.
cavortingcheetah is offline  
Old 8th Jan 2007, 04:45
  #10 (permalink)  
Está servira para distraerle.
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: In a perambulator.
Posts: 6
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post


Well, as Oscar Wilde once said:

'I wish I had thought of that.'

To which comment, incidentally, some wag replied:

'You will, Oscar, you will.'

cavortingcheetah is offline  
Old 10th Jan 2007, 02:05
  #11 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Bangkok, Thailand
Age: 64
Posts: 191
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Quote:
It is the easiest thing in the world to actually imbibe enough alcohol and to behave in such an obvious drunken way as to be refused embarcation onto an aeroplane.
Unquote.

Ah yes, however, not guaranteed. BE has, on a couple of extremely rare occasions, actually been allowed to board while in an overly "tired and emotional" state. That would scupper this pax efforts to do away with his loved ones!
Bangkokeasy is offline  

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service

Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.