Scared PAX force Air Berlin to replace aircraft

[SNS3Guppy]

Oh yes, I do, as a first-hand witness. Those people who stirred the ****, and most of those who followed them were functionally illiterate. Amongst other things (apart from their use of uneducated speech) not being capable of filling out the complaint forms they were given was a bit of a giveaway. It was in fact quite telling when at one point they decided to split the passengers in two groups, those that wanted to fly and those who didn't--you could smell the grey matter imbalance from two terminals away

Got it...you were personally involved in this incident, then.

And you're questioning the intelligence of the passengers.

That's really irrelevant with respect to the passengers right to make decisions regarding their own safety. A passenger isn't required to take an IQ test any more than a pilot is...and I've met some fairly dense pilots in my time. Nor should either group be required to do so. Nor is that any criteria for determining what one is willing to personally accept.

You cite literacy as if it has some bearing, in any way, shape, or form, to the right or even ability to make a personal decision with regard to one's own safety. How can this be?

[TightSlot]

Please try and keep this on the rails. There is clearly merit on all sides of the discussion - it would be more productive to try and find common ground and points from which we can all learn. You'll come unstuck if you try to claim that you have 100% of the available merit.

[A330-300]

@Tonyc: Would you mind telling us what he or she said? Just Curious. I'm going to take notes ..promise.

I agree with all the others, that it can calm passengers down, when the Captain speaks to them...however I'm always puzzled when people think the FO or as some still call it "Co-Pilot" can't do the job. (besides giving the captain his coffee ) But i suppose that is a lil bit off-topic.

[frequentflyer2]

Not all passengers are unduly alarmed by technical hitches. We were flying back to BHD from LBA last Sunday evening. Right in front of the windows of the food village at the gates was a Jet 2 757 - Jet 2 Tenerife if my memory serves me rightly - with the covers off one of its engines which was being examined by engineers. Eventually the flight and cabin crew due to operate the already very delayed Paphos flight left the aircraft and were taken away in a minibus. The uncovered engine was then turned on and run up to what I assume was full power by engineers in the cockpit. Eventually, it was turned off, the engine covers were put back on and the flight and cabin crew returned. All it would seem was well. The first announcement calling passengers to the gate was greeted by loud cheers and the SLF made their way to that aircraft as quickly as possible.

[seang]

sfl

Well, what an eye opener this little thread has been. There I was thinking I was a decent sort of bloke forking out a lot of cash to fly with various airlines quite a few times a year and having a bit of a crack with the staff on board, when in fact all along I have been a "silly, ignorant and idiotic SLF" pain in the arse for all you cabin crew and pilots beacause I might have been a little bit worried about something that may make the aircraft crash. Silly me. I am so sorry to have troubled you all by boarding the plane in the first place, please accept my apologies for inconveniencing you in any way. As for this mad assumption that we should all be reassured that the plane will arrive safely because all you pilots and cc wouldn't fly on it otherwise, well, what can I say?

[FrequentSLF]

IMHO it is disturbing that some pilots (actually a number of them) consider the PAX idiotic, silly, etc. I am not saying that all have this kind of attitude, but many comments in this thread have mentioned those words.
We should understand the reason of that! This is the IMHO the major issue. PAX generally trust the pilots, pilots not always trust the PAX. Why?

[LH2]

Guppy,

Got it...you were personally involved in this incident, then

Yes, I was travelling on that flight and was a witness to the pathetic scene that developed.

And you're questioning the intelligence of the passengers.

Not at all. Their lack thereof was completely beyond question.

And btw I am talking about certain passengers, not the heterogeneous group as a whole, as would be clear if people actually bothered to pay attention to what they read (if nothing else, as a courtesy if they intend to respond to it, else we're all wasting our time here.)

That [intelligence?] is really irrelevant with respect to the passengers right to make decisions regarding their own safety.

Is it? That's an interesting postulate indeed.

You cite literacy as if it has some bearing, [....] with regard to one's own safety. How can this be?

That, I trust, you are more than capable of answering for yourself.

I am terribly sorry but I really do not have time for all that PC rubbish. One thing is people with genuine cognitive disabilities, but idiocy in the form of a lack of interest in achieving a certain degree of education or discernment is not excusable much less acceptable.

...and for the sake of completeness while we're at it, did I mention those pax refusing to travel were all low-class and ugly? (hey, I'm just making an observation here, not drawing any inferences -- Also, any suggestion of me being sour for having been pointlessly delayed for four hours is mere speculation)

[SNS3Guppy]

That, I trust, you are more than capable of answering for yourself.

I am terribly sorry but I really do not have time for all that PC rubbish. One thing is people with genuine cognitive disabilities, but idiocy in the form of a lack of interest in achieving a certain degree of education or discernment is not excusable much less acceptable.

...and for the sake of completeness while we're at it, did I mention those pax refusing to travel were all low-class and ugly? (hey, I'm just making an observation here, not drawing any inferences -- Also, any suggestion of me being sour for having been pointlessly delayed for four hours is mere speculation)

I can't answer it for myself...I lack the basic qualifications to do so: your arrogance, I'm not illiterate, and I'm not prejudiced against those who are.

Perhaps your post belongs in the arrogant posters thread as a glaring example of ego, and proof that one's nose can indeed be so high in the air that it's snowing on one's brain. Do you look down on everyone like this, or pick and choose your victims?

You do realize that when a flight departs, everyone on board, regardless of their intelligence, sex, color, education, background training, religion, health, literary skills, upbringing, heritage, or personal habit, has the same stake in the safe outcome of the flight, right?

No, absolutely not...a less intelligent person does NOT have less right to decide his or her fate. If one feels unsafe, one has every right to speak out. Your assertion that those you feel are lesser than yourself don't have such a right is ridiculous and yes, wrong.

If I crash an airplane, I'm the first one to the scene of the crash. However, everyone else behind me arrives very shortly thereafter. I have the full capability at any time of accepting or rejecting the airplane, the approach, the clearance, the fuel load, you name it...as a pilot I can make many decisions on behalf of the company, the passengers, etc. The passengers place their faith in my ability to do that. They place their faith in my ability to operate the airplane safely. They place their faith in the company's ability to maintain the airplane safely.

If that faith is misplaced, or if they have a reason to believe it is, then the passenger has every right, and every responsibility, to speak out.

In flight, the airplane belongs to the pilot. On the ground, this is not so. It's quite one thing for a passenger to demand a change in destination or a return to the gate after takeoff; at this point the pilot is making the decisions and operates in a manner most conducive to the safety of flight. It's another matter for a passenger in the comfort of the gate, before the airpalne is underway, to make a safety decision of his or her own. Even an ill-informed one. If the passenger isn't comfortable taking the flight, then the passenger shouldn't take the flight.

The level of reading ability of the passenger plays no part in this. None. To suggest otherwise is so blatently conceited that it gives one pause. Clearly you believe you're a better person than these passengers; a pathetic view. Such condecension and haughty arrogance only makes you appear small. Peel back your pride, and you may find you're no better than they are...and without doubt you'll find, if you can see beyond the tip of your nose with that near-sighted view on humanity, that they have every bit as much right to speak for themselves, to act for themselves, and to act in their best interest as you.

I am truly disgusted by your comments, and no, I care not a whit about political correctness.

[FrequentSLF]

If the passenger isn't comfortable taking the flight, then the passenger shouldn't take the flight.

\

I am with you on this.

Such passenger might panic in flight and create a serious safety issue

[Mshamba]

What was the topic again?