Trapped on an airplane for 9 hours
Join Date: Aug 1999
Location: Dublin, Ireland
Posts: 1,879
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
CNN reports Transportation Sec's comments on the incident:
Feds: Regional carrier, not crew, at fault in plane's tarmac stranding - CNN.com
"This could also be legally classified as unlawful detainment (as well as many other definitions) justifying a 911 call and the airline, airport and federal government need to be held accountable. The jail time would just increase the financial settlement."
This was my feeling on the issue; passengers were being held on the aircraft against their will, indeed having also being flown to an airport to which they didn't want to fly in the first place.
If nothing else, hopefully this incident will spur the development of an action plan to deal with situations like this. Talking sense to airlines and appealing for common sense almost certainly will not work, but if they're hit by large fines/court settlements and there is legal precedent, you can bet that they will begin to understand. It's sad that it comes down to "talking to them in a language they understand" (i.e. money), but if there is a positive outcome, it will hopefully be that we won't see a repeat of a situation like this.
Feds: Regional carrier, not crew, at fault in plane's tarmac stranding - CNN.com
"This could also be legally classified as unlawful detainment (as well as many other definitions) justifying a 911 call and the airline, airport and federal government need to be held accountable. The jail time would just increase the financial settlement."
This was my feeling on the issue; passengers were being held on the aircraft against their will, indeed having also being flown to an airport to which they didn't want to fly in the first place.
If nothing else, hopefully this incident will spur the development of an action plan to deal with situations like this. Talking sense to airlines and appealing for common sense almost certainly will not work, but if they're hit by large fines/court settlements and there is legal precedent, you can bet that they will begin to understand. It's sad that it comes down to "talking to them in a language they understand" (i.e. money), but if there is a positive outcome, it will hopefully be that we won't see a repeat of a situation like this.
Last edited by akerosid; 22nd Aug 2009 at 09:35. Reason: Slight grammatical change
I've been stuck on a/c on the tarmac for hours several times, almost always due to horrendous weather delays. Usually outbound, but occasionally inbound. At DFW one time we landed in a storm gap, but had no available gate. Persistent lightning kept stopping ground ops, so we sat there like muppets for 3 hours...... The sole consolation was that the crew, front and back, were stuck in exactly the same situation, with the same lack of desire to be there....
The most similar to this Rochester thing that happened to me personally was a very late night divert on an already very delayed BA outbound from JFK to LHR. Long story, but we ended up landing at Montreal at about 2.30 am. Down, and taxi to some holding area (nowhere near a terminal) - and then the skipper comes on the PA to say that Montreal is now shut and, as there are no immigration personnel on duty, we have to remain on the a/c (in sub-zero temperatures......) until they turn up. Which they do shortly before 6.00am.... when we are eventually taken to hotels until the a/c can be fixed. Although again the crew were every bit as stuck as we were, in this case the cabin crew were a disgrace - they basically just gave up, announced that there was nothing left to eat or drink, gathered up front and remained there - bitching loudly - for the duration. Flight deck crew never emerged, but did give regular updates and apologies.
With the CO at Rochester, I'm slightly puzzled. The suggestion is that the passengers and crew could physically have de-planed, but the issue would then be whether they were or were not in a restricted area. Question - do we know whether the flight crew remained in the a/c for the duration? If so, OK: in that circumstance you - SLF - have to defer to their authority and judgement on the spot (though I have vowed next time this happens to me to take the "Irish Solution" mentioned above!). But, unless the PIC has somehow managed to leave the a/c, then he or she remains as PIC - and surely **as Commander** he or she could and should have done more, much more for the safety and comfort of the passengers and crew. Why - seemingly - no calls to the local cops, the fire guys? No call to local radio or TV stations - who I'm sure would have loved to put out an all points to anyone still awake with any sense of responsibility or authority.... I don't think - from the limited evidence - that the PIC made every possible effort here.
That said, I'm always amazed to think how flight crews have to deal with these endless, intensely frustrating and uncomfortable delays. To be stopped and messed around for hours and then, perhaps, just have to turn on the fully pro approach to getting the a/c airborne, turning on a mental dime. I really do think that it's a very special kind of skill, and I'm grateful that all the guys and gals up front have it!
But that's why I'm really wondering if this Rochester PIC dropped the responsibility ball (or whether of course there is much more to the tale....).
AGB
The most similar to this Rochester thing that happened to me personally was a very late night divert on an already very delayed BA outbound from JFK to LHR. Long story, but we ended up landing at Montreal at about 2.30 am. Down, and taxi to some holding area (nowhere near a terminal) - and then the skipper comes on the PA to say that Montreal is now shut and, as there are no immigration personnel on duty, we have to remain on the a/c (in sub-zero temperatures......) until they turn up. Which they do shortly before 6.00am.... when we are eventually taken to hotels until the a/c can be fixed. Although again the crew were every bit as stuck as we were, in this case the cabin crew were a disgrace - they basically just gave up, announced that there was nothing left to eat or drink, gathered up front and remained there - bitching loudly - for the duration. Flight deck crew never emerged, but did give regular updates and apologies.
With the CO at Rochester, I'm slightly puzzled. The suggestion is that the passengers and crew could physically have de-planed, but the issue would then be whether they were or were not in a restricted area. Question - do we know whether the flight crew remained in the a/c for the duration? If so, OK: in that circumstance you - SLF - have to defer to their authority and judgement on the spot (though I have vowed next time this happens to me to take the "Irish Solution" mentioned above!). But, unless the PIC has somehow managed to leave the a/c, then he or she remains as PIC - and surely **as Commander** he or she could and should have done more, much more for the safety and comfort of the passengers and crew. Why - seemingly - no calls to the local cops, the fire guys? No call to local radio or TV stations - who I'm sure would have loved to put out an all points to anyone still awake with any sense of responsibility or authority.... I don't think - from the limited evidence - that the PIC made every possible effort here.
That said, I'm always amazed to think how flight crews have to deal with these endless, intensely frustrating and uncomfortable delays. To be stopped and messed around for hours and then, perhaps, just have to turn on the fully pro approach to getting the a/c airborne, turning on a mental dime. I really do think that it's a very special kind of skill, and I'm grateful that all the guys and gals up front have it!
But that's why I'm really wondering if this Rochester PIC dropped the responsibility ball (or whether of course there is much more to the tale....).
AGB
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: E.Wash State
Posts: 0
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
What utter rubbish. Security exists FOR the passengers, not the other way around. The passengers should have taken the initiative, and then made the security procedures serve their purposes. If the PIC either could not or would not make the proper decision, they should have deplaned themselves onto the tarmac. That would get some authorities there "toot sweet". At least if they decided to take them all to jail, a bus would be required and the toilets there wouldn't be overflowing. Sort that out with the judge.
@obgraham,
Actually I agree with you (well, apart from the "rubbish"!). What I was trying to say that it seems that the PIC made the **command decision** not to de-plane the passengers because he was told that to do so would constitute a security breach: righly or wrongly, sensibly or stupidly that's the decision he made (or so it seems...).
I'm with you that, in this ridiculous situation, passengers could have taken matters into their own hands, confident that public opinion would support them in the end. But there's a difference between passengers saying, "Right, we've had enough!", opening the doors and de-planing regardless, and passengers maybe physically removing a protesting crew from in front of the doors, and ignoring a PIC who says, "I'm ordering you, Sir, to return to your seat...".
As the old saying goes, Hit a Cop, Go to Jail......
AGB
Actually I agree with you (well, apart from the "rubbish"!). What I was trying to say that it seems that the PIC made the **command decision** not to de-plane the passengers because he was told that to do so would constitute a security breach: righly or wrongly, sensibly or stupidly that's the decision he made (or so it seems...).
I'm with you that, in this ridiculous situation, passengers could have taken matters into their own hands, confident that public opinion would support them in the end. But there's a difference between passengers saying, "Right, we've had enough!", opening the doors and de-planing regardless, and passengers maybe physically removing a protesting crew from in front of the doors, and ignoring a PIC who says, "I'm ordering you, Sir, to return to your seat...".
As the old saying goes, Hit a Cop, Go to Jail......
AGB
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: E.Wash State
Posts: 0
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Wet Coast
Posts: 2,335
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by me
Internet rumor is that the airplane did not have any stairs
ExpressJet 145s do NOT have airstairs; I didn't know that was an option. See:http://library.corporate-ir.net/libr...7/coex5_LG.jpg
