Ryanair & Air Arran Bomb Threat Diversions to PIK (merged)
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Ireland
Posts: 596
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by britanniaboy
At the end of the day, does that pilot know if the device is on a trip where it would explode when cabin altitude starts to increase on decent?
The idea that cabin crew will be expected to search and possibly de-fuse a device is nonsense.
SoS
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: gatwick
Posts: 76
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Sorry speed of sound, but where exactly did I say CC were expected to defuse any device? Um... nowhere.
And as for CC not searching for a device; think you'll find our training says different and that under CERTAIN circumstances we are expected to build an LRBL and place a device in that area.
As far as I'm aware it has never happened, but then I'm also unaware of a modern jetliner ditching and the crew getting passengers into the liferafts. But hey, we're also trained for that.
And as for CC not searching for a device; think you'll find our training says different and that under CERTAIN circumstances we are expected to build an LRBL and place a device in that area.
As far as I'm aware it has never happened, but then I'm also unaware of a modern jetliner ditching and the crew getting passengers into the liferafts. But hey, we're also trained for that.
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Switzerland, Singapore
Posts: 1,309
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
noone says the C/C has to defuse the bomb, if found. You seem to have no big knowledge of security in aviation. It's the job of someone (most of the time a C/Cs) to search for the bomb and then put it on the "least dangerous place", which is often in a hatrack or a toilet (depending on aircraft type). The reason behind is that if it really goes off, the least structural damage happens.There is another misconception in some postings: During a bomb-on-board incident you do not land as soon as possible, but as soon as practicable. Aircraft builder have therefore issued long checklists, where you try to fly with a reasonable low speed and with a rather slow descent angle to land, by fiddeling around with the cabin pressure, so if the bomb would explode, you would do as few harm as possible.
Dani
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Ireland
Posts: 596
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by britanniaboy
And as for CC not searching for a device; think you'll find our training says different
SoS
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: gatwick
Posts: 76
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Yes, I'm aware of that. My point was that you didn't read what I'd initially written; you read what you thought I'd written by reading between the lines. I used to do that when i was sitting exams at school. Learned not to the hard way.
And had the jet been out over the mid Atlantic, would you still maintain that the crew would not conduct a search? Or would you rather leave that decision to the experts?
And had the jet been out over the mid Atlantic, would you still maintain that the crew would not conduct a search? Or would you rather leave that decision to the experts?
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Ireland
Posts: 596
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by britanniaboy
Yes, I'm aware of that. My point was that you didn't read what I'd initially written............
And had the jet been out over the mid Atlantic, would you still maintain that the crew would not conduct a search? Or would you rather leave that decision to the experts?
And had the jet been out over the mid Atlantic, would you still maintain that the crew would not conduct a search? Or would you rather leave that decision to the experts?
And yes, the crew probably would carry out a search over the Atlantic but my original question is still unanswered. What help would alerting ATC to the situation be, other than to put your passengers in jeopardy of being shot down? (Even more likely over the Atlantic)
SoS
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: gatwick
Posts: 76
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
First off, thanks Dani! :-D Didn't see your post until just now!
OK you did read my post, but I still can't see where I said that crew would defuse a device.
Asking what good it would do to infrom ATC that you had a bomb threat on board? Isn't that arrogant presumption on the part of the pilot who makes that decision; that he's better trained to deal with it than the professionals on the ground? And why would you be shot out of the sky for having an expliosve device on board? Surely if there was still a pilot in command then there is no threat of a suicide attack on a ground target?
And what of the consequences on the ground? You get a nice devert to LHR and on to stand them BAM! Of course, if ATC knew of the situation and you'd been divereted to STN and put on remote then perhaps the people in the terminal, on the ground and on neighbouring AC wouldn't have died?
And there lies my point.
OK you did read my post, but I still can't see where I said that crew would defuse a device.
Asking what good it would do to infrom ATC that you had a bomb threat on board? Isn't that arrogant presumption on the part of the pilot who makes that decision; that he's better trained to deal with it than the professionals on the ground? And why would you be shot out of the sky for having an expliosve device on board? Surely if there was still a pilot in command then there is no threat of a suicide attack on a ground target?
And what of the consequences on the ground? You get a nice devert to LHR and on to stand them BAM! Of course, if ATC knew of the situation and you'd been divereted to STN and put on remote then perhaps the people in the terminal, on the ground and on neighbouring AC wouldn't have died?
And there lies my point.
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: East Molesey, Surrey, UK
Posts: 102
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Why the wait?
The real issue here is why the pax were kept on the aircraft so long. I cannot see the reason for it.
This was not a hijack – it was a bomb threat.
I have spoken to one of the pax. He said the captain told them several times during the 2.5 hours they were stuck on the aircraft - in a remote corner of Prestwick airfield - that he was asking for permission to disembark them, but was not being given clearance. Prestwick says the police were making the decisions.
Did the captain need clearance? ICAO security SARPs say that, in the event of an aircraft being illegally threatened, “the paramount objective is safe release of the passengers and crew which should override considerations [of apprehending those responsible]”. I say again, this was a bomb threat, not an armed hijack.
I have a creeping feeling that there are procedures for hijacks, and there are procedures in the air for bomb threats, but there are no well thought-out procedures on the ground for a bomb-threat that – as in this case - has not been made by a suicide merchant with his hand on the detonator. In the latter case you are dead if you twitch and dead if you don’t, but this was not the case here.
The passenger told me that the authorities – the crash/rescue services included – were keeping their distance – about 500m or more. So they were entertaining the possibility that there really was a bomb on board.
Somebody please tell me, in my ignorance, that there was a reason for risking the lives of 173 people on this aircraft, and that the authorities were not prepared to sacrifice them to the police’s fear that one potential terrorist might escape their clutches if they let the people disembark.
I would never criticise this captain for not exercising his authority and ordering an evacuation, because I suspect that he thought the authorities knew better than him.
But did they?
IFALPA, BALPA and IALPA must accost the Home Office and the Department for Transport NOW to find out what is behind this logic, so they can give advice to captains on situations like this one. They have done this before in the case of armed hijacking, but maybe this one has slipped through the cracks.
SF
This was not a hijack – it was a bomb threat.
I have spoken to one of the pax. He said the captain told them several times during the 2.5 hours they were stuck on the aircraft - in a remote corner of Prestwick airfield - that he was asking for permission to disembark them, but was not being given clearance. Prestwick says the police were making the decisions.
Did the captain need clearance? ICAO security SARPs say that, in the event of an aircraft being illegally threatened, “the paramount objective is safe release of the passengers and crew which should override considerations [of apprehending those responsible]”. I say again, this was a bomb threat, not an armed hijack.
I have a creeping feeling that there are procedures for hijacks, and there are procedures in the air for bomb threats, but there are no well thought-out procedures on the ground for a bomb-threat that – as in this case - has not been made by a suicide merchant with his hand on the detonator. In the latter case you are dead if you twitch and dead if you don’t, but this was not the case here.
The passenger told me that the authorities – the crash/rescue services included – were keeping their distance – about 500m or more. So they were entertaining the possibility that there really was a bomb on board.
Somebody please tell me, in my ignorance, that there was a reason for risking the lives of 173 people on this aircraft, and that the authorities were not prepared to sacrifice them to the police’s fear that one potential terrorist might escape their clutches if they let the people disembark.
I would never criticise this captain for not exercising his authority and ordering an evacuation, because I suspect that he thought the authorities knew better than him.
But did they?
IFALPA, BALPA and IALPA must accost the Home Office and the Department for Transport NOW to find out what is behind this logic, so they can give advice to captains on situations like this one. They have done this before in the case of armed hijacking, but maybe this one has slipped through the cracks.
SF
If the aircraft had a mechanical failure it would be readily accepted by any airport underneath its path with a long enough runway.
Why are things different with a suspected bomb hoax ? In fact I thought the Heathrow/Prestwick designation was for hijackings, not for bomb warnings.
And why Prestwick on a Beauvais to Dublin routing ? For goodness sake, no matter where it happened Dublin will always have been closer.
Why are things different with a suspected bomb hoax ? In fact I thought the Heathrow/Prestwick designation was for hijackings, not for bomb warnings.
And why Prestwick on a Beauvais to Dublin routing ? For goodness sake, no matter where it happened Dublin will always have been closer.
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Ireland
Posts: 596
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by britanniaboy
OK you did read my post, but I still can't see where I said that crew would defuse a device............that he's better trained to deal with it than the professionals on the ground?
The captain may not be be better trained than the professionals on the ground but he is certainly better placed. Why do you think armed fighter aircraft are sent up to 'escort' the plane? To prevent it doing any harm to life or property. There is only one way they can do that and that is to shoot it down.
If I was a captain responsible for the lives of those on board, I would think seriously before alerting ATC of the full situation. If there is a bomb on board that is timed to go off before the plane has a chance to land, then very little can be done to stop that, while the plane is in the air.
SoS
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: gatwick
Posts: 76
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Speed of Sound
The idea that cabin crew will be expected to search and possibly de-fuse a device is nonsense.
SoS
SoS
But you are still missing my point. The Captain is in no position to decide whether informing ATC of a bomb threat is the best course of action. He must tell them so that people better informed than him can make the decision of what to do. Like I said, if the bomb was timed to explode on the ground, or the timer malfunctioned and detonated late, then the results on the ground would be far more catastrophic if the jet was parked at a gate (the result of not informing ATC) than if it was parked away on a remote stand (the result of informing ATC).
As for the fighter escort, this seems to be the standard procedure in any case where there is a terrorist threat made to the a/c.
Who was to say that the bomb threat wasn't a ruse of a would-be terrorist(s) to take over the aircraft in some ill-hoped for confusion? Perhaps waiting for a crewmember to go into or out of the flight deck to investigate the threat and then attempt to overpower the flight crew. That's why I recon that they had an escort: if things escalated then there was more time to play with.
This whole thread is getting ridiculous and I think the moderators should seriously consider closing it down now. Once again we are being besieged by promising hysterics who do not have the faintest idea of what they are talking about.
Bomb threats used to happen on a daily basis and probably still do. Each one is assessed and given an order of merit by those who know about such things and advice is issued accordingly.
Usually the threat is assessed as very low but the situation is still considered seriously.
I have been in the front of three "bomb scares" and found it very difficult to take any of them seriously.
The most ridiculous was when I was working for a good but poor Muslim nation and ATC could not understand why I was not prepared to put 350 passengers down 30-foot slides and probably kill some of them for a ridiculous claim.
My guess is that the reason the punters were kept on board Ryanair for 2 or 3 hours was that the assessment was very low and the hope was that the culprit might just be smoked out after a bit of pressure.
Bomb threats used to happen on a daily basis and probably still do. Each one is assessed and given an order of merit by those who know about such things and advice is issued accordingly.
Usually the threat is assessed as very low but the situation is still considered seriously.
I have been in the front of three "bomb scares" and found it very difficult to take any of them seriously.
The most ridiculous was when I was working for a good but poor Muslim nation and ATC could not understand why I was not prepared to put 350 passengers down 30-foot slides and probably kill some of them for a ridiculous claim.
My guess is that the reason the punters were kept on board Ryanair for 2 or 3 hours was that the assessment was very low and the hope was that the culprit might just be smoked out after a bit of pressure.
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Gatwick
Posts: 1,980
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Some people go to great lengths to hoax.
A few years ago, pre 9/11 I was on a jet at LGW, in the flight deck going through some bits and pieces with the crew. One of the cabin crew came upto me and informed me that some wires were hanging out of one of the seats in the front cabin. I said it was probably IFE wiring and I would pop down to have a look in a bit.
I finished up with the crew and walked down to the seat in question. I saw a blue wire in between that seat and the next one to it. Very odd, as you do not see coloured wires like that on aircraft. I had a closer look and on the other side was a red wire. I looked closer at the first wire and followed it down below the seat base (without touching it!), to see it ending in a croc clip, that was clipped to the frame of the seat. A slight brown smell of fear grew around me as I departed from the seat at great haste. I informed the Captain, who had just given the OK to board. He stopped that and we all got off as quick as we could.
The police turned up with a sniffer dog and handler, who asked what had happened. I told him and he asked me to show him where abouts it seat in question was. Skeptically, I followed him and pointed him in the right direction. He released the dog who ran straight to the seat in question! I was about to bolt, but looked at the handler, who wasn't concerned. I asked him why and he replied that the dog wasn't barking, but if he started I would have to race him of the jet! We all walked over to the seat and one of the officers moved the seat base (I was still more than a little nervous!), to find the two bits of wire wound round a spindle and hidden at the base of the seat. PAX lists were requested for the last few flights and that was the last I heard of it.
I wonder what would be the reaction now?
Well done for the crew member who found it!
What would have happened if it had been found in flight? This was not a fone call or note, but physical evidence that there could be a bomb on board!
A few years ago, pre 9/11 I was on a jet at LGW, in the flight deck going through some bits and pieces with the crew. One of the cabin crew came upto me and informed me that some wires were hanging out of one of the seats in the front cabin. I said it was probably IFE wiring and I would pop down to have a look in a bit.
I finished up with the crew and walked down to the seat in question. I saw a blue wire in between that seat and the next one to it. Very odd, as you do not see coloured wires like that on aircraft. I had a closer look and on the other side was a red wire. I looked closer at the first wire and followed it down below the seat base (without touching it!), to see it ending in a croc clip, that was clipped to the frame of the seat. A slight brown smell of fear grew around me as I departed from the seat at great haste. I informed the Captain, who had just given the OK to board. He stopped that and we all got off as quick as we could.
The police turned up with a sniffer dog and handler, who asked what had happened. I told him and he asked me to show him where abouts it seat in question was. Skeptically, I followed him and pointed him in the right direction. He released the dog who ran straight to the seat in question! I was about to bolt, but looked at the handler, who wasn't concerned. I asked him why and he replied that the dog wasn't barking, but if he started I would have to race him of the jet! We all walked over to the seat and one of the officers moved the seat base (I was still more than a little nervous!), to find the two bits of wire wound round a spindle and hidden at the base of the seat. PAX lists were requested for the last few flights and that was the last I heard of it.
I wonder what would be the reaction now?
Well done for the crew member who found it!
What would have happened if it had been found in flight? This was not a fone call or note, but physical evidence that there could be a bomb on board!
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Thrid rock from the sun
Posts: 54
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Evacuate
This is not the first time that Authorities have forced crew to DETAIN pax on board an aircraft while the decide what to do.
Firstly NO ONE, whatever the Assessment is, can definitely say that the threat is not real.
Imagine the outcry if a bomb exploded after the aircraft had sat on the ground for an hour and crew were awaiting clearence to disembark!!!!!!. The main body of pax were teenage school children!!!!.
As a Captain I will put my hand up and admit I would request steps and if they did not come immediately, I would evacuate the pax.
P
Firstly NO ONE, whatever the Assessment is, can definitely say that the threat is not real.
Imagine the outcry if a bomb exploded after the aircraft had sat on the ground for an hour and crew were awaiting clearence to disembark!!!!!!. The main body of pax were teenage school children!!!!.
As a Captain I will put my hand up and admit I would request steps and if they did not come immediately, I would evacuate the pax.
P
Pigsfly:
Q1: Have you ever been involved in a bomb scare?
Q2: At which airport would you expect a set of steps to appear "immediately"?
Q3: Depending on your definition of "immediately" would you really contemplate possibly killing and injuring passengers going down 30-foot slides (or can you perhaps step out of your aeroplane)?
Q4: If the risk assessment is low (as it usually is) would you be prepared to be sued by all of the punters or their relatives that you have just killed or injured for no good reason?
Q1: Have you ever been involved in a bomb scare?
Q2: At which airport would you expect a set of steps to appear "immediately"?
Q3: Depending on your definition of "immediately" would you really contemplate possibly killing and injuring passengers going down 30-foot slides (or can you perhaps step out of your aeroplane)?
Q4: If the risk assessment is low (as it usually is) would you be prepared to be sued by all of the punters or their relatives that you have just killed or injured for no good reason?
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: UK
Age: 45
Posts: 121
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by HEATHROW DIRECTOR
Lastly, one report said that the pilot reported the bomb scare to ATC who promptly handed control to the RAF.... Hmmmmm....
I'm puzzled though about who exactly "forced" the crew to keep the passengers on board while there was a bomb threat? I'm sure that as far as the safety of the aircraft and the people on board are concerned then the buck stops with the captain. If he/she had decided to evacuate everyone down the slides would the police be there telling them to make their way back up? If I was a passenger I would be desperate to get off the aircraft ASAP,so I feel sorry for the folk who were put through an ordeal yesterday. Glad everyone is OK.
There are some aspects of this incident, as reported, which I find quite puzzling and, as flight crew, quite concerning.
I am with Pigsfly on this one. As commander I would be inclined to inform the airport authorities that if steps were not provided post haste I would be ordering a pax evacuation. Ok there might be a few minor injuries but the consequences would be insignificant compared to a bomb being detonated with all pax still on board. Apart from the liability aspect should the latter case apply (could you not see the lawyers having a field day?) the aircraft commander is the person who has final responsibility for the safety and security of his/her passengers. It concerns me that it appears from all the reports so far that in this case the commander's authority has not been respected. I would hope that BALPA, IFALPA the IPA investigate the full circumstances of this case and make suitable representations to the politicians concerned. In short, it's not much good having the responsibility without the authority.
I am with Pigsfly on this one. As commander I would be inclined to inform the airport authorities that if steps were not provided post haste I would be ordering a pax evacuation. Ok there might be a few minor injuries but the consequences would be insignificant compared to a bomb being detonated with all pax still on board. Apart from the liability aspect should the latter case apply (could you not see the lawyers having a field day?) the aircraft commander is the person who has final responsibility for the safety and security of his/her passengers. It concerns me that it appears from all the reports so far that in this case the commander's authority has not been respected. I would hope that BALPA, IFALPA the IPA investigate the full circumstances of this case and make suitable representations to the politicians concerned. In short, it's not much good having the responsibility without the authority.