Hot flight
Thread Starter
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: JFK
Posts: 20
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hot flight
Post reporter experiences tense United flight
By Jeffrey Leib, Denver Post Staff Writer
For more than three hours late Monday afternoon, before boarding more than 200 passengers on Chicago-to-Denver flight 909, United Airlines officials had tried to cool down an extremely hot widebody jet at O'Hare International Airport.
The auxiliary power unit, or APU, on the Boeing 777, which generates electricity for planes when engines are shut down at the gate, was broken. Chicago's 100-degree heat and blazing sun had baked the plane's dark blue and gray skin, sending temperatures in the empty cabin soaring to at least 115 degrees.
Flight 909 had been scheduled for a 2:45 p.m. departure. To cool the cabin down, United first tried pumping air in at the gate. That didn't work. Then they started one engine at the gate, pushed the plane back and took it to a holding pad to get air flowing.
All other flights to Denver were booked full throughout the day. United tried to find a replacement plane for the 777, but none was available. If the company cancelled flight 909, it might be putting hundreds of travelers up in hotels.
Around 6:30 p.m., the big jet reappeared at the terminal and a growing gaggle of United officials told remaining travelers (some had bailed out) that they would be boarding. The cabin still was hot, company representatives said, but they would speed the boarding process and once an engine was started and the plane pushed back, the temperature would start moderating.
By 7, all were on board and the door closed. It was hot, probably in the low 90s. Officials said they had packed extra water and juice, but instead of a bottle of water on each seat, there was a blanket.
Captain Michael Glawe, his co-pilot and the plane's purser, or lead flight attendant, had spent hours on the sweltering plane trying to get it cooled down.
When the jet returned to the gate to board passengers, an external air source was hooked to the plane to prevent further overheating, Glawe said. Because the APU was not operating, that external air had be pulled and another air source supplied to start one engine, he added.
The process needed swift execution, but it did not happen.
Passengers waited for the engine start, and waited some more. There was little or no air flowing and the body heat of hundreds of passengers and crew members was lifting the temperature. It now was very hot in the cabin and cockpit.
There was no panic, but there was concern among the passengers. Some began to break out cellphones and call for help. One tried alerting an acquaintance, chief of the air traffic control tower at O'Hare, about flight 909's predicament.
Around 7:30, the chief flight attendant got on the intercom and said "we know it's over 100 degrees."
She said she had notified the captain how bad it was in the cabin and that he said the engine start would come within two minutes.
About the same time, Glawe was giving his own ultimatum to company officials -- supply air for the start or empty the plane. He was worried about heatstroke in the cabin.
"I was right on the verge of getting everybody off the airplane," he said today. "The plane was so heat-soaked that it was going to be warm until we got to altitude."
Monday night, just after the the doors were closed on the 777, Glawe, a United veteran and former pilots' union chief, had told passengers that it had been "one of the goofiest and most frustrating afternoons I've ever spent with the airline."
Finally, within seconds of Glawe's warning, the engine was started. Almost immediately, some air was flowing.
"I couldn't breathe; I thought I was going to faint," said passenger Sandy Ball, sitting in seat 37C. She later recalled that if the crew's request for two minutes more had expired without action, "I was going to stand up and scream. They endangered our lives putting us on that plane."
One frustrated flight attendant came down the aisle telling passengers to call United's headquarters and let executives know how bad it was. "Otherwise it will never change."
The plane took off at 8, and as soon as the flight attendants could get up, hydration began. Within an hour, it was so cool in the cabin that many passengers were grabbing blankets.
As the jet landed in Denver, the lead flight attendant apologized and begged people to give United another chance. She said, "This has been a very embarrassing and unprofessional situation."
"We're extremely sorry to everyone on that aircraft," United spokeswoman Robin Urbanski said today. "Our crew did the best job they could to get that plane cooled as quickly as possible."
By Jeffrey Leib, Denver Post Staff Writer
For more than three hours late Monday afternoon, before boarding more than 200 passengers on Chicago-to-Denver flight 909, United Airlines officials had tried to cool down an extremely hot widebody jet at O'Hare International Airport.
The auxiliary power unit, or APU, on the Boeing 777, which generates electricity for planes when engines are shut down at the gate, was broken. Chicago's 100-degree heat and blazing sun had baked the plane's dark blue and gray skin, sending temperatures in the empty cabin soaring to at least 115 degrees.
Flight 909 had been scheduled for a 2:45 p.m. departure. To cool the cabin down, United first tried pumping air in at the gate. That didn't work. Then they started one engine at the gate, pushed the plane back and took it to a holding pad to get air flowing.
All other flights to Denver were booked full throughout the day. United tried to find a replacement plane for the 777, but none was available. If the company cancelled flight 909, it might be putting hundreds of travelers up in hotels.
Around 6:30 p.m., the big jet reappeared at the terminal and a growing gaggle of United officials told remaining travelers (some had bailed out) that they would be boarding. The cabin still was hot, company representatives said, but they would speed the boarding process and once an engine was started and the plane pushed back, the temperature would start moderating.
By 7, all were on board and the door closed. It was hot, probably in the low 90s. Officials said they had packed extra water and juice, but instead of a bottle of water on each seat, there was a blanket.
Captain Michael Glawe, his co-pilot and the plane's purser, or lead flight attendant, had spent hours on the sweltering plane trying to get it cooled down.
When the jet returned to the gate to board passengers, an external air source was hooked to the plane to prevent further overheating, Glawe said. Because the APU was not operating, that external air had be pulled and another air source supplied to start one engine, he added.
The process needed swift execution, but it did not happen.
Passengers waited for the engine start, and waited some more. There was little or no air flowing and the body heat of hundreds of passengers and crew members was lifting the temperature. It now was very hot in the cabin and cockpit.
There was no panic, but there was concern among the passengers. Some began to break out cellphones and call for help. One tried alerting an acquaintance, chief of the air traffic control tower at O'Hare, about flight 909's predicament.
Around 7:30, the chief flight attendant got on the intercom and said "we know it's over 100 degrees."
She said she had notified the captain how bad it was in the cabin and that he said the engine start would come within two minutes.
About the same time, Glawe was giving his own ultimatum to company officials -- supply air for the start or empty the plane. He was worried about heatstroke in the cabin.
"I was right on the verge of getting everybody off the airplane," he said today. "The plane was so heat-soaked that it was going to be warm until we got to altitude."
Monday night, just after the the doors were closed on the 777, Glawe, a United veteran and former pilots' union chief, had told passengers that it had been "one of the goofiest and most frustrating afternoons I've ever spent with the airline."
Finally, within seconds of Glawe's warning, the engine was started. Almost immediately, some air was flowing.
"I couldn't breathe; I thought I was going to faint," said passenger Sandy Ball, sitting in seat 37C. She later recalled that if the crew's request for two minutes more had expired without action, "I was going to stand up and scream. They endangered our lives putting us on that plane."
One frustrated flight attendant came down the aisle telling passengers to call United's headquarters and let executives know how bad it was. "Otherwise it will never change."
The plane took off at 8, and as soon as the flight attendants could get up, hydration began. Within an hour, it was so cool in the cabin that many passengers were grabbing blankets.
As the jet landed in Denver, the lead flight attendant apologized and begged people to give United another chance. She said, "This has been a very embarrassing and unprofessional situation."
"We're extremely sorry to everyone on that aircraft," United spokeswoman Robin Urbanski said today. "Our crew did the best job they could to get that plane cooled as quickly as possible."
Lady Lexxington
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: The Manor House
Age: 43
Posts: 1,145
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
What an embarrasing situation for the crew to be put in, it sounds like they (the crew) handled the situation as well as they could to the best of their abilities. United.
Paxing All Over The World
Sounds like bad luck for the crew. It would certainly seem that loading and pushing back quickly could be done and they would have wanted to try, then something slowed them down and the a/c already very hot. So I would think it just very bad luck. Life is like this.
If the pax had been in the terminal and then in hotels - would they have said 'thank you' and not complained?
If the pax had been in the terminal and then in hotels - would they have said 'thank you' and not complained?
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: USA
Posts: 451
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Yea, right!!!
If the captain had any balls, he would have told management to either fix the plane, accommodate the passengers so they'd be comfortable, or stuff the Boeing up their @SS.
This is one of the many reasons we have unions.....So, you can do what's right, without fear of job action.
PantLoad!!!!
This is one of the many reasons we have unions.....So, you can do what's right, without fear of job action.
PantLoad!!!!
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: England
Posts: 1,389
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Perhaps an expert could comment on what would happen to the oxygen levels without the air flowing? I've been on a few flights where I've been convinced that the real problem was not the air temperature (although they were hot) but it felt like the oxygen levels were way down.
the lunatic fringe
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Everywhere
Age: 67
Posts: 618
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Why couldn't they have used ground power?
Ground Power only provides electricity, not air. So no air, no aircon.
L337
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: fairly close to the colonial capitol
Age: 55
Posts: 1,693
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
All AC packs rely on high pressure air from the engines or APU to operate. While the ground cart can provide airflow for engine starting and limited cooling, the available ground air volume for left pack operation on the 777 is inadequate under max cooling loads. Only the APU or one or more engines can provide the needed HP air. On a hot day, 2 pack operation would be barely enough to properly cool the aircraft once the interior has reached 90F or so.
The United crew did what they could with the limited means available to cool the cabin. Unfortunately, even properly working air conditioning equipment is barely able to adequately cool in high heat conditions on the ground.
Throw in a lack of HP air (no APU or other faults) and even after engine start-up, the system is barely able to keep up with the heat-load, let alone actually cool the cabin any further as long as you remain on the ground.
Dispatch should have not released that aircraft for passenger use - in my opinion.
The United crew did what they could with the limited means available to cool the cabin. Unfortunately, even properly working air conditioning equipment is barely able to adequately cool in high heat conditions on the ground.
Throw in a lack of HP air (no APU or other faults) and even after engine start-up, the system is barely able to keep up with the heat-load, let alone actually cool the cabin any further as long as you remain on the ground.
Dispatch should have not released that aircraft for passenger use - in my opinion.
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Vietnam
Posts: 167
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
How about to use a GACU
Ground Air Conditionning Unit
D ont tell me United d ont have them
A big Cie like United should be more professionnal
Mod note: Do try reading the first post!
Ground Air Conditionning Unit
D ont tell me United d ont have them
A big Cie like United should be more professionnal
Mod note: Do try reading the first post!
I wonder to what extent the Captain considered the fitness of the crew in this situation. From the description it appears that flight and cabin crew would have been working at less than optimum performance, and in the event of an emergency, early or later in the flight they may not have been able to adequately fulfilled their tasks.
Also it appears that the Captain placed great reliance on the ‘company’ (presumably dispatch) for the decision making; surely it was his decision as to the health and safety of the passengers and crew. This is not to judge the situation in hindsight or criticise the Captain, we were not there, but heat exhaustion can have significant effect on judgement.
I note an excellent article on the issue of being in command, from the RAeS Flt Ops Group, here is an extract – Captain Philip H.S. Smith, MRAeS.
The article concludes -
” The commander’s judgement should be informed by the best information and advice available in the circumstances but only the commander can make the decision. If advice indicates a course of action which is wrong in the judgement of the commander, then it is the judgement of the commander which must prevail. That is what an aircraft commander is paid for… Aviation cannot be safe without them. Commanders must take command.
Also it appears that the Captain placed great reliance on the ‘company’ (presumably dispatch) for the decision making; surely it was his decision as to the health and safety of the passengers and crew. This is not to judge the situation in hindsight or criticise the Captain, we were not there, but heat exhaustion can have significant effect on judgement.
I note an excellent article on the issue of being in command, from the RAeS Flt Ops Group, here is an extract – Captain Philip H.S. Smith, MRAeS.
Excellent communications allows a commander to seek information and advice if time is available but it also allows operators or outside agencies to attempt to compel a particular course of action. It is too much to expect even the best informed and most carefully briefed commander to have committed to memory or have at his fingertips all the information that might be of use in every conceivable situation. A prudent commander faced with a critical situation will acquire all relevant information he can in the time available before he makes a decision. He will probably want to seek advice from specialists in areas, such as security, where such specialists have access to sources not available to an aircraft commander. But neither the commander nor the source of information or advice should forget that it is no more than that. A request for information must not be taken as a request for instructions. The operator, personified by the commander’s managers, may try to dictate what their commander should do. This is understandable in a world in which a manager’s next pay rise and promotion may depend on the outcome, and especially the perception, of a decision made by someone they manage. Sometimes an operator’s standing instructions may point to a course of action that is inappropriate in the circumstances on the day. Outside agencies such as security authorities may also feel that they have the right to compel a particular course of action. The responsibility they bear is heavy and their priorities are wider than those of the commander of an aircraft. Nevertheless, neither the operator nor any other agency can take over command of the aircraft.
” The commander’s judgement should be informed by the best information and advice available in the circumstances but only the commander can make the decision. If advice indicates a course of action which is wrong in the judgement of the commander, then it is the judgement of the commander which must prevail. That is what an aircraft commander is paid for… Aviation cannot be safe without them. Commanders must take command.
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: USA
Posts: 563
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
PantLoad
you are right. captain could have said: FIX it or don't board.
Sorry UAL capt. Just say NO. You have one of the strongest pilot unions around. Things never happen until the pilot puts his foot down.
Just say: get the station manager or head of mx.
ORDER your crew off the plane until a safe temperature is reached.
AND on the previous leg you could have asked all the pax to lower the cute little window blind ( or the incoming crew could have done it). That would have helped a little
TO UNITED AIRLINES, if you haven't figured out that CHICAGO gets HOT in SUMMER, maybe you shouldn't be in the airline biz! Allocation of resources is the name of the game! PEOPLE die in high heat.
This is about as bad as running out of deice fluid in January!
And YES, you would have heard from the CHIEF PILOT, but every REAL ALPA pilot would have backed up your choice. They don't call you captain for nothing.
jon
you are right. captain could have said: FIX it or don't board.
Sorry UAL capt. Just say NO. You have one of the strongest pilot unions around. Things never happen until the pilot puts his foot down.
Just say: get the station manager or head of mx.
ORDER your crew off the plane until a safe temperature is reached.
AND on the previous leg you could have asked all the pax to lower the cute little window blind ( or the incoming crew could have done it). That would have helped a little
TO UNITED AIRLINES, if you haven't figured out that CHICAGO gets HOT in SUMMER, maybe you shouldn't be in the airline biz! Allocation of resources is the name of the game! PEOPLE die in high heat.
This is about as bad as running out of deice fluid in January!
And YES, you would have heard from the CHIEF PILOT, but every REAL ALPA pilot would have backed up your choice. They don't call you captain for nothing.
jon
Last edited by jondc9; 5th Aug 2006 at 20:05.
About two years ago in August, our plane at RDU/Raleigh Durham (US) was maybe not as bad as on the United 777, but was so hot and humid that after about 15 minuters waiting by the runway with an indefinite delay (no EDCT) due to bad wx. near the destination, I began to taxi us about two miles back to the gate-so we could all cool off! Once you write down the word "UNSAFE" in a written report, you will have a better leg to stand on.
As soon as we moved about 100 feet, the FO said "wait-they are releasing us for @+^^." If we had made it to the gate with no ATC release and allowed all 100+ pax to walk to the gate and cool off, the Station Manager would probably have written me up for an unreasonable delay etc. But it would have made no difference to me, as hot and humid as that plane was: and I had parked it by the runway at an angle whereby no sun was coming in the windows! Sometimes, even after DECADES (!) of operating a certain type of very old turbofan, the various staff still have trouble working together and understanding that the air must be plugged in just after arrival-you might have a long taxi delay.
Since that episode, if it is July-Aug and the arriving plane has no ground air plugged within about 10 minutes of engine shutdown, I tell the gate agent or any agent who is brave enough to answer the Ops freq, that I will not board the plane without the extra ground air. This seems to work. If this means that we have a three minute delay outbound-so be it. Mgmt makes the decisions about how many staff to lay off or outsource. They must not be allowed to create a working environment in which the passengers must suffer, all the while pay a cash bonus to a Station Manager
, who further reduces monthly cost by inefficient scheduling of people at "airport Nascar" and avoids staff being paid overtime!
Our local Chief Pilot told me that (on his own initiative!) he conducted a ground cooling test on a hot day-using two different aircraft and comparing APU output with one or both packs and various combinations with or without ground air.
And he does not fly this aircraft type! THAT is leadership
. How many other Chief Pilots would bother??
This uncomfortable episode happened when the plane had first arrived-the station reportedly had no tug to bring a portable air cond. unit to the plane.
Later, even with the APU and BOTH engines running (using a bit of contingency fuel quickly-we began and ended up with plenty, but it had little effect on the temp.), the old plane continued to heat up. And North Carolina in the summer can sometimes be worse than parts of the Deep South.
If Captains would treat their passengers, on each flight (and company executives would staff it...), as if their wife and relatives were on board, would they not have more sympathy regarding job stress and limited understanding among ground workers and the predictable results? By the way, at one of our stations, all of the new company 'outsourced staff' recently walked off the job.
Or maybe we should have two sets of standards, with the lower standards a flimsy attempt to improve schedule recovery (too late-the wx started the mess) ? Well, the passengers buy the tickets but nothing is guaranteed-they take their chances, mostly with the last flight to the hub. To heck with the lower standards-my crew and passengers' comfort, and maybe yours(?), should always be put between schedule reliability and safety, with safety and comfort at the top. I found out later that a number of Captains 'put their foot down' under the nasty conditions-but why not all, on the worst days? Somebody once wrote something like: "He who goes through life with no antagonists or enemies stands up for nothing".
Do it-and your crew will support you later, unless they are wimps, but so what if they are........
As soon as we moved about 100 feet, the FO said "wait-they are releasing us for @+^^." If we had made it to the gate with no ATC release and allowed all 100+ pax to walk to the gate and cool off, the Station Manager would probably have written me up for an unreasonable delay etc. But it would have made no difference to me, as hot and humid as that plane was: and I had parked it by the runway at an angle whereby no sun was coming in the windows! Sometimes, even after DECADES (!) of operating a certain type of very old turbofan, the various staff still have trouble working together and understanding that the air must be plugged in just after arrival-you might have a long taxi delay.
Since that episode, if it is July-Aug and the arriving plane has no ground air plugged within about 10 minutes of engine shutdown, I tell the gate agent or any agent who is brave enough to answer the Ops freq, that I will not board the plane without the extra ground air. This seems to work. If this means that we have a three minute delay outbound-so be it. Mgmt makes the decisions about how many staff to lay off or outsource. They must not be allowed to create a working environment in which the passengers must suffer, all the while pay a cash bonus to a Station Manager
, who further reduces monthly cost by inefficient scheduling of people at "airport Nascar" and avoids staff being paid overtime! Our local Chief Pilot told me that (on his own initiative!) he conducted a ground cooling test on a hot day-using two different aircraft and comparing APU output with one or both packs and various combinations with or without ground air.
And he does not fly this aircraft type! THAT is leadership
. How many other Chief Pilots would bother??This uncomfortable episode happened when the plane had first arrived-the station reportedly had no tug to bring a portable air cond. unit to the plane.
Later, even with the APU and BOTH engines running (using a bit of contingency fuel quickly-we began and ended up with plenty, but it had little effect on the temp.), the old plane continued to heat up. And North Carolina in the summer can sometimes be worse than parts of the Deep South.
If Captains would treat their passengers, on each flight (and company executives would staff it...), as if their wife and relatives were on board, would they not have more sympathy regarding job stress and limited understanding among ground workers and the predictable results? By the way, at one of our stations, all of the new company 'outsourced staff' recently walked off the job.
Or maybe we should have two sets of standards, with the lower standards a flimsy attempt to improve schedule recovery (too late-the wx started the mess) ? Well, the passengers buy the tickets but nothing is guaranteed-they take their chances, mostly with the last flight to the hub. To heck with the lower standards-my crew and passengers' comfort, and maybe yours(?), should always be put between schedule reliability and safety, with safety and comfort at the top. I found out later that a number of Captains 'put their foot down' under the nasty conditions-but why not all, on the worst days? Somebody once wrote something like: "He who goes through life with no antagonists or enemies stands up for nothing".
Do it-and your crew will support you later, unless they are wimps, but so what if they are........
Last edited by Ignition Override; 10th Aug 2006 at 05:39.
Too mean to buy a long personal title
Originally Posted by vapilot2004
Dispatch should have not released that aircraft for passenger use - in my opinion.
BUT: If, hypothetically, such a poll had been taken, I'll bet that most of the pax would ultimately have preferred to put up with a terrible but temporary situation on board so that they could get to their destination, rather than have the disruption of the cancellation of the flight.
If my guess is right, then hats off to the crew for doing what they could to make the best out of a bad job.
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: South Coast, UK
Posts: 78
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
OK, thre might be a perfectly sensible answer but why didn't the crew just load the bags, get rid of all the ancilliary vehicles and then start an engine for AC. The passengers could have been boarded through a jetway or by stairs on the non-running side so there was no danger and then the plane could have gone.
Paxing All Over The World
cb9002 Two main reasons: Firstly, if you start an engine at the terminal, you would have to prevent movement of people and vehicles in a wide area in front of the machine. For many places this would bring the whole pier to a halt - as the vehicles are running up and down in front of, and under, the pier to service everyone.
Secondly, the risk of the engine sucking up waste/trash material lying on the ground would be very high. There would be plastic and cardboard and other stuff lying around near the terminal and that can kill an engine fast. Which is why the a/c was backed off the stand to start an engine and attempt to cool the a/c. As has been stated by Ignition Override, the chance of a single engine being able to do that with an overheated airframe are low.
Secondly, the risk of the engine sucking up waste/trash material lying on the ground would be very high. There would be plastic and cardboard and other stuff lying around near the terminal and that can kill an engine fast. Which is why the a/c was backed off the stand to start an engine and attempt to cool the a/c. As has been stated by Ignition Override, the chance of a single engine being able to do that with an overheated airframe are low.
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Rockytop, Tennessee, USA
Posts: 5,898
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
All this chest pounding about what the captain woulda shoulda done is fine but in the real world the captain isn't running the show while the plane is at the gate with the door open. We all agree that in hindsight he could have done things differently but with an uncertain delay you can never call the shots in real time with total accuracy, you just don't have enough information while sitting in the left seat.
Sure, you could cause a scene, press to test and see if the once mighty union is as strong as in the good old days of Y2K. But most of United ALPA's work in recent years has been negotiating massive concessions to try to save the company. The captain is probably like most of my friends over there, he's looking for a job while hoping things hold together a while longer. A lot of us have been in that position in years past, I sure have.
Dispatch in hot or cold weather with APU bleed air problems is often legal but it really does dump a lot on the crew when there is a delay or miscue with the ground equipment. And these days all the carriers are back on the fuel conservation kick so the air is turned on at the last minute. We went through a cycle of this twenty years ago, you leave the air off until just before boarding, you save gas, the pax complain and take their business elsewhere.
Here's a similar incident overseas where the high ranking pax took decisive action:
______________________________
FAULTY AIR-CONDITIONING
MINISTERS PANIC. FLIGHT ABORTED AFTER BABA SIDDIQUI OPENS DOOR
MLAs lose their cool on Jet flight
Express News Service
Mumbai, December 13: ANGRY that the air-conditioning on the Jet Airways plane they had boarded was not functioning properly, several state ministers and legislators raised a ruckus on Monday morning until the flight was aborted.
Flight No 9W-111 was scheduled to leave Mumbai at 7.05 am and was to reach Nagpur at 8.25 am.
As the aircraft was being taxied towards the runway, some of the 10 ministers and 40 legislators on board—they were on their way to Nagpur to attend the winter session of the state legislature—complained of suffocation.
State Labour Minister Baba Siddiqui, State Bharatiya Janata Party President Gopinath Munde, Nationalist Congress Party legislator Jitendra Awhad and others promptly brought this to the notice of the airline staff.
When their protests didn’t have the desired result, the ministers moved towards the cockpit.
Airport sources say the pilot tried to reason with the ministers, explaining that the temperature inside the aircraft would stabilise once it attained a certain altitude after take-off.
The high-profile passengers weren’t convinced though. They demanded that the pilot abort the flight.
Sources say the agitated MLAs—Munde and Siddiqui were allegedly the most vocal—cursed and abused the pilot.
Then, a livid Siddiqui forcibly opened a plane door. This forced the pilot to abort the flight.
After the plane returned to bay 35 minutes later, senior Jet Airways officials attempted to pacify the VIP passengers, in vain. They were then put on another aircraft, which left for Nagpur at 9.25 am.
‘‘The pilot refused to halt the plane,’’ Munde, who has survived two aircraft accidents in the past, thundered.
‘‘State Director General of Health Subhash Salunkhe advised the airline staff to halt, but to no avail. Something serious could have happened had the pilot gone ahead with the flight,’’ Munde said.
A visibly angry Janardan Chandurkar, Congress MLA from Kherwadi, alleged that private airlines were ‘‘playing with the lives of the passengers’’ and demanded government control on them.
Looking to placate the angry legislators, the government ordered a high-level probe into the pilot’s ‘‘irresponsible’’ behaviour.
‘‘The government will lodge a First Information Report against the airlines after consulting experts on the issue. A high-level inquiry will also be conducted,’’ Deputy Chief Minister R R Patil said in the Assembly.
The Union Civil Aviation Ministry, however, reacted cautiously. ‘‘We are looking into the matter,’’ Union Civil Aviation Minister Praful Patel told Newsline.
‘‘We will see if there was anything life-threatening. We will also see if it deserves an inquiry,’’ he said, adding that a preliminary inquiry by the Director General of Civil Aviation (DGCA) has begun.
No threat to passengers’ safety, says Jet
Jet Airways’ Delhi-based spokesperson A K Shivanandan said the incident was unfortunate. At the last minute, he added, one air-conditioning system stopped functioning.
‘‘We have a duplicate system. When airborne, it can function without any difficulty and become fully operational. It was not a factor affecting the safety of passengers on the aircraft,’’ said Shivanandan.
The air-conditioning problem was rectified and the same aircraft later flew to Vadodara.
Angry leaders
It’s not the first time that Jet has faced the wrath of politicians.
* On March 25, 2003, then Union Labour Minister Sahib Singh Verma allegedly manhandled three Jet Airways officials after the flight could not take off on time due to work on the runway
* Seven months before this incident, Verma created a ruckus at a Jet terminal in Mumbai after reaching late for his flight for Bhuj
* A senior security official of Jet Airways lost his job in August 2002 for not letting the armed security guard of Shiv Sena leader Narayan Rane board a Chennai-Mumbai flight
‘No authority’
An aviation expert scoffed at the state government’s announcement of an inquiry. Speaking on condition of anonymity, he said, ‘‘Unfortunately, the state government has no legal authority to hold an inquiry on board an aircraft. It comes into the ambit of the Director General of Civil Aviation alone.’’
The Central Government can specifically set up a court of inquiry. In the past, this has been restricted to serious accidents, he added.
A passenger, the expert said, has no right to dictate terms and conditions to the pilot of an aircraft. Forcibly opening an aircraft door amounts to unlawful interference (hijacking) with the functioning of the aircraft, he added.
‘‘In fact, those involved in this incident should be charged for hijacking under international law, for which minimum punishment is a jail term.’’
http://cities.expressindia.com/fulls...?newsid=110225
Sure, you could cause a scene, press to test and see if the once mighty union is as strong as in the good old days of Y2K. But most of United ALPA's work in recent years has been negotiating massive concessions to try to save the company. The captain is probably like most of my friends over there, he's looking for a job while hoping things hold together a while longer. A lot of us have been in that position in years past, I sure have.
Dispatch in hot or cold weather with APU bleed air problems is often legal but it really does dump a lot on the crew when there is a delay or miscue with the ground equipment. And these days all the carriers are back on the fuel conservation kick so the air is turned on at the last minute. We went through a cycle of this twenty years ago, you leave the air off until just before boarding, you save gas, the pax complain and take their business elsewhere.
Here's a similar incident overseas where the high ranking pax took decisive action:
______________________________
FAULTY AIR-CONDITIONING
MINISTERS PANIC. FLIGHT ABORTED AFTER BABA SIDDIQUI OPENS DOOR
MLAs lose their cool on Jet flight
Express News Service
Mumbai, December 13: ANGRY that the air-conditioning on the Jet Airways plane they had boarded was not functioning properly, several state ministers and legislators raised a ruckus on Monday morning until the flight was aborted.
Flight No 9W-111 was scheduled to leave Mumbai at 7.05 am and was to reach Nagpur at 8.25 am.
As the aircraft was being taxied towards the runway, some of the 10 ministers and 40 legislators on board—they were on their way to Nagpur to attend the winter session of the state legislature—complained of suffocation.
State Labour Minister Baba Siddiqui, State Bharatiya Janata Party President Gopinath Munde, Nationalist Congress Party legislator Jitendra Awhad and others promptly brought this to the notice of the airline staff.
When their protests didn’t have the desired result, the ministers moved towards the cockpit.
Airport sources say the pilot tried to reason with the ministers, explaining that the temperature inside the aircraft would stabilise once it attained a certain altitude after take-off.
The high-profile passengers weren’t convinced though. They demanded that the pilot abort the flight.
Sources say the agitated MLAs—Munde and Siddiqui were allegedly the most vocal—cursed and abused the pilot.
Then, a livid Siddiqui forcibly opened a plane door. This forced the pilot to abort the flight.
After the plane returned to bay 35 minutes later, senior Jet Airways officials attempted to pacify the VIP passengers, in vain. They were then put on another aircraft, which left for Nagpur at 9.25 am.
‘‘The pilot refused to halt the plane,’’ Munde, who has survived two aircraft accidents in the past, thundered.
‘‘State Director General of Health Subhash Salunkhe advised the airline staff to halt, but to no avail. Something serious could have happened had the pilot gone ahead with the flight,’’ Munde said.
A visibly angry Janardan Chandurkar, Congress MLA from Kherwadi, alleged that private airlines were ‘‘playing with the lives of the passengers’’ and demanded government control on them.
Looking to placate the angry legislators, the government ordered a high-level probe into the pilot’s ‘‘irresponsible’’ behaviour.
‘‘The government will lodge a First Information Report against the airlines after consulting experts on the issue. A high-level inquiry will also be conducted,’’ Deputy Chief Minister R R Patil said in the Assembly.
The Union Civil Aviation Ministry, however, reacted cautiously. ‘‘We are looking into the matter,’’ Union Civil Aviation Minister Praful Patel told Newsline.
‘‘We will see if there was anything life-threatening. We will also see if it deserves an inquiry,’’ he said, adding that a preliminary inquiry by the Director General of Civil Aviation (DGCA) has begun.
No threat to passengers’ safety, says Jet
Jet Airways’ Delhi-based spokesperson A K Shivanandan said the incident was unfortunate. At the last minute, he added, one air-conditioning system stopped functioning.
‘‘We have a duplicate system. When airborne, it can function without any difficulty and become fully operational. It was not a factor affecting the safety of passengers on the aircraft,’’ said Shivanandan.
The air-conditioning problem was rectified and the same aircraft later flew to Vadodara.
Angry leaders
It’s not the first time that Jet has faced the wrath of politicians.
* On March 25, 2003, then Union Labour Minister Sahib Singh Verma allegedly manhandled three Jet Airways officials after the flight could not take off on time due to work on the runway
* Seven months before this incident, Verma created a ruckus at a Jet terminal in Mumbai after reaching late for his flight for Bhuj
* A senior security official of Jet Airways lost his job in August 2002 for not letting the armed security guard of Shiv Sena leader Narayan Rane board a Chennai-Mumbai flight
‘No authority’
An aviation expert scoffed at the state government’s announcement of an inquiry. Speaking on condition of anonymity, he said, ‘‘Unfortunately, the state government has no legal authority to hold an inquiry on board an aircraft. It comes into the ambit of the Director General of Civil Aviation alone.’’
The Central Government can specifically set up a court of inquiry. In the past, this has been restricted to serious accidents, he added.
A passenger, the expert said, has no right to dictate terms and conditions to the pilot of an aircraft. Forcibly opening an aircraft door amounts to unlawful interference (hijacking) with the functioning of the aircraft, he added.
‘‘In fact, those involved in this incident should be charged for hijacking under international law, for which minimum punishment is a jail term.’’
http://cities.expressindia.com/fulls...?newsid=110225
Last edited by Airbubba; 6th Aug 2006 at 18:57.
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: USA
Posts: 563
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
This isn't about chest thumping or testing a union.
It is about captain's authority. Its about a major airline acting like a 2 bit puddle jumper.
Its about allocating resources and thinking. in the mighty fom isn't passenger/crew safety and comfort mentioned? Why not a page that says: Thou shalt not board if the cabin temp is above 85 degrees?
This is FAIR WARNING to passengers that things aren't quite right in the world of the sky.
---
Ignition Overide
Imagine having a pro active chief pilot? wow! that is about as rare as a secure pension plan these days.
Isn't it funny how managment can give us the keys to a multi million dollar plane, the lives of people, the reputation of the company AND THEN CAN'T TRUST US ENOUGH TO KNOW IF THE PLANE IS TOO HOT OR NOT?
To the poster who indicated having the passengers VOTE on the situation. The captain must protect the safety of all those on the plane from the weakest to the strongest. Imagine voting to go when the plane is too hot and have a baby get terribly sick on the plane.
Shame on United management for not being prepared. Even boy scouts are prepared.
Heat stroke can be deadly. Over 100 people in California alone have died due to high heat in the last 3 weeks. More across the whole country and MANY MANY times that in Europe in the last few years.
Multiple choice question:
If your plane is so hot that you are concerned for the safety and comfort of your crew and passengers do you?
1. Board anyway because if you don't you might get in trouble from the station manager who doesn't know what an ACM is.
2. Take a vote among passengers and board even if a baby or senior citizen is really not able to take the heat.
3. Remember that you have the responsibility for the well being of your crew and passengers and the LAWFUL AUTHORITY to act to preserve their safety and well being.
4. Wait for the same management team, that votes themselves bonuses while you lose pay and pension, to actually do something?
If you don't know the answer, maybe you should give up the 4th stripe.
Management has been trying to fly all airlines on the cheap...PILOTS wake up! Passengers WAKE UP TOO>
It is about captain's authority. Its about a major airline acting like a 2 bit puddle jumper.
Its about allocating resources and thinking. in the mighty fom isn't passenger/crew safety and comfort mentioned? Why not a page that says: Thou shalt not board if the cabin temp is above 85 degrees?
This is FAIR WARNING to passengers that things aren't quite right in the world of the sky.
---
Ignition Overide
Imagine having a pro active chief pilot? wow! that is about as rare as a secure pension plan these days.
Isn't it funny how managment can give us the keys to a multi million dollar plane, the lives of people, the reputation of the company AND THEN CAN'T TRUST US ENOUGH TO KNOW IF THE PLANE IS TOO HOT OR NOT?
To the poster who indicated having the passengers VOTE on the situation. The captain must protect the safety of all those on the plane from the weakest to the strongest. Imagine voting to go when the plane is too hot and have a baby get terribly sick on the plane.
Shame on United management for not being prepared. Even boy scouts are prepared.
Heat stroke can be deadly. Over 100 people in California alone have died due to high heat in the last 3 weeks. More across the whole country and MANY MANY times that in Europe in the last few years.
Multiple choice question:
If your plane is so hot that you are concerned for the safety and comfort of your crew and passengers do you?
1. Board anyway because if you don't you might get in trouble from the station manager who doesn't know what an ACM is.
2. Take a vote among passengers and board even if a baby or senior citizen is really not able to take the heat.
3. Remember that you have the responsibility for the well being of your crew and passengers and the LAWFUL AUTHORITY to act to preserve their safety and well being.
4. Wait for the same management team, that votes themselves bonuses while you lose pay and pension, to actually do something?
If you don't know the answer, maybe you should give up the 4th stripe.
Management has been trying to fly all airlines on the cheap...PILOTS wake up! Passengers WAKE UP TOO>
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: England
Posts: 1,389
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If flight crew give good/bad service pax can write to the airline and praise/complain about the service on flight xyz. It's somewhat harder to do that about some anonymous person or proceedure most pax don't know exists. Most of the time pax have no idea who or what is to blame for the problem/situation they are currently facing. Perhaps pilots need to explain the reasons a bit more to pax.