Go Back  PPRuNe Forums > Flight Deck Forums > Rumours & News
Reload this Page >

AA109 returns to LHR

Wikiposts
Search
Rumours & News Reporting Points that may affect our jobs or lives as professional pilots. Also, items that may be of interest to professional pilots.

AA109 returns to LHR

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old 7th Aug 2006, 13:18
  #1 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: uk
Posts: 123
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
AA109 returns to LHR

AA109 LHR-BOS departed this morning (10:53BST), but is scheduled back into LHR at 15:10 as AA109R. Anyone know more?
jerrystinger is offline  
Old 7th Aug 2006, 13:38
  #2 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Sky
Posts: 26
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Think you have incorrect information. According to "flytecomm", it is due to arrive in Boston at 12:49 and is currently enroute on schedule.

flyerire.
flyerire is offline  
Old 7th Aug 2006, 14:48
  #3 (permalink)  
Too mean to buy a long personal title
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: UK
Posts: 1,968
Received 6 Likes on 4 Posts
www.aa.com says "FLIGHT STATUS - CANCELLED".
Globaliser is offline  
Old 7th Aug 2006, 15:11
  #4 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: UK
Posts: 130
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
AA109

Flt AA109 recently landed 09R, whilst 27R/L in use at LHR - and flight now
showing as cancelled.
diesel862 is offline  
Old 7th Aug 2006, 15:12
  #5 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Berkshire, UK
Age: 79
Posts: 8,268
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
I hear that it returned with a "mechanical problem".
HEATHROW DIRECTOR is offline  
Old 7th Aug 2006, 15:15
  #6 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: London (Babylon-on-Thames)
Age: 42
Posts: 6,168
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by flyerire
Think you have incorrect information. According to "flytecomm", it is due to arrive in Boston at 12:49 and is currently enroute on schedule.

flyerire.
' cos that website is never wrong..........
Skipness One Echo is offline  
Old 7th Aug 2006, 15:24
  #7 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: UK
Posts: 130
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
It returned due to a mechanical problem and the flight is now cancelled.
It will either ferry empty or go with pax tomorrow if the problem is fixed.
Most of the pax have already been booked on other flights tonight.
diesel862 is offline  
Old 7th Aug 2006, 16:12
  #8 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: Herts, UK
Posts: 156
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Sky news are reporting that it returned due to a 'security incident'.
Cahlibahn is offline  
Old 7th Aug 2006, 16:12
  #9 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: EGLL
Posts: 81
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
SKY NEWS

"AA109 returned due to an onboard security incident"
Airline Tycoon is offline  
Old 7th Aug 2006, 16:55
  #10 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: DUBLIN
Posts: 77
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Excuse my ignorance when i ask what type of a/c this is your talking about?

Thanks
EIDW
DUB-GREG is offline  
Old 7th Aug 2006, 17:29
  #11 (permalink)  

Lady Lexxington
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: The Manor House
Age: 43
Posts: 1,145
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
BBC reporting 4 pax being spoken to.

Link.
lexxity is offline  
Old 7th Aug 2006, 17:53
  #12 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Berkshire, UK
Age: 79
Posts: 8,268
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Thinks: So why did it need to land opposite direction?
HEATHROW DIRECTOR is offline  
Old 7th Aug 2006, 18:17
  #13 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: La Belle Province
Posts: 2,179
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by HEATHROW DIRECTOR
Thinks: So why did it need to land opposite direction?
At a guess, following the incident a few months ago (?) when an aircraft with a problem was routed over central London, they used 09R because it approaches from the West i.e. over suburbia.
Mad (Flt) Scientist is offline  
Old 7th Aug 2006, 19:07
  #14 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: USA
Posts: 185
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
From AP:
LONDON - A London-to-Boston flight was called back to Heathrow Airport on Monday after U.S. authorities discovered a passenger's name was on their "no-fly" list, officials said. Four passengers were being questioned by border control officers.
American Airlines Flight 109, a Boeing 777, left London at 10:55 a.m. (5:55 a.m. EDT) headed for Boston, said Tim Wagner, a spokesman for the Fort Worth, Texas-based airline.

"The flight returned to Heathrow due to a security issue that needed to be resolved in London," he said. "It was not a security threat to the aircraft. The flight was in no danger."

Wagner provided no other details.

Phil Orlandella, a spokesman for the Massachusetts Port Authority, which runs Boston's Logan Airport, said staff were told at a meeting Monday morning that the name of a passenger on the flight matched one on the no-fly list. He had no further information.

"Out of an abundance of caution, Homeland Security determined the flight would not be allowed to land in Boston," a U.S. Homeland Security Department official said in Washington, speaking on condition of anonymity because of the sensitivity of the situation.

He said no unusual activity was reported aboard the plane.

The man, traveling with three women identified as his mother and two sisters, was taken into custody for questioning by British and U.S. authorities, the Homeland Security official said.

The official, who did not know the suspect passenger's age or nationality, said the three women traveling with him were not taken into custody.

But London's Metropolitan Police said port and border control officials were questioning four passengers removed from the flight. Police did not specify who they were.

The U.S. Transportation Security Administration's "no-fly" list was established after the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks to prevent people who may have terrorist ties from boarding commercial flights.
Middle Seat is offline  
Old 7th Aug 2006, 21:57
  #15 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: woop woop
Posts: 229
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
As if any "terrorist" would travel under his right name to the US sheesh !

I recently had to apply for a US visa and one of the questions was (amongst a bunch of other inane ones) was "do you intend to engage in terrorist activities" !!

Yeah right and the answer to that would be yes????
I know they are paranoid re 911 and rightly so, but do they honestly think that anyone right minded or not would answer yes to that question?

How much money has homeland security cost AA for that little episode.
faheel is offline  
Old 7th Aug 2006, 22:36
  #16 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: EGLL
Posts: 81
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by HEATHROW DIRECTOR
Thinks: So why did it need to land opposite direction?
Just a precaution Bren, so it didn't fly over central London.
Airline Tycoon is offline  
Old 7th Aug 2006, 23:50
  #17 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Cheshire
Posts: 183
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Devil

I thought US authorities got the pax list hours before take-off & I assume they use computers to compare names, so why the delay in ident?
Must have an advanced copy of MS Vista!
... or Cat Stevens aka Yusuf Ali trying to sneak back in with a News of the World 'sheikh' in tow!
Nov71 is offline  
Old 8th Aug 2006, 08:05
  #18 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Berkshire, UK
Age: 79
Posts: 8,268
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Tnx Airline Tycoon...
HEATHROW DIRECTOR is offline  
Old 8th Aug 2006, 08:14
  #19 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: London UK
Posts: 7,659
Likes: 0
Received 19 Likes on 16 Posts
So if there really is a security concern .....

Why are the US authorities unhappy to accept this flight into Boston or into any remote Air Force base in the US but are quite happy to send it back to overfly populated areas at its origin ?

Overflown of Slough
WHBM is offline  
Old 8th Aug 2006, 08:35
  #20 (permalink)  
The Analog Kid
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Brecon Beacons National Park
Age: 57
Posts: 239
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by WHBM
So if there really is a security concern .....
Why are the US authorities unhappy to accept this flight into Boston or into any remote Air Force base in the US but are quite happy to send it back to overfly populated areas at its origin ?
I think you may have just answered your own question in the previous paragraph

Originally Posted by WHBM
Overflown of Slough
LOL!

Rich.
fyrefli is offline  


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.