Pax cockpit access - are there rules?
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: London
Posts: 2,916
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
taildragger67
If TMH had "simply asked what the protocol is", I doubt if he'd have got the same reactions.
IMHO his behaviour on board was bizarre, and didn't improve in the baggage hall.
MarlboroLite
I'm green with envy.
I went into Kai Tak twice with Cathay, and was fortunate to be allowed the jumpseat of the L1011 both times.
But, sod's law, on both occasions, we landed on 31.
I've never understood the logic for changing the rules as a result of 9/11 when, even before that, the FAA didn't allow pax in the cockpit during flight and the rule didn't prevent the atrocities.
Has there ever been an incident where a hijacker got into the cockpit by posing as an aviation enthusiast?
FL
If TMH had "simply asked what the protocol is", I doubt if he'd have got the same reactions.
"are there any international rulings ...... or should I just put this down to idiocy"
MarlboroLite
The good old days
Speaking as a SLF
1. Sitting on in the flight deck whilst doing the checker board approach into Kai Tak
Speaking as a SLF
1. Sitting on in the flight deck whilst doing the checker board approach into Kai Tak
I went into Kai Tak twice with Cathay, and was fortunate to be allowed the jumpseat of the L1011 both times.
But, sod's law, on both occasions, we landed on 31.
I've never understood the logic for changing the rules as a result of 9/11 when, even before that, the FAA didn't allow pax in the cockpit during flight and the rule didn't prevent the atrocities.
Has there ever been an incident where a hijacker got into the cockpit by posing as an aviation enthusiast?
FL
ex-Tanker
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: Luton Beds UK
Posts: 907
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Where do you stand?
The original post and subsequent one by the same author show:
Thirst for knowledge - "are there rules?"
Interest in flying - "I did it and it piqued my interest"
and predudice - "I told him I thought he acted irresponsibly"
You can't have it all ways!
FC.
Thirst for knowledge - "are there rules?"
Interest in flying - "I did it and it piqued my interest"
and predudice - "I told him I thought he acted irresponsibly"
You can't have it all ways!
FC.
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: Chandler, Arizona
Posts: 183
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
A certain Irish airline let my 3 yr old sit in the first office seat (after landing) with his teddy bear. Seeing the joy on his face will be with me forever (my son, not the first officer!).
In 1999 I had over half a dozen jump seat rides in 737-200's whilst doing my PPL. It's unfortunate it can't happen anymore, but rules are rules.
In 1999 I had over half a dozen jump seat rides in 737-200's whilst doing my PPL. It's unfortunate it can't happen anymore, but rules are rules.
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: The Planet Earth
Age: 23
Posts: 37
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
One has to wonder how the SLF would vote with their feet and chequebooks if the ranters amongst us were forthcoming enough to confirm which airlines they work for. Personally whilst I dislike the DfT and DHS and TSA rules, we are where we are - abuse never solves anything and the point about pax getting involved is very well made. Just think what might not have happened at Kegworth if the pax observations to the Cabin Crew had actually been passed on - but they were pax after all, what did they know? And yes, I remember all the subsequent holdouts against CRM as well.
Actually naming people on here is not such a great idea, but really, a Senior Exec should not use his position and privilege to abuse rules and regs in such a way. Or, if he does, he should not be surprised in this day and age if people make an issue of it.
Perhaps those with such strong feelings should air them during their next PA - but they'll probably just sit there simmering, stressed out about the effrontery of the people who pay their wages. Pathetic.
Actually naming people on here is not such a great idea, but really, a Senior Exec should not use his position and privilege to abuse rules and regs in such a way. Or, if he does, he should not be surprised in this day and age if people make an issue of it.
Perhaps those with such strong feelings should air them during their next PA - but they'll probably just sit there simmering, stressed out about the effrontery of the people who pay their wages. Pathetic.
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Above 30,000 ft
Posts: 215
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Mike Mercury: "One has to wonder how the SLF would vote with their feet and chequebooks "
This kind would actually cause an accident given enough time, so if they wanna fly elsewhere, go for it. Let them endanger someone else's airline. If you think this is a rant, let me give you another example of some of these foolhardy twits who read a little and think that their ticket gives them right to do & say whatever they want:
Soon after the Iraq war, i flew from, SE Asia to Europe. The route was via Iran & Turkey - Saveh/Shiraz/Tabriz. Approaching the Ankara FIR, i was informed that a pax was giving the cabin crew grief because we were "flying near Iraq, and what the **** we were doing there", because he had seen the progress of the flight on the airshow. I gave the cabin crew instructions to firmly advise him that this was the road today, and if he continued to cause ruckus, i would have him arrested upon arrival.
Well, some of you may think it funny for pax who think they are smart to go on like this, in the name of keeping their "buisiness". I'll say it again - their ticket price does not entitle them to behavior like this. It does entitle them to know one thing, and only one: they are coming along for the ride with me, and i don't intend to die. So long as i keep my a** safe, they'll be alright. If you want to welcome them into the Flight Planning, Dispatch or any other part of the flight operation, that's your call. Not on my watch. Next thing you'll get somebody wanting to know why you're at FL320 instead of FL310 as per Semi-circular rules (just because he/she has read a little bit). I am not inclined to explain RVSM or anything else.
In the case of this idiot Takemehome, he asked the reason why, was given one, and yet CONTINUED in his line of stupidity. That's what i mean by "fool".
This kind would actually cause an accident given enough time, so if they wanna fly elsewhere, go for it. Let them endanger someone else's airline. If you think this is a rant, let me give you another example of some of these foolhardy twits who read a little and think that their ticket gives them right to do & say whatever they want:
Soon after the Iraq war, i flew from, SE Asia to Europe. The route was via Iran & Turkey - Saveh/Shiraz/Tabriz. Approaching the Ankara FIR, i was informed that a pax was giving the cabin crew grief because we were "flying near Iraq, and what the **** we were doing there", because he had seen the progress of the flight on the airshow. I gave the cabin crew instructions to firmly advise him that this was the road today, and if he continued to cause ruckus, i would have him arrested upon arrival.
Well, some of you may think it funny for pax who think they are smart to go on like this, in the name of keeping their "buisiness". I'll say it again - their ticket price does not entitle them to behavior like this. It does entitle them to know one thing, and only one: they are coming along for the ride with me, and i don't intend to die. So long as i keep my a** safe, they'll be alright. If you want to welcome them into the Flight Planning, Dispatch or any other part of the flight operation, that's your call. Not on my watch. Next thing you'll get somebody wanting to know why you're at FL320 instead of FL310 as per Semi-circular rules (just because he/she has read a little bit). I am not inclined to explain RVSM or anything else.
In the case of this idiot Takemehome, he asked the reason why, was given one, and yet CONTINUED in his line of stupidity. That's what i mean by "fool".
Last edited by gengis; 24th Apr 2007 at 22:53.
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: usa
Posts: 55
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Isn't it the VIP and the cabin crew who should be keeping their heads down until this blows over. If Flight Deck access laws or regulations were actually broken, I doubt that the authorities will simply turn away and look in some other direction. The Flight Deck group are the ones who are at risk. They could be shielded from further exposure if this thread were removed rather than to allow it to grind on and on, day after day. That step would also please those who wish to have the VIP's name removed.
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Sunny Spain
Posts: 18
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
That´s right Re-Heat, Mum & Brat training together (I was a young mum!). Although not at the same school, apparently that would just be too embarrassing (her words not mine)! Flying an instructor friends Yaks at the moment but can´t wait to get my hands on something more powerful.
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: uk
Age: 75
Posts: 588
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
old chinese proverb comes to mind "Rules are for the guidance of the wise and for the blind obedience of fools". That proverb very apt in our profession but the rule makers are trying to take "Captains's discretion" away. Operational SOP's are a must but does there really have to be an SOP for every activity??
Might get a few replies here, I think
Might get a few replies here, I think
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: It wasn't me, I wasn't there, wrong country ;-)
Age: 79
Posts: 1,757
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
125-750
Why, the boss is the boss in his own aeroplane (funny spell check here doesn't like aeroplane!) A captain has the ultimate say, or so we are told over and above all else. SOPs are there to be adhered to, unless of course there is an operational deviation to be acted upon.
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: UK
Posts: 54
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
We had a visit in the cockpit only 2 weeks ago, my capo didnt seem to mind at all, loved it should have seen the little guy, his eyes were like saucers. Was my first experience of this and Im glad i got to see it as i doubt i ever will again.....
PPRuNe Handmaiden
We don't have doors and our pax aka owners pop in for a visit often.
Join Date: May 1999
Location: Ireland
Age: 50
Posts: 150
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The accountants are running Mi6
Cockpits visits in the days when they could be done were almost like Catholics getting to meet the Pope. We didn't want to be pests but I remember getting a jump with FCA on a 757 to Malaga - well it was one of those "isn't life great" moments.
In every walk of life, we seem to be making rules to save idiots and these are takeing over our lives. We have to have rules, but this is like taking the milk out of ice cream because it'll make you fat.
For the few of you that still "allow it" - we'll always need rebels. Well Done.
For the rest of us I'll hang onto my PPL as long as I can - and will continue to potter along looking up at the contrails and the glints of sunshine shineing off the sides as you pass overhead.
Cheerio
Shamrogue.
And to the Captain of Concorde who let me in in March 99. Your picture is on the wall beside the family.
In every walk of life, we seem to be making rules to save idiots and these are takeing over our lives. We have to have rules, but this is like taking the milk out of ice cream because it'll make you fat.
For the few of you that still "allow it" - we'll always need rebels. Well Done.
For the rest of us I'll hang onto my PPL as long as I can - and will continue to potter along looking up at the contrails and the glints of sunshine shineing off the sides as you pass overhead.
Cheerio
Shamrogue.
And to the Captain of Concorde who let me in in March 99. Your picture is on the wall beside the family.
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: The Planet Earth
Age: 23
Posts: 37
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
gengis said:
another example of some of these foolhardy twits who read a little and think that their ticket gives them right to do & say whatever they want:
Rules...Wise Men...etc, however to assume that therefore all rules we don't like can be broken is an interesting concept. The diatribe regarding Flight Levels and paths is disingenuous and smacks again of "Count these bars", pity, I rather thought the majority of the Atlantic Barons had retired by now. Communication is a keynote of CRM, evidently not one that counts for a lot with gengis. The whole deal with the security issue that most of us dislike is the attitude of the Security personnel on the ground. You know, the ones that will only let you take one bag on board, the ones that make you leave your nailclippers before assuming command of 190+ tonnes of alloy, fuel and pax. They're the 'jobsworths' who increase our stress levels, and don't know what they're talking about, "Take off your shoes...AND your belt", yeah yeah we've all been there, but I am finally beginning to see the other side of the picture, the perception of the arrogant overpaid know-it-all pilot who believes he's above the rules. It's no wonder that some of the Security guys on the ground behave the way they do if they receive an attitude such as the one displayed by gengis and others on this thread.
Big picture people, see the big picture. I'd love to be able to take pax on the j/s, but the world has changed irrevocably and wearing tinted glasses and living in the past won't change that. A passenger concerned about the routing effectively gets told to shut up because the Captain knows better. I'm sure the Captain probably does, but do we REALLY think that's the best way to handle the situation? I wonder how many points such a display of authority would be awarded on a Command Course - would it enhance the passenger / cabin crew relationship? Would it reduce the possibility of air rage? Perhaps if they'd had a map on the Korean 747 someone might have noticed that that the USSR was getting a bit close, but doubtless the Captain would have "known better" then as well!
Hmmm.
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 56
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
gengis ALSO said:
idiots like you would be on a no-fly list as being, next to terrorists, the next greatest threat to an airplane.
! I sincerely hope any SLF reading this thread consider carefully and continue to alert any member of my crew to ANYTHING they consider untoward. I hugely regret not being able to allow you onto the Flight Deck during the Flight, I hope you understand. However, feel free ALWAYS to ask the Purser for a visit after we've landed, and for as long as we both have time, you can come and visit. If you have a camera with you, you're welcome to get a pic of yourself and/or family in the drivers' seats if you so wish - no problem!!
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Above 30,000 ft
Posts: 215
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Kurtz:
A concerned passenger may raise his concern, not push it even after it has been noted. When it crosses this line, he becomes a danger to the airplane. As to how much of a potential threat that 'concern' may actually be is not the passenger's call to make - it's yours, yes the one with all the bars, unless you didn't know that Kurtz? Why? Because you're the one who's supposedly got all the training, experience & facts at hand. Is this not so?
MM:
Kegworth/KAL may not have happened if someone raised concern. Communications. Agreed. Raised, not pushed. I trust you know the difference between the two (and by the way, in the case of the Iranian route, that pax was told to shut up because he was creating havoc in the cabin amongst other passengers as well which in the opinion of the cabin crew was threatening to turn ugly in spite of having been told that this was normal. You were not there, i was).
Back to the issue of the j/s - if the airline has an SOP or the country concerned has mandated a flight deck entry policy, then it is abided by. In this case, it appears that there was none, which made it the Capt's call - not the pax or even the SVP. Do you dispute this?
"The pilot-in-command is DIRECTLY RESPONSIBLE for, and the FINAL AUTHORITY as to, the operation of the airplane." - definition
For the most part, thankfully, passengers are not this obstinate/self-opinionated.
A concerned passenger may raise his concern, not push it even after it has been noted. When it crosses this line, he becomes a danger to the airplane. As to how much of a potential threat that 'concern' may actually be is not the passenger's call to make - it's yours, yes the one with all the bars, unless you didn't know that Kurtz? Why? Because you're the one who's supposedly got all the training, experience & facts at hand. Is this not so?
MM:
Kegworth/KAL may not have happened if someone raised concern. Communications. Agreed. Raised, not pushed. I trust you know the difference between the two (and by the way, in the case of the Iranian route, that pax was told to shut up because he was creating havoc in the cabin amongst other passengers as well which in the opinion of the cabin crew was threatening to turn ugly in spite of having been told that this was normal. You were not there, i was).
Back to the issue of the j/s - if the airline has an SOP or the country concerned has mandated a flight deck entry policy, then it is abided by. In this case, it appears that there was none, which made it the Capt's call - not the pax or even the SVP. Do you dispute this?
"The pilot-in-command is DIRECTLY RESPONSIBLE for, and the FINAL AUTHORITY as to, the operation of the airplane." - definition
For the most part, thankfully, passengers are not this obstinate/self-opinionated.