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

Atlas Jet Hijack

Rumours & News Reporting Points that may affect our jobs or lives as professional pilots. Also, items that may be of interest to professional pilots.
View Poll Results: Should the pilots of the hijacked a/c be criticised for disabling it by abandoning it
I AM a professional pilot and they SHOULD NOT be criticised
430
55.70%
I AM a professional pilot and they SHOULD be criticised
31
4.02%
I AM NOT a professional pilot and they SHOULD NOT be criticised
279
36.14%
I AM NOT an professional pilot ad they SHOULD be criticised
16
2.07%
I have no opinion one way or another
16
2.07%
Voters: 772. This poll is closed

Atlas Jet Hijack

Old 21st Aug 2007, 14:08
  #41 (permalink)  
Green Guard
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Controversy over hijacking continues
Although the hijacking of a Turkish passenger plane traveling from the Turkish Republic of Northern Cyprus (KKTC) to İstanbul on Saturday was concluded peacefully, without bloodshed, debate over the incident continues.


Aviation experts have criticized the crew for leaving the cockpit after the al-Qaeda-linked hijackers threat.
According to aviation experts, the local authorities failed to act to rescue the passengers and crew involved in the incident. The experts say the passengers and crew should receive an apology for this failure.
Two men, wielding a fake bomb and claiming links to al-Qaeda, hijacked the plane early on Saturday after it took off from northern Cyprus. They held the passengers and crew hostage for more than four hours before surrendering to police in the Turkish Mediterranean resort of Antalya. The incident saw the pilots escape from the cockpit while a group of men escaped after breaking down the rear emergency exit. Six passengers were injured when they jumped onto the tarmac from the tail of the plane, including a man who broke his pelvis.

Güntay Şimşek, an aviation expert, told Today’s Zaman by telephone that “the pilots were totally wrong. They say they were ordered to get off the plane. Even if there was such an order, it was a huge mistake and such an order violates all aviation security measures.” Şimşek claimed that the pilots’ escape was due to fear. He continued by saying that the pilots are the commanders of the airplane and they (both the pilots and crew) are trained in security and emergency tactics.

“The only people who can communicate from the plane and describe what is going on are the pilots. When they escaped, everything went out of control on the plane,” he said.

Şimşek stated that Turkey is a member of the International Civil Aviation Organization and is bound by international civil aviation regulations. “As a country you have to apply the civil aviation rules in your country. Not only the pilots, but also the local governors made mistakes in the operation. Another claim is, that without the support of the security measures the passengers and crew were left to their own devices.”

According to security experts “it is totally unacceptable for civilians to be used in such rescue operations.” In Saturday’s incident, nine psychologists were used to convince the hijackers to surrender. The experts have called on the security directorate to train negotiators and experts for such cases.

Debate also rages over the whereabouts of the minister for transportation, who was not involved despite his direct responsibility for such events.

Police find al-Qaeda link for Egyptian hijacker

Turkish police said the Egyptian hijacker involved in Saturday’s drama had received training at an al-Qaeda camp and had wanted to be flown to Iran to join al-Qaeda in Afghanistan, the Anatolia news agency reported on Monday.

According to information received by Anatolia, police said the 33-year-old Egyptian, Mommen Abdul Aziz Talik, had served time in the same prison in Saudi Arabia as a senior al-Qaeda member, called Ahmad, who was sentenced to life for helping to organize the Sept. 11 attacks. Police did not say at which al-Qaeda camp or in which country Talik had received his training, the agency said. Police also did not say why Talik was jailed in Saudi Arabia.

Police said Talik, who is of Palestinian origin, was born in Cairo and that his family was still lived in Saudi Arabia. His alleged accomplice, Mehmet Reşat Özlü, was from the city of Sanliurfa, in Turkey’s Southeast. The two hijackers met in northern Cyprus a year ago before living in the same house for a month, police said. Özlü was registered as a student in the literature department of a university in the KKTC.

Police said that during the interrogation the two suspects confessed that they wanted to divert the plane to Iran and travel to Afghanistan to join the “jihad.” The suspects told police they had tried to storm the cockpit shortly after takeoff, Antalya Governor Alaaddin Yüksel said. Passengers said they had failed to break the door down.

Police said the men had not been armed with explosives and that Talik was carrying a bomb-shaped pack of play-dough when he surrendered, Anatolia said. Police questioned two passengers on suspicion of ties to the hijackers but later released them after concluding they were not linked, according to Anatolia.

Dozens of Turks have joined al-Qaeda in Afghanistan or Iraq, police said. Suicide bombers linked to al-Qaeda hit Istanbul in 2003, killing 58 people in attacks that targeted two synagogues, the British Consulate General and a British bank. In February, the courts sentenced seven people to life in prison for the bombings.


21.08.2007

İstanbul Today’s Zaman
 
Old 21st Aug 2007, 14:33
  #42 (permalink)  
Warning Toxic!
Disgusted of Tunbridge
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Hampshire, UK
Posts: 4,011
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
I see Guntay Simcek has been mysteriously promoted from 'journalist':
Another columnist to agree with Bila was Güntay Şimşek, who handled the same issue in yesterday's daily Sabah. Şimşek cites the International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO) and the Tokyo Convention Act Rules to judge the manner of the pilots' abandoning the plane as “totally wrong.” He pointed out that the conventions show the pilot as the foremost authority in case of a hijacking. “Yet, the foremost authority in this case abandoned the plane from the cockpit window,” read Şimşek's article. He added, “The Directorate General of Civil Aviation, the Turkish Airline Pilots Association (TALPA), and the administrators at Atlasjet Airlines have erred in trying to protect the pilots.”
to 'aviation expert':
Güntay Şimşek, an aviation expert, told Today’s Zaman by telephone that “the pilots were totally wrong.
he doesn't quite appear to know exactly what he is, and he does know he disagrees with:
The Directorate General of Civil Aviation, the Turkish Airline Pilots Association (TALPA), and the administrators at Atlasjet Airlines
and also all the current hijack security training given to pilots, the perceived wisdom is it is better to get the pilots out and remove possibility of relocating the aeroplane.
So contacttower
Why is that whenever someone goes against the prevailing opinion in this forum everyone jumps down their throat?
It's OK surely to tell people they are wrong but there is no need for so many people to simply repeat what others have said in putting people down. I'm just a PPL but I don't need hindsight explained to me and neither does a 747 pilot.
The reason so much criticism of the post was made was that it didn't go against 'prevailing opinion', it directly criticised the pilots for acting in accordance with security training, and that is a different matter. It also showed that the poster was ignorant of this training and needs revalidating himself.

And if you don't need 'hindsight explained' to you, what exactly are you posting here for? As a PPL with no knowledge of security training, perhaps you had better hold your peace and leave this discussion to people who know what they're talking about?
Rainboe is offline  
Old 21st Aug 2007, 15:13
  #43 (permalink)  
Fly Conventional Gear
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Winchester
Posts: 1,600
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Perhaps I should have made myself clearer, I was commenting on how people were reacting to Earl's post,

Earl, what a tosser you are
,for example

not how the prevailing opinion in the newspapers was, after all the prevailing opinion in this forum is nearly always against what the newspapers say. As it happens rainboe I actually agree with you but like you often do I was mearly passing comment on how the thread unfolds after a questionable action/decision/ommission has been committed by flight crew.
Contacttower is offline  
Old 21st Aug 2007, 15:24
  #44 (permalink)  
Warning Toxic!
Disgusted of Tunbridge
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Hampshire, UK
Posts: 4,011
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
What the papers say is irrelevant. One scans them for iotas of information, not the idiotic journalistic excess such as 'the striken death jet plunged 20,000' with passengers screaming........'. that they so often resort to. One seems to get that from the BBC now, but people don't really take much notice of newspapers tomorrow with a critical event happening today.

Comment/queries are fine, but when that crosses to uninformed and incorrect criticism based on few facts, then it is necessary for someone to start making people account for their criticism. How would those pilots feel if they logged on to Pprune and saw themselves villified for doing the right thing? Very possible, even likely. And they know they now have tribunals to face. So if only the smartarses would stop criticising and stick to facts only rather than shoot personal opinions out, we would all have a happier experience!
Rainboe is offline  
Old 21st Aug 2007, 17:32
  #45 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: USA
Posts: 844
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Ok you win, I will retract my comments made towards the crew, maybe it was a little severe.
But just a question for some.
1. With the crew not on board and should immediate armed intervention been needed from the ground, who would be left to call for this on the radios.
2. Should the ground security stormed this plane and shot up alot of people thinking it was immed needed and was not, who could have stopped this, the pax?
Yes the plane was definetly not going anywhere without the crew.
Thats why I said damned if you do and damned if you dont.
This ended without anyone getting killed.
Could have been different and with no one comunicating with the ground or informing them as to what was going on opens the door to many other possibilities.

Last edited by Earl; 21st Aug 2007 at 17:49.
Earl is offline  
Old 21st Aug 2007, 17:38
  #46 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: home and abroad
Posts: 582
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Inform them of what, exactly?

It has already been said that with the closed door policy there is a communication barrier between flight deck and cabin. This barrier is most likely aggravated by the fact that any hijacker would not take too kindly to a CA using the intercom to fully inform the flight crew about what is going on in the back and which seats the perpetrators are occupying, to be relayed to the anti-terrorist squad.

By leaving the a/c they have effectively grounded the a/c, buying time for the other professionals to do their job.

My question is, why didn't anybody insecurity spot the lump of clay and wires and what will the effects be on security measures after this?
S76Heavy is offline  
Old 21st Aug 2007, 17:49
  #47 (permalink)  
Warning Toxic!
Disgusted of Tunbridge
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Hampshire, UK
Posts: 4,011
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
My question is why didn't anybody exterminate the lump of clay and wiry hair that is the journalist Guntay Semcek? Like the world needs another journo! Especially one who has decided he knows best!

In a hijack situation, the pilots just become 2 more passengers who can move the aeroplane. They are unlikely to have free communications with the ground. Their effectiveness is minimal.

If shooting up is going on, nobody is going to be up saying 'don't shoot!'. You will be pressing your nose into the carpet trying to be shorter than the carpet fibres. The crew can do nothing.
Rainboe is offline  
Old 21st Aug 2007, 18:13
  #48 (permalink)  

Rotate on this!
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Aberdeen
Age: 64
Posts: 403
Likes: 0
Received 4 Likes on 1 Post
*Dons flak jacket*

Hmmm, I'm not so sure that it's quite that clear cut Rainboe. Whilst I would not use the word 'cowardice' I'm not sure this wasn't a 'dereliction of duty'.
I appreciate the point regarding no pilot - no fly but at the same time remain uneasy that the 'commander', (and Lord knows how many times we are told in here that his word is final), did not have sole responsibility for his aircraft and passengers.
I don't know what he may or may not have been able to do but it still sits uneasily with me.
SLFguy is offline  
Old 21st Aug 2007, 22:12
  #49 (permalink)  
Warning Toxic!
Disgusted of Tunbridge
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Hampshire, UK
Posts: 4,011
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
On what experience do you base your objection to the action? The action recommended by security services for years? We are aware, are we not, that the Captain was no longer 'Commander'? He was just another hijacked passenger. If you have a basis of experience and qualification to justify your objection, I would be interested to hear, but until you can tell me, I suggest you withhold any criticism because without a shadow of a doubt, their exit left the hijackers high and dry. It might sit uncomfortably with you, but if you are just a 'bean counter' with no security training, then your uninformed opinion is completely irrelevant to real life.
Rainboe is offline  
Old 22nd Aug 2007, 00:16
  #50 (permalink)  
Fly Conventional Gear
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Winchester
Posts: 1,600
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
It might sit uncomfortably with you, but if you are just a 'bean counter' with no security training, then your uninformed opinion is completely irrelevant to real life.
probably true, but to be fair Rainboe current philosophy on different aspects of flying are questionned all the time on this forum and just because the pilots complied with the current thinking on aircraft hijacking does not mean the validity or correctness of that training can not be questionned...but of course by those who are qualified to do so.
Contacttower is offline  
Old 22nd Aug 2007, 08:29
  #51 (permalink)  
Warning Toxic!
Disgusted of Tunbridge
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Hampshire, UK
Posts: 4,011
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
One is perfectly happy for policies to be discussed- as long as they don't step over the security line- but in this thread, and several others running currently, there are direct criticisms being made of the crew, usually for following currently recommended policy. In this case by security training itself. I'm thinking of the human element here- this is exactly the place those involved will come to when they have been involved in a serious incident to gauge reaction. How will it be received to find themselves dragged over the coals by people who are not aware of the issues or received the training, but promote themselves as self-appointed (and completely inexperienced) adjudicators? It won't sit well. And when that criticism is of those people of what is usually well trained and justified action, then I am going to wade in big time. And remember this is the very place they will come to!

When the point is understood that policies can be discussed, but direct criticism of crews under current or pending investigations cannot, then we will all be happier. An ability to fly Microsoft Flight Sim or an interest in aviation does not qualify one to criticise pilots whilst an investigation is proceeding! We see this in the CAL B737 thread the pilots now being criticised for evacuating the aeroplane and not doing a walk through to look for those trapped! Now my training was 'don't become another casualty for the emergency services to rescue- leave it to them'. They evidently would not have survived a walk through, nobody died- yet they are now being criticised! How does that make them feel? Once again, they did the right thing and get hammered for it by uninformed and ignorant people- yet again 'journalists'!
Rainboe is offline  
Old 22nd Aug 2007, 10:25
  #52 (permalink)  
Green Guard
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
escape ropes

Do i need new pair of glasses or somebody else can notice ANY escape ropes hanging out of cockpit windows? How did the 2 bale out? Dolphin style or ghekko style
 
Old 22nd Aug 2007, 12:21
  #53 (permalink)  
Fly Conventional Gear
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Winchester
Posts: 1,600
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
The MD-80 cockpit is quiet low to the ground. Also if you remember the Air France hijacking from a while ago the co-pilot actually fell all the way from the cockpit of the Airbus A300- quite a way to fall.
Contacttower is offline  
Old 23rd Aug 2007, 02:50
  #54 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: USA
Posts: 844
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Quote from WEE ONE:
the security forces cant follow their training as you havent followed yours. You interfer with the situation because you are confusing your flying licence with counter terrorism training. people get killed. You survive. The correct proceedures are made known to the public and you get sued until you are a pauper and villified for being a know all ******

Earl: Where does this come from?
Where is it written for in the regs"the correct procedures are known to the public"? Interfering with counter terrorism training?
Your statements says it all, are you even crew?
I can take critisism when due, but dude you are way out there!
Lawyers and litigation is the least of our worries, doing the correct action is.

Last edited by Earl; 23rd Aug 2007 at 06:29.
Earl is offline  
Old 23rd Aug 2007, 08:14
  #55 (permalink)  
Warning Toxic!
Disgusted of Tunbridge
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Hampshire, UK
Posts: 4,011
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Earl- drop it mate! You have made plain your criticism of the pilots. It is wrong. I have been undergoing annual security training since it started being needed back in the 70s. The advice is don't be a hero, be compliant, and get out if you can (thus disabling the aircraft). Leave it to the security people to handle. The days of the Captain saluting on the bridge of the Titanic as the water rises are gone- the days of the Captain doing a final walk through the cabin in an evacuation are gone- he just makes himself another body the rescue services must risk themselves trying to get out. The pilots just become 2 more people who have to be rescued. A plane without pilots can't move. They did the right thing in all respects under all current guidelines. I don't know why you are not aware of this, but it is wrong to draw criticism of them through your lack of awareness of current security training. You may not like it, but that's how it is.

I really don't want to go any deeper into security procedures in a public forum.
Rainboe is offline  
Old 23rd Aug 2007, 08:45
  #56 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: uk
Posts: 131
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Would it not be wise advice to first physically disable the aircraft and THEN leave.....?

Before 911 who would have thought it possible that hijackers could take control, navigate and deliver the aircraft at low level with pinpoint accuracy...? Some CAN fly therefore and it would not be beyond the realms of possibilty in this flight sim age to get the thing rolling and off the ground.....

These particular hijackers don't sound in the same league as the 911 guys, but i think a bit of deliberate disabling of the aircraft (ie fire handles pulled) would be in order before abandoning ship.....Hope that is standard hijack training before getting out.....

And don't get me wrong getting out IS the thing to do in my opinion if at all possible whether you are FD, CC or PAX.....
anartificialhorizon is offline  
Old 23rd Aug 2007, 09:02
  #57 (permalink)  
Warning Toxic!
Disgusted of Tunbridge
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Hampshire, UK
Posts: 4,011
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
How does one 'physically disable the aircraft'? This is where a little knowledge is a bad thing. I don't know from your profile what you are, but you think pulling fire handles somehow 'disables' the aircraft? One could disconnect the generator drives, but that doesn't stop the aeroplane moving, or even taking off and flying, and could cause the aeroplane to ultimately crash if forced to go. Could pull CBs, but they can be reset. In the meantime, you may well be punished for taking action. If the authorities want the aeroplane disabled- they can do it by parking a tractor in the way, or putting a block of wood through the fan blades- it's not for heroes onboard who will probably get a bullet for it.
What is the problem with accepting official advice? Why does every individual here have a better idea?
Rainboe is offline  
Old 23rd Aug 2007, 10:02
  #58 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: home
Posts: 1,576
Received 11 Likes on 5 Posts
Rainboe,
Don't you just take the keys with you!
Right Way Up is offline  
Old 23rd Aug 2007, 11:10
  #59 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Switzerland
Posts: 142
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Well, speaking a 'umble pax, my "uninformed" but strong opinion is that, given the choice between being

(a) on a hijacked aircraft on the tarmac, with no pilots so it's not going anywhere (assuming of course that the hijackers can't fly it, which appears to be the case here), and

(b) on a hijacked aircraft at 35,000 ft.

then I would take option (a) every time. I think the pilots did absolutely the right thing.
Octopussy2 is offline  
Old 23rd Aug 2007, 13:41
  #60 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Florida
Posts: 4,569
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Many years ago I was a frequent flyer on Pan Am. There was a hijack attempt in Pakistan where a car load of baddies drove up to the plane and boarded it shooting some of the F/As (fuzzy details in my memory) The flight crew went bdown the ropes and the hijack ended there with no more loss of lives.

The then head of Pan Am took a lot of flack for his pilot actions. I wrote a letter to him saying that I as a frequent passenger supported their actions. Surprisingly to me he answered the letter thanking me.
lomapaseo is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

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.