Flybe 145 returns with fumes in the cabin
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Devon
Posts: 198
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It is still showing as 146 returns on my screen - and can we also change the fumes....we do not know for certain it was fumes. It could have been a passengers poor choice of perfume for all we know at this stage!
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Solihull
Age: 60
Posts: 3,327
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Fumes
http://www.pprune.org/forums/showthr...=297115&page=6
As I said last Wednesday in the noxious air thread, I thought it was a
145 and so it proved to be.
The bbc online article was not too bad but it does show a 146.
However local radio really went to town on Wednesday morning.
The local free paper this week had an article underneath the
proposed runway extension and it is laughable, that is the fumes
article was laughable not the runway extension piece although it
came a close second.
As for fumes and the 145, I remember the BHX-MXP returning about
6-8 weeks ago and that was "alleged" fumes. I did ask the question
in the AAR thread but I don't think I got a definitive reply but I could
be wrong.
Pete
As I said last Wednesday in the noxious air thread, I thought it was a
145 and so it proved to be.
The bbc online article was not too bad but it does show a 146.
However local radio really went to town on Wednesday morning.
The local free paper this week had an article underneath the
proposed runway extension and it is laughable, that is the fumes
article was laughable not the runway extension piece although it
came a close second.
As for fumes and the 145, I remember the BHX-MXP returning about
6-8 weeks ago and that was "alleged" fumes. I did ask the question
in the AAR thread but I don't think I got a definitive reply but I could
be wrong.
Pete
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Devon
Posts: 198
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
cheesycol - Many Flybe staff including myself beg to differ with your statement.
However, now that we have all agreed that it was a 145 and there is no confirmation of fumes....I am not sure how far this topic can go.
However, now that we have all agreed that it was a 145 and there is no confirmation of fumes....I am not sure how far this topic can go.
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Belfast
Age: 60
Posts: 213
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
'I do try not to judge people until I meet them but I do feel that ALL journalists are the same - full of rubbish'.
Really. I'm a journalist and the one thing that annoys me when I visit this website is the constant derogatory referrals to other members of my profession.
Yes - there are certain daily newspapers which write stories in an unjutifiably sensationalist way.
However, most of us want to file stories which are accurate in both the factual and grammatical sense.
Grammar and punctuation are of course our responsibility but when it comes to factual accuracy we are frequently at the mercy of those appointed to provide us with information.
If someone gave me a tip off that an airliner had returned to an airport because of cabin fumes my two main sources would be the airport's press office and whoever the airline concerned has appointed to deal with press inquiries.
This may be their own press officer or as is often the case a public relations company operating under contract.
If these people tell me the aircraft involved was an EMB 145 why on earth would I write 'BAe 146'?
The answer is I wouldn't. So if an aviation story of this type refers to the wrong make of plane it's likely the journalist is accurately reporting inaccurate information supplied by the airline's own spokesperson.
Generally, this problem is going to get worst. When my career began press officers were normally people who had worked as journalists, had a good knowledge of news outlets and understood the importance of accuracy.
Very often they moved to a press officer position because it allowed them to work in a field in which they had a particular interest.
In those days an airline press officer would probably be someone who had a strong interest in civil aviation.
Nowadays, an airline may well employ a PR company to deal with the press.
The people employed by these companies may have degrees and certificates lining their walls but most of them will never have worked as journalists and are also having to deal with inquiries about a number of their clients at once.
Under these circumstances inaccurate information is always a possibility.
As I said earlier some newspapers - and we all know which ones - do indulge in sensationalist reporting.
Very often this has nothing to do with the reporters. They supply perfectly accurate stories which are transformed by sub-editors into something which they believe will sell more copies.
However, in some cases journalists are accused of sensationalism when they are accurately reporting what they are told.
If several passengers on an airliner which experienced problems told me their lives had flashed before them and people had prayed as the drama unfolded why wouldn't I include this in a story?
An introductory paragraph such as 'Passengers on a flight which experienced engine failure immediately after take-off from Belfast City Airport have described how people prayed as the Pilot and First Officer did everything in their power to return the aircraft safely to the ground' is perfectly legitimate if that's what happened.
A quote such as: "There was a bang and the plane lurched to the side. My life flashed before my eyes" is also perfectly legitimate as long as it's an accurate verbatim report of something said by someone on the aircraft.
As a final point could I say that in my experience spokespeople appointed by airlines do play incidents down when possible.
I can think of one during the past two years where it was hard to believe the airline's statement in its immediate aftermath and the Civil Aviation Authority's official report some time later referred to the same aircraft at the same time on the same day.
In this case it was the CAA who referred to frightened passengers and alarming movements by the aircraft.
Really. I'm a journalist and the one thing that annoys me when I visit this website is the constant derogatory referrals to other members of my profession.
Yes - there are certain daily newspapers which write stories in an unjutifiably sensationalist way.
However, most of us want to file stories which are accurate in both the factual and grammatical sense.
Grammar and punctuation are of course our responsibility but when it comes to factual accuracy we are frequently at the mercy of those appointed to provide us with information.
If someone gave me a tip off that an airliner had returned to an airport because of cabin fumes my two main sources would be the airport's press office and whoever the airline concerned has appointed to deal with press inquiries.
This may be their own press officer or as is often the case a public relations company operating under contract.
If these people tell me the aircraft involved was an EMB 145 why on earth would I write 'BAe 146'?
The answer is I wouldn't. So if an aviation story of this type refers to the wrong make of plane it's likely the journalist is accurately reporting inaccurate information supplied by the airline's own spokesperson.
Generally, this problem is going to get worst. When my career began press officers were normally people who had worked as journalists, had a good knowledge of news outlets and understood the importance of accuracy.
Very often they moved to a press officer position because it allowed them to work in a field in which they had a particular interest.
In those days an airline press officer would probably be someone who had a strong interest in civil aviation.
Nowadays, an airline may well employ a PR company to deal with the press.
The people employed by these companies may have degrees and certificates lining their walls but most of them will never have worked as journalists and are also having to deal with inquiries about a number of their clients at once.
Under these circumstances inaccurate information is always a possibility.
As I said earlier some newspapers - and we all know which ones - do indulge in sensationalist reporting.
Very often this has nothing to do with the reporters. They supply perfectly accurate stories which are transformed by sub-editors into something which they believe will sell more copies.
However, in some cases journalists are accused of sensationalism when they are accurately reporting what they are told.
If several passengers on an airliner which experienced problems told me their lives had flashed before them and people had prayed as the drama unfolded why wouldn't I include this in a story?
An introductory paragraph such as 'Passengers on a flight which experienced engine failure immediately after take-off from Belfast City Airport have described how people prayed as the Pilot and First Officer did everything in their power to return the aircraft safely to the ground' is perfectly legitimate if that's what happened.
A quote such as: "There was a bang and the plane lurched to the side. My life flashed before my eyes" is also perfectly legitimate as long as it's an accurate verbatim report of something said by someone on the aircraft.
As a final point could I say that in my experience spokespeople appointed by airlines do play incidents down when possible.
I can think of one during the past two years where it was hard to believe the airline's statement in its immediate aftermath and the Civil Aviation Authority's official report some time later referred to the same aircraft at the same time on the same day.
In this case it was the CAA who referred to frightened passengers and alarming movements by the aircraft.
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: France
Posts: 2,315
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
frequentflyer2,
I won't slag you off for your speling mistake, or for your defense of the "narrowly missed a primary school" and "me life passed before me eyes" style.
Rather, I'd like to say thanks for what was IMHO a balanced view "from the other side of the airport fence".
I won't slag you off for your speling mistake, or for your defense of the "narrowly missed a primary school" and "me life passed before me eyes" style.
Rather, I'd like to say thanks for what was IMHO a balanced view "from the other side of the airport fence".
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Devon
Posts: 198
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
frequentflyer - I have not yet met a single journalist, or read a completely factual article.
I apologise if you feel offended and whilst I have not read your post in full, as it is quite long, am sure you are an exception
I apologise if you feel offended and whilst I have not read your post in full, as it is quite long, am sure you are an exception
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Belfast
Age: 60
Posts: 213
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I won't slag you off for your speling mistake, or for your defense of the "narrowly missed a primary school" and "me life passed before me eyes" style.
Rather, I'd like to say thanks for what was IMHO a balanced view "from the other side of the airport fence".
Sorry about the spelling mistake. I should have let Mrs. Frequentflyer read my post first. She's an absolute stickler for spelling.
As a journalist it's also gratifying to see anything I write described as 'a balanced view' - many thanks for that.
Rather, I'd like to say thanks for what was IMHO a balanced view "from the other side of the airport fence".
Sorry about the spelling mistake. I should have let Mrs. Frequentflyer read my post first. She's an absolute stickler for spelling.
As a journalist it's also gratifying to see anything I write described as 'a balanced view' - many thanks for that.
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Milton Keynes
Posts: 15
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I totally disagree with you frequentflyer. You can't just use the excuse, "thats what they told me" and then wash your hands of any responsibility.
Unless you write for your school newspaper, that is.
Surely you should be attempting to report the truth, a few simple questions (how many engines, how many seats wide, high or low wing) would have helped identify type.
Doing the basics correctly and being thorough and accurate, we call it professionalism. Just glad that the crew involved don't have the same sloppy attitude towards their jobs.
Unless you write for your school newspaper, that is.
Surely you should be attempting to report the truth, a few simple questions (how many engines, how many seats wide, high or low wing) would have helped identify type.
Doing the basics correctly and being thorough and accurate, we call it professionalism. Just glad that the crew involved don't have the same sloppy attitude towards their jobs.
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Devon
Posts: 198
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Yes that is exactly what happened - Flybe decided to take off, burn of fuel which had been paid for, return, land and pay the necessary fees and then refuel, taking off again.
I still reckon it was bad perfume....
I still reckon it was bad perfume....
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: On the Climb
Age: 55
Posts: 73
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Flybe Embraer G-EMBU back into BHX earlier today with Local Standby declared initially, then upgraded to Full Emergency.
Nature of problem?..wait for it, "Fumes on the Flightdeck"
Nature of problem?..wait for it, "Fumes on the Flightdeck"
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Belfast
Age: 60
Posts: 213
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I totally disagree with you frequentflyer. You can't just use the excuse, "thats what they told me" and then wash your hands of any responsibility.
Unless you write for your school newspaper, that is.
Surely you should be attempting to report the truth, a few simple questions (how many engines, how many seats wide, high or low wing) would have helped identify type.
Doing the basics correctly and being thorough and accurate, we call it professionalism. Just glad that the crew involved don't have the same sloppy attitude towards their jobs.
Actually, I write for one of Northern Ireland's leading weekly newspapers covering a wide area of Greater Belfast and beyond.
During my 26 years in journalism I've supplied copy to Belfast, London and Dublin based dailies as well as broadcasting outlets. I've also helped researchers gathering information for radio and television documentaries.
On the aviation front I've written about developments at both BFS and BHD and have never forgotten covering the harrowing aftermath of the Kegworth disaster which claimed the lives of a number of my newspaper's readers.
I'm confident if you spoke to my editor he would describe me as 'thorough, accurate and professional' in my approach to my job and for your information I left school almost 28 years ago without ever contributing to its newspaper.
All that said let's return to the scenario of the journalist covering the story of fumes in the cabin of the EMB 145.
His or her first course of action will be to confirm with the relevant press officer/PR company employee the incident took place.
Having obtained confirmation the journalist will want as many details as possible starting with the airline and type of aircraft involved.
Once again I have to say if an airline appointed spokesperson describes it as a BAe 146 the journalist really has no reason to doubt this.
It may well be he or she will then seek further details about the aircraft.
At this point the airline spokesperson will simply open information about the 146 stored on a computer and rhyme it off.
So there's no point in trying to cross reference all of this as you seem to be suggesting because the spokesperson's description of the aircraft will always match the type identified.
In this case the problem may well have started with the type of aircraft being incorrectly identified to the press officer by another airline employee.
I'm guessing he or she then prepared some kind of press release on the incident and released it to a number of news outlets. Hence the incorrect information.
I agree it should not happen but I maintain as long as the journalist has taken all possible measures to check the facts he or she cannot be held responsible.
Remember, the airline employees who really know what happened are not allowed to speak to the press so journalists are totally reliant on official spokespersons when it comes to gathering information about such incidents.
Unless you write for your school newspaper, that is.
Surely you should be attempting to report the truth, a few simple questions (how many engines, how many seats wide, high or low wing) would have helped identify type.
Doing the basics correctly and being thorough and accurate, we call it professionalism. Just glad that the crew involved don't have the same sloppy attitude towards their jobs.
Actually, I write for one of Northern Ireland's leading weekly newspapers covering a wide area of Greater Belfast and beyond.
During my 26 years in journalism I've supplied copy to Belfast, London and Dublin based dailies as well as broadcasting outlets. I've also helped researchers gathering information for radio and television documentaries.
On the aviation front I've written about developments at both BFS and BHD and have never forgotten covering the harrowing aftermath of the Kegworth disaster which claimed the lives of a number of my newspaper's readers.
I'm confident if you spoke to my editor he would describe me as 'thorough, accurate and professional' in my approach to my job and for your information I left school almost 28 years ago without ever contributing to its newspaper.
All that said let's return to the scenario of the journalist covering the story of fumes in the cabin of the EMB 145.
His or her first course of action will be to confirm with the relevant press officer/PR company employee the incident took place.
Having obtained confirmation the journalist will want as many details as possible starting with the airline and type of aircraft involved.
Once again I have to say if an airline appointed spokesperson describes it as a BAe 146 the journalist really has no reason to doubt this.
It may well be he or she will then seek further details about the aircraft.
At this point the airline spokesperson will simply open information about the 146 stored on a computer and rhyme it off.
So there's no point in trying to cross reference all of this as you seem to be suggesting because the spokesperson's description of the aircraft will always match the type identified.
In this case the problem may well have started with the type of aircraft being incorrectly identified to the press officer by another airline employee.
I'm guessing he or she then prepared some kind of press release on the incident and released it to a number of news outlets. Hence the incorrect information.
I agree it should not happen but I maintain as long as the journalist has taken all possible measures to check the facts he or she cannot be held responsible.
Remember, the airline employees who really know what happened are not allowed to speak to the press so journalists are totally reliant on official spokespersons when it comes to gathering information about such incidents.
Rebel PPRuNer
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: Toronto, Canada (formerly EICK)
Age: 51
Posts: 2,834
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
