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

London Airspace Restricted/security Alert

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.

London Airspace Restricted/security Alert

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old 2nd Mar 2010, 09:48
  #1 (permalink)  
Dash-7 lover
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
London Airspace Restricted/security Alert

Just heard from various sources that there's in incident ongoing involving and aircraft/security and London Airspace/gatwick? Flow aren't giving too much away?
 
Old 2nd Mar 2010, 09:52
  #2 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: UK
Posts: 7
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Just got a txt from my girlfriend who is a pilot.

It's an AA aircraft (American 78 call sign) on finals now. Had a flight deck security breach. Flow into LHR has been reduced to nil......
flyerman2020 is offline  
Old 2nd Mar 2010, 09:58
  #3 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: UK
Posts: 7
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
the a/c has landed....
flyerman2020 is offline  
Old 2nd Mar 2010, 10:03
  #4 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: EASA country
Posts: 68
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
CFMU status is downgraded again. Still no details there
first_solo is offline  
Old 2nd Mar 2010, 10:04
  #5 (permalink)  
Dash-7 lover
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
AAL78 767-300 from DFW. Glad all is well.
 
Old 2nd Mar 2010, 10:43
  #6 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: UK
Posts: 38
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
A women tried to break into the cockpit.
fchan is offline  
Old 2nd Mar 2010, 10:48
  #7 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Berkshire, UK
Age: 79
Posts: 8,268
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Seems a bit OTT. Why didn't the crew simply tell ATC what had happened so that traffic could have continued with minimum delay?
HEATHROW DIRECTOR is offline  
Old 2nd Mar 2010, 10:54
  #8 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: UK
Posts: 38
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
As a guess, even if you pacify and handcuff the culprit you are not certain that there isn’t a silent accomplice about to spring into action.
fchan is offline  
Old 2nd Mar 2010, 10:55
  #9 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: cheshire
Posts: 133
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Did they know she was alone? Could they believe the report from the CC? What if they were being taken hostage? All kinds of scenarios sadly in this day and age but better safe than sorry...

Scenario is terrorists use a normal loking drunk woman to lure crew out etc etc et add your own next bit...

Sure it will turn out to be the resultt of booze/drugs who knows what.
lexoncd is offline  
Old 2nd Mar 2010, 11:13
  #10 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Bedford
Posts: 330
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
My sources at LHR tell me that the lady passenger was reportedly emotionally disturbed and calmed by flight attendants. The captain, as a precaution, requested a priority approach to LHR as a result of the attempted flight deck entry and the lady's mental state but he advised that the situation was under control and no further assistance was required other than for police to meet the aircraft on arrival as is routine for any disruptive passenger.

Presumably at this point, due to the reports of attempted flight deck access, standard procedures kicked in although those onboard the aircraft were unaware of a fighter escort and none was visible on arrival at LHR as I saw the aircraft land.
oncemorealoft is offline  
Old 2nd Mar 2010, 11:30
  #11 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 1998
Location: London, UK
Posts: 1,995
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes on 2 Posts
That could hav explained the two small fast moving contrails I saw over London just after 11.00.
Groundloop is offline  
Old 2nd Mar 2010, 12:04
  #12 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: In Frozen Chunks (Cloud Cuckoo Land)
Age: 17
Posts: 1,521
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
two small fast moving contrails
they have coined a new term for that:

"overreaction"
blueloo is offline  
Old 2nd Mar 2010, 12:07
  #13 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Bedford
Posts: 330
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
The two RAF Typhoons broke off over Oxfordshire and returned to their Coningsby base.
oncemorealoft is offline  
Old 2nd Mar 2010, 13:25
  #14 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 1999
Location: UK
Posts: 2,584
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Aren't people in danger of forgetting what that armoured door is for?

Second, and just an opinion based on nothing more than is written above, wouldn't it be very inadvisable indeed to request or accept an approach to LHR (over or close to central London) if interference was really believed to be occurring, or for the authorities to allow it. To allow that, and then shut down airspace and call out the RAF seems a bizarre mixture of ineffectual thinking followed by panic. On second thoughts, standard behaviour for a UK "security" reaction.

And further to the above point, if interference was not believed to be the case then pretty inadvisable to mention attempts to breach the door over the radio which must only result in utter and widespread pandemonium? Requesting a return for disruptive pax would be sufficient in that case.

I get the feeling that nowadays many pilots are far too free with bleating all sorts of unnecessary detail of malfunctions/difficulties over the radio to people who can do nothing whatsoever about it except misunderstand it and/or overreact...less detail is often far, far better.
Agaricus bisporus is offline  
Old 2nd Mar 2010, 13:27
  #15 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Malvern, UK
Posts: 425
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
We should've turned it back.

If one is going to overreact why do it in half measures?

Dont Hang Up is offline  
Old 2nd Mar 2010, 13:34
  #16 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Essex, UK
Posts: 68
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Incident: American B763 over Atlantic on Mar 2nd 2010, unruly passenger creates suspicion of unlawful interference
PoloJamie is offline  
Old 2nd Mar 2010, 14:14
  #17 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Berkshire, UK
Age: 79
Posts: 8,268
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
"We should've turned it back"...... Who are "we"?

"..utter and widespread pandemonium".. In a lifetime in ATC I never saw anything approaching such a state. I guess things have changed for the very much worse?
HEATHROW DIRECTOR is offline  
Old 2nd Mar 2010, 16:59
  #18 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: Hants, UK
Posts: 1,064
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
1) There was only one Typhoon.
2) Those on board the AA flight would not have seen it as it remained behind.
3) The decision to launch QRA and restrict airspace is made by military and government personnel, not civil ATC.
4) If it was indeed a flight deck incursion by person or persons with hostile intent, why would a report to ATC that 'all is well' be correct?

Would agree that, having done that, to allow it to approach over London would seem a little contradictory...
eyeinthesky is offline  
Old 2nd Mar 2010, 17:23
  #19 (permalink)  
Per Ardua ad Astraeus
 
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: UK
Posts: 18,579
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
I quite agree with 'Don't hang up' - it should have been turned back - it was only at 30W!

We do, after all, take aviation security seriously in the UK and if the US cannot control who gets on flights to the UK we should be firm.

Mind you - the whole thing sounds a lot like a John Wayne movie.
BOAC is offline  
Old 2nd Mar 2010, 17:44
  #20 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Munich, Germany
Age: 80
Posts: 129
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
I fully support Dont Hang Upīs & BOACīs statements. Looks like things are getting out of control over there.
BEA 71 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.