Woman jailed for air rage
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: not a million miles from old BKK
Posts: 494
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
What is it that makes people make complete fools of themselves on aircraft? 5 hours into my most recent flight (BAH/BKK) an elderly gent (a Brit) began ranting about Mrs Thatcher and related garbage mostly to do with the Inland Revenue.
Now I happen to agree with much of what he was on about but that wasn't the point. In a packed A340 it is very unnerving to hear someone carrying on like that and quite out of the blue. The cabin staff (mostly third world) were just as embarrassed as we were but seemed unable to shut him up. So we were subjected to sudden and random, quite uncalled for political invective for the remaining 2 hours of the flight.
Now I know that this could not be called "air rage" in the true sence of the word but the incident was obviously booze related and was extremely annoying if not unnerving.
The flight in question is a late evening departure arriving at BKK around 9 am the follwing morning. Most people on such flights (and I'm one of them) like to have a couple of drinks and a glass of wine with the meal and then settle down as best we can for the night given the available legroom.
Posts on this subject have suggested that flights be made dry. That is unfair. There were 300+ people on that flight all of whom were well behaved, quiet and no problem to the crew with the exception of that one asshole who managed to unsettle all of us to one degree or another.
On arrival and during disembarkation, the same asshole expressed his hope that we had enjoyed his comments during the flight and wished us a happy stay amongst the whores of Patpong. At that point I began to wonder whether he was as pissed as he made out to be and whether the whole thing was manufactured for his own entertainment during the flight.
Rather than issue guns to flight deck crew (as has been suiggested) perhaps the Purser should be issed with a good quality rolling pin.
Long distance flying is BORING and very uncomfortable. Take away the bar trolley and people will begin to seriously consider travling by sea again! The answer is to limit the amount that individuals are allowed to imbibe during the flight and for ground staff to be more vigilant during boarding.
Now I happen to agree with much of what he was on about but that wasn't the point. In a packed A340 it is very unnerving to hear someone carrying on like that and quite out of the blue. The cabin staff (mostly third world) were just as embarrassed as we were but seemed unable to shut him up. So we were subjected to sudden and random, quite uncalled for political invective for the remaining 2 hours of the flight.
Now I know that this could not be called "air rage" in the true sence of the word but the incident was obviously booze related and was extremely annoying if not unnerving.
The flight in question is a late evening departure arriving at BKK around 9 am the follwing morning. Most people on such flights (and I'm one of them) like to have a couple of drinks and a glass of wine with the meal and then settle down as best we can for the night given the available legroom.
Posts on this subject have suggested that flights be made dry. That is unfair. There were 300+ people on that flight all of whom were well behaved, quiet and no problem to the crew with the exception of that one asshole who managed to unsettle all of us to one degree or another.
On arrival and during disembarkation, the same asshole expressed his hope that we had enjoyed his comments during the flight and wished us a happy stay amongst the whores of Patpong. At that point I began to wonder whether he was as pissed as he made out to be and whether the whole thing was manufactured for his own entertainment during the flight.
Rather than issue guns to flight deck crew (as has been suiggested) perhaps the Purser should be issed with a good quality rolling pin.
Long distance flying is BORING and very uncomfortable. Take away the bar trolley and people will begin to seriously consider travling by sea again! The answer is to limit the amount that individuals are allowed to imbibe during the flight and for ground staff to be more vigilant during boarding.
Join Date: Nov 1999
Location: Mk. 1 desk at present...
Posts: 365
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Banning duty free alcohol IS part of the answer
Covenant,
I've always been uneasy about duty-free on board, far more so since 9/11. I can't believe FAA haven't taken some action:
1. A bottle of high-proof spirits IS a deadly weapon. Broken it's as bad as a knife, unbroken it's a potential Molotov cocktail. It's lunacy to keep selling the stuff, or allowing it on board. Confiscating granny's nail clippers but allowing anyone glass bottles of Vodka... lunacy!
Doesn't anyone else see this? I'm astonished how little discussion this issue has had. Who needs bombs? Three or four willing martyrs on a flight, coordinated action each with a couple of bottles of spirits (and if they've brought them on board, the actual contents of the bottles may well be something even deadlier and more incendiary than the purported contents) and you have perhaps eight simultaneous fires in the cabin. I wouldn't bet on a good outcome...
2. It's a lot easier and less confrontational to stop serving someone who's had a skinful than it is to take away a bottle they already have.
So:
3. Prohibit pre-boarding duty-free sales.
4. If prohibition just won't fly, collect it from the pax as they board, return it as they disembark.
5. If in-flight duty free sales are to continue, sell the stuff but don't hand it over to the pax until you're on the gate.
Just my $0.02
R1
I've always been uneasy about duty-free on board, far more so since 9/11. I can't believe FAA haven't taken some action:
1. A bottle of high-proof spirits IS a deadly weapon. Broken it's as bad as a knife, unbroken it's a potential Molotov cocktail. It's lunacy to keep selling the stuff, or allowing it on board. Confiscating granny's nail clippers but allowing anyone glass bottles of Vodka... lunacy!
Doesn't anyone else see this? I'm astonished how little discussion this issue has had. Who needs bombs? Three or four willing martyrs on a flight, coordinated action each with a couple of bottles of spirits (and if they've brought them on board, the actual contents of the bottles may well be something even deadlier and more incendiary than the purported contents) and you have perhaps eight simultaneous fires in the cabin. I wouldn't bet on a good outcome...
2. It's a lot easier and less confrontational to stop serving someone who's had a skinful than it is to take away a bottle they already have.
So:
3. Prohibit pre-boarding duty-free sales.
4. If prohibition just won't fly, collect it from the pax as they board, return it as they disembark.
5. If in-flight duty free sales are to continue, sell the stuff but don't hand it over to the pax until you're on the gate.
Just my $0.02
R1
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 49
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I have to agree with X
I have to travel a great deal as SLF as well as with my other job. There are those of us who do like to have a few quiets on the flight. Prehaps there should be more high profile restraints.
I have been in the unfortunate position several years ago that a passenger set fire to the bin in the aircraft, after smoking a crafty fag.
If the aircraft had diverted and the passenger removed I would have been happy with the delay to our flight. Many of the airlines pass on too many idle threats. Unfortunately there is little substance to their threats of prosecution.
The situation became more dangerous as there was a lynce mob starting on the flight.
This was as frightening as the fire.
Apologies for the spelling . . feeling a little tipsey.
I have to travel a great deal as SLF as well as with my other job. There are those of us who do like to have a few quiets on the flight. Prehaps there should be more high profile restraints.
I have been in the unfortunate position several years ago that a passenger set fire to the bin in the aircraft, after smoking a crafty fag.
If the aircraft had diverted and the passenger removed I would have been happy with the delay to our flight. Many of the airlines pass on too many idle threats. Unfortunately there is little substance to their threats of prosecution.
The situation became more dangerous as there was a lynce mob starting on the flight.
This was as frightening as the fire.
Apologies for the spelling . . feeling a little tipsey.
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Philadelphia (UK expat)
Posts: 92
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
on-board duty-free
R1
Personally agree with you about on-board duty free. But the reasons you gave (i.e. terrorism) are very different from the air-rage ones that are the subject of this thread. It is a very valid point to raise the possibility of using high proof spirits and the bottles as weapons (post Sept 11), but I don't think this relates to air rage and drunkenness on flights.
IMHO, on-board duty free is a waste of time anyway. Most people don't use it because the choice is extremely limited and the prices are (usually) higher than in the airport. It seems to me it's just a way for the airlines to get in on the duty-free action.
Given the amount of revenue raised by duty-free sales at airports, I don't think an already stretched air transport industry would be willing to give them up altogether. A compromise may be able to be reached along the lines of what you suggest where duty-free sales are transported directly to the hold and redeemed upon arrival at the destination. This isn't too different from the system used at most US airports, except that currently you get your baggy when you embark.
An earlier suggestion by another contributor that duty-free shops should be at arrival rather than departure is unworkable, because the whole point about duty-free is that it is exempt from duty in the country in which it is purchased because it is intended for immediate export.
[Edited to add the following]
Correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe that current legislation prohibits duty-free (which is sealed for a reason) from being opened before clearing customs at your destination in any case. So there is already sufficient legislation to prevent the situation that is the subject of this thread; apparently it just needs better enforcement.
Personally agree with you about on-board duty free. But the reasons you gave (i.e. terrorism) are very different from the air-rage ones that are the subject of this thread. It is a very valid point to raise the possibility of using high proof spirits and the bottles as weapons (post Sept 11), but I don't think this relates to air rage and drunkenness on flights.
IMHO, on-board duty free is a waste of time anyway. Most people don't use it because the choice is extremely limited and the prices are (usually) higher than in the airport. It seems to me it's just a way for the airlines to get in on the duty-free action.
Given the amount of revenue raised by duty-free sales at airports, I don't think an already stretched air transport industry would be willing to give them up altogether. A compromise may be able to be reached along the lines of what you suggest where duty-free sales are transported directly to the hold and redeemed upon arrival at the destination. This isn't too different from the system used at most US airports, except that currently you get your baggy when you embark.
An earlier suggestion by another contributor that duty-free shops should be at arrival rather than departure is unworkable, because the whole point about duty-free is that it is exempt from duty in the country in which it is purchased because it is intended for immediate export.
[Edited to add the following]
Correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe that current legislation prohibits duty-free (which is sealed for a reason) from being opened before clearing customs at your destination in any case. So there is already sufficient legislation to prevent the situation that is the subject of this thread; apparently it just needs better enforcement.
Last edited by Covenant; 28th Jun 2002 at 19:25.
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Philadelphia (UK expat)
Posts: 92
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Engineer
There's no problem, but what we are talking about is establishing a need.
Surely your only criterion for introducing a ban on something is not simply that there is no problem in doing so?
There's no problem, but what we are talking about is establishing a need.
Surely your only criterion for introducing a ban on something is not simply that there is no problem in doing so?
Anyone who has been involved in the usual annual failed pyromania involving Christmas pudding, brandy and matches will know that a bottle of duty-free booze (apart from Bacardi 151) is not a particularly useful Molotov substitute.... The result is usually cold Christmas pud, burnt fingers and a cloud of hissing vapour which refuses to light!
Eight Gun Fighter
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: Western Approaches
Posts: 1,126
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Memorable Christmases
Here's the trick.
Warm the brandy, seriously warm, but only warm.
Pour into a shot glass.
Set alight,
Pour over the Xmas Pud.
A hit always, especially in a semi-darkened dining room.
Now, how to sabre a bottle of champers.
Warm the brandy, seriously warm, but only warm.
Pour into a shot glass.
Set alight,
Pour over the Xmas Pud.
A hit always, especially in a semi-darkened dining room.
Now, how to sabre a bottle of champers.
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: on the edge
Posts: 186
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RollingThunder...
Great post....
..another tip is..if you inject a Christmas Pudding with copious amounts of brandy just prior to the flaming ceremony, the resultant vapour ignites very nicely!
Great post....
..another tip is..if you inject a Christmas Pudding with copious amounts of brandy just prior to the flaming ceremony, the resultant vapour ignites very nicely!
Ranger One: The FAA must have lots of broken bodies in order to create a new regulation. The cause must be something which results in shocking headlines and Congressional action, as with Valuejet near Miami (no more oxygen generators shipped as cargo).
The NTSB never pointed to fatigue as the primary cause for any air carrier accident until a cargo DC-8 cartwheeled in Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, after a long night duty period with very little rest beforehand, and the NTSB could or should have pointed to fatigue as the primary factor in so many other airline accidents. After the MD-80 landing accident in Little Rock after a long non-stop duty period, which killed passengers instead of "only" freight pilots with few if any non-revenue passengers, the FAA finally ruled for the first time EVER, that pilots on constant 24-hour reserve/standby for consecutive days in a row must have a pre-designated uninterrupted rest period (eight hours, maybe 1200 until 2000).
Knowing how the NTSB makes definite recommendations while the FAA mostly delays or ignores so much of this input, it is not at all surprising to most or all US airline pilots that the FAA refuses to acknowledge the danger from selling or giving alcohol to passengers. And this is in clear contradiction of the Federal Air Regulation which prohibits intoxicated passengers from boarding an airliner.
Believe it or not, ALPA in its early years initiated the very creation of the FAA, because pilots were pushed very hard by their employers to fly through serious icing and other weather conditions, or else no job.
The NTSB never pointed to fatigue as the primary cause for any air carrier accident until a cargo DC-8 cartwheeled in Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, after a long night duty period with very little rest beforehand, and the NTSB could or should have pointed to fatigue as the primary factor in so many other airline accidents. After the MD-80 landing accident in Little Rock after a long non-stop duty period, which killed passengers instead of "only" freight pilots with few if any non-revenue passengers, the FAA finally ruled for the first time EVER, that pilots on constant 24-hour reserve/standby for consecutive days in a row must have a pre-designated uninterrupted rest period (eight hours, maybe 1200 until 2000).
Knowing how the NTSB makes definite recommendations while the FAA mostly delays or ignores so much of this input, it is not at all surprising to most or all US airline pilots that the FAA refuses to acknowledge the danger from selling or giving alcohol to passengers. And this is in clear contradiction of the Federal Air Regulation which prohibits intoxicated passengers from boarding an airliner.
Believe it or not, ALPA in its early years initiated the very creation of the FAA, because pilots were pushed very hard by their employers to fly through serious icing and other weather conditions, or else no job.
Last edited by Ignition Override; 30th Jun 2002 at 04:31.
Join Date: Feb 2001
Posts: 69
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It may have already been covered....but.....in terms of a further safety aspect of Duty free grog onboard, and reasons for it not to be available until the destination might include that in incidents inflight such as turbulence or landing overruns etc, where the overhead lockers are subjected to greater loads than normal, bottles of alcohol can come out, becoming missiles....not only doing serious damage when hitting various objects (pax heads..) but potentially becoming a nice little inferno when the alcohol comes into contact with an ignition source.
My understanding in the Korean Airlines jet that came to grief in Guam several years back was that some of the onboard fires after the accident were attributable to the duty free grog coming crashing out of the overhead lockers.
My understanding in the Korean Airlines jet that came to grief in Guam several years back was that some of the onboard fires after the accident were attributable to the duty free grog coming crashing out of the overhead lockers.
Guest
Posts: n/a
We used to have plastic litre bottles of gin on our duty free carts, but only the gin all the others were glass and we used to get loads of breakages. I can't remember when I last had a drinking related problem on a flight and I don't know how you can draw the line because some people on flights have had quite a bit to drink and be perfectly pleasent and lucid. Myself on the other hand, two pints and I'm anybody's.
Don't spoil things for everyone for the sake of a few ars...s.
The causes of airrage seem to be far more complex than merely banning alchohol. Most aggro I get on flights is due to delays, maybe airlines should ban delays!
People seem to have a lot of deep seated anxieties about flying. I think a lot of time the aggressive people feel they are regaining control in their lives after having the last few hours totally controlled by public transport, airport staff and airline staff.
Just my thoughts.
Don't spoil things for everyone for the sake of a few ars...s.
The causes of airrage seem to be far more complex than merely banning alchohol. Most aggro I get on flights is due to delays, maybe airlines should ban delays!
People seem to have a lot of deep seated anxieties about flying. I think a lot of time the aggressive people feel they are regaining control in their lives after having the last few hours totally controlled by public transport, airport staff and airline staff.
Just my thoughts.
Join Date: Feb 1999
Location: Sydney Australia
Posts: 18
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
woman jailed for air rage
I agree the best solution is no duty-free on departure.
This could be for booze only. Whowants to lug rattling bottles around the airport and on the flight if they were available on landing.
The sooner airlines stop turning a blind eye to pop-stars regarding their behaviour and dress, then perhaps all passengers will get the message.
This could be for booze only. Whowants to lug rattling bottles around the airport and on the flight if they were available on landing.
The sooner airlines stop turning a blind eye to pop-stars regarding their behaviour and dress, then perhaps all passengers will get the message.
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Europe
Posts: 12
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The pax that is quietly drunk, overcoming fear of flying or just plain bored with the flight, is no problem as long as they realise that their chances in a 'crash and burn' situation are minimal.
Its the person that can't hold their drink and would be prone to loss of self control if exposed to stress or provocation in any situation that are the problem. Flying is a dicipline for pax as well as crew.
In vino veritas.
Its the person that can't hold their drink and would be prone to loss of self control if exposed to stress or provocation in any situation that are the problem. Flying is a dicipline for pax as well as crew.
In vino veritas.
Join Date: May 2000
Location: New York
Posts: 510
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
No need to ban alcohol. Just VERY stiff, public penalties for being disruptive and interfering with aircrew. Four months in the slammer with big Pierre as a cellmate should convince the lout that getting drunk and being an ass was a really bad idea. Maybe he'll tell his yobo friends, too. When the punishment gets bad enough, word gets around.
