Ryan Air pax exits overwing ..
Resident insomniac
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: N54 58 34 W02 01 21
Age: 79
Posts: 1,873
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
Ryanair passenger who prised open emergency door ‘is Polish man who lived in £35-a-week Costa del Sol homeless hostel'.
meaning he is unlikely to be able to afford a hefty fine
Join Date: Jan 2000
Location: FL410
Posts: 860
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Always think it is best to address the pax prior to departure and in case of delays from the cabin when possible, rather than using the flight deck microphone. A very wise captain once told me this after severe delays and complications.
It worked then and works now, try it.
Regarding the above case, there’s always a bit more to it than a simple story, maybe better details will emerge shortly as to how this could’ve happened.
It worked then and works now, try it.
Regarding the above case, there’s always a bit more to it than a simple story, maybe better details will emerge shortly as to how this could’ve happened.
The Homeless use FR often for commuting. Beg for while, buy a late night return. Sleep in a Terminal downroute somewhere for the night, facilities provided FOC. Return next morning, beg again and so on.
Resident insomniac
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: N54 58 34 W02 01 21
Age: 79
Posts: 1,873
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
Malaga Airport Guardia Civil chief Miguel Sanchez said Mr Graczyk, 57, could now could face a £40,000 fine for his air security breach.
But the fine may be difficult to enforce, as it emerged yesterday that Mr Craczyk’s last known address is a homeless hostel.
But the fine may be difficult to enforce, as it emerged yesterday that Mr Craczyk’s last known address is a homeless hostel.
Join Date: Dec 2012
Location: Australia
Posts: 6
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Agoraphobia or asthma?
Reading the description of his in-flight behaviour from the escapee's fellow passenger (based on the media links provided), if there is a medical cause of this gentleman's precipitate departure, it would appear to be more above the neck than below it.
The Homeless use FR often for commuting. Beg for while, buy a late night return. Sleep in a Terminal downroute somewhere for the night, facilities provided FOC. Return next morning, beg again and so on.
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: USA
Posts: 241
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
What's missing in a lot of the "explanations" here is a very important second half of the sentence.
I'm reading a lot of "there was no way to let the passengers off," when I think the actual truth was "there was no way to let the passengers off without inconveniencing the airline or the airport staff."
There is always a way to let the passengers off. 738s have a built-in front stairway. Mobile stairways abound at every airport. No gate? No problem; there's always some door somewhere leading from the ramp into the terminal; passengers could be deplaned and directed to that door.
People get so hung up on "this is the standard way we do things" that they fail to take a step back and realize that there are alternative solutions available.
I'm reading a lot of "there was no way to let the passengers off," when I think the actual truth was "there was no way to let the passengers off without inconveniencing the airline or the airport staff."
There is always a way to let the passengers off. 738s have a built-in front stairway. Mobile stairways abound at every airport. No gate? No problem; there's always some door somewhere leading from the ramp into the terminal; passengers could be deplaned and directed to that door.
People get so hung up on "this is the standard way we do things" that they fail to take a step back and realize that there are alternative solutions available.
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Horsham, England, UK. ---o--O--o---
Posts: 1,185
Received 4 Likes
on
2 Posts
Guages and Dials,Clearly has no airport knowledge about inbound and outbound passenger segregration and security regulations!
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: USA
Posts: 241
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
... And that's just the attitude I was talking about. Actually I know a fair bit about inbound and outbound passenger segregation and security regulations.
Neither of which, of course, are immutable laws of physics, violation of which would cause the world to come to an end.
Would it be a hassle to let passengers off the plane, to walk across the apron and enter the terminal through some random door? Of course. That doesn't make it "impossible" by even the remotest stretch of the imagination. And, deploying a few extra staff to watch the corridors and doors along the way, would make it possible to do so without even busting anyone's precious security theater.
Everyone needs to understand that there's a world of difference between "we can't do that," and "we can't do that without busting some paper-pusher's rule and making a little extra work for ourselves."
Neither of which, of course, are immutable laws of physics, violation of which would cause the world to come to an end.
Would it be a hassle to let passengers off the plane, to walk across the apron and enter the terminal through some random door? Of course. That doesn't make it "impossible" by even the remotest stretch of the imagination. And, deploying a few extra staff to watch the corridors and doors along the way, would make it possible to do so without even busting anyone's precious security theater.
Everyone needs to understand that there's a world of difference between "we can't do that," and "we can't do that without busting some paper-pusher's rule and making a little extra work for ourselves."
Last edited by Gauges and Dials; 5th Jan 2018 at 01:43. Reason: typo
Would it be a hassle to let passengers off the plane, to walk across the apron and enter the terminal through some random door?
to walk across the apron - depends on the distance and any taxying aircraft or other moving vehicles ... could cause delay or put lives at risk ... and what about any disabled passengers on the aircraft?
enter the terminal through some random door - contamination between incoming and outgoing passengers possible, who has the key and who controls the movement of 150+ passengers? Not a good spontaneous idea.
Everyone needs to understand that there's a world of difference between "we can't do that," and "we can't do that without busting some paper-pusher's rule and making a little extra work for ourselves."
What's missing in a lot of the "explanations" here is a very important second half of the sentence.
I'm reading a lot of "there was no way to let the passengers off," when I think the actual truth was "there was no way to let the passengers off without inconveniencing the airline or the airport staff."
There is always a way to let the passengers off. 738s have a built-in front stairway. Mobile stairways abound at every airport. No gate? No problem; there's always some door somewhere leading from the ramp into the terminal; passengers could be deplaned and directed to that door.
People get so hung up on "this is the standard way we do things" that they fail to take a step back and realize that there are alternative solutions available.
I'm reading a lot of "there was no way to let the passengers off," when I think the actual truth was "there was no way to let the passengers off without inconveniencing the airline or the airport staff."
There is always a way to let the passengers off. 738s have a built-in front stairway. Mobile stairways abound at every airport. No gate? No problem; there's always some door somewhere leading from the ramp into the terminal; passengers could be deplaned and directed to that door.
People get so hung up on "this is the standard way we do things" that they fail to take a step back and realize that there are alternative solutions available.
The problem seems to have been all about lack of communication.
Passengers actions totally unacceptable.
As was that of the crew; maybe FD, maybe cabin.
If the passenger is subject to censure then so should be the crew.
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: In my head
Posts: 694
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
And what is the story thesedays in EU regarding inbound and outbound contamination between passengers? One airport I use very regularly has it happening by design in a long corridor adjacent to the apron all airside of passport control. The only thing stopping FR inbound pax turning on their heel and flying back is the lack of a boarding pass to show cabin crew at the top of the aircraft steps, and they could even bypass that if they had conspired with an outbound passenger and either swapped places or displayed the outbound passenger's boarding pass on a second phone.
Thinking about it, this also would risk the scenario where an outbound passenger who had checked in a bag did not to fly - he need only turn on his heel after passport control and join the inbound queue, and show his passport again at a different desk as he exited.
Actually I raised this with airport security some months ago when they'd removed a wall (permanently it now seems) and created the situation. I got a blank response. Maybe we don't actually worry about such things anymore, else CCTV, facial recognition software, and passport scanning is all seamlessly integrated across EU and Schengen, and uniformed officers would come running the moment we step out of line?
And Communication? You mean like we still have to think outside the systems boxes and engage brain and speak to the great unwashed too?
Glad the Polish asthmatic got his air and didn't hurt himself.
Regular passengers notice all the foibles, opportunities and inconsistencies, and so they notice that top hinged 738 wing exits don't actually require much to close again, so no harm done really, eh?
Lessons learned all round we hope ...
Last edited by slip and turn; 5th Jan 2018 at 15:32.
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: USA
Posts: 241
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
to walk across the apron - depends on the distance and any taxying aircraft or other moving vehicles ... could cause delay or put lives at risk ... and what about any disabled passengers on the aircraft?
enter the terminal through some random door - contamination between incoming and outgoing passengers possible, who has the key and who controls the movement of 150+ passengers? Not a good spontaneous idea.
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: USA
Posts: 241
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
What's interesting here I think, is the reflection of industry culture and corporate culture. There are very different mindsets required for different parts of the industry, and a "one size fits all" mindset does not work.
For the people who are flying and maintaining the aircraft, the exemplary forward progress of western aviation safety suggests that we're doing pretty much the right thing: carefully developing procedures and following them. For pilots and mechanics, the personality type whose first instinct is "hey, let's try something new," is quite wrong.
On the other hand, in spite of the senior management of the airlines trying to convince Wall Street that they are in an industrial business that involves moving metal around the country, they are, to their constant annoyance, in the hospitality business. In that situation, a culture of "These are the rules and we need to follow them without fail." is exactly wrong.
What works excellently for operations, works terribly for hospitality, and we are seeing increasing numbers of instances of the conflict between the two mindsets creating misery all around.
For the people who are flying and maintaining the aircraft, the exemplary forward progress of western aviation safety suggests that we're doing pretty much the right thing: carefully developing procedures and following them. For pilots and mechanics, the personality type whose first instinct is "hey, let's try something new," is quite wrong.
On the other hand, in spite of the senior management of the airlines trying to convince Wall Street that they are in an industrial business that involves moving metal around the country, they are, to their constant annoyance, in the hospitality business. In that situation, a culture of "These are the rules and we need to follow them without fail." is exactly wrong.
What works excellently for operations, works terribly for hospitality, and we are seeing increasing numbers of instances of the conflict between the two mindsets creating misery all around.
Didn't too many airlines forget about that a long time ago? More seats less lavs. No food and service at all? Flying Strato-Greyhounds including the same clientele. So no surprise.
Join Date: Sep 2016
Location: Lossy city
Posts: 58
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
And what is the story thesedays in EU regarding inbound and outbound contamination between passengers? One airport I use very regularly has it happening by design in a long corridor adjacent to the apron all airside of passport control. The only thing stopping FR inbound pax turning on their heel and flying back is the lack of a boarding pass to show cabin crew at the top of the aircraft steps, and they could even bypass that if they had conspired with an outbound passenger and either swapped places or displayed the outbound passenger's boarding pass on a second phone.
And ID checks at boarding are quite rare for Schengen internal flights IME. Some countries do it, but many don't. At least there is positive bag matching (at least relative to ticket if not passenger), the US don't even bother with that.
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: In my head
Posts: 694
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The venue I'm referring to regularly has 2x189 pax opposite direction long queues completely mixed in a 4 meter wide, 30 metre long corridor with seats for whoever fancies them down the sides. It is so mixed that inbound pax often have to weave round outbound seated pax legs and bags and loose kids as they head into the terminal. On inbound I have stood for minutes with the outbound queue chatting to neighbours standing waiting to board outbound who by arrangement used my car to get to the airport (saves parking charges!). We had arranged to use two different keys but I could have gone with my gut feeling that one key handed over in the inevitable mixed queue would have been sufficient due to the recent disappearance of the partition between us!
The effect of the removal of the wall between inbound and outbound has the effect that they could have left the outbound queue and gone back landside with me, and that means they could have left one or more checked-in bags to fly to UK unaccompanied. No-one would have been the wiser other than if count was occurring on the aircraft (and who has noticed one of those recently on FR, eh?). Even with allocated seating there are no checks so long as everyone is happy and not getting cabin-crew involved. I sit in my allocated seat about one flight in five - I blag the other four because as a regular pax, I know where the likely unsold more comfortable seats will be and one time even got to sit in someone else's allocated seat because I'd blagged from cabin crew on the offchance, and cabin crew smoothly persuaded said dispossessed that another seat was just as good! So it isn't so much the pax being treated as automatically sterile - because it seems no-one notices whether we are actually there or not after we've been through the usual motions at the gate - we can just as easily turn up after that as an undetected surplus, or our empty seat can be an undetected deficit onboard. It's the checked-in bags that now seem to be being treated as automatically sterile.
And back to the rubbing shoulders aspects of a mixed queue, it just so happens my neighbours are from two separate non-EU countries, and they do not carry EU or Schengen ID.
So is segregation of inbound and outbound international pax and bag matching to actual flying pax at all important anymore ? ... I'm now guessing not ...
As Guages and Dials begins to highlight quite well, we have many effects which are a reflection of the gross inconsistencies that can occur with the permutations of 1001 different brands of hospitality versus almost as many combinations of slick transport and airport security operations. Cabin crew may smile and let me informally "upgrade" my seat and even sit in someone else's seat, but who am I? Unless they ask to see my boarding pass and ID (and they never have in any of the tens of times I've blagged a different seat) they've only got my word that I even belong on the aircraft in the first place, because I could be using another pax boarding pass - even one belonging to someone who is also on the aircraft sat in their proper seat or not, especially at the EU airport airport and on the airline I've alluded to. Alternatively I and everyone else could be sat in the cabin in the allocated seat of one who didn't fly but checked-in a bag which did ... but hey, it's part of life's rich pattern, I guess ... are we at all bovvered?
Last edited by slip and turn; 5th Jan 2018 at 20:44.
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: New York
Posts: 225
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
DOT 3
We receive automated ACARS messages if not airborne within 30 minutes of Out Time, and they require a specific scripted Pax PA and confirmation back to the Company; with increasing levels of visibility in the OCC as time progresses. We can even make a specific request to Ground to expedite gate return based on the DOT3. Penalties, as explained to me; run into the tens of thousands of dollars per Pax.
It's taken very seriously in the US.
Join Date: Sep 2016
Location: Lossy city
Posts: 58
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Nor does the EU airport I often use. As I mentioned earlier, the FR UK inbound and EU outbound to UK same aircraft flight (and maybe others - I have no experience of those at this airport) always mixes the airside inbound and outbound queues airside of passport control in both cases. Passport control inbound is separately manned some distance from passport control outbound and both are the closest functions airside to the aircraft. Bags to the hold can be identified with the credentials of who dropped them, but as there is no further check that those people ever get on the aircraft or whether instead, they double-back after passing through gate checks and scans and passport control, but then leave the airport with the inbounds, the hold bags can no longer be guaranteed accompanied on the outbound flight, now can they?
The bag matching is done when boarding passes are scanned, at which point passengers should no longer be mixed. (Also, many airlines count passengers when boarding so a mismatch would be detected if someone didn't scan their boarding pass.) Flights to the UK also _have_ to check passenger ID when boarding, so bags are positively matched to an identity - but that's separate from passport control run by the immigration authorities. Most schengen-internal flights don't do that ID check when boarding, but they still match bags against boarding passes.