Ryan Air pax exits overwing ..
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: In my head
Posts: 694
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
No, I can't imagine so 
I think I have confused you by mentioning passport control which could be pre or post gate at different airports. In the airport in question it just happens to be the last check before boarding the aircraft i.e. it is after the gate, so after the last boarding pass scan and ID check. Yes it is a separate function to the airline gate check and electronic bag match. But both opportunities for the final scan and control are compromised. The relevant fault is all caused by the free mixing of inbounds and outbounds after the gate which means outbound pax can easily leave undetected at that point without having to abnormally run across an apron and vault a fence! The inbounds who've been mixed with final scanned and ID'd outbounds are merely subject to a passport check to get landside. One or more deliberate non-fliers i.e. who had not boarded after being counted and scanned through their boarding gate, would not be noticed or challenged - their flight would depart short of SOBs, and no-one would be the wiser.
Yes, scanned once when dropping the bag landside and a second time when passing through the gate and being counted through the gate, thus confirming the match of bag with original drop-off passenger ...
That's my point ... they are then mixed 
Nope, because "boarding" is contaminated by mixing post gate, the theory is compromised at the airport I described, I'm afraid. Bag matching is all about making sure a pax who checks in a bag flies with it without fail, right? Else the bag should be pulled.
I am sure all changes have been implemented in good faith, and are intended to maintain security and improve it, but the trouble is, there are still far too many variations of airport pax handling at each destination to reasonably expect any EU-wide or Schengen-wide, or worldwide one-size-fits-all directive to work at every venue. As a result, I have a nasty feeling the plot still gets lost sometimes in more ways than you might imagine!
I appreciate this is all a far cry from what caused a Ryanair pax to let himself out of a wing exit, but broadly it is still about what bad things potentially happen when you squash passengers into small spaces where they don't think they ought to be, especially they realise they are being "kettled".
In small spaces bumping with others, they even have time to work out how to breach the system should they so wish on another occasion. By "kettled" I mean they are involuntarily held in some way in a confined area until the airport or the airline is ready to deal with letting them move freely. That just as well applies to being held on the aircraft on stand waiting unreasonably for ground crew to bring stairs (which simply shouldn't happen), or queuing in poorly lit and steep gate stairwells never designed for it before being release onto the apron. Some of those include areas which I would question as safe for nearly 200 people to be crammed into with what appear to be locked exits until the airport is ready to let you onto the apron! This need for kettling the pax close to the stand in order to reduce turnround times now also seems to include, at at least one airport, the sort of actual apronside mixing of inbound and outbound international pax. That simply can't be right however you look at it.
We humans don't like being "kettled" against our will. It's a natural aversion. "Queueing" is something else - that's an optional activity. Spending time flying in a cigar tube plus a modest bit of time on the ground both ends is also optional - but when that gets extended unreasonably ("lo-cost" has certainly redefined that!), we shouldn't be surprised some people get more and more claustrophobic and a few are driven to do strange things.
I think I have confused you by mentioning passport control which could be pre or post gate at different airports. In the airport in question it just happens to be the last check before boarding the aircraft i.e. it is after the gate, so after the last boarding pass scan and ID check. Yes it is a separate function to the airline gate check and electronic bag match. But both opportunities for the final scan and control are compromised. The relevant fault is all caused by the free mixing of inbounds and outbounds after the gate which means outbound pax can easily leave undetected at that point without having to abnormally run across an apron and vault a fence! The inbounds who've been mixed with final scanned and ID'd outbounds are merely subject to a passport check to get landside. One or more deliberate non-fliers i.e. who had not boarded after being counted and scanned through their boarding gate, would not be noticed or challenged - their flight would depart short of SOBs, and no-one would be the wiser.
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 ...
- Mixing occurs after going through their gate and showing ID.
- Boarding or not becomes an undetectable choice although of course most do not realise they have the choice to walk out the airport quickly with the inbounds if they wish without a word to anyone.
- No counts occur as pax climb the stairs with my favourite airline
- rarely is there a count when all pax are onboard anymore - most of the reasons for having to do them are "thought" to have been eliminated by newer digital systems of control.
- cabin crew merely glance at boarding passes to make sure you have boarded the correct flight and to point you to the right part of the cabin.
I am sure all changes have been implemented in good faith, and are intended to maintain security and improve it, but the trouble is, there are still far too many variations of airport pax handling at each destination to reasonably expect any EU-wide or Schengen-wide, or worldwide one-size-fits-all directive to work at every venue. As a result, I have a nasty feeling the plot still gets lost sometimes in more ways than you might imagine!
I appreciate this is all a far cry from what caused a Ryanair pax to let himself out of a wing exit, but broadly it is still about what bad things potentially happen when you squash passengers into small spaces where they don't think they ought to be, especially they realise they are being "kettled".
In small spaces bumping with others, they even have time to work out how to breach the system should they so wish on another occasion. By "kettled" I mean they are involuntarily held in some way in a confined area until the airport or the airline is ready to deal with letting them move freely. That just as well applies to being held on the aircraft on stand waiting unreasonably for ground crew to bring stairs (which simply shouldn't happen), or queuing in poorly lit and steep gate stairwells never designed for it before being release onto the apron. Some of those include areas which I would question as safe for nearly 200 people to be crammed into with what appear to be locked exits until the airport is ready to let you onto the apron! This need for kettling the pax close to the stand in order to reduce turnround times now also seems to include, at at least one airport, the sort of actual apronside mixing of inbound and outbound international pax. That simply can't be right however you look at it.
We humans don't like being "kettled" against our will. It's a natural aversion. "Queueing" is something else - that's an optional activity. Spending time flying in a cigar tube plus a modest bit of time on the ground both ends is also optional - but when that gets extended unreasonably ("lo-cost" has certainly redefined that!), we shouldn't be surprised some people get more and more claustrophobic and a few are driven to do strange things.
Last edited by slip and turn; 7th Jan 2018 at 09:30.
This thread has gone a bit astray.
The fact is that this was New Year's Day; the aircraft had a slot outbound from STN and arrived to a remote stand in AGP where no buses were available. The crew made PAs to the passengers at all stages.
Anybody who has piloted commercial aircraft around Europe will know that at busy times ATC slot delays are the rule, not the exception. A 1 hour delay is not unusual. Waiting for ground transport for pax on arrival is not unusual either, and wouldn't surprise me on New Year's Day when an aircraft arrives an hour late. I'm not saying things can't be organised better. Of course they can. But some things are not in the hands of the flight crew.
No Captain in his right mind would allow a plane load of pax to disembark and walk across a busy apron to a terminal building a few hundred metres away. To suggest that his or her unwillingness to countenance the option of doing so represents a failure to 'think outside the box' is nonsense.
This is simply a case of a distressed pax doing something silly.
The fact is that this was New Year's Day; the aircraft had a slot outbound from STN and arrived to a remote stand in AGP where no buses were available. The crew made PAs to the passengers at all stages.
Anybody who has piloted commercial aircraft around Europe will know that at busy times ATC slot delays are the rule, not the exception. A 1 hour delay is not unusual. Waiting for ground transport for pax on arrival is not unusual either, and wouldn't surprise me on New Year's Day when an aircraft arrives an hour late. I'm not saying things can't be organised better. Of course they can. But some things are not in the hands of the flight crew.
No Captain in his right mind would allow a plane load of pax to disembark and walk across a busy apron to a terminal building a few hundred metres away. To suggest that his or her unwillingness to countenance the option of doing so represents a failure to 'think outside the box' is nonsense.
This is simply a case of a distressed pax doing something silly.
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: In my head
Posts: 694
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Guilty! So has certain types of communication with and control of pax in airports and aircraft!
So what? This is aviation. I came into STN on New Year's afternoon. It was a breeze! Are New Year's Day's elsewhere written off as bad days?
Shouldn't have happened.
The lions share of EU-EU flights of 150+ pax loads are FR. A 1 hour delay is not unusual at the end of the day, but destinations know it so should be covering it. My rental car is always ready with a smile the moment I pick it up after a long delay. They have my flight number, and if they have nothing else, but we'd hope they do, they have FR24 on their smartphones. They find other things to do until I arrive. It's called planning.
This is simply a case of p!ss poor planning distressing the pax.
The fact is that this was New Year's Day
... the aircraft had a slot outbound from STN and arrived to a remote stand in AGP where no buses were available.
The crew made PAs to the passengers at all stages.
Anybody who has piloted commercial aircraft around Europe will know that at busy times ATC slot delays are the rule, not the exception. A 1 hour delay is not unusual.
Anybody who has piloted commercial aircraft around Europe will know that at busy times ATC slot delays are the rule, not the exception. A 1 hour delay is not unusual.
This is simply a case of a distressed pax doing something silly.
