737 diverted to CWL
Death Cruiser Flight Crew
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Vaucluse, France.
Posts: 613
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I have watched the interview on Sky News with the MD of the tour operator which chartered the aircraft. As MOL says, it certainly presents an "alternative viewpoint"!! In short it is a rant against the actions of the crew and the captain in particular.
I hope this MD gentleman comes to realise that his remarks, at this stage of the proceedings, are inflammatory, ill-advised and bordering on actionable.
My airline has long advised that in the event of serious cabin disruption whilst airborne, flight deck crews must not intervene in the cabin but concentrate on landing the aircraft safely and sorting it out on the ground. This advice followed a serious incident when a Britannia Airways captain was stabbed and incapacitated, leaving the first officer alone to fly and land the aircraft.
I hope this MD gentleman comes to realise that his remarks, at this stage of the proceedings, are inflammatory, ill-advised and bordering on actionable.
My airline has long advised that in the event of serious cabin disruption whilst airborne, flight deck crews must not intervene in the cabin but concentrate on landing the aircraft safely and sorting it out on the ground. This advice followed a serious incident when a Britannia Airways captain was stabbed and incapacitated, leaving the first officer alone to fly and land the aircraft.
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: London
Posts: 569
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Whether the crew over-reacted or not may well be debatable but I do think the locked door policy makes it more difficult for flight crew to correctly assess any situation in the cabin. Clearly, however, aboard an aircraft the captain has the final word on safety issues and if he’s in any doubt, it is far better to be cautious than cavalier. Some passengers must understand that anti-social, abusive and violent behaviour will not be tolerated. After all there are other passengers who may well be intimidated and frightened by such behaviour and in the close confines of a pressurised cabin have nowhere to escape. Passengers are often stressed by the thought of flying and when you combine some of the above elements, the flight can quickly become a living nightmare! Perhaps the service of alcohol on such flights needs to be looked at. It will always be the case that certain individuals, when in a group or by themselves, cannot control their outbursts following alcohol intake.
Perhaps it is about time passengers were made specifically aware of the requisite articles of the ANO that apply to them. Perhaps this could be done as part of the safety briefing, whereby each passenger has in the back of his seat brief details of the ANO that apply to him. During the general safety briefing given by cabin crew, passengers could be referred to the ANO card and informed of the consequences of any breach.
Unfortunately selfish and ill-disciplined behaviour is all too common in certain parts of British society today. Moral standards have declined and many people have a very self-centred attitude, where the world seems to revolve around them. Whilst these people still constitute a minority in society, they can be a very vocal and disruptive one!
In some areas of the country social and community responsibility struggles to exist. The rot has been setting in for some time and it seems that very few people in government seem to want to grasp the nettle and deal with the problem. If parents can’t instil decent values in their children, because they themselves don’t possess them, then perhaps it’s time that the government (through schools) take up that mantle. Criminal and anti-social behaviour must be dealt with severely by the police and courts and from a personal standpoint, I would like to see the introduction of consecutive prison sentences for certain serious offences. There is very little room for political correctness in these matters.
As for the tabloid media, the less said the better. Am I right in saying that the Sun is the most widely read newspaper in Britain? Frightening really!
Perhaps it is about time passengers were made specifically aware of the requisite articles of the ANO that apply to them. Perhaps this could be done as part of the safety briefing, whereby each passenger has in the back of his seat brief details of the ANO that apply to him. During the general safety briefing given by cabin crew, passengers could be referred to the ANO card and informed of the consequences of any breach.
Unfortunately selfish and ill-disciplined behaviour is all too common in certain parts of British society today. Moral standards have declined and many people have a very self-centred attitude, where the world seems to revolve around them. Whilst these people still constitute a minority in society, they can be a very vocal and disruptive one!
In some areas of the country social and community responsibility struggles to exist. The rot has been setting in for some time and it seems that very few people in government seem to want to grasp the nettle and deal with the problem. If parents can’t instil decent values in their children, because they themselves don’t possess them, then perhaps it’s time that the government (through schools) take up that mantle. Criminal and anti-social behaviour must be dealt with severely by the police and courts and from a personal standpoint, I would like to see the introduction of consecutive prison sentences for certain serious offences. There is very little room for political correctness in these matters.
As for the tabloid media, the less said the better. Am I right in saying that the Sun is the most widely read newspaper in Britain? Frightening really!
Last edited by Crosswind Limits; 15th Dec 2002 at 11:01.
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Somewhere probing
Posts: 301
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Astound Mars - w.r.t. There is a difference between declaring an emergency and calling Mayday sorry mate, but you are WRONG !!!
The correct terminology is either Mayday, or Pan, or Securite ( not many folks know about that last one ) dependent upon the level of urgency - any one of which can be downgraded or upgraded as required - and using anything else is non-standard RT ( and who else remembers the jet which crashed when it ran out fuel as result of the pilots being reluctant to declare a Mayday, i.e. just what the heck is a "fuel emergency" ?! )
And w.r.t. sending your FO outside - given the circumstances, that's got to be the stupidest thing I think I've ever read on PPRuNe.
The correct terminology is either Mayday, or Pan, or Securite ( not many folks know about that last one ) dependent upon the level of urgency - any one of which can be downgraded or upgraded as required - and using anything else is non-standard RT ( and who else remembers the jet which crashed when it ran out fuel as result of the pilots being reluctant to declare a Mayday, i.e. just what the heck is a "fuel emergency" ?! )
And w.r.t. sending your FO outside - given the circumstances, that's got to be the stupidest thing I think I've ever read on PPRuNe.
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Germany
Posts: 14
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Tango 85
You may come rom "planet earth", but you certainly don't seem to have any idea of "evidence"
To say there is no such thing as "police evidence" is utter bull. This aircraf, had it landed at the original destination would have landed in Glasgow and dealt with under Scottish Criminal Law.Had the fans for example been drinking, the police would mention it in their report to the prosecutor (Procurator Fiscal).The main evidence here is likely to be eye witness ie the crew on board
Police are "witnesses", in Scotland with very special powers with respect to the public .If they give evidence in court eg eye witness "evidence", this is POLICE evidence.
You may come rom "planet earth", but you certainly don't seem to have any idea of "evidence"
To say there is no such thing as "police evidence" is utter bull. This aircraf, had it landed at the original destination would have landed in Glasgow and dealt with under Scottish Criminal Law.Had the fans for example been drinking, the police would mention it in their report to the prosecutor (Procurator Fiscal).The main evidence here is likely to be eye witness ie the crew on board
Police are "witnesses", in Scotland with very special powers with respect to the public .If they give evidence in court eg eye witness "evidence", this is POLICE evidence.
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: UK
Posts: 7
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
advocate
1.perhaps you being a skilled aviator and authority on procedure could enlighten me on the given circumstances?
2. you are WRONG in differences between pan securite and mayday.
3.your answer supercedes the stupidest thing you have ever seen on prune
4 presuming you are a captain, what would you have done to get to get accurate information.
1.perhaps you being a skilled aviator and authority on procedure could enlighten me on the given circumstances?
2. you are WRONG in differences between pan securite and mayday.
3.your answer supercedes the stupidest thing you have ever seen on prune
4 presuming you are a captain, what would you have done to get to get accurate information.
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: the Tearooms of Mars
Posts: 206
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
No way!!
Absolutely not, Mr Mars! The flight crew are the only ones who can fly the aircraft. What are you going to do if he gets his lights punched out and you have a coronary with the stress? Your job is to protect the aircraft and its passengers long enough to get it on the ground where the problem can be sorted out by law enforcement, with whom one imagines, these individuals are used to dealing.
I’m incredulous as to what some of our readers regard as acceptable behaviour. I don’t expect to enter into a dialogue over Company procedures and relevant legislation with my passengers, and I don’t expect them to tell me which parts they consider trivial or not relevant, neither to I expect to ask which parts of the Law they will be complying with today.
The Law has been clarified post September 11th to rightfully put the weight of legislation behind the crews and groundstaff so that they may operate the aircraft safely and unhindered without fear of contradiction or threat. I can only imagine what liberties these groups might take with other public amenities. Their behaviour, however acceptable they may consider it to be, would not be tolerated in MacDonalds or on the bus. How then they consider it acceptable in an aircraft beggars belief.
The very great majority of the passengers I fly are decent, respectable individuals who know how to conduct themselves in public and adjust their behaviour in such a way that they cause as little impact on the comfort of others as possible. Hence as a group they are a pleasure to look after, and are welcomed back again and again. My crew have the right to be treated with dignity and respect, they are not there as sex toys or galley slaves, and considering their prime purpose on board, you would have thought that the protagonists in this incident might have been more compliant.
The fact that otherwise normal citizens can put on a football shirt, get lagered up, and then wander round like packs of marauding Vikings would, you might imagine, be problem enough for the forces of law and order. The fact that some of these people wish to travel on a public transport aeroplane is concerning indeed. I would be extremely circumspect in judging which of these individuals was likely to be under the influence, or likely to cause a threat to the safety and good order and discipline on board, reason enough to deny them boarding. We might well ask ourselves if it is wise to offer such groups transportation by air.
I can easily enjoy a flight without upsetting anyone, being courteous to the crew and my travelling companions, enjoying the service offered, and leave the aircraft at my planned destination without having transgressed the law or abused my welcome in any way. Why do a very small minority find this such a challenge?
I’m incredulous as to what some of our readers regard as acceptable behaviour. I don’t expect to enter into a dialogue over Company procedures and relevant legislation with my passengers, and I don’t expect them to tell me which parts they consider trivial or not relevant, neither to I expect to ask which parts of the Law they will be complying with today.
The Law has been clarified post September 11th to rightfully put the weight of legislation behind the crews and groundstaff so that they may operate the aircraft safely and unhindered without fear of contradiction or threat. I can only imagine what liberties these groups might take with other public amenities. Their behaviour, however acceptable they may consider it to be, would not be tolerated in MacDonalds or on the bus. How then they consider it acceptable in an aircraft beggars belief.
The very great majority of the passengers I fly are decent, respectable individuals who know how to conduct themselves in public and adjust their behaviour in such a way that they cause as little impact on the comfort of others as possible. Hence as a group they are a pleasure to look after, and are welcomed back again and again. My crew have the right to be treated with dignity and respect, they are not there as sex toys or galley slaves, and considering their prime purpose on board, you would have thought that the protagonists in this incident might have been more compliant.
The fact that otherwise normal citizens can put on a football shirt, get lagered up, and then wander round like packs of marauding Vikings would, you might imagine, be problem enough for the forces of law and order. The fact that some of these people wish to travel on a public transport aeroplane is concerning indeed. I would be extremely circumspect in judging which of these individuals was likely to be under the influence, or likely to cause a threat to the safety and good order and discipline on board, reason enough to deny them boarding. We might well ask ourselves if it is wise to offer such groups transportation by air.
I can easily enjoy a flight without upsetting anyone, being courteous to the crew and my travelling companions, enjoying the service offered, and leave the aircraft at my planned destination without having transgressed the law or abused my welcome in any way. Why do a very small minority find this such a challenge?
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Hong Kong
Posts: 5
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hans-Uhlrich
Hans
Evidence comes from witnesses. Anything else is hearsay. In certain circumstances police may give expert testimony - but that no longer extends to observations about drunkeness. Medical evidence is required.
Since there were no police onboard, they are not witnesses to the events. The most evidence they can give is to say that the crew were "distressed".
The point I was originally rebutting was the suggestion that <the police evidence> was somehow a higher truth which made the passengers guilty.
ps - the Law of England and Wales applies to this case.
Evidence comes from witnesses. Anything else is hearsay. In certain circumstances police may give expert testimony - but that no longer extends to observations about drunkeness. Medical evidence is required.
Since there were no police onboard, they are not witnesses to the events. The most evidence they can give is to say that the crew were "distressed".
The point I was originally rebutting was the suggestion that <the police evidence> was somehow a higher truth which made the passengers guilty.
ps - the Law of England and Wales applies to this case.
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Somewhere probing
Posts: 301
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Astound M, wr.t.
1). The circumstances where senior member of your crew reports to you that a serious disturbance is occuring in the cabin, and where he/she themselves reports having been assaulted.
2). Actually I'm right, and I suggest that you have a read of the UK CAA CAP413 RT Manual 2002 / Chapter 9 / Sections 2.2 ( a & b ), section 4.2, and section 11 ( amongst others )
3). See answers to 1 and 2.
4). Invidious as it might seem ( because it is ) I would have to rely on the information being relayed to me by my professional colleagues in the cabin - they deal with the general public a lot more than I do, and as such they're probably better placed to assess the true situation than I am.
Also, aside from the new rules w.r.t. flight crew leaving the flight deck, it would be very stupid to attempt to assess the situation ( in circumstances described in 1 above ) only to find oneself embroiled in a melee and / or at risk of injury to oneself such that - as a critical member of the crew - you find yourself unable to operate in your normal capacity.
1). The circumstances where senior member of your crew reports to you that a serious disturbance is occuring in the cabin, and where he/she themselves reports having been assaulted.
2). Actually I'm right, and I suggest that you have a read of the UK CAA CAP413 RT Manual 2002 / Chapter 9 / Sections 2.2 ( a & b ), section 4.2, and section 11 ( amongst others )
3). See answers to 1 and 2.
4). Invidious as it might seem ( because it is ) I would have to rely on the information being relayed to me by my professional colleagues in the cabin - they deal with the general public a lot more than I do, and as such they're probably better placed to assess the true situation than I am.
Also, aside from the new rules w.r.t. flight crew leaving the flight deck, it would be very stupid to attempt to assess the situation ( in circumstances described in 1 above ) only to find oneself embroiled in a melee and / or at risk of injury to oneself such that - as a critical member of the crew - you find yourself unable to operate in your normal capacity.
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 179
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Very wise of Sky to cut the later version of the travel agents post interview outburst that went so close to getting himself and Sky in trouble.
I wonder what the gentleman travel agent would have been saying if the captain had decided to fly on and God forbid, an accident had happended.
I bet the comment would then have been why didn't he land somewhere as a precaution.
I wonder what the gentleman travel agent would have been saying if the captain had decided to fly on and God forbid, an accident had happended.
I bet the comment would then have been why didn't he land somewhere as a precaution.
Join Date: Aug 1999
Location: UK
Posts: 314
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I see four out of the "Astraeus Six" 
have been released !
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/wales/2575913.stm
have been released !http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/wales/2575913.stm
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Germany
Posts: 14
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Tango
I know the point that you were trying to make, and of course the law of England and Wales applies, but only because the a/c landed there.
I was niffed that you made reference to a sweeping statement there was no such thing as "police evidence"
-as 10,000 police officers in Scotland might disagree with you.
Evidence "all legal means exclusive of mere argument which tend to prove or disprove the subject under judicial examination"
Obviously you have knowledge of the workings of the law, there are many others here with a good background in jurisprudence.
I know the point that you were trying to make, and of course the law of England and Wales applies, but only because the a/c landed there.
I was niffed that you made reference to a sweeping statement there was no such thing as "police evidence"
-as 10,000 police officers in Scotland might disagree with you.
Evidence "all legal means exclusive of mere argument which tend to prove or disprove the subject under judicial examination"
Obviously you have knowledge of the workings of the law, there are many others here with a good background in jurisprudence.
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: The Valley Where the Thames Runs Softly
Age: 77
Posts: 556
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Ghostrider:
Released yes, but on (presumably) police bail. That means that they will have to go back to the police station at a future date.
So that is not the same as released without charge.
Released yes, but on (presumably) police bail. That means that they will have to go back to the police station at a future date.
So that is not the same as released without charge.
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Dublin
Posts: 23
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
What would I have done ? I would have assessed the situation thoroughly before calling a Mayday. I would like to know what information was given to the captain that ensured such a critical call. Sure the captain may have had no alternative but he must have been under the impression that there was turmoil on the plane to do what he did. It is clear that there was no turmoil or riot and the company should take its head out of the sand and listen to all the comments from passengers. There should be an inquiry with the result made public. Perhaps we could be told the reasons for all the problems with the aircraft on both trips as well.
As to the TraveL Agent's comments on Sky he was quite clear on the views of the passengers. The reason the repeat interview was shortened was because the original live interview wasabout 5 of 6 minutes long.
My own solution to prevent further 'misunderstnadings' would be to have cameras installed so that the crew can always see what's happeninfrom the cockpit - but then again that would cost money.
As to the TraveL Agent's comments on Sky he was quite clear on the views of the passengers. The reason the repeat interview was shortened was because the original live interview wasabout 5 of 6 minutes long.
My own solution to prevent further 'misunderstnadings' would be to have cameras installed so that the crew can always see what's happeninfrom the cockpit - but then again that would cost money.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: EDI, LHR, NQY
Posts: 403
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Unwell Raptor is correct.
3 AIR Alert Substitute 14:59GMT 14DEC02
Meanwhile, four men arrested yesterday after the incident have been released on bail, police said this afternoon.
A spokesman for South Wales Police said the four had been released on police bail pending further inquiries but that two other men continued to be questioned.
mfl
Meanwhile, four men arrested yesterday after the incident have been released on bail, police said this afternoon.
A spokesman for South Wales Police said the four had been released on police bail pending further inquiries but that two other men continued to be questioned.
mfl
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 34
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
MOL
Assessed the situation thoroughly? How exactly?
Do you think the crew diverted because they felt like it?
Has your "friend" told you that the Police had to be called in at Santiago Airport to deal with these passengers?
That there was smoking and drinking on board?
How far would you let it go in your "assessment"?
Assessed the situation thoroughly? How exactly?
Do you think the crew diverted because they felt like it?
Has your "friend" told you that the Police had to be called in at Santiago Airport to deal with these passengers?
That there was smoking and drinking on board?
How far would you let it go in your "assessment"?
Join Date: Aug 1999
Location: UK
Posts: 314
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
MOL,
You say you would have assessed the situation thoroughly before declaring a 'mayday'. I should hope so !
What evidence is there that the AEU skipper did not do just that ? He gets my vote !
I just love it when the hindsight brigade get involved.
Public enquiry ?!?! oh please ! ( There's more important things going on in the world at the moment ! Like 'Cheriegate' for example ! 
)
This makes me cringe to read the posts slagging off the 'over-reaction' by the crew after loads of previous occassions with disruptive pax where we all scream for criminal action and justice against the offenders and go ape when nothing is done.
So what's the difference here ?!?!?! **** all if you ask me !
You say you would have assessed the situation thoroughly before declaring a 'mayday'. I should hope so !
What evidence is there that the AEU skipper did not do just that ? He gets my vote !
I just love it when the hindsight brigade get involved.
Public enquiry ?!?! oh please !
( There's more important things going on in the world at the moment ! Like 'Cheriegate' for example ! )This makes me cringe to read the posts slagging off the 'over-reaction' by the crew after loads of previous occassions with disruptive pax where we all scream for criminal action and justice against the offenders and go ape when nothing is done.
So what's the difference here ?!?!?! **** all if you ask me !