MYT Flight Revolt
Dancing with the devil, going with the flow... it's all a game to me.
Join Date: May 2000
Location: England
Posts: 1,688
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Must say I'm very interested in this recognised procedure of using braking force to shift cargo bay baggage to within limits thus extinguishing a spurious flight deck light indication. It sounds almost too funny to be an answer in a JAR Mass and Balance exam! Where do these journo's dig it up from? 
Anyway, enough has been conjectured already so I won't add to the ridiculous speculation with my thoughts at this early media hysteria stage save to say that I feel sorry for the Captain who by the sounds of it did his best to manage the situation tactfully. Perhaps he should have just called "tech" and left it at that? Notes have been taken incase I ever encounter a simliar scenario as appears here that's for sure.*
One last thing: does anyone else think this hardly qualifies as Daily Telegraph front page fodder and ITV Lunchtime News material? More proof that the media are again (for whatever personal gripes) trying to stick the knife into the commercial aviation world rather than doing the honourable thing and blowing sunshine up up it's ass at this low point in it's history. Suprised ITV never managed to slip some library footage of BA in their news item. I bet BBC do!
VFE.
* Reminded of the young FO who kindly informed the pax they'd be entering turbulence in seven hours.
Anyway, enough has been conjectured already so I won't add to the ridiculous speculation with my thoughts at this early media hysteria stage save to say that I feel sorry for the Captain who by the sounds of it did his best to manage the situation tactfully. Perhaps he should have just called "tech" and left it at that? Notes have been taken incase I ever encounter a simliar scenario as appears here that's for sure.*
One last thing: does anyone else think this hardly qualifies as Daily Telegraph front page fodder and ITV Lunchtime News material? More proof that the media are again (for whatever personal gripes) trying to stick the knife into the commercial aviation world rather than doing the honourable thing and blowing sunshine up up it's ass at this low point in it's history. Suprised ITV never managed to slip some library footage of BA in their news item. I bet BBC do!
VFE.
* Reminded of the young FO who kindly informed the pax they'd be entering turbulence in seven hours.
Last edited by VFE; 12th Aug 2003 at 20:52.
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: over here
Posts: 472
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Sadly, it seems to be the usual newspaper trash at this time of year - no real news to report, so let's scare the holidaymakers - this morning we had some toerag from the Express getting a baggage handler's job at LHR, and then deliberately smuggling in sharp objects; last week there was some tripe about great white sharks off the Cornish coast.
I liked Eric Moody's comment about helicopters!!
I liked Eric Moody's comment about helicopters!!
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Moved back to enemy territory... Leeds!!
Age: 49
Posts: 324
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Perhaps the pilots decision not to just call the plane Tech' and walk away was the result of him being informed by HO that most of MYT's other northern based a/c had also thrown sevens and the weekend schedule had already been decimated. Far be it from me to suggest that the pilot should "fudge" some sort of repair in order to avoid adding to MYT's tech problems but it would add up wouldn't it? You could speculate that on another weekend the plane would have been sat and a replacement called in, but as is mentioned elsewhere on PPRUNE there was little or no subcharter capacity and certainly no spare aircraft. It's bad enough that the press have got hold of the story but imagine what a meal they'd make of it they put the weekend's chaos together with it and made a whole new aviation safety story.
Last edited by Frankfurt_Cowboy; 12th Aug 2003 at 21:40.
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: EMA
Posts: 28
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Am i on the right website? I thought it said Proffesional in the title.if this story is true then god help us .Gnd /flt sensing does not just put on a little indicator.It is a valid signal to dozens of other systems including all the really important ones we dont like to go off.with a defect like this you should ground the a/c end of story,and get the engineering support that it warrants no matter what the delay.How about an engineer flying an a/c home one sector because of a crewing problem? Don't laugh,It is just as illegal and only a bit more dangerous.
Guest
Posts: n/a
Get over it
What a bunch of whingers!
This is most definitely a story...worthy of prominent coverage.
Surely you chaps fly by numbers...procedures etc. Either you go or don't go...if you need clarification I presume you have a technical department in your own airlines to go to.
You do not stand on a chair and ask the pax to make a decision....what position are they in to judge whether it is safe or not??
You have all been so quick to condemn this report as inaccurate garbage, and yet the more we hear the more accurate it appears to have been reported - so in fact it was many of you jumping to conclusions and publishing half facts.
rant over - but a more tolerant attitude to criticism of the industry would not go a miss on this website.
This is most definitely a story...worthy of prominent coverage.
Surely you chaps fly by numbers...procedures etc. Either you go or don't go...if you need clarification I presume you have a technical department in your own airlines to go to.
You do not stand on a chair and ask the pax to make a decision....what position are they in to judge whether it is safe or not??
You have all been so quick to condemn this report as inaccurate garbage, and yet the more we hear the more accurate it appears to have been reported - so in fact it was many of you jumping to conclusions and publishing half facts.
rant over - but a more tolerant attitude to criticism of the industry would not go a miss on this website.
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: UK
Posts: 1,914
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
You call people here 'whingers'. You're a prat. You know nothing about the technical details. Anyone who flies professionally will know what nature the problem was. It was not done to 'shift the baggage in the holds'- a ridiculous conclusion dreamt up by imbeciles. It was done to work the weight switch. Hats off to a doubtless very tired pilot trying his best to keep the show on the road and fix the problem the only way he could see.
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: MAN
Posts: 122
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Well Instrument Ranting, here’s a quote from a pax who was actually on the flight:
I was one of the passengers on this flight (with my wife and 2 young children) and have been amazed by the inaccuracy of the reporting on this event. The vote was not to see if we should "risk it" but merely whether passengers wanted to go the lengths of boarding the plane again (3rd time) to try and fly home. The only "risk" was that the plane would only be able to taxi to the end of the runway and because of the fault not start the initialisation sequence. We would then have had to go straight back to the terminal and wait at least another 4 hours for the engineers to be flown from the UK.
All the news I have read today is about a “patched” plane “personally repaired” by the pilot and then us voting whether we thought it was safe to fly, which is just not the case but obviously makes for a better headline. It is funny that the bit of oil on the pilots shirt has now become him being “caked” and “covered” in oil!
All the news I have read today is about a “patched” plane “personally repaired” by the pilot and then us voting whether we thought it was safe to fly, which is just not the case but obviously makes for a better headline. It is funny that the bit of oil on the pilots shirt has now become him being “caked” and “covered” in oil!
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 1,178
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
You have all been so quick to condemn this report as inaccurate garbage, and yet the more we hear the more accurate it appears to have been reported - so in fact it was many of you jumping to conclusions and publishing half facts.
The news reports are complete garbage:-
Taxiway = a test area
Sudden braking to re-distribute luggage = an approved procedure
A warning light to say it was airborne
230 = nearly 300
This report is total garbage UNTIL someone in the know tells us what actually happened.
Only the following is clear:
There was an incident/failure of some sort preventing take off.
The pilot manged to fix it somehow.
The aircraft flew home safely without a few of it's pax.
Anything else - let's wait and see.
aka Capt PPRuNe
Join Date: May 1995
Location: UK
Posts: 4,541
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
No one seems to have picked up this comment from the BBC website which has some relevance:
Whatever was reported by the press can be attributed to a cr@p editor sending an even lower life form to report the story. 
Oh, and the comment by 'Danny' wasn't me. Honest!
You can see who bothered to read the previous comments and who didn't but were still prepared to come out with real indignation even thought hey only had the cr@p reporting to work from! 
I was one of the passengers on this flight (with my wife and 2 young children) and have been amazed by the inaccuracy of the reporting on this event. The vote was not to see if we should "risk it" but merely whether passengers wanted to go the lengths of boarding the plane again (3rd time ) to try and fly home. The only "risk" was that the plane would only be able to taxi to the end of the runway and because of the fault not start the initialisation sequence. We would then have had to go straight back to the terminal and wait at least another 4 hours for the engineers to be flown from the UK.
All the news I have read today is about a "patched" plane "personally repaired" by the pilot and then us voting whether we thought it was safe to fly, which is just not the case but obviously makes for a better headline. It is funny that the bit of oil on the pilots shirt has now become him being "caked" and "covered" in oil !
Nigel, England
All the news I have read today is about a "patched" plane "personally repaired" by the pilot and then us voting whether we thought it was safe to fly, which is just not the case but obviously makes for a better headline. It is funny that the bit of oil on the pilots shirt has now become him being "caked" and "covered" in oil !
Nigel, England
Oh, and the comment by 'Danny' wasn't me. Honest!
You can see who bothered to read the previous comments and who didn't but were still prepared to come out with real indignation even thought hey only had the cr@p reporting to work from!
Join Date: Sep 1999
Location: The Deep South (Sussex)
Posts: 783
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
My heart really goes out to this captain who, not only was trying to fix the problem himself, but also took the trouble(and had the b*lls to walk into the terminal and tell the pax the truth).
All it takes is one passenger claiming to be a pilot to stir things up and create panic amongst the assembled masses. Add to that a few journo's short of a story and... Bingo!
And the passengers wonder why they are never told anything and why we regard the majority of journo's as pratts.
Thanks Danny for the report on what the passengers actually heard from the captain!
All it takes is one passenger claiming to be a pilot to stir things up and create panic amongst the assembled masses. Add to that a few journo's short of a story and... Bingo!
And the passengers wonder why they are never told anything and why we regard the majority of journo's as pratts.
Thanks Danny for the report on what the passengers actually heard from the captain!
Guest
Posts: n/a
But Notso, the pilot wasn't addressing fellow professional pilots was he? He was talking to passengers. Can you blame them for being , un-nerved by a pilot saying 'do you want to give it a try?'.
You may fully understand that there would never be any risk because he would not have taken off if the problem re-occured, but can you blame some pax for not grasping that...after all another favourite past-time of these forums is to highlight the apparent stupidity of so called self loading freight.
My point is the pilot did fix the problem himself.
He did ask his pax if they wanted to give it a try (both facts referred to by the airline itself). That makes the story as I read it accurate:
BBC News On Line
it also makes it newsworthy.
IR.
PS It seems a pity that after western civilisation came through the renaissance and the enlightenment, that your first response to an argument challenging your views was 'You're a prat'!
You may fully understand that there would never be any risk because he would not have taken off if the problem re-occured, but can you blame some pax for not grasping that...after all another favourite past-time of these forums is to highlight the apparent stupidity of so called self loading freight.
My point is the pilot did fix the problem himself.
He did ask his pax if they wanted to give it a try (both facts referred to by the airline itself). That makes the story as I read it accurate:
BBC News On Line
it also makes it newsworthy.
IR.
PS It seems a pity that after western civilisation came through the renaissance and the enlightenment, that your first response to an argument challenging your views was 'You're a prat'!
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: UK
Posts: 1,914
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
You started the name calling! But to move on, a very tired pilot feeling for his passengers. Knowing they may feel shaken. Good on him. Whether he said anything indiscreet I wouldn't like to judge, but I shall learn from this. Sometimes you can be too honest, to give too much information.
Join Date: Aug 1999
Location: UK
Posts: 314
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Instrument Rating ...
It's obvious you don't have a clue about what you're going on about. Listen to the people who have tried to explain it to you !
There wasn't a serious 'safety' issue at all. It was a flight deck instrument failure that meant the Captain could not legally depart without having it fixed.
It was fixed, the aircraft departed, albeit without a few pax.
The Capt had the decency to explain to the pax what was happening and to give them the opportunity to 'try it again' to ensure the fix remained fixed ! If they wanted to offload they could, but would be stuck there overnight until the company could arrange alternative accom and flights.
At no time were pax EVER in danger ! This was a professional airline Capt - not some cowboy for Christ's sake !
The problem was a few pax used the chinese whisper syndrome to alarm others. A little knowledge is a dangerous thing !
It seems a pity that after western civilisation came through the renaissance and the enlightenment, that your responses to overwhelming evidence to discredit the reports are met by your blind and increasing intransigence !
Newsworthy probably, but not in it's current guise. The crew should be commended for keeping the pax appraised !
But we can't win can we - tell pax nothing or tell 'em everything and we're condemned either way !
Disclaimer - I wasn't there, but have just listened to and read the reports.
Methinks this thread should be retitled 'Revolting Reporting' !
It's obvious you don't have a clue about what you're going on about. Listen to the people who have tried to explain it to you !
There wasn't a serious 'safety' issue at all. It was a flight deck instrument failure that meant the Captain could not legally depart without having it fixed.
It was fixed, the aircraft departed, albeit without a few pax.
The Capt had the decency to explain to the pax what was happening and to give them the opportunity to 'try it again' to ensure the fix remained fixed ! If they wanted to offload they could, but would be stuck there overnight until the company could arrange alternative accom and flights.
At no time were pax EVER in danger ! This was a professional airline Capt - not some cowboy for Christ's sake !
The problem was a few pax used the chinese whisper syndrome to alarm others. A little knowledge is a dangerous thing !
It seems a pity that after western civilisation came through the renaissance and the enlightenment, that your responses to overwhelming evidence to discredit the reports are met by your blind and increasing intransigence !
Newsworthy probably, but not in it's current guise. The crew should be commended for keeping the pax appraised !
But we can't win can we - tell pax nothing or tell 'em everything and we're condemned either way !
Disclaimer - I wasn't there, but have just listened to and read the reports.
Methinks this thread should be retitled 'Revolting Reporting' !
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: West Country
Posts: 1,271
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
NSF
Air/ground sensing on 757 is done by proximity sensors - they are either 'near' or 'far' - what 'weight switch' would be fixed by taxying fast and braking hard.
Whilst I don't know the exact details of this incident, I have had similar snags in the past - if the nose gear oleo is over-inflated and the freight is loaded too far back it can extend the nose gear on the ground and give a spurious air/ground signal - the quick fix is to let some nitrogen out of the nose gear.
Anyone who flies professionally will know what nature the problem was. It was not done to 'shift the baggage in the holds'- a ridiculous conclusion dreamt up by imbeciles. It was done to work the weight switch
Whilst I don't know the exact details of this incident, I have had similar snags in the past - if the nose gear oleo is over-inflated and the freight is loaded too far back it can extend the nose gear on the ground and give a spurious air/ground signal - the quick fix is to let some nitrogen out of the nose gear.
Guest
Posts: n/a
Notso - fair point.
Ghost rider, I do understand and I don't concur that it was legal semantics. Isn't it the case that such a micro-switch forms part of a mechanism that guards some systems from delpoying in flight?
But in a way you make my point - can you blame some pax from being unnerved by being asked to vote on whether they attempt to fly or not?
I have no doubt this pilot worked hard to get the aircraft in the air - and he was very honest, but the bottom line is, it was the wrong thing to do.
I know hindsight is a wonderfuly thing, but really he should have made the decision and then informed the pax - that is what most pax expect when they say they want to be kept informed...not asked to take part in a vote.
Ghost rider, I do understand and I don't concur that it was legal semantics. Isn't it the case that such a micro-switch forms part of a mechanism that guards some systems from delpoying in flight?
But in a way you make my point - can you blame some pax from being unnerved by being asked to vote on whether they attempt to fly or not?
I have no doubt this pilot worked hard to get the aircraft in the air - and he was very honest, but the bottom line is, it was the wrong thing to do.
I know hindsight is a wonderfuly thing, but really he should have made the decision and then informed the pax - that is what most pax expect when they say they want to be kept informed...not asked to take part in a vote.
niknak
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 2,335
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Its hardly suprising the passengers were alarmed, most of the posts here seem to be oblivious of the fact that the vast majority of these type of customers only fly once or twice a year, and only have a minimal appreciation of aircraft performance.
The captain has to be applauded for his efforts in attempting to be honest with everyone, and trying to explain the problem, but I really do wonder if he would have been better off if he'd kept them off the aircraft until the problem was resolved.
Lets hope he is not made a scapegoat because of the publicity.
The captain has to be applauded for his efforts in attempting to be honest with everyone, and trying to explain the problem, but I really do wonder if he would have been better off if he'd kept them off the aircraft until the problem was resolved.
Lets hope he is not made a scapegoat because of the publicity.
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Dublin, Ireland
Age: 74
Posts: 87
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Yes, fair play to the Captain for trying to keep the pax informed. I too sincerely hope he isnt hung out to dry for this.
The comment posted by Danny clarified most of it for me.
The comment posted by Danny clarified most of it for me.
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: In the circuit
Posts: 177
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Radio 2 did eventually get two passengers from this flight on the phone to talk about it. It was illuminating to say the least.
The passenger who flew said the fact that the pilot addressed them and kept them informed gave them absolute confidence that he would be operating safely or not atall. She was complimentary and understanding about the whole incident.
The passenger who did not fly also commended the professionalism of the pilot and the company but simply decided that he and his family would prefer not to fly and would make their own arrangements. He also said that despite the fact that this was their decision not to fly MYT arranged transport and accommodation, which of course the pax had to pay for, but said that the company were most helpful and didn't mention compensation once.
Both passengers said they felt the event had been exaggerated in the news.
They also had Eric Moody on who gave some background insight.
I have no idea what the problem was or the rights and wrongs of the situation so I have no comment. All I can say is that people who were involved from both sides said the captain did a professional job. Good enough for me.
Cheers,
GB
The passenger who flew said the fact that the pilot addressed them and kept them informed gave them absolute confidence that he would be operating safely or not atall. She was complimentary and understanding about the whole incident.
The passenger who did not fly also commended the professionalism of the pilot and the company but simply decided that he and his family would prefer not to fly and would make their own arrangements. He also said that despite the fact that this was their decision not to fly MYT arranged transport and accommodation, which of course the pax had to pay for, but said that the company were most helpful and didn't mention compensation once.
Both passengers said they felt the event had been exaggerated in the news.
They also had Eric Moody on who gave some background insight.
I have no idea what the problem was or the rights and wrongs of the situation so I have no comment. All I can say is that people who were involved from both sides said the captain did a professional job. Good enough for me.
Cheers,
GB
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: UK
Posts: 1,914
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
AFSKAP- you don't need a fully qualified ground engineer at every turnaround. Basic and simple defects can be handled by 'ACF' (Acceptable Carry Forward) in the Technical Log. This is an industry that is trying to cut its costs! If he was able by this means to get the machine home for further checking, it is a perfectly acceptable procedure.