Blog reports flight with medical emergency diverted to Toronto
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Various
Posts: 290
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
And while we are at it can anyone PROVE this event happened at all except in a poorly written post on an aviation blog?
And can it be PROVED that the US turned them away if such a flight and diversion did exist because the post sure seemed to indicate they were cleared into US airspace before they decided to divert. You don't get to top of descent into JFK without being in controlled airspace.
Of course there is no chance someone decided to twist some facts to make some political points on a web blog. We're all professionals right?
And can it be PROVED that the US turned them away if such a flight and diversion did exist because the post sure seemed to indicate they were cleared into US airspace before they decided to divert. You don't get to top of descent into JFK without being in controlled airspace.
Of course there is no chance someone decided to twist some facts to make some political points on a web blog. We're all professionals right?
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: USA
Posts: 72
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Interesting article but it appears it was the pilot in command who preferred to fly to Canada versus the US after declaring the medical emergency...
Probably after receiving an ACAR message from the company? Once on US soil any person, including foreign business men and women found to be violating the US laws of embargo with Cuba can be arrested. By violating the embargo terms I mean foreign, usually European companies that are doing business with companies in Cuba that used to be American owned until Castor nationalized them and then years later sold parts of them to the Europeans. The US and most of the anti-Castor refugees view it as theft and as a European I tend to agree.
Similar to what Venezuela is doing nowadays... Force a company to sell for pennies to the Venezuelan government or simply take it over and then sell parts of the new venture to a different country.
Something tells me Aerolflot realized they might have a few of those business folks on board and chose to fly to another country that actively participates in violating the embargo.
Probably after receiving an ACAR message from the company? Once on US soil any person, including foreign business men and women found to be violating the US laws of embargo with Cuba can be arrested. By violating the embargo terms I mean foreign, usually European companies that are doing business with companies in Cuba that used to be American owned until Castor nationalized them and then years later sold parts of them to the Europeans. The US and most of the anti-Castor refugees view it as theft and as a European I tend to agree.
Similar to what Venezuela is doing nowadays... Force a company to sell for pennies to the Venezuelan government or simply take it over and then sell parts of the new venture to a different country.
Something tells me Aerolflot realized they might have a few of those business folks on board and chose to fly to another country that actively participates in violating the embargo.
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Somewhere over the Rainbow
Posts: 735
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The Passenger seems to have recovered with no damage so far, flight proceeded 3.5 hrs late.
Pilots have learned that in future when overflying the US from Cuba divert to Canada as it is both politically correct and better chances of not being "escorted down" Excellent learning in this forum.
Pilots have learned that in future when overflying the US from Cuba divert to Canada as it is both politically correct and better chances of not being "escorted down" Excellent learning in this forum.
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: USA
Posts: 72
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
"...So what is agreed upon here is that politics supersedes humanity, what a sick world we live in..."
Well, I guess so. Call it politics or simply the PIC's decision probably based on his/her company's "strong encouragement".
Well, I guess so. Call it politics or simply the PIC's decision probably based on his/her company's "strong encouragement".
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: USA
Posts: 72
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
"...Pilots have learned that in future when overflying the US from Cuba divert to Canada as it is both politically correct and better chances of not being "escorted down" Excellent learning in this forum..."
Better yet, encourage your respective governments not to deal with stolen (nationalized) assets. Problem solved...
Remember, the embargo does NOT apply to foreign businesses dealing with Cuba. It applies to foreign businesses dealing with Cuban businesses that were taken away from their owners by Castro and given away "for a small fee"
to many European and Canadian businesses. Most of the former rightful owners live nowadays on Florida and have numerous lawsuits pending against some of the "new owners". If those new owners'representatives happen to enter the US - the State Department has little choice but to follow the law - i.e. arrest the "thief" representatives.
Better yet, encourage your respective governments not to deal with stolen (nationalized) assets. Problem solved...
Remember, the embargo does NOT apply to foreign businesses dealing with Cuba. It applies to foreign businesses dealing with Cuban businesses that were taken away from their owners by Castro and given away "for a small fee"
to many European and Canadian businesses. Most of the former rightful owners live nowadays on Florida and have numerous lawsuits pending against some of the "new owners". If those new owners'representatives happen to enter the US - the State Department has little choice but to follow the law - i.e. arrest the "thief" representatives.
Guest
Posts: n/a
"...Pilots have learned that in future when overflying the US from Cuba divert to Canada as it is both politically correct and better chances of not being "escorted down" Excellent learning in this forum..."
More like the foolishness of politics leading to the endangerment of innocent lives in the air and on the ground.
One would hope that politics whether correct or expedient can be driven out of air travel world wide so that that anomalous situations like are erradicated in the name of safety and (yes) in the name of the humanity of innocent passengers and air crew.
I seem to recall an Air Transat Airbus with a missing rudder, abeam Florida, who elected to return to Varadero rather than complicate life by diverting to the closest airport, in the USA.
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: USA
Posts: 72
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Michael - I agree with your post. Seems to me it was the PIC and the airline involved that chose convenience (possibly lots of paper work) over the actual emergency.
As far as declaring emergencies - "Brakes On" - stop the nonsense of US military denying aircraft entrance in case of an emergency - simply not factual. In an emergency any aircraft will be let in. Getting out might be a different, probably a pretty lengthy procedure.
Also and a little off the subject - I used to fly over the Cuban airspace heading to Cancun and the Cuban controllers were very helpful with weather advisories when asked. Their English skills were much better than in Mexico too btw. That's a different story.
As far as declaring emergencies - "Brakes On" - stop the nonsense of US military denying aircraft entrance in case of an emergency - simply not factual. In an emergency any aircraft will be let in. Getting out might be a different, probably a pretty lengthy procedure.
Also and a little off the subject - I used to fly over the Cuban airspace heading to Cancun and the Cuban controllers were very helpful with weather advisories when asked. Their English skills were much better than in Mexico too btw. That's a different story.
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: USA
Posts: 72
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Beardy - the flight you mentioned was still in contact with the Cuban controllers AND the winds at the airport they took off from were calm. Winds were their main concern having only partial rudder control.
The MIA center had already been notified of a possible emergency flight from Cuba - know this from a friend who used to work the ATC in southern Florida.
The MIA center had already been notified of a possible emergency flight from Cuba - know this from a friend who used to work the ATC in southern Florida.
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: where the money is
Posts: 385
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
common sense
I suppose that no commander of any armed forces (of a civilized country, that is) will dare to order a shootdown of a commercial airliner whose crew has trufully and repeatedly said the 'e-word' and stated the nature of its problems and intentions. Even after 9-11 I find that hard to believe. Given this assumption, when a pilot of an airplane in distress does not allow a 'less cooperative' air traffic controller to intimidate him/her, it's fair game according to 14 CFR § 91.3 ('In an in-flight emergency requiring immediate action, the pilot in command may deviate from any rule of this part to the extent required to meet that emergency.') to insist on landing at a US airport (maybe not so close to downtown Manhattan) and start descending.
If I am not mistaken, any passenger who stays onboard an airplane will - according to internationally accepted diplomatic rules - technically remain the territory of the airplane's state of registry, even if the airplane itself stands on another country's soil. So, US authorities would have no jurisdiction over them.
If I am not mistaken, any passenger who stays onboard an airplane will - according to internationally accepted diplomatic rules - technically remain the territory of the airplane's state of registry, even if the airplane itself stands on another country's soil. So, US authorities would have no jurisdiction over them.
Trash du Blanc
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: KBHM
Posts: 1,185
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Excellent learning in this forum.
And how low our stock has fallen here in the USA, that people would even believe such slanderous crap. Turning away an emergency aircraft... what, you think we drown puppies for fun too?
Looks like the mods moved this to "Non Airline Transport Stuff" in the "Non Airline Forums".
You have got to be kidding.
This subject has got to be one of the more relevant things I have ever seen started on Prune and is light years ahead of 99% of the other crap here. Diversions due to medical emergencies are one of the most common things that happen to us commercial pilots. The information learned from problems can be a great help no matter if it was the US, Israel, North Korea, Pakistan-India or any other sensitive border.
You mods already tolerate any discussions on accidents to degenerate in a yahoo chatboard of clueless posters, why move the thread in this case?
You have got to be kidding.
This subject has got to be one of the more relevant things I have ever seen started on Prune and is light years ahead of 99% of the other crap here. Diversions due to medical emergencies are one of the most common things that happen to us commercial pilots. The information learned from problems can be a great help no matter if it was the US, Israel, North Korea, Pakistan-India or any other sensitive border.
You mods already tolerate any discussions on accidents to degenerate in a yahoo chatboard of clueless posters, why move the thread in this case?
So none of you have found any supporting documentation to prove what a written in some blog and stirred you up, nor has anyone given a reference to the exclusionary document that prohibits emergencies from divurting to the US.
I have a bridge to sale as well. Anyone heard the one about the US aircraft carrier and the lighthouse?
Figure the gullible will have a field day with that story.
This thread furthers the case for pprune being limited to professional pilots, not that some of them aren't so stupid to believe the story as well.
I have a bridge to sale as well. Anyone heard the one about the US aircraft carrier and the lighthouse?
Figure the gullible will have a field day with that story.
This thread furthers the case for pprune being limited to professional pilots, not that some of them aren't so stupid to believe the story as well.
This subject has got to be one of the more relevant things I have ever seen started on Prune and is light years ahead of 99% of the other crap here. Diversions due to medical emergencies are one of the most common things that happen to us commercial pilots. The information learned from problems can be a great help no matter if it was the US, Israel, North Korea, Pakistan-India or any other sensitive border.
It's not the threads fault, its the that gets these threads into trouble. Had the mods chosen to delete this non-pertinent stuff then all we would have is the rumor opening post and nothing more to discuss.
and it really isn't pilots vs the unwashed that either cause or solve discussion board problems. It's our collective behaviour of associating cause-effect without knowledge
Had the mods chosen to delete the politicizing and postulations about facts-not-in-evidence and non-pertinent stuff, there would have been no thread at all.
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: USA
Posts: 3,218
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Now that everyone is done expressing their indignation and bashing the United States, let's refer back to the article which stated:
The article does not state that a landing clearance was denied, or that the United States refused the aircraft. It makes a very generic statement that the flight "wasn't accepted," and nothing more. As "wasn't accepted" isn't an aviaiton term, and is therefore incorrect, we are left without any specific meaning as to what this term means.
Perhaps one should clarify what actually took place before flying off the handle with baseless opinion.
So far as heroic (and idiotic) notions of simply diverting without any regard to other traffic, clearances, air traffic control, international laws and regulations, or the safety of the flight...no. That's not going to happen.
One should remember that the pilot in command is responsible not only for the sick passenger, but for all passengers as well as for the safety of the aircraft.
New York is a busy place. Busy enough that I've taken four hours to move an aircraft seven miles from JFK to EWR (New York to Newark, just across the river). Getting in and out is not a simple task. Aside from traffic management issues, numerous other factors bear consideration, from legal, political, safety, security, and other points must be taken into account.
A blog article has been presented for consideration. The news media, nearly always wrong and vague with respect to all things aviation, seldom gets the story right. The "news" amounts to little more than an entertainment service with a few occasionally correct facts thrown in for spice, anyway. Here, a debate has ensued regarding the actions of all parties concerned, when the truth is that we don't know the actions (or reactions) of the parties concerned. Perhaps before some of you get on your high horse again, you should find out.
The crew decided to divert to New York, but later announced, that their flight wasn't accepted into the United States and they'd need to divert to Toronto.
Perhaps one should clarify what actually took place before flying off the handle with baseless opinion.
So far as heroic (and idiotic) notions of simply diverting without any regard to other traffic, clearances, air traffic control, international laws and regulations, or the safety of the flight...no. That's not going to happen.
One should remember that the pilot in command is responsible not only for the sick passenger, but for all passengers as well as for the safety of the aircraft.
New York is a busy place. Busy enough that I've taken four hours to move an aircraft seven miles from JFK to EWR (New York to Newark, just across the river). Getting in and out is not a simple task. Aside from traffic management issues, numerous other factors bear consideration, from legal, political, safety, security, and other points must be taken into account.
A blog article has been presented for consideration. The news media, nearly always wrong and vague with respect to all things aviation, seldom gets the story right. The "news" amounts to little more than an entertainment service with a few occasionally correct facts thrown in for spice, anyway. Here, a debate has ensued regarding the actions of all parties concerned, when the truth is that we don't know the actions (or reactions) of the parties concerned. Perhaps before some of you get on your high horse again, you should find out.
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Stuck in the middle...
Posts: 1,638
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
Why would a pilot not divert to Bermuda, given how close it was?
actually if passenger wouldn't recover,relatives could sue US