Go Back  PPRuNe Forums > Misc. Forums > Spectators Balcony (Spotters Corner)
Reload this Page >

Passengers to sue airline over Captain's PAs

Wikiposts
Search
Spectators Balcony (Spotters Corner) If you're not a professional pilot but want to discuss issues about the job, this is the best place to loiter. You won't be moved on by 'security' and there'll be plenty of experts to answer any questions.

Passengers to sue airline over Captain's PAs

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old 2nd Sep 2003, 20:54
  #21 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Behind the P2
Posts: 31
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
GB, don't be too hard on BA. A few years back, I was pax on MUC-LHR 757. As we boarded, RB211's were gently windmilling with the usual clunking of the fan blades, some pax were obviously concerned and brought this to the attention of the CC.

Once airborne the Capt. came on the P.A. to allay fears, said he would send the F.O. outside to check all was ok with the engines when we reached cruise level. Everyone enjoyed a laugh.

Before descent he offered the jumpseat to any pax or wannabee who would like to view the approach to LHR. Great flight.

Pity neither of the above are acceptable any longer in our p.c. sterile environment.
epreye is offline  
Old 2nd Sep 2003, 21:57
  #22 (permalink)  

Evertonian
 
Join Date: May 2000
Location: #3117# Ppruner of the Year Nominee 2005
Posts: 12,523
Received 106 Likes on 60 Posts
Just read on Dunnunda about a Virgin Blue FA calling "Brace, brace, brace" whilst taxiing! Don't know if it's true, but...oh dear!
Buster Hyman is offline  
Old 2nd Sep 2003, 22:38
  #23 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: Arizona USA
Posts: 8,571
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Always thought that the best solution was to have the First Officer give the PA...as generally they seem to do a better job anyway. That, and a couple of extra sectors (beyond every other) keeps 'em smiling.
411A is offline  
Old 3rd Sep 2003, 00:25
  #24 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Switzerland, Singapore
Posts: 1,309
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Whether suing or not is appropriate, I cannot judge.
It is a clear fact that it is neighter professional nor psychological wise to make ambiguous announcements, that can be understand as cheerful or frightening. You just don't do it! Period.

Pilots who do are eighter too funny to think or never understood the CRM lession "Begin to think what the others think about your statements". Flying business is never stick and throttle only, but taking a lot of different factors into consideration, of which one is practical psychology. I am shure this Brazilian commander behaves the same with his crew: with disrespect

Dani
Dani is offline  
Old 3rd Sep 2003, 01:15
  #25 (permalink)  
Final 3 Greens
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Jerricho

I hate ambulance chasers too

Gatwick Bugle

"Regular BA pax must wince or just not listen to the same old banaal, trite, schmalz that is always churned out"

Well I'm a regular BA pax and I don't find the scripting offensive, in fact I believe that the demonstrated discpiline of sticking to SOPS in airline Ops is a very Good Thing.
 
Old 3rd Sep 2003, 09:02
  #26 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: USA
Posts: 61
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Re the train that allegedly was speeding... Am I missing something? Isn't it completely appropriate for the incident (including the physical condition of the conductor) to be investigated? I should think it would be mandatory. Derailments do happen, and can be just as unfortunate for passengers as flying accidents.
BrightonGirl is offline  
Old 3rd Sep 2003, 10:03
  #27 (permalink)  
mgc
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: uk
Posts: 32
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
BrightonGirl

I think you are missing the point. It is totally impossible for a punter on a train to know if a train is on 2 wheels (4 actualy, total of 8 on most coaches). I think this is actually an impossible situation without a major accident. What we are actually looking at is uninformed punters making wild speculations about somthing they know nothing about. Result is that an industry that is paranoid about percieved safety totally over reacts so that they are seen to take the 'incident' seriously. Result one suspended proffessional, 1 train out of action resulting in umpteen delays and cancellations and associted costs of all other aspects of the 'investigation'. Why? because they are all to scarred to tell the proles their allegations are tripe and to tell them to **** off.

relate this to aviation, the 'see you in court mentality' and the ability of the media to make a typhoon out of the dregs in your tea cup and you should get the message!
mgc is offline  
Old 3rd Sep 2003, 11:08
  #28 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: USA
Posts: 61
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
mgc,

Of course I don't know the details, but it seems to me that passengers who might travel that same train often could conceivably know when it's going faster around a curve than it usually does. And if baggage is being tossed around? Even allowing for some exaggeration -- and I'm not saying there mightn't be some in the account posted -- I don't see why the perceptions of any and all passengers would be deemed up-front to be worthless.

Maybe it's highly unlikely that the wheels on one side had actually left the tracks, but going through a curve or a turn with more centrifugal force than usual is something an alert passenger could notice accurately.

Rail accidents do occur, and I just think it's always wise to err [perhaps] on the side of safety. And for the authorities to err [perhaps] on the side of vigilance.

Which is exactly what I've noticed most pprune pilots think is appropriate in the air.
BrightonGirl is offline  
Old 3rd Sep 2003, 13:50
  #29 (permalink)  
Final 3 Greens
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
mgc

Why? because they are all to scarred to tell the proles their allegations are tripe and to tell them to **** off.
I heard a wagn spokesman responding to the story on the radio.

The company admits the train was exceeding the speed limit, aka operating outside approved limits. (Don't a certain airline get stick on this board for similar alleged acts in the air and during taxi?)

Maybe the proles understand a little more than you give credit for.
 
Old 3rd Sep 2003, 15:42
  #30 (permalink)  
Ohcirrej
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: This is the internet FFS.........
Posts: 2,921
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Maybe it wasn't exceeding speed limits.................

Maybe for the first time in history the train actually reached the posted speed limit!! No buckled tracks, no leaves on the line, no "wrong snow". The driver probably though "Let's do it!!!"
Jerricho is offline  
Old 4th Sep 2003, 06:03
  #31 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Under the flight path
Posts: 2,632
Received 14 Likes on 5 Posts
This is your captain speaking.
I hope you are enjoying your flight with xx airlines.
Those of you on the starboard side of the aircraft may be able to see a small, yellow dinghy.
I am speaking to you from that small, yellow dinghy...
LGS6753 is offline  
Old 4th Sep 2003, 06:38
  #32 (permalink)  
ww1
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: _
Posts: 59
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Good morning, everyone, this is your captain speaking. Welcome to flight ###. Passengers on the right side of the aircraft, look to your left. Passengers on the left, look to your right. SMILE....SAY "HI!"...
ww1 is offline  
Old 4th Sep 2003, 07:38
  #33 (permalink)  
mgc
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: uk
Posts: 32
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
brightongirl and final3greens
I'm a bit surprised by your last postings

There are many reports and threads on these pages of uniformed passengers making outrageous accusations of breechs of safety. It is normal for air accident investigators to take all reports and statements from non proffessional witnessess with extreme caution due to well documented tendancies for the uninformed to see/ hear/ feel things that never happened or that happened in a different order to what the observer belived to happen. Why should things been different on the railways?

I would never suggest that safety should be compromised- BUT totally outrageous accusations should be treated as such. That is largely where this thread started from. We are plagued by self appointed 'experts' who know more than the true experts. It is these self appointed experts who often start the legislative process, beliving that they can make a case to win compensation. It is now widely accepted in technical / engineering circles that legal truth and real truth are two very different things

Last edited by mgc; 4th Sep 2003 at 08:54.
mgc is offline  
Old 4th Sep 2003, 08:21
  #34 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Frimley, Surrey.
Posts: 182
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
I'm reminded of an incident not long ago, with our local suburban trains, where some peak hour trains pass through a couple of stations without stopping. Needless to say, they travel faster at certain places because of this. One such place was where a branch line joined, and there was always a lot of noise and lurching due to traversing the points.

I used to take the fast train at times, and was truly amazed at how fast a driver would take a train through that spot, with the carriages lurching from side-to-side, with standing passengers being thrown off their feet. During my holiday week, a train derailed at that very spot, due to a broken rail. I don't recall if there were any fatalities, but obviously that was an extremely dangerous occurrence.

At what point am I allowed to have an opinion on this sort of event? (I wasn't uniformed incidentally)
spork is offline  
Old 4th Sep 2003, 08:51
  #35 (permalink)  
mgc
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: uk
Posts: 32
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
what opinion do you want to have.

that trains lurch when going fast over junctions?

that trains going fast over junctions= broken rails?

that if trains lurch people get jostled about?

that trains going fast over junctions is dangerous?

that trains are dangerous?

You are entiltled to your view on all the above. It does not however mean that all your views are correct. Your views on 1 and 3 are probably correct, bassed on repeated observed cause and effect. Your view on 2 is almost certainly biased by one incident close to you. You are however unlikely to have much experience to draw any meaningful scientific conclusion. In this respect you are uninformed and your view, scientifically, counts for nothing. 4 and 5 are unquantified. 4 is a qualification of 5. It may be your view that 4 is more dangerous than 5, but still unquantified and therefore to all intense and purpose meaningless for most scientific purposes!

Sorry if thats confusing, but thats the way it is. Neither does it mean that any of your views and experiences are any the less valid for you.
mgc is offline  
Old 4th Sep 2003, 09:03
  #36 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Frimley, Surrey.
Posts: 182
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Just interested where you draw the line on anyone knowing anything at all. Regardless of the laws of physics and metallurgy then, I suppose it was a sparrow landing on the rail that broke it.
spork is offline  
Old 4th Sep 2003, 10:00
  #37 (permalink)  
mgc
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: uk
Posts: 32
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Its very simple

If their statement contains outrageous statements (to the informed) i place very little credit to the remainder of their statement, until proven otherwise.

If their statement seams viable (to the informed) I will treat it with the respect it deserves.

That is why accident investigators, be it AAI or HMRI tend to be the most informed available so that they can sort the gems from chaff.
mgc is offline  
Old 4th Sep 2003, 20:10
  #38 (permalink)  

Grim Sleeper
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 179
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Personally I am glad that the vast majority of passengers remain largely ignorant of the intricacies of air travel. At least it confines the lawsuits to matters of comfort and perceived fears rather than any concrete critique of our performance by passengers who know *just* enough to be dangerous......
Slim20 is offline  
Old 4th Sep 2003, 23:21
  #39 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Frimley, Surrey.
Posts: 182
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Ah! Thanks for informing me, mgc.

Incidentally, your spelling, syntax, and punctuation all need more attention if you are not to appear uninformed.
spork is offline  
Old 5th Sep 2003, 00:51
  #40 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: london
Posts: 11
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
i have to agree with slim20 ignorance is definately bliss!!
A little knowledge is dangerous. Ive had the great pleasure of having to straghten out a few PAX.
Favourite example: PAX "what is that coast line ahead?"
(after asking Cpt) SA " the French coast Nice and Cannes ahead
PAX: "No it isnt it cant be"
SA "Madam if the captain says its the french coast line then you better hope it is"
runner3 is offline  


Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service

Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.