Leezyjet From United Kingdom, joined Oct 2001, 4041 posts, RR: 53
Reply 8, posted (11 years 1 week 4 days 18 hours ago) and read 5196 times:
Ahh, how that article brought back the memories for me of my first years in aviation as a check-in agent at LBA dealing with those knock-on delay situations...........
The once a year charter passengers really don't have the slightest clue, they really are the worst people to deal with when their flight is delayed. They don't understand the realites of it because they only fly once a year and expect their flight to be ontime, they expect to pay peanuts and get a first class service, expect to be compensated for every slightest mishap. The amount of times I've heard some gyppo tell me they are "gonna sue" me because they were delayed for a couple of hours is unreal, and the ones who think that it's the airlines fault becuse it's snowy/foggy etc you just have to hear it to believe it. At least the business travellers understand that things can and do go wrong.
"We were shell shocked" - yeah right o about what, that a machine that is built by man had actually broken down on their 2nd yearly flight and actually needed to be fixed !!!. Get in the real world people - there are far worse things going on in it than an a/c breaking down, and there were probably hundreds of other a/c with tech problems that day too throughout the world.
"She Rolls, 45 knots, 90, 135, nose comes up to 20 degrees, she's airborne - She flies, Concorde Flies"
Bmistaff From United Kingdom, joined Jul 2003, 20 posts, RR: 0
Reply 10, posted (11 years 1 week 4 days 18 hours ago) and read 5077 times:
I think that they have a right not to be happy. If you buy a flight no matter how cheap you expect more than anything safety. If the plane had a problem then the engineer is the person who should fix it. They are upset because an unqualified person fixed the plane. If the pilot was qualified to do this the airlines wouldn't need to send people on four year courses in airline engineering. But at the end of the day the pilot is only qualified to fly the thing. I say MyTravel should have paid for them to get home another way or at least reaccommodated them on another MyTravel flight.
Buckfifty From Canada, joined Oct 2001, 1316 posts, RR: 20
Reply 11, posted (11 years 1 week 4 days 17 hours ago) and read 4993 times:
I think there is justification for a gripe.
There are very few airlines in the world that would involve paying passengers as part of the process to repair a/c. There are fewer airlines still in the civilized world which would use such crude methods (braking heavily on the runway) to fix a problem (probably be cheaper to fly a couple of engineers out there, instead of wasting all that fuel). However, this last part could have been due to the rejected takeoffs, and perhaps a bit too much sensational journalism.
So, after such a weird and drastic episode, the captain (who by now must have appeared to the passengers as a tired, perhaps a none-too-happy person) asks you to board his flight. Of course passengers would have been weary.
However, if the above mentioned are part of a incorrectly filed story, then I will stand corrected.
E1FAIL From United States of America, joined Dec 2002, 74 posts, RR: 0
Reply 12, posted (11 years 1 week 4 days 17 hours ago) and read 4943 times:
J32driver.....We occasionally have problems with the ATR that sound like that. If the ramp doesn't load the bags before the pax board, there is the possibility of the plane tipping back far enough that the nose strut WOW switch will go "target far" and cause an AOA caution if the alpha probes aren't level or nearly level. The fix would be to wait for the strut to compress, which sounds like what this guy was trying to do, compress the nose strut.
Skymonster From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 13, posted (11 years 1 week 4 days 17 hours ago) and read 4882 times:
Lengthy report about this on Radio 4 at lunch time. Whilst no one from the airline commented, a passenger who flew back on the airplane said that the reports were over-egged, that the captain wasn't covered in oil and all that from fixing the aeroplane (no suggestion that he even suggested he had been fixing the airplane himself), and that at no time were they really concerned. I guess some tech issues just phase inexperienced travellers. Apparently however the aircraft did make two aborted take-offs, finally departing on the third. Given that the captain was, according to the passenger who travelled, giving plenty of reassurances that the aeroplane was safe and that he was happy to fly it and that the aircraft made a totally uneventful flight back to the UK, I'd guess that those who opted out feel pretty stupid right now. Fundamentally, it comes down to the ignorance of passengers who don't fly very often, who for some reason when problems occasionally arise seem to think that airlines will chuck aircraft into the air without a thought for passenger safety, let alone the safety of their own staff.
Jmc757 From United Kingdom, joined Mar 2000, 1298 posts, RR: 7
Reply 15, posted (11 years 1 week 4 days 16 hours ago) and read 4729 times:
Perhaps the passengers were scared or whatever, but to me it seems like everything was handled well and the captain at all times wanted to keep his pax informed on the situation. Some media stories have been fine, stating facts, whereas others I have seen can only be described as poor....
Interestingly, on BBC news pages you can leave comments (although sorted by BBC to see which are posted and not, and you do have to leave your details). I will extract this one... " 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........." (it goes on to say how it has been blown out of all proportion.)