PanAm747 From United States of America, joined Feb 2004, 4242 posts, RR: 8
Reply 3, posted (9 years 3 months 22 hours ago) and read 25791 times:
I remember a thread a long time ago about the U.S. State Department pulling the rights for American Airliners to overfly Iran, including routes over the Persian Gulf.
One of the respondents was a United Airlines pilot, who flew the route to India quite frequently. He commented that he was quite disapppointed as the Iranian controllers were actually quite friendly and extremely professional.
The "guests" of the Islamic Republic of Iran I'm sure will be made to feel quite welcome, even if all they ever get to see is Mehrebad airport. The plane will be adequately repaired (perhaps by one of the European airlines that flies into THR) and a bill will be sent to NW Airlines.
The Iranian people have always had a history of great hospitality, going back to the Persian Empire. Just because a country has been taken over by religious fanatics hostile to "non-believers" and claim "this is what God wants" does not mean that everyone in the country will be hostile.
That's not a quip at any of the previous replies - just a reminder to the world that ANY country can have a non representational blindly religious government that doesn't represent the goodness of its people.
Pan Am:The World's Most Experienced Airline - P(oor) S(ailor's) A(irline): San Diego's Hometown Airline-Catch Our Smile!
Bassie2010 From United Kingdom, joined Mar 2005, 65 posts, RR: 0
Reply 4, posted (9 years 3 months 22 hours ago) and read 25727 times:
It was a false alarm. The plane is expected to land at AMS in the afternoon. Current ETA 14:18 local time. I expect that the pilot had to dump fuel before he could land. Since he is probably already airborne again, it is safe to say that Teheran helped the plane on its way. Maybe the fuel is even cheaper over there
IslipWN From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 5, posted (9 years 3 months 22 hours ago) and read 25726 times:
Quoting JoKeR (Reply 2): Just because Iran and the US are not the best of friends does not mean that these passengers will be left to dehydrate or starve, I'm pretty sure they will get all the necessary help and support.
I didn't mean it like that, but I guess I should have been more clear. I meant will they have enough supplies for a NW DC-10? I have no clue how big Tehran airport is, nor do I know what airlines even serve it. Have I heard of it before? Yes. But I don't know anything about it.
JoKeR From Serbia, joined Nov 2004, 2238 posts, RR: 9
Reply 9, posted (9 years 3 months 21 hours ago) and read 25597 times:
Quoting IslipWN (Reply 5): I have no clue how big Tehran airport is, nor do I know what airlines even serve it. Have I heard of it before? Yes. But I don't know anything about it.
Fair enough; haven't been there myself, the city recently activated its new - 1 year old (if that makes any sense) but controversial Imam Khomeini International Airport, a modern structure that was caught in the middle of a publicity storm; I actually don't quite know what the fuss was all about but it caused the new airport to be opened for just a few hours last year before getting shut down for a period of one year. This facility replaces the old Mehrabad (sp?) Airport. With regards to your question regarding the size, both facilities are/were capable of handling the largest airliners and transport planes and do so on a daily basis (747s, 777s, MD-11s, 767s, A330s etc).
The city is served by most European carriers, as well as by airlines from the Middle East and Asia.
Laxintl From United States of America, joined May 2000, 25346 posts, RR: 49
Reply 11, posted (9 years 3 months 20 hours ago) and read 25543 times:
Quoting JoKeR (Reply 9): I actually don't quite know what the fuss was all about but it caused the new airport to be opened for just a few hours last year before getting shut down for a period of one year.
Internal Iranian politics.
The new Imam Khomeini airport IKIA was built by a Turkish-Austrian consortium per a BOT (Build, Operate, Transfer) agreement which it had won from the Iranian Ministry of Public Works.
Upon completion of the facility and just after the 1st plane landed, hardline elements in the Iran government and military forced the closure of the facility. These hardliners claimed, that the facility did not meet required safety and security codes. All types of trumped up claims were placed regarding the unsafe nature of the facility, from an improperly designed roof, to unsafe escalator and on and on.
Shortly it became clear however that these hardliners were in reality objecting to foreign parties having control of the facility. It was claimed the Turkish-Austrian group had secret Israeli links.
As a result while internal and legal rangling continued the facility remained closed for an additional year.
The Turkish-Austrian group has since had its 20 year contract cancelled and have had their financial claims settled for the most part.
The new airport now is being managed by a joint Iran Air, and the Iranian Revolutionary Guards.
Interestingly the near the same thing happended to another Turkish company. Couple years back a Turkish telecommunications company won the bid to establish Irancell which would be the countries second cell phone operator. This year various parties in Iran forced the legislature to enact new laws banning foreign ownership of Irancell on grounds a threat to national security. The Turkish company now is negotiating either for new terms in its investment or would like to have its investment bought out to the tune of 300million Euro's.
Bascially what one hand does in Iran, the other hand cancels!
From the desert to the sea, to all of Southern California
Brons2 From United States of America, joined Sep 2001, 3013 posts, RR: 4
Reply 12, posted (9 years 3 months 20 hours ago) and read 25511 times:
Quoting PanAm747 (Reply 3): One of the respondents was a United Airlines pilot, who flew the route to India quite frequently. He commented that he was quite disapppointed as the Iranian controllers were actually quite friendly and extremely professional.
The pilots on Iran Air were very friendly at our a.net CGN sightseeing trip on the 747SP.
They encouaged me to visit Iran, but I'm not sure how the State Department would feel about that upon my return.
Firings, if well done, are good for employee morale.
LTBEWR From United States of America, joined Jan 2004, 13113 posts, RR: 12
Reply 13, posted (9 years 3 months 17 hours ago) and read 25160 times:
Per NW's website, this is Flt. # 41, which departed BOM about 12:43 am June 19th, scheduled to arrive in AMS at 6:40 am, but instead diverted to Terhan at about 4:08 am. It departed about 10:35 am, after mechanical repairs. It was/is scheduled to arrive in AMS 2:20 pm local time (original time 6:40 am). the continuation of this flight # 41 AMS-MSP was cancelled for it's ops on June 19.
IFLYMCO From United States of America, joined Sep 2003, 482 posts, RR: 2
Reply 14, posted (9 years 3 months 17 hours ago) and read 25160 times:
Quoting Brons2 (Reply 12): They encouaged me to visit Iran, but I'm not sure how the State Department would feel about that upon my return
It is still possible (despite popular belief) to visit Iran. I have many persian friends and I would love to visit Iran.. I looked into going and it is still OK to do as long as a persian person invites you to go. I have heard stories of "interviews" upon entering Iran and coming back into the US but nothing serious.
Ahlfors From Canada, joined Oct 2000, 1347 posts, RR: 4
Reply 17, posted (9 years 3 months 16 hours ago) and read 25063 times:
There are no US laws against travelling to Iran. There are laws against doing business (as in import/export/investment) with Iran, with exceptions made for those expenses normally incurred as a visitor/traveller/tourist, and certain products like persian carpets and personal effects. You do need an invitation from an Iranian to get a visa, but there are several travel agencies that can do that. As for safety, I felt much safer in Iran than I do in most US or European cities.
Though I must say, some people on that plane must have been rather nervous landing in Tehran on an American airliner.
Ahlfors From Canada, joined Oct 2000, 1347 posts, RR: 4
Reply 18, posted (9 years 3 months 16 hours ago) and read 25025 times:
Quoting SATL382G (Reply 16): Yes Americans have always been well treated in Iran...
Iran today is very different from Iran in 1979.
Also, the Iranians make a very clear distinction between the US government (and government officials) on one hand and private American citizens on the other. The latter are warmly welcomed. They should know, seeing as their own government most certainly does not represent their people.
SATL382G From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 19, posted (9 years 3 months 16 hours ago) and read 24978 times:
Quoting Ahlfors (Reply 18): Also, the Iranians make a very clear distinction between the US government (and government officials) on one hand and private American citizens on the other. The latter are warmly welcomed. They should know, seeing as their own government most certainly does not represent their people.
Odd, the gov't officials they took hostage WERE private American citizens.
The thing that the Iranians need to understand is that the U.S. has a representative gov't (though not perfect) and most (but not all) Americans will view an attack upon our gov't as an attack upon ourselves.
The story on this DC10 diversion will be an interesting read when the details emerge.
WhiteHatter From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 21, posted (9 years 3 months 16 hours ago) and read 24944 times:
Quoting SATL382G (Reply 16):
Yes Americans have always been well treated in Iran...
Incredibly blinkered comment.
Those events happened as a result of Iran being embroiled in a revolution against an unpopular dictatorship supported by the USA.
Iran today is much more stable and there is absolutely no reason why an American airliner with Americans on board would not be warmly welcomed, and offered every assistance to rectify the problem the plane had.
If anything it is good for Iran to behave in that fashion as it reinforces their case that they are good international citizens and honour the conventions of air travel.