Pogo From United Kingdom, joined Mar 2005, 355 posts, RR: 0
Reply 1, posted (7 years 6 months 6 days 13 hours ago) and read 10536 times:
I am working at LHR as we speak, I went to have a look, a/c reg G-EUUN BA A320, there is 4 of them on the tail section.
3 of them have hi-viz waist coats on and are taking photos and calling the press for maximum publicity, the authorities are trying to talk them down. I have photos on my phone but I am not able to upload them from work.
Mhodgson From United Kingdom, joined Dec 2002, 5047 posts, RR: 23
Reply 3, posted (7 years 6 months 6 days 13 hours ago) and read 10504 times:
A320/777- what's the difference?
Only one word for these idiots; but I'd probably get a ban for saying it! If only we could get them down using marksmen. Or just take the plane to the runway, start the engines, and then see how long they last...
No trees were harmed by this message. However, several million electrons were terribly inconvenienced
N1120A From United States of America, joined Dec 2003, 27930 posts, RR: 74
Reply 4, posted (7 years 6 months 6 days 13 hours ago) and read 10508 times:
Oh goodness, quit picking on aviation for CO2 emissions.
I think everyone here knows I lean heavily green and I'll add that I focused much of my studies on Environmental Law in law school. That said, I have a major issue with this kind of protest, because aviation is not the threat here. Using the US as an example, only 3% of our total CO2 emissions are put out by aviation. That is a minuscule number and even considering that airplanes let out gases higher up, their impact is still negligible compared to that of cars, big rigs and industry. While jet aircraft consumption is a problem, there are tons of economic reasons why reduction on that end is a priority focus of the industry.
If Greenpeace, or any other environmental group, wants to protest something, they should come Los Angeles and demand that public transport be made the number one priority for all budget proposals over the next 20 years and a comprehensive rail system be built.
Mangeons les French fries, mais surtout pratiquons avec fierte le French kiss
PanHAM From Germany, joined May 2005, 10332 posts, RR: 32
Reply 7, posted (7 years 6 months 6 days 12 hours ago) and read 10366 times:
Right question. How the heck did they get on that aircraft? This is a serious security breach and these morons should be treated the say way as terrorists are treated. If they can do it, real terrorists can as well. That much for old Ladies harrassed at security points because they have some eau de cologne in their handbags.
Greenpeace is a totally irresponsible money making machine. It is nothing but a business with people on top making good money by talking idiots like those this morning into stupid actions. They need that to raise more money, simple as that. No "good" intentions behind whatsoever.
Green Piss has lost charity statis in some countries already and this organisation should be taxed as any other corporation. That is the right answer and I hope that the British Government comes to that conclusion.
Danny From Poland, joined Apr 2002, 3528 posts, RR: 3
Reply 8, posted (7 years 6 months 6 days 12 hours ago) and read 10354 times:
Quoting N1120A (Reply 4): only 3% of our total CO2 emissions are put out by aviation
Oh well, that is a fact but aviation is such an easy target for protesting (as it gets a lot of publicity) and for taxing as well. For sure though it is a very serious security breach. Can't believe they still didn't "take them down".
Voodoo From Niue, joined Mar 2001, 2138 posts, RR: 0
Reply 9, posted (7 years 6 months 6 days 12 hours ago) and read 10322 times:
As an LHR enthusiast I am fairly philosophical about it all. If there is a third runway, there is a good chance that if go out to LHR to see something 'special' land or take-off I will miss it because it will be on the 'wrong' runway. So while I agree that the environmental argument is balderdash compared to other things going on these days, I will (have to) live with whatever democracy throws at me.
MD11Engineer From Germany, joined Oct 2003, 14623 posts, RR: 62
Reply 13, posted (7 years 6 months 6 days 12 hours ago) and read 10198 times:
Quoting Pogo (Reply 1): 3 of them have hi-viz waist coats on and are taking photos and calling the press for maximum publicity, the authorities are trying to talk them down. I have photos on my phone but I am not able to upload them from work.
F*ck talking then down. Where is the de-icing truck? I want to see how boiling glycol suits them.
Also, if I would just find one paint scratch, I would sue Greenpeace for a whole paint job. Let's see if they have THAT much money.
RJ111 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 16, posted (7 years 6 months 6 days 11 hours ago) and read 10132 times:
What a bunch of fools. People are entitled to their opinion and to protest but breaching security and illegaly climbing on top of a multi-million dollar aircraft is out of line. Imagine BA had done something slightly illegal, you wouldn't hear the end of it.
I hope they pay for their crime.
Quoting N1120A (Reply 4): If Greenpeace, or any other environmental group, wants to protest something, they should come Los Angeles and demand that public transport be made the number one priority for all budget proposals over the next 20 years and a comprehensive rail system be built.
SpenceSaab From United Kingdom, joined Jun 2006, 59 posts, RR: 0
Reply 19, posted (7 years 6 months 6 days 11 hours ago) and read 9957 times:
Greenpeace once again doing stupid things.
They claim to be a peaceful protest group, but what, prey, is peaceful about causing a security breach at one of the world's busiest international airports?! These idiots (and thats what they are) don't seem to appreciate any other issues whatsoever other than climate change. They are so blinkered.
On sky news the reporter, Dermott Murnaghan (sorry I've probably spelt his name wrong - no offense intended) said that "In the last 50years the aviation industry has cut its emissions by 75%". The Greenpeace Spokeswoman he was speaking to said "Actually the figures are that the UK aviation sector has only reduced its emissions by 13% and the aviation industry is the biggest cause of climate change."
Once again a greenpeace activist who's quite able to rattle of supposed figures. What what do those figures tell us, "the UK aviation secotr has reduced its emissions by only 13%" were not talking about the UK only, and neither are greenpeace - so what relevence does that point have? None, fact of the matter is that figure just helps as damage limitation against a fact which does not support their cause. It staggers me how blinkered these people are.
Furthermore, she made a point about how there are too many domestic flights in the UK. Okay, so then why target the airlines, they only flight those routes because there is a market demand - target the consumers, in a proper manner.
Don't get me wrong, I'm all for going green, its a good thing. But there are proper and correct ways about which to do this, and proper ways to protest. Creating a security breach at an international airport is not a correct and proper thing to do, and highlights just how warped these people's priorities are.
Surely investing time pounding the streets talking to people and getting them on board is a better way of creating awareness than this sort of thing. Quite clearly half the people who see this thing think "What a bunch of idiots", so yes, they are getting publicity but they are by no means gaining anything. Because nobody supports the cause of madmen. People support those who are noble, doing good things.
By creating such a security breech they are not only disgusting half their target audience (in aviaiton terms I guess you could say they are getting a very low load factor), and they are also showing that they have their priorities completely messed up - especially in the post 9/11 world - which hinders their success rate (in terms of getting support) with future protests.
I guess we can only be thankful that a security issue has been found by an organisation that is not of the torrorist pursuation. But thankyou greenpeace for making this security hole a know area to those organisations who ARE of a terrorist pursuation. We can all fly more safely thanks to you.
Sorry about the rant but this sort of blinkered ignorance makes me so mad, putting peoples lives at risk to make a statement about an issue that many of us are already aware of and trying to change - including the aviation industry!
Silence is Golden when you don't know a good answer
VV701 From United Kingdom, joined Aug 2005, 8247 posts, RR: 24
Reply 20, posted (7 years 6 months 6 days 10 hours ago) and read 9886 times:
Someone at the Beeb must have been listening. The site now says:
"Four people were arrested after unfurling a banner from the top of the British Airways Airbus A320, which had arrived from Manchester."
But I think that since both the Beeb and the Daily Mail made the same mistake of originally saying it was a 777 they were just publishing what Greenpeace said to them without checking it out. This is very dangerous, particularly if you are dealing with a pressure group willing to break the law to gain publicity. It is time the media become a little more inquiring and stop publishing whatever the likes of Greenpeace tell them thus acting as their spokespersons.
GCT64 From United Kingdom, joined Nov 2007, 1648 posts, RR: 1
Reply 21, posted (7 years 6 months 6 days 9 hours ago) and read 9779 times:
I was airside at LHR T1 this morning catching a flight to EDI as this was going on - got a couple of poor photos on my mobile phone.
While G-EUUN was surrounded by Police etc., it was good to see that the rest of the airport was operating normally with no issues (in fact, arguably better than "normal" as my flight actually departed on time! )
It looks to the uninformed eye that the protesters had passed through airport security (either at LHR or MAN), so I doubt there were any real terrorism security issues nor do I blame the security staff for not spotting a banner (presumably rolled up or folded).
LHR27C From United Kingdom, joined Aug 2004, 1279 posts, RR: 15
Reply 22, posted (7 years 6 months 6 days 8 hours ago) and read 9744 times:
Yes, watching a video about it, it sounds like they flew down on EUUN from MAN, hung around in the cabin/airbridge area until the other passengers had left, then went out of the side door of the airbridge and climbed up onto the top and then onto the fuselage... so not really a major security breach although not ideal that there was no one in the airbridge to stop people wandering out of the side!
Once you have tasted flight, you will walk the earth with your eyes turned forever skyward
Slider From United States of America, joined Feb 2004, 7095 posts, RR: 33
Reply 24, posted (7 years 6 months 6 days 7 hours ago) and read 9515 times:
Quoting Sevenair (Reply 12): Amazing- if you kick up a fuss in the airport, you are likely to be arrested, or tasered. Yet you climb on top of a plane, and they try and gently talk you down. Unbelievable.
Quoting MD11Engineer (Reply 13): F*ck talking then down. Where is the de-icing truck? I want to see how boiling glycol suits them.
I like the way you think!! haha
Better than tasering them or shooting them, although the latter would be a good idea.
: Unbelievable, yes. Do as I say, not as I do. Remember that! Does this plane now have to go into maintenance to check for damage?
: Protestors removed from BA aircraft Protestors have been removed from a British Airways aircraft after climbing on top of it this morning. They climb
: The actions by the Greenpeace protestors is deplorable. They are lucky that we don't have the American TSA working here. They would have had an 'exper
: No wonder the aviation industry gets a bad press and is getting slaughtered on the environmental issues if this is the highest level of intellectual
: How stupid can people be? They are protesting against a third runway. And they protest against CO2 emission. They don't know that the easy way to redu
30 David L
: Come on, now. This forum is not "the aviation industry".
: Ah, I thought as much. Thanks! Did anyone in the aviation industry go after them with water canons, de-icing trucks, bullets or billyclubs? No, which
: OK, but it likes to think that it is and - on a more serious note - forums like this and opinions posted have been known to be taken as "gospel" by l
: They should have been treated as terrorists without question. A security breach that serious, even for them to get on top of the aircraft should not b
: Actually, aviation gets a lot of major tax breaks. This is especially true when it comes to energy taxes. They do have THAT much money, though it wou
: Heard a very interesting comment on PPRUNE this morning that the reason security didn't react quickly enough was that they were too busy confiscating
: Yes, I'd be interested to see how they got to the airport. Hopefully they all walked, or rode bicycles, but I'm guessing the hypocritical idiots prob
: I saw a clip on a German TV channel where they showed people climbing on top of the jet bridge and then the aircraft. The question is, how did the cam
: LOL! Or amde them take their shoes of before climbing atop the aircraft!
: They are a worldwide organization, and their actions vary from country to country. Greenpeace pacifists have never killed or even injured someone in
: Ha Ha... which crime? Are you kidding???? They breached a high security area, putting themselves and an aircraft in danger. That is a serious crime!
: See above - they err... flew there [Edited 2008-02-25 11:17:16]
: well, if they are pacifists, they have to be called militant pacifists. Try that for yourself and the local DA will tell you. Let's see, criminal tre
: If it were my choice they'd be hung... Very serious situation not to be taken lightly, as it implores those with more sinister motives insight and the
: Love that! Reminds me of the Woody Allen movie where he says he got beaten up by Quakers (who are pacifists ... well, except where Woody Allen is con
: That they flew in to protest flying is beautifully ironic. Considering the hours I've spent in LHR standing in security cues, I find it stunning that
: I wonder if they carbon offset their flight? Nice....but a waste of glycol, just pitch the left over all-day-delis at them that should knock them off
: I'm hoping they stepped on some expensive "No Step" part and BA will bill them a hefty replacement charge. . . at least bill Greenpeace.
: I think BA should have gone ahead and done a bio-fuel test with this plane. Yell at the GP people..."Hey. OK. You win! We are going to test bio-fuel.
: The francophone says: >they should come Los Angeles and demand that public transport be made the number one priority for all budget >proposals over th
: California is similarly densely populated to France. However, i think N1120A was suggesting an improved public transport system within LA. I hear it
: You will probably find that it is GP's own footage, they were taking photos and filming from the aircraft and sending the images off to the media.
: ... and/or those who have travelled outside the USA and have seen how successful public transport is everywhere except the USA. In case you didn't re
: I hope everyone of these dipsh*ts gets hauled away to Scotland Yard, locked away, and then the key is thrown away. Or, better yet, throw them in the T
: Couldn't agree more!! It's idiots like these that give other folks who are concerned about the state of our environment a black eye. They are really
: It wouldn't. GP were quoted, after VS flew their biofuel aircraft at the weekend, as saying "Instead of looking for a magic green bullet, Virgin shou
: Can't do that to them. They are the GOOD GUYS, the one's with the white hats. You got to give them a li'l leeway. if they break the law for our own g
: They should have called the Fire trucks with their high pressure hoses. I have no tolerance for anyone who deliberately flouts airport security regula
: While watching the video of the GPers on the tail I was waiting for the flight crew to push hard Left rudder knocking one of them off "while yelling g
: HAHA! There isn't a price too high that I would pay to see that happen.
: These morons should be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law and then sent for psychiatric treatments. These environmentalist wackos think they
: Why didnt someone just shoot them down. I cant stand "greenpeace"
: The third runway has the potential to save energy, AS LONG AS FLIGHTS ARE NOT INCREASED. With additional "room" for take-offs and landings, planes spe
: A bit extreme there! After all the aircraft might have got damaged. In all seriousness though I would challenge Greenpeace to state why this form of
: These people are such idiots! To think they had the audacity to fly down to LHR and THEN protest!!! What would have happened if one of them had taken
: One of the reason idiots do this sort of thing is because the UK Government promotes it. I saw during Prime Minister question time they were actually
: No point in risking putting bullet holes in the plane and having to take it out of services. Just shoot firehouses at them, or as some else suggested
: They act like a bunch of 5-year olds, demanding everything that suits their wants, however impossible or impractical. And to make their case, they thr
: Just tell the British Police that wires can be seen under their jackets...sure they will send in the same cops who "sorted-out" the MP3 user in the L
: No, that was clearly from the terminal building. Filmed froma distance, showing how the air bridge door was opened, the guys climbed on top of the ai
: Interesting use of a source to back up your argument.... I took the liberty to do some math: -Average 4 car commuter train uses 2 gallons of fuel to
: I wonder if this stunt was worth losing their flying privileges for life. Does the UK have a no-fly list?
: Yeah, it is not possible to get anywhere without a car, but I suppose thats what happens when something like 60% of all surface areas are roads and h
: I completely agree.........can you imagine if these protesters were of asian or arabic descent. I think the situation would have been a whole lot dif
: 1 - BAA security are not trained or allowed to tackle passengers, that role is reserved for the police. 2 - Many airbridges have a security lock on th
: Agree but they should have used rubber bullets.
: It doesn't matter, that's why they're sharp shooters. a quick laser target to the centre of the brow ridge before shooting should ensure no damage to
: Yup, I do know. true, but if there is something you believe passionately in, what would you do to try and get change?
: Oh I love that, that just proves my point that they don't actually know s**t. That's one of my two biggist irritants about Greenpeace: 1. They don't
: Potentially damaging an aircraft. Just for info, aircraft are not designed to be walked over and are fairly sensitive. And about GP protestors fallin
: They should rather demonstrate for a 3rd and a 4th runway at LHR. Actually, GP is running into open doors, the industry is well aware of the issue and
: In the UK the Green Party do that in a legal and democratic manner. These 'protesters' as you call them, I call them criminals as they broke the law,
: This protest was delaying a flight and thus costing an airline money and the passengers waiting unneeded aggravation. I don't care if your protest is
83 David L
: As others have said, the protest in itself is not the issue. The issue is in the number of laws they broke and the obstruction they caused in order t
: Its time to label Green Peace as a terrorist organization and move on. These people are nutjobs and don't represent those who really care about the pl
: Holy crap how the heck are they standing up there? Isn't the paint slippery? How did they remove the protester, with firetrucks?
: Several options, I can go to the City Council and arrange a licence to convene in a public place at a certain time on a certain date and protest for
: Hopefully with a gorilla tranquilizer.
: This is a concept that is apparently alien to Greenpeace...it's called democracy
: Correct. Environmentalism has now become more of a dictatorial theocracy. These radical crazies are members of the Church of the Suspension of Realit
: Why are things so often named opposite to what it is? I mean "German Democratic Republic!!!" (should of course have been German Dictatorship Republic)
: Actually, given the location, they almost certainly used the Tube, Train or Bus. Or perhaps made them put their plastic bag through the machine separ
: It is in the UK. As I stated in a previous post, the actions of these idiots were offences under the Civil Aviation Act and the Public Order Act.
: And lets name the specific provisions within those acts then. That is a bit of a contradictory statement.
: i really wish they had gotten sniped I really do not understand these people, burning down houses made of wood... well because they are made of wood .
: Completely wrong. Peaceful protestors should not be treated as terrorists.
: When you trespass, break who knows how many laws, and disrupt the airport by climbing on top of an airplane that doesn't belong to you I hardly call
: If I try to take more than 100ml of water past security, I'm treated like a terrorist. These people sneaked into an area that they knew was out of bou
: Had a bunch of people bypassed security and entered the WTC when it was empty in order to hang a banner out of a window, I would have called that an
: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/politics/7266512.stm They've now climbed onto the Houses of Parliament. Is it me or is security not very secure whe
: Breaking in to a house is not peaceful A sit-in blocking others is not peaceful Breaking security at an airport and climbing on top of an aircrfaft i
101 David L
: Much as I hate the idiots, I can't agree that they're "terrorists". Protests like these don't put people in fear of their lives, they only cause a lot
: In my opinion, to be realistic, I don't know the true intentions of some strangers, trespassing in a security area, standing on a piece of equipment
: I did not voice an opinion. I just said that this was an example of peaceful protest, not of terrorism. Demonising people because they act illegally
: Peaceful? Taking over a plane is a peaceful act now? What? How? Terrorism is far more than just a threat to life.
105 David L
: OK, they weren't instilling terror into anyone. The point of their stunt was obvious pretty quickly.
: At the end of the day in the UK it is illegal to be on airport property unless you are: 1. Dropping off or picking up a passenger(s) 2. Working at the
: GP will issue a statement that the earthquake felt in the UK was an obvious result of "climate change". The IPCC will likely agree.
: AFAIK the protestors also broke the Aviation and Maritime Security Act of 1990 by trespassing in the secure zone of the airport and endangering the sa
: Standing out along the curb holding up protest signs is peaceful. Breaking in to a secured area and climbing up on top of a plane and disrupting oper
: Aviation Security Act 1982 (Embodied in the Civil Aviation Act) Part 2 Section 21c Sub section 1 Unauthorised presence in a restricted zone A person
: A couple of typos in my prev post should read Section 21c Subsection 1 b) Remain on any such part of a restricted zone having been requested to leaveb