PanHAM From Germany, joined May 2005, 9754 posts, RR: 31
Reply 5, posted (4 years 3 months 2 weeks 1 day 11 hours ago) and read 21772 times:
..and she wasn't even blonde...
question is, why was she arrested? She had a panic attack, which is not criminal, she is not a criminal, she tried to open a door which is, like everyone knows is impossible. So what's the point of an arrest?
Es saugt und blaest der Heinzelmann wo Mutti sonst nur blasen kann. Frueher war mehr Lametta.
FlyingSicilian From Italy, joined Mar 2009, 1397 posts, RR: 0
Reply 7, posted (4 years 3 months 2 weeks 1 day 10 hours ago) and read 20688 times:
According to news reports she did not try to open the door. She got up after one bout of turb and another hit, she fell into the door and braced her self with the handle all the while chatting with the F/A. Interviewers said afterwords the F/A and model confirmed she did not try and open the door. It was just "quick reacting pax" who jumped her.
“Without seeing Sicily it is impossible to understand Italy.Sicily is the key of everything.”-Goethe "Journey to Italy"
gr8circle From Canada, joined Dec 2005, 3131 posts, RR: 4
Reply 9, posted (4 years 3 months 2 weeks 1 day 9 hours ago) and read 18748 times:
Quoting PanHAM (Reply 8): question is, why was she arrested? She had a panic attack, which is not criminal, she is not a criminal, she tried to open a door which is, like everyone knows is impossible. So what's the point of an arrest?
To determine the actual cause of the actions taken by her on the plane, ensure that there was no foul intent and set an example for anyone else who might want to emulate her....
Quokka From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 10, posted (4 years 3 months 2 weeks 1 day 8 hours ago) and read 18024 times:
Thanks for the clarification on how easy (or not) to open doors in flight. We see so many Hollywood and "news" programme dramatisations that it is hard to know what is possible and what is pure fiction.
I can understand why she would be arrested. Before a proper investigation, no-one would know what the motivation for her behaviour was. She may genuinely be suffering from a clinical condition and if that is so she can expect sympathetic treatment. But until she has been assessed, who can say what was going through her mind. While she may be charged with an offence, if a genuine medical condition exists (and if my understanding of US law is correct) it is unlikely that any conviction will be recorded and appropriate medical treatment will be recommended. The airlines may keep her name on file, however.
Aesma From Reunion, joined Nov 2009, 6959 posts, RR: 12
Reply 12, posted (4 years 3 months 2 weeks 1 day 8 hours ago) and read 17886 times:
Quoting oly720man (Reply 7): In round terms the pressure inside the plane is 12.2psi and, at 35000ft, the pressure outside is 3.5psi. A difference of 8.7psi. For a door, say 6ft x 3ft, that's equivalent to about 10 tons.
You have to add that the door is larger than the opening, and that to open them you have to first pull them to the inside and rotate them somewhat, that's what the pressure differential prevent. If that was not the case, the door would be very easy to open because the pressure differential would actually help !
New Technology is the name we give to stuff that doesn't work yet. Douglas Adams
CharlieNoble From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 14, posted (4 years 3 months 2 weeks 1 day 7 hours ago) and read 16844 times:
Quoting PanHAM (Reply 22): There's no need to arrest her for that purpose. The young lady needed medical assistance after which she can be questioned about the incident and that's it.
Maybe, maybe not.
Only in hindsight would it be obviously a medical issue vice foul play. Initial (erroneous) reports were probably that "some lady tried to open the door"...that's illegal, I imagine.
If the police asked her to stick around for questioning regarding a potential crime and she declined, arrest would be their only option. Even if the officers were concerned about her safety or theirs she'd end up in cuffs. I believe that is technically an arrest.
AR385 From Mexico, joined Nov 2003, 6614 posts, RR: 35
Reply 15, posted (4 years 3 months 2 weeks 1 day 7 hours ago) and read 16344 times:
Quoting Quokka (Reply 2): But seriously, I feel sorry for her if she was in such a state of anxiety that she had to break away.
Well, I actually feel sorry that she is a Playboy model and has to fly Jet Blue. What mag do yo need to be a model of these days in order to fly another carrier´s F? What do Penthouse models fly? I suppose the ones from Hustler take Greyhound?
aveugle From United States of America, joined Aug 2007, 65 posts, RR: 0
Reply 16, posted (4 years 3 months 2 weeks 1 day 7 hours ago) and read 16044 times:
So I know that at cruising altitude, a typical aircraft cabin is pressurized to the equivalent of around 8000ft. Out of curiosity though, is the cabin pressurized more than the surrounding atmosphere up to the height of 8000ft? Because it would seem that if one were to try to open the cabin doors, it could work just as long as the aircraft was at a low enough altitude where there wasn't such a huge pressure difference.
Panman From Trinidad and Tobago, joined Aug 1999, 790 posts, RR: 0
Reply 17, posted (4 years 3 months 2 weeks 1 day 6 hours ago) and read 14848 times:
Quoting ADent (Reply 15): 85% of the doors on planes are impossible to open while the plane is pressurized - due to the door swinging in against the air pressure, before they swing out.
85%? Really? Where did you get that figure from? Because there are lots of Airbuses (read thousands) and Embraer's flying around that don't open in and swing..... (Both types which Jetblue uses)
Well I haven't worked on any Embraers, but from the picture below, it would appear that the Embraer opens using the same principles as Airbus doors and the only airbus I have not worked on is the A318. You lift the handle (exterior or interior) and the door comes out slightly, then up slighty and then translates forward. No swinging/rotating involved.
MNMncrcnwjr From United States of America, joined Jul 2010, 308 posts, RR: 0
Reply 18, posted (4 years 3 months 2 weeks 1 day 6 hours ago) and read 14598 times:
Quoting aveugle (Reply 20): So I know that at cruising altitude, a typical aircraft cabin is pressurized to the equivalent of around 8000ft. Out of curiosity though, is the cabin pressurized more than the surrounding atmosphere up to the height of 8000ft?
Question?? When does the Flght deck pressurize and de pressurize a cabin on a normal flght? and how much discretion do they have to the cabin pressure settings?
musang From United Kingdom, joined Apr 2001, 872 posts, RR: 7
Reply 21, posted (4 years 3 months 2 weeks 1 day 4 hours ago) and read 13149 times:
Quoting MNMncrcnwjr (Reply 22): Question?? When does the Flght deck pressurize and de pressurize a cabin on a normal flght? and how much discretion do they have to the cabin pressure settings?
Typically the cruise level and the landing altitude are dialled in by the pilot(s), and if the system's in auto mode, it schedules the pressurisation itself. After engine start when air con packs are turned on, the interior starts to pressurise slightly (the 737 classic goes to approx 200 feet below its actual elevation) to ease the pressure transition during the take-off climb. At this stage flight deck windows are openable but I doubt the doors (never tried) . Even with that slight differential the door would be plugged in place. See post 7. Some types have pressure switches inside the doors which effectively lock the mechanism if there's any pressure differential at all.
If the pressurisation's not in auto mode, the crew may have to operate it manually, i.e. resetting the diff. every few thousand feet. Its a distraction one can do without, and everyone knows if we don't get it exactly right! I last had to do that, for four sectors, in approx 1999. We pretty much had it figured out by the end of the day though!
Other than that there would be no reason I can think of, in normal ops, for the pilots to want to bias the pressurisation.
About doors. Someone described the traditional Boeing sequence where the door moves inboard on opening, then rotates slightly, the top and bottom panels fold making the door smaller than the aperture, so it can be moved outward edge first. As far as I remember, on 767, 777, DC-9 series, Airbus, BAC-111, 146 and Concorde doors, there is no appreciable inward movement. The first movement is upward by a couple of inches, which relocates a series of fixed bolts on the door clear of their respective lugs (correct term?) around the door frame. This type of door is not smaller than the aperture, but it doesn't pass through it so it doesn't matter.
On closing, the door is swung into a position in the doorway, but too high by a couple of inches, and the final movement of the door is almost vertically downward, so those bolts wedge behind their "lugs". Wish I could remember the technical terms.
The door effectively becomes a plug type door, as pressurisation forces it against the fittings and movement is impossible.
gr8circle From Canada, joined Dec 2005, 3131 posts, RR: 4
Reply 22, posted (4 years 3 months 2 weeks 1 day 1 hour ago) and read 10701 times:
Quoting PanHAM (Reply 17): Quoting gr8circle (Reply 18):
and set an example for anyone else who might want to emulate her....
wow. such remarks leave me almost speechless. I could understand if you had said that someone might want to emulate the guy who jumped on the lady, but emulate a medical disorder? Set an example? OMG.
You seem to be taking my comments totally out of context....while having a medical disorder on a plane is completely understandable, trying to open doors in midflight is not acceptable behaviour....I quite fail to understand why you've twisted my comments to make it look that way....I think it was quite apparent to all else who've read my post, that I was referring to the door opening and not the medical disorder....
GlobalCabotage From United States of America, joined Nov 2009, 605 posts, RR: 0
Reply 23, posted (4 years 3 months 2 weeks 1 day 1 hour ago) and read 10517 times:
Just let us law abiding citizens with a CHL (thorough background check by State's, Fed's, etc.) carry on board legally and this crap wouldn't happen. We would save taxpayer money on sky marshalls and do a better job. Of course, this will open a whole new can of worms. But I see no reason why a certified passenger (or crew member) can not carry on board. Heck, you can board an local train, bus, or AmCrap and carry. Give the law abiding citizens and crew members the right to carry, and we will stop this s*^(!
Elevated From United States of America, joined Feb 2010, 297 posts, RR: 1
Reply 24, posted (4 years 3 months 2 weeks 1 day ago) and read 9540 times:
Quoting GlobalCabotage (Reply 31): Just let us law abiding citizens with a CHL (thorough background check by State's, Fed's, etc.) carry on board legally and this crap wouldn't happen. We would save taxpayer money on sky marshalls and do a better job. Of course, this will open a whole new can of worms. But I see no reason why a certified passenger (or crew member) can not carry on board. Heck, you can board an local train, bus, or AmCrap and carry. Give the law abiding citizens and crew members the right to carry, and we will stop this s*^(!
Right because when people carry down on the ground all this (insert your expletive) is really much more under control.
I am sure a Concealed Handgun License is the answer...I can just imagine a F/A being the first to get attacked by some crazy CHL person going off and refusing compliance and ending up shooting off rounds.
How many people with guns lately have gone bananas and killed scores of people? How does that make anyone more sane with a "clean" background? What a joke.
Do you read what you write? I am not sure which is scarier, your words or her actions. At lest she has a serious condition and it's evident.
: Just because the door opens outward does not mean it can be opened in flight. I have tried to open a cabin door at just 0.4 deltaP after ground testi
: From my book... It seems that a week can't go by without hearing the latest story about a passenger who went cuckoo and tried to yank open an emergenc
: What? How will you stop this? Shoot her?
: Nice joke. Now, let's rain brain and define "law abiding citizens" - is that someone who thinks that he's right and the other guy is wrong? Seriously
: Please. Don't argue the point. You are WRONG. I've had to rig the type of door I am talking about, I have had to change the door guides. They do NOT
: 767 doors move inwards and then upwards into the fuselage (spring drum assisted). Don't ever open the door without a slide raft attached or a ballast
: There are psychiatric disorders where people "emulates" illness, and many people just for caughting attention would try to "emulate" this girl, is no
: Quite right Panman. That was what's known as a brain f@rt. Scrub 767 from my list of recollections! But see my list in reply 21. Spoke to our mainten
: Looks like no one else managed to see this comment. While she may have panicked because of the turbulence it doesn't appear she INTENDED to try and o
: Shows at 3:00 and 6:00. Enjoy the buffet!
: Shooting a gun in a plane is clearly a hazard, however a bullet hole into the door would not cause any accident, it would not even depressurize the p
: I guess he would either blame it on her behaviour or not say anything because he blew a few holes in the plane with the expected results. What a moro