Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
British Airways Should Hang Their Heads In Shame.  
User currently offlineKoolguy40 From Canada, joined Dec 1999, 61 posts, RR: 0
Posted (12 years 11 months 3 weeks 1 day 20 hours ago) and read 2648 times:

NEWS STORY
Stranded fliers face choice: Pay as you go, or go home
Foreign airlines don't want their planes sitting idle

Journal Staff
Edmonton Journal


Thursday, September 13, 2001
Watch the Global Report - (RealPlayer)

Ruby Trotter looked forward to visiting her friend of 50 years in San Francisco, but now she must return home, to London, England without seeing her.

Trotter was one of 1,200 passengers diverted to Edmonton on Tuesday because of the terrorist attacks in New York and Washington, D.C.

She had been on a British Airways flight from London's Heathrow airport bound for San Francisco. But in a bizarre twist, Trotter and most of the other passengers, including many from the United States, returned to London Wednesday evening even though American skies were reopened for air travel earlier in the day.

Trotter said the airline offered to put passengers up in London but wouldn't pay for another day in Edmonton and a subsequent flight to San Francisco on another airline.

"My friend was very upset I'm going back to London," Trotter said in an interview. "I planned for a whole year to see her and she is not in good health."

No one from British Airways could be reached for comment Wednesday.

But Don Gibson, owner of Uniglobe Geo Travel in Edmonton, speculated that British Airways wanted to get all its airplanes back on schedule.

If the British Airways flight continued on to San Francisco, Gibson said the plane may have difficulty getting back out.

"They could virtually be in a lineup to simply get it cleaned," he said. "Having a plane on the ground is a very expensive commodity."

Trotter was sitting with a group of Americans bound for San Francisco who also decided to go to London rather than face more uncertainty about when they could get home from Edmonton.

"If we stay here on our own we have to pay for it as well as a flight from here to San Francisco," said Mercedes Dalrymple, who had just finished a riverboat trip in France with three blind Americans.

Kurt Ambuehl, of San Francisco, said he was heading back to London because he couldn't afford to get back on his own.

He calculated it would cost him more than $1,000 to rent a car to drive south. "It's crazy," he said.

Edmonton International was quiet for most of the day Wednesday, a contrast to the usual 10,000 passengers a day it usually receives. Some people waited in hopes they could get a flight out but by mid-afternoon, most had left the airport.

Cristina Stolarchuk and Mike Fahr played double solitaire as they waited to see if their WestJet flight would leave for their home in Nanaimo, B.C.

They were in Edmonton visiting Fahr's sister and were supposed to leave Tuesday night. Fahr said the terrorist attacks were shocking but he wasn't overly surprised.

"It was just a matter of time before they found a glitch in superforce America," Fahr said.

"I'm just happy to be Canadian," Stolarchuk said.

Doreen Mullen, of Dublin, Ireland, had been visiting her niece Anne Murphy and husband Mike of Drayton Valley.

"I've had an absolutely superb time here and there's no problem going home later," Mullen said. "My husband won't mind. He will want me to be safe.

"My plight is nothing compared to the unfortunates who lost their lives. It's unbelievable what some people will do."

Bill Strauss of San Francisco said he was impressed with the professionalism of Canadian authorities and with the hospitality he had received.

"When you put everything in perspective, there are so many people that had devastation brought upon them that this is a minor inconvenience," Strauss said.

25 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlineChepos From Puerto Rico, joined Dec 2000, 6215 posts, RR: 11
Reply 1, posted (12 years 11 months 3 weeks 1 day 20 hours ago) and read 2235 times:

I think BA should pay for the tkickets of the pax going to SFO.
Chepos



Fly the Flag!!!!
User currently offlineCV640 From United States of America, joined Aug 2000, 952 posts, RR: 5
Reply 2, posted (12 years 11 months 3 weeks 1 day 20 hours ago) and read 2189 times:

No international flights will be allowed to leave enter the US for a while. SO, they just want to get their airplanes home. This unfortunately has changed a lot of people's plans

User currently offlineCO/BA From United States of America, joined May 2001, 399 posts, RR: 3
Reply 3, posted (12 years 11 months 3 weeks 1 day 20 hours ago) and read 2159 times:

I think the right call was made. Arrangements were made to acmodate pax in LHR. It makes no sense to leave an a/c in a foriegn country indefinitely. Unfortunately pax were inconvineced as is always unfortunate. Airlines are in a real pinch here and we all need to be a little patient here while they attempt to get ops back to normal while they overhaul procedures.

User currently offlineAviatsiya From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 4, posted (12 years 11 months 3 weeks 1 day 20 hours ago) and read 2133 times:

There is nothing wrong with BA's actions in this situation. As CV640, there are no international flights into/out of America at the moment. Are British Airways supposed to wait until they are allowed? Who knows, it could be another 3 or 4 days before international flights are allowed to resume. No-one knows.

BA is a commercial entity, and they are the world's biggest international airline, and they have an obligation to all of their other passengers to operate their scheduled services.


User currently offlineAvion From Bouvet Island, joined May 1999, 2205 posts, RR: 7
Reply 5, posted (12 years 11 months 3 weeks 1 day 19 hours ago) and read 2107 times:

Aviatsya:
Wrong. Since last year Lufthansa is worlds biggest intl airline. Thats why they cant use "The world's fav airline anymore."

Tom


User currently offlineSingapore_Air From United Kingdom, joined Nov 2000, 13742 posts, RR: 19
Reply 6, posted (12 years 11 months 3 weeks 1 day 14 hours ago) and read 2001 times:

Avion: Hear hear. That was ages ago that Lufthansa used BA calculations which make BA able to say that they are the world's favourite airline. LH has disproved that.

In addition, they are not my favourite airline, and in the words of a union which has many employees in BA "they are not our favourite airline".



Anyone can fly, only the best Soar.
User currently offlineV1-rotate From United Kingdom, joined Feb 2001, 53 posts, RR: 1
Reply 7, posted (12 years 11 months 3 weeks 1 day 13 hours ago) and read 1963 times:

koolguy40,
you should hang YOUR head in shame.
What will be your next post,"50,000 sue airlines and FAA for inconvenience"The airlines are coping as best they can!
Get a grip man!I cannot believe you are starting down this route.Sue the perpetrators of this evil,not the people trying to help!


User currently offlineV1-rotate From United Kingdom, joined Feb 2001, 53 posts, RR: 1
Reply 8, posted (12 years 11 months 3 weeks 1 day 13 hours ago) and read 1958 times:

Hmmmmm,

User currently offlineV1-rotate From United Kingdom, joined Feb 2001, 53 posts, RR: 1
Reply 9, posted (12 years 11 months 3 weeks 1 day 13 hours ago) and read 1952 times:

Koolguy40,
hang YOUR head in shame,airlines are doing the best they can,during the circumstances.
And your next post??
50,000+ sue airlines and FAA over "inconvenience"


User currently offlineSrbmod From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 10, posted (12 years 11 months 3 weeks 1 day 13 hours ago) and read 1938 times:

Gee, BA's giving people yet another reason to Fly Virgin Atlantic or one of the U.S. airlines instead of BA. Sure, BA really had not reason to reprotect these inconvienced passengers, but for good reasons, they should have been a little more respectful of these passengers and tried to accommodate these people. Yes, airlines don't have to reprotect passengers when flights are diverted, delayed or cancelled due to circumstances beyond their control, i.e., weather, airport closures, or in the case of this week, a total shutdown of the flight systems in the U.S. and Canada, but many airlines have thrown their policies out during these trying times.

User currently offlineShankly From United Kingdom, joined Jan 2000, 1541 posts, RR: 1
Reply 11, posted (12 years 11 months 3 weeks 1 day 12 hours ago) and read 1926 times:

Seems there is a story for every angle. Listened on the radio last night to a number of pax on a BA flight diverted to Halifax on 11th, who went out of their way to praise the BA crew and staff for all their help.

Extreme situations generate extreme reactions. Don't be surprised by anything over the next month or so



L1011 - P F M
User currently offlineSevenair From United Kingdom, joined Feb 2001, 1728 posts, RR: 0
Reply 12, posted (12 years 11 months 3 weeks 1 day ago) and read 1801 times:

Well, i think you should think more of those who actually died, and HOW DARE YOU insult my national carrier, especially when Britain continues to offer support to USA, as it always has done and always will do. IM sure that this didnt just happen with BA. ANyway, it was american based airlines which caused the problem in the first place,so leave alone the British, and concentratre on the US.

User currently offlineSevenair From United Kingdom, joined Feb 2001, 1728 posts, RR: 0
Reply 13, posted (12 years 11 months 3 weeks 23 hours ago) and read 1784 times:

UNITED AND AMERICAN SHOULD HANG THEIR HEADS IN SHAME: it was there lapse that caused this. This would never to a European airline. ITs the fault of the US airlines that caused this tragic incedent. And i find it strange that US banned foreign airlines from entering US airspace, when it was american based airlines that were involved in the disaster.
But, I support the US 100%, not one person deservces what happened, never mind the thousands that were killed, may the lord be with them in this difficult and shocking time. God bless america.


User currently offlineSingapore_Air From United Kingdom, joined Nov 2000, 13742 posts, RR: 19
Reply 14, posted (12 years 11 months 3 weeks 23 hours ago) and read 1771 times:

FFS Will you lot take a chill pill?!


Anyone can fly, only the best Soar.
User currently offlineSevenair From United Kingdom, joined Feb 2001, 1728 posts, RR: 0
Reply 15, posted (12 years 11 months 3 weeks 23 hours ago) and read 1747 times:

BAck again, im sorry but yous have really pissed me off. Who the hell cares if BA are not oficially the worlds favourite now; their slogan is 21st CENTURY AIR TRAVEL, not THE WORLDS FAVOURITE AIRLINE. I can tell you now, that no US airline is anybody's favourite at the minute for what has happened. BA have sent two jumbos to position to take people home (on top the actual scheduled flights) one is trying to get to NY, the other to SFO. I dont hear of any US airlines doing this???? Do you????? People are probably too scared to to fly american. Which leaves me with sevenairs final thaught::

FLY BRITISH; IT MAY NOT NE THE WORLDS FAVOURITE, BUT ITS CERTAINLY SAFE AS HOUSES.

and at leat British airways can claim to HAVE been favourite!


User currently offlineSevenair From United Kingdom, joined Feb 2001, 1728 posts, RR: 0
Reply 16, posted (12 years 11 months 3 weeks 23 hours ago) and read 1745 times:

BAck again, im sorry but yous have really pissed me off. Who the hell cares if BA are not oficially the worlds favourite now; their slogan is 21st CENTURY AIR TRAVEL, not THE WORLDS FAVOURITE AIRLINE. I can tell you now, that no US airline is anybody's favourite at the minute for what has happened. BA have sent two jumbos to position to take people home (on top the actual scheduled flights) one is trying to get to NY, the other to SFO. I dont hear of any US airlines doing this???? Do you????? People are probably too scared to to fly american. Which leaves me with sevenairs final thaught::

FLY BRITISH; IT MAY NOT BE THE WORLDS FAVOURITE, BUT ITS CERTAINLY SAFE AS HOUSES.

and at leat British airways can claim to HAVE been favourite!


User currently offlineDouglasDC8 From Australia, joined Dec 2007, 0 posts, RR: 0
Reply 17, posted (12 years 11 months 3 weeks 23 hours ago) and read 1718 times:

"UNITED AND AMERICAN SHOULD HANG THEIR HEADS IN SHAME: it was there lapse that caused this. This would never to a European airline."

My friend-NEVER say NEVER. The fact is that in the United States there are many instances where BA, LH, and many non U.S. carriers share a common security checkpoint with U.S. air carriers. In addition, do you know for a fact what caused this horror to occur? Are you a employee of the NTSB, FBI, or perhaps the CIA? UNITED AND AMERICAN HAVE NO REASON TO HANG THEIR HEADS IN SHAME! ONLY YOU DO FOR MAKING SUCH A MORONIC COMMENT!


User currently offlineWoodsboy From United States of America, joined Mar 2000, 1031 posts, RR: 3
Reply 18, posted (12 years 11 months 3 weeks 23 hours ago) and read 1718 times:

Airlines could very well bankrupt themselves reaccomodating passengers when in this situation it would be impossible to know if they would ever get to their destination in a timely fashion. And how about getting home? Airlines are businesses and travelers must realize that not everything always goes perfectly, as long as they get a refund or voucher for the flight they were on, I would say thats an appropriate response.

Again, as has been said before, I am sorry for the inconvenience that this tragedy has caused people who are visiting friends, family or traveling for pleasure- but your inconvenience is nothing compared to the loss of life and destruction that was wrought in this attack.

If I were a passenger on a diverted plane who had been stranded by this event, I would be happy to just get home!


User currently offlineDouglasDC8 From Australia, joined Dec 2007, 0 posts, RR: 0
Reply 19, posted (12 years 11 months 3 weeks 22 hours ago) and read 1707 times:

By the way, BA is most likely doing the best they can under very trying circumstances that are constantly changing. I feel they did they right thing.

User currently offlineSilverfox From United Kingdom, joined Mar 2001, 1058 posts, RR: 0
Reply 20, posted (12 years 11 months 3 weeks 22 hours ago) and read 1712 times:

Sevenair,
As a Brit i must say you are very vitriolic.
It wasnt American and United that caused this problem. It was the very bad and downright unprofessional attitude shown at all US airports for internal flights in that the type of screening as opposed to that which we are accustomed to in UK and Europe, is quite frankly, shite. To allow knives on planes, and have them sold openly after the check in is IMHO suicidal and Tues events have proved that point. Unfortunately. being distanced from the troubles that we have had in UK for the last 25 or so years and bombings that seem to be a regular part of All of Europe, France Spain Italy Germay, not to mention the ex communist countires, have made the US think that it is bullet proof, and as a result has not implemented the measures seen over here. No doubt it could have done, but some loud mouthed redneck possibly complained to his senator about his rights a a us citizen etc etc being frisked in his own country etc etc and it was quietly dropped. There is no alternative but to implement stringent screening for all flights and. if the airports or those in their emply are incapable (as most of the listees seem to think) then why doesnt the US govt install the military until such times that the right people have been trained. I am not inconvenienced when i fly within Europe,but it will be a new ball game for the yanks but, lets face it it was a accident waiting to happen.
I deplore the actions taken by those loonies but they saw a loophole and used it.
And one last thought to all the Rambos out there intent on bombing.. just who do you bomb? you cannot bomb a religion out of existence, Hilter tried that in 1939. Does Bush want to go down in history as the second Hitler?


User currently offlineSevenair From United Kingdom, joined Feb 2001, 1728 posts, RR: 0
Reply 21, posted (12 years 11 months 3 weeks 22 hours ago) and read 1674 times:

Well, okay, but im not tryin to start an intercontinental war within airliners.net, okay, soz for what i said.

User currently offlineUs330 From United States of America, joined Aug 2000, 3871 posts, RR: 14
Reply 22, posted (12 years 11 months 3 weeks 17 hours ago) and read 1626 times:

You might want to watch your words, Sevenair, as you have started to offend people who originally agreed with you, like me for example.
You have begun to change into a BA or Singapore_Air like character, which I would strongly advise against. Don't be so arrogant to think that the European way is so much better than the American way. Also, if somebody wanted to duplicate last week's events in Europe and had enough desire to, they would find a way.


User currently offlineGDB From United Kingdom, joined May 2001, 13192 posts, RR: 77
Reply 23, posted (12 years 11 months 3 weeks 10 hours ago) and read 1568 times:

Hello? Who successfully lobbied to prevent an upgrading of US domestic security to international standards? The US majors did.
Of course you can never completely prevent terrorism, but FOUR aircraft being hi-jacked at one time?
Myself, and everyone I know who has been there, have long been shocked at the joke that is/was domestic security.
BA have no reason to hang their heads in shame, it's pretty clear who should though.
And the FAA need total reform, their mission cannot be to just look after the commercial interests of US carriers, they are quite big and powerful enough to look after themselves.
But I'm sure something like that will happen, because US travellers will demand it. That will be REALLY looking after the major's interests.
No more nickle and dimeing on security.
How tragic it's taken such an appalling event to make them wake up.


User currently offlineJetstreamer From United Kingdom, joined Apr 2001, 329 posts, RR: 4
Reply 24, posted (12 years 11 months 3 weeks ago) and read 1509 times:

None of the airlines should be hanging their heads in shame. Some of the carriers will probably not survive the next few months.

Those who should hang heads are the "shutting the door after the horse has bolted" brigade. It's too late to talk about stepping up security now. It should already have been at the highest possible level. Safety should always come first.

As for ridiculous comments about it would never happen here. How do you know? Have you got a crystal ball? Don't forget that the bomb which destroyed the flight over Lockerbie was loaded in Europe. Following that tragedy I would have thought that all lessons about lax security would have been learnt. Apparently not........


User currently offlineTsully From United States of America, joined Mar 2001, 651 posts, RR: 4
Reply 25, posted (12 years 11 months 2 weeks 6 days 23 hours ago) and read 1463 times:

I have no comment on whether or not BA is right for acting this way. All I can do is provide a bit of contrast:
those pax headed to SFO should just be glad they are alive and have the ability to walk on to an airplane. I'm sure those who died would absolutely love the inconvenience of being rerouted. I know I would.




I love America. I guess that makes me Bush's poodle, but I'd rather be a dog in New York City than a prince in Riyadh.
Top Of Page
Forum Index

This topic is archived and can not be replied to any more.

Printer friendly format

Similar topics:More similar topics...
British Airways And Iberia Boards Meet In Spain posted Fri Oct 3 2003 23:20:35 by Singapore_Air
British Airways To Resume Pakistan Service In June posted Sat Jan 19 2002 11:10:12 by Airmale
British Airways / WestJet In Prelim. Talks posted Thu Dec 14 2006 21:28:44 by JBLUA320
British Airways 777 In Near Collision posted Sat Oct 21 2006 01:34:46 by Ge90110b1
British Airways To Expand In Eastern Europe posted Thu Mar 16 2006 12:22:14 by Vfw614
Historical Snapshot - British Airways In 1977 posted Thu Dec 15 2005 16:01:25 by Palmjet
British Airways Sued In Nigeria For Defamation posted Thu Nov 17 2005 20:02:45 by ETStar
British Airways In Talks About Buying 747Adv posted Sun Jun 5 2005 20:47:39 by BoeingBus
Trident In British Airways Landor Scheme? posted Thu May 26 2005 23:06:16 by Yanksn4
Hundreds Stranded As British Airways Affiliate In posted Mon Apr 11 2005 14:35:45 by AIR MALTA