From https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles ... an-air-jet

The U.S. is probing an attempted cockpit breach on an American Airlines flight to Honolulu after a passenger placed a laptop near the cockpit door, said a person familiar with the matter.

The passenger was restrained by law enforcement and other fliers on Flight 31 from Los Angeles, the person said. The severity of the threat was still unclear. The pilots made a gradual descent from cruise altitude to lower levels out of precaution to limit the potential damage in the event there was an explosion, according to the official.

Hope this turns out to be nothing, but if true, it's more drama than any of us need right now.

From Twitter:

AirlineGeeks.com ‏Verified account @AirlineGeeks 33m33 minutes ago

#AA31 from Los Angeles to Honolulu was met by F-22 fighter jets from Hawaii Air National Guard, according to ABC.

Also from Twitter:

Gadi Schwartz‏ Verified account @GadiNBC 15m15 minutes ago

Witnesses on #AA31 say arrested passenger had shirt over head. didn't make it past 1st class. Flight attendant blocked aisle, man taken down

He seemed to have created trouble in LAX but was still allowed to board.

http://www.channelnewsasia.com/news/wor ... rt-8867130

Airplanes were gate held in HNL for a few while the aircraft approached and landed...

This will only add steam to the laptop ban talk, rightly or wrongly. If I were to hazard a guess, the laptop will turn out to be nothing and this guy is mentally ill. Pilots take the necessary action by descending to a lower altitude and seemingly great response by the cabin crew.

Someone who just wants to create a panic and make sure this laptop ban goes through. Terrorists are winning. They just want to cripple the economy. Fear alone creates all this chaos.

Was there an actual problem?doesnt seen like much of a revelation

This would be very serious if true. It also shows how unbelievably ineffective the current ban is at accomplishing anything.

If you look at Flightaware, they dropped down to 10k feet about 750 miles out from Oahu. And then while still 180 miles out they dropped down to 5000 feet. Man I wish I was a passenger on that flight just to look out the window and see the perspective of flying that low over the ocean for that long. I know it's not much to look at, but to me that would have been cool, particularly as you got closer to the islands.

We should consider banning passengers from flights

I was walking to my car after a company meeting at the HNL airport conference rooms and saw the HANG F22s roar off 8L. They seemed to be moving faster and their departure sounded louder than I've ever seen before. Once I got back to my office I heard what happened. AA31 actually parked on the north hardstands next to my office. While door 1L was facing away from me I saw a slew of LEO vehicles swarming the aircraft for several hours.

On a side note, I think this is a sobering reminder that threats still exist onboard commercial aircraft and with all the backlash airline staff have gotten over the last few months for following protocols the public may view as customer unfriendly protocols are there for a reason. Kudos to the crew and passengers onboard the aircraft for containing the issue in a consummate manner.

77H

Maybe airline was afraid of bad press and wanted to make sure he got on his flight.. another drawback.

PEK777 wrote:

Was there an actual problem?doesnt seen like much of a revelation

Aren't you making this a bit too personal?

In any case, we don't know if there was much of a problem. We do know the guy had been causing trouble around 2AM before the flight left at 8AM ( ref: https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles ... an-air-jet ). We know he made what other passengers and/or crew perceived to be a rush for the cockpit and they stopped him before he could do any damage and restrained him in his seat. We know two F22 jets were scrambled to meet the plane and the aircrew did descend early which suggests the crew thought a bomb could be a factor. We know the guy was arrested immediately upon arrival and that the FBI was involved.

Personally I'm surprised more news isn't out there about this incident.

danman132x wrote:

Someone who just wants to create a panic and make sure this laptop ban goes through. Terrorists are winning. They just want to cripple the economy. Fear alone creates all this chaos.

I agree with you.

Who's going to fly without their laptop? That would be a disaster.

Either the HNL police are a more gentle force or the passenger was not trying a scam for publicity. In either case, why was the passenger allowed on the aircraft in LAX if he was believed to be intoxicated. It is against the FARs to allow a drunk passenger on the aircraft. Someone at AA or the airport security in LAX made a major mistake.

The man's behavior, even as a threat, was peculiar. I suspect some sort of mental impairment.

From the Seattle Times
"It caused worry on the plane, more curiosity than fear I would say because he wasn’t acting irrationally but you could tell something was kind off about him as well,” he said. “Once they took him to the back we never heard anything else about it.”

jumbojet wrote:

RL777 wrote:

This will only add steam to the laptop ban talk, rightly or wrongly. If I were to hazard a guess, the laptop will turn out to be nothing and this guy is mentally ill. Pilots take the necessary action by descending to a lower altitude and seemingly great response by the cabin crew.

Flying down to a lower altitude isn't always possible. Laptops do need to be banned, on all flights, domestic and international to/from within the USA. You want true safety, than that is the way to go. To bad for the people that feel otherwise. Maybe it will take a disaster for you to change your mind. Just pick an airline that has in seat AVOD and you will be fine. GOGO wifi will soon be a thing of the past.

Wow, all laptops? because of the lithium ion or lithium polymer batteries? Cell phones use similar batteries. Ban them too? How about people who take lithium prescription drugs? Ban the people or the medicine? I hope your response was sarcastic. It is so hard to tell when writing on my laptop with lithium batteries.

frmrCapCadet wrote:

The man's behavior, even as a threat, was peculiar. I suspect some sort of mental impairment.

From the Seattle Times
"It caused worry on the plane, more curiosity than fear I would say because he wasn’t acting irrationally but you could tell something was kind off about him as well,” he said. “Once they took him to the back we never heard anything else about it.”

Sounds similar to an event on a UA flight 2 years ago IAD-DEN ...though the UA event appeared to be bigger/more dangerous....

http://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/disruptive-passenger-cause-united-flight-turn-around-n324771

downdata wrote:

We should consider banning passengers from flights

Don't give them any ideas...

jumbojet wrote:

RL777 wrote:

This will only add steam to the laptop ban talk, rightly or wrongly. If I were to hazard a guess, the laptop will turn out to be nothing and this guy is mentally ill. Pilots take the necessary action by descending to a lower altitude and seemingly great response by the cabin crew.

Flying down to a lower altitude isn't always possible. Laptops do need to be banned, on all flights, domestic and international to/from within the USA. You want true safety, than that is the way to go. To bad for the people that feel otherwise. Maybe it will take a disaster for you to change your mind. Just pick an airline that has in seat AVOD and you will be fine. GOGO wifi will soon be a thing of the past.

Maybe they can issue paper underwear at the gate and everyone can wear that onboard and take no belongings. All in the name of safety, you understand.

kiowa wrote:

In either case, why was the passenger allowed on the aircraft in LAX if he was believed to be intoxicated. It is against the FARs to allow a drunk passenger on the aircraft. Someone at AA or the airport security in LAX made a major mistake.

Did you read the article? The man "claimed" that he was intoxicated but the officers didn't note behavior consistent with that.

Shouldn't the FAA require all commercial flights to carry "plastic handcuffs"? Or, is duct tape what's recommend by the FAA to restrain an unruly passenger?

dfwramper wrote:

If you look at Flightaware, they dropped down to 10k feet about 750 miles out from Oahu. And then while still 180 miles out they dropped down to 5000 feet. Man I wish I was a passenger on that flight just to look out the window and see the perspective of flying that low over the ocean for that long. I know it's not much to look at, but to me that would have been cool, particularly as you got closer to the islands.

Maybe some pax YT video of that will show up....

jumbojet wrote:

RL777 wrote:

This will only add steam to the laptop ban talk, rightly or wrongly. If I were to hazard a guess, the laptop will turn out to be nothing and this guy is mentally ill. Pilots take the necessary action by descending to a lower altitude and seemingly great response by the cabin crew.

Flying down to a lower altitude isn't always possible. Laptops do need to be banned, on all flights, domestic and international to/from within the USA. You want true safety, than that is the way to go. To bad for the people that feel otherwise. Maybe it will take a disaster for you to change your mind. Just pick an airline that has in seat AVOD and you will be fine. GOGO wifi will soon be a thing of the past.

What good does that do? Many people fly for business and need their laptops. It's just not that simple. Not to mention, there is inherent risk in anything we do. We cannot create a sanitized world. I don't mean that as a way of saying we shouldn't have security or things in place to protect us from danger. But it will always be a compromise. How much freedom are we willing to sacrifice in the name of safety? We all have different answers. Perhaps we can agree on this, the situation was handled effectively, which to me shows we have a good system in place.

Banning laptops is no safety measure. It actually would make things more dangerous by putting more batteries in the cargo hold as well as inciting more fear in the flying public.

Why were the stairs brought to the front of the aircraft if the offender is in the rear? In pictures of the aircraft, there were stairs at the front and back. Is it standard protocol to open the front door first? Why not lead the prisoner out the back instead of walking down the aisle?

The full affidavit for probable cause to arrest and detain the perp is at
http://www.hawaiinewsnow.com/story/3548 ... c-thoughts

The perp is being sent back to CONUS for mental eval.

As for restraints on board, earlier reports mention the use of duct tape.

Perp is mentally fit... will stand trial.
http://www.hawaiinewsnow.com/story/3642 ... ic-hearing

WPvsMW wrote:

Perp is mentally fit... will stand trial.
http://www.hawaiinewsnow.com/story/3642 ... ic-hearing

Apparently the ruling as it stands now only addresses his competency to stand trial. His mental state at the time appears less well settled. Assistant U.S. Attorney Morgan Early is on court record as saying that Uskanli suffers from a "major mental illness."

At LAX he broached security at 2:00AM and asked an airport employee where he could find something to eat. The employee alerted police who then charged Uskanli with trespass and released him. Police said the smelled alcohol on his breath but did not find that unusual at 2:00AM. Nothing about his behavior at the time indicated more than someone who probably drank too much and started to wander around looking for food.

Apparently he did not rush to the front of the aircraft. One passenger described his movement to the front as, "He was very quiet, moving very sluggish.” American also said he was not restrained but his computer was duct-taped to the crew carry-on luggage so that if it was a bomb the explosion would need to expend energy on the luggage before reaching the cabin. Again, Uskanli was not restrained for the remainder of the flight however an off duty police officer police officer sat with him and prevented him from taking another field trip.

I applaud the flight crew because a small explosion from a device resting against the aircraft can cause significant damage. The luggage barrier would absorb the blast from most explosives that can be fitted into a laptop unless it is military grade or exotic.

He is a Turkish citizen and his US visa has now been revoked. If the US insists on a trial then so be it but trial or not the best thing we could do. Just send him home and permanently revoke his right to return to the US. The last thing we need to do is imprison him and then deport him afterward. That is just throwing money away on the prison sentence. My sense is that he was not acting out of malice and is indeed someone suffering from severe mental illness . If that is the case then prison would not only be a waste of money but probably make things worse rather than serving as punishment or rehabilitation

Fun fact, I "attempted a cockpit breech" once, in 2002. It was the middle of the night aboard a full Corsair 747 (so more than 500 PAX), I was bored, the F/As were not nice to a 18 y/o me, so I climbed to the upper deck and went for the cockpit to have a chat with the pilots, hoping to talk about my love for aviation. I knocked on the door several times, but nobody answered. Nobody cared on my side of the door either. Thankfully.

jumbojet wrote:

You want true safety, than that is the way to go.

Maybe we don't. Because "true safety" in life would require digging a trench, putting on a metal suit of armor, locking yourself in a panic room built into that trench and never coming out, ever. You want true safety, that is the way to go. Even then, maybe someday an engine cowling falls from the sky and crushes your little panic room with you in it. There is no way to prevent freak things from happening.

There's a fallacy that we can ever have 100% security in aviation. We can't. We should stop trying. Sorry, but that's the truth. Sometimes things are going to happen. We've gone far enough. Some say we've already gone too far. Every additional thing we do just takes away our own freedom and enjoyment of life. It's not worth it.

Yeah, somebody's always going to say "if it saves ONE LIFE..." and I agree that life is precious. Of course life is precious. So let's start by looking at all the other things that we completely ignore that kill thousands, tens of thousands or hundreds of thousands of people every year and do something about those things instead of worrying about laptops on planes that have only ever (to anyone's knowledge) killed literally a few people, and that while stored in the cargo hold. Which is not coincidentally where you want to put them all in the name of "true safety".