A Travel and vacations forum. TravelBanter

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Go Back   Home » TravelBanter forum » Travelling Style » Air travel
Site Map Home Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

At least 4 jets strand Conn. passengers for hours



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old October 31st, 2011, 07:55 AM posted to rec.travel.air
Ablang[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 6
Default At least 4 jets strand Conn. passengers for hours

At least 4 jets strand Conn. passengers for hours
APBy CANDICE CHOI - AP Business Writer | AP – 5 hrs ago

NEW YORK (AP) — It was a passengers' nightmare at Bradley International
Airport near Hartford, Conn., this weekend.

Passengers on at least three JetBlue planes and one American Airline
plane say they were stranded on the tarmac for seven hours or more after
being diverted from New York-area airports on Saturday.

The ordeal continued after they were let off and had to spend the night
on cots and chairs in terminals.

A passenger on one of the diverted JetBlue planes says the crew ran out
of snacks and bottled water for the last few hours of the delay.

"The toilets were backed up. When you flushed, nothing would happen,"
said Andrew Carter, a reporter for the Sun Sentinel of Florida, who was
traveling to cover the Miami Dolphins game against the New York Giants.
His plane took off from Fort Lauderdale for Newark Liberty International
Airport at around 9 a.m. After being diverted to Hartford, the plane sat
on the tarmac between around 1:30 p.m. and 9 p.m., he said.

A representative for Bradley International wasn't available to comment
on the scope of the tarmac delays at the airport.

A JetBlue spokeswoman, Victoria Lucia, confirmed in an emailed statement
that six of its planes, carrying a total of about 700 passengers, were
diverted to Hartford as a result of a "confluence of events" including
equipment failures at Newark and New York's John F. Kennedy
International Airport that prevented planes from landing in low visibility.

She declined to specify how long the planes sat on the tarmac at
Bradley, but noted that 17 other flights with different carriers were
also diverted to airport.

Once the planes landed at Bradley, Lucia said that intermittent power
outages at the airport made refueling and deplaning difficult.

Kate Hanni, executive editor for FlyersRights.org, said she got calls
and emails from passengers and worried family members regarding at least
four flights that were stranded on the tarmac for up to 10 hours.

Brent Stanley and his wife were on one of those planes, an American
Airlines flight that had originally been headed to JFK after taking off
from Charles de Gaulle airport in Paris.

After being diverted and landing in Hartford at 2:30 p.m., Stanley said
passengers were given various reasons for being held on the tarmac,
including the need to refuel and de-ice and the airport's limited
capacity for handling international flights. He and his wife were eager
to get back home to their two young sons in Lake Zurich, Ill. But they
realized they didn't have it as bad as the parents who had infants on
the plane.

"There was a lady in front of us with an 18-month-old daughter," Stanley
said. "Another woman came by to borrow diapers because we couldn't get
to our luggage."

After spending the night at the airport, Stanley was lucky to find two
seats Sunday on an afternoon flight home to Chicago. But the headache
isn't over yet; his luggage was headed to JFK because the Hartford
airport crew wasn't able to handle international luggage, he said.

An American Airlines spokesman, Ed Martelle, said the passengers weren't
allowed off the plane by customs at the airport. Martelle did not know
the exact number of American planes that were diverted to Bradley or how
long they sat on the tarmac.

Matt Shellenberger, who was on a JetBlue flight from Boston to JFK, said
his plane was diverted to Bradley International and sat on the tarmac
for seven hours.

The crew picked up trash regularly and handed out water and snacks and
"everyone held their cool," he said. But his frustrations grew with each
status update; the reasons for the delay kept changing as the hours passed.

Early on, passengers were told that the plane was just being refueled
and would fly out soon, Shellenberger said. Then they were told it was
being de-iced. Then there was an emergency on another plane.

"We were told we were the third plane in line to get to the gate when we
landed," he said. "Then we stayed on the plane for seven hours."

Carter of the Sun Sentinel, who was on another JetBlue flight, reported
a similar sequence of updates.

The saga continued long after passengers were let off the plane.

The power outages from storms throughout Connecticut made booking hotel
rooms difficult. As a result, many passengers just slept at the airport,
Carter and Shellenberger said in separate interviews.

When they awoke, hundreds of passengers had to wait in line for hours
just to figure out which flight they'd be on.

"That was most disappointing part," Carter said. "It seemed like there
was no plan when we got off the plane."

In the morning, Carter said he and several other passengers rented a van
to drive to New Jersey rather than wait for the afternoon flight JetBlue
had scheduled to Newark.

It's not the first time JetBlue has had problems with tarmac delays. The
New York-based airline also made headlines in 2007 when snow and ice
storms stranded its planes for nearly 11 hours at New York's John F.
Kennedy International Airport.

Such high-profile delays helped prompt a regulation last year that fines
airlines for holding domestic flights on the tarmac for more than three
hours. This year, the rule was extended to apply to international
flights that are held on the tarmac for more than four hours.

The Department of Transportation often doesn't enforce the fines to
their full extent unless delays are extreme, however. Passengers also do
not get a cut of the fines.

Low-cost carriers are more prone to tarmac delays because letting
passengers off planes can cost an airline a lot of money, said Hanni of
FlyersRights.org.

If a plane is diverted because of a reason within the airline's control,
such as a mechanical failure, ticket contracts usually state that
passengers will be reimbursed for hotels, food and transportation. That
means airlines do everything in their power to keep passengers on board
in hope that the plane will be able to take off again.

JetBlue said that passengers who were diverted to Bradley International
would be reimbursed for their fares and hotel expenses.

A representative for the Port Authority of New York & New Jersey, which
oversees Newark and JFK airports, could not immediately say how many
total flights were diverted to other airports because of equipment failures.

http://news.yahoo.com/least-4-jets-s...234334714.html
  #2  
Old October 31st, 2011, 02:29 PM posted to rec.travel.air
Fly Guy
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 193
Default At least 4 jets strand Conn. passengers for hours

Ablang wrote:

At least 4 jets strand Conn. passengers for hours


The story now reads that 6 Jetblue planes were diverted to Hartford,
carrying a total of about 700 pax.

17 planes from other carriers were also diverted there, but no reports
if they were de-planed or not.

Jetblue suffered major PR dammage back in 2007 when they stranded pax on
a plane for 11 hours.

The media is reporting that it costs carriers a lot of money to de-plane
pax at airports where they don't normally operate from. Aside from any
off-airport costs (ie hotel rooms) I'd like to know just what those
costs are.

You would think that your constitutional rights are being violated by
being held captive in a plane like that. The PAX should have called the
police and claimed that they were being held captive inside a confined
space against their will at Bradley.

=========
JetBlue Flight Pilot Pleaded for Help During Tarmac Ordeal

http://www.670kboi.com/rssItem.asp?f...temid=29747249

The pilot of a JetBlue plane stuck on the tarmac for seven hours full of
increasingly angry and frustrated passengers pleaded for assistance from
airport officials, telling them he "can't seem to get any help from our
own company."

"I got a problem here on the airplane, I'm gonna need to have the cops
on board," the pilot said, according to cockpit recordings posted
onLiveATC.net. "There's a cop car sitting in front of me right here
right now. I need some air stairs brought over here and the cops brought
on board the airplane.

"Look, you know we can't seem to get any help from our own company, I
apologize for this, but is there any way you can get a tug and a tow bar
out here to us and get us towed somewhere to a gate or something," he
said. "I don't care. Take us anywhere."

ABC News has learned that the Department of Transportation's Aviation
Consumer Protection division is investigating the delay involving
JetBlue Flight 504, as well as a couple of other flights, that occurred
Saturday.

If the government determines any airline violated the tarmac delay rule,
that carrier could be fined as much as $27,500 per passenger.
===========

Every time I hear about this, I have to wonder why pilots don't have
more power or common sense during contract negotiations to have
iron-clad agreements in their contract that they can force their carrier
or the airport they land at to de-plane passengers at their request.

Pilots seem to have a lot of authority over their plane and how they
operate and fly it, but this fundamental issue of being demoted to
hostage status on their own plane during events like this and why they
tolerate this state of affairs is a mystery.

And why the airport refused a direct request by the pilot to tow the
plane to a gate and de-plane the passengers needs to be looked into.

Obviously all the layers of this rotting onion weren't examined and
taken into account when the gov't passed the tarmac-delay rule.
  #3  
Old October 31st, 2011, 03:26 PM posted to rec.travel.air
Kurt Ullman
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,653
Default At least 4 jets strand Conn. passengers for hours

In article , Fly Guy wrote:


You would think that your constitutional rights are being violated by
being held captive in a plane like that. The PAX should have called the
police and claimed that they were being held captive inside a confined
space against their will at Bradley.

Constitutional rights only impact on governmental actions, not the
actions of a private entity. The best you might be able to do might be
kidnapping or something similar because you were held against your will,
but I wouldn't want to press it.


Every time I hear about this, I have to wonder why pilots don't have
more power or common sense during contract negotiations to have
iron-clad agreements in their contract that they can force their carrier
or the airport they land at to de-plane passengers at their request.


The contract language with the airline would have absolutely no
impact on the airport.


And why the airport refused a direct request by the pilot to tow the
plane to a gate and de-plane the passengers needs to be looked into.


My guess would be gates were overwhelmed by 23 (17 others and 6 Jet
Blue) unexpected "guests". Especially since, IIRC, they were having
operational problems of their own during the event.

Obviously all the layers of this rotting onion weren't examined and
taken into account when the gov't passed the tarmac-delay rule.

Yeah, like weather caused diversions and (at least in some cases) no
nearby customs and immigrations people.

--
People thought cybersex was a safe alternative,
until patients started presenting with sexually
acquired carpal tunnel syndrome.-Howard Berkowitz
  #4  
Old October 31st, 2011, 04:38 PM posted to rec.travel.air
Fly Guy
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 193
Default At least 4 jets strand Conn. passengers for hours

Kurt Ullman wrote:

You would think that your constitutional rights are being violated


Constitutional rights only impact on governmental actions,


No, I think constitutional rights apply to the private sector as well.

I have to wonder why pilots don't have agreements in their
contract that they can force their carrier or the airport
they land at to de-plane passengers at their request.


The contract language with the airline would have absolutely no
impact on the airport.


That may be true, but in this case the pilot was seeking authority with
Jetblue management for some sort of go-ahead to park the plane at a gate
(or even for air-stairs). Pilots could be granted that decision-making
status on their own in these situations under a better contract.

It's not clear what the airport was looking for or asking of Jetblue (or
any other non-local carrier) to allow the passengers to de-plane. Since
they ultimately did de-plane at 9:30 pm, this 7 hours of being stuck on
the plane was an unnecessary hardship for the crew and pax.

It seems what is missing in this whole puzzle is federal rules that
obligate an airport to off-load the pax of an "irregular" plane under
the request of the pilot. Whether or not there's an open gate is
irrelavent. There are always air-stairs. And you can always move an
empty plane out of the way to accomodate a full one that wants to
de-plane.

Given that most (if not all) airports are federally funded (sometimes to
a ridiculous extent given their passenger demographics and load) the fed
gov't and FAA has big stick it can swing here.

Bag handling isin't even a complication. You simply don't off-load any
checked bags under these conditions. You simply off-load the pax and
tell them that if they want to continue by some other means to their
destination, they can, but their bags will be off-loaded at their
originally-ticketed airport when conditions permit. Any pax that want
to hang around the airport and re-board the plane when it's ready to fly
to it's originally-ticketed destination can certainly do so.

This ought to be the way it works for domestic travel. I agree there
are other complications for internationally-arriving passengers but I
don't think that's the case here (does Jetblue fly internationally?) and
it's not necessary to impliment a simultaneous solution to both cases
(domestic and international). The domestic case has fewer complications
and can be addressed separately.
  #5  
Old October 31st, 2011, 04:58 PM posted to rec.travel.air
Sancho Panza[_1_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 552
Default At least 4 jets strand Conn. passengers for hours

On 10/31/2011 11:38 AM, Fly Guy wrote:
does Jetblue fly internationally?


It has 19 international destinations.

  #6  
Old October 31st, 2011, 05:10 PM posted to rec.travel.air
Kurt Ullman
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,653
Default At least 4 jets strand Conn. passengers for hours

In article , Fly Guy wrote:

The contract language with the airline would have absolutely no
impact on the airport.


That may be true, but in this case the pilot was seeking authority with
Jetblue management for some sort of go-ahead to park the plane at a gate
(or even for air-stairs). Pilots could be granted that decision-making
status on their own in these situations under a better contract.


We haven't seen anything that indicates JB did not already contact the
airport and find out that nothing was available and just did not get
back in touch with the pilot. (Or that they did indeed ignore him).


It's not clear what the airport was looking for or asking of Jetblue (or
any other non-local carrier) to allow the passengers to de-plane. Since
they ultimately did de-plane at 9:30 pm, this 7 hours of being stuck on
the plane was an unnecessary hardship for the crew and pax.


Pretty much my point at this time. We don't know if JB was turned
down, wasn't able to get in touch with the needed people at the airport
(who were having their own problems with weather, etc.), even tried to
get in touch with the airport, or what happened.


It seems what is missing in this whole puzzle is federal rules that
obligate an airport to off-load the pax of an "irregular" plane under
the request of the pilot. Whether or not there's an open gate is
irrelavent. There are always air-stairs. And you can always move an
empty plane out of the way to accomodate a full one that wants to
de-plane.


Again, that is most likely subject to availability of crews to bring
the stairs around, was there any place in the overcrowded airport to
move the planes that did not violate other FAA rules? I can't see anyone
deplaning a group of passengers and then having them troop across the
tarmac in a snow storm with equipment and other planes running around.



Bag handling isin't even a complication. You simply don't off-load any
checked bags under these conditions. You simply off-load the pax and
tell them that if they want to continue by some other means to their
destination, they can, but their bags will be off-loaded at their
originally-ticketed airport when conditions permit. Any pax that want
to hang around the airport and re-board the plane when it's ready to fly
to it's originally-ticketed destination can certainly do so.

Probably right.

--
People thought cybersex was a safe alternative,
until patients started presenting with sexually
acquired carpal tunnel syndrome.-Howard Berkowitz
  #7  
Old October 31st, 2011, 08:57 PM posted to rec.travel.air
DevilsPGD[_3_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 79
Default At least 4 jets strand Conn. passengers for hours

In message someone claiming to be Fly Guy
typed:

Kurt Ullman wrote:

You would think that your constitutional rights are being violated


Constitutional rights only impact on governmental actions,


No, I think constitutional rights apply to the private sector as well.


You should read up on that. (Hint, it's governmental action only.)

--
It's always darkest before dawn. So if you're going to
steal your neighbor's newspaper, that's the time to do it.
  #8  
Old October 31st, 2011, 10:18 PM posted to rec.travel.air
Fly Guy
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 193
Default At least 4 jets strand Conn. passengers for hours

DevilsPGD wrote:

Constitutional rights only impact on governmental actions,


No, I think constitutional rights apply to the private sector as
well.


You should read up on that. (Hint, it's governmental action only.)


Can an airline have a policy where blacks are seated at the back of a
plane?

Regardless of the economic or PR impact such a policy may have, can they
legally have such a policy?
  #9  
Old October 31st, 2011, 10:26 PM posted to rec.travel.air
Sancho Panza[_1_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 552
Default At least 4 jets strand Conn. passengers for hours

On 10/31/2011 5:18 PM, Fly Guy wrote:
DevilsPGD wrote:

Constitutional rights only impact on governmental actions,

No, I think constitutional rights apply to the private sector as
well.


You should read up on that. (Hint, it's governmental action only.)


Can an airline have a policy where blacks are seated at the back of a
plane?


A law passed by Congress and signed by the President prohibits that.
  #10  
Old November 1st, 2011, 02:55 AM posted to rec.travel.air
Kurt Ullman
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,653
Default At least 4 jets strand Conn. passengers for hours

In article , Fly Guy wrote:

DevilsPGD wrote:

Constitutional rights only impact on governmental actions,

No, I think constitutional rights apply to the private sector as
well.


You should read up on that. (Hint, it's governmental action only.)


Can an airline have a policy where blacks are seated at the back of a
plane?

That is written law, not constitutional.



--
People thought cybersex was a safe alternative,
until patients started presenting with sexually
acquired carpal tunnel syndrome.-Howard Berkowitz
 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Passengers Trapped on Runway for 8 Hours at JFK Agent_C Air travel 106 February 20th, 2007 03:24 AM
JetBlue Passengers Stranded for Almost 11 Hours Ablang Air travel 0 February 18th, 2007 08:42 AM
AA holds passengers hostage in airplane for 9 hours James Robinson USA & Canada 0 January 11th, 2007 03:22 PM
Passengers Aboard Flight Delayed 18 Hours Larry R Harrison Jr Air travel 296 January 10th, 2005 11:31 PM
USA detains BA passengers for 3 hours nobody Air travel 28 January 4th, 2004 10:15 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 10:34 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 TravelBanter.
The comments are property of their posters.