BA Flight to JFK returns to LHR

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/4169655.stm

A British Airways flight returned back to LHR, three
hours after take-off because one of the passengers
appeared to be on the US No-Fly list.

Well, at least this time they didn't wait until Canada...

In this BBC story though it is said that "... after a
US request that the man should not be allowed to land",
and later on "...BA took the decision to return to
Heathrow Airport".

Was it really up to BA? Could they have just continued
on to JFK, landed normally and let the US authorities
take care of the passenger?

--
Mikko Peltoniemi
Film & Video Editor, Avid Technician at large.
http://www.discountcadavers.com

"Mikko Peltoniemi" wrote in message
...
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/4169655.stm

A British Airways flight returned back to LHR, three
hours after take-off because one of the passengers
appeared to be on the US No-Fly list.

Well, at least this time they didn't wait until Canada...

In this BBC story though it is said that "... after a
US request that the man should not be allowed to land",
and later on "...BA took the decision to return to
Heathrow Airport".

Was it really up to BA? Could they have just continued
on to JFK, landed normally and let the US authorities
take care of the passenger?



http://www.cnn.com/2005/WORLD/europe...ack/index.html

no but they supposedly were given the option of landing in Maine.

Is bangor airport big enough for proper planes ?

"Miss L. Toe" wrote:

Is bangor airport big enough for proper planes ?

Define proper!

IIRC, it's a former Strategic Air Command base. B-52 runways need to be
significantly wider and longer than a commercial runway.

"Miss L. Toe" wrote:

Is bangor airport big enough for proper planes ?

Define proper!

IIRC, it's a former Strategic Air Command base. B-52 runways need to be
significantly wider and longer than a commercial runway.

Was it really up to BA? Could they have just continued on to JFK,
landed normally and let the US authorities take care of the passenger?

BA has no choice. If the USA tells the captain that they cannot land
with that passenger, they will be forced to turn around and land in
Canada. Remember we have trigger-happy F-16 and F-15 pilots
on alert at every airport now.

Of course, this points out yet another example of paranoia taken to
extremes. If this passenger really is so bad, why cannot the plane
land, have the USA authorities take him into custody, interrogate
him, and then either arrest him or demand that BA return him to his
departure airport at BA's expense? Making a 747 return to LHR
after three hours of flight is a huge waste of fuel, not to mention
the time wasted by all aboard.


Casey

"Mikko Peltoniemi" wrote in message
Was it really up to BA? Could they have just continued
on to JFK, landed normally and let the US authorities
take care of the passenger?

I was just listening to this story on the BBC news that is broadcast in the
US, and they said that the plane was given the option of landing at Bangor
in Maine, but the pilot decided to return to heathrow.

all very odd, and rather worrying.

ant

On Thu, 13 Jan 2005 05:16:21 GMT "Casey" wrote:

: Was it really up to BA? Could they have just continued on to JFK,
: landed normally and let the US authorities take care of the passenger?

:BA has no choice. If the USA tells the captain that they cannot land
:with that passenger, they will be forced to turn around and land in
:Canada. Remember we have trigger-happy F-16 and F-15 pilots
:on alert at every airport now.

"We"????

Snicker.

Why do trolls pretend to be Americans?

:Of course, this points out yet another example of paranoia taken to
:extremes. If this passenger really is so bad, why cannot the plane
:land, have the USA authorities take him into custody, interrogate
:him, and then either arrest him or demand that BA return him to his
:departure airport at BA's expense? Making a 747 return to LHR
:after three hours of flight is a huge waste of fuel, not to mention
:the time wasted by all aboard.

If your redneck education had provided you with reading comprehension skills
you would have seen that there were other choices.

The pilot made the choice to return.

--
Binyamin Dissen
http://www.dissensoftware.com

Should you use the mailblocks package and expect a response from me,
you should preauthorize the dissensoftware.com domain.

I very rarely bother responding to challenge/response systems,
especially those from irresponsible companies.

On Thu, 13 Jan 2005 05:16:21 GMT "Casey" wrote:

: Was it really up to BA? Could they have just continued on to JFK,
: landed normally and let the US authorities take care of the passenger?

:BA has no choice. If the USA tells the captain that they cannot land
:with that passenger, they will be forced to turn around and land in
:Canada. Remember we have trigger-happy F-16 and F-15 pilots
:on alert at every airport now.

"We"????

Snicker.

Why do trolls pretend to be Americans?

:Of course, this points out yet another example of paranoia taken to
:extremes. If this passenger really is so bad, why cannot the plane
:land, have the USA authorities take him into custody, interrogate
:him, and then either arrest him or demand that BA return him to his
:departure airport at BA's expense? Making a 747 return to LHR
:after three hours of flight is a huge waste of fuel, not to mention
:the time wasted by all aboard.

If your redneck education had provided you with reading comprehension skills
you would have seen that there were other choices.

The pilot made the choice to return.

--
Binyamin Dissen
http://www.dissensoftware.com

Should you use the mailblocks package and expect a response from me,
you should preauthorize the dissensoftware.com domain.

I very rarely bother responding to challenge/response systems,
especially those from irresponsible companies.

On Thu, 13 Jan 2005 05:16:21 GMT "Casey" wrote:

: Was it really up to BA? Could they have just continued on to JFK,
: landed normally and let the US authorities take care of the passenger?

:BA has no choice. If the USA tells the captain that they cannot land
:with that passenger, they will be forced to turn around and land in
:Canada. Remember we have trigger-happy F-16 and F-15 pilots
:on alert at every airport now.

"We"????

Snicker.

Why do trolls pretend to be Americans?

:Of course, this points out yet another example of paranoia taken to
:extremes. If this passenger really is so bad, why cannot the plane
:land, have the USA authorities take him into custody, interrogate
:him, and then either arrest him or demand that BA return him to his
:departure airport at BA's expense? Making a 747 return to LHR
:after three hours of flight is a huge waste of fuel, not to mention
:the time wasted by all aboard.

If your redneck education had provided you with reading comprehension skills
you would have seen that there were other choices.

The pilot made the choice to return.

--
Binyamin Dissen
http://www.dissensoftware.com

Should you use the mailblocks package and expect a response from me,
you should preauthorize the dissensoftware.com domain.

I very rarely bother responding to challenge/response systems,
especially those from irresponsible companies.

ant wrote:

I was just listening to this story on the BBC news that is broadcast in the
US, and they said that the plane was given the option of landing at Bangor
in Maine, but the pilot decided to return to heathrow.

What might have been the reason for returning back to Heathrow, instead
of landing in Maine? Was the decision made by the pilot or BA
executives?

I'm wondering, which option is better as far as customer service is
considered. And to me it seems as if Heathrow is better, even though
Maine would put the passengers definitely closer to their destination.

But who knows, what kind of delays there would've been in Maine. At
least this way it seems BA kept the control of the situation.

--
Mikko Peltoniemi
Film & Video Editor, Avid Technician at large.
http://www.discountcadavers.com