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

Passengers Aboard Flight Delayed 18 Hours



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old December 30th, 2004, 02:57 PM
Larry R Harrison Jr
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Passengers Aboard Flight Delayed 18 Hours

http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=stor...layed_flight_1

You probably already have heard about that--people weren't allowed to leave
the plane for some 18 hours while numerous things kept proper procedures
delayed.

My question is: isn't this kidnapping? It seems it surely could be called
that. Another thing--I recently flew (I rarely do) and I was fortunate to be
seated next to the emergency exit. Couldn't someone have just opened that
and taken off? One thing is for sure--that is absolutely what I would have
done. It's ridiculous to think anyone is supposed to just sit there & wait
18 HOURS while they straighten out their own nonsense.

Comments?

LRH


  #2  
Old December 30th, 2004, 04:36 PM
AJC
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

On Thu, 30 Dec 2004 06:57:31 -0700, "Larry R Harrison Jr"
wrote:

http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=stor...layed_flight_1

You probably already have heard about that--people weren't allowed to leave
the plane for some 18 hours while numerous things kept proper procedures
delayed.

My question is: isn't this kidnapping? It seems it surely could be called
that. Another thing--I recently flew (I rarely do) and I was fortunate to be
seated next to the emergency exit. Couldn't someone have just opened that
and taken off? One thing is for sure--that is absolutely what I would have
done. It's ridiculous to think anyone is supposed to just sit there & wait
18 HOURS while they straighten out their own nonsense.

Comments?

LRH



I wonder if the emergency slides will have been disengaged, if so the
jump from a DC10 door to the ground would most likely lead to broken
bones. In any case don't forget this happened in the US. With the
state of nervousness there, the likely presence of armed air marshalls
on the aircraft, and almost certainly the presence of armed police on
the ground, opening a door and jumping out could well be the last
action you took.
--==++AJC++==--
  #3  
Old December 30th, 2004, 04:36 PM
AJC
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

On Thu, 30 Dec 2004 06:57:31 -0700, "Larry R Harrison Jr"
wrote:

http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=stor...layed_flight_1

You probably already have heard about that--people weren't allowed to leave
the plane for some 18 hours while numerous things kept proper procedures
delayed.

My question is: isn't this kidnapping? It seems it surely could be called
that. Another thing--I recently flew (I rarely do) and I was fortunate to be
seated next to the emergency exit. Couldn't someone have just opened that
and taken off? One thing is for sure--that is absolutely what I would have
done. It's ridiculous to think anyone is supposed to just sit there & wait
18 HOURS while they straighten out their own nonsense.

Comments?

LRH



I wonder if the emergency slides will have been disengaged, if so the
jump from a DC10 door to the ground would most likely lead to broken
bones. In any case don't forget this happened in the US. With the
state of nervousness there, the likely presence of armed air marshalls
on the aircraft, and almost certainly the presence of armed police on
the ground, opening a door and jumping out could well be the last
action you took.
--==++AJC++==--
  #4  
Old December 30th, 2004, 05:10 PM
*bicker*
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

A Thu, 30 Dec 2004 06:57:31 -0700, "Larry R Harrison Jr"
escribió:
My question is: isn't this kidnapping?


It would have been a violation of US law to let folks off
the aircraft without adequate security measures in place.
Government officials enforcing the law are immune from
accusations of felonies such as this.


--
bicker®
  #5  
Old December 30th, 2004, 05:39 PM
nobody
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

*bicker* wrote:
My question is: isn't this kidnapping?


It would have been a violation of US law to let folks off
the aircraft without adequate security measures in place.


Where there is a will, there is a way. Remember that northwest is also the
airline that had kidnapped passengers at Detroit airport some years ago
because they were unwilling to bring airstairs to the plane and there were no
gates available due to a snow storm.

Where the airline should be held responsible is in using some inadequate
airfield. They could have diverted to Portland, Victoria or Vancouver and not
wait until they had runned out of fuel and needing to land at the nearest
piece of runway they could find.

In fact, in hindsight, they would have been better off landing at vancouver
and busing passengers to seattle, or land at victoria and hop on the ferry to seattle.

Surely this wasn't the only intl flight coming into Seattle ? How di dother
flights get handled ?
  #6  
Old December 30th, 2004, 06:03 PM
Larry R Harrison Jr
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default


"AJC" wrote in message
news
I wonder if the emergency slides will have been disengaged, if so the
jump from a DC10 door to the ground would most likely lead to broken
bones. In any case don't forget this happened in the US. With the
state of nervousness there, the likely presence of armed air marshalls
on the aircraft, and almost certainly the presence of armed police on
the ground, opening a door and jumping out could well be the last
action you took.
--==++AJC++==--


And that would be KIDNAPPING. To not allow me to leave unless I'm under
questioning for having committed a crime, or I'm under oath in court giving
crucial testimony, or I'm at work performing a delicate life-dependent type
of occupation, those things excepted--to not allow me to leave is flat-out
KIDNAPPING, I don't care what the law says.

How can we get this changed?

LRH


  #7  
Old December 30th, 2004, 06:03 PM
Larry R Harrison Jr
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default


"AJC" wrote in message
news
I wonder if the emergency slides will have been disengaged, if so the
jump from a DC10 door to the ground would most likely lead to broken
bones. In any case don't forget this happened in the US. With the
state of nervousness there, the likely presence of armed air marshalls
on the aircraft, and almost certainly the presence of armed police on
the ground, opening a door and jumping out could well be the last
action you took.
--==++AJC++==--


And that would be KIDNAPPING. To not allow me to leave unless I'm under
questioning for having committed a crime, or I'm under oath in court giving
crucial testimony, or I'm at work performing a delicate life-dependent type
of occupation, those things excepted--to not allow me to leave is flat-out
KIDNAPPING, I don't care what the law says.

How can we get this changed?

LRH


  #8  
Old December 30th, 2004, 06:08 PM
AJC
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

On Thu, 30 Dec 2004 11:39:29 -0500, nobody wrote:

*bicker* wrote:
My question is: isn't this kidnapping?


It would have been a violation of US law to let folks off
the aircraft without adequate security measures in place.


Where there is a will, there is a way. Remember that northwest is also the
airline that had kidnapped passengers at Detroit airport some years ago
because they were unwilling to bring airstairs to the plane and there were no
gates available due to a snow storm.

Where the airline should be held responsible is in using some inadequate
airfield. They could have diverted to Portland, Victoria or Vancouver and not
wait until they had runned out of fuel and needing to land at the nearest
piece of runway they could find.

In fact, in hindsight, they would have been better off landing at vancouver
and busing passengers to seattle, or land at victoria and hop on the ferry to seattle.

Surely this wasn't the only intl flight coming into Seattle ? How di dother
flights get handled ?


I believe one issue is that it was a DC10 and therefore unable to land
when other better equipped aircraft could have done. From what I've
read elsewhere, if it had been one of NW's new A330s they could have
landed at SEA.
--==++AJC++==--
  #9  
Old December 30th, 2004, 06:08 PM
AJC
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

On Thu, 30 Dec 2004 11:39:29 -0500, nobody wrote:

*bicker* wrote:
My question is: isn't this kidnapping?


It would have been a violation of US law to let folks off
the aircraft without adequate security measures in place.


Where there is a will, there is a way. Remember that northwest is also the
airline that had kidnapped passengers at Detroit airport some years ago
because they were unwilling to bring airstairs to the plane and there were no
gates available due to a snow storm.

Where the airline should be held responsible is in using some inadequate
airfield. They could have diverted to Portland, Victoria or Vancouver and not
wait until they had runned out of fuel and needing to land at the nearest
piece of runway they could find.

In fact, in hindsight, they would have been better off landing at vancouver
and busing passengers to seattle, or land at victoria and hop on the ferry to seattle.

Surely this wasn't the only intl flight coming into Seattle ? How di dother
flights get handled ?


I believe one issue is that it was a DC10 and therefore unable to land
when other better equipped aircraft could have done. From what I've
read elsewhere, if it had been one of NW's new A330s they could have
landed at SEA.
--==++AJC++==--
  #10  
Old December 30th, 2004, 06:40 PM
Lorzling
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

AJC wrote:

On Thu, 30 Dec 2004 11:39:29 -0500, nobody wrote:

Where the airline should be held responsible is in using some inadequate
airfield. They could have diverted to Portland, Victoria or Vancouver and not
wait until they had runned out of fuel and needing to land at the nearest
piece of runway they could find.

In fact, in hindsight, they would have been better off landing at vancouver
and busing passengers to seattle, or land at victoria and hop on the ferry to seattle.

Surely this wasn't the only intl flight coming into Seattle ? How di dother
flights get handled ?



I believe one issue is that it was a DC10 and therefore unable to land
when other better equipped aircraft could have done. From what I've
read elsewhere, if it had been one of NW's new A330s they could have
landed at SEA.

But that still doesn't explain why they couldn't have landed at an
airport equipped to deal with the customs issues. PDX had gorgeous
weather that day. They could have landed there.
 




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
My terrible Dragoman experience in Africa Nadine S. Africa 5 April 26th, 2004 06:54 PM
Trip Report LHR-DXB-SYD-OOL-SYD-WLG-AKL-WAIHEKE-AKL-SYD-DXB-LGW Howard Long Air travel 3 March 29th, 2004 12:35 AM
Trip report CPR-LAS/LAS-CPR Michael Graham Air travel 4 October 27th, 2003 01:09 AM
Air Madagascar trip report (long) Vitaly Shmatikov Africa 7 October 7th, 2003 08:05 PM
Passengers tell of Concorde horror Chanchao Air travel 7 September 22nd, 2003 04:04 AM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 01:04 PM.


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