koiraHey Siri Walk Me Premium Member join:2004-02-16 |
to jaberi
Re: Family of smokers very expensive for Sunwing flightAirline overacted. Really no need to divert. They should have continued and just fined them heavily. |
|
|
jaberi
Member
2013-Feb-3 10:32 pm
to think that not so many years ago people smoked like chimney's on the flight....what makes it more dangerous now, and were passengers and crew in danger?
the pilot makes the final decision. |
|
Gone Premium Member join:2011-01-24 Fort Erie, ON |
Gone to koira
Premium Member
2013-Feb-3 10:38 pm
to koira
said by koira:Airline overacted. Really no need to divert. They should have continued and just fined them heavily. From the way I read things, the bigger issue was how the family reacted and fought with flight attendants over the incident rather than just the smoking in itself. |
|
|
|
to jaberi
said by jaberi:what makes it more dangerous now, and were passengers and crew in danger? Post flight 797 & 9/11 world. Suffice to say airplanes have crash while the pilots troubleshoot something as simple as a light bulb, or mistaken cigar smoke as fires raged in the aircraft. They are there to fly the plane, not diagnose it, or carry out passenger interrogations. Likely the cabin crew called up to report smoke, the rest is procedure, smoke in the cabin = emergency situation. |
|
koiraHey Siri Walk Me Premium Member join:2004-02-16 |
koira to Gone
Premium Member
2013-Feb-3 10:43 pm
to Gone
said by Gone:said by koira:Airline overacted. Really no need to divert. They should have continued and just fined them heavily. From the way I read things, the bigger issue was how the family reacted and fought with flight attendants over the incident rather than just the smoking in itself. well bind them up with tyraps and carry on throw em in the slammer and fine them |
|
Gone Premium Member join:2011-01-24 Fort Erie, ON |
Gone
Premium Member
2013-Feb-3 10:46 pm
said by koira:well bind them up with tyraps and carry on throw em in the slammer and fine them As fun as that sounds, would you want to be stuck on a full three hour flight with someone bound up in the seat next to you who already didn't give a shit about anyone on the plane, and now really doesn't give a shit about anyone on the plane? |
|
koiraHey Siri Walk Me Premium Member join:2004-02-16 |
koira
Premium Member
2013-Feb-3 10:59 pm
Well given the choice of reaching my destination with slight delay vs a major diversion for a plane full of travelers, it would make sense to continue if the hooligans could be controlled. But it's not a common sense world any more is it.? |
|
|
to Gone
said by Gone:From the way I read things, the bigger issue was how the family reacted and fought with flight attendants over the incident rather than just the smoking in itself. Yep, some relevant details... quote: "... when they came out they got into a little bit of an argument with the attendants. They couldn't say where they put their cigarette butts and that caused a bit of a commotion, I guess. From there it kind of escalated with the father, the mother and the son,"
ding ding ding ding... The plane had to be searched thoroughly because the people were "screaming and swearing" and wouldn't tell the crew where they put out the butts. quote: the plane had to be searched the same way they would search for contraband items.
|
|
Gone Premium Member join:2011-01-24 Fort Erie, ON |
Gone to koira
Premium Member
2013-Feb-3 11:19 pm
to koira
said by koira:Well given the choice of reaching my destination with slight delay vs a major diversion for a plane full of travelers, it would make sense to continue if the hooligans could be controlled. But it's not a common sense world any more is it.? To which, I think it defies common sense to try and blame the airline for following procedures for dealing with combative and violent passengers (let alone three of them) than the actual people in question. Furthermore, after spending four hours in a packed-to-the-brim 737 flight from hell yesterday, I can say that I'd rather land and get on my way the next day than to spend four hours sat next to some tied up asshole who is going to make a point of just how pissed off they are. But what do I know. |
|
koiraHey Siri Walk Me Premium Member join:2004-02-16 |
koira
Premium Member
2013-Feb-3 11:26 pm
said by Gone:said by koira:Well given the choice of reaching my destination with slight delay vs a major diversion for a plane full of travelers, it would make sense to continue if the hooligans could be controlled. But it's not a common sense world any more is it.? To which, I think it defies common sense to try and blame the airline for following procedures for dealing with combative and violent passengers (let alone three of them) than the actual people in question. Furthermore, after spending four hours in a packed-to-the-brim 737 flight from hell yesterday, I can say that I'd rather land and get on my way the next day than to spend four hours sat next to some tied up asshole who is going to make a point of just how pissed off they are. But what do I know. on that note I have to agree, I wouldn't want to sit next to you either |
|
Gone Premium Member join:2011-01-24 Fort Erie, ON |
Gone
Premium Member
2013-Feb-3 11:28 pm
Nor I you, obviously. Your point, smartypants? |
|
koiraHey Siri Walk Me Premium Member join:2004-02-16 |
koira
Premium Member
2013-Feb-3 11:51 pm
My point...your rant about 4 hour flight from hell, pissed off yada yada. You're not much better than the smokers in the OP thanks |
|
Gone Premium Member join:2011-01-24 Fort Erie, ON |
Gone
Premium Member
2013-Feb-4 12:00 am
Yeah, because ranting about a redeye with a rude flight crew, the seatbelt light never turning off due to constant turbulence and a rough landing in the god forsaken hellhole known as Newark after it all happened from the comfort of my own home is the same as someone smoking in an airplane and getting into a near-fist fight with the flight crew to the point where they need to do an emergency landing to arrest the assholes. Then again, considering that your cognitive reasoning allows you to reconcile blaming the airline for what happened rather than the actual people who caused the issue, watching you come to this kind of conclusion about my flight from hell is - unfortunately - something that shouldn't surprise anyone here. Your move. |
|
nitzguy Premium Member join:2002-07-11 Sudbury, ON |
nitzguy
Premium Member
2013-Feb-4 12:24 am
said by Gone:Yeah, because ranting about a redeye with a rude flight crew, the seatbelt light never turning off due to constant turbulence and a rough landing in the god forsaken hellhole known as Newark after it all happened from the comfort of my own home is the same as someone smoking in an airplane and getting into a near-fist fight with the flight crew to the point where they need to do an emergency landing to arrest the assholes.
Then again, considering that your cognitive reasoning allows you to reconcile blaming the airline for what happened rather than the actual people who caused the issue, watching you come to this kind of conclusion about my flight from hell is - unfortunately - something that shouldn't surprise anyone here.
Your move. ....I felt turbulence on the way there....on the way back it was quite smooth...although pretty full and the attendant smashed her drink cart against my knee...granted my knee was out in the aisle so maybe I deserved it.... But redeye's are not all they're cracked up to be that's for sure. I would take it over someone doing something stupid like smoking in the washroom even though they say there are smoke detectors...and that's probably what caused the landing... |
|
Gone Premium Member join:2011-01-24 Fort Erie, ON |
Gone
Premium Member
2013-Feb-4 12:43 am
The A320 on the flight there was also a hell of a lot quieter in the cabin than the 737-800 on the way back, too. That, and they provided us with free movies and TV on the A320, whereas on the 737 we got... to pay $8 for Direct TV. Wonderful. |
|
DKSDamn Kidney Stones
join:2001-03-22 Owen Sound, ON |
to koira
said by koira:Airline overacted. Really no need to divert. They should have continued and just fined them heavily. Perfect storm. Idiot, combative passengers forced the landing then the flight crew bumped up on the Hours of Service law, requiring a 12 hour rest before continuing; shorter than it would have taken to find a fly a new crew in from Toronto. As aircraft are now all non-smoking and their ventilation systems are tuned that way (and aircraft are highly tuned systems), a mechanic from the airline had to be brought in to check for damage. And because the perps were uncooperative, the plane had to be searched for other contraband. I hope charges are laid and the arrogant idiots who did it are on the No Fly list for a long time. |
|
LazMan Premium Member join:2003-03-26 Beverly Hills, CA |
to koira
said by koira:Airline overacted. Really no need to divert. They should have continued and just fined them heavily. Well, since they wouldn't disclose what they did with the butt's, or if there was more smokes onboard; the airline didn't have much option... A fire, even a smoldering one, at altitude, rarely ends well for anyone on board... |
|
|
to DKS
said by DKS:I hope charges are laid and the arrogant idiots who did it are on the No Fly list for a long time. Something I hadn't considered. 100% on side with this idea. Plus financial penalties to compensate all parties. |
|
|
to Gone
Continental (United) ? |
|
|
corster Premium Member join:2002-02-23 Oshawa, ON |
to Gone
said by Gone:The A320 on the flight there was also a hell of a lot quieter in the cabin than the 737-800 on the way back, too. That, and they provided us with free movies and TV on the A320, whereas on the 737 we got... to pay $8 for Direct TV. Wonderful. The joys of flying a post-merger airline (assuming United-Continental?) |
|
AnavSarcastic Llama? Naw, Just Acerbic Premium Member join:2001-07-16 Dartmouth, NS |
Anav to koira
Premium Member
2013-Feb-4 9:38 am
to koira
said by koira:Airline overacted. Really no need to divert. They should have continued and just fined them heavily. I believe Canadian regulations made it necessary to land at the nearest airport. Personally I would not have landed when dropping (literally) them off over Bermuda. Cigarettes or cigarettes butts were not accounted for and thus pose a potential hazard and thus by refusing to state what they had done with them, only complicated matters and in of itself is a flight hazard. |
|
|
On board smouldering fire would get out of hand quick. I do know there is fire suppression systems in aircraft lavatories as a result of 797 and other mishaps.
However the captain would divert, no one wants to deal with a fire when there is nothing but water below. |
|
Gone Premium Member join:2011-01-24 Fort Erie, ON |
to corster
said by corster:The joys of flying a post-merger airline (assuming United-Continental?) Ding ding ding ding. To quote my father-in-law, "Never again." |
|
|
Airlines I'll always fly
Jetblue, Southwest, Virgin Atlantic, Westjet
Never again
AC, American, United, Transat |
|
Gone Premium Member join:2011-01-24 Fort Erie, ON |
Gone
Premium Member
2013-Feb-4 10:43 am
Southwest has dicked my FIL a few times in the past, but next year when I head south I'll pay more for a direct Southwest BUF-LAS flight rather than the ordeal that was United on the way back. I didn't even mention how we got stuck on the tarmac in Newark for an hour packed into a sardine can Embraer 145 because someone overfilled the plane and it needed to be drained. |
|
|
I flew the SW BUF-LAS this last summer. Packed flight but no interruptions, I don't expect frills on SW just prompt efficient service. |
|
FaxCap join:2002-05-25 Surrey, BC |
to I_H8_Spam
said by I_H8_Spam:Never again
AC, American, United, Transat I hear so many people say that about Transat yet I have flown them at least 6-8 times and never had a problem. FaxCap |
|
SteveI know your IP address
join:2001-03-10 Tustin, CA |
to koira
said by koira:Airline overacted. Really no need to divert. Canadian air transport regulations required that they divert (at least the article said). Note the same as a pilot making his own call. |
|
|
to FaxCap
said by FaxCap:said by I_H8_Spam:Never again
AC, American, United, Transat I hear so many people say that about Transat yet I have flown them at least 6-8 times and never had a problem. FaxCap Twice over the pond, '99 - First delayed for hours at Gatwick as we were returned to gate for an computer error. '05 - Delayed, then an incredible hot flight for hours, felt really stuffy, hostess was quite snippy on being asked for water. Effected about 20 rows in the middle of the plane, landed in YYZ finally fully drenched in sweat. |
|
nitzguy Premium Member join:2002-07-11 Sudbury, ON |
to I_H8_Spam
said by I_H8_Spam:Airlines I'll always fly
Jetblue, Southwest, Virgin Atlantic, Westjet
Never again
AC, American, United, Transat Considering my very low air mile count....I've never had a problem with AC. And consider the price I paid to go to vegas (Return $598 all taxes in...from Sudbury, not Toronto) it was pretty good overall, flight coming back was delayed, but that's because it was delayed in Toronto...weather related I believe that day so out of airlines control. Got free movies/tv shows on the AC flight too...bought the crummy headphones but hey at $3.25 it wasn't too bad for the flight there and back...and then I forgot them in my hoodie and they got washed...oh well memories... I guess since its my only viable option out of Sudbury I don't rail against AC like others do? lol...flew on one of their "Express" planes on the way down (not on the way back) and flight wasn't full so they asked 2 people to move to adjust the planes "ballast" I thought that was hilarious....it was a Q400 or Dash8-400 on the way down...A321 to LAS, which was tiny compared to the 747 that left the gate used for a flight to Heathrow about 4 hours before my flight left. Probably that same A321 back...and crammed into a Dash8-100 with a guy who brought along his ipad for a 50 minute flight...oh well some people . |
|