Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss
ETOPS and Visas
9 views
Skip to first unread message
JF Mezei
Dec 13, 2011, 2:24:43 AM12/13/11
to
Recently, there was an incident with 2 RIM executives being too rowdy on
an Air Canada flight between Toronto and Beijing.
A newspaper article briefly (before it was pulled) showed a picture of
the aircraft's navigation display as well as lot of "colour" to the
story of the 2 drunks.
The plane was on a arctic/polar route, probably north west of Inuvik and
they decided to head south and land in Vancouver instead fo Anchorage
because many passengers were chinese and did not have visas to enter the
USA.
I suspect pilots also had duty limits in their mind and realised that if
they landed anywhere to unload those 2 pax, they wouldn't be able to
complete the flight anyways so going to a large base would then make
sense since pax could be accomodated with another plane/crew.
In the case of ETOPS operations, are pilots still forced to land at the
nearest airport due to loss of engine ? Or do they now have a bit more
flxibility to choose where they will land in order to reduce immigration
issues, or reach an airport with better maintenance/hotels etc ?
If you're certified for 240 minutes on one engine, shouldn't you be able
to use perhaps at least half of it to reach a more suitable airport
instead of landing asap ?
Also, are there treaties which isolate/protect passengers who land due
to ETOPS emergency. Say a chinese dissident is flying from Canada to
Singapore, and the plane is forced to land in China. Would he get any
protection or would the chinese be able to arrest him the minute the
plane landed ?
--
misc.travel.air-industry is a moderated newsgroup. Please mail messages to
mt...@airinfo.aero, and see http://mtai.airinfo.aero for the FAQ and policies.
an Air Canada flight between Toronto and Beijing.
A newspaper article briefly (before it was pulled) showed a picture of
the aircraft's navigation display as well as lot of "colour" to the
story of the 2 drunks.
The plane was on a arctic/polar route, probably north west of Inuvik and
they decided to head south and land in Vancouver instead fo Anchorage
because many passengers were chinese and did not have visas to enter the
USA.
I suspect pilots also had duty limits in their mind and realised that if
they landed anywhere to unload those 2 pax, they wouldn't be able to
complete the flight anyways so going to a large base would then make
sense since pax could be accomodated with another plane/crew.
In the case of ETOPS operations, are pilots still forced to land at the
nearest airport due to loss of engine ? Or do they now have a bit more
flxibility to choose where they will land in order to reduce immigration
issues, or reach an airport with better maintenance/hotels etc ?
If you're certified for 240 minutes on one engine, shouldn't you be able
to use perhaps at least half of it to reach a more suitable airport
instead of landing asap ?
Also, are there treaties which isolate/protect passengers who land due
to ETOPS emergency. Say a chinese dissident is flying from Canada to
Singapore, and the plane is forced to land in China. Would he get any
protection or would the chinese be able to arrest him the minute the
plane landed ?
--
misc.travel.air-industry is a moderated newsgroup. Please mail messages to
mt...@airinfo.aero, and see http://mtai.airinfo.aero for the FAQ and policies.
JF Mezei
Dec 13, 2011, 6:16:11 PM12/13/11
to
TW, Canadian Business re-instated the article.
http://www.canadianbusiness.com/blog/tech/61566--drunk-ex-rim-execs-went-totally-off-the-deep-end-on-flight-says-eyewitness
The plane was well north of the northern coast of canada/alaska.
Returning to Vancouver was a HUGE detour and very costly.
For such flights. especially with the more liberal ETOPS, shouldn't
airlines have on-board ways of dealing with rowdy passengers instead of
having a very costly diversion ?
http://www.canadianbusiness.com/blog/tech/61566--drunk-ex-rim-execs-went-totally-off-the-deep-end-on-flight-says-eyewitness
The plane was well north of the northern coast of canada/alaska.
Returning to Vancouver was a HUGE detour and very costly.
For such flights. especially with the more liberal ETOPS, shouldn't
airlines have on-board ways of dealing with rowdy passengers instead of
having a very costly diversion ?
Robin Johnson
Dec 14, 2011, 1:40:04 AM12/14/11
to
On Dec 14, 10:16 am, JF Mezei <jfmezei.spam...@vaxination.ca> wrote:
> TW, Canadian Business re-instated the article.
>
> http://www.canadianbusiness.com/blog/tech/61566--drunk-ex-rim-execs-w...
> TW, Canadian Business re-instated the article.
>
>
I suppose depressurising, and chucking them out is out of the
question.
More to the point, if the plane really needed to land, like if one
engine was out,
and had to land in US territory, what would have happened?
Obviously, there would have been a lengthy ground delay, while either
the crew was rested sufficiently to continue the flight, or another
crew (or aircraft) arrived to take passengers on.
There's few alternative airlines on routes from Alaska to the Orient
these days.
So, what happens to 200 or more transit passengers without US visas?
Has this actually happened. I've been aboard non-US carriers making
transit stops on US territory, and as far as I can see there are no
rules to cover this.
matt weber
Dec 14, 2011, 5:00:36 PM12/14/11
to
On Tue, 13 Dec 2011 22:40:04 -0800 (PST), Robin Johnson
<rerjo...@gmail.com> wrote:
>On Dec 14, 10:16 am, JF Mezei <jfmezei.spam...@vaxination.ca> wrote:
>> TW, Canadian Business re-instated the article.
>>
>> http://www.canadianbusiness.com/blog/tech/61566--drunk-ex-rim-execs-w...
>>
>I suppose depressurising, and chucking them out is out of the
>question.
>More to the point, if the plane really needed to land, like if one
>engine was out,
>and had to land in US territory, what would have happened?
>Obviously, there would have been a lengthy ground delay, while either
>the crew was rested sufficiently to continue the flight, or another
>crew (or aircraft) arrived to take passengers on.
>There's few alternative airlines on routes from Alaska to the Orient
>these days.
>So, what happens to 200 or more transit passengers without US visas?
>Has this actually happened. I've been aboard non-US carriers making
>transit stops on US territory, and as far as I can see there are no
>rules to cover this.
It goes back about 20 years ago, but I remember an BA flight from NRT
<rerjo...@gmail.com> wrote:
>On Dec 14, 10:16 am, JF Mezei <jfmezei.spam...@vaxination.ca> wrote:
>> TW, Canadian Business re-instated the article.
>>
>> http://www.canadianbusiness.com/blog/tech/61566--drunk-ex-rim-execs-w...
>>
>I suppose depressurising, and chucking them out is out of the
>question.
>More to the point, if the plane really needed to land, like if one
>engine was out,
>and had to land in US territory, what would have happened?
>Obviously, there would have been a lengthy ground delay, while either
>the crew was rested sufficiently to continue the flight, or another
>crew (or aircraft) arrived to take passengers on.
>There's few alternative airlines on routes from Alaska to the Orient
>these days.
>So, what happens to 200 or more transit passengers without US visas?
>Has this actually happened. I've been aboard non-US carriers making
>transit stops on US territory, and as far as I can see there are no
>rules to cover this.
to LHR that stopped in ANC. Due to a major foulup the day before, the
preceding day's flight (which carried the crew for the next leg), had
arrived literally only a few hours earlier. It was during the Exxon
Valdez snafu, so there were no rooms available in Anchorage. They had
about 250 passengers literally camped out in the transit area at ANC
for about 20 hours waiting for the crew for the ANC-LHR sector to be
properly rested. I know about because I happened to be flying the
other way (ANC-NRT) that day, and had to go through the crowd to get
on board the aircraft.
0 new messages