Boston pilot threatens to evacuate the aircraft in 60 seconds

TangoWhiskey

TangoWhiskey

Touchdown! Greaser!
Joined
Feb 23, 2005
Messages
14,210
Location
Midlothian, TX
Display Name
Display name:
3Green
JFK pilot threatens to evacuate the aircraft in 60 seconds

Did you guys see this story and audio from LiveATC.net, where a jet captain threatened ATC that he was going to evacuate the aircraft in sixty seconds if they wouldn't tell him why security and emergency vehicles converged on his plane?

NBC had it and video on the national morning news.

Edit: Correction to title. Happened Monday at JFK, not Boston. Involved an AA and FinnAir jet that were held by security and diverted back to the ramp after phoned in threats. It was the AA pilot that got testy with ATC.
 
Last edited:
Once again, the TSA potentially puts people at risk. I'll bet that the pilot will get a stern talking-to by one of the "authorities".
 
Kudos to the pilot for demanding to know WTF.

Hopefully he won't be chastised.
 
I found the raw audio on Live ATC (1900Z, JFK, 9/17); I edited and compressed for time (the clip below transpired over a 20 minute period).
 

Attachments

  • KJFK-Twr-Sep-17-2012-1900Z-AA24-TIME_COMPRESSED.mp3
    2.4 MB · Views: 206
wsuffa said:
Once again, the TSA potentially puts people at risk. I'll bet that the pilot will get a stern talking-to by one of the "authorities".
Click to expand...

Read the article. Didn't see any mention of TSA in there. So how are they potentially putting people at risk?
 
TangoWhiskey said:
I found the raw audio on Live ATC (1900Z, JFK, 9/17); I edited and compressed for time (the clip below transpired over a 20 minute period).
Click to expand...

Interesting. I can see where the Captain would be stressed. His duty is to the safety of his passengers and he doesn't have information to make any decisions.

I'm sort of surprised that there's no codeword that ATC can use to advise a pilot "You have a security problem. We <meaning the government, not necessarily ATC> are taking control and responsibility. Sit there and do what you're told" or something similar.
 
TMetzinger said:
I'm sort of surprised that there's no codeword that ATC can use to advise a pilot "You have a security problem. We <meaning the government, not necessarily ATC> are taking control and responsibility. Sit there and do what you're told" or something similar.
Click to expand...

Like the old hijack code word, "American FLIGHT 24"?
 
Last edited:
TMetzinger said:
Interesting. I can see where the Captain would be stressed. His duty is to the safety of his passengers and he doesn't have information to make any decisions.
Click to expand...

Although, when you're told both you and the airplane next to you have been told to hold there, it's a pretty good guess it has nothing to do with visible fire or something... there's something more involved going on.
 
JB1842 said:
Read the article. Didn't see any mention of TSA in there. So how are they potentially putting people at risk?
Click to expand...

Who do you think was ultimately making the decision not to tell them?

Suppose there really WAS some kind of explosive on board and they decided to hold everyone on-board instead of telling them so they could evacuate?
 
Last edited:
wsuffa said:
Once again, the TSA potentially puts people at risk. I'll bet that the pilot will get a stern talking-to by one of the "authorities".
Click to expand...

So the pilot gets into a load of trouble for eliminating the possibility of another airliner cruise missile?

Possible terrorist onboard.
Evacuate the airplane.
Nobody at all onboard anymore.
The plane won't go fly off by itself and knock another building over.

If it's about stopping airliner cruise missiles, getting everyone off the plane on the ground seems like one of the best preventative measures possible. If it's about touchy feely gustappo nonsense, the pilot will get burned at the stake for being the bad guy for eliminating the possibility of a cruise missile building buster.

Fruitcakes, the whole lot of them.
 
Gotta wonder if he would have popped the doors after 60 seconds... she did get back to him in about 45 seconds from his "you've got 60 seconds" demand.
 
The last people the gov't gestapo considers are often the only people in danger.
 
Hope the guy doesn't get in trouble for standing up for his pax. Finally someone with a clue.
 
"Either you do as I say or I'm going to evacuate...you have 60 seconds."



ummmmm. I see a problem here. Evacuating is a thing you in the name of safety. Not a lever to bargain with to get your way. And WTF? He want's answers but can't be bothered to call the number given?

BTW, a code word would be nice to have in this situation.
 
If you're surrounded by emergency vehicles and have no idea what's going on, I can see the thought process...

There's something wrong with the airplane.
Get the passengers off the airplane.
Don't ask me to call a ****ing phone number. Tell me what the **** is going on.
 
TSA has nothing to do with this, situation like this, it's Port Uthority Police and FBI take the lead.
 
Captain said:
And WTF? He want's answers but can't be bothered to call the number given?
Click to expand...

Respectfully, does the 767 MEL have a phone listed?

Too many thespians in the security world.

I say, nice work, Chris!
 
Last edited:
TangoWhiskey said:
I found the raw audio on Live ATC (1900Z, JFK, 9/17); I edited and compressed for time (the clip below transpired over a 20 minute period).
Click to expand...

Thanks, Troy. Very interesting. I think the TSA and DHS need to understand what PIC means.
 
Very strange. Anyone know why those vehicles were there?
 
Captain said:
"Either you do as I say or I'm going to evacuate...you have 60 seconds."



ummmmm. I see a problem here. Evacuating is a thing you in the name of safety. Not a lever to bargain with to get your way. And WTF? He want's answers but can't be bothered to call the number given?

BTW, a code word would be nice to have in this situation.
Click to expand...

He's PIC, it's his prerogative.
 
There was an anonymous call that there was a hi jacked and a bomb on the AA flight and the Finair flight. So protocol is get the planes out I the isolated part of the field. Like I said before, TSA has no say over this situation, PAPD and FBI have point in a situation like this. Should they have told the pilot what was going on, yes. But if the pilot would have evacuated the plane, yeah he would have been in some hot water.
 
nddons said:
Thanks, Troy. Very interesting. I think the TSA and DHS need to understand what PIC means.
Click to expand...

They don't know or care. As far as they are concerned, they are god. Unfortunately, there is nobody who will tell these idiots that their positions only exist to serve the people...not vice-versa.
 
airguy said:
He's PIC, it's his prerogative.
Click to expand...


No it isn't. An evacuation is a dangerous maneuver in itself. People will get hurt in the process.

An evacuation is not a threat you use to get info you want. Giving ATC a 60 second limit to comply or he's going to hurt passengers is off the chart crazy.

Look, I agree the guy needed to know that state of his aircraft. If there a bomb or something else onboard he needs to know. I do not dispute that. But the way that Captain chose to handle the situation is far from how myself, or any other level headed Captain, would have. Poor job.
 
I was thinking of why they couldn't get out:

Remember that movie Speed? Dennis Hopper's character said he was going to blow the bus up if anybody gets off. Perhaps the "authorities" believe a similar situation is unfolding in these cases? Meaning, if anybody gets off the plane, the ter'rist is gonna bomb the thing? Perhaps they are trying to save lives by not messing with the ter'rist's rules. Alternatively, they might be trying to prevent an explosion that may cause damages to things nearby.


Also, air marshalls still fly on planes today? I forgot to look on my last commercial flight. I imagine they look a little obvious.
 
The Port Authority Police received a phoned threat that hijackers wearing gas masks were hiding in the wheel wells of the American Airlines plane, but the information was vague, sources said.
Click to expand...

And they found this plausible?
 
timwinters said:
And they found this plausible?
Click to expand...

It's awful cold up there. Unless they were suited up like a HALO jumper, they would have been useless. Also, I don't know how much available space is in those wheelwells, but I do know that they don't waste space in airplane design.
 
At first glance, I thought is might be a case of extreme flatulence on the part of a crew member who had too many Boston Baked Beans. :eek:
 
Captain said:
No it isn't. An evacuation is a dangerous maneuver in itself. People will get hurt in the process.

An evacuation is not a threat you use to get info you want. Giving ATC a 60 second limit to comply or he's going to hurt passengers is off the chart crazy.

Look, I agree the guy needed to know that state of his aircraft. If there a bomb or something else onboard he needs to know. I do not dispute that. But the way that Captain chose to handle the situation is far from how myself, or any other level headed Captain, would have. Poor job.
Click to expand...

Nope - it's still his prerogative as PIC. I can declare an emergency and deviate from the FAR's if I wish, but that too is "dangerous" in that the FAA may violate me if they disagree with my decision - but the decision is still mine to make. The captain is in charge of the aircraft, he gets the final vote on what happens with the aircraft, period, end of story. He may be second-guessed and called on the carpet later, but he still gets the final vote in the heat of battle. If he decides that evacuating the airplane is the best course of action and Grandma breaks a hip on the slide, the company will be responsible for the liability and will certainly want to discuss it with the pilot, but it's still the pilots duty to make that call.

Pilot In Command does not mean Pilot In Command Unless Somebody Else Decides They Know Better. It means Pilot In Command.

Don't misunderstand me, I'm not agreeing that this was the best or wisest course of action - but it is nonetheless his call to make. His "Career Dissipation Light" might be flashing brightly right now, but that's part of the responsibility you assume with the title. If you make a bad decision you have to take the heat for it - but it's still your right to make that decision as PIC.
 
Last edited:
I don't think the 'career dissipation light' is blinking. He didn't evacuate after all. I'm just speaking to the concept of threatening an evac. That and that alone is not a tool in the tool belt.

I fully support PIC authority and if any Captain feels its in the interest of safety to blow the slides then by all means take charge and do what you need to do. I'm not going to second guess it.

But when an evac is used as an ultimatum to get your way I think we've left the rails of what PIC authority means.


Again, from the tape, "I'm the Captain of an airliner. I need to know what's going on. (all fine so far) If I'm not told what's going on then I'm going to evacuate the aircraft...you have 60 seconds." (not fine IMO)

My only issue is that last sentence.
 
That last sentence would certainly be up for debate, but that has to be an "after-the-fact" debate. Sort of the same thing as "You have to be alive to get in trouble", to borrow from the Cirrus thread.

It's been many years now but I distinctly remember hearing an aircraft on approach frequency using "PAN PAN PAN" and requesting priority handling due to some problem, they were asked if they were declaring an emergency and the pilot replied "I will declare an emergency if you deny priority handling." They got the priority handling and he didn't declare an emergency (and approach did not declare it FOR him, which I thought was strange). I would put both those situations in the same bucket, both pilots used the threat of further action (which was legally available to them, even if not necessary or even advisable) to get their way.
 
Last edited:
Captain said:
Again, from the tape, "I'm the Captain of an airliner. I need to know what's going on. (all fine so far) If I'm not told what's going on then I'm going to evacuate the aircraft...you have 60 seconds." (not fine IMO)

My only issue is that last sentence.
Click to expand...

I think he had reason to suspect there was a bomb on the aircraft and wanted to get everyone the heck out of there. He also had reason to suspect that the law enforcement was not communicating properly with ATC. If you're parked in a remote area and surrounded by LEO's with flashing lights, the cat's already out of the bag. There is no good reason for them not to tell him what is happening, or at least give him very specific directions and clue him in on the situation.

I don't blame him one bit. Its his ship, passengers and if he suspects the plane is going to blow up he has the duty to evacuate it. If ATC acts like they don't know what's going on, he has emergency authority to disregard them. If they assigned you an altitude that would put you into the side of a mountain, you wouldn't listen would you? If you were arguing about it, you might say "i'll go to that altitude, but I believe there is terrain ahead and you have 60 seconds to put your supervisor on the radio and straighten this out or I am declaring an emergency and climbing due to terrain"
 
Last edited:
TangoWhiskey said:
Like the old hijack code word, "American FLIGHT 24"?
Click to expand...

I'm not aware of "Flight" ever being a code word for Hijack. I am aware of the use of the word "Trip" followed by the flight number as having been a code word.
Also most company operations manuals still have a code word and status words for bomb warning situations. My company would have given me an ACARS message with that in there. I guess AA is not up to speed on this.
 
HerrGruyere said:
I was thinking of why they couldn't get out:

Remember that movie Speed? Dennis Hopper's character said he was going to blow the bus up if anybody gets off. Perhaps the "authorities" believe a similar situation is unfolding in these cases? Meaning, if anybody gets off the plane, the ter'rist is gonna bomb the thing? Perhaps they are trying to save lives by not messing with the ter'rist's rules. Alternatively, they might be trying to prevent an explosion that may cause damages to things nearby.


Also, air marshalls still fly on planes today? I forgot to look on my last commercial flight. I imagine they look a little obvious.
Click to expand...
Yes there are still air marhalls, and I bet you cant locate them. But if you know what to look for then maybe.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top