American Airlines security incident....

Cap'n Jack

Cap'n Jack

Final Approach
Joined
Jun 25, 2006
Messages
8,783
Location
Nebraska
Display Name
Display name:
Cap'n Jack
...was someone with an antique camera

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...wJmRqFAqLPqmLM_xOFPREQfWFg85h8yvN8Y9MigHLeSyQ

TL;DR
  • The 'bomb scare' that caused an emergency landing at LaGuardia Airport in Queens was triggered by a passenger adjusting their camera
  • The American Airlines Flight 4817, coming from Indianapolis, was forced to make an emergency landing at the Queens airport around 3 pm on Saturday
  • The incident led to the 'suspicious passenger' being taken into custody for hours
  • The News reports that the 'bomber' in question was in fact a vintage camera aficionado, with the woman reporting him ultimately making a mistake
 
Cap'n Jack said:
...was someone with an antique camera

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...wJmRqFAqLPqmLM_xOFPREQfWFg85h8yvN8Y9MigHLeSyQ

TL;DR
  • The 'bomb scare' that caused an emergency landing at LaGuardia Airport in Queens was triggered by a passenger adjusting their camera
  • The American Airlines Flight 4817, coming from Indianapolis, was forced to make an emergency landing at the Queens airport around 3 pm on Saturday
  • The incident led to the 'suspicious passenger' being taken into custody for hours
  • The News reports that the 'bomber' in question was in fact a vintage camera aficionado, with the woman reporting him ultimately making a mistake
Click to expand...

I hope the poor guy at least got a free upgrade on his next flight.
 
Last edited:
Now I want to see what a vintage camera looks like. The back seat tray probably isn't the best work bench.
 
Is the firefighter detaining the camera buff in those photos?

I didn’t know that a firefighter’s job includes apprehending and detaining a suspect.
 
"The woman believed he was searching for bomb instructions. And when he retrieved a camera and began tinkering with it, she was convinced it was a bomb"

This woman frankly shouldn't be permitted out in public unsupervised. I bet she'll face zero repercussions for harassing this poor guy.
 
Katamarino said:
"The woman believed he was searching for bomb instructions. And when he retrieved a camera and began tinkering with it, she was convinced it was a bomb"

This woman frankly shouldn't be permitted out in public unsupervised. I bet she'll face zero repercussions for harassing this poor guy.
Click to expand...

She'll get rewarded for saying something. "If you see something..."
 
NoHeat said:
Is the firefighter detaining the camera buff in those photos?

I didn’t know that a firefighter’s job includes apprehending and detaining a suspect.
Click to expand...

I'm betting those 2 are Homeland Security and just wearing bunker gear as some sort of protocol.
 
NoHeat said:
Is the firefighter detaining the camera buff in those photos?

I didn’t know that a firefighter’s job includes apprehending and detaining a suspect.
Click to expand...
I was able to see a frame that showed the back of his coat. "ARFF" across the top, and "PAPD" (Port Authority PD) across the bottom.
 
wsuffa said:
She'll get rewarded for saying something. "If you see something..."
Click to expand...
There is no consistency.

I saw a backpack in an unused gate area once (not long after the the Boston Marathon bombing). After 30 minutes and nobody going anywhere near it, I figured I should mention it (announcements over the PA every 15 minutes saying if you see any unattended bags to call security). I explained the situation and the guy said “what do you want me to do about it?”
 
donjohnston said:
There is no consistency.

I saw a backpack in an unused gate area once (not long after the the Boston Marathon bombing). After 30 minutes and nobody going anywhere near it, I figured I should mention it (announcements over the PA every 15 minutes saying if you see any unattended bags to call security). I explained the situation and the guy said “what do you want me to do about it?”
Click to expand...

The proper answer is 'your effing job' then demand a supervisor.

If they want to make up all these stupid rules, the least we can do is make them enforce them.
 
Journalist's guide to bomb identification:
bomb600.jpg 1328671_050716-professormath.jpg
 

Attachments

  • Brownie.HawkEye.1024.jpg
    Brownie.HawkEye.1024.jpg
    53 KB · Views: 56
  • CinemasterII.1024.jpg
    CinemasterII.1024.jpg
    57.1 KB · Views: 52
Cap'n Jack said:
What has that to do with this instance? AFAIK, it wasn't a journalist that couldn't differentiate between a camera and a bomb.
Click to expand...
Is joke, comrade :)
 
I installed a tankless electric water heater last month, and without the cover that thing would make a perfect bomb prop for a movie. Had all the cliche parts, a red wire, a digital display, a mysterious tube.
 

Attachments

  • images.jpeg
    images.jpeg
    11.1 KB · Views: 94

I have the "movie" camera on the right, used it to make a movie in grade school.. No electronics, just wind it up and go..
 
I see people with phones on silent, not in airplane mode once advised. Get out those cuffs.
 
The next time there is a "Can I take XXX through airport security?" question, we should link this thread.:rolleyes:
 
Katamarino said:
"The woman believed he was searching for bomb instructions. And when he retrieved a camera and began tinkering with it, she was convinced it was a bomb"

This woman frankly shouldn't be permitted out in public unsupervised. I bet she'll face zero repercussions for harassing this poor guy.
Click to expand...

Her name should be released, so we can ridicule her abject stupidity.
 
I don't blame the passenger for this one. The whole concept of "see something say something" is silly. Much better instructions to passengers would be "sit down and be quiet." As far as the reaction goes, it's just stupid. You think you might have a terrorist on an airplane carrying an unknown device, and you're going to fly it over the highest population density city in the country? If they really thought there was a problem, they should've made up some story about a problem with the landing gear, diverted to Stewart, and made a normal exit at the terminal.

The problem isn't the passengers. The problem is the groups managing this silliness.
 
I once accidentally brought 4 printed copies of this game manual on a plane from bombmanual.com in my laptop bag:
Nfnt6GS.png
 
I miss the pre-covid days, where the most dangerous things in the air was software written by Boeing, engines built by GE, and people flying light planes with gopros stapled all over them.
 
Albany Tom said:
I don't blame the passenger for this one. The whole concept of "see something say something" is silly. Much better instructions to passengers would be "sit down and be quiet." As far as the reaction goes, it's just stupid. You think you might have a terrorist on an airplane carrying an unknown device, and you're going to fly it over the highest population density city in the country? If they really thought there was a problem, they should've made up some story about a problem with the landing gear, diverted to Stewart, and made a normal exit at the terminal.

The problem isn't the passengers. The problem is the groups managing this silliness.
Click to expand...

Not defending the response to this one, but 12/22/2001 could have been much different without a passenger saying something after seeing something.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richard_Reid

It can be a fine line between an under reaction, the correct reaction and an over reaction. And if you're going to be wrong, which way would you rather err?
 
Albany Tom said:
I miss the pre-covid days, where the most dangerous things in the air was software written by Boeing, engines built by GE, and people flying light planes with gopros stapled all over them.
Click to expand...
GE's software wasn't all that great either. I interviewed at GE when the 757/767 was being designed and they were doing some of the control computers. Originally, it was thought that the design of the 757/767 was going to require these stability augmentation systems in order to maintain flight. I didn't end up taking the job. I was happy later on when I found out that initial testing at Boeing decided they weren't necessary. There were two of the units. If one failed, the other took over. If both failed, the error was written to NVRAM so that the NTSB could recover it from the wreckage.
 
donjohnston said:
Not defending the response to this one, but 12/22/2001 could have been much different without a passenger saying something after seeing something.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richard_Reid

It can be a fine line between an under reaction, the correct reaction and an over reaction. And if you're going to be wrong, which way would you rather err?
Click to expand...

Yeah, I think there were a couple of incidents like that. But in that case, and I believe others, it was an ad-hoc coalition of passengers, working together and with flight attendants, that solved the problem. A clear and present danger that was obvious to multiple people. I believe there was smoke involved. As compared to one person seeing something a little weird and reporting it. That said, it's also possible that the airlines and TSA get 50 false alarms every day, and ignore most of them...but that still speaks to a problem with the system.
 
All good points. But one has to wonder what kind of investigation of the suspicious behavior took place while aloft in this recent case. Let’s say someone observes another individual with a device like this, which they don’t recognize, but suspect to be a bomb. They report it to the crew, and the crew accepts the claim enough to call ahead for law enforcement response at landing (did they divert?). So until landing, they just fly on their way, and leave the “suspect” to himself, and his device/bomb? Really?
 
The reaction is much like when we had an FRZ penetration by a 152. Rather than telling everybody to remain in place and stay away from the windows, we had them all evacuating into the streets. It by and large INCREASED the risk.
 
flyingron said:
The reaction is much like when we had an FRZ penetration by a 152. Rather than telling everybody to remain in place and stay away from the windows, we had them all evacuating into the streets. It by and large INCREASED the risk.
Click to expand...

Like when my parents said...''Don't touch this red button.!!'' :lol::lol:
 
Seth.A said:
I love that this woman thought that during the flight is when someone would be looking up bomb making instructions
Click to expand...
That was my thought. I didn't realize bombs came with instructions. Learn something every day (NOT).
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top