at what point is it ok to disobey the flight crew?

[Porsche-O-Phile]

I have to admit I'd be awfully tempted to pull an emergency exit and say "F this" and catch a cab to my destination. However, more likely I'd have the airline attempt to sue me for the cost of repacking the slide, maybe some FAA yokel going after my pilot certificate because I happen to have one and "ought to know better", etc.

I like the idea of people not sitting around and letting themselves get screwed over by stupid individuals, but there likely would be repercussions.

That said, I could see myself doing it anyway and just dealing with it later. I bet whomever pulled the lever would be an instant hero in the eyes of the rest of the pax and if the news media ever got hold of it, would probably be a hero in the public's eyes too.

[304065]

All you guys who say you'd blow the exit, guess what, if you even TOUCH the exit in that situation you're probably going to be ordered to NOT touch the exit by a uniformed flight crew member. Once you do that, you're right in the scope of FAR 91.11 (easy to remember the cite because it's "9-11")-

No person may assault, threaten, intimidate, or interfere with a crewmember in the performance of the crewmember's duties aboard an aircraft being operated.

And then the show starts. I highly doubt that the tradeoff is worth it, unless it's a GENUINELY life-threatening situation e.g. the automatic defibrillator is out, etc.

That said it's incredibly frustrating, particularly if small children are involved. Personally I wouldn't mind seeing legislation because it then removes the airlines from having to incur these customer service nightmares every few years.

[widgeon13]

The decision process is so onerous that making a decision based on common sense in impossible.

[fingpilot]

Today's news is that the crew was desperately trying anything to get permission to let the pax into the terminal. Not only was their own ops not playing ball, but it turns out Mesaba Airlines (a Nortwest/Delta feeder) was also not helping in any way, as they had people and equiptment at Rochester as well.

I had stated that if left to the crew (no matter how incompetant you might think they are) the pax would have been helped. My bet all along was that they were operating on DIRECT orders, and they were.

Sad story all around.

[450knotOffice]

Just as I suspected (see my post #57). Thanks Michael.

[rattlsnak]

two sides to every story. the news here reported that Mesaba was indeed offering help, but were turned down by EJ ops. Crew was indeed left handcuffed, no one arguing that, but STILL should have done something more.

Also talked with an attorney. No way anyone would get convicted for opening an exit in that situation. Arrested, yes, convicted?, not a chance..

Only one FA on board. When shes up front, or back turned, open it and bail, then start pointing fingers.


>>I stand corrected. There was another flight that came in earlier in which Mesaba did help out, but did tell this crew that they could do nothing for them.<<

[304065]

Originally Posted by rattlsnak

two sides to every story. the news here reported that Mesaba was indeed offering help, but were turned down by EJ ops. Crew was indeed left handcuffed, no one arguing that, but STILL should have done something more.

Also talked with an attorney. No way anyone would get convicted for opening an exit in that situation. Arrested, yes, convicted?, not a chance..

Only one FA on board. When shes up front, or back turned, open it and bail, then start pointing fingers.


>>I stand corrected. There was another flight that came in earlier in which Mesaba did help out, but did tell this crew that they could do nothing for them.<<

That's the trouble with Attorneys-- always rendering "legal advice" about what one should do in a particular situation. . . then there to clean up the mess when that situation turns out differently. I fail to see how one could AVOID a conviction in that situation-- no clear life/death emergency present, exit blown, jury finds the facts and the law is pretty clear-cut.

"Open it and bail?" With an 80 pound exit plug? It's probably a 30 second operation to blow the exit and the slide, and you're either the exit row pax or you move across them to blow the exit? If you come across my seat I'm thinking HUGE tort liability from a civil perspective, and "violation of statute" is one of the ways to dispense with the requirement to prove a couple of the elements of a cause of action for Negligence. . .

Best thing the crew can do in that situation is to explain what's happening. If the pilot in command is confronted with a GENUINE emergency, as that term is defined in the FARs, then he is the ultimate decisionmaker when it comes to safety of flight, and he should take action.

[tcar]

There was a recording on the radio here yesterday of the pilot (woman) trying to get the terminal (Mesaba) to let the pax in or get a bus, which Mesaba did for an earlier EJ flight.

Mesaba said no. No terminal, no bus.

[450knotOffice]

Bad situation for everyone on the plane - passengers and crew. Too bad no one called a news outlet or the police.

[450knotOffice]

ExpressJet wasn't at fault for tarmac delay, feds say
Associated Press


WASHINGTON - Federal officials said today that Houston-based ExpressJet wasn't at fault when its passengers were stranded overnight on a Minnesota airport tarmac, instead blaming another airline for refusing requests to allow the passengers to enter the airport's terminal.

Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood said an investigation by his department found that the captain of Continental Express Flight 2816 and other officials for ExpressJet, the regional air carrier that operated the flight for Continental Airlines, repeatedly pleaded to allow the passengers to deplane and enter the Rochester terminal.

There were turned down by representatives of Mesaba Airlines, who incorrectly said that the passengers couldn't be allowed inside because Transportation Security Administration personnel had left for the day, LaHood said in a statement.


That was incorrect. Passengers could have stayed in a separate "sterile" area, he said.

Mesaba was the only airline with staff still at the airport during the incident earlier this month.

The plane left Houston at 9:23 p.m. on Aug. 7, but was diverted by thunderstorms to Rochester.

Passengers were kept for about six hours waiting inside the cramped plane amid wailing babies and a smelly toilet even though they were only 50 yards from a terminal.

In the morning they were allowed to deplane. They spent about two and a half hours inside the terminal before reboarding the same plane.

They arrived in Minneapolis, their destination, after 11 a.m.

"We have determined that the Express Jet crew was not at fault. In fact, the flight crew repeatedly tried to get permission to deplane the passengers at the airport or obtain a bus for them," LaHood said.

"There was a complete lack of common sense here," the secretary added. "It's no wonder the flying public is so angry and frustrated."

Mesaba is a subsidiary of Northwest Airlines, which is a subsidiary of Delta Air Lines.

A spokesman for Mesaba parent Delta Air Lines Inc. did not immediately return a phone message seeking comment.

Continental CEO Larry Kellner said the airline is pleased the LaHood "recognized the crew's efforts to resolve the situation.

"While the result for the customers was clearly unacceptable, it is evident that the ExpressJet crew worked through the night to resolve the situation and was frustrated."

"We have processes in place to avoid these situations and those processes clearly broke down in this case," Kellner said. "We are working to ensure that doesn't happen again."