Lucifer UK

As the aircraft refuels on the stand; mobile phones are not permitting during refuelling

moeve

Well since the doors were already closed I highly doubt they were still refueling. Based on the fact that many airlines around the world don't enforce the shut off before boarding I also see this excuse as exactly that - an unproven excuse. Otherwise you would have to agree that we would have to see more than one explosion or fire every year at some airport.......

Oh right when was the last time a cell phone caused a fire at a petrol/gas station??? Since that hasn't happened and I bet that world wide there have to be millions of phones on - even being used at gas/petrol stations EVERYDAY.

Aus_Mal

They have, although it is normally static discharge from the phone rather than the actual phone radiation itself.

People seem to think that because they haven't seen something happen it doesn't happen. The "mythbusters debunked the theory" argument above proves this point well.

CCayley

That's not really the point, though, is it? You just can't have 200 or whatever passengers making their own judgments about which safety rules or crew instructions to respect and which to ignore:

"Oh I'm sure one quick ciggy while I'm in the toilet won't do any harm"

"Who cares that I couldn't help out in an emergency - I'm as entitled to this nice exit row as anyone, and even if there was a crash there'd just be utter panic anyway"

"I've seen a million safety demonstrations so no reason not to keep chatting loudly with my girlfriend during this one"

"I've never known a take-off so bumpy that my seat belt made any difference so I'll just leave it unfastened while I sort out the contents of my bag"

Where does it all end?

heartybob

The AeroSvit Antonov 24 does at least have a door, but that is where any similarity ends

phb

Re phones and gas stations.

Theoretically the phone may cause a spark. It's not the radiation or static, but the fact that there is an energy source which if shorted could create sufficient energy to ignite an explosive atmosphere.

But think about it folks. You are driving a car or bike onto the forecourt. It has a battery many times the capacity of the cell phone in your pocket, not to mention any number of potential electrical, chemical and mechanical souces of ignition. What's the biggest risk?

The real reason that cell phones are banned on forecourts is that EM radiation can interfere with weighing and measuring equipment, like that petrol pump.

I hate it when 'authorities' claim a safety case for banning and restricting some activity as they consider that if they admit the real reason then people will ignore them.

BAAZ

Exactly. When you have 200 people in a safety-critical situation, you can't rely on them all exercising their judgment. If you encounter someone who repeatedly disobeys instructions from the cabin crew, what other instructions will they not comply with?

I recall the story a year or two ago of a couple of dozen teenagers who refused to stop chatting during the safety demonstration on a LH flight, and the captain simply offloaded them all.

moeve

Ahh I see we will have to start offf loading FAs now tooo Sorry couldn't resist it - I have aready mentioned that FA do chat now days with those new demo videos and them no longer having to do the demos themselves

BAAZ

Well, not really, because the FAs' instructions are to the passengers, not to the other FAs.

Back to the original post - there must be more to this than meets the eye. As you say, the Captain wouldn't go back to the gate without a very good reason.

Bellerophon

moeve

I don’t know any details of the incident, beyond those reported in the Daily Mail, and so I can offer little in the way of comment on the incident. I would like, if I may, to comment briefly on two points you made in your posts.

Firstly, you seem very convinced that that the aircraft was still parked at the gate:

...The simple fact that they were obviously still at the gate when she turned off her phone...

... the aircraft is still at the gate (PARKED NOT MOVING)...

Now, you may be right about that or you may be wrong about it, I don’t know and can’t say.

However, you give this reason for your belief that the aircraft was still parked at the gate:

...it has to have been the case or the FA would not just been allowed to enter the cockpit on the quick...since...9/11 it is supposed to be secured by law before the aircraft leaves the gate...

...if they were already on the taxiway - then what the H*** was the FA doing opening the door to the cockpit anyway! Post 9/11 regulations require those doors to be secured BEFORE leaving the gate!..

No such inference – that the aircraft must still be parked at the gate - can validly be drawn from the fact that the FA entered the Flight Deck. I won’t say anything further about BA’s flight-deck-entry security procedures beyond saying there is no ban on cabin crew entering the flight deck just because the aircraft has taxied from the gate.

I stress again that I am not commenting on the incident in question, about which I know little, but permit me to make this point.

BA cabin crew are well aware that they work in a customer service industry, and the vast majority of them try very hard to make their passengers’ journeys as pleasant as possible.

They also are aware that they have important safety responsibilities, which sometimes require them to ask passengers to follow safety requirements which may seem trivial or irksome.

If they ask a passenger to do something, they’re not doing it to be awkward or because they feel like it, they’re doing it because they are obliged to do so, and the overwhelming majority of passengers are content to comply.

The occasional passenger, who repeatedly refuses to comply with safety instructions, can cause a lot of aggravation and distraction at a busy time, and will quickly be informed of the consequences of not complying. Should they still deliberately refuse to comply with a safety request, then action will be taken. BA takes a firm line in these matters, and does not bluff.


...I really cannot believe a Capt would return to the gate (which costs money) just because....she won't turn off her phone...

Oddly enough, the last passenger I returned to the gate to offload didn’t believe that either, right until the moment the aircraft door re-opened and three large Police Officers appeared.


Best Regards

Bellerophon

aliceathome

I don't care how important anyone thinks they are or how terribly "urgent" their conversation is. Just turn the damn phone/blackberry/whatever off. i don't know or care about how it effects the flight systems, or not. The rule is to turn it off and I don't want to have to listen to your conversation anyway.

I was once, for my many sins, on an AA flight in F, and the guy next to me was allowed to continue on his phone throughout takeoff because, when asked to turn it off he just flatly refused. All I could think was that it wouldn't happen on BA.

O/T - I'm must confess to being one of those people who gets the Quiet Carriage on the train and is then enraged by the people who think that 'just one call" won't make any difference. And I always (politely, promise) apologise for disturbing them and point out that they're in a Quiet Zone. About 50% of people "didn't notice" the HUGE blue signs on every window, door and divider and stop their call. About 40% get nasty and abusive and the other 10% just ignore me and carry on. One day I will just go mad and start confiscating phones and throwing them out of the window...

Stez

Careful that it doesn't bounce off the window and knock you out on the head.

aliceathome

Good tip. Thanks!

goingnow

About 50% of people "didn't notice" the HUGE blue signs on every window, door and divider and stop their call.

moeve

This will be my last post on this matter but I do want to say that I find it a very sorry situtation that many of you cannot put yourself into this womans situation that she might very well have had a very important call to deal with. I hope some of YOU are caught in such a situation too one day and have to deal with the same kind of attitude.

The FA s it is terrible to see that some of you think you cannot do your job properly if your passengers don't drop to their knees at your immeadiate command. To assume a person will not co operate in a real emergancy just because they ingnore your objection to a phone call BEFORE take off is rediculous and you know it. Take it from someone who has been in a REAL emrgancy - that ist the criteria you should be looking for. I have seen grown men climb over seats and everything or anyone in their way to get to the exists.