snaxmuppet

But they could possibly be opened either on the ground (perhaps while the aircraft if in motion) or when the pressure differential is low (i.e. at low altitude ).

BertieBadger

To gently steer it back on topic, I came across my first self-upgrader the other day - from ET to CE[1] - and I thought the crew member handled it very well.

From ExpertFlyer we knew we only had one pax in the row behind us in CE, so Mrs BertieB was free to recline and so was somewhat surprised to discover that after take off there was in fact someone behind her. The crew had noticed as well and were immediately onto the situation - the attendant was unfailingly polite but equally firm that the interloper would not be allowed to remain. The passengers appealed that they were friends/colleagues and it was a shame that they couldn't sit and talk to each other given the seat was free, but the FA was absolutely firm that the he could not remain. She even offered an olive branch that it might be possible for him to come up for a short time after the meal service was completed so they could talk then.

He never did reappear that we could see, but it would be mere speculation that their need to talk to each other became less urgent once the possibility of free food and/or drink had been removed!


[1] I'm aware that some on here will regard this as no upgrade at all

Globaliser

This intrigued me, so I tried some back-of-the-envelope stuff.

Assume (using very rough approximations) that a door is about 1 yard/metre = 3 feet = 36 inches wide and 2 yards/metres = 6 feet = 72 inches tall, or about 2,600 square inches. Sea level air pressure is about 15 psi. If the pressure differential is as little as 1 psi, that's about a ton or so pushing the door shut into the frame.

Does that sound about right? What I don't know is whether the pressurisation system will create a pressure differential as soon as the engines are started and the cabin is being ventilated via bleed air, or whether the aircraft actually has to be airborne.

If those numbers are on the right track, then at cruising altitude where the cabin air pressure might be about 11 psi and the outside air pressure is about 3 psi, then that's about 9 tons keeping that door shut.

Apologies for drifting OT.

Sprodo

Write a complaint, note the seat number of the WTP+ passenger and hope that BA can link the pax by surnames to validate the story.

Personally this kind of thing doesn't really bother me, but I'd be more disappointed by the CSM / Crew attitude here and they should be pulled up on this.

IAMORGAN

On the subject of the CSM, I am not really expressing a view either way but think it’s unrealistic to expect stuff to be anonymised - that said, I’m sure BA wouldn’t take action based on an unverified web story - circumstances depending they might look into it I guess.

On the door question, some types such as the 777 also have a lock which engages / disengages at 80kts.

dougzz

I did begin with at face value, which was my attempt to say we only know one side of it. Broadly speaking I disagree with your point. If you have a team member/staff that are too angry to reason with you wait a bit and speak to them when they're calmer, thus avoiding confrontation. But in this situation with a customer that's likely to be on more flights in the future aren't you really just pushing the problem down the road for the next crew when the behaviour is repeated, possibly emboldened by previous success. If the CSM felt the situation was so volatile that anything other than ignoring the issue would create a bigger problem, then surely further action was absolutely necessary.
Again we have only the OPs version, but that reads to me much more like couldn't be bothered than anything else.

amt

Snitches get stitches.

subject2load

As others have said, this is a distasteful practice, effectively amounting to theft of services & facilities to which the passenger concerned simply has no entitlement - and for which others have, by contrast, handed over significant sums.

I’m really struggling to see why it is that the CSM felt unable to take appropriate action. What exactly does she fear ?? Are we perhaps into snowflake territory ?

When legitimately challenged by a crew member, there can only be one of two possible reactions by the rogue passenger : a) he complies, OR b) he protests.
In the case of a) the issue is instantly resolved. But if b), then the CSM should firmly but politely repeat the demand, and make it clear that (if necessary) the Captain will be informed, and that further action could well be taken after landing as a result of failure to obey an instruction by a member of crew.

Only on two occasions have I witnessed at close quarters this sort of behaviour on long-haul flights. Both were many years ago, and neither involved BA. On a British Caledonian flight, the Purser - once aware - adopted such an authoritative and resolute tone in her request that the passenger did not even attempt to argue. It was very much a case of “I’ve been rumbled”.
The second instance was on Gulf Air, where the interloper - who had come into F from the J cabin just as the doors were being closed - tried to smooth-talk his way into remaining, saying that the adjacent passenger was an old friend he had chanced upon at the airport (which did appear the case based on their conversation) and that he “will be no trouble at all, and nobody will know”. The Purser repeated the request that he return to his assigned seat, but this time there was a strong protest. The Purser then said, very calmly, that the aircraft would not be taking off until he had complied - again, a clear indication that the Captain would be informed if necessary.

For me, the incident as related by the OP raises serious doubts as to whether the CSM had been appointed to a role for which she is, quite simply, not fit.

footballfanatic

At this point though, I’d complain to BA. Might not get anywhere that you know of, but surely it will internally I’d imagine.

snaxmuppet

Regarding the door opening... OK, perhaps that was not such a good example

Nevertheless, the principle of my point still applies... someone could do something potentially dangerous.

PUCCI GALORE

I wonder if this was me? My question would be - may I see your Boarding Pass please? - if they said that did not have it. I would have asked him to look for it - in the event that he could not or would not show this, I would have checked the Ipad and sent him packing. If she didn't like it - and if there were seats available at the back in WT, I would have told her that if she wanted to fly with her husband ,she was welcome to join them There are people who honestly think that possession is nine-tenths of the law.No way.

nancypants

it can’t be you, there is absolutely *no* mention of a hairbrush

corporate-wage-slave

I was thinking, given the references to snowflakes, what would the CWS de-escalation route be here. And this is what I have come up with. BA flights already have a "yellow card" system, where disruptive passengers are given one last chance to settle down / sober up / stop misbehaving before the aircraft's commander will do something dramatic like divert to, say, DME and invite the Russian police to take the passenger in for discussions. Maybe there could be an "orange" card as well, which says something like this.

GlasgowCyclops

For me, I pay fo my seat and if I get to sit in it that is fine. If someone gets a seat at the discression of the Crew (for whatever reason) it is not my business.

Same as when I get a free upgrade. Now if the crew had refused then they did it anyway, well that is a different story and if the CSM/D didnt do it then htis will only encourage others.

PUCCI GALORE

You made me laugh out loud - for that - would you like to be a Mucci?