Go Back  FlyerTalk Forums > Travel&Dining > Travel Safety/Security > Practical Travel Safety and Security Issues
Reload this Page >

Disruptive passenger incident on AA 1561 ORD to SFO May 8 2011

Disruptive passenger incident on AA 1561 ORD to SFO May 8 2011

Old May 9, 2011, 6:21 pm
  #76  
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Programs: AA EXP
Posts: 3,049
Originally Posted by austin_modern
I agree - it becomes black when you dont follow crewmember's instructions, which is probably their catchall for "follow the rules."
I'm still not convinced on that point as I've yet to see anything that backs up the frequent misquote about having to follow all crew-member instructions when that is not what is actually stated in the FAR.
Mark_T is offline  
Old May 9, 2011, 6:33 pm
  #77  
Original Poster
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: ORD
Programs: Hilton Diamond, AA Executive Platinum, Marriott Platinum
Posts: 16
Hmmm, people were bagging on me for being a newbie and yet his only gets one response? This man could have been a woman,transvestite, or hermaphrodite of any ethnicity but usually when someone comes charging at the cockpit and it takes numerous people to restrain them, i consider it a danger. Gotta love the internet, sometimes people lose all common sense. Not sure about any other regulars but the thought of being in a downed plane might come along with being dangerous or viewing that person as a danger...
Hinsdale123 is offline  
Old May 9, 2011, 6:38 pm
  #78  
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Programs: Bonvoy Amb; AA EXP
Posts: 1,136
As far as following the directive to stop taking pictures: 1) I doubt very much that when it came down to final resolution that you would even be charged with anything unless the flight personnel were unwavering in stating that you were a security problem. 2) Practically, regardless of the ultimate outcome, this likely means getting processed and missing whatever it was that put you on the plane in the first place. 3) You would also likely get the famed "black mark" on your PNR in perpetuity. 4) Being arrested at the same time as someone being detained for charging the cockpit seems a poor choice of company.

I can see how in this stressed scenario, however, that the participants in the conflict would prefer to not have anything pointed at them - particularly something electronic.
Score8 is offline  
Old May 9, 2011, 6:44 pm
  #79  
Original Poster
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: ORD
Programs: Hilton Diamond, AA Executive Platinum, Marriott Platinum
Posts: 16
Pictures

Like I had previously said, and maybe this will clarify. People were taking pictures during and just after the incident. The issue I believe came to head with one person who was standing up, when the seatbelt sign was on and we were told all ectronics should be off. At this point we were literally already coming up the south bay,for those who fly this route a lot like I do this will make sense. The flight attendant said it to one person, to my knowledge as it was not an announcement to all. There was never any issue with cameras or photos before or after. Also it was the female FA who said this and realistically she was obviously very freaked and trying to gain control over the main cabin in particular. Dont know if this will clarify but it wasnt something that was a big issue more of an individual one.
Hinsdale123 is offline  
Old May 9, 2011, 7:10 pm
  #80  
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 3,657
Originally Posted by FriendlySkies
I am a bit confused as to why so many of these Isolated Incidents have occurred within the last few days..
Others have noted that it may simply be a matter of more people paying attention to these sorts of incidents.

It also could be simple coincidence. Sometimes a cigar is just a cigar.
jkhuggins is offline  
Old May 9, 2011, 7:35 pm
  #81  
FlyerTalk Evangelist
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Phoenix, AZ
Programs: AA Gold AAdvantage Elite, Rapids Reward
Posts: 38,296
Originally Posted by Saitek
because they are reporting these instances now, because they want to expand their Police State. And the only way to do that would be to have a bunch of incidents they can point to and say 'see!'
Why there is no FAM onboard the entire aircraft? FAM should have to protected with those passengers & the crew, too. Mental guys will eventually to being banned flying from the commercial airplanes for the life. His behaviors that he does not changes at all. I wasn't wonders to know why? TSA does not have to deployed more FAM for every aircraft during in-flight in domestic USA.
N830MH is offline  
Old May 9, 2011, 8:02 pm
  #82  
Suspended
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Posts: 62
You know...a lot has been said on this thread about whether or not the FA had the right to order the passenger to stop taking pics and threatening to have the police meet the plane if they did not stop.

Look....the situation is this: mere days after Osama Bin Laden was declared dead and the traveling public has told to be "on alert" for retaliation.... you have an American Airlines flight (one of the major carriers involved in 9/11) flying along with an apparently upset person yelling something in a foreign language making his way to the front of the aircraft.....

The passenger is in the process of being subdued and another passenger starts taking pics.

Look...believe it or not there is the belief that terrorists on 9/11 trained on how to take over airplanes.

There is the belief that terrorists are STILL studing how to take over commercial airliners.

They arent stupid...they "study" the reaction of the crew and passengers.

Now you have a passenger going crazy....making his way to the front of the plana....and in the process of being subdued, another passenger is taking pics.

What is not to say....this wasn't a "test"...see how the passengers and crew react, document what happened....the crew didnt know that the pic-taker wasnt on the sides of this "crazy" passenger.

Perhaps this "passenger" was working along-side the alleged "crazy" man and documenting on film how the crew would react? How they would restain him? Getting it all on film?

I am certainly not saying this WAS the case...but in the days after Osama Bin Laden's death when people are being told to be on alert and you have a passenger apparently trying to make his way to the front of the plane and another passenger documenting the crew's reaction on film.....it makes sense that the crew didnt want pics taken of their reaction.

Like I said...the 9/11 hijackers studied the flights...the crews...the passegers. Maybe THAT is the reason the FA threatened to call the police on a passenger taking pics of someone being restrained and how the crew reacted.

Why was the passenger filming this? So they have the crew's reaction and method or restraining a passenger on film? Who knows. But it may explain why the crew made the threat of calling the police.
flight1352 is offline  
Old May 9, 2011, 8:05 pm
  #83  
FlyerTalk Evangelist
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: STL
Programs: AA 2MM, AS MVP Gold, Hilton Diamond
Posts: 12,966
Originally Posted by Hinsdale123
Hmmm, people were bagging on me for being a newbie and yet his only gets one response? This man could have been a woman,transvestite, or hermaphrodite of any ethnicity but usually when someone comes charging at the cockpit and it takes numerous people to restrain them, i consider it a danger. Gotta love the internet, sometimes people lose all common sense. Not sure about any other regulars but the thought of being in a downed plane might come along with being dangerous or viewing that person as a danger...
I'm guessing that most here were staggered by that comment (not yours, the one you are discussing), and having some difficulty regaining their equilibrium. I know I was. Also, if you spend enough time here, you develop a sense of which members to debate and which not to debate.
gemac is offline  
Old May 9, 2011, 8:06 pm
  #84  
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: DCA / WAS
Programs: DL 2+ million/PM, YX, Marriott Plt, *wood gold, HHonors, CO Plt, UA, AA EXP, WN, AGR
Posts: 9,388
Originally Posted by Saitek
because they are reporting these instances now, because they want to expand their Police State. And the only way to do that would be to have a bunch of incidents they can point to and say 'see!'
The media is very happy to expand big government, tight restrictions on corporations and a police state because they have direct constitutional protections that others don't enjoy. Gives them more power.
Global_Hi_Flyer is offline  
Old May 9, 2011, 8:34 pm
  #85  
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: LAX
Posts: 3,267
Originally Posted by flight1352
Why was the passenger filming this? So they have the crew's reaction and method or restraining a passenger on film? Who knows. But it may explain why the crew made the threat of calling the police.
I'm film it so I could put it on facebook and achieve a measure of celebrity amongst my friends.
lobo411 is offline  
Old May 9, 2011, 9:48 pm
  #86  
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 843
Originally Posted by N830MH
Why there is no FAM onboard the entire aircraft? FAM should have to protected with those passengers & the crew, too. Mental guys will eventually to being banned flying from the commercial airplanes for the life. His behaviors that he does not changes at all. I wasn't wonders to know why? TSA does not have to deployed more FAM for every aircraft during in-flight in domestic USA.
Never a cop when you need one.
Good Guy is offline  
Old May 9, 2011, 9:58 pm
  #87  
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Programs: M&M, AA GLD, FB
Posts: 233
Originally Posted by dhuey
Even one unarmed crazy guy can be pretty dangerous when everyone is packed into a flying aluminum tube.
In the last fight of the evening featuring Reinforced Cockpit Entrance aka "The Door" vs 2-Fists, surprisingly enough, 2-Fists lost in the first round. In the post-fight interview, when asked about his sidekick "The Passengers" who held down 2-Fists during the final stages of the confrontation, "The Door" stated that even without that help, 2-Fists had absolutely no chance at all.
TamCaP is offline  
Old May 9, 2011, 10:10 pm
  #88  
A FlyerTalk Posting Legend
 
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: Berkeley, CA USA
Programs: Piggly Wiggly "Shop the Pig!" Preferred Shopper
Posts: 56,899
Originally Posted by TamCaP
In the last fight of the evening featuring Reinforced Cockpit Entrance aka "The Door" vs 2-Fists, surprisingly enough, 2-Fists lost in the first round. In the post-fight interview, when asked about his sidekick "The Passengers" who held down 2-Fists during the final stages of the confrontation, "The Door" stated that even without that help, 2-Fists had absolutely no chance at all.
I wasn't contemplating his odds against the door. I had in mind crazy guy with whatever items he could find (e.g., bottles to break) against FAs and passengers. That could get very bloody quickly without the intervention of passengers willing to take him on.
dhuey is offline  
Old May 9, 2011, 10:42 pm
  #89  
FlyerTalk Evangelist
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Phoenix, AZ
Programs: AA Gold AAdvantage Elite, Rapids Reward
Posts: 38,296
****News Flash****

The man was charges with interfering of the flight crew and etc. SO here the link:

http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/...7490DY20110510

The man was tries to open the exit doors. He could being banned flying on the commercial airplanes for existence rest his miserable life. He will sentences for 10 years in federal prisons and enjoy the times in prisons, dude.
N830MH is offline  
Old May 9, 2011, 11:57 pm
  #90  
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Programs: M&M, AA GLD, FB
Posts: 233
It seems the person was trying to open emergency door, not cockpit door. BTW, based on the information available, I could wager a guess of some sort of mental instability... in that case he doesn't need 10 years of supermax, but proper treatment and care...
TamCaP is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Manage Preferences - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service -

This site is owned, operated, and maintained by MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Designated trademarks are the property of their respective owners.