In article , Fly Guy wrote:

Kurt Ullman wrote:

I haven't heard anything definitive on what was done. Did they
deplane none of them? Or was Jet Blue just down the line?

I don't know. The only people that know are the ones that apparently
don't talk to reporters.

That makes them smarter than the average bear.


Actually, since you appareently have nearly as many unscheduled
planes as you did gates (the website indicates 30 gates) , how
can you deplane them all?

Huh?

There were ~20 extra planes trying to sandwich into 30 gates. Plus, I
am assuming many of the scheduled flights.


If the number of gates and the number of planes is roughly equal, then
doesn't that mean there's maybe 1 gate for every plane? Or close to it?

Not necessarily. I am assuming at least some of the gates were for
the Delta Connection type planes that would have no jet way, for
instance. There were probably already regularly scheduled jets sitting
there. Does the FAA or other entity require some sort of staffing level
at the gates and, if so, how were the appropriate personnel allocated?
Where there enough "drivers" to get the gates to the planes? How well
did the gates match up with the types of planes coming into the airport
(I am not familiar with jetways to know if they all would mate properly
with various flavors of Airbus and Boeing or if you maybe had some gates
that would only mate with specific kinds of airplanes). Where can they
put the planes once they move off the gates? (The main thing that
allowed IND, for instance, to take as many planes as they did
immediately following 9-11 was because of the Fed Ex ramp space
available. And that was on a nice clear day when you did not have to
keep runways, taxiways AND THEN extra ramp space free of snow.)
Just because the number of gates available is close to what is
needed, doesn't mean that the actual availability of gates is
sufficient.


And again, you continue to ignore the possible use of air stairs for
those planes that are lacking a gate.

And you keep assuming that there was a clear space to actually move
the airstairs to. ANd that there was a clear space near enough to the
terminal to get them inside in an safe manner. Or that that there was
clear space somewhere else AND a bus or some other transportation to get
them to safety. At a busier than usual airport, it isn't just a matter
of parking a plane at some random space and trucking the airstairs up
and letting groups traipse around until they find warmth.


The news reports said specifically that 20 or so were diverted from
other airports. Besides if they are unscheduled how could they be
anything BUT irregular.

By irregular, I mean that the plane in question (as in the carrier
operating the plane) has no ground operations at the airport in
question. That is what I mean by an "irregular plane".

Okay


but to arbitrarily put a time line on deplaning (in emergency
conditions) seems untenable.

I question your use of the term "emergency".
The middle of a nor'easter where you suddenly have 20 flights show
up at your doorstep with snow falling. That certainly qualifies in my
book.


Weather or infrastructure conditions that prohibit safe landing at one
airport does not constitute an "emergency" condition at a nearby "safe"
or otherwise normally-operating airport.

I beg to differ, especially in this context.

What aspect of law enforcement and police duty was being
excercised here? Could this be viewed as a level of gov't
assisting a private corporation to limit or interfere with
the liberty of the citizens on that plane?

Depends on who put them there.

No it does not. Unless you're saying that the police can play different
roles and enforce different rules / laws depending on who calls them for
service.
I am exactly saying that. They always enforce different rules and
laws depending on the situation.


If it was at the behsest of the airport so the pilot did not
do something (they felt) was rash and move the plane, then
nope.

If police are called to block the exits of a shopping mall by the
owner/operator of the mall given a situation where no crime or code
infraction is being alledged, and you are confined within the mall
against your will for 7 hours, is that not a case where some level of
gov't is violating your constitutional right to liberty / personal
freedom?
Maybe. But then you have a lock down of a school or mall where
public safety is an issue where the exact same thing happens. A case can
certainly be made that a pilot going off and moving a plane on his
accord without okay from the FAA officials responsible for the area is a
public safety issue. I don't know why they were there, any more than
you do, I was just putting out a couple of alternatives that fit the
situation.
Even assuming they were there.


What if that police car was blocking the plane's access to a free / open
gate? What argument would you put forward to support the action of the
state (as carried out by the police) in that situation?

See above.

--
People thought cybersex was a safe alternative,
until patients started presenting with sexually
acquired carpal tunnel syndrome.-Howard Berkowitz