Amsterdam-Seattle flight: storm the exits?

Some Guy wrote:

Which airline was that - North West? Or was it KLM metal?

I guess it doesn't matter.


It was an NWA DC-10, flight 33.

You would think that the cost of having a big plane taken out of
service and throwing a monkey wrench into flight scheduling, and also
probably throwing the crew into limbo (do they get paid during this 18
hours? Does this count as work or "rest" for them?).


IIRC, NWA pilots get paid for flying time only. The FAA has cracked down on the
definition of rest time - this would not count as rest.

Yes, dropping a plane out of service for a couple of days unscheduled can be a
big problem.


The cost of this incident would theoretically force the airline to
make the best decision possible to avoid this, and once it happens to
make it as short as possible.


You would think so, wouldn't you?

Aren't all Airline companies always in contact with their planes at
all times, from a central location? If so, aren't the controllers in
a position to determine the best diversion in a case like this?


The pilots were certainly in contact with NWA Dispatch the entire time. In the
air they have dedicated company radio frequencies and if the plane is new
enough, datalink messages. On the ground they can use their personal cell
phones. Satcom voice calls may or may not be disabled within the domestic US.


Instead, it seems the pilots were flying by the seat of their pants,
with no direction from head office.

No way this was a pilot call. The decision to land at Moses Lake was probably
made by Dispatch. But as the hours passed, you can bet it went all the way up
the top of the company. That's why there's no excuse for what happened.

Some Guy wrote:

Which airline was that - North West? Or was it KLM metal?

I guess it doesn't matter.


It was an NWA DC-10, flight 33.

You would think that the cost of having a big plane taken out of
service and throwing a monkey wrench into flight scheduling, and also
probably throwing the crew into limbo (do they get paid during this 18
hours? Does this count as work or "rest" for them?).


IIRC, NWA pilots get paid for flying time only. The FAA has cracked down on the
definition of rest time - this would not count as rest.

Yes, dropping a plane out of service for a couple of days unscheduled can be a
big problem.


The cost of this incident would theoretically force the airline to
make the best decision possible to avoid this, and once it happens to
make it as short as possible.


You would think so, wouldn't you?

Aren't all Airline companies always in contact with their planes at
all times, from a central location? If so, aren't the controllers in
a position to determine the best diversion in a case like this?


The pilots were certainly in contact with NWA Dispatch the entire time. In the
air they have dedicated company radio frequencies and if the plane is new
enough, datalink messages. On the ground they can use their personal cell
phones. Satcom voice calls may or may not be disabled within the domestic US.


Instead, it seems the pilots were flying by the seat of their pants,
with no direction from head office.

No way this was a pilot call. The decision to land at Moses Lake was probably
made by Dispatch. But as the hours passed, you can bet it went all the way up
the top of the company. That's why there's no excuse for what happened.

"Some Guy" wrote in message ...
Charles Packer wrote:

About that Amsterdam-Seattle flight that was on the ground
18 hours at Moses Lake without anybody being let off:

Which airline was that - North West? Or was it KLM metal?

Northwest. KLM doesn't have any more DC10's

I guess it doesn't matter.

You would think that the cost of having a big plane taken out of
service and throwing a monkey wrench into flight scheduling, and also
probably throwing the crew into limbo (do they get paid during this 18
hours? Does this count as work or "rest" for them?).

The cost of this incident would theoretically force the airline to
make the best decision possible to avoid this, and once it happens to
make it as short as possible.

Aren't all Airline companies always in contact with their planes at
all times, from a central location? If so, aren't the controllers in
a position to determine the best diversion in a case like this?

Instead, it seems the pilots were flying by the seat of their pants,
with no direction from head office.

"Some Guy" wrote in message ...
Charles Packer wrote:

About that Amsterdam-Seattle flight that was on the ground
18 hours at Moses Lake without anybody being let off:

Which airline was that - North West? Or was it KLM metal?

Northwest. KLM doesn't have any more DC10's

I guess it doesn't matter.

You would think that the cost of having a big plane taken out of
service and throwing a monkey wrench into flight scheduling, and also
probably throwing the crew into limbo (do they get paid during this 18
hours? Does this count as work or "rest" for them?).

The cost of this incident would theoretically force the airline to
make the best decision possible to avoid this, and once it happens to
make it as short as possible.

Aren't all Airline companies always in contact with their planes at
all times, from a central location? If so, aren't the controllers in
a position to determine the best diversion in a case like this?

Instead, it seems the pilots were flying by the seat of their pants,
with no direction from head office.

In article , AES/newspost
says.I've seen very little or no detailed information on what actually took
place on the plane: what the passengers were actually told by the crew
or by ground authorities and when, what the food situation was, what the
ventilation system was, what the toilet situation was, what measures
were taken for emergency situations (infants, pasengers with medical
problems), what sort of supplies (blankets, etc) were provided, what
sort of communications facilities were made available to passengers (to
call families, for example), what attempts passengers were able to make
to contact potential rescuers independent of the airline and so on.

But depending on just how bad or good the responses from the airline and
the local authorities were, after some number of hours I think I would
definitely try to join with others in setting up an ad hoc impromptu
passenger organization, start assembling and discussing collective
passenger demands, demand the use of the plane's PA system for these
discussions, maybe elect some group representatives, demand a public
conference with the flight crew or local authorities; and if the
response to these actions was sufficiently inadequate, then start
considering group actions by the passengers.

(Thoughts of the Boston Tea Party also come to mind -- the very model of
a totally American reaction to an unacceptable sitution, right?)


I'm heartened by this and a couple of the other follow-ups. The idea of civil
disobedience is alive and well, at least among air travelers on Usenet.

As I recall from news accounts, the air was foul, the toilets were full, and
there were a couple of incipient medical emergencies.

--
(Charles Packer)
http://cpacker.org/whatnews

In article , AES/newspost
says.I've seen very little or no detailed information on what actually took
place on the plane: what the passengers were actually told by the crew
or by ground authorities and when, what the food situation was, what the
ventilation system was, what the toilet situation was, what measures
were taken for emergency situations (infants, pasengers with medical
problems), what sort of supplies (blankets, etc) were provided, what
sort of communications facilities were made available to passengers (to
call families, for example), what attempts passengers were able to make
to contact potential rescuers independent of the airline and so on.

But depending on just how bad or good the responses from the airline and
the local authorities were, after some number of hours I think I would
definitely try to join with others in setting up an ad hoc impromptu
passenger organization, start assembling and discussing collective
passenger demands, demand the use of the plane's PA system for these
discussions, maybe elect some group representatives, demand a public
conference with the flight crew or local authorities; and if the
response to these actions was sufficiently inadequate, then start
considering group actions by the passengers.

(Thoughts of the Boston Tea Party also come to mind -- the very model of
a totally American reaction to an unacceptable sitution, right?)


I'm heartened by this and a couple of the other follow-ups. The idea of civil
disobedience is alive and well, at least among air travelers on Usenet.

As I recall from news accounts, the air was foul, the toilets were full, and
there were a couple of incipient medical emergencies.

--
(Charles Packer)
http://cpacker.org/whatnews

"Clark W. Griswold, Jr." wrote:

Instead, it seems the pilots were flying by the seat of their
pants, with no direction from head office.

No way this was a pilot call. The decision to land at Moses Lake
was probably made by Dispatch.

Let's see.

A DC 10 arriving from an overseas location, need to divert, need to
land at a place where customs can handle the de-planing.

Yes, the obvious solution is Moses Lake! They're an "international"
airport after all, don'tcha know!

Brilliant! NWA dispatch saves the day!

But as the hours passed, you can bet it went all the way up
the top of the company. That's why there's no excuse for
what happened.

Any NWA memos generated as a result? (or will I have to check out the
various web-based airline boards to find out?)

"Clark W. Griswold, Jr." wrote:

Instead, it seems the pilots were flying by the seat of their
pants, with no direction from head office.

No way this was a pilot call. The decision to land at Moses Lake
was probably made by Dispatch.

Let's see.

A DC 10 arriving from an overseas location, need to divert, need to
land at a place where customs can handle the de-planing.

Yes, the obvious solution is Moses Lake! They're an "international"
airport after all, don'tcha know!

Brilliant! NWA dispatch saves the day!

But as the hours passed, you can bet it went all the way up
the top of the company. That's why there's no excuse for
what happened.

Any NWA memos generated as a result? (or will I have to check out the
various web-based airline boards to find out?)

"Charles Packer" wrote in message
...
In article , AES/newspost
says.I've seen very little or no detailed information on what actually
took
place on the plane: what the passengers were actually told by the crew
or by ground authorities and when, what the food situation was, what the
ventilation system was, what the toilet situation was, what measures
were taken for emergency situations (infants, pasengers with medical
problems), what sort of supplies (blankets, etc) were provided, what
sort of communications facilities were made available to passengers (to
call families, for example), what attempts passengers were able to make
to contact potential rescuers independent of the airline and so on.

But depending on just how bad or good the responses from the airline and
the local authorities were, after some number of hours I think I would
definitely try to join with others in setting up an ad hoc impromptu
passenger organization, start assembling and discussing collective
passenger demands, demand the use of the plane's PA system for these
discussions, maybe elect some group representatives, demand a public
conference with the flight crew or local authorities; and if the
response to these actions was sufficiently inadequate, then start
considering group actions by the passengers.

(Thoughts of the Boston Tea Party also come to mind -- the very model of
a totally American reaction to an unacceptable sitution, right?)


I'm heartened by this and a couple of the other follow-ups. The idea of
civil
disobedience is alive and well, at least among air travelers on Usenet.

As I recall from news accounts, the air was foul, the toilets were full,
and
there were a couple of incipient medical emergencies.


AND THE PASSENGERS WERE ALLOWED TO LEAVE THE PLANE IN MOSES LAKE. GET YOUR
FACTS STRAIGHT. SHEESH!

"Charles Packer" wrote in message
...
In article , AES/newspost
says.I've seen very little or no detailed information on what actually
took
place on the plane: what the passengers were actually told by the crew
or by ground authorities and when, what the food situation was, what the
ventilation system was, what the toilet situation was, what measures
were taken for emergency situations (infants, pasengers with medical
problems), what sort of supplies (blankets, etc) were provided, what
sort of communications facilities were made available to passengers (to
call families, for example), what attempts passengers were able to make
to contact potential rescuers independent of the airline and so on.

But depending on just how bad or good the responses from the airline and
the local authorities were, after some number of hours I think I would
definitely try to join with others in setting up an ad hoc impromptu
passenger organization, start assembling and discussing collective
passenger demands, demand the use of the plane's PA system for these
discussions, maybe elect some group representatives, demand a public
conference with the flight crew or local authorities; and if the
response to these actions was sufficiently inadequate, then start
considering group actions by the passengers.

(Thoughts of the Boston Tea Party also come to mind -- the very model of
a totally American reaction to an unacceptable sitution, right?)


I'm heartened by this and a couple of the other follow-ups. The idea of
civil
disobedience is alive and well, at least among air travelers on Usenet.

As I recall from news accounts, the air was foul, the toilets were full,
and
there were a couple of incipient medical emergencies.


AND THE PASSENGERS WERE ALLOWED TO LEAVE THE PLANE IN MOSES LAKE. GET YOUR
FACTS STRAIGHT. SHEESH!