dagger Posted June 3, 2005 Share Posted June 3, 2005 .... everywhere you look there's people trying to milk the system. They should be happy it wasn't much worse and they can all tell the tale. Seems folks think hurtling several thousand pounds of machinery, flesh and blood through our atmosphere at mach .8, and getting it all woed up again on a tiny strip of pavement is such a simple thing it should cost next to nothing and always have the same pefect result. Mitch, there is a right way and a wrong way to handle an incident like this, and some of the passenger reaction, I believe, comes from the way Skyservice is trying to bury the story and buy their way out cheap ($500 travel voucher doesn't come close in this instance, IMHO). Russ Payson has made a lot of enemies - I know people who swear at him and not by him - and some of this is about to come home to roost. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mitch Cronin Posted June 3, 2005 Share Posted June 3, 2005 A "right way" of handling it might be all they're after, I guess... I really don't know what exactly was/is bieng done... If I'd been on that airplane, I'd only want "fair treatment"... in my mind, "fair" would be covering me for ANY expenses that might result, if any (medical, time off work, whatever)... and in the extreme, if it happened to have somehow wrecked my holiday, some compensation for that (say the equivalent of pay for my time) and another chance for a free ride to have a flippin' holiday. Nobody should lose anything for it. By the pictures posted on that web site where you can see passengers deplaning, it looks to me like very few of them will have any need for anything other than a "sorry for the bumpy ride folks". But my gut tells me they're going to be after something somewhat more than I'd call "fair". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dagger Posted June 3, 2005 Share Posted June 3, 2005 Can't hide the story now, it's really OUT there. Mind you, I think the accusations in the laysuit are even further OUT there... TORONTO (CP) - Passengers of a charter flight that bounced off a Caribbean runway in a terrifying rough landing that sent baggage and video monitors sailing through the cabin have launched a lawsuit against Skyservice Airlines. Passengers claim they were "thrown around the plane like rag dolls" in what they describe as a "near-death experience" on May 22. The proposed class action demands an apology and accuses the Toronto-based airline of acting recklessly when Flight 560 from Toronto made a rough landing on a Punta Cana runway in the Dominican Republic. The lawsuit claims that the landing was so violent that the plane bounced off the runway three times before coming to a stop. The oxygen masks in the plane were released as a result, and video monitors, baggage and metal containers were thrown around, injuring some of the 318 passengers. The Boeing 767's fuselage, passengers said, was also damaged. "I thought my life was over," Linda Maggisano, who was travelling with her two-month-old and two-year-old sons, said Friday in a release. "I was especially frightened for my infant son, who was nearly thrown from my arms." The suit alleges that passengers suffered soft tissue injuries, bruising, abrasions, sprains and fractures, nervous shock, emotional distress and post-traumatic stress disorder as a result of the landing. "This was the most traumatic event in my life," passenger Patricia McLean said in a release. " I am very concerned about my injured back and the crack to my neck found on an X-ray." Maggisano's lawyer, Joel Rochon, said passengers were also upset by Skyservice's handling of the incident. "There has been no apology made by the airline," he said. "There's some talk of a travel voucher for $500 with Skyservice. I haven't spoken to anyone who wants to fly again with the airline." The claim was filed Thursday in a Toronto Superior Court. None of the allegations have been proven in court and Skyservice Airlines Inc. has yet to file a statement of defence. Skyservice was not immediately available for comment. The action accuses Skyservice of failing to properly maintain the aircraft and failing to hire sufficient staff to do so, failing to perform adequate safety checks before take-off, failing to hire competently trained pilots and failing to train its flight crew to deal with an emergency and to comfort passengers in the face of crisis. If allowed to proceed, the action would seek $10 million in general damages and $1 million in punitive damages, as well unidentified amounts for special damages and the costs of the lawsuit. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tsgas Posted June 3, 2005 Share Posted June 3, 2005 The Canadian airline passenger has come to expect much more then a controlled crash on a B-767. The company messed up big time then tried to cover it up . They should be held accountable to their customers and made to pay for their mistakes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mitch Cronin Posted June 3, 2005 Share Posted June 3, 2005 "The action accuses Skyservice of failing to properly maintain the aircraft and failing to hire sufficient staff to do so, failing to perform adequate safety checks before take-off, failing to hire competently trained pilots and failing to train its flight crew to deal with an emergency and to comfort passengers in the face of crisis." Hah! Based on that load of rubbish, they're pissin' in the wind! Tsgas??? They tried to cover it up? How so?... I think you may be enjoying the attention focussed elsewhere a wee bit too much. ...glass houses and such.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest ORK Posted June 3, 2005 Share Posted June 3, 2005 Cheers friends! If Bin Laden couldn’t crush the industry, then maybe the average opportunist will have a go … does it pose the question of what to do about proper restraints for infants and toddlers though? Happy Friday! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cp fa Posted June 3, 2005 Share Posted June 3, 2005 I noticed in the website that some of the damage photos were provided by the Air Canada Pilots Association. How very... helpful of them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rudder Posted June 3, 2005 Share Posted June 3, 2005 Despite the best efforts of Global news, Payson and Giguere are still nowhere to be found. Avoiding the media certainly gives the impression of something amiss. Come on guys, come out of hiding and act like responsible airline executives or this will turn into a PR fiasco that could spell the end of SkyService. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dagger Posted June 3, 2005 Share Posted June 3, 2005 Despite the best efforts of Global news, Payson and Giguere are still nowhere to be found. Avoiding the media certainly gives the impression of something amiss. Come on guys, come out of hiding and act like responsible airline executives or this will turn into a PR fiasco that could spell the end of SkyService. I'm shocked at the ineptitude of their reaction. I believe they really thought after a day or two that they were going to get away without anyone noticing. Not in the Internet, billion-channel, cellphone-camera-click-and-send universe. They haven't put a customer care team on the ground They haven't put out a press release They didn't make an offer of compensation (which need not pre-empt the right to sue) They don't appear to have a disaster plan They are steadfastly refusing to say anything to the press So of course, the story is growing. Instead of pre-empting bad press by being upfront about it, the lack of a response is now starting to fuel the story, as the media loves to pounce on a coverup. This might not be the case, but Payson has done nothing to dampen the notion that the airline is trying to sweep it all under the rug. We'll hear from the minister and from TC on this one yet. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest rattler Posted June 4, 2005 Share Posted June 4, 2005 I'm shocked at the ineptitude of their reaction. I believe they really thought after a day or two that they were going to get away without anyone noticing. Not in the Internet, billion-channel, cellphone-camera-click-and-send universe. They haven't put a customer care team on the ground They haven't put out a press release They didn't make an offer of compensation (which need not pre-empt the right to sue) They don't appear to have a disaster plan They are steadfastly refusing to say anything to the press So of course, the story is growing. Instead of pre-empting bad press by being upfront about it, the lack of a response is now starting to fuel the story, as the media loves to pounce on a coverup. This might not be the case, but Payson has done nothing to dampen the notion that the airline is trying to sweep it all under the rug. We'll hear from the minister and from TC on this one yet. Dagger, get a grip. It was not a "BFD".(big f....ng deal) except for those in command of the aircraft. The aircraft got bent (yes), no one got hurt but the lawyers will as usual get their pound of flesh. Getting sick and tired of folks reporting "near death experiences" and then Hoping for a cheque at the end of the rainbow............... Regarding a "Disaster plan", as these normally deal with fatalities, it would not have been invoked. This was an incident, not a disaster. Now this is something I can get incensed about: Man charged after girl assaulted on web broadcast Last updated Jun 3 2005 12:15 PM MDT CBC News CALGARY – A Fort McMurray man is facing charges after someone reported seeing a young girl being sexually assaulted live on the internet. RCMP say they were tipped to the crime by a woman in Missouri, who was watching a webcast in April when she saw the assault. Cpl. Al Fraser called the woman tenacious in finding who to report the crime to. "She was not going to let go. She was going to follow through," Fraser said. "That's something commendable." The girl is believed to be between five and nine years of age, and police believe the assault took place in Calgary. Fraser said the girl is safe, but had no other details. The investigation into the assault involved police in Calgary and Edmonton, and Homeland Security officials in the U.S. "We are working very diligently. These are young children that are being placed in harm's way here and we are doing everything we can to make sure the investigations are as diligent and as complete as possible," Fraser said. The Calgary Herald quoted investigators as saying the Missouri woman had been involved in a sexual role-playing game over the internet, and was on the phone with a man when the assault began. Investigators said the woman stopped talking to him, but got a phone number from her call display. Fraser said he had no details about how police became aware of the assault, other than the Missouri woman contacted them. A 36-year-old man has been charged with transmitting child pornography, sexual interference, sexual assault, counselling an offence and counselling an offence of sexual assault, and will appear in a Calgary court Tuesday. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CanadaEH Posted June 4, 2005 Share Posted June 4, 2005 Dagger, get a grip. It was not a "BFD".(big f....ng deal) except for those in command of the aircraft. The aircraft got bent (yes), no one got hurt but the lawyers will as usual get their pound of flesh. Getting sick and tired of folks reporting "near death experiences" and then Hoping for a cheque at the end of the rainbow............... Regarding a "Disaster plan", as these normally deal with fatalities, it would not have been invoked. This was an incident, not a disaster. Rattler, I understand your point-of-view but I'd have to say that this became a big deal when it wasn't handled properly (IF that's the case). According to the lawsuit, there were injuries onboard. Now, that's the first I've heard of any injuries on the landing and I have no idea how serious they were. If there were injuries serious enough to require medical attention then Skyservice should have (or maybe they did?) react immediately by sending a team to make sure the situation/customers were taken care of from a mental and physical standpoint. For you Westjetters: If this incident was a Westjet aircraft would we have activated Caregivers (knock on wood)? For you AC'ers: how would Air Canada have handled the situation? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Azure Posted June 4, 2005 Share Posted June 4, 2005 rattler: I suppose it's all how we 'read' the story, but instead of being angry or as you put it "incensed" by the article, I was relieved and grateful that this woman went to so much trouble to catch the perv. Child pornography exists, children all over the world are used. This woman put herself out, admitted what she was into, and possibly saved a young life. Let's hope for the best Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SkyBlazer Posted June 4, 2005 Share Posted June 4, 2005 Canada Eh, As a caregiver and knowing the process YES I believe we would have dispatched the program. My best Guess anyways SB Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
newgirl Posted June 4, 2005 Share Posted June 4, 2005 Perhaps some the injuries were a result of the overhead bins popping open and those humongous carryon bags fell on someones head? This incident could possibly be used to set tougher safety regulations on carryon stowage in the cabins...no more rollerboards in the overhead. If it doesn't fit under the seat-too bad, it's a checked item. 22lbs for carryon is still too heavy in my mind and I'm tired of arguing with the passengers to remove weight out of the carryons. Yes some bases do weigh the carryons!!! It needs to be a Govt. regulation that all airlines in Canada follow. I also believe that something must be done for children under 2 who do not occupy a seat. I have no solutions to offer as most people do not want to pay for a seat for their child but at the same time why should the airline sell the the at a lesser cost. What a conundrum it is! I just think that something positive could be made of a sad situation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest rattler Posted June 4, 2005 Share Posted June 4, 2005 rattler: I suppose it's all how we 'read' the story, but instead of being angry or as you put it "incensed" by the article, I was relieved and grateful that this woman went to so much trouble to catch the perv. Child pornography exists, children all over the world are used. This woman put herself out, admitted what she was into, and possibly saved a young life. Let's hope for the best Very glad that the perv was caught but incensed that our children / grandchildren are not safe. The empty playgrounds illustrate the real fear that parents have in this regard. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tsgas Posted June 4, 2005 Share Posted June 4, 2005 Mitch when the crew reffered to it as being just a normal landing, to me that would be less then thruthful, so I would consider that to be dishonest. lying. or maybe a cover up. As far as the glass house B.S., I've made many a mistake as a pilot, but unlike a lot of you P.C. types I will take responsibility for my actions. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mitch Cronin Posted June 4, 2005 Share Posted June 4, 2005 Tsgas... It sounds to me like you're making assumptions... I don't know if the guy who landed that thing is avoiding "responsibility"... do you? The glass houses stuff isn't BS at all! It's an unfortunate reality of being human... the more we do, the more errors we're liable to commit... sooner or later, one of those errors will shine a little brighter than the others. Yessir, it's important to admit to them, and learn from them, etc. (and for the record, I won't run and hide when I make mistakes!) ...but when it's one that gets the attention of the media, don't you think the boss would tell you to keep quiet? I don't have any idea what you think SkyService is covering up here, if anything. I suspect they hoped to minimize the event to some degree -avoid the inevitable exaggerated nonsense that will come from the press - perhaps in hopes of avoiding costly repercussions. Maybe they've blown that, maybe not... But a hard landing (or "de-rotation") is hardly a "controlled crash, as you put it... Nobody was seriously hurt... most weren't hurt at all.... Yep, it's an unfortunate incident, but not something worth roasting the whole company for. You said "The company messed up big time then tried to cover it up ." I don't see a coverup, and I don't see how an aircraft handling error (if that's what it was?) equates to the company messing up at all? There are already ambulance chasers hot on their heals now, seeking totally absurd number$ ...Should they have issued a press release immediately after the event, saying "We just wrecked an airplane and scared the wits out of a bunch of people, we're sorry, please have anyone who ever thought of flying on our airplanes who's now feeling traumatized have their lawyers line up here... and the folks who were on board will have compensation for life"? ... for what? ..an extra hard bumpy landing??! (now running out of gas with nuthin' but water beneath you, and then slamming it down on an island you just barely managed to get to.... that I could see. ... damn, was that house made of glass?) I dunno... a lot of bunk about diddley, that's what I see. At worst, maybe the guy flying messed up a landing, the airplane's a goner, and a few people need compensation for their injuries... At best, there may yet be a good explanation for the landing and the damage incurred, the airplane can be fixed and a few people need compensation for their injuries... but nothing like what that class action suit is after. ... and not worth all the fuss and nasty comments from all of us armchair quarterbacks. That's mho anyway. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Cargodawg Posted June 6, 2005 Share Posted June 6, 2005 I guess the passengers couldnt have been too traumatized or injured since they all enjoyed their week in sunny Punta Cana (didnt see any reports of pax hospitalized their stay/or having been flown home early). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jump seat Posted June 17, 2005 Share Posted June 17, 2005 Is there an outcome on whether or not this bird is getting fixed yet? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
J.O. Posted June 18, 2005 Share Posted June 18, 2005 Not quite yet, due to logistics & parts availability, but it will be repaired in due course. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Starman Posted June 18, 2005 Share Posted June 18, 2005 This incident goes to prove the old adage: if you think that the cost of a good, highly trained and motivated pilot is high; consider the cost of a bad one... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest ORK Posted June 18, 2005 Share Posted June 18, 2005 ...what makes a bad pilot? One mistake? Training? Experience to high or too low? Arrogance? Stupidity? Health? Luck? That comment raises concern from me, especially if you are a pilot. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
J.O. Posted June 18, 2005 Share Posted June 18, 2005 Another eloquent display of arrogance and ignorance in one sentence, compliments of Starman. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mitch Cronin Posted June 18, 2005 Share Posted June 18, 2005 Starman? It could be that all I've read from you in the past has led me down a trail, but I don't think so... This seems out of character for you? Did you say what you meant to say? J.O. Good to see your smilin' face around here. ... "Logistics" !! I should say so! Without a hangar, somehow (I'm pretty sure) they'll have to erect a structure around the bird so that wind won't be a factor as they re-skin it in a jig of sorts. Somewhere in the clutter on this WWW, I came across mention of an occasion where someone's airplane was ferried to a suitable place for repair, with external braces temporarily fitted... I wonder if that's an option being considered? ...or would it be too iffy for Boeing or some regulatory folks to approve such a method? I'm sure it could be done, but I don't know if it could get approval, or if it would be any less expensive in the long run... - essentially, repair it twice - once for the ferry flt and once when you have it home... vs. one proper repair only plus the cost of building a facility to fix it in? If it was my airplane, and I didn't have to get approval from anyone, that's what I think I'd do... bolt on a bunch of external stringers of differing lengths all around the fuselage, add a few temporary ones inside as well, gas it up and fly it home, slowly in perfect weather. Anyway, I'm interested in knowing what methods are used... If you, or anyone else can keep us posted, I'd sure appreciate that? Maybe I'm wrong about the need to have it sheltered, but having seen the nature of precision needed for even a belly repair after a tail strike, I'd be surprised if it could be done outside. Cheers, Mitch Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Starman Posted June 18, 2005 Share Posted June 18, 2005 If that post came across as too arrogant, I'll have to live with it. I could have chosen better words like, "the cost of poor piloting is very high". But that is the point. The cost of attracting and retaining high quality flight crew and the cost of properly training those people is high, but the cost of one incident like this is enormous. I suspect that the individual who was at the controls of this aircraft was inadequately trained and it is now costing Sky Service a lot more than it would have cost to provide the pilot with the experience base he needed to prevent the accident. By the way, the info I heard through the grapevine is that the aircraft has been written off, but I haven't had that substantiated. Anyone have the straight goods? And hey Mitch... I've never been far away, just lurking more than posting (...evidently to the delight of some on this forum ) but I read all your posts... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.