Had a similar situation on AA1700 EWR-DFW April 6. Pilot announced we were diverting to Memphis due to a "security issue", landed and taxied to an area well away from the main terminal, and were told to remain in our seats. FBI agents boarded the plane and after maybe 90 minutes, we were told that someone wrote a note about a bomb on the lav wall. We exited the aircraft via airstairs, leaving all personal belonging on board. They removed all checked luggage, presumably for inspection. We were left standing outside with no access to restrooms (thankfully it was a mild, sunny day). After another hour we were bussed back to the main terminal where we were finally allowed to use the rest rooms. It was another few hours before we finally took off for DFW -- same aircraft, fresh crew. Total 6 hours late arriving at DFW. I never saw anything on the news about this incident, and would love to know what happened. Someone suggested to me that they intentionally don't reveal any details about this sort of thing to avoid copy-cats.
I like the approach on how to keep everyone on board while somebody just told them there`s a bomb on board also. I`d get the ppl out first and then search.
I wondered what they tell passengers. Thanks for the info. I would think they would land and tell everyone to "run." Weird that they kept you so long on a plane that might have a bomb! I'd rather be alive first and catch the person 2nd lol
I know it's not the most appropriate reaction but that "I hope not" cracked me up. Someone tells me the pilot had the same humor stress reaction I have. Make jokes to lower the tension and maybe if you make it funny enough it won't become traumatizing
Happens a lot. For example, Qantas 32 I think it was? The captain, to break the tension, quoted 'Looks like I picked the wrong week to give up sniffing glue" from _Airplane!_ to break the stressful tension after experiencing a loss of control. And there's chock full of tension breakers that occured during the United 232 fiasco, Al Haynes cracked a few jokes yet still remained professional in light of the situation.
That is definitely a pilot I’d want to have in an emergency! He was calm and extremely well prepared despite what must be a very stressful situation. Had all the info that ATC was likely to need ready and clearly explained the situation
That pilot is one cool, calm, and collected dude. In the midst of it all, he volunteers extra details investigators will need if everything goes badly.
@@RLTtizMEIt's not about extreme or exaggerated reactions you see on TV. If you really listen, there are normal and common changes in real people's voices and words when a normal day becomes a serious situation. Like slight change of tone, speaking faster, focused breathing, more pauses and "uhhh," or even just sounding a little less comfortable and sure of themselves. It's a testament to the pilot monitoring's stress tolerance and focus that he never even slightly showed any of those normal and common responses, that's the cool and calm part. Collected especially because of what they mentioned above.
@@kacey8372 Oh my goodness....that was excruciating to read. Let us take a moment to recenter ourselves. OK...better now. Hope you didn't knock yourself out conjuring up that highly detailed and arduous explanation. You remained cool, unflustered, calm and collected.
@@kacey8372 The tenor of your reply including your chosen characterization of others....tells us quite a bit about you. Rest assured it is not cool, calm, collected and polite. You have nullified yourself.
I was listening to this when they were on the ground and both atc and pilot were very calm. Only took like 2 hours before they got off the plane. This isn’t the first time this has happened….
To be fair if you want to keep a flight in the air knowing in minutes is nice, if you want to math the size and risk of an explosion the pound will be prefered. Might both be required to know for different reasons.
A passenger was a former WGN radio show producer and interviewed by phone. She said everyone deplaned and sat on the adjoining grassy field for several hours. Passengers started looking at each other, trying to figure who wrote the threat. Between this incident and the protest obstruction on I-190, O'Hare was particularly stressful for countless people.
Pilot: "We want to return to O'Hare immediately" ATC: "Keep flying straight ahead for now" Pilot: "Sorry, I said immediately" ATC: "Yes yes, turn slowly to the north" ATC: "Oh yes, I have a few more questions and the next controller will ask them again. " ...
Might be time for airlines to consider getting cameras at the front and back of the plane so there is a record of all of the stupidity. Wouldn't hurt if there was a small monitor in the cockpit for the pilots to glance at either.
@@Plutogalaxy It's not to watch people going to try and defecate at altitude, it's so that the pilot can say, 'Quiet back there, or we will pull this plane over and you're gonna get it!' Actually, it's so you can record and narrow down potential suspects. I think there are just too many distractions and other concerns to have active monitoring by in-flight crew Edit: Yes, it would definitely take money to fit such a thing. However, there are already FAA-certified electronics that are off-the-shelf(ish) and after 9/11, there are installed cameras monitoring forward areas of some aircraft. The cost would be less than a ground-up approach.
@@Daveradcliffevegasrealestate That's what happened to us on AA1700 two weeks ago. From the time we landed until we eventually made it into the terminal building was something like 3 hours.
Usually aircraft with bomb threats don't go anywhere near the terminal and is strictly instructed to head to the blast pad (located at the start/ends of runways) until they can verify no bombs are aboard. Imagine not only blowing an aircraft up, but doing so near a super busy terminal.
I agree, it is frustrating and needlessly repetitive for the already most pressured people. I feel the information should be relayed from controller to controller such that the pilots can hear it being repeated and make corrections if something is inaccurate. That is how it would work in military ground communications when lives are on the line.
“Chicago approach this is Chicago centre, united 265 is reporting xxxx. They have no hazmat, xxx souls on board and xxxx fuel remaining. They are managing the situation and currently manoeuvring for immediate return and will require xxxx services waiting on the ground”. That’s what the pilots should hear immediately after declaring an emergency as they go to work on the problem to safely land their aircraft.
Most of this info is unnecessary and is only asked for in the USA. The rest of the world you may get asked for the POB (souls on board is not ICAO) but that’s about it. The term Hazardous Materials is not used internationally (Dangerous Goods is the IATA phrase). Passenger aircraft carry insignificant DGs and cargo aircraft carry so many types it’s not practical to read the manifest over the radio. Fuel on board is more or less obvious by the aircraft type and destination (hint: on larger aircraft it’s more than you’ll ever be able to extinguish with your fire trucks. Just send everything. The whole exercise is a form filling waste of time.
I think the notes author meant a different kind of bomb was in the bathroom. Or maybe everyone was on the same page and a huge dump forced the landing.
People asking why PAX are made to sit on an aircraft with a potential bomb for so long, understand that until they know who made that threat, each and every PAX is a potential threat with a bomb on them. They aren't going to trust anyone to just run/walk off the aircraft towards you. Would you? Knowing that someone has made a bomb threat, and that one of them could have a bomb on them but you don't know who. Are you just going to trust that it's a hoax and let a potential bomber blow themselves up in front of you, taking you and others out with you? No. Aircraft usually sent to the blast pad (it is not called blast because of bombs, but jet blasts etc), it's away from busy terminals and so on. In the meantime agencies will do deep background checks on those onboard for any tip that may lead to who it is and if the threat is more likely genuine. Then searching the aircraft hold with bomb dogs (hold inc). Then PAX will come off the aircraft in small batches, asked to queue individually and spaced apart, then you and your luggage will be searched, sniffed by bomb dogs (unless asked to keep it on board, but many won't as they want PAX to stay with their luggage so if there is a bomb in it, they know who's it likely is). You will have to give your passport/ID to the police who will verify you are who you say you are. If you are all clear, no threat, you'll go wait with others away from the rest. Then the search continues until every PAX is verified as not a threat. Aircraft will be searched by bomb sniffing dogs. Then if that's all done you will all still be held until they figure out who made the hoax and interviewed. Either way they know one of you is the person who made the threat, and some PAX likely saw who used that toilet prior to departure. I can't tell if they reached cruise or not, because if not nobody will have used that toilet after departing as it's prohibited until the seatbelt signs are off. Unfortunately as its aft, the cockpit camera likely wouldn't capture anything. But yeah, anyway, they aren't purposely endangering you, but you, including children/babies (terrorists stoop very low), could be or are being used to conceal a bomb or threat and they will see you as such until they can deem otherwise.
Blah blah blah it’s an ethical issue, they condemn all the other passengers to sit with the bomber as if they are dead until proven worthy to live. Your attitude created situations like Waco Texas, like Uvalde. Shame on your kind
@@M_SC Then don’t fly on an airplane. Simple as that. Their job is to keep as many people alive as possible. Sometimes that means risking others. 1 life is not greater than 100. It’s tragic, but completely understandable if you do even the most basic of thinking
Gotta think when the person wrote the threat. From the previous flight as they left. Who ever launders the bathroom. Who checks to make sure the “lavs” are clean and empty of debris.
The provision come on board to restock, they checked the bathrooms, mop, the floors, replaced tissue, etc.… Also flight attendants, often wash their hands, try to get a chance to brush their hair, etc., before boarding again
I don't understand. Why would someone on the flight write that message in the lavatory, so that they can wind up being incredibly inconvenienced along with everyone else when the flight returns? After having (presumably) paid money for that flight, no less?
Maybe it was someone on the previous flight. Or a disgruntled cleaning staff person. But there would be many reasons why a human didn’t want their flight to arrive where it was going on time
Not super impressed with the controllers on this one. The FAA really needs to fix the procedures so they stop asking the same questions over and over and over and over....... Sheesh.
In that specific example, FL290 is 29000 ft and Climb to 5000 is obviously 5000 ft. In USA/Canada (and similar to other countries) the transition altitude is 18000 ft ASL. 18000 ft and above is expressed in FL180. Why is the format suddenly changed from # ft to FL#? Expressing the altitude instruction to FL will tell the pilot they are going to be at or above the transition altitude which also tells pilots to set their altimeter based on the standard of 29.92 inMg. This way, with all aircraft on 29.92 altimeter setting will be flying a consistent altitude at high level airspace. This is safer since two aircraft on the same altimeter settings and assigned at the same or similar altitude flying across the country should never hit each other if comms failed/other problems etc...
It's all to do with different transition altitudes and levels. For instance, in the US and surrounding countries below 18,000ft, the instruction to climb, descend is read in thousands and hundreds of feet. Above 18,000ft it transitions to flight levels, so instructions are read in levels, for instance Climb Flight Level 230. Flight level pilots will use standard pressure of 29.92 InHg (1013 hPa). Below 18,000ft pilots will use the local airport air pressure measured at MSL for instance, 3012 InHg (1020 hPa).
Odd, he said they had 134 minutes of fuel on board. It takes about 1hour 30 minutes to go from Chicago to Washington. You also must have at least 45 minutes of fuel reserve or PART 121 operations. His math doesn't add up.
Looks like it's time for small cameras outside of lavs. NYC, NJ Transit, and other transit systems already put them on buses. As a pilot, the knucklehead like author of the bomb threat left on the lav's mirror, is why I've always preferred flying cargo.
@@RLTtizME Cameras inside lavs? ...a tad invasive, and therefore, a no go. Hey, with Internet there would be bootleg videos of people in lavs, within two seconds of lav camera installations :) Sold by low hourly wage airline, or airport workers.
I would have thought that they would have directed them AWAY from a major urban center and a busy airport to a quieter regional airport. Cool pilot, though - sounds like he's talking about last night's sports scores, only less drama....
Small airport may not have emergency personel, fire etc needed if real. Or busses for passengers. Or rwy suitable for commercial aircraft. Or navigational aids needed for instrument approaches needed.
That's now how declaring an emergency works. As soon as they declared the emergency, ATC's job is to assist the pilots in getting to wherever the pilots think is best ASAP and get everyone else out of their way. ATC doesn't get to dictate the destination.
@@lcv8401plus it’s an international airport so we’re already have all the Feds here or nearby. They have the equipment people and tools to handle all types of emergency’s and this isn’t the first bomb threat they have dealt with.
Just switched to news report on incident. I'm wondering if the FBI at least asked the passengers and attendants "hey would you mind writing down the sentence on a piece of paper?" before they let them get back on the plane to maybe rule out one of them writing it down. Yes, I know it is extremely unlikely someone got out of their seat unnoticed while they were still climbing but there was time before takeoff.
Surely the airlines have a better set of procedures than this? The chances of there actually being a device on board is very slim, so the airlines security department would, I assume, see such incidents as fake. You have to determine if the threat is credible or not as well. There’s much more to a B threat than just finding the B word written somewhere.
The flight landed, and then taxied to a remote parking position? And what if that bomb had exploded whilst the pilots were doing that? Surely stop as quickly as possible and initiate an emergency evacuation, otherwise it is NOT an emergency landing.
Not being knowledgeable about everything is OK. It is just important to remember that you may be missing some critical information when talking about something you are less familiar with. I am not an expert, but these are some facts I have picked up. 1. They declared an emergency, therefore it was an emergency landing. 2. Emergency evacuations take time. 3. Emergency evacuations are dangerous. People are often hurt during evacuations. 4. The protocols set up for this type of incident are based on past incidents and the work of experts. They are well grounded and consider many possibilities.
With all that’s happened to United airline’s lately maybe their having some union problems? This DEI hiring practice may not be working that well for them.
How the flipping f*** is those related to DEI? That's the next target for you fools, huh?? Oh, a girl doesn't want anything to do with you, and you blame that on DEI. Your mom doesn't love you anymore, therefore DEI! Sheesh....
![“อ.เบียร์ คนตื่นธรรม” มาตามคำเรียกร้อง แหกศาสตร์ฮวงจุ้ย เตือนสติอย่างมงาย | แฉ 7 พ.ย. 67 [1/3]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/5fc4S3xBNfc/mqdefault.jpg)
Had a similar situation on AA1700 EWR-DFW April 6. Pilot announced we were diverting to Memphis due to a "security issue", landed and taxied to an area well away from the main terminal, and were told to remain in our seats. FBI agents boarded the plane and after maybe 90 minutes, we were told that someone wrote a note about a bomb on the lav wall. We exited the aircraft via airstairs, leaving all personal belonging on board. They removed all checked luggage, presumably for inspection. We were left standing outside with no access to restrooms (thankfully it was a mild, sunny day). After another hour we were bussed back to the main terminal where we were finally allowed to use the rest rooms. It was another few hours before we finally took off for DFW -- same aircraft, fresh crew. Total 6 hours late arriving at DFW. I never saw anything on the news about this incident, and would love to know what happened. Someone suggested to me that they intentionally don't reveal any details about this sort of thing to avoid copy-cats.
I bet that made for some grumpy passengers, but definitely have to be safe rather than sorry
They make the passengers sit in a plane with a bomb for 90 min, lol.
I like the approach on how to keep everyone on board while somebody just told them there`s a bomb on board also.
I`d get the ppl out first and then search.
I wondered what they tell passengers. Thanks for the info. I would think they would land and tell everyone to "run." Weird that they kept you so long on a plane that might have a bomb! I'd rather be alive first and catch the person 2nd lol
@@bodhi1462 My assumption is that they concluded it was a hoax pretty early on, but there wasn't much detail conveyed to the passengers.
I know it's not the most appropriate reaction but that "I hope not" cracked me up. Someone tells me the pilot had the same humor stress reaction I have. Make jokes to lower the tension and maybe if you make it funny enough it won't become traumatizing
Happens a lot. For example, Qantas 32 I think it was? The captain, to break the tension, quoted 'Looks like I picked the wrong week to give up sniffing glue" from _Airplane!_ to break the stressful tension after experiencing a loss of control.
And there's chock full of tension breakers that occured during the United 232 fiasco, Al Haynes cracked a few jokes yet still remained professional in light of the situation.
I am all for stress humor. It's a good way to keep everybody stress levels down just a little bit more.
That is definitely a pilot I’d want to have in an emergency! He was calm and extremely well prepared despite what must be a very stressful situation. Had all the info that ATC was likely to need ready and clearly explained the situation
Not really that stressful, just annoying
The flight attendants were the ones who supplied that info. They deserve the credit. He just relayed the message.
This isn’t an emergency!!!! It’s a PUSSY RESPONSE TO A NON-THREAT!!!
That pilot is one cool, calm, and collected dude. In the midst of it all, he volunteers extra details investigators will need if everything goes badly.
Have you ever heard them scream and cry? I haven't.
@@RLTtizMEIt's not about extreme or exaggerated reactions you see on TV. If you really listen, there are normal and common changes in real people's voices and words when a normal day becomes a serious situation. Like slight change of tone, speaking faster, focused breathing, more pauses and "uhhh," or even just sounding a little less comfortable and sure of themselves. It's a testament to the pilot monitoring's stress tolerance and focus that he never even slightly showed any of those normal and common responses, that's the cool and calm part. Collected especially because of what they mentioned above.
@@kacey8372 Oh my goodness....that was excruciating to read. Let us take a moment to recenter ourselves. OK...better now. Hope you didn't knock yourself out conjuring up that highly detailed and arduous explanation. You remained cool, unflustered, calm and collected.
@@RLTtizME you may find that people don't speak to you like you're an idiot if you don't go out of your way to act like one.
@@kacey8372 The tenor of your reply including your chosen characterization of others....tells us quite a bit about you. Rest assured it is not cool, calm, collected and polite. You have nullified yourself.
Pilot is like, this happens all the time, no problems.
Calm and cool!
Stupid to take this shit as a REAL THREAT!!!!
I was listening to this when they were on the ground and both atc and pilot were very calm. Only took like 2 hours before they got off the plane.
This isn’t the first time this has happened….
Plagerizing this from someone else this morning. You give them fuel in minutes, they ask for pounds, give it in pounds, they'll ask in pints.
To be fair if you want to keep a flight in the air knowing in minutes is nice, if you want to math the size and risk of an explosion the pound will be prefered. Might both be required to know for different reasons.
A pint's a pound the world around by the way 😅
@@ProulxSexactly -fire crews want the pounds. ATC need the minutes.
A passenger was a former WGN radio show producer and interviewed by phone. She said everyone deplaned and sat on the adjoining grassy field for several hours. Passengers started looking at each other, trying to figure who wrote the threat. Between this incident and the protest obstruction on I-190, O'Hare was particularly stressful for countless people.
They should have ignored it!!!
Yeah, because that's what's commonly done in these situations. Such good advice--just ignore it.
There was also two other emergency’s that came in before and while the plane was on the ground. It was an eventful morning.
4:30 "Is the cockpit secure?" Oh wait, no I did not tell you about the 18 storm troopers we have admitted.
It's a standard question for situations like this.
Pilot: "We want to return to O'Hare immediately"
ATC: "Keep flying straight ahead for now"
Pilot: "Sorry, I said immediately"
ATC: "Yes yes, turn slowly to the north"
ATC: "Oh yes, I have a few more questions and the next controller will ask them again. "
...
How could someone go to the bathroom so quickly
Disgruntled cabin crew.
Probably done during boarding.
@@SJF15yeah I was thinking ground crew or maintenance
Might be time for airlines to consider getting cameras at the front and back of the plane so there is a record of all of the stupidity. Wouldn't hurt if there was a small monitor in the cockpit for the pilots to glance at either.
We could just ban liьегаls from flying and we wouldn't have any trouble makers.
Like every school bus in America? 😂
@@Plutogalaxy camera are cheap & easy to record kiddo. 🤣
@@Plutogalaxy It's not to watch people going to try and defecate at altitude, it's so that the pilot can say, 'Quiet back there, or we will pull this plane over and you're gonna get it!'
Actually, it's so you can record and narrow down potential suspects. I think there are just too many distractions and other concerns to have active monitoring by in-flight crew
Edit: Yes, it would definitely take money to fit such a thing. However, there are already FAA-certified electronics that are off-the-shelf(ish) and after 9/11, there are installed cameras monitoring forward areas of some aircraft. The cost would be less than a ground-up approach.
Cameras in the flight deck ? Not gonna happen
Had the seatbelt signs come off yet? Looks like it may have already been written from the previous flight and missed.
Probably done during boarding.
@@jimrossi4787 Surely you can’t be serious.
@@jgrazziI am serious, and don't call me Shirley.
@@Nathan-wk9dd you beat me to it! 😂
Wonder how they handled that back at the gate. They’d have to hold the passengers for a while to sort out who might have written it, I assume?
Excellent point!
When i was a cop, We never brought them to the gate. We took them remote no where close to structures.
@@Daveradcliffevegasrealestate That's what happened to us on AA1700 two weeks ago. From the time we landed until we eventually made it into the terminal building was something like 3 hours.
Usually aircraft with bomb threats don't go anywhere near the terminal and is strictly instructed to head to the blast pad (located at the start/ends of runways) until they can verify no bombs are aboard. Imagine not only blowing an aircraft up, but doing so near a super busy terminal.
They don’t get to go to the gate. They deplane away from everyone and everything.
Good grief, can ATC please get their shit together and pass on information? It’s flat out unacceptable.
So you rather take the chance there is not some miscommunication between the controllers and the pilot?
I agree, it is frustrating and needlessly repetitive for the already most pressured people. I feel the information should be relayed from controller to controller such that the pilots can hear it being repeated and make corrections if something is inaccurate. That is how it would work in military ground communications when lives are on the line.
“Chicago approach this is Chicago centre, united 265 is reporting xxxx. They have no hazmat, xxx souls on board and xxxx fuel remaining. They are managing the situation and currently manoeuvring for immediate return and will require xxxx services waiting on the ground”. That’s what the pilots should hear immediately after declaring an emergency as they go to work on the problem to safely land their aircraft.
Most of this info is unnecessary and is only asked for in the USA. The rest of the world you may get asked for the POB (souls on board is not ICAO) but that’s about it.
The term Hazardous Materials is not used internationally (Dangerous Goods is the IATA phrase). Passenger aircraft carry insignificant DGs and cargo aircraft carry so many types it’s not practical to read the manifest over the radio. Fuel on board is more or less obvious by the aircraft type and destination (hint: on larger aircraft it’s more than you’ll ever be able to extinguish with your fire trucks. Just send everything.
The whole exercise is a form filling waste of time.
I'd rather have them ask again so they have the right info.
I think the notes author meant a different kind of bomb was in the bathroom. Or maybe everyone was on the same page and a huge dump forced the landing.
Reminds me of the incident when a plane turned back to Sydney because someone wrote BOB on a sick bag in 2004.
Bob? that’s a name not a bomb
@@M_SC Bomb on Board, although more commonly Best on Board or indeed just a name.
@@andyalder7910And here I thought BOB was Battery Operated Boyfriend... 🤔
A lot of comments below how calm and cool the pilot was.
Hello.
Professional commercial pilot 😊
I wonder what announcement is made to the passengers in cases like this one.
"Ahhh... Don't panic but ahhh there may be a bomb on board. Ahhh... please keep your seatbelts fastened"
Didn’t that happen on one of the “Airport” movies?
"Bomb has been planted"
People asking why PAX are made to sit on an aircraft with a potential bomb for so long, understand that until they know who made that threat, each and every PAX is a potential threat with a bomb on them. They aren't going to trust anyone to just run/walk off the aircraft towards you. Would you? Knowing that someone has made a bomb threat, and that one of them could have a bomb on them but you don't know who. Are you just going to trust that it's a hoax and let a potential bomber blow themselves up in front of you, taking you and others out with you? No.
Aircraft usually sent to the blast pad (it is not called blast because of bombs, but jet blasts etc), it's away from busy terminals and so on. In the meantime agencies will do deep background checks on those onboard for any tip that may lead to who it is and if the threat is more likely genuine. Then searching the aircraft hold with bomb dogs (hold inc). Then PAX will come off the aircraft in small batches, asked to queue individually and spaced apart, then you and your luggage will be searched, sniffed by bomb dogs (unless asked to keep it on board, but many won't as they want PAX to stay with their luggage so if there is a bomb in it, they know who's it likely is). You will have to give your passport/ID to the police who will verify you are who you say you are. If you are all clear, no threat, you'll go wait with others away from the rest. Then the search continues until every PAX is verified as not a threat. Aircraft will be searched by bomb sniffing dogs. Then if that's all done you will all still be held until they figure out who made the hoax and interviewed. Either way they know one of you is the person who made the threat, and some PAX likely saw who used that toilet prior to departure. I can't tell if they reached cruise or not, because if not nobody will have used that toilet after departing as it's prohibited until the seatbelt signs are off. Unfortunately as its aft, the cockpit camera likely wouldn't capture anything.
But yeah, anyway, they aren't purposely endangering you, but you, including children/babies (terrorists stoop very low), could be or are being used to conceal a bomb or threat and they will see you as such until they can deem otherwise.
Great comment. Thank you for describing better than I could
Blah blah blah it’s an ethical issue, they condemn all the other passengers to sit with the bomber as if they are dead until proven worthy to live. Your attitude created situations like Waco Texas, like Uvalde. Shame on your kind
@@M_SC Then don’t fly on an airplane. Simple as that. Their job is to keep as many people alive as possible. Sometimes that means risking others. 1 life is not greater than 100. It’s tragic, but completely understandable if you do even the most basic of thinking
WRONG!!!!! WHY TF WOULD ANYONE WITH A BOMB ACTUALLY POST IT??????
shouldn't be too hard to rig cameras/memory storage to monitor bathroom doors.
SWAT Team screamed "YESESSSSS!!!!"
Someone watched the 1974 thriller The Parallax View and decided it would be fun to play Warren Beaty?
Or the 1972 film "Skyjacked" and decided to play James Brolin.
Gotta think when the person wrote the threat. From the previous flight as they left. Who ever launders the bathroom. Who checks to make sure the “lavs” are clean and empty of debris.
The lavs are checked and cleaned by the provisioners… and flight attendants who check themselves before boarding etc
The provision come on board to restock, they checked the bathrooms, mop, the floors, replaced tissue, etc.… Also flight attendants, often wash their hands, try to get a chance to brush their hair, etc., before boarding again
Sorry for the grammar, it was dictation problem
If only every pilot would say “switching” after every radio freq read back
I don't understand. Why would someone on the flight write that message in the lavatory, so that they can wind up being incredibly inconvenienced along with everyone else when the flight returns? After having (presumably) paid money for that flight, no less?
Someone trying to be funny - or drunk.
Prankster on the cleaning crew?
Maybe it was someone on the previous flight. Or a disgruntled cleaning staff person.
But there would be many reasons why a human didn’t want their flight to arrive where it was going on time
Damn, 2024 just isn’t aviation’s year
There was a 1960's movie, forgot the name of it, but a passenger wrote a bomb threat using lipstick on the lavatory mirror.
Mentioned above in comments. 2 movies. In 70s
Not super impressed with the controllers on this one. The FAA really needs to fix the procedures so they stop asking the same questions over and over and over and over....... Sheesh.
so how do they figure out who wrote it ?
There is no information on internet.
its just good investigative work
So why do people feel a need to respond to such garbage???
Start searching and get any witness statements.
It's like the pilot imagines a young child listening next to atc. Super calm so as not to scare.
What’s there to be scared about?!?!?!? This clearly was a prank!!!!!
If I bother, I do apologize but what's the difference between: climb to 5000 and flight level 290? No need to say I'm not a pilot😅
5000 feet or 29000
Above 10000 just use first 2 numbers
In that specific example, FL290 is 29000 ft and Climb to 5000 is obviously 5000 ft.
In USA/Canada (and similar to other countries) the transition altitude is 18000 ft ASL. 18000 ft and above is expressed in FL180.
Why is the format suddenly changed from # ft to FL#?
Expressing the altitude instruction to FL will tell the pilot they are going to be at or above the transition altitude which also tells pilots to set their altimeter based on the standard of 29.92 inMg. This way, with all aircraft on 29.92 altimeter setting will be flying a consistent altitude at high level airspace.
This is safer since two aircraft on the same altimeter settings and assigned at the same or similar altitude flying across the country should never hit each other if comms failed/other problems etc...
It's all to do with different transition altitudes and levels. For instance, in the US and surrounding countries below 18,000ft, the instruction to climb, descend is read in thousands and hundreds of feet. Above 18,000ft it transitions to flight levels, so instructions are read in levels, for instance Climb Flight Level 230. Flight level pilots will use standard pressure of 29.92 InHg (1013 hPa). Below 18,000ft pilots will use the local airport air pressure measured at MSL for instance, 3012 InHg (1020 hPa).
@@MrHater72 it's clear now. GRAZIE
@@OrangeChonk It's clear now. Grazie!
Odd, he said they had 134 minutes of fuel on board. It takes about 1hour 30 minutes to go from Chicago to Washington. You also must have at least 45 minutes of fuel reserve or PART 121 operations. His math doesn't add up.
90+45 is 135. After burning some taxiing and being a few minutes into the flight, sounds like they had exactly the right amount of fuel on board.
@@aaronclark524 Aye, you're right. When I looked at Flightradar's time enroute, I switched 1:30 to 130mins. Thanks for catching public math mistake.
Scary to think the margins of our lives as passengers comes down to 45 minutes.
"A BUH!..."
"No, a bomb"
Looks like it's time for small cameras outside of lavs.
NYC, NJ Transit, and other transit systems already put them on buses.
As a pilot,
the knucklehead like author of the bomb threat left on the lav's mirror,
is why I've always preferred flying cargo.
YOu changed from inside lavs...how come?
@@RLTtizME
Cameras inside lavs?
...a tad invasive, and therefore, a no go.
Hey,
with Internet there would be bootleg videos of people in lavs, within two seconds of lav camera installations :)
Sold by low hourly wage airline, or airport workers.
Airlines need a BAC test if someone acts impaired, no more alcohol in flight.
Irrelevant
I would have thought that they would have directed them AWAY from a major urban center and a busy airport to a quieter regional airport. Cool pilot, though - sounds like he's talking about last night's sports scores, only less drama....
Small airport may not have emergency personel, fire etc needed if real. Or busses for passengers. Or rwy suitable for commercial aircraft. Or navigational aids needed for instrument approaches needed.
That's now how declaring an emergency works. As soon as they declared the emergency, ATC's job is to assist the pilots in getting to wherever the pilots think is best ASAP and get everyone else out of their way. ATC doesn't get to dictate the destination.
Why? There OBVIOUSLY was NO BOMB ABOARD!!!! STOP SATISFYING THESE PEOPLE!!!!
@@lcv8401plus it’s an international airport so we’re already have all the Feds here or nearby.
They have the equipment people and tools to handle all types of emergency’s and this isn’t the first bomb threat they have dealt with.
Has a bomb ever been found when one of these messages is found?
EXACTLY!!!!!’
Probably not, but what if there was one this time?
@@BlamBl00 Putting the note on the plane doesn't make sense. No one will see it if you're successful.
@@JimFeig doesn’t matter. They still have to take it seriously.
Ugh I hope not…. Sooo calm 😮😂
Easy, take a pic of the message and analyse everyone's hand writing on board including crew
come on how many times are you going to ask how many souls?! T_T
Just switched to news report on incident. I'm wondering if the FBI at least asked the passengers and attendants "hey would you mind writing down the sentence on a piece of paper?" before they let them get back on the plane to maybe rule out one of them writing it down. Yes, I know it is extremely unlikely someone got out of their seat unnoticed while they were still climbing but there was time before takeoff.
It was written on a mirror in lipstick so it would be hard to get a good copy of their handwriting.
Maybe it’s was the food
Has a bomb threat ever been real? Even once?
The ATC guy sounds like a sim kid!
Surely the airlines have a better set of procedures than this? The chances of there actually being a device on board is very slim, so the airlines security department would, I assume, see such incidents as fake. You have to determine if the threat is credible or not as well. There’s much more to a B threat than just finding the B word written somewhere.
EXACTLY!!!! STOP BEING SO DAMN PARANOID!!!
Why they didn't follow the QRH which first item is LEVEL OFF?
……. Because they wouldn’t reference a QRH for this?
@@atcdude067 For a bomb threat? It's one of QRH chapters
How much fuel?
souls?
fuel in ml?
field in sight
souls still?
still in sight
Chinese or the Russians or both????
“Best speed forward”… as opposed to reverse? 😂
The pilot SHOULD HAVE TOLD the FA to clean the mirror, and then kept on course!!!!
Ok, what if there was a real threat to safety?
make me sit in my seat until the plane is INSPECTED...HELL NO. I AM LEAVING THE PLANE.
oh really? was it isis, hamas, ...? shame
Most likely some dumbass trying to be funny. Not an unknown phenomenon.
The flight landed, and then taxied to a remote parking position? And what if that bomb had exploded whilst the pilots were doing that? Surely stop as quickly as possible and initiate an emergency evacuation, otherwise it is NOT an emergency landing.
they followed protocol not your what ifs that dont work
Not being knowledgeable about everything is OK. It is just important to remember that you may be missing some critical information when talking about something you are less familiar with. I am not an expert, but these are some facts I have picked up.
1. They declared an emergency, therefore it was an emergency landing.
2. Emergency evacuations take time.
3. Emergency evacuations are dangerous. People are often hurt during evacuations.
4. The protocols set up for this type of incident are based on past incidents and the work of experts. They are well grounded and consider many possibilities.
There is a whole different protocol for this type of situation. You don't know it. There is a reason for every action they take.
@@sarahalbers5555 yes, and those delayed actions could get people killed.
@@davidmoser3535 protocols will not save lives when a bomb is due to explode.
With all that’s happened to United airline’s lately maybe their having some union problems? This DEI hiring practice may not be working that well for them.
Insert D3____t Everywhere
Please stop using DEI as an excuse for everything.
Dumb comment
DEI? There is a pilot, flight attendant, and air traffic control shortage.
How the flipping f*** is those related to DEI? That's the next target for you fools, huh?? Oh, a girl doesn't want anything to do with you, and you blame that on DEI. Your mom doesn't love you anymore, therefore DEI! Sheesh....
Well damn, glad they took it as calmly as they did since I would've been shitting myself.
You would be a lousy pilot.
I wonder if the pilot told the passengers why they were headed back to Chicago?
Which is why they're pilots and you're not
Why???? It OBVIOUSLY was BS!!!!