The real reason you can't use cell phones on airplanes
By: Elliott Neal Hester
Source: SF Chronicle, Sunday, July 22, 2001

One of the most difficult aspects of a flight attendant's job is handling passengers who refuse to follow rules. "Please stow your carry-on, sir." "Fasten your seat belt, ma'am." "Sorry, but fingernail polish is flammable and should not be applied onboard." Having voiced these FAA mandates to those who weren't willing to comply, I've had my share of onboard confrontations. But the war of words seems at its worst when the subject turns to cell phones.

Recently I approached a businessman as our New York-Miami flight taxied toward the runway. Sitting in the first row of coach, he spoke loudly enough that passengers in the rear could hear details of his cellular conversation. Yes, he was annoying fellow fliers. And because the plane had left the gate, he was violating airline policy against cell-phone use on the ground. "Sir, will you please turn off your phone?" I said. He nodded his head in a way that suggested he would hang up when he was good and ready. I hovered above him, scrutinized by passengers eager to hear my next ploy.

I cleared my throat, and he looked up. "I'll be finished in a minute!" he said, aggravated by the intrusion. "Sir, you need to terminate your call now," I said. "It's airline policy" The man ignored me, prattling into his mobile phone unperturbed. At this point I had three options:
1. Vociferously demand that he turn off his cell phone,
2. Inform the captain of the problem and possibly delay the flight or
3. Forget the whole thing, return to my jump seat and hope no one reports the indiscretion.

I stood there, amid a sea of upturned faces, weighing my options as the plane moved closer to takeoff . . .

Cellular phone usage aboard airplanes is proliferating. Before the departure of any given flight, no less than four or five passengers (sometimes 20 or more) will have a cell phone glued to one ear. On the ground, the decision to allow mobile calls is left to the discretion of individual airlines. But government regulations prohibit cell phone use in flight. Contrary to what most passengers believe, the Federal Communication Commission (the government agency that regulates telephone usage), not the FAA, imposed the in-flight ban on cell phones in 1991. According to a Wall Street Journal report, "the FCC was mainly concerned about (airborne) cell phones' potential to interfere with ground-to-ground cellular transmission."

Airlines tell passengers that cell phones can interfere with navigation and communications equipment in the cockpit. But a study commissioned by the FAA in 1996 failed to find a single instance in which equipment was affected by a wireless phone. Nevertheless, electricity from cellular phones can, in theory, interfere with aircraft systems. For this reason, Boeing and the FAA support the FCC ban.

Although many airplanes have public "air phones," passengers flinch at the fee of $6 per minute. (Airlines get a cut of the profits, which casts suspicion on why airlines want to keep cell phones turned off in the air.) Despite government regulation, or perhaps because of it, chatting above the clouds on a cell phone has proved irresistible for some. I've seen passengers hunkered in their seats, whispering into Nokias. I've watched frequent fliers scurry for a carry-on as muffled ringing emanates from within. Once, after the lavatory line grew to an unreasonable length, I knocked on the door. A guilt- ridden teenager emerged. She admitted that she'd been in there for half an hour, talking to her boyfriend on a cell phone.

These violators on U.S. airlines face harsh words and a fine. But cell-phone scofflaws on foreign airlines can face more serious consequences. In 1999, oil worker Neil Whitehouse refused to switch off his mobile phone on a British Airways flight. When a cabin attendant advised him to turn off the unit because it could interfere with navigation systems, Whitehouse replied, "Why? Are we going to get lost?" The captain arrived and told Whitehouse to hand over his phone. He refused. The 28-year-old was arrested upon landing and later sentenced to one year in prison. Last February, cell-phone abusers received yet another warning. This time it came from Saudi Arabia. Despite orders from the cabin crew to turn off his cell phone before takeoff, a Saudi passenger continued to chat away.

The man forced a 30-minute delay and was escorted from the plane by airport security. Later, a Saudi court sentenced him to 70 lashes. Moments before my New York-Miami flight rolled onto the runway, I looked down at the businessman who had refused to turn off his cell phone. Twice, I'd asked for compliance. Twice, my request was ignored. If we were in Saudi Arabia instead of New York, he might get 70 lashes. If we were governed by Britain's Civil Aviation Authority instead of the U.S. Federal Aviation Administration, he might get a year behind bars. I advised the businessman of these facts, but to no avail. Then, in a voice loud enough for the planeload of passengers to hear, I told him that the aircraft would return to the gate and that although he would not receive lashes or a prison sentence, he might, however, cause his fellow passengers to miss their connections in Miami. That's when a hundred pairs of narrowed eyes turned on him. The businessman abruptly put away his cell phone and remained incommunicado for the duration of the flight.

The plane is a Boeing 757 with 66 passengers and 6 crew members. Police say an 81 year old passenger was flying with his 2 grandchildren from Orlando to Flint, Michigan, with a connection in Cincinnati. He was headed to the restroom when he took a writing pen from the bag of a flight attendent.

When the crew member confronted him, they began arguing and the man hit the flight attendant in the face with a rolled up newspaper. The man was taken from the flight and is not allowed on any Delta flights for the remainder of the day. The grandchildren were sent along on the connecting flight to Flint. The man had to stay in the custody of the Transporation Safety Agency until they deemed him to be safe, then he was allowed to fly to Flint the next day. The flight attendant is not pressing charges.

Flugpassagier schnallte sich nicht an - Anzeige

Der Passagier blieb stur. Mehrmals forderten die Stewardessen den Mann auf, sich anzuschnallen - ohne Erfolg. Er ignorierte selbst eine schriftliche Anweisung des Piloten. Daraufhin war für ihn der Flug innerhalb Japans schon vor dem Start beendet.
.

Randalierender Passagier an Sitz gefesselt
Ein Airbus der LTU von München nach Bangkok musste eine unplanmäßige Zwischenlandung in Düsseldorf einlegen.

Notlandung wegen betrunkenem Passagier

Ein betrunkener Fluggast hat auf dem Rückflug von Mexiko nach Großbritannien im Flugzeug so randaliert, dass der Pilot zwischenlanden musste.

Der Mann habe zunächst einen Streit mit seinem Sitznachbarn begonnen und dann angefangen, die Waschräume "zu zerlegen". Das sagte ein Sprecher des britischen Charterflugunternehmens Thomsonfly. Mit Unterstützung einiger Passagiere gelang es drei Besatzungsmitgliedern schließlich, den Mann unter Kontrolle zu bringen. Der Pilot landete die Boeing 767 aus Sicherheitsgründen in Orlando im US-Bundesstaat Florida. Der aufsässige Passagier wurde festgenommen.

Da die Crew wegen der unplanmäßigen Zwischenlandung bei einem Weiterflug nach Birmingham über ihre maximale Crew-Duty-Time gekommen wäre, und da ihr andererseits eine Minimum-Rest-Time zustand, wurden die 232 Passagiere, die auf dem Weg von Cancun in Mexiko nach Birmingham waren, kurzerhand in Hotels untergebracht; von wo sie tags darauf ihre Reise fortsetzen konnten.

Die Kosten der Aktion bezahlt üblicherweise der Verursacher...

The Thomsonfly plane from Cancun in Mexico to Manchester was diverted to Sanford Airport in Orlando following the disturbance on board. The FBI said a man it named as Rafal Krawczyk, aged 32, had been charged with "interfering with" flight crew.

The FBI named the passenger involved as Rafal Krawczyk, from Belfast, who has a Polish passport and was born in 1973. It said he had assaulted three flight attendants and several passengers were needed to restrain him and confirmed he had been charged with "interfering with a flight crew". Mr Krawczyk is due to appear in court on Tuesday.

Ian MacGranthin, a passenger on flight BY437B, told BBC News: "He attacked a couple of crew members and a few people got knocked about. Eventually he had to be restrained." Another passenger said: "He started getting more aggressive. "He tried to get into the toilets and when he couldn't get into the toilets he reached for the emergency exit handle and he was pulling on that. That's when everyone piled in".

A Thomsonfly spokesman said: "The captain took the decision for the safety of all passengers to take the aircraft into Sanford." Passengers on the flight were put up in hotels and given food, the spokesman said.

Source: BBC

Air-rage passenger dumped on paradise island
By Simon Freeman and Russell Jenkins

A drunken passenger who abused cabin crew on a flight to Tenerife spent 36 hours castaway after the airline abandoned him on a tiny island in the Atlantic, 300 miles from his destination. Monarch Airlines said that the man became rude and aggressive towards staff shortly after flight ZB558 took off from Manchester on Tuesday evening. When he refused to calm down, the pilot took the decision to divert the plane and make an unscheduled stop-off at an airstrip on the tiny Portuguese island of Porto Santo. The passenger was frogmarched out - and his luggage removed from the hold - before the Airbus A321 carrying 200 other passengers took off again, leaving him behind.

Porto Santo, described as an unspoilt island paradise with a population of fewer than 5,000, is a two-hour ferry ride away from the nearest major airport on Madeira. An officer at the airport's police station told Times Online that the man had remained on the island until this morning, when he managed to book a seat on a German charter flight to the Canary Islands.

A spokesman for Monarch, the Italian-owned operation based in Manchester, explained that the man had put the safety of other passengers in danger. "Despite repeated attempts by Monarch staff to calm the individual, the passenger’s behaviour did not improve and the decision was taken to divert to Porto Santo at 1955 where the passenger was removed," he said. "The action was taken in the interests of all the passengers. That sort of behaviour is not acceptable. He was the given the chance to calm down and he declined it. He was given a form, a caution for his behaviour, and he refused to sign it."

A spokeswoman for British Airways said that the airline operated a "yellow card" policy under which disruptive passengers were issued with a written warning and then arrested an the destination airport if they continued to misbehave. She said that only in the most extreme cases - and only once before on record - would a plane be diverted and the passenger removed.

Keith Bill, of British Airline Pilots’ Association, said that the captain of any aircraft has wide-ranging powers to deal with troublemakers who threaten the safety of other passengers. He said: "There's no doubt that the captain was acting within his rights to take this action. Pilots feel very strongly that anyone who puts the lives of the crew or passengers at risk ought also to be punished by the courts."

Source: Times Online

Auf einem Flug von London nach Malaga zum Beispiel schlug einmal ein Passagier einer Stewardess eine Wodka-Flasche an den Kopf, dass sie anschließend mit 18 Stichen genäht werden musste.

Ein Flug von London nach Orlando wurde in Boston mit einer Notlandung unterbrochen, nachdem ein Passagier vergeblich versucht hatte, eine Stewardess zu küssen. Einem anderen Passagier, der versuchte, der Stewardess zur Hilfe zu kommen, verpasste er einen Kopfstoß. Schließlich drohte er, den Käpt'n umzubringen.

Auf einem Flug von Los Angeles nach Baltimore ging ein Passagier den Gang rauf und runter, behauptete er sei Jesus. Er 'segnete' die Passagiere, indem er ihre Köpfe mit einem Kissen berührte. So weit war das ja noch harmlos und fast amüsant. Für eine Weile. Als ihn aber der Flugbegleiter anwies, sich nun hinzusetzen und anzuschnallen, wurde der 'Jesus' plötzlich gewalttätig.

Passenger Mr. Finneran, a banker, was fined $50,000 by United Airlines after he assaulted an attendant and then defecated on a first-class food cart during a Buenos Aires-to-New York flight.

Passenger Mr. Guzman-Hernandez removed his pants and then "simulated having sex with the back of his own seat."

Passenger Mr. Misiak put his hands around the throat of a flight attendant and threatened her because she spilled a drink on him.

A passenger named Ms. Pennix grabbed a flight attendant's finger and bent it backward. Pennix explained to authorities that she didn't like the way the flight attendant told her to put her tray and seat in an upright position before landing. Passenger Mrs. Levy grabbed a flight attendant by the arms and twisted her wrists. Levy was traveling with three children and explains that she lost her temper because her 20-month-old was crying, had wet pants, and there was no way to get to the bathroom.

Passenger Mr. Okada from Japan "allegedly urinated on the seats" then punched another passenger who told him to stop.

A group of drunken Irish tourists were apparently so unruly over the Atlantic that the crew enlisted the help of a wrestling team to restrain them.

Airline crews have begun to take drastic measures which sometimes have disastrous consequences. In December 1998, an unruly passenger was aboard a Malov flight between Bangkok and Budapest. The crew and passengers tied the unruly man to his seat, then a doctor on board injected him with a tranquilizer. The passenger died - tied to his seat with airplane headset cords!
Once the crew noticed that the unruly passenger had died, the plane made an unscheduled stop in Istanbul. Five witnesses (passengers) were detained by the Turkish police along with the doctor. After a 13-hour delay, the remaining 183 passengers winged away (and behaved themselves, in spite of their late arrivals and missed connections).
An autopsy in Istanbul showed that the unruly passenger had died due to the mixture in his blood of the tranquilizer and some other drug or alcohol.

by Diana Fairechild

Salt Lake City police this week released reports detailing the bizarre August incident on a Southwest Airlines plane that left an unruly 19-year-old dead--killed by fellow passengers who fought to restrain the man after he rushed the cockpit.

'Air rage' diplomat cleared

A senior British diplomat has been cleared of being drunk on board an aircraft after threatening passengers and staff during a flight between Abu Dhabi and London Heathrow in February 2005. Colonel Peter Roberts MBE, who was Britain's defence attache in Thailand at the time, had to be physically restrained during the flight after launching a tirade of abuse at both passengers and crew during the flight.

Fellow passengers claimed the diplomat had been downing a cocktail of beer, wine and spirits throughout the flight, and had angrily insulted Thailand, shouting: 'F*** the king and f*** this country and f*** the Buddha.'

However, a jury at Isleworth crown court in south-west London today cleared Col Roberts of being drunk while on board the plane, accepting the defence team's claims that his behaviour was caused by antidepressant drugs the diplomat was taking at the time to help him recover from the trauma of the Boxing Day tsunami. Speaking after the verdict, Look Chih Wang, Col Roberts' defence lawyer, was delighted that his client's name had been cleared. 'Col Roberts has been found not guilty of this offence because he was not in fact drunk. His behaviour was due to a temporary abnormality of function caused by long-term chronic stress, tsunami-related post traumatic stress, sleep deprivation, and a combination of the anti-depressant Seroxat and alcohol,' he said. 'Col Roberts has been advised by his doctor that he could drink in moderation whilst taking Seroxat and has maintained his innocence throughout these proceedings. He added: 'The Crown Prosecution Service has been in possession of the defence expert's reports in this case for many months. It is therefore perhaps surprising that this matter was ever brought to trial.'

However, despite being cleared of the charged of being drunk while on board an aircraft, Judge Usha Karu rejected Col Roberts' application for his legal costs to be covered, ruling that the diplomat should have been more moderate in his alcohol consumption given that he was on medication. Col Roberts claims to have no recollection of the incident and has since apologised to fellow passengers and cabin crew, as well as to the Thai authorities for any offence caused by his remarks. He had been one of the first British officials on the scene in western Thailand in the aftermath of the tsunami and was said to have been deeply traumatised by what he had seen.