Incident on Airline - passengers misinformed

faceman

I am reluctant to name the carrier or specific airports in this just in case but can if necessary. Basically there was an incident with a flight from the UK to ireland recently and due to a mechanical failure a serious of events unfolded that to be honest, have left me feeling very weary of the airline in question.

To give the back story. "A friend" was flying from UK to Ireland and the airline that due to a mechanical failure the flight was delayed. Await further annoucements etc. AFter a few more announcements (and hours) it was was announced that an engineer was being flown from Ireland to fix what was described as an engine issue. later it was announced that because the issue wouldnt be fixed a replacement airplane was being sourced.

When boarding it was noticed that the replaced plane was in fact the original plane (the plane's name/number was the same as the one that had been sitting outside the airport since earlier!!) Some passengers expressed concern (some refused to board AFAIK) Anyway the plane took off. After about 10 minutes the pilot came on asking people not to panic, one of the engines had failed and the flight would be returning to the airport. There were tears, screams and all that jazz. One bloke started saying he could see oil leaking from the faulty engine setting more people into a panic. Anyway, we landed and eventually came to a stop (very close to the end of the runyway!) with a fleet of ambulances and fire engines visibily behind the plane.

After been kept waiting on the plane for an hour they were taken off the plane and told by the airline they would be accommodated in a hotel and flown to Ireland the next day. By the time it came to my friend in the queue, he was informed they had no more accommodation options left and that he would have to come to his own arrangements. After much argy bargy he was offered a solution of been transported to a different airport the folllowing day and flown to a different irish aiport and bussed to his destination. Something that was completely unacceptable to him.

So he made alternate accommodation plans and was informed he would be contacted first thing in the morning with my flight details. There was no phone call. It took him 2 days before he got a hold of someone who could help him. Finally he had a flight. (After accruing expenses for 2 days)

This is were things take a turn for the down right scary. On the flight to Ireland a man sat beside him in the airline uniform. he got chatting to him. Turns out he was an engineer. He asked him if he had been fixing any interesting issues. He told him about an issue with one of their flights that week, an engine failure, thing was in tatters, nightmare to try fix but the airline tried to fly after and the engine pack in etc etc. When he revealed to him that he was on that flight, the engineer's tone changed. He started to tone down and water down his comments on it.

When they arrived and my friend got off, the engineer came back over to him shook his hand, and started being overly nice to him, telling me him he was a top bloke etc. It was clear the engineer had realised he shouldnt have opened his mouth and was hoping my friend would say nought.

My friend sent a formal complaint to the airline. There was no mention of the incident in the media but we are now left a major aversion to this airline. So much so that my friend is considering going to the media over it as he hasnt received a response from the airline.

Presumably my friend is due compensation and reimbursement of expenses. Should the incident be reported to the regulator?

highlydebased

Reads a bit like a story that belongs in The Sun etc.

Shamrock231

Aer Lingus Regional Flight EI3187 from Luton to Waterord, operated by Aer Arann using an ATR 42?

ScouseMouse

Looks like they took a chance. Have checked it out online and there is much shorted version on "AHerald".

Would certainly make me think twice.

saspeir

Is it just me or is Aer Arann having quite a few incidents recently?

Manchester - brake failure, plane hit ground equipment at the gate
Shannon - veered off runways, nose gear collapse
Dublin - burst tire on landing, closed Runway 28 for few hours

And numerous engine failures...

Skuxx

faceman wrote: »

I am reluctant to name the carrier or specific airports in this just in case but can if necessary. Basically there was an incident with a flight from the UK to ireland recently and due to a mechanical failure a serious of events unfolded that to be honest, have left me feeling very weary of the airline in question.

To give the back story. "A friend" was flying from UK to Ireland and the airline that due to a mechanical failure the flight was delayed. Await further annoucements etc. AFter a few more announcements (and hours) it was was announced that an engineer was being flown from Ireland to fix what was described as an engine issue. later it was announced that because the issue wouldnt be fixed a replacement airplane was being sourced.

When boarding it was noticed that the replaced plane was in fact the original plane (the plane's name/number was the same as the one that had been sitting outside the airport since earlier!!) Some passengers expressed concern (some refused to board AFAIK) Anyway the plane took off. After about 10 minutes the pilot came on asking people not to panic, one of the engines had failed and the flight would be returning to the airport. There were tears, screams and all that jazz. One bloke started saying he could see oil leaking from the faulty engine setting more people into a panic. Anyway, we landed and eventually came to a stop (very close to the end of the runyway!) with a fleet of ambulances and fire engines visibily behind the plane.

After been kept waiting on the plane for an hour they were taken off the plane and told by the airline they would be accommodated in a hotel and flown to Ireland the next day. By the time it came to my friend in the queue, he was informed they had no more accommodation options left and that he would have to come to his own arrangements. After much argy bargy he was offered a solution of been transported to a different airport the folllowing day and flown to a different irish aiport and bussed to his destination. Something that was completely unacceptable to him.

So he made alternate accommodation plans and was informed he would be contacted first thing in the morning with my flight details. There was no phone call. It took him 2 days before he got a hold of someone who could help him. Finally he had a flight. (After accruing expenses for 2 days)

This is were things take a turn for the down right scary. On the flight to Ireland a man sat beside him in the airline uniform. he got chatting to him. Turns out he was an engineer. He asked him if he had been fixing any interesting issues. He told him about an issue with one of their flights that week, an engine failure, thing was in tatters, nightmare to try fix but the airline tried to fly after and the engine pack in etc etc. When he revealed to him that he was on that flight, the engineer's tone changed. He started to tone down and water down his comments on it.

When they arrived and my friend got off, the engineer came back over to him shook his hand, and started being overly nice to him, telling me him he was a top bloke etc. It was clear the engineer had realised he shouldnt have opened his mouth and was hoping my friend would say nought.

My friend sent a formal complaint to the airline. There was no mention of the incident in the media but we are now left a major aversion to this airline. So much so that my friend is considering going to the media over it as he hasnt received a response from the airline.

Presumably my friend is due compensation and reimbursement of expenses. Should the incident be reported to the regulator?

If it was you on the flight, why not just say that??

As for fire engines and ambulances on arrival, thats standard procedure, even for non A/C failure incidents such as medical emergencies, doesn't mean there was any real danager!!

Shamrock231

saspeir wrote: »

Is it just me or is Aer Arann having quite a few incidents recently?

Manchester - brake failure, plane hit ground equipment at the gate
Shannon - veered off runways, nose gear collapse
Dublin - burst tire on landing, closed Runway 28 for few hours

And numerous engine failures...

It's those old ATR 42's, some of them are over 20 years old. They're supposed to be putting in an order for 6 new aircraft though in a few weeks, so that should improve reliability to no end....

faceman

alan1990 wrote:

If it was you on the flight, why not just say that??

As for fire engines and ambulances on arrival, thats standard procedure, even for non A/C failure incidents such as medical emergencies, doesn't mean there was any real danager!!

It was a copy/paste job with edits from his email. Sure if it was me I would have said it! (would make the story more dramatic too...)

My friend is a good flyer (Whereas I'm not) so he wasn't too phased by having to undergo an emergency landing. It's the handling of it that is a shambles as far as he is concerned.

saspeir

faceman wrote: »

It was a copy/paste job with edits from his email. Sure if it was me I would have said it! (would make the story more dramatic too...)

My friend is a good flyer (Whereas I'm not) so he wasn't too phased by having to undergo an emergency landing. It's the handling of it that is a shambles as far as he is concerned.

Your friend's costs should be completely covered so long as he has receipts. I don't think there's any legislation for a company misinforming about which plane they used and I'm sure the C.A.A. will do their investigations into the history of the flight and any maintenance carried out. Just don't fly with them again. It's yet another example of fine Irish customer service... We really excel at it...

bluecode

Sounds more like a precautionary engine shutdown than an actual engine failure. An oil leak of some sort. I don't know if Aer Arann are more or less prone to maintenance issues. I think it may be a worldwide problem with ATRs. The Aer Arann ATRs are getting older now and older aircraft have more problems, even the best maintained.

The reality is that as usual passengers were not in much danger at all, inconvenienced yes, scared yes. But people get carried away with the perceived risks when flying. No surprise there.

As for the Engineer on the flight, he really should have kept his mouth shut. One of things you're told when you work in the business is not to disclose information to the public least of all a passenger on board a flight. This is not a suggestion to cover up issues but this is an example of how comments can be misunderstood or exaggerated and then it ends up in the media in a completely distorted form.

Even on this forum there are people in the industry who post here who hold back on their comments or don't post at all. But when you meet them face to face you hear all the stories. If only you knew!

Skuxx

An Aer Arann Avion de Transport Regional ATR-42-300 on behalf of Aer Lingus, registration EI-BYO performing flight RE-3187/EI-3187 from London Luton,EN (UK) to Waterford (Ireland), was climbing out of Luton Airport when the crew decided to return to Luton causing the temporary closure of the runway.

A number of aircraft diverted to other airports. A passenger of an aircraft diverting reported their captain informed them about an aircraft blocking the runway in Luton following a runway overrun and spillage on the runway. Their aircraft was able to position to Luton Airport later and reached their destination with a delay of just over 2 hours.

The airport reported the crew reported some technical issues and returned to Luton for a safe landing.

The airline did not comment.

Avherald's version of events!

http://www.avherald.com/h?article=451cecb1&opt=768

Skuxx

ForeignersOut wrote: »

WTF?? I don't get it!

Milan Cobian

Should the incident be reported to the regulator?

Yeah you should probably contact them. It's likely no-one else involved, from the pilots to ATC to the fire-services, would have reported, or noticed, an engine failure so they're probably none the wiser as it stands.

saspeir

Milan Cobian wrote: »

Yeah you should probably contact them. It's likely no-one else involved, from the pilots to ATC to the fire-services, would have reported, or noticed, an engine failure so they're probably none the wiser as it stands.

You for real? I take it you don't work in aviation... They called to return and shut a runway down. You can be sure both pilots and ATC reported this and the C.A.A. and I.A.A. know too... It's mandatory!

What's at fault here is customer service. I suggest you let the National Consumer Agency know so that if any regulations were violated, with regards to compensation and due care after a disrupted flight, that they may advise you where to go.

air2000

Hi All

Im not involved with Aer Arann but know enough about their operations to point out that some parts of this report dont smell right.

Since when did Aer Arann engineers wear uniforms.... they dont.

I also find it hard to believe the engine was in tatters as the aircraft was ferried back to Dublin empty. Normal procedure is for the engineer to fly back with the aircraft, seems strange that he would take a mini break in Luton for 2 days and cost the airline money to fly back rather than a free jump seat on the ATR.

coylemj

air2000 wrote: »

Hi All

Im not involved with Aer Arann but know enough about their operations to point out that some parts of this report dont smell right.

Since when did Aer Arann engineers wear uniforms.... they dont.

I also find it hard to believe the engine was in tatters as the aircraft was ferried back to Dublin empty. Normal procedure is for the engineer to fly back with the aircraft, seems strange that he would take a mini break in Luton for 2 days and cost the airline money to fly back rather than a free jump seat on the ATR.

+1 An 'engineer' wearing the uniform of airline X is sitting on an airline X flight beside a complete stranger and tells him a about an incident involving an engine 'in tatters' and 'a nightmare to fix' not knowing if he's talking to an employee of the IAA or a journo from the Evening Herald, doesn't add up.

Nonoperational

So while on the airline in question a man sits next to your friend in the airlines uniform. Your friend out of the blue asks "hey, fixing any interesting aircraft lately". The stranger who works for the company, is flying on their plane and wearing their uniform, proceeds to tell a complete stranger that yes, he recently tried to fix a bucket of ****e but sur they flew it anyway. It's in tatters and a nightmare...

Absolute bs for me anyway or at best extreme exaggeration.

Terrontress

I thought that the use of "a friend" in inverted commas and the capitalisation of AF in the word after was a coded message that it is Air France / Cityjet that the op was referring to.

gihj

gpf101 wrote: »

So while on the airline in question a man sits next to your friend in the airlines uniform. Your friend out of the blue asks "hey, fixing any interesting aircraft lately". The stranger who works for the company, is flying on their plane and wearing their uniform, proceeds to tell a complete stranger that yes, he recently tried to fix a bucket of ****e but sur they flew it anyway. It's in tatters and a nightmare...

Absolute bs for me anyway or at best extreme exaggeration.

It's a load of horse**** tbh.

The op is after all a mod of both the Humour and Theater and performing arts fora.:D

Dangerous story to be making up too.

faceman

Right just to clarify. I purposefully didn't mention any airline or airports. It's only fair that the airline responds direct first to my friend and his complaint.

The purpose of the thread was to get people's view of the circumstances/recommended course of action from a consumer's point if view.

As to the credibility of the story, if I was going to make it up, I'd make it far more interesting to be honest!

Milan Cobian

You for real? I take it you don't work in aviation... They called to return and shut a runway down. You can be sure both pilots and ATC reported this and the C.A.A. and I.A.A. know too... It's mandatory!

Good man saspeir. The next time I employ sarcasm I'll make a full declaration so as to ensure no misunderstanding. :rolleyes:

christy c

faceman wrote: »

Right just to clarify. I purposefully didn't mention any airline or airports. It's only fair that the airline responds direct first to my friend and his complaint.

The purpose of the thread was to get people's view of the circumstances/recommended course of action from a consumer's point if view.

As to the credibility of the story, if I was going to make it up, I'd make it far more interesting to be honest!

So would it not be more appropriate to have this in the consumer issues section?

I also agree with other posters that it sounds like BS. You may not have made it up but did "your friend"?

endofrainbow

Hearsay.....

faceman

Looking for some help, the airline have not responded to the complaint. Can anyone please advise what avenue should be taken next?

Skuxx

faceman wrote: »

Looking for some help, the airline have not responded to the complaint. Can anyone please advise what avenue should be taken next?

Consumer issues forum is that way

---

>

InvestiJohn

Hi,

I am a journalist working in Luton and I have been looking in to this incident myself. So far Aer Arran have been very unco-operative with this, refusing to say a word and getting a bit antsy about it!

They said the incident was under investigation but the plane in question is flying again.

Is this sort of thing usual in the aviation industry?

Shamrock231

InvestiJohn wrote: »

Hi,

I am a journalist working in Luton and I have been looking in to this incident myself. So far Aer Arran have been very unco-operative with this, refusing to say a word and getting a bit antsy about it!

They said the incident was under investigation but the plane in question is flying again.

Is this sort of thing usual in the aviation industry?

It is common enough, these things can be fixed easily within the time period since the accident. They're likely acting on the advice of their lawyers if they're point blank refusing to comment on the investigation.

A320

InvestiJohn wrote: »

.

Is this sort of thing usual in the aviation industry?

Yes it would as they are probably cooperating with another body and can't say anything until a report

InvestiJohn

Well the UK AAIB have concluded their investigations but the IAA are still looking in to it. Where can I get more information on these ATR planes? Never heard of them before prior to this incident.

Cessna_Pilot

Surely as an educated Journo you know the best place to find very accurate information is off some random page on google.

Shamrock231

InvestiJohn wrote: »

Well the UK AAIB have concluded their investigations but the IAA are still looking in to it. Where can I get more information on these ATR planes? Never heard of them before prior to this incident.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ATR_72

InvestiJohn

Cheers Shamrock. I have already had look at that and am surprised at how old the plane is.

Cessna_Pilot wrote: »

Surely as an educated Journo you know the best place to find very accurate information is off some random page on google.

Me posting on this board and speaking to people who know more than me about aviation is a luxury - most journos would not even bother! You'd be surprised at how much google searching is done in newsrooms these days...

martinsvi

what does plane age has to do with this incident?

Tenger

InvestiJohn wrote: »

Cheers Shamrock. I have already had look at that and am surprised at how old the plane is.



Me posting on this board and speaking to people who know more than me about aviation is a luxury - most journos would not even bother! You'd be surprised at how much google searching is done in newsrooms these days...

Actually looking at some newspaper articles I would be surpriied that any online research was done........Daily mail/Evening Herald....I am looking at you.


By the way John, while the age of an aircraft may seem like a factor, you have to remember that aircraft are not built like cars. They are designed to operate for 15-25 years. After all they receive a basic check-up after every flight and more intensive work overs at tightly regulated regular intervals. Most US airlines have aircraft from the last 1980's/early 90's flying all day long. The average age of aircraft is a lot lower among European airlines.

kevjob

Just because an aircraft is old, does not mean the engines are old. The airframe could be 15 years old, but the engines could be a few months old.

The ATR 72-500 is around the same time as the B747-400, of which there are a lot still flying. The age of the aircraft is not relevant to the incident, in my opinion.

There is a perception that if the aircraft has propellers, then it must be old, there are a lot of ATR aircraft flying around that are only a few years old.

Kev

Nonoperational

InvestiJohn wrote: »

Well the UK AAIB have concluded their investigations but the IAA are still looking in to it. Where can I get more information on these ATR planes? Never heard of them before prior to this incident.

No offence, but it's going to be very difficult to write a quality piece if you never heard of very common aircraft like ATR 42/72s.

There are many many 20 year + aircraft operating day in day out.

L1011

InvestiJohn wrote: »

Cheers Shamrock. I have already had look at that and am surprised at how old the plane is.

BA have a lot of similarly aged metal flying. 747-400s and 737 Classics.

InvestiJohn wrote: »

Me posting on this board and speaking to people who know more than me about aviation is a luxury - most journos would not even bother! You'd be surprised at how much google searching is done in newsrooms these days...

I still have a horrible suspicion that any article published will be sensationalist - as the general public really aren't going to give a damn about what is a fairly normal tech/ops issue on a small airline.

InvestiJohn

I still have a horrible suspicion that any article published will be sensationalist - as the general public really aren't going to give a damn about what is a fairly normal tech/ops issue on a small airline.

Will not be writing anything as the story is not what I thought it was so you don't have to worry about that!

No offence, but it's going to be very difficult to write a quality piece if you never heard of very common aircraft like ATR 42/72s.

There are many many 20 year + aircraft operating day in day out.

None taken. Aviation is not my area hence why I dug around a bit to get some info. This thread has really helped.

pclancy

I'm thinking either close this thread or move it to consumer issues, the opinion of several people who work in the industry has been given and to me I find it all non-news, planes go tech every day of the year and I certainly don't like the idea of stirring up a story,

Faceman what are your thoughts?

faceman

pclancy wrote: »

I'm thinking either close this thread or move it to consumer issues, the opinion of several people who work in the industry has been given and to me I find it all non-news, planes go tech every day of the year and I certainly don't like the idea of stirring up a story,

Faceman what are your thoughts?

I'm ok with you closing it. The thread has run its course and while the issue is still ongoing in RL, it's now really a consumer issue.