Effects on Flight Crews
At the recent 17th Annual International Aircraft Cabin Safety Symposium held in Los Angeles, California, NASAASRS staff presented the results of a study on commercial air passenger behavior problems reported to the ASRS in 1998. Of the total 152 passenger behavior incidents reviewed, 77 reports were submitted by cabin crew and 75 by cockpit crew. This selection assured that the perspectives of both pilots and cabin attendants were represented. The ASRS study revealed that passenger misconduct causes significant problems to flight deck crews as well as cabin attendants. A “snapshot” of the study data is revealing: assistance people. I don’t mean our [gate] agents – who of course would know better – but the people that push the wheelchairs and drive the carts. Someone needs to counsel these people that while their job may be to assist passengers, it is not to assist drunk passengers on the airplanes. I feel that if a guy is too drunk to walk on the airplane, then he is too drunk to ride for 2-1/2 hours on the same full airplane.
To Intervene, or Not to Intervene?
The ASRS study data indicated that cockpit crews are often faced with the dilemma of whether to intervene in a passenger-caused disturbance. A harrowing smoke-in-thelavatory incident illustrates:
✈ In 43% of the passenger-related incidents, flight crews
experienced some level of distraction from flying duties.
✈ In more than half of these distraction incidents, a pilot
deviation was the consequence.
I A passenger on the flight became violent as we started
the Visual Approach to Runway 13L. I had the First Officer call for assistance on the ground and continued the approach. I elected to land as soon as possible and deal with the passenger on the ground. I landed the aircraft while the struggle went on. When we cleared the runway the flight attendants had trapped the passenger in the forward lavatory. I taxied to the gate and shut down and went into the cabin to help. As I stepped into the cabin the smoke alarm in the forward lavatory went off and smoke started to come out. The gate was not yet up to the aircraft, also the forward lavatory was between the passengers and the boarding door. I elected to have the aircraft stairs dropped and deplane the passengers onto the ramp. Police and Fire Department arrived and took control of the passenger after a struggle. The passenger had taken off his clothes in the lavatory and set fire to them in an attempt to set the aircraft on fire. The aircraft sustained little damage as the fire self-extinguished. In this instance, the Captain’s decision not to intervene until after the aircraft had landed may have been due to company policy, or reluctance to lose the services of a cockpit crew member during the crucial approach and landing phases.
✈ In 22% of the total study incidents, a flight crew member
left the cockpit to assist flight attendants in dealing with an unruly passenger.
✈ Flight crews diverted to an alternate airport to deplane
the unruly passenger in 13% of the total incidents. The following study report illustrates all of these factors:
I …Passenger became unruly and drunk. The Captain
advised him no alcohol, no touching flight attendant or passengers. The Captain returned to the cockpit and was then advised by the flight attendant that the passenger was brandishing a knife. [We initiated] a descent and diversion to [alternate airport]. Exceeded 250 knots below 10,000 feet due to gravity of situation. SWAT team removed passenger and he was taken to jail.
Monitoring of Passengers Prior to Boarding
Alcohol intoxication was directly involved in 43% of the ASRS passenger misconduct incidents. The study’s reporters frequently suggested that passengers should be monitored for erratic behavior prior to boarding – particularly for signs of intoxication – and denied boarding if their behavior appears likely to continue during flight. Yet in some instances drunken passengers were actually assisted in boarding by ground personnel:
In 1999, passenger behavior problems became the type of incident most frequently reported to the ASRS by cabin crew personnel. The phenomenon of “air rage” is justifiably attracting the attention of media, regulators, and airlines. The ASRS study data show additional reasons to be concerned: Commercial aircraft, and their passengers, are exposed to higher risks of a serious incident or accident when pilots are distracted from flying tasks, become involved in restraining unruly passengers, and are put at risk of personal injury.
I While boarding, the #1 Flight Attendant advised that
we had a drunk passenger… In a very short time the #2 Flight Attendant advised me that he was a problem and that she wanted him off the plane. I called the ramp tower and asked for police and the proper people. He left the airplane peacefully... The agent working the flight was very helpful. All in all, this was no big deal except for one major problem. I later found out that the guy was so drunk that he had to be helped on the plane by the passenger
ASRS Recently Issued Alerts On…
Runaway electric trim on an Avro RJ85 Multiple incidents of MEL non-compliance off the gate Runway incursion and signage problems at an airport B-767 bulkhead charring caused by an airphone short Radio frequency disruption of a DC-9 pressure controller
A Monthly Safety Bulletin from
The Office of the NASA Aviation Safety Reporting System, P.O. Box 189, Moffett Field, CA 94035-0189 http://asrs.arc.nasa.gov/
February 2000 Report Intake
Air Carrier / Air Taxi Pilots General Aviation Pilots Controllers Cabin/Mechanics/Military/Other TOTAL 2195 575 77 180 3027
飞行翻译公司 www.aviation.cn 本文链接地址：美国ASRS安全公告CALLBACK cb_250.pdf