4EngineETOPS
Well-Known Member
I'm sure most of you have seen this: http://www.cnn.com/2017/12/27/us/chrissy-teigen-flight-mixup-trnd/index.html
Obviously all airlines have different policies and the ultimate decision to return to LAX was made by the PIC. However, I'm curious what your thoughts are from a dispatch perspective and how your airline might handle a similar hypothetical situation. Personally, I cannot understand why the PIC would make the decision to turn around at that point. The unauthorized pax was screened at the airport by TSA and before the flight by all United protocols (pax was booked with United also going to NRT). This would mean that passport, background checks, other paperwork/legal checks, and physical security were all fine. There was absolutely no question that security was compromised at any point, other than the fact that the ticket scanner failed or that there was a gate agent oversight. It was reported that the situation was figured out before turning back, so there shouldn't have been any question of security or safety being compromised.
When considering everything from a dispatch perspective (safety/security vs. cost/time/logistics impact), continuing to NRT weighs out as the clear winner. The crew obviously timed out after being on duty for about 10 hours (8hrs flying time + showing up at airport), so the flight was further delayed. Counting in fuel, aircraft routing impacts, pax service/accommodation/compensation costs, and PR, this has been/will be considerably expensive for ANA. I would imagine dispatch had a say in the decision to turn back as well. I do work with ANA relatively frequently, so maybe I can get more insight soon. From just reading the story, I am baffled by the decision.
Obviously all airlines have different policies and the ultimate decision to return to LAX was made by the PIC. However, I'm curious what your thoughts are from a dispatch perspective and how your airline might handle a similar hypothetical situation. Personally, I cannot understand why the PIC would make the decision to turn around at that point. The unauthorized pax was screened at the airport by TSA and before the flight by all United protocols (pax was booked with United also going to NRT). This would mean that passport, background checks, other paperwork/legal checks, and physical security were all fine. There was absolutely no question that security was compromised at any point, other than the fact that the ticket scanner failed or that there was a gate agent oversight. It was reported that the situation was figured out before turning back, so there shouldn't have been any question of security or safety being compromised.
When considering everything from a dispatch perspective (safety/security vs. cost/time/logistics impact), continuing to NRT weighs out as the clear winner. The crew obviously timed out after being on duty for about 10 hours (8hrs flying time + showing up at airport), so the flight was further delayed. Counting in fuel, aircraft routing impacts, pax service/accommodation/compensation costs, and PR, this has been/will be considerably expensive for ANA. I would imagine dispatch had a say in the decision to turn back as well. I do work with ANA relatively frequently, so maybe I can get more insight soon. From just reading the story, I am baffled by the decision.
