Got someone up in the lav...

Here's a scenario I had not long ago

Short final into DCA and aircraft is fully configured. FA calls up and says someone just went into the lav.

What do you do? We did a go around but I'm not so sure it was safer than just landing.
 
m77y said:
Here's a scenario I had not long ago

Short final into DCA and aircraft is fully configured. FA calls up and says someone just went into the lav.

What do you do? We did a go around but I'm not so sure it was safer than just landing.
Click to expand...
I'd be annoyed that the FAs are calling during sterile, on short final, for something other than "the wing fell off" or "the plane is on fire"
 
JordanD said:
I'd be annoyed that the FAs are calling during sterile, on short final, for something other than "the wing fell off" or "the plane is on fire"
Click to expand...

That was my initial feeling. Lately I've had a few hit the emergency button instead of the PA while on landing rollout.
 
m77y said:
Here's a scenario I had not long ago

Short final into DCA and aircraft is fully configured. FA calls up and says someone just went into the lav.

What do you do? We did a go around but I'm not so sure it was safer than just landing.
Click to expand...
Land. IMO the way safer option.
 
m77y said:
Here's a scenario I had not long ago

Short final into DCA and aircraft is fully configured. FA calls up and says someone just went into the lav.

What do you do? We did a go around but I'm not so sure it was safer than just landing.
Click to expand...

I'm not answering anything that isn't an emergency call coming from the cabin.
 
m77y said:
Here's a scenario I had not long ago

Short final into DCA and aircraft is fully configured. FA calls up and says someone just went into the lav.

What do you do? We did a go around but I'm not so sure it was safer than just landing.
Click to expand...

I'd land.

Needs of the few < needs of the many

I think a go around carries more risk than landing at that point.
 
m77y said:
Here's a scenario I had not long ago

Short final into DCA and aircraft is fully configured. FA calls up and says someone just went into the lav.

What do you do? We did a go around but I'm not so sure it was safer than just landing.
Click to expand...

I had this scenario with a twist a couple years ago. I was the captain, and we did go-around. But it wasn't at DCA, and we were way early with plenty of fuel, and there was a little more to it.

We were flying DTW-IAH. There is a large cancer treatment center in Houston.

A dad and his son of age ~14 were in first class, first row.

We didn't hear from the flight attendants until about halfway through the three hour flight, that the son had been in the forward lav for about a third of the flight so far, off and on over a bunch of times. They figured he was airsick or ate something bad the first time or two but then inquired and the dad told them he was on the way to another round of cancer treatments for colorectal cancer. He apologized to the F/As and said there hadn't been any trouble like this on the flight the week before nor did he anticipate this before the flight. They were sympathetic to his situation and said don't worry about it. They ended up closing off the lav for everyone else for the last hour.

I got up to hit the bathroom before descent and saw that the kid was sound asleep. We reiterated to the F/As, who were fortunately vastly experienced from past lives at a defunct airline, to just call us and use their best judgement if he wakes up before landing and is back in the lav again towards the end of the flight.

We were something like 30-40 minutes early and had tons of gas, so we briefed that we'd break off the approach and come back around if we had to, but only once given the fact that the kid and his dad knew exactly what the rules are but he was just not able to control himself.

IAH was really quiet on approach and it was clear and a million so we stuck with the plan. We don't practice go-arounds often enough anyway, right?

Sure enough, they call us at 2000'AGL on the glideslope and say he just went in the lav. We told them, if we don't hear from you by the time we're at our decision point, we'll assume he's still in there and we'll go-around. We told them 'our decision point' but we had briefed we'd give it until 500' AGL or so, after telling tower we might need to climb out and we had their instructions all set up in the FMA ready to go so it was very benign.

We were back around in five minutes and on the ground. He looked real weak and tired walking off, understandably, and I think most passengers in the first half of the jet kinda figured out what was going on and so we had kept the post-go-around P.A. extremely basic and certainly the opposite of the chastising, rude announcements that single one passenger out without knowing one iota about why they got up. I hate that; obviously in our case we didn't even need to ask the passenger to sit back down because he very well already knew that.

I recall the four of us talked about it at dinner that night and figured we did everything about right given the slightly different circumstances.

My rationale with where to draw the line for going around was the point that we must be on a stabilized approach and spooled up and on speed. I figure if we're permitted by the book to get that far and find ourselves out of the parameters, then a "no fault, mandatory" go-around from there must not be that big of a deal. Now, if the F/As had called us at 100'AGL, well first of all we knew they knew not to, but if they had, we'd just go ahead and land it.

Hopefully the kid's attitude+modern medicine let him kick cancer's butt.
 
Nick said:
I had this scenario with a twist a couple years ago. I was the captain, and we did go-around. But it wasn't at DCA, and we were way early with plenty of fuel, and there was a little more to it.

We were flying DTW-IAH. There is a large cancer treatment center in Houston.

A dad and his son of age ~14 were in first class, first row.

We didn't hear from the flight attendants until about halfway through the three hour flight, that the son had been in the forward lav for about a third of the flight so far, off and on over a bunch of times. They figured he was airsick or ate something bad the first time or two but then inquired and the dad told them he was on the way to another round of cancer treatments for colorectal cancer. He apologized to the F/As and said there hadn't been any trouble like this on the flight the week before nor did he anticipate this before the flight. They were sympathetic to his situation and said don't worry about it. They ended up closing off the lav for everyone else for the last hour.

I got up to hit the bathroom before descent and saw that the kid was sound asleep. We reiterated to the F/As, who were fortunately vastly experienced from past lives at a defunct airline, to just call us and use their best judgement if he wakes up before landing and is back in the lav again towards the end of the flight.

We were something like 30-40 minutes early and had tons of gas, so we briefed that we'd break off the approach and come back around if we had to, but only once given the fact that the kid and his dad knew exactly what the rules are but he was just not able to control himself.

IAH was really quiet on approach and it was clear and a million so we stuck with the plan. We don't practice go-arounds often enough anyway, right?

Sure enough, they call us at 2000'AGL on the glideslope and say he just went in the lav. We told them, if we don't hear from you by the time we're at our decision point, we'll assume he's still in there and we'll go-around. We told them 'our decision point' but we had briefed we'd give it until 500' AGL or so, after telling tower we might need to climb out and we had their instructions all set up in the FMA ready to go so it was very benign.

We were back around in five minutes and on the ground. He looked real weak and tired walking off, understandably, and I think most passengers in the first half of the jet kinda figured out what was going on and so we had kept the post-go-around P.A. extremely basic and certainly the opposite of the chastising, rude announcements that single one passenger out without knowing one iota about why they got up. I hate that; obviously in our case we didn't even need to ask the passenger to sit back down because he very well already knew that.

I recall the four of us talked about it at dinner that night and figured we did everything about right given the slightly different circumstances.

My rationale with where to draw the line for going around was the point that we must be on a stabilized approach and spooled up and on speed. I figure if we're permitted by the book to get that far and find ourselves out of the parameters, then a "no fault, mandatory" go-around from there must not be that big of a deal. Now, if the F/As had called us at 100'AGL, well first of all we knew they knew not to, but if they had, we'd just go ahead and land it.

Hopefully the kid's attitude+modern medicine let him kick cancer's butt.
Click to expand...

Awesome story, and also a good TMAT story to use at an interview.

Not that you'll never need to again! :)
 
So once again we should not hold passengers to the regulatory standards that they should be held to because some of us find it ridiculous to stop during taxing?

I commute and then deadhead A LOT. The shear lack of compliance from passengers towards cabin crew is absolutely amazing. Sometimes a lesson needs to be made so that EVERYONE aboard realizes the rules are...well...the rules.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
surreal1221 said:
So once again we should not hold passengers to the regulatory standards that they should be held to because some of us find it ridiculous to stop during taxing?

I commute and then deadhead A LOT. The shear lack of compliance from passengers towards cabin crew is absolutely amazing. Sometimes a lesson needs to be made so that EVERYONE aboard realizes the rules are...well...the rules.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

I especially hate the competition to be the first one on their phone on final. I'm more addicted to my phone than most, but I just can't comprehend the inability to wait just 5 more minutes.
 
surreal1221 said:
Yeeee-Buddy. I gots this here big business I'm important in that makes me needs tos always be on mys fone. SELL SELL SELL!
Click to expand...
On my last DH another DH crew were on their phones (texting) on short final. It was their metal.
 
Derg said:
Pee before you leave, Red.
Click to expand...

Derg +1000.

People want to get up? I have no problem with that. I'll pull over to the side, turn the sign off, and everyone gets to pee. However...when everyone is done, ATC is going to send us to the BACK of the line that it just took us 30 minutes to get to halfway up. By the way, the line got a helluva lot longer than when we started.

So, whatddaya wanna do? Proper situational awareness tends to mitigate those "gee, I've been sitting here for 30 minutes and I bored, so I think I'll go pee" urges.

Richman
 
Richman said:
Derg +1000.

People want to get up? I have no problem with that. I'll pull over to the side, turn the sign off, and everyone gets to pee. However...when everyone is done, ATC is going to send us to the BACK of the line that it just took us 30 minutes to get to halfway up. By the way, the line got a helluva lot longer than when we started.

So, whatddaya wanna do? Proper situational awareness tends to mitigate those "gee, I've been sitting here for 30 minutes and I bored, so I think I'll go pee" urges.

Richman
Click to expand...


Gotta get the stews to quit serving us Pompous 1st class types lots of alcohol while boarding :)
 
jskibo said:
Gotta get the stews to quit serving us Pompous 1st class types lots of alcohol while boarding :)
Click to expand...

That's why it was a pleasure flying Mr. @mikecweb, one of our high value customers. I got him introduced to my flight leader and instructed him to make sure he was well taken care of.

Then I filed a COR about "I think we could use a Galley Gurney onboard our Airbus fleet"
 
Kingairer said:
Land. IMO the way safer option.
Click to expand...

Derg said:
I'd land.

Needs of the few < needs of the many

I think a go around carries more risk than landing at that point.
Click to expand...

Devils advocate...

Do you think a go-around has more potential or likelihood to cause harm to the unsecured passenger than a landing?

I would assume with your "needs of the many" you are more worried about overall aircraft safety?
 
Funny thing overheard on ramp frequency.

"Ground, we are going to have to set the brake right here, passengers using the lav"

Ramp: "Roger, advise ready to taxi."

"Will advise...

Palm Beach flight, they are all dribbling"
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top