VA1522 TSV-SYD: passenger fights with pilot

[Melburnian1]

The news(dot)com(dot)au site, which can be sensationalist like some online competitors, has a video of Wednesday 4 January 2023's VA1522 (1800 hours TSV-SYD twice weekly, B738 VH-VON) that took off at 1901 hours and arrived at 2220 hours, 40 minutes late.

Up front, an inebriated passenger is shown fighting with the pilot (or second officer) as to why he was about to be kicked off.

He is eventually pushed out, or leaves, with the airline's pilot/FO and attendant being assisted by a tropically-clad, casually dressed gent.

The aircraft had arrived TSV at 1743 hours, 28 late from Sydney so surprisingly the melee didn't see it losing much more time on the run south.

Apparently the inebriate has been placed on a 'no fly list.'

Fortunately I have never seen this type of behaviour on any aircraft but some AFFers will have. Not a great way to conduct oneself.

 

[Hvr]

https://www.news.com.au/travel/travel-updates/incidents/angry-passenger-gets-physical-with-virgin-pilot-before-being-booted-off-flight/news-story/6191c149bde7b673f6950a3e879fa7e7

I do hope the airlines share details of people on their no fly lists.
And that criminal charges are laid.

 

[Quickstatus]

The female? CC is a force to be reckoned with. S/he is as big as the other passenger and bigger than the pilot

 

[Melburnian1]

I do hope the airlines share details of people on their no fly lists.
And that criminal charges are laid.

It would be interesting to know if the alleged victim(s) are prepared to give statement(s) and, in time, to appear in court multiple times if need be to be cross-examined.

If multiple court hearings over many months are involved, such as a Local/Magistrates Court via an initial mention, then an eventual committal hearing and subsequent transfer to a District/County Court, it may take a lot of flight and/or cabin crew time up, especially if they were based in Sydney not Townsville.

Would the employer compensate staff for lost allowances while they were in court, or preparing to do, and therefore unable to fly on tours of duty?

Some employees might be reluctant to be away from home for an uncertain period and number of times, especially if they have children.

 

[Saab34]

A Jetstar passenger was recently jailed for 2 months for abusing a crew in similar fashion in Adelaide. Can’t see why this is any different.

Would be interesting to see how the pilot got involved here, I can’t see the offender entering the coughpit I guess he had a crack at the captain at the coughpit door. I had a JQ flight last year with an abusive passenger removed, they closed the flight deck door before he was removed, one AFP member was in attendance also.

 

[Quickstatus]

It would be interesting to know if the alleged victim(s) are prepared to give statement(s)

Easier and more effective to take away FF account (if any) and just say can't fly with us.

 

[Hvr]

@TheInsider and/or @jb747 may be able to advise how the airlines support employees in this situation and how the witness requirements are handled.

 

[Melburnian1]

Easier and more effective to take away FF account (if any) and just say can't fly with us.

VA has already apparently done the latter. Media is silent on the former.

 

[Quickstatus]

Jetstar passenger was recently jailed for 2 months

That one I think was more serious. The antics IIRC were
Smoking in toilet inflight
Abuse of passengers and crew inflight
Bit an AFP officer who then needed hand surgery
Passenger involvement to get him off the flight - apparently he was carried off

And banned not just from Airline but from Adelaide airport

 

[AustraliaPoochie]

Aren't we here in Aust "supposed" to have "flight marshalls" on dom flights too?
Think I read somewhere they have them on int flights, and we are paying for the service via dom airlines "security" levy.
Of course, their cover would be blown if they said anything, maybe the "pax" who "escorted" the person off was one.

 

[Ade]

Aren't we here in Aust "supposed" to have "flight marshalls" on dom flights too?

I always thought this was a thing in the US? I have only seen this in movies ... didn't know that we have them in AU ...

 

[Vic]

Yes, there are potentially "flight marshalls" on australian domestic flights. BUT not on every flight. Almost zero reason for a flight marshall to involve themselves in this type of incident.

It would be interesting to know if the alleged victim(s) are prepared to give statement(s) and, in time, to appear in court multiple times if need be to be cross-examined.

Why would they bother? Person is banned from airline. Case closed.

 

[Quickstatus]

Aren't we here in Aust "supposed" to have "flight marshalls" on dom flights too?

It's a covert operation, but they are called Air security officers. They travel incognito, and not a lot of details whether Dom or int or both and whether armed.

I wonder if they have SC accumulation as a perk?

 

[AustraliaPoochie]

They are called ASO in Aust.
Google is your best friend.
Edit: granted that ASO are more about anti terrorism, it all started after 9/11.
Lucky what happened in regards to VA was on the ground, and it didn't escalate in the air.

 

[Ade]

I wonder if they have SC accumulation as a perk?

And if they do accumulate SC's - how do I apply for the job?

On a serious note - I'd assume ASOs are Federal employees/contractors - so they might earn SC's but no points on CoA travel ...

 

[Bagpuss]

Lucky what happened in regards to VA was on the ground, and it didn't escalate in the air.

With VA it's less likely as they have a FA standing in front the galley to prevent this during flight. Obviously, still a risk element there.

Qantas don't seem to follow this practice any more so there's a higher risk there.

 

[oz_mark]

They are called ASO in Aust.
Google is your best friend.
Edit: granted that ASO are more about anti terrorism, it all started after 9/11.
Lucky what happened in regards to VA was on the ground, and it didn't escalate in the air.

Pretty sure that the flight crew would not have got involved if it happened in the air.

 

[RooFlyer]

With VA it's less likely as they have a FA standing in front the galley to prevent this during flight. Obviously, still a risk element there.

Qantas don't seem to follow this practice any more so there's a higher risk there.

Yes, when I switched over from QF to VA, it was very noticeable that the VA FAs were much more proactive & apparent in 'guarding' the coughpit door when pilots emerge in flight.

 

[RooFlyer]

It would be interesting to know if the alleged victim(s) are prepared to give statement(s) and, in time, to appear in court multiple times if need be to be cross-examined.

Why would they bother? Person is banned from airline. Case closed.

Well, it looked a lot like assault to me not to mention various offences under 'air safety' Acts. A couple of potential cases there.

 

[Melburnian1]

Why would they bother? Person is banned from airline. Case closed.

That's rarely the attitude of police in such a situation. Perhaps they've already been in touch with the airline or staff involved requesting further information and/or statements.

For the courts if the case proceeds to a plea, finding of guilt and subsequent sentence, the principle of 'general deterrence', ineffective as it may be perceived at times, is one possible aspect for the magistrate or judge to consider.

The airline may wish to deliver a public message that it doesn't tolerate (alleged) assaults, given there seems to have been physical contact.

Of course, we don't know the attitude of the staff: if they don't want to provide a statement, any case against the alleged assailant may collapse, or be rendered weaker.

The judiciary certainly take note of victim impact statements if these are included in the court book.