Simviation Forums

Opinions, after a quick buck or should the aircraft have done around...?

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article ... ublin.html

Matt

Pathetic

She's after a quick buck I think. But if I saw all that booze dripping out of the upper bins I would be in trauma too.

First off. Booze should be kept under the seat in front of you. Second off, The rear cabin crew seat is close enough to the toilet. Third, who said descending at 1400FPM is too fast? They have brake chutes don't they? Hmm don't they? I once had a stewardess sit in the seat next to me crying because we were going through turbulence. I really think some of them should wear depends.

FIRST - Although that is the way that I normally land planes, I uncategorically deny that I was the pilot.

SECOND - Poor baby.

THIRD - I bet that this captain is happy that she wasn't on his last flight;

Captain 'Sully' Sullenberger, who saved 155 lives during emergency plane landing on the Hudson in 2009, insists he's no 'hero' - and credits his crew with ensuring the safety of his passengers

The alegation is that her employer failed to protect her safety. There is no back story tohow thecompany treated her after tbe incident. Keep in mind this apparently happened in 2009.

Now put yourselves in her pisition, where you suffered an injury of some sort that kept you from doing tbe job you wanted to do. Why shouldn't she have the case tried at court? Isn't that what courts do?

If you want to hate on something, hate on lawyers who manipulate the court system based on a position of advocasy rather that a position of truth and equity.

Don't hate on the woman for looking out for herself. It's tbe attitudes like some of you are displying that has probably forced her to have the question decided by tbe courts in the first place.

Ya!

How the company treated her after the incident? They gave her another job within Aer Lingus.


That news article is poorly written. It really doesn't give much information on the event its' self.


My best guess is that there were strong winds, quite possibly a CAT (Clear-air turbulence), and/or a Wake Turbulence problem.

If that was the case, she should have been aware that such conditions were an occupational hazard.

In fact, handling such events, should have been part of her training.


Her lawyer - "said that in the last six seconds before the landing, the Airbus 320's rate of descent was as fast as 1,400 feet per minute, 'three to four times what it should have been'."

To know what the rate and speed of decent should have been, you would need to know how heavy the aircraft was at the time, the speed of the aircraft, flaps settings, the runway length, and temperature/humidity, ground conditions, and a whole lot of other stuff that I don't know.

His statement "that in the last six seconds before the landing, the Airbus 320's rate of descent was as fast as 1,400 feet per minute" sounds dramatic, but consider that 1,400 divided by 60 seconds in only 23.3 feet per second on an aircraft that's probably at a landing speed somewhere around 120 and 140kts (best guess, again).

I'm sure that she was surprised and, possibly, frightened by the suddenness of the event. But that doesn't absolve her of the fact such turbulence is part of her chosen "work place".


"Her counsel, Finbarr Fox SC, said Ms Reddin, an experienced cabin crew member whose lifetime ambition had been to work in that job," Lawyer BS to get more money.

Yes, she had her dreams and ambitions. We all do. Mine didn't turn out the way that I had dreamed either. Who do I sue???

"She said she now works in the social media section of Aer Lingus." She now has a more steady job with all of the benefits that come from working with an airlines.

I'll stick by my snarky Poor baby quip until I'm proven wrong.



For what it's worth

Flight Attendants - Career, Salary and Education Information

Work Environment
....

Flight attendants work primarily in the cabin of passenger aircraft. Dealing directly with the public and standing for long periods can be stressful and tiring. Occasionally, flight attendants must deal with turbulence, which can make providing service more difficult and causes anxiety in some passengers. Although rare, dealing with emergency situations and unruly customers can also be difficult and cause stress.

Flight attendants spend many nights away from home and often sleep in hotels or apartments shared by a group of flight attendants.

Work Schedules

Most flight attendants work full time, but they usually have variable schedules. Flight attendants often work nights, weekends, and holidays because airlines operate every day and have overnight flights. In most cases, a contract between the airline and the flight attendant union determines the total daily and monthly workable hours. A typical on-duty shift is usually about 12 to 14 hours per day.

Yup!

Difficult to pass judgment, but I know which side I'd probably sit on. Without the facts presented it's impossible.

Links have been provided within the confines of these spaces detailing near misses and near disasters involving aircraft landing. I'd imagine we chuckle, take a deep breath and thank that which we hold holy that we weren't sitting on any of those aircraft; and when someone files suit for injuries alleged to have occurred in a rough landing situation, we make the accusation of "a quick buck?" Come on guys, there really isn't enough information on which to rush to judgement on this. Who knows, maybe it did happen, maybe it didn't. Personally, I want all the facts before I make a decision. Happy flying, and yeah, safe landings too!.

I agree. The 'daily mail' report is a bit tabloidy and not professional.

Interesting case though as this isn't the 1st time this has happened by any means. It's happened 100's of times. I've even been on 2 flights where the air masks have fallen down on a heavy landing. Everyone just breathed a sigh of relief. But I do question the motives of the claimant and will watch this.
Meanwhile I would advise anyone watching this story to look at other reports. I found this in the Irish Times
http://www.irishtimes.com/news/crime-an ... -1.2427604

From that link; "She alleges that a co-pilot failed to adequately supervise the landing of the plane."

How the heck would she know what was going on FAR up in the cockpit? "Counsel noted that Ms Reddin had been seated at the rear of the plane...."

A co-pilot assists in the landing, but there is no way he, or the pilot, can actually see sudden clear air turbulence.



We certainly don't have much more than a little information, but we now know that irregardless of the pilots & co-pilots actions, there was strong crosswinds and a sudden downdraft just before touchdown.

She alleges that a co-pilot failed to adequately supervise the landing of the plane, does she?

This post is titled "Opinions". Mine is that the more that she says, the less likely I am to have sympathy for her.


BTW - How come this isn't a class action suit with her, her colleagues, and the passengers? Why her alone?

This F/A said this was the scariest flight of her life? I got two or three I'd trade her for. Flying in an aircraft and wanting to be in a safe work environment?
She needs to get out of the flight attendant business.

Hawkeye07 wrote:This F/A said this was the scariest flight of her life? I got two or three I'd trade her for. Flying in an aircraft and wanting to be in a safe work environment?
She needs to get out of the flight attendant business.

I would also trade that flight............for the one when I was on a CRJ200 at about 20 feet off the ground on approach that had commanded roll spoiler deployment.............I thought my time was up on this small planet....two hours later I was on my connecting flight.............With a large Jack and Coke in my hand........

Matt