AirTran flight from MCO diverts to RDU after smelling smoke

[trs717]

Originally Posted by dbaker

As far as the passenger who didn't know about MGTOW/MGLW/etc I think it's pathetic and ridiculous to mock him. I'm sure there's plenty of things that he knows about that you don't and we can hope that he'd be more respectful in sharing things without "cracking up."

I agree. That's why when I'm told by a professional like dentist, mechanic, architect, etc. (in that case CAL Capt.) what is going on, I don't second guess their expertise based on my own assessment of satiation.
That is why this passenger "cracks me up."

[dbaker]

Originally Posted by trs717

I agree. That's why when I'm told by a professional like dentist, mechanic, architect, etc. (in that case CAL Capt.) what is going on, I don't second guess their expertise based on my own assessment of satiation.
That is why this passenger "cracks me up."

So if you dentist said you needed some procedure and you said, "why? my teeth feel fine," it'd be OK for him/her to laugh at you?

[ithisk]

Classic thread. So far, only one reply has been about the AirTran incident. The rest have been deflecting by trying to point out problems at other airlines, not to mention mocking customers. It's only a matter of time before someone blames Boeing or tries to eliminate blame entirely.

[trs717]

Originally Posted by dbaker

So if you dentist said you needed some procedure and you said, "why? my teeth feel fine," it'd be OK for him/her to laugh at you?

That was my point, and you missed it again. I wouldn't tell my dentist that my teeth feel fine, because he knows better what kind of treatment they need, and I don't have 10 (or however many) years of dental school to make the diagnosis on the status of my teeth simply based on how I feel.

I might look for second opinion...but I wouldn't (like the above passenger) bash my dentist on internet based on what I think.

The point is that this person couldn't understand how a plane can takeoff and not be able to land with 180 minutes less fuel. Sounds logical...But not the case. The problem is (particular in aviation) that there is a lot more involved than common sense. Unfortunately people often misinterpret what they see and treat an honest explanation as a lie, again due to lack of knowledge.

You, dbaker seem to have a pretty good grasp on aviation, which surprises me the most, that you continue to argue that AirTran is unsafe. (we're back on topic, ithisk. Are you happy now?) I honestly don't even think that you believe in that yourself and just refuse to admit it here. And If I'm wrong about you, then you are not as intelligent of a person as I give you credit for.

[haze]

Originally Posted by ithisk

Classic thread. So far, only one reply has been about the AirTran incident. The rest have been deflecting by trying to point out problems at other airlines, not to mention mocking customers. It's only a matter of time before someone blames Boeing or tries to eliminate blame entirely.

You're exactly right about this being a classic thread: dbaker reprises his well-worn Chicken Little role and claims the sky is falling just because an AirTran pilot smells a sealant and diverts a flight (nice to know that AirTran pilots are that cautious and attentive to safety though isn't it?). Then he turns around and claims that an actual emergency onboard his beloved Continental (an engine shutdown over the Pacific Ocean) "wasn't a large issue." Three times in one year, mind you. If recurring engine problems on the same CAL route over the Pacific Ocean aren't a "large issue", how is an AirTran diversion due to a "smell"? What's really surprising is that you fail to see right through that agenda, ithisk

And what's really "pathetic and ridiculous" is dbaker's sensationalism of a diverted AirTran flight due to a smell, while in the same thread claiming a serious and recurring engine problem on a Continental 777 isn't an issue. Wake up people, this isn't exactly rocket surgery. The blatant agenda is once again crystal clear

Speaking of "deflection" ithisk, that message board entry posted by a CAL frequent flier from Austin was intended to show yet another emergency CAL landing in addition to those other two I had already mentioned. Not some opportunity to critique passengers' feelings on the matter and some mechanics' treatment of them. Guess if dbaker had "check[ed] even more carefully" he would've realized that post refers to the aforementioned 3rd incident in one year that he claims I overlooked

[jetmech717]

This just goes to show you how Dbaker is....We havent heard from him in months and in these months of silence AirTran has had many, many positive things happen. Do you think that Baker would post these positive things on a travel site in a forum that is devoted to AirTran? No! All other airline sites have positive info pertaining to them. Not AirTran though. Baker just sits back and scans the web for negative info and when he finds it then you will be sure to hear from him. Saying that this is a web site devoted to balanced info on airlines is like saying CNN isnt all about the democrats. As for Ithisk all he is a "YES" boy for Dbaker.

[dbaker]

Originally Posted by haze

You're exactly right about this being a classic thread: dbaker reprises his well-worn Chicken Little role and claims the sky is falling just because an AirTran pilot smells a sealant and diverts a flight

I made no assertions about what happened or suggested that the sky was falling. You're just creating all that in your mind. Anyone reading this thread is going to think you're insane if you read what I said and your responses to what I allegedly said and implied.

Then he turns around and claims that an actual emergency onboard his beloved Continental (an engine shutdown over the Pacific Ocean) "wasn't a large issue." Three times in one year, mind you. If recurring engine problems on the same CAL route over the Pacific Ocean aren't a "large issue",

That's not what I said at all -- I actually said the opposite. I'm sort of at a loss for a reply besides asking you to re-read what I said. I indicated that the first in-flight shutdown wasn't a "big issue" but that having multiple is interesting and "brings question to ETOPS."

And what's really "pathetic and ridiculous" is dbaker's sensationalism of a diverted AirTran flight due to a smell, while in the same thread claiming a serious and recurring engine problem on a Continental 777 isn't an issue. Wake up people, this isn't exactly rocket surgery. The blatant agenda is once again crystal clear

Sensationalism? What did I say about it?

The most that I ever said about it is describing it as an "AirTran incident" -- which it is.

Guess if dbaker had "check[ed] even more carefully" he would've realized that post refers to the aforementioned 3rd incident in one year that he claims I overlooked

Your consumer complaint was 2003, which would make last year which is the event you overlooked was the second (of three) events this year.

[haze]

Ohhhhhh dear, do you really think all these people are that naive?

[NiGHTS]

Haze, can you please tell me what "rocket surgury" is? I'm sort of naive and have no idea.

[717driver]

ithisk, the reason we have to bring up the fact that the same incidents happen at other carriers. Is because the owners of this site are biased. Every Airline has inflight emergencies. We declare emergencies with air traffic in order to recieve expedited handling to the airport. If we smell something or hear something it is better to follow this proceedure. Because the first question the FAA will ask is "Captain why did'nt you declare an emergency"? the down side is that the media hears about it and shows up with a drama queen looking for the top lead in story to the 6 o'clock news and proceeds to do exactly what dbaker does here. Example : On the home page for this web site there is a picture of a DC-9 and the caption " A DC-9 after an uncontained engine failure". Nobody got hurt, but the exact same thing happend to Delta in pensacola, FL in 94 and 2 people were killed. Alaska Airlines was convicted of disregarding manufactures reccommended proceedures which was directly responsible for the crash of an MD-80 in 2000 that killed everybody on board. They admitted that they were tring to cut cost. American Airlines pushed the wrong button and flew a plane in to a mountain in 95. Accidents are just that, accidents. The reason I bring these facts up is because other airlines have been shown to have acted negligently but somehow AirTran is the only airline singled out. Listening to dbaker is like watching Peter Arnet on CNN, because we all know he gave us the real truth from bagdad.