Passengers revolt after being told to fly on jet with its wing tip missing
By DANIEL BOFFEY - London Daily Mail
Last updated at 18:01pm on 4th November 2007
An airline crew faced a rebellion when they told passengers they were going to fly on a jet that had lost its wing tip in a runway crash.
The SriLankan Airlines customers had been on the Airbus A340 a day earlier when it sliced through a wing of a stationary British Airways 747 at Heathrow, delaying departure by 24 hours.
So they were amazed to be boarding the same plane next day for the ten-hour flight to Colombo.
When cabin crew then admitted there was still a 5ft wing tip missing, there was "a minor revolt" as seven passengers demanded to be let off the aircraft.
A further two-hour delay followed as their baggage was removed before the aircraft could take off.
Club-class passenger Ian McKie, 54, from Loughton, Essex, said: "We were put up in hotels the night of the crash and next morning we were told we would be on a different plane that day.
"We only realised that we were actually going on the same aircraft when we got to the Club lounge and saw the plane but without its wing tip."
The former policeman, who was jetting off for a two-week holiday with his partner Gill Stone, 52, added: "On board, the cabin crew admitted that it was the same one as last time and that the tip had been ripped off.
"They assured us it didn't matter but a number of the passengers insisted that they would rather get on the next flight."
The collision happened shortly after 10pm two weeks ago when the BA011 flight to Singapore was waiting on a runway, followed by the SriLankan Airbus.
The SriLankan aircraft wing ripped through the BA flight's wing, tearing off a huge chunk and resulting in the BA jumbo being grounded.
SriLankan Airlines insisted there was no danger in flying without a wing tip.
It added: "They are purely for aerodynamics and to keep fuel costs to a minimum. There is no impact on safety at all. Safety is our absolute priority." "Don't worry my main man, it's not a big deal we don't have most of the engines working either". "Come on lighten up bro bro, pile your wife and kids aboard and lets take off."
Ok, I added the last sentence.
[Reply]
Originally Posted by ChiefaRoo:
True. However, most airline accidents are usually the result of a cascade of failures like a series of dominos. No way would I get on a plane that had any known damage as you don't know what the result of the torn metal might lead to during flight, wiring failure or a number of other unintended consequences.
It's a winglet, an appendage. There's nothing out there to get damaged and cause a problem. It's on par with the antenna being ripped off your car and being worried about the engine failing.
[Reply]
Originally Posted by Stewie:
It's a winglet, an appendage. There's nothing out there to get damaged and cause a problem. It's on par with the antenna being ripped off your car and being worried about the engine failing.
You really shouldn't argue by analogy as it's a poor source of logic.
Stewie, I understand how aircraft work and I know what the winglet is for. I also conceptually understand the stresses put on an airframe while traveling at high sub-sonic speeds and the added issue of potential weather and of course unintended consequences. If you want to fly on a plane where the winglet was sheared off by another aircraft on the taxi way then be my guest and you'll probably be ok. That being said why you would want to add to the risk of an accident even in the smallest way is beyond me as the result of any accident will cost you your life.
[Reply]
