Sign in. It’s quick, free and it’s up to you.
An account is an optional way to support the work we do. Find out more.
A PILOT WAS praised after carrying out a safe emergency landing when his commander became ill and briefly lost consciousness during the flight.
The Air Accident Investigation Unit Ireland (AAIU) report into the emergency landing of a Boeing 737-8AS near Lisbon, Portugal on 9 October 2013 at 8.16am said that the co-pilot took appropriate actions to ensure the landing went safely.
There were six crew and 167 passengers on board the flight, and the male captain was 35 years old and had 6,300 hours of flying experience.
What happened on board
The plane departed from East Midlands Airport on a scheduled passenger service to Tenerife. But as the flight progressed, the Commander noticed that he had a slight headache. He had been dealing with a light cold six to seven days previously.
The flight was routine until the aircraft approached the northern coast of Spain, which is when the Commander suddenly felt unwell. He told the co-pilot, and took a meal break, but his condition deteriorated and he briefly lost consciousness.
The co-pilot took command of the flight, and the senior cabin crew member was informed about the situation. The passenger seat-belt sign was switched on to ensure that the cabin could be secured quickly.
The co-pilot suggested an immediate diversion to Faro Airport and the Commander agreed.
After checking the weather conditions were suitable, the co-pilot declared an emergency with Lisbon Air Traffic Control Centre (ATCC) and commenced a diversion. The flight landed without further incident. Once on the ground, the Commander was met and assessed by medical personnel.
The co-pilot “completed the descent, approach and landing without incident”, said the report. The commander received medical attention once they arrived, and returned to the UK the same day.
The co-pilot was 26, with an Irish-issued pilot’s licence, and had a total of 1,502 hours flying time.
“Sudden incapacitation of a flight crew member is a rare, but serious event, which requires an immediate and effective response by the remaining crew member(s),” said the AAIU.
It said that the co-pilot “took appropriate and considered actions to ensure the safe conclusion of the flight” after assuming the command role.
An event involving incapacitation of a commander “places great demands on the remaining flight crew”, said the AAIU.
“In this case, the emergency was well handled to a safe conclusion.”
To embed this post, copy the code below on your site
Starmer was head of the British prosecution services when thousands of accusations against Jimmy Savile were dismissed….his excuse is he wasnt in charge of that particular case, but as head of the services surely the buck stopped with him.
@Dere: That argument against Starmer was debunked at the time Johnson made it against him in the House Of Commons….repeatedly debunked.
@Numinous20111: yeah by him stating he wasnt in charge of the case….but he was in charge of the services….that excuse might fly with the gullible, but not all.
@Dere: The CPS was dealing with 900,000 prosecutions a year and there was no reason for Starmer to be aware of this case. It’s just a smear.
@Dere: a prosecutor, not Starmer, closed the case due to a lack of witnesses willing to testify. Starmer was not informed, because the system he had inherited less than a year previously was, reportedly, “a sprawling network of prosecutors and lawyers who operated largely independently from the DPP’s office.” When he was informed, Starmer ordered a full inquiry into that decision, which revealed errors made by prosecutors and gaps in the organisational structure of the CPS. The result was an official apology from Starmer, new guidance on how prosecutors should deal with cases of alleged sexual abuse, and an overhaul of the decision-making process. Is that not what you think “buck-stopping” looks like?
@Dere: Go and review the clarifications that were made about Starmer (all over the news) when Johnson launched that smear. Bonus points available for remembering exactly what Johnson was trying to distract from when he did so. And gullible is someone who still puts forward something which was debunked widely and repeatedly.
@Brendan O’Brien: How many of those 900,000 involved one of the most famous men in Britain ? He didn’t know there was a case being compiled against JS ? Hmmm .. I find it a bit of a stretch.. especially given the history of the British Establishment and their pepesinity to perverse the course of justice. Not withstanding my own personal opinion, the subsequent report found ”Prosecutions could have been possible “had the police and prosecutors taken a different approach”. As has been said, and correctly so, as Head of the Crown prosecution services at the time ..the responsibility ultimately lies with him for that. That is not a smear.. its a statement of fact.
@Dere: the case file never left the regional office because the police could not provide the evidence for a prosecution nor were the victims prepared to testify.
@Brendan O’Brien: Also find it a tad ironic you cite the BBC, given the fact they, along with other parts of the British Establishment, were complict in covering up for JS .
@Brian: I quoted Nazir Afzal, Chief Crown Prosecutor in the CPS for North West England 2011-15, as reported by the BBC.
Read the comment by mani mus. The ‘history of the British Establishment and their pepesinity to perverse the course of justice’ does not imply that Starmer did anything wrong.
@Brian: you are entitled to find it a bit of a stretch. A formal enquiry, the report of which was published in its entirety by Starmer, examined the full facts of the matter, and concluded that Starmer was not informed. That’s a statement of established, proven fact. As I said though, you and Boris Johnson are entitled to your own opinions.
@Brendan O’Brien: right on time, Brendan with the fair, balanced, unbiased rebuttal. Starmer was head of the service. All heads of all services know about high profile cases and that vile pedo savile was known to him. You know it. I know it. We all know it. Anyone who defends anyone who defended Jimmy Savile is complicit if his crimes.
@Brendan O’Brien: Ahhh come on .. So CPP vouches for former CPP .. you’re having a laugh right? And you’re just deflecting, as usual.. The fact is he was CPP when the JS case was being compiled.. The fact is that regardless of outcomes, his input or lack thereof, he is ultimately responsible for that .. as he is the 899,999 other cases .. as demonstrated by his apology “I would like to take the opportunity to apologise for the shortcomings in the part played by the CPS in these cases” . Why are ye trying so hard to refute this fact.
@Oh Mammy: No, we don’t ‘know it’.
You have no evidence to back up your claims: just a reliance on guesswork and generalisation.
@Oh Mammy: and….if Starmer some how did not know about Savile (I believe that’s nonsense) he the failed his duty running the service. If he missed a vile pedo on his watch, should he be PM? I think that is a legitimate question.
@Brian: Starmer apologised for the shortcomings of the service. He may ultimately have been responsible for those shortcomings (although he could hardly have fixed everything in a year), but there is no evidence that he knew about the Savile case.
@Brendan O’Brien: ‘He “may” ultimately be responsible’ There’s no “may” Brendan.. He was. And that is my point.. I said outside of my own personal belief.. ( that ya know.. the lads in charge of the case involving one of the highest profile people in the UK, which had ramifications for multiple agencies within the British Establishment, never said ‘ we better run this by the big man ‘ ) to state he was responsible is not a smear, but a statement of fact.. but thanks for almost agreeing with me.
@Brian: Again, you are making an assumption (that Starmer knew about the Savile case), not stating a fact. You don’t seem to know the difference between the two.
@Brendan O’Brien: generalisations are more accurate than most of the “sources” you quote.
@Brendan O’Brien: Dog with a bone.. you were doing so well and all. You accept he is ultimately responsible.. which was my point and saying so is not a smear. As for assumptions.. seem to remember you saying some assumptions are safety make .. so I’ll safely make one if you don’t mind.. but let that not deflec,t as much as you’d like, to the fact ultimate responsibility for the JS case lay with him. Now don’t be a hypocrite Brendan and keep arguing against a fact you’ve already accepted.
@Brian: 1. He was technically responsible as head of an organisation for the actions of the organisation.
2. This does not mean that he was aware of all those actions.
@Brian: boris Johnson said what he said under parliamentary privilege. You must be fairly certain of your anonymity to personally libel the man about to become Prime Minister of England.
@Brendan O’Brien: 1. Yep, he’s ultimately responsible, as I’ve being saying.
2. Personally I don’t find that credible in the JS case.
Both those statements can be true at the same time.
@mani mus: Quote back to me one libellous thing I have said..
@Brendan O’Brien: There’s a line in ’12 Angry Men’ when Jack Warden storms out when the old man is talking, Henry Fonda responds to the old man’s outburst at Warden: “He can’t hear you. He never will.” Sums up a lot of the accounts who argue in bad faith against the points you make.
@Brian: wait, are you not the guy claiming that Starmer knew about the decision not to prosecute Jimmy Savile?
@Numinous20111: You know what’s bad faith arguing .. Tying yourself up in knots with semantics and word play before eventually accepting something factual that was put to you. Cute anecdote though..
@Brian: You are conflating two completely separate concepts: technical responsibility and moral responsibility. If you don’t have the intelligence to understand this, it’s not my fault.
@mani mus: Don’t paraphrase..its sloppy,especially when your accusing someone of libel.. produce the libellous statement, verbatim.
@Brendan O’Brien: You’re the one now trying to conflate things Brendan.. For the man who is all about facts you sure a siht dont care about them when they don’t suit your narrative.. and as always you resort to personal insults when you’ve been proven to be wrong.. Grow up and deal with it..
@Brian: ah don’t come over all coy now Brian. You’re a big, brave boy. Stand over your claim that Starmer knew about the decision not to prosecute Savile. Or, retract. It’s ok to admit you made a mistake. Personal growth, all that.
@mani mus: Once again.. produce the libellous statement .. Verbatim. Surely you can do that???
@Brian: I can’t say I’m disappointed in you, backing down is absolutely the right thing for you to do. It does weaken the rest of your argument, of course, but it was thin enough gruel to begin with.
@mani mus: The only one backing down here is you. I stand by my comments. You’ve been asked multiple times now to produce this libellous statement.. verbatim. But you can’t.. because your full of sht. Your only making a fool of yourself now.. comes naturally obviously.
@Dere: Yeah sure. Let’s cancel the election, the Tories should win by default and we’ll put Keir Starmer in jail for the things that Jimmy Savile did. Sounds right.
@mani mus: @Brian actually hasn’t stated that Starmer was aware of the case only that he was ultimately responsible. I don’t agree with Brian’s arguments but libel unfortunately is “a bit of a stretch”
@Dere:
US documents reveal that Starmer, while head of the Crown Proecution Service, met with US Attorney General Eric Holder and a number of American and British national security officials in Washington when he was in charge of Julian Assange’s planned extradition to Sweden in 2011. UK records of these trips have been destroyed,
In 2009, 2011, 2012, and 2013, Starmer traveled to Washington: it was his most frequent travel destination.
The CPS has acknowledged deleting important Assange-related emails, particularly during the time when Starmer was in charge.
Starmer was knighted in the 2014 New Year Honours for “services to law and criminal justice”.
Assange had refused to go to Sweden, where he faced accusations (not charges) of rape, as he would he would have been extradited to the US. However he was willing to be interviewed in London by the Swedish prosecutor, but t,this was vetoed by the Crown Prosecution Service, i.e. Starmer.
The rape accusations were part of a conspiracy to silence him. This was confirmed UN special envoy Nils Melzer in an investigation. The rape accusations were later dropped.
The US wanted to make an example of Assange in order to prevent further disclosures of US/UK war crimes, and Starmer as Head of the CPS was a willing tool.
Methinks it’s the end of the Tories as we know them now. Politics are changing, maybe not as we want and definitely not in a logical and intelligent way, but change is happening. So bye bye Tories, you brought your country to its knees!!
@Meatball Martin: Fianna Fail regularly received between 40 and 70% in general elections. In 2007 they received 41% of the popular vote. Those days are long gone, they received 22% in 2020 and Martin only became Taoiseach because of a 3 way coalition
@Meatball Martin: most of ff voters are senile old gits,won’t be around for many more elections thank God
The Conservative Party are finished, several polls yesterday predicted they will win less than 100 seats. They have been a cancer on British society – Brexit, cataclysmic state of NHS, hollowing out of most public services and huge inequalities in towns the length and breadth of the UK – look at places such as Hull, Grimsby, Teesside. The damage done will take a couple of decades to repair. But at least they are now being consigned to take their ignominious place in the history books
@John Manahan:
No chance.
As someone else said, people thought the same here about FF.
The Tories will do a Corbyn on it and veer to the other extreme for an election or two then they will elect a populist or centrist leader, combined with 10 or 15 years of a labour government that by then will have run out of ideas, probably have made a couple of bad mistakes and corruption having inevitably seeped in and the Tories will be back baby!!!!
Rinse and repeat.
Great article!
Start a fire……and walk away
https://youtu.be/LSxBkUPDH_E?si=yLb86njyEMkhDmRR
It’s such a shame that Starmer is so much of a damp squib because it would be good to have someone in 10 Downing that might at least try and stand up to Trump after his coup is successful next near.
The injection of the Enlightenment subculture in the 18th century weaponised an academic/political vehicle that is on full display in the UK and America presently as a toxic variant of democracy that people may not sufficiently appreciate.
” I have received your comments concerning the busts & pictures I will put off till my return from America, all of them except Bacon, Locke and Newton, whose pictures I will have you copy for me: and as I consider them as the three greatest men that have ever lived, without any exception, and as having laid the foundations of those superstructures which have been raised in the Physical & Moral sciences, I would wish to form them into a knot on the same canvas, that they may not be confounded at all with the herd of other great men.” Jefferson
have your say