313
submitted 1 month ago by ByteOnBikes@slrpnk.net to c/news@lemmy.world

According to the Australian Federal Police, a then-32-year-old man from Western Australia was disruptive on a flight headed from Perth to Sydney. As a result, the plane had to turn around and go back to Perth, which meant that the pilot was forced to dump some fuel to land.

Now, the passenger has been ordered to pay $8,630 AUD ($5,806 USD) back to the airline to cover the cost of the wasted fuel. The Perth Magistrate Court also fined him $6,055, meaning that his mid-air misbehavior has a total price tag of $11,861 – likely many times higher than whatever h

top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[-] ByteOnBikes@slrpnk.net 110 points 1 month ago

Get this in America.

One unruly passenger should not have the power to control 300 other flyers' plans.

[-] ShadowRam@fedia.io 38 points 1 month ago

They could cure a lot of it, if they stopped serving alcohol in the terminals or on the plane.

[-] ravhall@discuss.online 25 points 1 month ago

Do you want mass murder? Because taking away a republican’s right to get drunk and express their anger for not being served first is unconstitutional, and against the principles in which this country was founded. Liberty and justice for me.

[-] NJSpradlin@lemmy.world 32 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

Hey, man. I’m blue, through and through, but don’t touch my right to get fucking wasted in the middle of the day, or morning, at an airport. You down to tussle? Because I’m throwing hands.

[-] Tujio@lemmy.world 26 points 1 month ago

What's the point of taking a vacation if I don't get to send my coworkers pictures of my airport mimosa as they're clocking in at 8am?

[-] BakerBagel@midwest.social 16 points 1 month ago

Please dont take one of the remaining socially acceptable places to get absolutely blitzed before noon. Football tailgates are only in the fall

[-] PrincessLeiasCat@sh.itjust.works 7 points 1 month ago

This guy flies.

[-] ravhall@discuss.online 13 points 1 month ago

please do not cut off your hands and throw them at me in a drunken rage.

[-] atzanteol@sh.itjust.works 12 points 1 month ago

DONTCHUTELLMEWHATTODO!

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] prole 4 points 1 month ago

Eh... Alcohol doesn't care about party lines

[-] ravhall@discuss.online 4 points 1 month ago

Tell that to the Conga! CHECKKKMMATEEE!!!

[-] circuitfarmer@lemmy.sdf.org 10 points 1 month ago

But then how would I get my breakfast beer? Only at an airport do you get the plausibility of being accustomed to a different time zone.

In all seriousness though, this is the classic "blame the person or the tool" argument.

[-] thesohoriots@lemmy.world 8 points 1 month ago

I had a layover in Midway at maybe 7:30am once. Everyone — and I mean everyone — was drinking. Like, are you going to get the shakes between security and boarding?

[-] Tujio@lemmy.world 8 points 1 month ago
[-] skuzz@discuss.tchncs.de 7 points 1 month ago

Alcohol is the only way to survive the terribleness that is air travel, until such a time that weed vending machines become available in airports, or air travel becomes less shitty. The latter will never happen. Former inside of a decade.

[-] KinglyWeevil@lemmy.dbzer0.com 4 points 1 month ago

It's pretty much a ritual of mine to be and stay hammered most of my travel day.

Chug most of a half pint of liquor in the parking garage, double of Johnnie Walker Black for pretty much every hour I'm in the airport, order some mini bottles (or carry on my own) on the plane, sleep until my destination, and then do whatever it is I'm doing that day.

But then, I handle my alcohol extremely well (and have the red hair gene that makes you less susceptible to its effect and process it more quickly). So I don't really get in trouble.

[-] couch1potato@lemmy.dbzer0.com 2 points 1 month ago

Scotch-in-your-3-1-1-bottles team, unite!

[-] JovialMicrobial@lemm.ee 3 points 1 month ago

This only works for shorter flights, but you can eat an edible before you go into the airport. I reccomend one that you've tried before the flight so you know how high you'll get and how long it'll last.

[-] ByteOnBikes@slrpnk.net 1 points 1 month ago

Sadly, Edibles aren't legal all around the world.

We aren't there yet.

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] ShepherdPie@midwest.social 1 points 1 month ago

Wow just directly parroting one corporate airlines solution to the hell that is airline travel? If they'd instead suggested that they fill the plane with knockout gas to put the passengers to sleep, would you be suggesting that here instead?

[-] ShadowRam@fedia.io 3 points 1 month ago

You can't drink in a museum.

You can't drink at a park.

You can't drink in a lot of public places.

Why's that?

Because people can't act like fucking adults and so this has been banned in public places.

An airplane is a public place. It's a close quarter public place, where when one person fucks up, it fucks it up for the whole plane.

[-] ShepherdPie@midwest.social 3 points 1 month ago

Bars and restaurants are public places too. What's the difference? Airline travel is stressful since people are now treated like cattle in a high security area. Banning alcohol sales just means that normal people won't drink at the airport while the people with problems will chug shooters before getting to the airport and be drunk all the same.

[-] ShadowRam@fedia.io 6 points 1 month ago

What's the difference?

They get kicked out when they cause a problem, and don't cost the other 150 other people hundreds of $$$ and days of their time.

Airline travel is stressful

Alcohol is not the fucking solution to that, are you kidding me? Now you have have drunk people in a stressful situation.

[-] ByteOnBikes@slrpnk.net 1 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)
  1. Museums have Night events where they serve beer. There's three of them happening in my city this month at a Art Museum, science Museum, and a Arboretum. Wine is often at gallery showings.

  2. Depending on your state laws, You may be able drink at a public park. Review your States laws. Many forbid open containers.

  3. Review your state laws. Again, it "depends". In New Jersey, you are allowed to drink in public.

Because people can't act like fucking adults and so this has been banned in public places.

Again not true. Millions of people drink responsibility. If your statement was correct, then every single bar would be a haven for violence and destruction. Yet most cities are now allowing CHILDREN into bars and converting them into family friendly establishments.

I'm not Pro-alcohol - it's literally poison for your body to give you a pleasant reaction. But Jesus Christ, if you're going to use blanket statements, do some research. This is the same line of thinking as "DRUGs is BAAAAAAD". Like no?

[-] ripcord@lemmy.world 2 points 1 month ago

Museums have Night events where they serve beer

Beer, wiine, and liquor, even.

Heck, I was at pop up exhibit that had a bar outside, and another that had one at the end of the exhibit.

[-] subtext@lemmy.world 74 points 1 month ago

Honestly that’s way less than it should be given how much other passengers were inconvenienced. That might be harder to quantify the value of, though, I suppose.

[-] A_Random_Idiot@lemmy.world 27 points 1 month ago

can start by reinbursing all passengers 3x their ticket value

[-] AbsoluteChicagoDog@lemm.ee 4 points 1 month ago

Depends on who gets to decide what qualifies as "bad behavior"

[-] ShepherdPie@midwest.social 19 points 1 month ago

It must have been bad enough for the staff to decide that it's better to fuck up a plane full of passengers itinerary by turning around than continue on with the flight. I seriously doubt anyone would want to make that call unless they absolutely had to.

[-] PrincessLeiasCat@sh.itjust.works 63 points 1 month ago

The single highest individual penalty, $40,823, was issued to a traveler who brought their own alcohol on board, was intoxicated, attempted to smoke marijuana in the lavatory, and sexually assaulted a flight attendant – all in a single flight.

Elon? You flying commercial these days?

[-] NotMyOldRedditName@lemmy.world 25 points 1 month ago

They said alcohol, not ketamine

[-] skyspydude1@lemmy.world 6 points 1 month ago

Maybe it was just to wash down some Ambien.

[-] some_guy@lemmy.sdf.org 18 points 1 month ago

The article doesn’t say why the pilot had to dump fuel to land. Was this because the plane needed to be lighter (dumping what would have otherwise been consumed)? If anyone can provide context that’d be appreciated.

[-] mkwt@lemmy.world 61 points 1 month ago

Airplanes are usually limited to land at only around half of the total weight they can take off with.

This isn't normally a problem for normal trips.

If they went to a higher landing weight, the landing gear struts would have to be designed quite a bit stronger. This would make the landing gear heavier, and that would reduce the useful payload weight in the plane.

[-] ramble81@lemm.ee 14 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

Which that’s something i find interesting about electric planes they’re testing. MTOW and MLW are almost identical in an electric plane. You can’t just dump fuel

[-] lud@lemm.ee 8 points 1 month ago

Which is good for the environment but makes it really hard to design airplanes.

I'm guessing it's comparable to designing SSTOs in KSP where it's hard to get to orbit (and often back) on a single stage because you don't get much lighter.

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] Geobloke@lemm.ee 5 points 1 month ago

The Perth to Sydney flight is a longer one. I think around 3000km, so maybe they had a bigger fuel load

[-] JackbyDev@programming.dev 2 points 1 month ago

Half the weight of a plane is the fuel??

[-] deltapi@lemmy.world 5 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

A350-900

Maximum takeoff weight: 283 tonnes

Maximum landing weight: 207 tonnes

Manufacturers' empty weight: 115.7 tonnes

[-] thesohoriots@lemmy.world 17 points 1 month ago

They dump fuel so they can safely land due to weight, as you guessed. In this case it was a cross-country trip, so the plane had a fair amount of fuel that needed to be offloaded.

[-] hume_lemmy@lemmy.ca 14 points 1 month ago

The story in the article about the guy who tried to get into the cockpit is amazing... he's lucky he didn't get himself killed by the other passengers. Since that little incident twenty years ago even Granny will chew on your face if it looks like you're pulling that shit.

[-] thanks_shakey_snake@lemmy.ca 10 points 1 month ago

Neither the man nor the airline was publicly named, nor was it specified exactly what he did to earn such a hefty penalty.

Why the hell not? I feel like it's weird for this information to not be public in a case like this-- In this same article, there are three examples of other incidents where the details are known.

Phrases like the passenger "was disruptive," and “It’s far simpler to obey the directions of airline staff than cause unnecessary issues, which can end up hitting you in the hip pocket” seem weirdly euphemistic to me.

[-] Geobloke@lemm.ee 7 points 1 month ago

Tell me you're from Perth without saying you're from Perth...

[-] thanks_shakey_snake@lemmy.ca 6 points 1 month ago

So does "dump fuel" literally mean "sprinkle a large volume of jet fuel over a large swathe of countryside?" Does it become diffuse enough that the environmental impact is negligible, or do we get a big splash that kills everything in an AoE?

Like... I'm surprised the fuel cost is the focus here, and not the environmental impact of releasing jet fuel just... into the air I guess? But maybe it doesn't work the way I'm picturing.

[-] nucleative@lemmy.world 8 points 1 month ago

That's exactly right. But much evaporates or is diffused over such a large area that no one particular piece of land gets a significant amount.

The alternative is landing overweight, risking potential damage or failure to the aircraft's landing gear, full of human lives, while still full of the explodey stuff.

The other alternative is designing planes to land at heavier weights, resulting in every other flight being less efficient.

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] desktop_user 4 points 1 month ago

jet fuel isn't dumped that rarely, it diffuses over an enormous area and isn't significantly harmful to the ground, but is a greenhouse "gas" source iirc.

load more comments
view more: next ›
this post was submitted on 13 Sep 2024
313 points (100.0% liked)

News

23266 readers
2701 users here now

Welcome to the News community!

Rules:

1. Be civil


Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.


2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.


Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. We have an actively updated blocklist, which you can see here: https://lemmy.world/post/2246130 if you feel like any website is missing, contact the mods. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.


3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.


Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.


4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.


Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.


5. Only recent news is allowed.


Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.


6. All posts must be news articles.


No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.


7. No duplicate posts.


If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.


8. Misinformation is prohibited.


Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.


9. No link shorteners.


The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.


10. Don't copy entire article in your post body


For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS