Airlines Toilets, is there something up?

I was reading the attached post last night.

Interesting Events with United Airlines

I have to say I liked the "it reduces turnaround time, and saves money" explanation....

HOWEVER ...... Airline toilets are in the new again today...

Bangladesh Hits Toilet Jam

Flight from Heathrow to Bangladesh I think...

Coincidence? Need to keep eyes pealed, another story and this is starting to link up to something of concern.

reply to post by akoviem


This caught my eye because I was the one who started that thread. Interesting.

Thanks.
Mike

Well, to be honest, that is certainly very strange.

So your flight was delayed because of a busted bulb in the lavatory.

Then a passenger on another plane told you he had the same problem on his plane (already a strange coincidence).

Then FIVE PLANES are delayed for hours because, amazingly, they all had blocked toilets?? AND it was somehow news worthy (slow news day?)?

I couldn't possibly begin to imagine what the "conspiracy" would be, but these events seem to fit under "more than just a coincidence".

Also, how does it take two hours to unclog a toilet?

reply to post by nunya13


My flight wasn't delayed because of a broken light bulb in the lav, we just weren't allowed to use it. On three different flights, to three different locations, on three different planes(that I know of).

reply to post by mikerussellus


I thought your post was interesting... coincidences add up

reply to post by akoviem


I'm sorry, there are no 'coincidences' here, no story.

People are already treating this as somehow important...one already has mis-read, and thought the United flights were cancelled.

THEN, another read the BBC News story, and thought FIVE flights wre cancelled!!!

This is how ridiculous rumours start.

The Bangladesh airline had FIVE lavatories, all were clogged by the PASSENGERS because....let's be honest here, without seeming, ermmm....too offensive, consider the clientele. Bangladesh?? Let's say, not your seasoned frequent fliers, eh??

The article clearly states that people threw stuff into the toilets that are SPECIFICALLY warned against, because...well, guess what? They get clogged and jammed!

Sheesh! What to you think would happen to your toilet at home, if you threw tampons, shoes, aluminum cans, etc, etc into it???

Originally posted by mikerussellus
reply to post by nunya13

 

My flight wasn't delayed because of a broken light bulb in the lav, we just weren't allowed to use it. On three different flights, to three different locations, on three different planes(that I know of).

Ahhh...I jumped to conclusions. I read the light bulb burned out and that no one was aloud to use it then my mind assumed they would fix such a thing before taking off. Silly me.

This is such a strange occurrence. Three different planes?

[edit on 1-9-2009 by nunya13]

reply to post by nunya13


Please.

If you read a little more, the story is pretty clear. Cost saving ploy.

I'm also certain all of these commuter flights were short. Right, Mike???

Originally posted by nunya13
I couldn't possibly begin to imagine what the "conspiracy" would be, but these events seem to fit under "more than just a coincidence".

Well here's food for thought (and what I initially thought when I read the other thread on this)....

You remember that 'shoe bomber' dude? Well had it gone to the lav to strike his match (match common even kids stealing cigs know that a match is not first choice) well had he gone to the lav his plan would of gone off without a hitch - the small amount of explosive would of caused serious and probably terminal damage to the plane - everyone would of died in the middle of the Atlantic.

Just thinking out loud - maybe there had been a threat and the airlines are taking it seriously.

Now there will be upgrades to the toilets after I typed that - they will be built like safes and we will have to be strip searched gy stewardesses... Naked stewardesses

reply to post by weedwhacker


I never stated they were canceled.

I made a mistake about the light bulb being fixed. It wasn't fixed. I assumed they would fix such a thing, but even stranger is that they didn't. They continued on without fixing a light bulb on three of the flights he was on.

I feel like a dunce that I misread the BBC story. I thought it said "because all five planes had blocked toilets" when it actually said "because all five OF THE planes toilets were blocked." (had a dyslexic moment there). Simple, but big mistake. Taking into consideration it's five toilets on one plane (not the other way around like I thought ), that might not be such a strange thing.

Regardless of my stupidity (reading too fast and in a rush to comment on a thread before my break) that doesn't downplay the fact that it's still strange. We could leave out the BBC story and still have the strange story of three planes all having the same easily fixable problem, that wasn't fixed.

There could very well be nothing to it, but we can at least discuss it.


[edit on 1-9-2009 by nunya13]

reply to post by Now_Then


So you think they shut down all the lavs on the planes to prevent a potential suicide bomber from going in there to blow up the plane?

reply to post by weedwhacker


Don't be so quick to write off the CT angle . . .

From the news article:

The news came a day after reports that the United Nations had advised staff not to fly Biman because of concerns over safety and flight delays.

[edit on 9/1/2009 by Lemon.Fresh]

Originally posted by nunya13
So you think they shut down all the lavs on the planes to prevent a potential suicide bomber from going in there to blow up the plane?

Well all I'm saying is that they may be responding to a specific threat - they never tell us most of them, we would probably end up being too scared to put our socks on.

reply to post by Now_Then


Guys....the original story was about a flight on the 50-seat regional jet from Lincoln, NE. Connecting through Denver to Salt Lake.

I looked up on United's website...LNK-DEN was a CRJ-200. 50 seats, ONE lavatory. Less than an hour in the air, 1:25 gate-to-gate. Next flight, to SLC....same. ALL were operated by Skywest, under contract with United Airlines.

Saving money by not servicing the Lav? Likely. No light, no time to fix it? Also likely. Items like that are commonly NOT fixed, in the hectic schedule of the airline business, until later, at night, when the airplane is sitting for hours. Some minor faults can go for up to TEN days, without repair. Even some safety items, if they have redundancy, can go for three days! (It's complicated, but designed to hopefully prevent delays...depends on what's broken...)

Bombers? On a commuter jet over Nebraska?!? Hardly likely.

Or, maybe the conpiracy was the Flight Attendant. She didn't want people up and in the way while she was throwing peanuts, pretzels or Cokes at the passengers.

reply to post by weedwhacker


We're just extremely curious as to why three planes all had burned out light bulbs and instead of screwing in a new one (on all three planes) they went on and did not allow them to be used (on all three planes).

mikerussellus was talking with a passenger from a completely different flight (none that he was on) on the shuttle home who had the exact same thing happen on one of his flights. Which actually leads to at least four planes, not three, having a burned out light bulb that took too much time to change so passengers weren't permitted to use the restroom.

So mikerussellus gets on a plane. The light bulb is burned out. They figure they let it go and just not let passengers use the lav because we don't want people peeing in the dark now do we? Was the light out on the flight before? If so, why didn't they change it while passengers were boarding his flight? If not, did they change the light bulb when his flight landed? Possibly.

But then, darn the luck, he gets on another plane with the same dang problem. Same thing goes...was it burned out before? Did they change it after.

THEN...OMG...it happens AGAIN on his last leg. What are the flippin chances? How many people had the same thing happen on their flights that day?

We know at least one other. The guy mikerussellus talked to on the shuttle. Was HIS light bulb burned out before. Did they fix it after?

Do these two men just have horrible luck and their planes' lavs light bulbs burn out as soon as they get on the plane? They can't replace a bulb while passengers are boarding? Or even just before? It's not like they just rush everyone off, then immediately start boarding the next flight. They take time to go through the cabin and prepare it for the next batch of passengers. They could have changed the light during that time.

You obviously believe it was mere coincidence. We see it as more than that for obvious reasons.



[edit on 1-9-2009 by nunya13]

Originally posted by weedwhacker
reply to post by Now_Then

 

. . .

Bombers? On a commuter jet over Nebraska?!? Hardly likely.

. . .

Planes flying into buildings . . . not likely.

Japan attacking the US . . . not likely.

JFK getting shot . . . not likely.

reply to post by nunya13

We're just extremely curious as to why three planes all had burned out light bulbs and instead of screwing in a new one (on all three planes) they went on and did not allow them to be used (on all three planes).

The point I didn't make very clear is, they might not have been three separate airplanes here. Mike flew from LNK-DEN on one. He sat for his connection for about two hours, he said.

Commuter airlines keep theier ground times to a minimum, between flights. HIS flight, arriving in DEN, could easily have 'turned' into another flight number, with as little as 15-20 minutes on the ground. People off, new on, new fuel load. Then, it's off...who knows?? He sat there long enough, could have been the same airplane that made a round-trip somewhere close, and then made up his flight to Salt Lake City!!

That's the nature of the biz.

mikerussellus was talking with a passenger from a completely different flight (none that he was on) on the shuttle home who had the exact same thing happen on one of his flights.

Yes...well, maybe TWO airplanes then? Same company. Maybe it really wasn't a "light", but it was the same cost savings (AKA cheap) bit, since it's likely the same airline, right?

Was the light out on the flight before? If so, why didn't they change it while passengers were boarding his flight? If not, did they change the light bulb when his flight landed? Possibly.

People do more than just pee in there, ya know! Where is the lav? FWD or AFT? Either way, the mechanic is going to be in the way. It's just not that important to risk a delay....should look up statistics for Skywest, they may have made the news lately for being habitually late or something...the major Airline (United) wouldn't like that much.

It's not like they just rush everyone off, then immediately start boarding the next flight. They take time to go through the cabin and prepare it for the next batch of passengers. They could have changed the light during that time.

As I said above, the ground times can be very short...especially if they're running late anyways, trying to catch up. Mechanics may have been busy elsewhere, there in Denver. Any number of reasons. BTW, ONLY mechanics can change the bulbs...THEY have to go get them from the warehouse, they are authorized. Spares aren't routinely carried, and it's not in the Union rules for pilots or flight attendants to do it, nor would the FAA be happy either.