Narrative:

3 thru passengers failed to reboard at intermediate stop, had checked bags, were young and mideastern descent and paid cash for tickets 3 days prior. Company refused to search aircraft and removed the crew from the trip for refusal to fly. Callback conversation with reporter revealed the following information: the PIC stated that the flight originated at an east coast airport and was destined for a southeast coastal airport. When notified of the missing passengers' names, the captain was concerned that the security of the flight had been compromised and asked the director of security for an aircraft bomb search. This was not done and the crew was removed from the flight as they had requested that the aircraft be searched prior to their taking the flight out. The police arrived at the scene with dogs but were not allowed on the aircraft by the director of security. Captain was aware that this could have been a dress rehearsal for whatever type operation it was. He does not have the passenger names but the company does. The hearing with the chief pilot was at the union's request after having a meeting with the union's safety and legal departments. The PIC also stated that this airline has an attitude problem towards this type situation and was told that he was not to do anything in the way of reporting unusual events or trying to do something about them by this director of security. It is alleged, according to the reporter, that a similar situation of missing passenger, and perhaps the denial of a flight search request, had occurred earlier this year. The union safety and legal department advised the captain that he had 'done the right thing.' reporter said that any information he has transmitted to ASRS may be passed onto any higher organization for purposes as seen fit. Supplemental information from acn 518307: as part of a new crew to continue a thru flight 3 male passenger failed to reboard the aircraft in pit. Discrepancy was noticed when the agent counted final weight and balance numbers did not agree. Passenger checked bags were removed and aircraft search was requested by crew. Callback conversation with reporter revealed the following information: the first officer said that the first indication of any problem was when the gate agent came to the cockpit just prior to the passenger door being closed, advising the crew of a passenger count of 132. Normally the crew would receive the passenger count and weight/balance during taxi on the ACARS. Just at this time however, the ACARS delivered the passenger count as 135, flag number 1. The airline's policy is to have an allowable passenger count discrepancy of 2 passenger. The agent read the passenger names to the crew and that was flag number 2 as the names sounded very foreign. Captain asked that their bags be removed. Inside the terminal, while passenger were being deplaned, the captain learned that the passenger had paid cash 3 days before for the tickets, flag number 3. The police were called, bringing bomb search dogs with them. At the same time the chief pilot and the director of security arrived at the jetway, as the passenger were deplaning. Just after that, the missing 3 passenger showed up, they were tourists bound for the southeast coastal airport for a cruise on a ship. They said that they had been 'shopping' and hadn't noted the time. At this point the PIC still wanted the aircraft searched. The first officer said he was a very strict follower of rules and regulations. 3 days after the event the crew had their meeting with the chief pilot. The PIC was taken off schedule but the first officer was not.

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: THE FLT CREW OF AN MD80 IS REMOVED FROM DUTY AFTER REFUSING TO FLY THEIR ACFT UNTIL A BOMB SEARCH WAS INITIATED AFTER THREE SUSPICIOUS MEN FAILED TO REBOARD A THROUGH FLT AT PIT, PA.

Narrative: 3 THRU PASSENGERS FAILED TO REBOARD AT INTERMEDIATE STOP, HAD CHECKED BAGS, WERE YOUNG AND MIDEASTERN DSCNT AND PAID CASH FOR TICKETS 3 DAYS PRIOR. COMPANY REFUSED TO SEARCH ACFT AND REMOVED THE CREW FROM THE TRIP FOR REFUSAL TO FLY. CALLBACK CONVERSATION WITH RPTR REVEALED THE FOLLOWING INFO: THE PIC STATED THAT THE FLT ORIGINATED AT AN E COAST ARPT AND WAS DESTINED FOR A SE COASTAL ARPT. WHEN NOTIFIED OF THE MISSING PASSENGERS' NAMES, THE CAPT WAS CONCERNED THAT THE SECURITY OF THE FLT HAD BEEN COMPROMISED AND ASKED THE DIRECTOR OF SECURITY FOR AN ACFT BOMB SEARCH. THIS WAS NOT DONE AND THE CREW WAS REMOVED FROM THE FLT AS THEY HAD REQUESTED THAT THE ACFT BE SEARCHED PRIOR TO THEIR TAKING THE FLT OUT. THE POLICE ARRIVED AT THE SCENE WITH DOGS BUT WERE NOT ALLOWED ON THE ACFT BY THE DIRECTOR OF SECURITY. CAPT WAS AWARE THAT THIS COULD HAVE BEEN A DRESS REHEARSAL FOR WHATEVER TYPE OPERATION IT WAS. HE DOES NOT HAVE THE PAX NAMES BUT THE COMPANY DOES. THE HEARING WITH THE CHIEF PLT WAS AT THE UNION'S REQUEST AFTER HAVING A MEETING WITH THE UNION'S SAFETY AND LEGAL DEPARTMENTS. THE PIC ALSO STATED THAT THIS AIRLINE HAS AN ATTITUDE PROB TOWARDS THIS TYPE SIT AND WAS TOLD THAT HE WAS NOT TO DO ANYTHING IN THE WAY OF RPTING UNUSUAL EVENTS OR TRYING TO DO SOMETHING ABOUT THEM BY THIS DIRECTOR OF SECURITY. IT IS ALLEGED, ACCORDING TO THE RPTR, THAT A SIMILAR SIT OF MISSING PAX, AND PERHAPS THE DENIAL OF A FLT SEARCH REQUEST, HAD OCCURRED EARLIER THIS YEAR. THE UNION SAFETY AND LEGAL DEPARTMENT ADVISED THE CAPT THAT HE HAD 'DONE THE RIGHT THING.' RPTR SAID THAT ANY INFO HE HAS TRANSMITTED TO ASRS MAY BE PASSED ONTO ANY HIGHER ORGANIZATION FOR PURPOSES AS SEEN FIT. SUPPLEMENTAL INFO FROM ACN 518307: AS PART OF A NEW CREW TO CONTINUE A THRU FLT 3 MALE PAX FAILED TO REBOARD THE ACFT IN PIT. DISCREPANCY WAS NOTICED WHEN THE AGENT COUNTED FINAL WT AND BALANCE NUMBERS DID NOT AGREE. PAX CHECKED BAGS WERE REMOVED AND ACFT SEARCH WAS REQUESTED BY CREW. CALLBACK CONVERSATION WITH RPTR REVEALED THE FOLLOWING INFO: THE FO SAID THAT THE FIRST INDICATION OF ANY PROB WAS WHEN THE GATE AGENT CAME TO THE COCKPIT JUST PRIOR TO THE PAX DOOR BEING CLOSED, ADVISING THE CREW OF A PAX COUNT OF 132. NORMALLY THE CREW WOULD RECEIVE THE PAX COUNT AND WT/BALANCE DURING TAXI ON THE ACARS. JUST AT THIS TIME HOWEVER, THE ACARS DELIVERED THE PAX COUNT AS 135, FLAG NUMBER 1. THE AIRLINE'S POLICY IS TO HAVE AN ALLOWABLE PAX COUNT DISCREPANCY OF 2 PAX. THE AGENT READ THE PAX NAMES TO THE CREW AND THAT WAS FLAG NUMBER 2 AS THE NAMES SOUNDED VERY FOREIGN. CAPT ASKED THAT THEIR BAGS BE REMOVED. INSIDE THE TERMINAL, WHILE PAX WERE BEING DEPLANED, THE CAPT LEARNED THAT THE PAX HAD PAID CASH 3 DAYS BEFORE FOR THE TICKETS, FLAG NUMBER 3. THE POLICE WERE CALLED, BRINGING BOMB SEARCH DOGS WITH THEM. AT THE SAME TIME THE CHIEF PLT AND THE DIRECTOR OF SECURITY ARRIVED AT THE JETWAY, AS THE PAX WERE DEPLANING. JUST AFTER THAT, THE MISSING 3 PAX SHOWED UP, THEY WERE TOURISTS BOUND FOR THE SE COASTAL ARPT FOR A CRUISE ON A SHIP. THEY SAID THAT THEY HAD BEEN 'SHOPPING' AND HADN'T NOTED THE TIME. AT THIS POINT THE PIC STILL WANTED THE ACFT SEARCHED. THE FO SAID HE WAS A VERY STRICT FOLLOWER OF RULES AND REGULATIONS. 3 DAYS AFTER THE EVENT THE CREW HAD THEIR MEETING WITH THE CHIEF PLT. THE PIC WAS TAKEN OFF SCHEDULE BUT THE FO WAS NOT.

Data retrieved from NASA's ASRS site as of July 2007 and automatically converted to unabbreviated mixed upper/lowercase text. This report is for informational purposes with no guarantee of accuracy. See NASA's ASRS site for official report.