Flight crew insisted the cabin window shades be lowered because of a deferred inoperative pack. The ...

Attributes
ACN	559044
Time
Date	200208
Day	Sat
Local Time Of Day	0601 To 1200
Place
Locale Reference	atc facility : zfw.artcc
State Reference	TX
Altitude	msl single value : 24000
Environment
Flight Conditions	VMC
Aircraft 1
Controlling Facilities	artcc : zab.artcc
Operator	common carrier : air carrier
Make Model Name	Commercial Fixed Wing
Operating Under FAR Part	Part 121
Flight Phase	cruise : level
Flight Plan	IFR
Person 1
Affiliation	company : air carrier
Function	flight crew : captain oversight : pic
Qualification	pilot : multi engine pilot : commercial pilot : atp pilot : instrument
Experience	flight time last 90 days : 210 flight time total : 18000 flight time type : 4000
ASRS Report	559044
Person 2
Affiliation	company : air carrier
Function	flight crew : first officer
Events
Anomaly	aircraft equipment problem : less severe cabin event : passenger misconduct non adherence : far non adherence : published procedure
Independent Detector	other flight crewa other flight crewb other other : 3
Resolutory Action	other
Supplementary
Problem Areas	Flight Crew Human Performance Aircraft Environmental Factor Company Cabin Crew Human Performance
Primary Problem	Flight Crew Human Performance

Narrative:

Our aircraft was operating with a deferred air-conditioning pack. Therefore, the window shades in the aircraft had been pulled down to shade the cabin. The significance of this is that the cabin was dim, yet 2 passenger sat in the cabin with dark sunglasses on. This aroused the suspicion of those in the cabin. When the 2 passenger went into our small aircraft lavatory together in-flight, a 'PA announcement' was made for a second time, since the seatbelt sign had already been on, and the announcement to remain seated had already been made. After about 7 mins, I instructed the flight attendant to open the bathroom door to find out what was going on in the lavatory, since the 2 passenger in the bathroom would not respond to our calls to return to their seats. Finally, as she was opening the door, they came out of the bathroom. Still needing to know why the 2 of them were in the bathroom at an inappropriate time during the flight, I asked the flight attendant if the man in the bathroom appeared to be sexually aroused when he came out of the bathroom. She replied that she had noticed that he was. This couple was charged with disorderly conduct by the company. The bottom line is: 1) a couple had sex in our bathroom. 2) they would not respond to our announcements, and 3) they interfered with the crew duties of flight attendants with their actions.

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: FLC INSISTED THE CABIN WINDOW SHADES BE LOWERED BECAUSE OF A DEFERRED INOP PACK. THE CREW THEN SAW 2 PAX WITH THEIR SUNGLASSES ON. THE PAX THEN ENTERED THE ACFT LAVATORY TOGETHER.

Narrative: OUR ACFT WAS OPERATING WITH A DEFERRED AIR-CONDITIONING PACK. THEREFORE, THE WINDOW SHADES IN THE ACFT HAD BEEN PULLED DOWN TO SHADE THE CABIN. THE SIGNIFICANCE OF THIS IS THAT THE CABIN WAS DIM, YET 2 PAX SAT IN THE CABIN WITH DARK SUNGLASSES ON. THIS AROUSED THE SUSPICION OF THOSE IN THE CABIN. WHEN THE 2 PAX WENT INTO OUR SMALL ACFT LAVATORY TOGETHER INFLT, A 'PA ANNOUNCEMENT' WAS MADE FOR A SECOND TIME, SINCE THE SEATBELT SIGN HAD ALREADY BEEN ON, AND THE ANNOUNCEMENT TO REMAIN SEATED HAD ALREADY BEEN MADE. AFTER ABOUT 7 MINS, I INSTRUCTED THE FLT ATTENDANT TO OPEN THE BATHROOM DOOR TO FIND OUT WHAT WAS GOING ON IN THE LAVATORY, SINCE THE 2 PAX IN THE BATHROOM WOULD NOT RESPOND TO OUR CALLS TO RETURN TO THEIR SEATS. FINALLY, AS SHE WAS OPENING THE DOOR, THEY CAME OUT OF THE BATHROOM. STILL NEEDING TO KNOW WHY THE 2 OF THEM WERE IN THE BATHROOM AT AN INAPPROPRIATE TIME DURING THE FLT, I ASKED THE FLT ATTENDANT IF THE MAN IN THE BATHROOM APPEARED TO BE SEXUALLY AROUSED WHEN HE CAME OUT OF THE BATHROOM. SHE REPLIED THAT SHE HAD NOTICED THAT HE WAS. THIS COUPLE WAS CHARGED WITH DISORDERLY CONDUCT BY THE COMPANY. THE BOTTOM LINE IS: 1) A COUPLE HAD SEX IN OUR BATHROOM. 2) THEY WOULD NOT RESPOND TO OUR ANNOUNCEMENTS, AND 3) THEY INTERFERED WITH THE CREW DUTIES OF FLT ATTENDANTS WITH THEIR ACTIONS.

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.

Flight crew insisted the cabin window shades be lowered because of a deferred inoperative pack. The crew then saw 2 passenger with their sunglasses on. The passenger then entered the aircraft lavatory together.