Registered: Jan 2002
Location: UK
Posts: 13002

If you fly on a plane nowadays it is 'smoke free'. One of the things you will get told and see in the toilet is reminder that Federal law prohibits tampering with, disabling, or destroying any smoke detector in an airplane lavatory and smoking in lavatories. At least this is what you will get told on a US carrier. We have pretty similiar laws too.

So... I am curious if anyone knows the answer (JEB?). How does this work in transatlantic crossings? If you are doing say the US - UK leg at one point does the jurisdiction of the application of these laws change?

As I understand it, international waters are considered to exist once 20 miles from land, so once over international water who takes precedence? Is it dependent on the driection you are going? Or do they turn round if you havn't gone that far? Does the home nation of the carrier define the jurisdiction? Is there some document or agreement on this? I am thinking here of the trouble that we had with the French when the Channel Tunnel was opened and someone had to figure o0ut where the border was.

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Jul 2000
Location: Location Location
Posts: 26383

Presumably, it is still the property of our nation's airlines.

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Jul 2000
Location: Sedona, Arizona
Posts: 18823

There is a sort of sovierenty (sp) aboard aircraft and ships that takes presidence over national boundaries.
I know that while I am flying commercially (in whatever type aircraft I am piloting) that there are many incidences that while on the ground would be under state or local juristiction, but once I am airborne or even just in command of an aircraft on the ground that automatically fall under federal law.
For example, if I were to land and someone pulled up and said I scared their dog and they were going to kick my ass, they just committed a federal crime, which would and could be dealt with by the
FBI rather than the local cops.
Point is, that I believe that the aircraft would be operating under the juristiction of the country it is licensed in until it has landed.

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Jan 2002
Location: UK
Posts: 13002

quote:

---

Originally posted by Paint CHiPs
Presumably, it is still the property of our nation's airlines.

---

hmmm ok, yes I guess. But if you tampered with the smoke detector whilst on the tarmac of Heathrow Airport (London) I doubt you would be taken to the US to be charged and then be deported again would you? That would be an awful waste of money. Secondly, you havn't commited a Federal crime, unless of course a US carrier's plane is like the US Embassy and considered US soil. I dunno. Thats why I am asking

What I really want to know is where the plane crosses jurisidiction. I'm sure it must be a procedural thing thats written down somewhere.

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Jan 2002
Location: UK
Posts: 13002

quote:

---

Originally posted by wonderaz
Point is, that I believe that the aircraft would be operating under the juristiction of the country it is licensed in until it has landed.

---

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Jul 2000
Location: Sedona, Arizona
Posts: 18823

The senior pilot on board has absolute authority during the flight, no matter where he is, in regards to anything that happens on board his aircraft and exercises that authority per the flight regulations of his licensing country.
One cannot expect the rules on board an aircraft to change everytime they fly over a border.
Once they land, then that is different. Then the law of the land prevails.

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Jan 2002
Location: UK
Posts: 13002

quote:

---

Originally posted by wonderaz
One cannot expect the rules on board an aircraft to change everytime they fly over a border.
Once they land, then that is different. Then the law of the land prevails.

---

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Jul 2000
Location: Sedona, Arizona
Posts: 18823

If the person is not posing a threat to the crew or passengers they are not going to divert the flight but will continue on course and deal with the violator at the next scheduled stop. If a threat is perceived, they will take the shortest route to the first available landing site.

It would be the same for each carrier as far as them following the proceedures set forth by their country of license.

I checked in the books I have on Federal Air Regulations and I don't have any info on international regs. That isn't anything that concerns me so I never bothered getting those FAR's.

Phil, I'm not sure where to find those specific rules, for the US regs, I would probably go to faa.gov

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Aug 2001
Location: Hilbert Space
Posts: 35561

I think that Peter Buck wasn't over any country's airspace when he was drunk and so on, but it was on a British plane so he got prosecuted here.

I would think that Wonder is right about the senior pilot (or ship's captain, at see) acting in accordance with the laws of the country whose flag the vessel operates (maybe that is a condition of registering in that country?).

Well, it would make sense that way anyway.

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged