Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
AC's Executive First Class, Evacuation Risk?  
User currently offlineBoeing Nut From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Posted (8 years 1 week 2 hours ago) and read 4491 times:

I got to wondering when I saw this photo in the database...


View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Youri Thonon - Contrails Aviation Photography



With this layout, it seems extremely difficult if passengers needed to progress from one side of the aircrfat to the other to evacuate. (Say a fire is on one side) Are there rules about this and if so, what would be the judgement on this?

Obviously it is legal or else it wouldn't be installed, but i was just wondering.

Boeing Nut
"the original one"

24 replies: All unread, jump to last
 
User currently offlineKLM685 From Mexico, joined May 2005, 1577 posts, RR: 19
Reply 1, posted (8 years 1 week 1 hour ago) and read 4432 times:

IMHO, If there is a fire on one side of the aircraft, having passengers jumping to the other side of the aircraft ( on NOT this kind of business class) would be riskier than actually running on your aisle to the emergency exit or to the rear and front of the aircraft.

Just jumping over the seats might be even more harmful as there are pax stuff, arm rests, etc...



KLM- The Best Airline in the World!
User currently offlineMSPGUY From United States of America, joined Aug 2006, 190 posts, RR: 0
Reply 2, posted (8 years 1 week 1 hour ago) and read 4432 times:

I'd rather get across to above pic versus 5 seats in coach!!!!!!!


If it ain't broke, DON'T touch it!!!!
User currently offlineBoeing Nut From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 3, posted (8 years 6 days 8 hours ago) and read 4043 times:

Quoting KLM685 (Reply 1):
Just jumping over the seats might be even more harmful as there are pax stuff, arm rests, etc...

But in this configuration, cross access is totally blocked off.


View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Youri Thonon - Contrails Aviation Photography



In standard configurations, it is much more passable as there is much more access to the floor.


View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Magnus Trippler



User currently offlineFLYACYYZ From Canada, joined Jan 2004, 1914 posts, RR: 12
Reply 4, posted (8 years 6 days 7 hours ago) and read 3980 times:

There are enhanced "stowage" procedures worked out in cooperation between the MOT and AC, that will be adhered to. Pillows, bedding, coats, carry on bags, etc. have very specific requirements on this aircraft.

I don't see it as any different than an airline that operates a conventional 2-3-2 business (or economy) configuration. Being non-symmetrical, ultimately movement in one aisle is bound to be heavier than the other.



Above and Beyond
User currently offlineBoeing Nut From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 5, posted (8 years 6 days 7 hours ago) and read 3962 times:

What I am getting at is with the Executive First Class, which is impressive BTW, there is a wall to climb over, while with the "standard class" there is not.

Regards


User currently offlineNorthStarDC4M From Canada, joined Apr 2000, 3038 posts, RR: 36
Reply 6, posted (8 years 6 days 2 hours ago) and read 3808 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW
CHAT OPERATOR

ok well lets think about this:

A> evacuation... people will be behaving either very calmly and organized or will be behaving like raving loons with no common sense. In the case of the latter no layout will work so we will hereby discount it.

B> Where the doors are, there is access from both aisles.

C> ExecFirst carries far fewer people per row than the back

I don't think it's a problem. the bottle neck is the same, its the bulkhead forward.
In the few cases i can think of that no evecuation was possible from one entire side of a plane on a widebody. The Galley space is where 50%+ of the people tried to cross between aisles anyways.



Those who would give up Essential Liberty to purchase a little Temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety.
User currently offlineEbbUK From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 7, posted (8 years 6 days 2 hours ago) and read 3792 times:

I totally see where you are coming from Boeing Nut.

I fear it might take a tragedy for them to see sense.


User currently offlineDoor5Right From United Kingdom, joined Dec 2005, 707 posts, RR: 16
Reply 8, posted (8 years 6 days 1 hour ago) and read 3732 times:

You raise a very interesting question, Mr. Boeing Nut. The style and layout of these seats makes the cabin look very cramped I think and there certainly does seem to be a "wall" blocking acess between the rows. Call me old fashioned but I like to sit in a seat firmly facing forward no matter what class I am in.


My soul is in the sky...
User currently offlineMarkhkg From United States of America, joined Dec 2005, 960 posts, RR: 2
Reply 9, posted (8 years 6 days ago) and read 3650 times:

Quoting Boeing Nut (Reply 5):
What I am getting at is with the Executive First Class, which is impressive BTW, there is a wall to climb over, while with the "standard class" there is not.

During an evacuation, lower density seating areas will be faster to evacuate. This has always been the case aboard any aircraft, and is the reason why cabin crew in First or Business class need to let other crew know of "dried up exits" during the evacuation sequence. (IE Doors 1R and 1L will dry up before 2R and 2L).

Since cabin crew are trained to evacuate 1 pax per second through the door, it is safe to say that even with only 1 door available, all Executive Class pax can be out within 30 seconds once people start sliding (24 seats, right?). (And in "best case" Executive class pax have access to 4 doors in an emergency.) We can't say the same about those on Economy since density is much higher there. Bottlenecks tend to happen at the bulkhead rows or at the exits, which is more important than the cross access of seats.

We should be more concerned about the pax in high density seating since it is harder for them to get out...in addition to having to get more of them out compared to business class pax.



Release your seat-belts and get out! Leave everything!
User currently offlineViscount724 From Switzerland, joined Oct 2006, 25659 posts, RR: 22
Reply 10, posted (8 years 5 days 22 hours ago) and read 3590 times:

Many B747s have been flying for decades with a longitudinal galley running the length of the B zone (between the 1st and 2nd doors) on the right side of the aircraft with a solid wall separating the galley from the seating area on the left size of the B zone. That cabin is at least as long as the J cabin on AC's 763.

If there was a safety issue with the new AC 763 layout (which there obviously isn't or it would never have been approved), then it should be even worse for 747s with the lengthwise galley. You certainly can't jump over that wall. And those seats are much further from the other side of the aircraft than on a 767 due to much wider 747 fuselage.

Many other aircraft, especially widebodies, often have quite a few rows of seats adjacent to galley/storage units or upper deck stairways etc. without easy access to the other side of the aircraft.

Photo of TG 744 below with the solid wall down the middle of the B zone with the galley to the right. KLM 747s have had that galley layout for decades, except they now have 41 economy seats in that area (5-abreast, 3-2).


View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Sam Chui




KL 744 all-passenger (combis are the same) seating chart illustrates the longitudinal galley layout.

http://www.klm.com/travel/ch_en/trav...on/on_board/seating_plans/b747.htm


User currently offlineIkramerica From United States of America, joined May 2005, 21544 posts, RR: 59
Reply 11, posted (8 years 5 days 22 hours ago) and read 3562 times:

Quoting EbbUK (Reply 7):
I fear it might take a tragedy for them to see sense.

Quite an irrational over reaction.

Any airline with a 'suite' product has this same situation. VS/NZ with theirs, AA, EK others. There are various forms of "solid wall" layouts on 330s, 767s, 747s, 777s and new offerings on the A380, 748, 787 and 350 as proposed.

Then you have all the people in the nose of a 747 that are completely trapped if there is a fire behind them. And same holds for people in ERJs behind the window exits, as they only have one way out.

A look at that AC jet, we are talking about 7-16 people having to get to doors 1 or 2 (depending on which side has the fire). They are going to get there WAY faster than the 42Y pax between doors 2 and 3 fighting to get across...



Of all the things to worry about... the Wookie has no pants.
User currently offlineBAe146QT From United Kingdom, joined Sep 2006, 996 posts, RR: 0
Reply 12, posted (8 years 5 days 21 hours ago) and read 3532 times:

Quoting Door5Right (Reply 8):
Call me old fashioned but I like to sit in a seat firmly facing forward no matter what class I am in.

A study was performed some years ago which determined that rearward-facing passengers had a far lower risk of injury - and a greater chance of escape - in survivable impact events.

The end result was that "people just didn't like it", so it wasn't adopted (except in some military applications).

What is your reasoning for wanting to face forward? Is it psychological or is there some practical reason?



Todos mis dominós son totalmente pegajosos
User currently offlineMarkHKG From United States of America, joined Dec 2005, 960 posts, RR: 2
Reply 13, posted (8 years 5 days 21 hours ago) and read 3489 times:

Quoting BAe146QT (Reply 12):

A study was performed some years ago which determined that rearward-facing passengers had a far lower risk of injury - and a greater chance of escape - in survivable impact events.



Quoting BAe146QT (Reply 12):
What is your reasoning for wanting to face forward? Is it psychological or is there some practical reason?

Okay, these AC seats are actually fitted with AIR BAGS in the seat belts. This actually could make these seats safer than rear-facing ones. (Rear facing has its problems too, like having your face exposed to all the debris during a crash, needing to strengthen the seat, etc.)



Release your seat-belts and get out! Leave everything!
User currently offlineChewingPlastic From Canada, joined Oct 2006, 57 posts, RR: 0
Reply 14, posted (8 years 5 days 21 hours ago) and read 3489 times:

Quoting Door5Right (Reply 8):
Call me old fashioned but I like to sit in a seat firmly facing forward no matter what class I am in.

I also like to face forwards. My reasoning: your direction the plane goes, the seat should face. But maybe it's my personal psych. reason.


User currently offlineEbbUK From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 15, posted (8 years 5 days 20 hours ago) and read 3467 times:

Quoting Ikramerica (Reply 11):

Quite an irrational over reaction.

Of course you are always right.


User currently offlineBAe146QT From United Kingdom, joined Sep 2006, 996 posts, RR: 0
Reply 16, posted (8 years 5 days 20 hours ago) and read 3455 times:

Mark,

It was a genuine and non-sarcastic question of course. And you're right, putting people backwards has its own challenges, (not least of which are the psychological ones).

But did you know that the main benefits of having people adopt the brace position are;

1) That it keeps their dentistry intact for identification purposes?
2) That having the neck bent in that position improves the chances of a clean kill against the seatback through severing the spinal cord?

Just a thought.



Todos mis dominós son totalmente pegajosos
User currently offlineMarkHKG From United States of America, joined Dec 2005, 960 posts, RR: 2
Reply 17, posted (8 years 5 days 20 hours ago) and read 3427 times:

Quoting BAe146QT (Reply 16):

1) That it keeps their dentistry intact for identification purposes?
2) That having the neck bent in that position improves the chances of a clean kill against the seatback through severing the spinal cord?

I totally understand where you are coming from...I hear a lot of people say it. However, the truth is that the brace position DOES save lives; the dentistry/killing you by having you snap your neck intact thing is in fact, an urban legend.

The mythbusting on this has been extensively covered on other websites like

http://www.snopes.com/travel/airline/brace.asp

and even the program "Mythbusters". While it is true that flight attendant seats are safer (since some are rear facing), the brace position is designed to PROTECT your life, rather than end it.

I've read many position papers by the NTSB, FAA, UKAAIB, all of whom tell people that it saves lives. Futhermore, since all pax on board Scandinavian Airlines Flight 751 adopted the brace position, it is widely cited as the reason why no one was killed. (Moment before impact, passengers were instructed to "grab their knees" by the Senior Cabin Flight Attendant). There are also cases of people putting their heads between their legs because they felt sick or did it instinctively and survived.

I do believe a lot can be done to increase pax survival. But it requires a total redesign (i.e. no overhead cabin bins that can drop a suitcase on you, better restraints, etc.) and shift in thinking!!!



Release your seat-belts and get out! Leave everything!
User currently offlineBAe146QT From United Kingdom, joined Sep 2006, 996 posts, RR: 0
Reply 18, posted (8 years 5 days 19 hours ago) and read 3391 times:

I have been a member of Snopes' forums for a number of years, and I have always disagreed with their treatment of this.

She (Barbara in this case) seems primarily concerned with one main idea. Namely that the legend comes from the fact that a dead passenger doesn't sue. Like dead passengers dont have family. Right.

Secondly, this business of flailing limbs. If that really was the primary concern of the FAA et. al., then the brace prosition should involve being belted in, with your heels on the seat and your arms around your head and lower legs. Much closer to the foetal position than with your heels on the floor. Better a broken arm or two than your nose pushed into your forebrain, as will often happen in a frontal impact when your forehead is against the seatback in front of you.

As for Kegworth, those seats actually became detached from the seat tracks. In many cases, the legs of the seats themselves collapsed or became detached. Having your feet on the floor at that time would not end well and did in fact cause dismemberment.

Of course I understand that I am disagreeing with a few august bodies here, but I don't trust their advice any more than I trust any other "one size fits all" advice that I get from government bodies and their agences.



Todos mis dominós son totalmente pegajosos
User currently offlineWalter747 From United States of America, joined Oct 2006, 1440 posts, RR: 4
Reply 19, posted (8 years 5 days 19 hours ago) and read 3386 times:

it would be difficult and especially if you enlarge the picture you can see how little space there is on the asile


Hussel, Hussel, Husel, Grind, Grind, Grind
User currently offlineMarkHKG From United States of America, joined Dec 2005, 960 posts, RR: 2
Reply 20, posted (8 years 5 days 19 hours ago) and read 3377 times:

Truth be told, the brace position is a sad compromise between safe aircraft seating and restraint systems.

Quoting BAe146QT (Reply 18):
Better a broken arm or two than your nose pushed into your forebrain, as will often happen in a frontal impact when your forehead is against the seatback in front of you.

I think one of the problems with a crash is people smacking their head against the seat back. The head injury score reaches 1000 or even more in such a case. Pre-positioning the head on the seat back reduces the risk of such an impact (a reduction of up to 100 points, whereas an airbag can reduce it by 200), and the seat back is meant to be energy absorbing. (Unless you are in one of the AC or VS seats, which have no soft seat back, in which case that's the reason why have the airbag...CX will use a three point shoulder harness.)

Quoting BAe146QT (Reply 18):
those seats actually became detached from the seat tracks.

That is a HUGE problem. The seats can be designed to absorb 16G, but if they get detached from the floor, what's the use?

Quoting BAe146QT (Reply 18):
Having your feet on the floor at that time would not end well and did in fact cause dismemberment.

If you have a report on that, I would love to read it. The Kegworth crash was the UKAAIB's intense research on the brace position. (Didn't the UKAAIB also recommend rear facing seats and three point shoulder belts?)

Quoting BAe146QT (Reply 18):
but I don't trust their advice any more than I trust any other "one size fits all" advice that I get from government bodies and their agences.

It's good to be skeptical.  Wink That way we get new ideas to improve cabin safety!



Release your seat-belts and get out! Leave everything!
User currently offlineBAe146QT From United Kingdom, joined Sep 2006, 996 posts, RR: 0
Reply 21, posted (8 years 5 days 12 hours ago) and read 3272 times:

Quoting MarkHKG (Reply 20):
the brace position is a sad compromise

That's the problem, all right. And as you say above;

Quoting MarkHKG (Reply 20):
(Didn't the UKAAIB also recommend rear facing seats and three point shoulder belts?)

...unless the cabin is redesigned - which eats into the airine's revenue - then a compromise is all you'll ever get.

Quoting MarkHKG (Reply 20):
If you have a report on that, I would love to read it.

To be more accurate, I believe it was amputations necessitated by crush injuries when the seats collapsed. The report was on some medical university site - I have the link at work and I'll dig it out when my boss isn't shoulder surfing me.



Todos mis dominós son totalmente pegajosos
User currently offlineDoor5Right From United Kingdom, joined Dec 2005, 707 posts, RR: 16
Reply 22, posted (8 years 5 days 7 hours ago) and read 3183 times:

Quoting BAe146QT (Reply 12):
What is your reasoning for wanting to face forward? Is it psychological or is there some practical reason?

I just like seats that are parallel and facing forward. The angled/cocoon style of seating seems to me to lead to a very insular flight experience.

I am just as happy in rearward facing seats too. BEA's first Tridents had half the cabin rear facing and passengers seem to accept it. Sometimes when BCAL flew between BFS and LGW it was on a BAC1-11 which operated flights at the same time for the MOD and all seats were rearward facing. I think I am correct in saying the RAF VC10's had rear facing seats but the Tristars now in use have forward facing seats.



My soul is in the sky...
User currently offline1stfl94 From United Kingdom, joined May 2006, 1455 posts, RR: 0
Reply 23, posted (8 years 5 days 3 hours ago) and read 3093 times:

Quoting MarkHKG (Reply 20):
Quoting BAe146QT (Reply 18):
but I don't trust their advice any more than I trust any other "one size fits all" advice that I get from government bodies and their agences.

It would be even more confusing if during your safety briefing you had five different types of brace position. Confusion would kill more people than the brace position, which does save lives.

Also, if your plane comes for a hard landing (not necessarily smashing into the ground) then the brace also protects you more from any cabin baggage crashing down.


User currently offlineA340600 From United Kingdom, joined Aug 2003, 4105 posts, RR: 51
Reply 24, posted (8 years 5 days 3 hours ago) and read 3084 times:

Quoting Door5Right (Reply 8):
You raise a very interesting question, Mr. Boeing Nut.



Quoting EbbUK (Reply 7):
I fear it might take a tragedy for them to see sense.

Don't be rediculous, do you not think it would have taken testing and consideration by people who knew more on the subject to approve the seats.

On a side note, what a truly hideous cabin, ugly colours and seat fabrics and there is a seriously plastic feel to it,

Sam



Despite the name I am a Boeing man through and through!
Top Of Page
Forum Index

This topic is archived and can not be replied to any more.

Printer friendly format

Similar topics:More similar topics...
AC Executive First Seats On 767-300s posted Sun Oct 22 2006 02:30:49 by N62NA
Been Upgraded To AC Executive First Recently? posted Wed Apr 18 2001 05:03:31 by BigD
AC Executive Class To HK posted Wed Jun 7 2006 04:42:35 by Legallykev
Personal Experience On AC Executive Class? posted Sat Jun 25 2005 05:41:35 by CORULEZ05
Food On AC Executive Class YOW-YYZ? posted Wed Oct 13 2004 21:05:03 by Q400
YYZ-ICN On AC In Executive First posted Sat Jun 5 2004 04:09:13 by Alespesl
AC Executive Class posted Thu Mar 28 2002 06:08:03 by AC330
Hot Towels In First Class posted Mon Nov 13 2006 15:49:28 by PAAclipper707
Delta Domestic First Class posted Wed Nov 8 2006 04:54:15 by Aero0729
SIA New First Class Seat Video posted Mon Oct 30 2006 12:48:19 by KE086