"Wanna make a bet? Granted, not a hell of a lot of difference, but you'd be surprised."
"Yes. What is the "surprise" difference with a passenger blocking the aisle on a 737 or on an A320? 2 inches makes absolutely no difference - particularly if it is a "standard" male adult!"
The aisle itself, irregardless of aircraft type, should be wide enough for a "standard adult male", as you put it, be able to freely walk up and down with NO restrictions placed on him which impedes quick movement. There are far too many examples of pax climbing over seat tops to evacuate an aircraft. The debate here is not 2 inches or 2 and three quarter inches. My concern is too narrow aisles, period. Period. Got it? Good.
"What are the safety standards that should be acceptable to Canadian "docile sheep who lack balls"? Surely, with all the criticism you have leveled at the safety standards, you are able to provide some safer alternatives."
Have you ever flown on a civil aircraft lately? If so, have you truly paid attention or studied the surroundings of the cabin in which you travelled?
Have you ever flown as a crew member and are aware of cabin safety improvements that a pax is not?
My main argument for safer cabins has been stated several times above. may I suggest you read? Other examples? They abound. Non-Kapton wiring (Ever heard of Swissair 111?, it may be but one example, but do you feel 229 lives don't warrant my objection?), no C02 extinguishers on-board any aircraft, no "flip-around" FA
jumpseats on the Airbus aircraft in the rear galley areas, as they have been known to disengage from their "locks" and have been, in some cases, impossible to lock back in place - As this was a poor initial design from Airbus, this particular one will be difficult to revise/re-design. Mandatory wider legroom at all emergency exit rows on all aircraft types; I have been on several carriers and aircraft type where the overwing exit areas have far too little room for an effective overwing evac.
No glass objects anywhere near an exit door. Lufthansa B747-400's (the ones I have been on) have glass mirrors positioned at exit doors across from the FA
jumpseats. These mirrors act as aids to the FA
to monitor and assess the cabin in front of them (behind their jumpseat). Any strong impact or internal structural damage sustained by the aircraft could strongly result in these glass mirrors shattering, which in turn would quite possibly tear or deflate an inflated door slide as pax rush to evacuate the aircraft. LH FA
's themselves have questioned these mirrors at the exit doors, yet they remain.
One of my biggest concerns (and the one that frightens me the most) is inadequate FA
intial and recurrent training methods. I have flown on several flights throughout the years where the cabin crew displayed a shocking lack of knowledge re cabin safety. On one AA
flight from ORD
, for example, a female pax passed out and required O2. The FA
's, in a panic, and I emphasize the word "panic", could not locate the portable O2 tank with facemask. They both ran to get their manuals, as the female pax was lying in the aisle, and obviously required 02. One went through her manual as the other opened up every overhead bin looking for the 02 tank; she subsequently brought a Halon extinguisher to the pax, thinking it was an 02 tank. You may say, "Oh, but that was only an example with 2 FA
's. that is hardly something to worry about or to present in your argument". True, that was one example that I myself witnessed. I also witnessed some disturbing lack of training/knowledge at WG in my 5 years there. How many more incompetent cabin crews are out there, and dear God, will it take an emergency for their shortfalls to be noticed? I hope not. I have many ex-colleagues who fly as FA
's today who tell me time and time again they themselves are shocked at the incompetence of many new hires coming on the line in regards to safety knowledge and procedures. You may think it impossible for these new-hires to get through the system, but believe me, they do, and will continue to.
I can tell you first hand that the WG FA
recurrent training syllabus and instruction was a joke. Very poor coverage of imperative issues and procedures, the result of which was many FA
's were "passed" only to fly on the line for another year not being fully aware or educated re pax/crew safety in all areas.
This lack of safety knowledge is not restricted to new-hires; I have seen on two occasions senior AC FA
's who, at take-off with less than full loads, decided to seat themselves not in their assigned jumpseats at their assigned emergency exits, but who in fact sat in the second and second from the last row of pax seats from their respective doors. Both had their eyes closed on take-off roll. Had an emergency occured, and they were somehow prohibited from getting to their assigned doors, then I shudder at what the consequences would have been.
The list, the safety infractions, they go on and on. Many are very "small" in and of themselves, but combined with other factors, could prove critical and dangerous.
Yes, for the most part, aircraft are relatively safe. Most FA
's are relatively adequately trained. But there are many many variables which play against these positive figures and factors.