Moderators: jsumali2, richierich, ua900, PanAm_DC10, hOMSaR

 
cesar666cu
Posts: 30
Joined: Tue Jun 14, 2005 8:08 pm

Re: Chaotic Evacuations may Lead to Recertification

Tue Nov 01, 2016 4:45 pm

Amiga500 wrote:
cesar666cu wrote:
I think people don't really understand the concept of this certification in 90 sec.


That is true - there is no perceptible increase in risk from 89 to 91 seconds.

But the bigger issue is that evacs are getting unnecessarily delayed, probably by minutes, due to people doing things they shouldn't. Over the span of a minute, risk does rise and not insubstantially.



I completely agree with the unnecessary delays.

But we are talking about 90 sec for certification.
The same way that the aircraft is certified by test pilots, who are doing better than the average pilot. Same thing applies here where the evacuation certification is performed in the best conditions.
I don't know how they came with 90 seconds, but when they decided it they might have deemed acceptable that 90 seconds in perfect situation is equivalent to 180 seconds in normal conditions...
 
seat38a
Posts: 296
Joined: Wed Nov 20, 2013 2:29 am

Re: Chaotic Evacuations may Lead to Recertification

Tue Nov 01, 2016 4:59 pm

IPFreely wrote:
DualQual wrote:
If you're enough of an inconsiderate ass to not get off a burning plane you better hope I'm not behind you trying to get out while you decide to fumble for whatever replaceable piece of luggage you need. I'm either busting your nose or shoving you out of the way.


seat38a wrote:
I will be personally, SHOVING, PUSHING AND PUNCHING YOU out of the way if your dumb ass was blocking my way during an evacuation trying to get your shit (coat, luggage etc) out of the overhead bin. And I HOPE everyone else behind me remembers to give you a good swift kick in the face as they rushed to the slides.


Brewfangrb wrote:
As I've said before: If you stop for ANY REASON unrelated to the actual evacuation of the aircraft, I will stop at nothing to remove you from my way. Your life does not come before mine and I will use any means of physical force necessary to evacuation.


garpd wrote:
Agreed, I have often said, in an evacuation such as a burning plane or one that threatens to go up in flame, anyone that stops me from getting to an exit will get a swift punch or kick to remind them to get moving. The same can be said for those ignorant PAX that are sitting on an exit row and pay no attention to the notices on how to operate them. If they stop me getting out because they're busy figuring it out or asking for instructions, I will drag them forcibly out of the dame way and possible given them a swift kick for their troubles.


fallap wrote:
For those trying to grab your precious items while I've got flames in my arse, you better get a move on or you'll end up under my leather jackboots <3 It's nothing personal, but I'd rather murder you than die in such an instance. .


garpd wrote:
They will be quickly rendered no longer an obstacle in whatever way is quickest. Could be shoving them in an empty seat, could be using them as a carpet. The people behind me will be thankful for it.


UAL777UK wrote:
I can tell you right now, if you are ever in front of me and I need to get out of a plane in an emergency I will come through you like a pin ball.


Some good contenders here. I'm really having trouble deciding which of these internet tough guys is the toughest.

Moose135 wrote:
I think half the people claiming they will punch, kick, trample, etc. those getting bags during an evacuation will be panicking themselves if it really hits the fan, and cause problems in their own right.


On further review I am pretty sure Moose is correct. In an actual emergency the above posters would be too busy wetting themselves to do any of the nose busting, shoving, pushing, punching, kicking, and murdering that they like to boast about. They are amusing, though.


When I hear EVACUATE EVACUATE EVACUATE from the FA, and some asshole blocks my way to the exit by getting his crap out of the overhead bin, you better believe it I'll be, punching, pushing shoving and kicking the inconsiderate asshole out of the way all the same time I'm wetting myself from fear.
 
User avatar
fallap
Posts: 1016
Joined: Thu Jan 15, 2009 11:36 am

Re: Chaotic Evacuations may Lead to Recertification

Tue Nov 01, 2016 6:29 pm

When I hear EVACUATE EVACUATE EVACUATE

I actually hear KILL KILL KILL!
Ex grease monkey buried head to toe inside an F-16M
Now studying Political Science
 
mjoelnir
Posts: 9411
Joined: Sun Feb 03, 2013 11:06 pm

Re: Chaotic Evacuations may Lead to Recertification

Tue Nov 01, 2016 6:40 pm

seat38a wrote:
IPFreely wrote:
DualQual wrote:
If you're enough of an inconsiderate ass to not get off a burning plane you better hope I'm not behind you trying to get out while you decide to fumble for whatever replaceable piece of luggage you need. I'm either busting your nose or shoving you out of the way.


seat38a wrote:
I will be personally, SHOVING, PUSHING AND PUNCHING YOU out of the way if your dumb ass was blocking my way during an evacuation trying to get your shit (coat, luggage etc) out of the overhead bin. And I HOPE everyone else behind me remembers to give you a good swift kick in the face as they rushed to the slides.


Brewfangrb wrote:
As I've said before: If you stop for ANY REASON unrelated to the actual evacuation of the aircraft, I will stop at nothing to remove you from my way. Your life does not come before mine and I will use any means of physical force necessary to evacuation.


garpd wrote:
Agreed, I have often said, in an evacuation such as a burning plane or one that threatens to go up in flame, anyone that stops me from getting to an exit will get a swift punch or kick to remind them to get moving. The same can be said for those ignorant PAX that are sitting on an exit row and pay no attention to the notices on how to operate them. If they stop me getting out because they're busy figuring it out or asking for instructions, I will drag them forcibly out of the dame way and possible given them a swift kick for their troubles.


fallap wrote:
For those trying to grab your precious items while I've got flames in my arse, you better get a move on or you'll end up under my leather jackboots <3 It's nothing personal, but I'd rather murder you than die in such an instance. .


garpd wrote:
They will be quickly rendered no longer an obstacle in whatever way is quickest. Could be shoving them in an empty seat, could be using them as a carpet. The people behind me will be thankful for it.


UAL777UK wrote:
I can tell you right now, if you are ever in front of me and I need to get out of a plane in an emergency I will come through you like a pin ball.


Some good contenders here. I'm really having trouble deciding which of these internet tough guys is the toughest.

Moose135 wrote:
I think half the people claiming they will punch, kick, trample, etc. those getting bags during an evacuation will be panicking themselves if it really hits the fan, and cause problems in their own right.


On further review I am pretty sure Moose is correct. In an actual emergency the above posters would be too busy wetting themselves to do any of the nose busting, shoving, pushing, punching, kicking, and murdering that they like to boast about. They are amusing, though.


When I hear EVACUATE EVACUATE EVACUATE from the FA, and some asshole blocks my way to the exit by getting his crap out of the overhead bin, you better believe it I'll be, punching, pushing shoving and kicking the inconsiderate asshole out of the way all the same time I'm wetting myself from fear.


It seems that nobody here spends time locking at the actual videos of evacuations. There is not one person stopping you getting while getting his stuff, but 50 people waiting in line getting out. Without any body getting stuff the lines move slow.
 
cumulushumilis
Posts: 230
Joined: Wed Jul 27, 2016 8:49 pm

Re: Chaotic Evacuations may Lead to Recertification

Tue Nov 01, 2016 6:57 pm

If the fire/smoke doesn't kill you then the slide perhaps will immobilize you such as causing fractures...
There are two bottle necks here and in most cases you are not getting off that aircraft with your carry-on if the Flight Attendant has anything to do with it...


In these evacuations is people hold you up by grabbing their carry-on (bottleneck number 1) - (bottleneck number 2 - you get a pile of bags at the door.) Emergency exits as the Flight Attendant wrestles that bag away because guaranteed jumping onto a near vertical slide from a height of 15-30 feet with the bag will cause some type of injury to either you or another passenger. As someone who has jumped on a slide from a 777 in training, you absolutely cannot do it with a bag.
 
Newbiepilot
Posts: 3642
Joined: Tue Aug 30, 2016 10:18 pm

Re: Chaotic Evacuations may Lead to Recertification

Tue Nov 01, 2016 7:41 pm

Amiga500 wrote:
Newbiepilot wrote:
As with anything on an airplane, the cabin door cannot close and plane push back if there is an open maintenance item.


Every aircraft has a Master Minimum Equipment List (MMEL) - which is downselected by the operator and regulator into a Minimum Equipment List - if those items aren't functioning, the plane ain't flying. Locks on the overhead bins would most assuredly not be on either MMEL or MEL!


If that is true and they are not considered safety equipment then an airline can deactivate all the locks indefinitely under most regulatory agency regulations. If they are treated like air vents or call lights then they won't be forced on the airplane. That goes back to what is the point of the lock? It is either deemed a safety requirement or not. I am not saying that they would be considered CAT C or D deferrals, but if not in the MEL as essential furnishings, then the airline will just get rid of them.

Things that are installed in the cabin for safety reasons usually are on the MMEL for example the ashtray in the lavatory, flapper door on the trash can or luggage restraint bar under the seat, etc all are on the MMEL and require a mechanic to sign off on them if they break. For the record per MMEL 25-28-01 (number varies based on model) any stowage compartment lock that is inoperative must be secured in the unlocked position. That means that if a lock fails closed on any stowage compartment on an airplane, the plane can't be dispatched (the FAA doesn't want any locked area where potential hazardous devices could be located).
 
User avatar
DocLightning
Posts: 21894
Joined: Wed Nov 16, 2005 8:51 am

Re: Chaotic Evacuations may Lead to Recertification

Tue Nov 01, 2016 8:40 pm

johns624 wrote:
mjoelnir wrote:
I find this idea of locking the overhead bins pretty strange. If it would be luggage storage only, but I usually store my winter coat there during the flight. Do you want to throw me off the plane in a storm and -20°C without my winter coat?
The plane fire will keep you warm. Or, you can just keep your coat with you...what a concept!


My practice is to prepare for an emergency evacuation prior to takeoff and landing. That means that until we are off the ground or after "FAs prepare cabin for landing" is called:
*My shoes are on.
*I have my coat with me or stuffed under the seat if we are arriving at/departing from a foul weather airport.
*My laptop and medications are in my small backpack that I will grab in an evacuation.
*My phone, wallet, keys, and passport if applicable are in my pockets (not in my seatback pocket).
*I have mentally reviewed my available evacuation paths.
-Doc Lightning-

"The sky calls to us. If we do not destroy ourselves, we will one day venture to the stars."
-Carl Sagan
 
bennett123
Posts: 10067
Joined: Sun Aug 15, 2004 12:49 am

Re: Chaotic Evacuations may Lead to Recertification

Tue Nov 01, 2016 9:59 pm

Previously, I would have said the camera would come with me, as it would be at hand.

Perhaps best to just take the SD Card, and get a new camera.
 
User avatar
AirlineCritic
Posts: 1771
Joined: Sat Mar 14, 2009 1:07 pm

Re: Chaotic Evacuations may Lead to Recertification

Tue Nov 01, 2016 10:09 pm

kalvado wrote:
I just hope new recertification tests would include representative pax population. For a 737 heading from Florida that includes: 3-4 wheelchair folks, 5-7 kids under 10 years, several people who didn't sleep last night, someone with a hangover.


... and a couple of a.netters with an opinion, for a good measure :-)

kalvado wrote:
Oh, and revoke certification from SQ for keeping pax in the cabin on the ground for 15 minutes after emergency landing - sitting on top of active fire.


Very much agree! That was a disgrace.
 
DTWPurserBoy
Posts: 2374
Joined: Fri Feb 19, 2010 10:33 pm

Re: Chaotic Evacuations may Lead to Recertification

Tue Nov 01, 2016 10:45 pm

SomebodyInTLS wrote:
DTWPurserBoy wrote:
SomebodyInTLS wrote:
Airplane evacuations are the wrong place as an entertainment venue. There are enough videos online that you can watch.


Seriously - I've seen thousands of videos and I'm 100% certain that I would still be unsure what I'm doing. A couple of goes in a simulation drill would do wonders.

Of course you don't have to jump down a four-storey slide! I'm not talking about using a real aircraft, I'm thinking of a small cabin mock-up with a couple of rows of seats and functional doors representing a few common configurations. Handful of people... play with the different doors... try the lifevest on... maybe a small slide to jump down... general briefing... then end with a quick drill (oxygens masks drop, lights out, evacuate!) to put it all in practice.

Assuming it was goverment / regulatory body sponsored (mandatory?) you could develop a cheap, standard kit and roll it out all across the board. I think it would be a cost-effective way of increasing passenger safety.


The doors are simple. Lift or pull a handle and it opens. Again, with non-trained people trying to open exit doors there is a major liability issue. If you are curious ask one of the flight attendants on your next flight. A caution--if you are on a 737-7, -8 or -9 and sitting by an overwing exit you pull the handle AND LET IT GO! If you don't it will do like it did to one of our passengers who wanted "some extra air." It pulled him out of his seat during taxi, he bounced off the wing and landed on the taxiway. He was hospitalized for weeks. Those exits are hinged at the top and are not like the older ones that you pulled into the cabin and threw it out on the wing. All newer airplanes built since the 747 have servo-assisted doors that when armed for departure will also yank you out of the aircraft if you do not let go and hold onto one of the assist handles.
Qualified on Concorde/B707/B720/B727/B737/B747/B757/B767/B777/DC-8/DC-9/DC-10/A319/A320/A330/MD-88-90
 
ikramerica
Posts: 15100
Joined: Mon May 23, 2005 9:33 am

Re: Chaotic Evacuations may Lead to Recertification

Tue Nov 01, 2016 10:59 pm

XLA2008 wrote:
Actually I believe the 90 second rule comes after studies, previous aviation crashes, onboard fires that have happened inflight, it's not just a random number plucked out of nowhere! 90 seconds doesn't mean that every situation is going to take 90 seconds, but based on worst case situations and average time it's taken for situations to become out of control they came to 90 seconds!

Round numbers are rarely ever the result of concrete studies.

1. It is a very old rule. It is unlikely it is based on evacuating the current traveling public and current aircraft.
2. 90 seconds is hardly random. It's deliberately easy to quantify. Doesn't mean it's actually meaningful. Why not 91? 84? 100 seconds? 1.5 minutes is so neat and tidy the engineer in me says it is totally fabricated. Real life isn't that neat and tidy when based on clinical/experimental results. Real life involves decimals. It doesn't involve 90 round seconds, 110 exact people through a door, etc. Those are all convenient approximations so there is some sort of test to pass and checkmark to put on a certification.
3. No evacuation tests are required at all anymore. Computer modeling is much more accurate for real world conditions. The current testing is farce. It should be scrapped.

Look into fire safety modeling. Forensic teams use it all the time during building fire investigations to understand if the building design was at fault. Now it is used to properly design fire exists for large structures. Without it, you can't get plans passed in many jurisdictions. No more "X number of doors per M2". This is why you see things in the USA like "Maximum occupancy 138" instead of "About 140". Because it's no longer rule of thumb based, except in aviation and small residential structures.

The 90 second rule smells of the rules of thumb, not science. It should be abandoned. Instead all the new data involving evacuations and fires, combined with existing models, should be used to create an aircraft by aircraft simulation under various conditions to understand the limit on each aircraft, including each airlines interior fitments. If it's already being done that way to certify an interior, good. Then why the arbitrary 90 seconds?

It would end this unscientific "440 passengers" garbage. We might find that 10Y 777s can't hold as many passengers as thought because the aisles are too narrow. We might find that 717s need to be re-certified because of the lack of exits in the back. We might find that locking bins is only necessary on densely configured aircraft rather than a blanket rule. But until that kind of real world analysis is done, let's not institute knee-jerk solutions.
Of all the things to worry about... the Wookie has no pants.
 
D L X
Posts: 12680
Joined: Thu May 27, 1999 3:30 am

Re: Chaotic Evacuations may Lead to Recertification

Wed Nov 02, 2016 3:29 am

2175301 wrote:
As an engineer

I am also an engineer.

Newbiepilot wrote:
D L X wrote:
Newbiepilot wrote:
It potentially could be a failure at the worst time possible (right when the cabin door is closed) which likely could cause a delay 25% of the time.
That's assuming that a failed lock is an MEL item, which I don't think would be appropriate.
Newbiepilot wrote:
I also imagine an airturnback on a 12 hour flight because a lock failed closed after takeoff and someone had their critical medication inside happening once every few years.
Sounds like a pretty remote event! Less remote than evacuations!


I would assume a lock would be an Mel item since its justification is safety. If it wasn't an airline could just deactivate all the locks and save the hassle.

Nah. You could set a maximum number of inoperative locks to make it unsafe to fly, and you're good to go. Kind of like how one wonky winglet doesn't stop the flight, but two does.

garpd wrote:
The locks my fail on arrival - A manual key can solve that. A small access hole beside each mechanism allows a special key to be inserted and manually forces the lock open, like you find on most locking mechanisms on the planet.
The locks might fail on boarding - Ok, so that flight goes with bins unlocked, big deal
The locks would be too expensive to retrofit - So was TCAS at one point, so was fire retardant insulation too.
People would still try to open then in an emergency - Yup, People.are.stupid. But, as the feature of the bins being locked spreads and the knowledge of that becomes an everyday thing, like using a seatbelt, less and less will try.
I won't be able to get to my coat - Seriously, really? Bring a jumper and tie it round your waist, if you're that concerned.

EXACTLY!! (I was even thinking the same thing regarding stuck locks upon arrival.
 
D L X
Posts: 12680
Joined: Thu May 27, 1999 3:30 am

Re: Chaotic Evacuations may Lead to Recertification

Wed Nov 02, 2016 3:37 am

mjoenir wrote:
It seems that nobody here spends time locking at the actual videos of evacuations. There is not one person stopping you getting while getting his stuff, but 50 people waiting in line getting out. Without any body getting stuff the lines move slow.

You weren't looking at the video. In the video (see 0:08) you can see someone in the overhead bins. You can also see many open and empty overhead bins at other times during the video. CLEARLY passengers have retrieved their belongings. You are incorrect.
 
Planetalk
Posts: 470
Joined: Thu Aug 27, 2015 5:12 pm

Re: Chaotic Evacuations may Lead to Recertification

Wed Nov 02, 2016 3:47 am

DocLightning wrote:
johns624 wrote:
mjoelnir wrote:
I find this idea of locking the overhead bins pretty strange. If it would be luggage storage only, but I usually store my winter coat there during the flight. Do you want to throw me off the plane in a storm and -20°C without my winter coat?
The plane fire will keep you warm. Or, you can just keep your coat with you...what a concept!


My practice is to prepare for an emergency evacuation prior to takeoff and landing. That means that until we are off the ground or after "FAs prepare cabin for landing" is called:
*My shoes are on.
*I have my coat with me or stuffed under the seat if we are arriving at/departing from a foul weather airport.
*My laptop and medications are in my small backpack that I will grab in an evacuation.
*My phone, wallet, keys, and passport if applicable are in my pockets (not in my seatback pocket).
*I have mentally reviewed my available evacuation paths.


Do you prepare equivalently for all similar risks of death/injury in life? if you do you'd never leave the house. I'm always amused by the dichotomy in advice from airline professonals; one minute they're saying 'don't worry it's the safest way to travel, nothing can happen', the next minute, 'dress like you're in a situation where you may be at high risk of death'. Now, given most people already have a fear of flying, I expect they prefer not to think too much about the eventuality of a crash when they get on board, as most people don't when they get in a cab. And in 99.9999% of cases they're right, on any kind of risk analysis they are doing the rational thing. Even if there is an accident, the steps you describe won't save their life, just avoid a bit of inconvenice after the event.

As for people carrying things off a plane, yes it would be better if people didn't. But I'm tired of people who've never been in an accident assuming they know how they would behave and acting all self righteous, and worse, tough guy. It's a fact, you have no idea how you would react in such a situation. So maybe ease off a little, however much you say you know, you don't. Unless you have been in a serious accident, in which case you are entitled to comment.
 
User avatar
DocLightning
Posts: 21894
Joined: Wed Nov 16, 2005 8:51 am

Re: Chaotic Evacuations may Lead to Recertification

Wed Nov 02, 2016 4:27 am

Planetalk wrote:
DocLightning wrote:
johns624 wrote:
The plane fire will keep you warm. Or, you can just keep your coat with you...what a concept!


My practice is to prepare for an emergency evacuation prior to takeoff and landing. That means that until we are off the ground or after "FAs prepare cabin for landing" is called:
*My shoes are on.
*I have my coat with me or stuffed under the seat if we are arriving at/departing from a foul weather airport.
*My laptop and medications are in my small backpack that I will grab in an evacuation.
*My phone, wallet, keys, and passport if applicable are in my pockets (not in my seatback pocket).
*I have mentally reviewed my available evacuation paths.


Do you prepare equivalently for all similar risks of death/injury in life?


In the Boy Scouts, I was taught "Be Prepared!" I try to arrange to be prepared for likely emergency situations in most areas of life. First aid and things to keep me alive and comfortable for an hour or two in the trunk of my car. I admit we haven't done our earthquake/disaster preparedness yet, but I'm planning on handling that by year's end. In many cases, being prepared for a disaster is not difficult. When I walk on the airplane, if a fire were to break out, I'm already in "evacuation prepared" mode. I have my shoes on, any outer garment probably worn or draped over me, my backpack packed and on my back, and my phone, wallet, keys, and passport are in my pockets. So being prepared for an emergency evacuation means not completely settling in until several seconds after takeoff and preparing to disembark around when we begin our descent. These are not major inconveniences. Rather, there are some people who, on finding their seats, kick off their shoes, empty their pockets, stow their coats, and whip out all their devices right away. I choose to wait until after we are airborne to do the same.
-Doc Lightning-

"The sky calls to us. If we do not destroy ourselves, we will one day venture to the stars."
-Carl Sagan
 
YZF101
Posts: 87
Joined: Fri Jul 15, 2016 8:12 am

Re: Chaotic Evacuations may Lead to Recertification

Wed Nov 02, 2016 5:08 am

I still, after reading into this 4th page, prefer the idea of lessening fees for checked luggage, or an expanded gate-check. With more and more passengers flying, the delays getting baggage at carousels factors into things too. Imagine using just a small bag, gate checking it, and picking it up and walking away - this is primarily what people wish to do when they pack the kitchen sink, no?

Might take a bit of ingenuity, but having a bin ready to take bags and then having that stowed underneath, ready for pick-up at the gate upon arrival would be very nice.

Something I hadn't noticed as yet are the implications of having animals in the cabin (not to open old wounds about service/therapy/'mental stability' animals).

Being fully prepared to deal with an evac is something that can't be stressed enough - one tip I've picked up in this reading is counting is counting seat backs....same as knowing where your exit is, just a different slant on it. Good for poor visibility evacs. As far as sitting, I've even gone as far as making sure I'm sitting up and not having legs crossed (not that we really can in our enhanced economy environments) or tucked under the seat for take off/landing.

Having electronics in pockets is alright, already looking into vests/jackets that can carry ipod, phone (when I get one), Kindle, earbuds, passport....all that good stuff. More room in the seatback pocket for small water bottle.

I have to admit to be surprised that no one has (even tongue in cheek) mentioned snipers on fire equipment to deal with offenders with cabin baggage. Large people helping to hold down the slides at the bottom and helping passengers get to their feet can always do a Chuck Norris on them, though. Well, maybe not.

I do hope that evacuations go fast....I have a thing about heights and hope that I can get out...without *too* much encouragement lol.

Stay safe out there!
 
User avatar
AirlineCritic
Posts: 1771
Joined: Sat Mar 14, 2009 1:07 pm

Re: Chaotic Evacuations may Lead to Recertification

Wed Nov 02, 2016 6:46 am

ikramerica wrote:
XLA2008 wrote:
The 90 second rule smells of the rules of thumb, not science. It should be abandoned. Instead all the new data involving evacuations and fires, combined with existing models, should be used to create an aircraft by aircraft simulation under various conditions to understand the limit on each aircraft, including each airlines interior fitments. If it's already being done that way to certify an interior, good. Then why the arbitrary 90 seconds?

It would end this unscientific "440 passengers" garbage. We might find that 10Y 777s can't hold as many passengers as thought because the aisles are too narrow. We might find that 717s need to be re-certified because of the lack of exits in the back. We might find that locking bins is only necessary on densely configured aircraft rather than a blanket rule. But until that kind of real world analysis is done, let's not institute knee-jerk solutions.


Well, yes, I agree that more detailed models would be useful. But I think you're making a very hard unscientific/scientific distinction here. The reality is that both situations are simplistic models of reality and never exact. Just a question of having more details, but still, both based on plenty of assumptions about circumstances like ability levels of the passengers, group behaviour, crew technique, amount of luggage in different places, etc.

But yes, you could imagine for instance that the exits in densely packed economy class section are wider and more efficient vs exits in business class. Or that more people can be taken aboard on a plane that has less hand luggage.
 
User avatar
garpd
Posts: 2534
Joined: Thu Aug 11, 2005 9:29 am

Re: Chaotic Evacuations may Lead to Recertification

Wed Nov 02, 2016 7:57 am

Planetalk wrote:
But I'm tired of people who've never been in an accident assuming they know how they would behave and acting all self righteous, and worse, tough guy. It's a fact, you have no idea how you would react in such a situation. So maybe ease off a little, however much you say you know, you don't. Unless you have been in a serious accident, in which case you are entitled to comment.


I've been involved in a severe car crash that nearly killed one person and broke bones in another. I was calm, collected and attended the wounded. I made sure my vehicle was powered down and the battery isolated as the fuel tank had been split open.

I've also assisted in a few accidents I was not involved in, but witnessed. Including one on a blind corner of a fast road where I donned a high vis jacket and controlled traffic so the police officer first on the scene could get statements. My brother had been hit in that particular accident, but I focused on the task in hand.

Further more, I was involved in a hunt for a child that suddenly disappeared at a hotel I was staying at while on vacation. As others panicked, I told people to separate into pairs and assigned each an area to search. I found the little girl, huddled up in a corner scared. I assured her I was there to help her, I calmed her down and led her to the waiting mother.

Do I now qualify in your view to pretty accurately guess how I would react in a situation where I had to evacuate an aircraft?

Not that I actually need your damn permission!
arpdesign.wordpress.com
 
User avatar
SomebodyInTLS
Posts: 1868
Joined: Wed Jun 15, 2016 12:31 pm

Re: Chaotic Evacuations may Lead to Recertification

Wed Nov 02, 2016 12:30 pm

DTWPurserBoy wrote:
The doors are simple. Lift or pull a handle and it opens.


Really? Because then you say:

DTWPurserBoy wrote:
A caution--if you are on a 737-7, -8 or -9 and sitting by an overwing exit you pull the handle AND LET IT GO! If you don't it will do like it did to one of our passengers who wanted "some extra air." It pulled him out of his seat during taxi, he bounced off the wing and landed on the taxiway. He was hospitalized for weeks. Those exits are hinged at the top and are not like the older ones that you pulled into the cabin and threw it out on the wing. All newer airplanes built since the 747 have servo-assisted doors that when armed for departure will also yank you out of the aircraft if you do not let go and hold onto one of the assist handles.


And you're making my point sound even more worthwhile than I thought!

DTWPurserBoy wrote:
Again, with non-trained people trying to open exit doors there is a major liability issue. If you are curious ask one of the flight attendants on your next flight.


And (again) I'm talking about a simulator, not an actual aircraft! It only has to look and feel close to the real thing - without actually endangering anybody.
"As with most things related to aircraft design, it's all about the trade-offs and much more nuanced than A.net likes to make out."
 
D L X
Posts: 12680
Joined: Thu May 27, 1999 3:30 am

Re: Chaotic Evacuations may Lead to Recertification

Wed Nov 02, 2016 2:48 pm

YZF101 wrote:
I still, after reading into this 4th page, prefer the idea of lessening fees for checked luggage, or an expanded gate-check.


I also don't think anyone has posted why they think lowering or ending bag fees would prevent people from going into the overhead compartments. Let's talk about that nexus before we declare it the solution.
 
User avatar
Aesma
Posts: 13389
Joined: Sat Nov 14, 2009 6:14 am

Re: Chaotic Evacuations may Lead to Recertification

Wed Nov 02, 2016 3:00 pm

mjoelnir wrote:
I find this idea of locking the overhead bins pretty strange. If it would be luggage storage only, but I usually store my winter coat there during the flight. Do you want to throw me off the plane in a storm and -20°C without my winter coat?


99% of evacuations happen on or near airport property (an exception I can think of has been made in a movie that is in theaters right now), meaning you will have a survival blanket in 10 minutes tops. You will survive that scenario, don't worry.
New Technology is the name we give to stuff that doesn't work yet. Douglas Adams
 
AirbusA6
Posts: 1656
Joined: Tue Apr 26, 2005 5:53 am

Re: Chaotic Evacuations may Lead to Recertification

Wed Nov 02, 2016 3:13 pm

Leaving aside the issue of people retrieving hand luggage, I'd be just as worried about being stuck behind a fat person trying to get through the tiny aisle of a 10Y 777...
it's the bus to stansted (now renamed National Express a6 to ruin my username)
 
buzzard302
Posts: 169
Joined: Sat Jun 06, 2015 12:06 pm

Re: Chaotic Evacuations may Lead to Recertification

Wed Nov 02, 2016 3:20 pm

The demographic of people on a flight will affect evacuation time. I was recently on a flight from FL to NY and there was barely anyone under the age of 60 on that flight. If there were a real emergency, it would have taken far greater time to evacuate that plane. It was a big challenge to get the plane loaded, much less evacuated quickly in the event of an emergency.

I imagine that not many people in this thread have been involved in a real emergency evacuation of a commercial aircraft, myself included. I do know that if it were to happen, people will have a real sense of panic and anxiety, and thoughts become irrational. So part of the solution would be to minimize the thought process (or perceived thought process by the passenger) to evacuate. It has to be simple and straightforward, and without thought of personal possessions.

For those that are concerned about being put out into freezing weather, the split second you were trapped inside a metal tube on fire, your mind will be made up immediately. All instincts for survival would have you pushing for the exit door. So if that's your concern, dress appropriately for the current weather and hope that the unfortunate rare event (thankfully) of an evacuation does not happen to you.
 
dfwjim1
Posts: 2468
Joined: Fri Sep 09, 2011 8:46 pm

Re: Chaotic Evacuations may Lead to Recertification

Wed Nov 02, 2016 4:10 pm

KLDC10 wrote:
mjoelnir wrote:
teriyaki wrote:
Yes. Because where do you draw the line? What about the jacket inside a bag? Inside a backpack? Inside your luggage?

The main priority should be to get all passengers off the plane in the minimum amount of time. No ifs ands or buts.


And kill them outside the airplane due to exposure, mission accomplished, You seem to be unaware that there are area in this world that are not sunny and warm. .


Just speaking personally here, I usually travel in a jacket. Usually, I will take the jacket off for the duration of the flight. However, at takeoff, and prior to landing, I wear the jacket and make sure that my passport, wallet and cellphone are stowed in the pockets. If I'm taking an international flight, I can't afford to find myself stranded in a foreign country without identification, money, or means of communication. Everything else can be left behind in the event of an evacuation, and stowing the important items in my jacket means that if the plane goes off the end of the runway, or some other incident requires an evacuation, I can just get up and get off without picking anything up.


I do the exact same thing - keep the essentials in my pockets in case of evacuation.
 
YZF101
Posts: 87
Joined: Fri Jul 15, 2016 8:12 am

Re: Chaotic Evacuations may Lead to Recertification

Thu Nov 03, 2016 3:17 am

D L X wrote:
YZF101 wrote:
I still, after reading into this 4th page, prefer the idea of lessening fees for checked luggage, or an expanded gate-check.


I also don't think anyone has posted why they think lowering or ending bag fees would prevent people from going into the overhead compartments. Let's talk about that nexus before we declare it the solution.


The way I'm seeing things, is that 1) With the fees implementeed/increasing, more people are taking their small luggage on board to negate those costs. 2) With the longer lines at the carousels (and wait times), people who travel light, are taking their small luggage on board.

So, one may well impact the other ie. lower fees, less money for ground handling, longer times waiting for luggage. Could be a traditional vicious circle. Howeve, back in the 'early days', photos of 707 cabins show open ledges. One wouldn't think they had less luggage then, but lower volumes of passengers might have led to shorter waits? Or they might not have been so hell-bent on needing to make a connection?

If the problem ("worry") of people is the wait times, lower fees would do nothing except maybe increase times. It's obvious to the more frequent traveller implementing fees did nothing to lessen the times either. So, it is either the savvy traveller who wants to avoid the carosel entirely and wants to exit the airport quickly or persons with tight connect times between airlines. I suppose it would be worth it to an airline to do an extensive, across the network survey with those who carry larger bags on board. Simply a form given at the gate or jetway to those persons, and have them kindly return them after their flight - maybe get a soft drink voucher? Anyway, that should help a lot to figure out, and maybe take that airline to the front of the line, so to speak.

I suppose a bulk gate check would be another option, but that would probably increase costs rather than lessening them. However, for $5, the gate check would work wonders?

Yeah, D L X, I might have negated my own solution above. I supoose it's always easy to point at fees and say that is the culprit. But a good study might be worthwhile - both for the airline itself and for the FAA/CAA etc. But the worthwhile solution would be to keep the luggage out of the cabin to begin with. How? That's the $64 dollar question. Study past and current behaviours - past behaviours sooner than later,all those people who worked the ramps and gates and cabins are retiring or have already...that information is important too.
 
D L X
Posts: 12680
Joined: Thu May 27, 1999 3:30 am

Re: Chaotic Evacuations may Lead to Recertification

Thu Nov 03, 2016 6:21 pm

YZF101 wrote:
The way I'm seeing things, is that 1) With the fees implemented/increasing, more people are taking their small luggage on board to negate those costs. 2) With the longer lines at the carousels (and wait times), people who travel light, are taking their small luggage on board.

So, one may well impact the other ie. lower fees, less money for ground handling, longer times waiting for luggage. Could be a traditional vicious circle. However, back in the 'early days', photos of 707 cabins show open ledges. One wouldn't think they had less luggage then, but lower volumes of passengers might have led to shorter waits? Or they might not have been so hell-bent on needing to make a connection?

If the problem ("worry") of people is the wait times, lower fees would do nothing except maybe increase times. It's obvious to the more frequent traveller implementing fees did nothing to lessen the times either. So, it is either the savvy traveller who wants to avoid the carosel entirely and wants to exit the airport quickly or persons with tight connect times between airlines. I suppose it would be worth it to an airline to do an extensive, across the network survey with those who carry larger bags on board. Simply a form given at the gate or jetway to those persons, and have them kindly return them after their flight - maybe get a soft drink voucher? Anyway, that should help a lot to figure out, and maybe take that airline to the front of the line, so to speak.

I suppose a bulk gate check would be another option, but that would probably increase costs rather than lessening them. However, for $5, the gate check would work wonders?

Yeah, D L X, I might have negated my own solution above. I supoose it's always easy to point at fees and say that is the culprit. But a good study might be worthwhile - both for the airline itself and for the FAA/CAA etc. But the worthwhile solution would be to keep the luggage out of the cabin to begin with. How? That's the $64 dollar question. Study past and current behaviours - past behaviours sooner than later,all those people who worked the ramps and gates and cabins are retiring or have already...that information is important too.

Passengers have had jackets, bags, cameras, souvenirs, jewels, briefcases, etc. in the overhead bins for decades. You're never going to get rid of these things in overheads because passengers routinely travel with items like these that they believe are too valuable to leave in the possession of the airline. People aren't grabbing their items in an evacuation because they are avoiding baggage fees. They're grabbing their items because
1) they have not cognized that their safety is truly at risk,
2) they have not cognized that the item is less valuable than their lives or the lives of fellow passengers, and/or
3) they simply always grab their items from the overheads when they're exiting an airplane. Force of habit.

They will continue to do this regardless of the size of their bags. Bag fees or even more efficient luggage delivery will not affect this.
 
YZF101
Posts: 87
Joined: Fri Jul 15, 2016 8:12 am

Re: Chaotic Evacuations may Lead to Recertification

Fri Nov 04, 2016 1:30 am

D L X wrote:
YZF101 wrote:
The way I'm seeing things, is that 1) With the fees implemented/increasing, more people are taking their small luggage on board to negate those costs. 2) With the longer lines at the carousels (and wait times), people who travel light, are taking their small luggage on board.

So, one may well impact the other ie. lower fees, less money for ground handling, longer times waiting for luggage. Could be a traditional vicious circle. However, back in the 'early days', photos of 707 cabins show open ledges. One wouldn't think they had less luggage then, but lower volumes of passengers might have led to shorter waits? Or they might not have been so hell-bent on needing to make a connection?

If the problem ("worry") of people is the wait times, lower fees would do nothing except maybe increase times. It's obvious to the more frequent traveller implementing fees did nothing to lessen the times either. So, it is either the savvy traveller who wants to avoid the carosel entirely and wants to exit the airport quickly or persons with tight connect times between airlines. I suppose it would be worth it to an airline to do an extensive, across the network survey with those who carry larger bags on board. Simply a form given at the gate or jetway to those persons, and have them kindly return them after their flight - maybe get a soft drink voucher? Anyway, that should help a lot to figure out, and maybe take that airline to the front of the line, so to speak.

I suppose a bulk gate check would be another option, but that would probably increase costs rather than lessening them. However, for $5, the gate check would work wonders?

Yeah, D L X, I might have negated my own solution above. I supoose it's always easy to point at fees and say that is the culprit. But a good study might be worthwhile - both for the airline itself and for the FAA/CAA etc. But the worthwhile solution would be to keep the luggage out of the cabin to begin with. How? That's the $64 dollar question. Study past and current behaviours - past behaviours sooner than later,all those people who worked the ramps and gates and cabins are retiring or have already...that information is important too.

Passengers have had jackets, bags, cameras, souvenirs, jewels, briefcases, etc. in the overhead bins for decades. You're never going to get rid of these things in overheads because passengers routinely travel with items like these that they believe are too valuable to leave in the possession of the airline. People aren't grabbing their items in an evacuation because they are avoiding baggage fees. They're grabbing their items because
1) they have not cognized that their safety is truly at risk,
2) they have not cognized that the item is less valuable than their lives or the lives of fellow passengers, and/or
3) they simply always grab their items from the overheads when they're exiting an airplane. Force of habit.

They will continue to do this regardless of the size of their bags. Bag fees or even more efficient luggage delivery will not affect this.



Correct....those "small" items have been and always will be stowed in the bins. I had been focussed (almost to the point of tunnel vision) too closely on the large bags and kitchen sinks. Your points 1) through 3) are rather spot on, and I'd like to put forth a fourth point. Perhpas, maybe, they actually do acknowledge the danger that is/could be present, and are doing something 'normal' to keep the dragon of panic at bay?

Any resolution or lessening of the large carry-on sizes by lower fees or gate checking will not remove the smaller ("normal, traditional") bags from the equation. I suppose just removing those larger bags would - could - be seen as enough of a victory, or a huge step forward in eliminating a larger percentage of items. And in the course of things, educate the public as well.

Popular Searches On Airliners.net

Top Photos of Last:   24 Hours  •  48 Hours  •  7 Days  •  30 Days  •  180 Days  •  365 Days  •  All Time

Military Aircraft Every type from fighters to helicopters from air forces around the globe

Classic Airliners Props and jets from the good old days

Flight Decks Views from inside the cockpit

Aircraft Cabins Passenger cabin shots showing seat arrangements as well as cargo aircraft interior

Cargo Aircraft Pictures of great freighter aircraft

Government Aircraft Aircraft flying government officials

Helicopters Our large helicopter section. Both military and civil versions

Blimps / Airships Everything from the Goodyear blimp to the Zeppelin

Night Photos Beautiful shots taken while the sun is below the horizon

Accidents Accident, incident and crash related photos

Air to Air Photos taken by airborne photographers of airborne aircraft

Special Paint Schemes Aircraft painted in beautiful and original liveries

Airport Overviews Airport overviews from the air or ground

Tails and Winglets Tail and Winglet closeups with beautiful airline logos