Overwing Exits and Frequent Fliers?

[offa]

I was positioning (in uniform) recently between ORD / ATL on American and I was interested to see that they put both of us crew at the overwing exit on a little Embraer jet thing. I position 5 - 10 times a month and it made me think that here was an airline that perhaps thought safety AND put it into practice??? It got me to wondering just how many airlines out there have a policy to put deadhead or positioning crew in these safety critical seats?
It appears that there are very few ..... a colleague relates that he was similarly positioning with a large German airline and mentioned at check-in that he was current 747 crew and he was given a seat in the emergency exit row. When he got to the aircraft however he was contacted and moved to a centre aisle seat to be replaced as a Frequent Flyer who was overweight and had requested that seat! Clearly commercial interest TOTALLY over-rode any thought about safety in that particular operation.
Putting a trained cabin or flight deck member on these seats would surely enhance safety enormously in the event of an evacuation or security event so why not prompt your safety department to put their money where their mouth is?
Does anybody know if their airline has any policy regarding these seats (other than putting Frequent Flyers in them?)

[Speedbird48]

You will find that some of the large, and not so large, US airlines are offering those Exit Row seats to those that will pay extra for them?? How's that for safety??

The rule of speaking and understanding?? the language etc., and the ability to perform the exit opening apparently still apply but current and qualified people may not necessarily be the ones in those seats.

The mighty dollar wins over common sense, yet again.

Speedbird 48.

[offa]

So would a large British carrier have a policy for example?

[Final 3 Greens]

I position 5 - 10 times a month and it made me think that here was an airline that perhaps thought safety AND put it into practice???

Many frequent flyers do your number of sectors in a week, are highly intelligent, are familiar with the type of aircraft they are on, have been briefed on the operation of the exit and hold leadership roles in their organisations.

So tell me what extra qualities positioning pilots have over these kind of people?
You won't be competing with me, as I sit in the front cabin, but I reckon I would do as good a job as you, in following the cabin crew instructions.

[wingzakimbo]

Some airlines use them for generating incremental revenue by charging for them if requested by pax at check in.

[offa]

"Many frequent flyers do your number of sectors in a week, are highly intelligent ...." (Final 3 greens)
So all those Emergency Training days are a waste of time ..... all we have to do is sit and listen to the Cabin Crew briefing:confused:
(my post refers to "trained cabin or flight deck member" and is not a "pilot" thing nor does it imply that Frequent Flyers lack leadership skills or intelligence)

[Clarence Oveur]

Many frequent flyers do your number of sectors in a week, are highly intelligent, are familiar with the type of aircraft they are on, have been briefed on the operation of the exit and hold leadership roles in their organisations.

Yes. Many, if not most, frequent flyers are so familiar with everything that they don't even need to pay any attention to the safety briefing, or even read the safety card.

[discountinvestigator]

Some frequent flyers do know what to do. I fly up to 300 times a year as a commercial passenger. I do know how to open the door. On many airlines you will find errors on the safety cards if you care to look.

The FAA overwing exit routine is particularly irritating as we killed enough passengers in Manchester 85 to find out about that. Still, the airlines won't change because the FAA does not require it.

Most major western airlines have a policy now for frequent flyers. Airlines always retain the right to deny you access to such rows if you do not speak the native language, are unfit etc.

If you really wanted to make a difference to this type of exit, perhaps you would be kind enough to brief those of us sitting there exactly what exit commands you are going to give us to open the door in the first place.

"The color of the exit lighting may vary." Too bloody right it varies, it varies to tell you that there is a door there, but please do not impart useful information like that into the passengers! Just let them think that it is normal.

Next time you get on BA out of LGW on a 737, try spotting at least five errors on the card. This card is somewhat worse than the last version....

Try standing up in a Dash 8 at the underwing exit and opening the door, unless you are a dwarf, you won't manage it if you are my height. However, the card shows that is what you have to do...

Try the hand positions on half the cards, you end up with your arms crossed and dropping the door...

I have flown on around 75 airlines on every continent. On Air Gambia, the used to open the overwing exits during the stops in Banjul as a form of air conditioning...but at least they had a flight engineer to put them back in again.

You know Victor, it really should be easy!

Rant off.:ugh:

[Shack37]

Strikes me as a " I'm crew and deserve more legroom/comfort than the slf complaint"
Not all frequent flyers ignore the safety briefing. I frequently fly three legs in one journey, same airline, same aircraft and sometimes same crew. I listen attentively each time.
If sat in the emergency exit row I also refresh my memory by reading AGAIN the safety leaflet provided.
s37:ugh:

[Morbid]

If you really wanted to make a difference to this type of exit, perhaps you would be kind enough to brief those of us sitting there exactly what exit commands you are going to give us to open the door in the first place.

Well I´ve got to admit that flying both Spanair and their subsidiary AeBal yesterday in the exit rows this is precisely what happened. A great deal was made on both flights about not to open the windows until informed to do so and to check for fire first (there is even a stick to this effect saying to look through the window before contemplating any action). Types were MD87 and B717.

On the flip side:

I´ve flown Iberia and seen mothers with babies placed in these rows with the biggest joke being they were told to put bags in the overhead bins but babies on laps were fine :hmm:

BA would on a good day tell you to read the instructions on the seat back in front of you (no mention of don´t open in the event of fire) or on a bad day say "Do you realise you are in an emergency exit row?" answer "Yes" BA: "Ok, good".

As for safety cards.... I´ve always thought there should be a supplemental card for those seats in emergency exit rows....

[blueloo]

I think in any emergency situation everyones performance varies, nobody knows how they will go on the day.

I think what people would be hoping for is that in an emergency when the S hits the fan, that at least the basic (albeit robotic) training of crew will kick in. Not to say that any joe blogs isnt cabable of doing it, its just that sometimes reversionary training seems to help.

From many incident reports, we can see that even the best highly trainined cabin crew stuff up at times. We have also seen that able bodied passengers at times can get in the way despite their best intentions.

I think the advantage of having a crew member be it pilot or otherwise (aircraft and airline specific ??) in those seats would be an advantage. They would be in tune with the rest of the cabin procedures, the specific warning phrases that some airlines use to evaluate the situation, and the evacuation provisions. Also they may be more aware of the specific dangers of opening exits into external threats.

After having listened to conversations between frequent flyers, it is amazing with some of the crap they come up with about aeroplane operations and performance!

[mickjoebill]

What would pilot or cabin crew do if a passenger were to complain that an overweight person sitting in an overwing exit row was a potential hazard?

Are we saying that they couldn't open the door (in good time) or that they wouldn't get through the exit at all?


Mickjoebill

[Final 3 Greens]

Clarence Oveur

How do you know that the people who ignore the briefings are frequent travellers?

What an illogical comment.

Offa

So all those Emergency Training days are a waste of time ..... all we have to do is sit and listen to the Cabin Crew briefing

I dare say that special forces training and fitness levels would even further improve the relatively safety of the aircraft, in fasct why don't the airlines carry a spare pilot on short haul flights, just in case both crew die?

The authorities mandate parameters and meeting those assures a level of safety that is acceptable to the public.

So in this context, the emergency training days are superfluous, so long as the crew and the people sitting in the emergency exit rows meet the requirements of the regulations.

[Final 3 Greens]

After having listened to conversations between frequent flyers, it is amazing with some of the crap they come up with about aeroplane operations and performance!

Having listened to crew talking, I've also heard some amazing crap about aeroplane operations and performance.

Remind me about cabin crew commanded evacuations due to tail pipe fires?

[WHBM]

It is indeed despicable that some carriers charge extra for these seats, as if it is some sort of bonus to be there. In fact it is an obligation to fellow passengers. It has spread through the holiday charter world. Do Virgin Atlantic still do it ? In any reasonable aviation world the CAA would have stamped this one out pronto.

I know that some pax (frequent or not) pay no attention to the safety briefing, but on the other hand there are a number of us who do, and who engage our fellow passengers who make comments about it being "useless" in informed discussion on the point (which tends to go along the lines of "if you were flying GA with me and I said "hey ho the checklist is useless, never had a problem", how confident would you feel).

If you are cabin crew you may have spotted me one day, I'm the one who when you say "life vest" actually feels under the seat to see it is there :)

Like D I above I like spotting the errors in the documented procedures, or just the plain stupities.

A very few carriers placard the overwing exits with their weight, although it's an awkward position to get into only to be surprised you have to swing half a hundredweight.

Even fewer have any clear instruction to look out of the window first to see if the exit route is clear of fire. Now there are not many plaudits for Ryanair around, but this is one thing they do mark up.

In passing, if you are qualified crew, is the most effective position to be at the exit where you will be first out and then gone from the scene ? Should you not be maybe one row behind, from where you can direct the mass in how to get through the exit most efficiently.

[blueloo]

Having listened to crew talking, I've also heard some amazing crap about aeroplane operations and performance

Couldnt agree with you more. I knew someone else would say it pretty soon after :}


Actually I reckon all Frequent flyers should be directed to PPRUNE, after a couple of sessions reading this, they will be fit to operate in lieu of cabin crew, and pretty soon fly the jets too!

[Final 3 Greens]

A very few carriers placard the overwing exits with their weight, although it's an awkward position to get into only to be surprised you have to swing half a hundredweight.

26kgs is a figure that comes to mind for the 737 - think it was Luxair, but can't exactly remember - it was a few years since I saw the placard.

Talking of Ryanair, they operate the 737 NG and the overwing exit swings up and out when operated - this strikes me as being much better than having to pull, twist, push and chuck in the classics and the minibuses.

[Final 3 Greens]

Actually I reckon all Frequent flyers should be directed to PPRUNE, after a couple of sessions reading this, they will be fit to operate in lieu of cabin crew, and pretty soon fly the jets too!

Well I wouldn't go so far, but I don't reckon I'd command an evac due to a tail pipe fire and I could feed the dog in a bus. :E

[Flip Flop Flyer]

What would pilot or cabin crew do if a passenger were to complain that an overweight person sitting in an overwing exit row was a potential hazard?

Well, I flew El Al not long ago outbound TLV on a 737-800. First emergency exit row, left hand side, was occupied as follows: Mother with infant on aisle seat, two kids of roughly 6-8 years in middle and window seat. The cabin crew didn't bat an eyelid.

I probably should have said something, but it's really not my job is it?

BMI are very good at asking if you're comfortable sitting in an exit row, and will ensure you've read the instructions for sitting there. Have experienced BMI crew moving passengers away from exit rows if they were unfit to operate the door (too young, old, fat or stupid).

BMI does not charge extra for the exit row.

[Clarence Oveur]

Well 3 Greens, there are many ways to spot a FF. The manifest is one. Annoyance at not being considered on par with professional crew is another.

Familiarity breeds contempt.

[ChristiaanJ]

RyanAir has a mysterious rule about the people in the very last row in the cabin not being allowed to put their bags under the seat in front.

Presumably the idea is not to have the very last row sprawling over their bags and holding up the entire cabin during an evacuation?
I don't understand this too well, because it just would mean the last six could get out pronto, but IMHO you just have moved the problem forward one row.

People next to the emergency exits is obviously not the same situation.

[Final 3 Greens]

Clarence

So the manifest tells you whose a member of every other airlines schemes does it?

And you are able, conclusively, to relate the manifest to each and every passenger, in real time, whilst observing their behaviour, since you need to do this to justify your statement.

So you are taking bolleaux

[bear11]

Anyone reading this would be forgiven for thinking that in the past, exit rows were allocated randomly - when the reality was that most of the seats were allocated to either airline staff or friends of staff long before the flight by friendly ground crew. Now, EI for example, apart from charging for bags are also asking 15-odd Euro for an aisle seat - how the mighty have fallen to lower than the pond-scum they used to look down on, but as a mate said, at least you can get one now if you're prepared to shell out for it.

Note the subject of safety hasn't been mentioned once in all this, and I can count on one finger the number of airlines where I have been properly briefed while paxing in an exit row. You'd be surprised how many people are weirded out by sitting by an exit door until told it can't be opened in flight.

[OFBSLF]

Yes. Many, if not most, frequent flyers are so familiar with everything that they don't even need to pay any attention to the safety briefing, or even read the safety card.At one point I flew 125,000 in a year, but fortunately I'm no longer a frequent traveler.

Do I pay close attention to the safety briefing? Frankly, no. I've heard it all before dozens of times. I know how to put on and take off my seat belt. I know how to put on the oxygen mask. By the time of the safety briefing, I've already read the safety card several times. I've located the closest exits to the front and rear. I've counted the number of seats to the closest exit and committed it to memory. I've memorized the procedure to open the closest exit. I've looked down at the floor to try to find the emergency lighting. Yes, I still do this on each flight.

Would a flight crew member be able to better operate an emergency exit than I? Possibly. But just how much better? From reading the safety cards, I have to say that opening emergency exits does not appear to be rocket science. Perhaps those of you with "extensive safety training" can convince me otherwise.

I can understand why dead-heading crew member would want to be in an exit row. I want to be in that very same row for the very same reason.

[ChristiaanJ]

I'm with OFBSLF here.
Do I listen to the safety briefing, aka "The Dance of the Trolley Dollies"?
Only with half an ear, in case there is a variant.....
But I read the card, check the exits, check the life jacket....

To me the seat belt demo is always the ultimate joke.... who in this world in this day and age has never seen a seat belt?
Especially since on my latest flight I found my seat belt didn't work as demonstrated.... the lock part was upside down, so I would have to twist it before locking it.
And no, it wasn't part of the seat next to mine.
After a two-minute analysis in 3D topology I figured how to get the lock the right way up (think car seat belts, where this can happen). Still wonder how it got that way, though. Probably an inquisitive 8-year old on the previous flight.

Oh, and sometime I wouldn't mind to be told how hard to tug on that oxygen mask.
And sometime I wouldn't mind a moment of hands-on practice with that life vest (can I buy a time-expired one cheap?).
And sometime I wouldn't mind knowing if the doors are on manual which lever to pull for the slide....

In this day and age, maybe with the endless security check queues, they could have an extended safety briefing video in an endless loop in the waiting area? With nothing else to do and watch, it might sink in.

[Airbourne-Adamski]

ChristiaanJ

From a Cabin Crews view its nice to see someone is interested in the safety demo for genuine reasons.

However I think extended demos would be a waste of time as many pax are to up themselves to take notice.

With regard to the doors manual or armed, honestly you would not need to know, if an evacutaion was ordered the doors would be correctly positioned ready.

Back to the point of exit seats. During boarding we as C.Crew pay close attention as to who sits in the seats, as they are restricted (CAA, not sure about FAA regs). Basically ONLY fully able bodied pax may sit in these seats. Also when in a exit seat the pax are briefed on exits (again a/c types regulations ect come into account) must pay attention to their briefing. If the pax wether positioning crew, frequent flyer or regular pax does not wish to pay attention they will be moved.

[perkin]

Frankly, I think all this 'frequent flyers know best' stuff is total b*llsh*t! I'm a frequent flyer myself and I certainly have never had to open one of these overwing exits - the crew are (presumably) all trained in this procedure and have practical experience of using these doors from their training.They will also know exactly what hazards to look for outside before opening said exit and I personally would always defer to the crews knowledge in the event of an evacuation.

On a slightly different note, flying with KLM from Aberdeen earlier in the year, the CC allowed a pax to remain in an emergency exit seat even though he was so overweight he patently would not even FIT THROUGH the overwing exit of a 737. How on earth can that be safe?! :ugh:

[OFBSLF]

Frankly, I think all this 'frequent flyers know best' stuff is total b*llsh*t!Frankly, I think people deliberately misrepresenting what others say is totally b*llsh*t. No one said 'frequent flyers know best', as you well know.

What some of us said is basically that anyone paying reasonable attention knows well enough.

1) the probability of an accident is very low.
2) the probability that the difference between my performance opening an over-wing accident versus that of a crew member will be important is low.

The combined probability is the multiplication of those two probabilities. In other words, minuscule.

[Final 3 Greens]

Frankly, I think people deliberately misrepresenting what others say is totally b*llsh*t. No one said 'frequent flyers know best', as you well know.

Well said.

To which I would add that a person sitting in the cabin who is not a member of the operating crew is in fact a passenger.

They will also know exactly what hazards to look for outside before opening said exit

Read this http://www.pprune.org/forums/showthread.php?t=60557&highlight=tail+pipe+fire+evacuation

[perkin]

So a pax knows better than trained cabin or flight crew now?! I know I certainly dont and I've heard enough safety briefings etc. Stated example was someone positioning in uniform and presumably with a company ID badge with which to identity themselves to the CC. NOT therefore your average pax as they HAVE been formally trained and assessed...

I certainly know who I'd prefer to have sitting next to the exit if there was an emergency and it sure as hell isn't someone with a gold FF card... :ugh:

[Final 3 Greens]

So a pax knows better than trained cabin or flight crew now?!

Perkin - there you go misrepresenting again.

Its quite simple and OFBSLF has already explained it to you.

[Ancient Mariner]

Hilarious as usual here on pprune when cockpit and cabin crews "professionalism" is questioned. As an old seadog with plenty of training in firefighting and emergency procedures and some real life experience in both I find the debate of opening an airplane emergency exit..... quite frankly hysterical. I do understand that "trained professionals" like to mystify and glorify their tasks in order to come across as a different breed, but on who should sit next to the emergemcy exit? :hmm:
Oh, and I have the odd FF goldie.
Per

[KATLPAX]

Its not really an issue of trained vs untrained when it comes to simply opening the exit (removing the door, come on a monkey could do it)...its the training when things go tits up...when its dark, smokey, and scary...having someone with their wits about them is key to saving the day. Too many times the people in those exit rows are not the sort that will be able to respond in times of need..yes they probably can lift 35lbs but I doubt their instincts will be to do what it takes to get out and assist crew.

My guess is trained cabin crew would be an asset but so would better screened or profiled pax. The FF with the gold card is fine and deserves the better seat, as long as they take the responsibility very seriously. However, in this day and age of political correctness and the almighty dollar, those seats will remain open to those that pay the salaries more often, no matter their physical or mental abilities...Ive seen a FF sitting in the exit who couldnt even lift his own laptop bag into the bin (weak, small fellow), yet demanded the exit row every trip as he was ...platnium (I know as he was my work colleague)...and really didnt even need the extra leg room, it was more of a prestige thing for him..for me it has always been about being 'willing and able' to assist...

[Standby Scum]

Cathay blocked off all 747 overwing exits at one stage = 12 extra pax. Do they still do this? It took many rehearsals to get 400+ out of the aircraft in under 90 seconds to get approval.:(

[con-pilot]

Currently my wife and I fly on the airlines about 6 or 7 times a year, hardly what one could term frequent Flyers. To be honest we avoid airline travel as much as possible. However, when forced to travel on the airlines due to time restrictions we do everything possible to be seated on the exit row.

Part of the reason is indeed the extra leg room, I'm 6 feet 5 inches and my wife is just under 6 feet tall, we like the room. However, the primary reason is for our safety. I am a semi-retired (looking for work) corporate/government pilot and my wife attended Flight Safety International Flight Attendant Training School and has served as a Corporate Flight Attendant.

We have opened emergency over-wing exits, we know how heavy they are, we know not to leave the exit window laying in the seat next to the exit, as some carriers still require. In fact I was nearly removed from a flight because I told a lady sitting next to the exit window that she was not to leave the window laying inside, as instructed, but to throw the thing out the exit hole and don't let go of it. Well, the FA overheard me and the fight was on, we finally agreed not to agree and carried on.

No, the primary reason for our desire to be placed in the window exit row is because we have no desire to die because some incompetent fool can't figure out how it really works, then takes too long to open it and then is to damn fat to fit through it.

So hell yes, have the dead-heading crews sit in the exit rows, if I can't at least I know for sure that there is someone sitting there that does know how to operate the exit. Or even better, when not to open the exit.

[kingair9]

I am a former FA and in my job a very frequent flyer. I personally like those airlines paying attention to who is sitting in these crucial seats and have already once complained to the safety pilot of one airline who is not only selling the exit rows at extra charge but on that flight I complained about also allowed the pax sitting there to stow their hand luggage under the seat in front.

KLM did the very best thing I can imagine in the 80s: They invited their frquent flyers to AMS for a safety day in which they were allowed to open doors and wing exits, to "shoot" a slide etc. I was one of the lucky ones to go there and once you had completed this "training" you were always marked on the PIL and in your booking. So you would automatically get these seats and the crew would know that you had been in the training.

I do understand that cost does not allow such things any more - but I know a lot (!!!) of frequent flyers who would even spend their airmiles to pay for such a training. This does include me, btw, as my FA times are more than 10 years ago...

Does anybody else know of an airline that offers such trainings?

[ChristiaanJ]

From a Cabin Crews view its nice to see someone is interested in the safety demo for genuine reasons.Simple, really.

I know, as an "ancient", that there are such things as survivable accidents. So I always try to put all the chips my way.....

As to the "doors to manual".... I still wonder.

Many years ago a DC-8 was caught in a sudden down-draught north of Milan, and was literally slammed down on a hill-side, shedding the wings among the trees, so no fire.
People literally walked away from that crash - to the extent that the authorities had no figures for the casualties for several days.

If I had been there, and I had to open the door, and you were halfway down the cabin.... would the slide have deployed automatically?

con-pilot
I'd fly with you any time.
Even if I prefer being right at the back, rather than at or near the overwing exits.

[CR2]

Familiarity breeds contempt. Yep.

How many of the frequent fliers listen to the safety briefing/read the cards? I know many do, and hats off to them. The rest of you "I've been on a 7x7 a hundred times, so I can read my newspaper instead" are a problem.

Not every aircraft of the same type is the same. Do well to remember that.

I always count the seat-rows to the nearest exit I might need. Having done plenty of training evacs, can tell you that smoke is kinda difficult to see through.

And as for kids/elderly/overweight/disabled at an emergency exit ... :ugh::ugh::ugh:

[Ancient Mariner]

Hopefully on topic.........
Early 90'ties, China domestic flight, half full Tupolev 154. Me seated in B, no seat where A should be, just a crate. Instruction printed on crate:
1. Open emergency exit, throw door out. Check (Just outside with inches to spare was a small jet engine.)
2. Open crate door. Check
3. Take out slide and remove ropes. Check
4. Throw slide out window. Check
5. Open valve on gas bottle. Check

No, no one asked if I was fit for the job. No one gave me any instruction and nothing happened that required me to put on my super hero costume. Just as well, had probably mixed up 4. and 5.
Per

[llondel]

CR2:
How many of the frequent fliers listen to the safety briefing/read the cards? I know many do, and hats off to them. The rest of you "I've been on a 7x7 a hundred times, so I can read my newspaper instead" are a problem.

While it exempts me from the exit rows by travelling with him, my son is young enough to be fascinated by the safety cards so we get to study them closely and explain what all the pictures mean long before pushback.

OFBSLF:
Would a flight crew member be able to better operate an emergency exit than I?

JAR 25.809 states "The means of opening emergency exits must be simple and obvious and may not require exceptional effort.'"

It's notable in some accident reports where cabin crew have reported difficulty opening exit doors. In a lot of cases this is because what's used in the simulator doesn't behave quite the same as a real door. Such as:-

Door 4R was reportedly very heavy to operate and passenger assistance was requested by the attendant, who thought that the door assist system had failed. The door and rigging were later checked and no faults were found, however the door assist actuator was returned to Airbus Industrie for investigation and use in trials, the results of which are described later in this report.

Anyone who wants the full blurb can visit http://www.aaib.gov.uk/cms_resources/dft_avsafety_pdf_503037.pdf which is where I got the text above. There was nothing wrong with the door.

[ChristiaanJ]

Having done plenty of training evacs....Lucky guy....
Wouldn't mind doing one, even at my age.
But how many pax get an occasion to do that? I bet, they're far fewer than car drivers who at least can take an extended course on a skid pan, and suchlike.

[leeUK]

I had seen myriad examples of hopelessly inappropriate passengers in the exit row seats so I subsequently readjusted my thinking and gave up on the exit row mess- now it's the aisle seat, last row, right hand side (and many, many boarding stubs to prove it)-and nothing but space between me and the rear door. My money is on the trained cabin crew member stationed there and to me that is worth the loss of a bit of leg room!

[beermaddavep]

Interesting reading.

Despite being overweight, I have no doubts at all about my ability to safely open any emergency exit if the need arises.

What concerns me is the comment that a fat person might not fit out of the wing exits!

If that is the case then surely very large passengers should always be seated closer to the conventional exit doors-in an evacuation one of the worst things possible would be to have one big(and likely strong or panicking) person trying to get from the centre to the front or rear of the plane against the flow of some of the rest of the pax?

Just how small are these exits?

[Panman]

WHBM wrote
...... Do Virgin Atlantic still do it ?
......................
If you are cabin crew you may have spotted me one day, I'm the one who when you say "life vest" actually feels under the seat to see it is there.....
Yes VS still charge for their exit row seats. And the price varies according to your destination.
When you check for said life vest, how much chewing gum do you come up with. If it's one thing I dread when doing cabin safety checks is the handfull of gum when checking expiry dates on life vests.
PaNMaN

[crewboi83]

It makes me laugh when someone who travels as a commercial pax often thinks they do more flights that the crew and think they know best.
I guess FQT flyers do make good pax to have at overwings/doors, but id still rather have a crew member, One thing you never get told when ur briefed to use these doors is how to use a slide as a rags slide shud it inflat and then deflate....
Just little things like that, how to disconnect slide from the door sil, how to use manual inflation handle, how to attach escape ropes to D ring on a 737 wing.
A lot of FQT flyers have this attitude, to me thats why you wouldnt be sat there, some of you think you know to much. and I agree, was my 6 weeks training a waste of time?
RE the comment regarding "who has never seen a seat belt"... well its a well known fact in an emergecny that passengers go to unfasten their seat belt as tho they were in a car, as its the only one they are familiar with.
Hence why we always make sure your belt is fastened with the buckle to the front. I do appriciate some of you may fly umpteen times a week/day/year/lifetime or what.... I still think you should give us the respect to take you through the demo, becuase its those of you that think you know it all that sit reading your paper in row 1, or with i half out in the aisle, or worse, talk to the person next to you at the top of your voice.
Its always going to be... crew think they know best, and FQT flyers think they know it all. but one thing to all those who fly often, when you travel on different airlines, things are different.... instead of questionning it, why cant you just get on with it? all our rules are differnt, my pet his is men hanging jackets on the pegs on the tray tables, some airlines allow this, mine dosnt... why cant u just put the jacket on for take off? or pop it in hat rack instead of kicking up a fuss and saying "i never had to at BA"

[ChristiaanJ]

... was my 6 weeks training a waste of time?Maybe, since you didn't get my point.
RE the comment regarding "who has never seen a seat belt"... That was me...
... well it's a well known fact in an emergency that passengers go to unfasten their seat belt as tho they were in a car, as its the only one they are familiar with.Two answers to that...
- How many people in an emergency know how to unlock their car safety belt?
- If you're right, shouldn't be aircraft seat belts be designed like car safety belts?
Hence why we always make sure your belt is fastened with the buckle to the front.Nice to know you do. But what if you can't fasten the belt except by twisting the belt (nice during a crash)? As I described, I figured it out. being an engineer :ugh: The average pax wouldn't.

[PAXboy]

FF know it alls? Yep, seen 'em and heard 'em in the 41 years that I have been a pax. I'm not FF but just a regular one across that time and on more models of a/c than I can remember.

It is true ChristiaanJ that you occasionally find belts where the buckle has been reversed and you have to reach deep between the seats to unsnap the shackle, return it to the correct orientation and then make sure that the shackle has not just 'snapped' but that it's safety latch is correctly positioned too..

kingair9KLM did the very best thing I can imagine in the 80s: They invited their frequent flyers to AMS for a safety day in which they were allowed to open doors and wing exits, to "shoot" a slide etc. I was one of the lucky ones to go there and once you had completed this "training" you were always marked on the PIL and in your booking. So you would automatically get these seats and the crew would know that you had been in the training.

I do understand that cost does not allow such things any more ...That is certainly the problem - cost. But just think what an interesting marketing angle it would be to do it now? I woul say that many pax would pay a contribution in cash or FFMs. The research department at Cranfield are set up for this I think? I have often heard that the 'plug' doors are very heavy and would like to know just how it feels to manipulate one when there is time to find out.

leeUK I could not agree more. If I am in coach, then I try to get right down the back as I presume that my fellow pax will plug the gap. It has the added benefit of allowing you to watch everyone scramble off at the destination, walk in a leisurely manner to the carousel and find them all waiting there - just as your bag arrives!

I would rather have off-duty FC + CC in the emergency exits because their training has them thinking that something might go wrong. Whereas pax always think that everything will go right. I equate this with a simple rule from my driving instructor, "Approach every traffic light expecting that it will go red - not that it will stay green."

[OFBSLF]

The rest of you "I've been on a 7x7 a hundred times, so I can read my newspaper instead" are a problem.

Not every aircraft of the same type is the same. Do well to remember that. CR2: Once I've sat down and stowed my luggage, I take out the briefing card and study it. I've spent 5-10 minutes studying it and my environs long before you start the safety briefing. I do this on each and every flight. I don't assume that one 737 is the same as another 737, even if they belong to the same carrier and it is just a day after the previous flight.

The safety briefing is not going to teach me anything unique to a particular aircraft (though the safety card might). The safety briefing covers operating the seat belt, putting on the oxygen masks, and the location of the exits. I know how to put on and take off the seat belt. I've already got it on long before you started the briefing. I know how to put on the oxygen mask. I've already located the exits -- I did that 10 minutes ago.

For 2 1/2 years, I did at least 2 legs a week. So I've already heard the briefing at least 300 times. I know why you do the briefing and I respect your professionalism for doing it with conviction multiple times every day. I understand your concern that many people aren't paying attention. But please understand that some of us have already heard it and have already done the appropriate study of the safety card and the aircraft.

[OFBSLF]

It makes me laugh when someone who travels as a commercial pax often thinks they do more flights that the crew and think they know best. !$@!!@#

Would you PLEASE STOP MISREPRESENTING WHAT I'VE BEEN SAYING!
I've NEVER said that I know best. I've never said that I could operate the over-wing exit better than a crew. What I have said is that I think I could operate the over-wing exit well enough. And since the FAA and the CAA both allow pax to sit in the exit row, it appears to me that those particular safety experts agree with me -- that pax can operate the over-wing exits well enough.

The arrogance displayed by crew on this thread is truly astonishing.
I would rather have off-duty FC + CC in the emergency exits because their training has them thinking that something might go wrong. Whereas pax always think that everything will go right. So tell me, please, just how is it that you know how all pax think? If you are able to read minds that well, I'm sure there are plenty of folks who'd like to speak with you.

If I "always think everything will go right", then why is it that I spend 5-10 minutes at the start of each flight studying the safety card, locating the exits fore and aft, counting the rows to the nearest exit, and memorizing the procedure to open that exit? If I "always think everything will go right", why do I say a brief prayer before takeoff, even though I'm not a churchly type?

The prejudice displayed on this thread is truly disgusting.

[boaclhryul]

Just flew EWR-YYZ on a major NA carrier, in exit row, diligently read both the yellow (safety) and white (exit row) cards, learned the weight of the door I would have to heft - on a 737NG :-) . Right.

[Roadster280]

My two cents -

As a FF (BA Gold, DL Platinum), I have the odd hour under my belt. I can't remember them all, but at least including:

B747-400
B777-200
B777-300ER
B767-400
B767-300
B767-300ER
B767-200
B757
B737-just about all of them
B717
MD-80
MD-88
MD-90
MD-11
A319
A320
A321
A330
A340
L1011
Comet (yes, really!)
Plus various CRJ, Fokker & Embraer puddlejumpers
In the military -
C130
Transall
VC10
Puma
Sea King
Chinook
Scout
Wessex
Lynx
Gazelle
Squirrel

The point is, despite the seats looking much the same (less helos & mil ac), they keep moving the doors and safety procedures on me :) SO I READ THE CARD. I LISTEN TO THE PRESENTATION. Much as it makes me laugh how the same old faces are on the same old videos of the airlines, it gives me the info I need for THIS ac.

I'm sure this has backed up the CC here, but a note of caution. Here's a quote from another thread from CC (my bold):

I also do say though if half the pax LISTENED to saftey demos rather than gassing and reading and thinking yeah yeah whatever, the situation may not have been so scary as they would have known what to do straigh away.

If CC can't spell safety, what in God's name suggests that said individual will pay any more attention to detail in the carrying out of saftey (sic) duties than merely spelling it correctly?

[CR2]

OFBSLF

You have the right attitude.

PS: I'm on 74 Freighters, nothing to do with being Cabin Crew. I respect & listen to what the CC have to say. Just as I'd expect them (and anyone else) to respect & listen to me on a -F.

Roadster280: Playing spelling police is frowned upon here. Not all of us are expert typists.

[Roadster280]

CR2 - If I were playing spelling police, I'd have picked up the other spelling mistake in the quote. My point is that there are minute differences in the safety procedures on variants of the same aircraft (even amongst the same variants). The credibility or otherwise of those guiding us mere SLF is somewhat undermined by a lack of attention to detail.

BTW - define "here". I think you'll find poor spelling is frowned upon equally here (http://www.pprune.org/forums/forumdisplay.php?f=57).

[X_class]

Interesting how others have commented how easy a seat belt is to use.
I was in Cathays new 'toastrack' business class a few weeks back. The upper deck was full. At the end of the safety demo the FAs went round and put the sash belt on each passenger. I was the only person in that cabin to have put the belt on correctly.
Now admittedly this was a three point belt not your usual lap belt. Even so the cabin was radically different to the normal cabin layout yet that did not seem to trigger any curiosity in the other passengers. I spent the boarding wait exploring the seat (took me 10 min to locate the life jacket). Most customers spent the safety demo reading the newspaper.
The flight attendants just smiled when I mentioned that nobody could put their belt on correctly. In their position I would have had had a fit.

[Final 3 Greens]

Just little things like that, how to disconnect slide from the door sil, how to use manual inflation handle, how to attach escape ropes to D ring on a 737 wing.

Slides on a 737 overwing exit?

[parabellum]

One point that hasn't been mentioned but I believe to be very relevant is this:

FF by the exit - opens it, gets out and then legs it, as fast as they can.

Crew of any kind or airline by the exit - opens it and then assists passengers through the exit, either from inside on, say, B747 or from outside on a B737 because that is what they are trained to do.

So it is a no-brainer really, if you have crew paxing then put them by the exits to improve the overall level of safety should an accident occur.

[Final 3 Greens]

Parabellum

Please will you provide hard evidence to support the wild assertion that you assume to be true and from which you build your subsequent 'logical' point?

I say again, any person who is not a member of the operating crew is a passenger.

How they will react in an emergency is unpredictable. They have not been part of a crew briefing and they may work for an airline with different SOPS - I would even go far as to suggest that non crew members (whoever they are) 'assisting' without crew instructions might, under some circumstances, make matters even worse.

When I was in an emergency where 57 died (not aviation related), I and other members of the public helped others and the evacuation was orderly.

However, on another day, there may have been blind panic.
You cannot make your assertion with any degree of confidence.

[PAXboy]

OFBSLFSo tell me, please, just how is it that you know how all pax think? If you are able to read minds that well, I'm sure there are plenty of folks who'd like to speak with you.Wow!! OK, so I said 'all' instead of 'most'. Please climb back into your seat and secure your belt before taking off.

You may wish to note that I am one of those pax that, after securing his own belt, mentally notes if fellow pax have followed rules about luggage etc and checks the details with members of his own party. On one occasion, I had to call the CC to a neighbouring pax whose belt had broken and he was totally confused. We were already on the way out to the active, with less than two minutes to go.

I do all the counting rows and reading the card bit, check for life jacket (as well as that of others in my party) and report to CC when it is missing. (What a pity the CC on FR did not care when so informed).

So ... it is not unreasonable to suggest that the majority of pax assume the flight will go well. So of us assume that it will go well but try to be aware of something going wrong.

[parabellum]

"Location: The Med
Posts: 2,623


Parabellum

Please will you provide hard evidence to support the wild assertion that you assume to be true and from which you build your subsequent 'logical' point?

I say again, any person who is not a member of the operating crew is a passenger.



'Wild Assertion" indeed, you are starting to make a fool of yourself, having previously made a couple of fair points. If you, the travelling passenger, are by the exit, an emergency occurs and you are the one to open the door are you suggesting that you will either remain in the burning aircraft or stand on the wing outside the burning aircraft and assist other passengers to escape?
You, sir, will be the first one to be out the door, (with essential brief case), and across the grass as soon as your happy little legs will take you.
Professional aircrew know that having opened an exit their job is to get the passengers out, not just run away.

Any person who is not an operating member of the crew but is a trained professional in escape and evacuation of an aircraft, as a passenger, is going to be a whole lot more use than you.

[Final 3 Greens]

Parabellum

I see that you are incapable of answering the challenge and thus resort to presenting your own rabid polemic as if it were fact.

[Clarence Oveur]

I probably should have said ...outrage at not being considered on par with professional crew is another....

I would seem that there are some who are so self-absorbed with their own self-importance, that even suggesting that a trained individual is preferable to a non-trained individual, is considered a personal insult.

There are some rather absurd arguments put forward in an apparent "you are not better than me" attempt.

3 Greens,

You seem to believe that this whole argument is revolving around you, despite it being about FF in general.

What psychological judgement would that lead to?

[Final 3 Greens]

Clarence

I hate to be the one to point this out to you, but crews are not professionals, although they are paid for doing their job. Tradesmen if you like.

So if it is a matter or establishing "who is best", to interpret your comments, why would I worry about someone's perception of whether I was on a par with a job that requires 2 GCSEs as an academic qualification and which is not included in a recognised profession, when I am a member of two professions?

I said in post #4 "you won't be competing with me, as I sit in the front cabin, but I reckon I would do as good a job as you, in following the cabin crew instructions."

Along with OFBSLF and others, I reckon that impact of most FQTVs sitting in a window seat is pretty miniscule and as the licensing authorities seem to think that any able bodied (presumably mentally competent) person can open an over wing exit.

As others have said on this thread, we appear to have crew trying to use smoke and mirrors to mystify something that is pretty straightforward.

The regs say what is necessary, end of.

[TheSailor]

Hello,


... well it's a well known fact in an emergency that passengers go to unfasten their seat belt as tho they were in a car, as its the only one they are familiar with.


ChristiaanJ wrote:

- If you're right, shouldn't be aircraft seat belts be designed like car safety belts?

This is a very interesting remark and a logic answer.

So ...are the cars safety belts wrong designed or instead the aircraft passengers safety belts ????

Regards. http://smilies.sofrayt.com/%5E/a/bye.gif

[perkin]

I hate to be the one to point this out to you, but crews are not professionals, although they are paid for doing their job. Tradesmen if you like.

My god, there's some cr@p being rolled out in this thread now...! So flight crew with minimum of about a years initial training and god knows how many hours on type to get a LHS are just tradesmen now?! :rolleyes:

[Final 3 Greens]

just tradesmen now?

What's wrong with being a tradesman? Its an honourable occupation.

If you think that length of training is an arbiter...

How many years training to be a doctor?

How many years training to be an accountant?

How many years training to be psychiatrist?

[perkin]

What is wrong with you? You were the one who was making the implication there was something wrong with it by stating air crew are not professionals...I give up, you are obviously posting on here just to wind up as many people as possible :ugh::ugh::ugh:

[Final 3 Greens]

Perkin

OBFSLF has already pointed out that you misrepresent things.

It seems to me that you do not read the comments properly before you answer.

It was Clarence Oveur who suggested that frequent travellers feel a sense of outrage at not being on a par with 'professional' crew.

I am pointing out that being operating crew of an aircraft is not considered a profession - fact.

I also asked the the question why, as a professional, I would worry about a non professional's perception. Answer, I don't particularly. Neither do I look down on them either.

My opinion is, along with others here, that the impact of most FQTVs sitting in a window seat is pretty miniscule and the licensing authorities seem to think that any able bodied (presumably mentally competent) person can open an over wing exit.

And for the complete avoidance of doubt, I very rarely sit in an overwing exit as I tend to travel business class (where available), so I don't have a vested interest.

[perkin]

According to the Cambridge dictionary a profession is:

any type of work which needs special training or a particular skill, often one which is respected because it involves a high level of education

and a tradesman is:

someone who works in a trade which needs skill at using your hands, usually in the building industry

Now you decide which applies to an aircraft crew...

[Final 3 Greens]

Those are two poor definitions, over simple.

The following (from Wikipedia) is a good stab......

A professional is a worker required to possess a large body of knowledge derived from extensive academic study (usually tertiary), with the training almost always formalized.

Professions are at least to a degree self-regulating, in that they control the training and evaluation processes that admit new persons to the field, and in judging whether the work done by their members is up to standard. This differs from other kinds of work where regulation (if considered necessary) is imposed by the state, or where official quality standards are often lacking. Professions have some historical links to Guilds in these regards.

Professionals usually have autonomy in the workplace - they are expected to utilize their independent judgement and professional ethics in carrying out their responsibilities.

This holds true even if they are employees instead of working on their own.

Typically a professional provides a service (in exchange for payment or salary), in accordance with established protocols for licensing, ethics, procedures, standards of service and training / certification.

[White Bear]

Some airliner crashes are survivable; and it is toward survivable crashes that I address the following comments. In no way should they be construed as critical of the bravery of any female.
It only speaks to their physical limitations.

IMHO Airlines abandoned the issued of passenger safety following a survivable airliner crash when they changed the status of female flight attendants, informing them they were no longer on the aircraft for the “convenience” of the passengers but for their “safety”.

There have been reports that following an airliner crash, female flight attendants were found leading passengers to safety, but in most cases it is a passenger found helping female flight attendants among others, out of the wreckage.:confused:

If the airlines employed flight attendants for the safety of passengers following a survivable crash, I strongly suggest they would not be 120 lb females. :eek:

I am a normal heterosexual male, but in this instance I would happily forgo the nubile female in favour of a 200 lb fit male who would be quite capable of dragging my 185 lb stunned arse out of a crashed airliner, and then go back for more.:D :ok:

Regards,
White Bear.

[perkin]

'Oh dear me' is all I can say...I will offer no further comment, all you're doing is attempting to antagonise.

[Final 3 Greens]

I will offer no further comment

Fair enough, matter closed.

[SXB]

Interesting argument about the exit row seats but fairly irrelevent, these seats are for fare paying passengers so, by definition, anyone sitting there requires no special skills other than being able bodied.

As for the meaning of a 'Profession' my definition would be a career or post that requires a professional qualification ,so that would exclude cabin crew, though I don't think they would claim that their job is part of a 'profession' That said doing your job professionally is a definition that can be applied to any type of post, and most people would aspire to that. Strictly speaking I suppose that flight deck crew do not possess a professional qualification as such.

[PAXboy]

F3G agreed to close the matter and SXB promptly reopened it - and that included the can of worms ... :p

SBX says 'my definition' and that is important. It is also relevant that the word is currently changing it's definition in popular understanding. This has happened for understandable reasons, part being that the British political class of the 1980s undermined the words trade and tradesman. Now, everyone wants to be a professional but they choose a career that is not a profession. Hence the definition of the word migrating.

In the UK and, I suspect, many other English speaking countries, the professions are those such as medicine and the law. F3G set out a good description of why they are such. I might strive for a professional approach to my work but I am not a member of a profession. Those that think F3G is trying to antagonise have, in my view, misunderstood that he is trying to clarify the correct use of English. We all understand that words change their meanings over time and this might be one of them but the change is not complete by any means.

[Final 3 Greens]

PAXBoy

At the risk of thread drift and purely to reinforce your comment that implies some confusion over which are the professions, I thought it would be interesting to look at who can sign off a passport photo...

# Accountant
# Articled clerk of a limited company
# Assurance agent of recognised company
# Bank/building society official
# Barrister
# British Computer Society (BCS) - Professional grades which are Associate (AMBCS), Member (MBCS), Fellow (FBCS) (PN 25/2003)
# Broker
# Chairman/director of limited company
# Chemist
# Chiropodist
# Christian Science practitioner
# Commissioner of oaths
# Councillor: local or county
# Civil servant (permanent)
# Dentist
# Designated Premises Supervisors
# Director/Manager of a VAT registered Charity
# Director/Manager/Personnel Officer of a VAT registered Company
# Engineer (with professional qualifications)
# Fire service official
# Funeral director
# Insurance agent (full time) of a recognised company
# Journalist
# Justice of the Peace
# Legal secretary (members and fellows of the Institute of legal secretaries)
# Local government officer
# Manager/Personnel officer (of limited company)
# Member of Parliament
# Merchant Navy officer
# Minister of a recognised religion
# Nurse (SRN and SEN)
# Officer of the armed services (active or retired)
# Optician
# Person with honours (e.g. OBE MBE etc.)
# Personal Licensee Holders
# Photographer (professional)
# Police officer
# Post Office official
# President/Secretary of a recognised organisation
# Salvation Army officer
# Social worker
# Solicitor
# Surveyor
# Teacher, lecturer
# Trade union officer
# Travel agency (qualified)
# Valuers and auctioneers (fellow and associate members of the incorporated society)
# Warrant officers and Chief Petty Officers

Can anyone see any logic in this lot? I certainly cannot :ugh:

[SXB]

F3G
No logic whatsoever.......

Bearing in mind that countersigning a passport application is a statement of the truth it's interesting that Journalists and MP's are authorised to do so:)

[parabellum]

"Strictly speaking I suppose that flight deck crew do not possess a professional qualification as such."

The definition of profession, according to the OED, is a calling or occupation.

Can't speak for other countries but the requirements for a British Airline Transport Pilots Licence do, according to education professionals, (there are two in my family, both well respected), satisfy the requirements for the academic side of a professional qualification. After the academic side there is a requirement for one thousand five hundred hours of relevant flying before the licence can be issued. Licence issue is only the beginning, third mates on a tramp steamer will have a Master's Ticket.

Now comes the experience required and the ability to pass six monthly and command assessment checks, not to mention a command course before said individual can be a captain.

Not sure what the basis of your reasoning is SXB, but I certainly believe, along with most, if not all my pilot colleagues, that I am a qualified professional.

[Clarence Oveur]

I wouldn't waste too much energy on this one parabellum.

It's a poor attempt by someone who obviously feels belittled to do the same to our profession.

Obviously someone with such a sense of self-importance that he will invariably end up talking about himself or think he is being talked about. Or is that a sign of low self-esteem? The two are easily confused. You should have seen post #60 before it was edited.

[SXB]

Parabellum
Not sure what the basis of your reasoning is SXB, but I certainly believe, along with most, if not all my pilot colleagues, that I am a qualified professional.

I was simply reacting to the previous posters opinions as to what is actually a 'Profession' and I don't think anyone here is doubting the professionalism of flight crew. You can't compare the established 'professions' with flight crew, they are just too different. Most 'professions' are based on a very long period of academic study, which then forms the (most) basis of their work in the future. Flight crew have a relatively short period of study followed by a relatively long period of 'other' training and this is the reason why most definitions exclude pilots from the 'profession' group of careers.

I'm not suggesting that one is better or more valuable than the other, it's all relative. One look at many of groups which belong to a 'profession' clearly indicates that comparisons are clearly irrelevant.

[Final 3 Greens]

Shall we try to put this one to bed?

http://www.dfes.gov.uk/europeopen/eutouk/authorities_list.shtml

An airline pilot is a skilled individual who takes on a good deal of responsibility and discharges his/her duties with careful judgement.

However, it is an occupation that is not a regulated profession.

[Pax Vobiscum]

Terminal thread drift here (sorry!), but I think the connection between those on F3G's list is that they are listed in directories that someone working at the passport office can readily check (in principle, I'm sure it happens very rarely). Of course, that doesn't explain why (e.g.) CORGI registered gas fitters don't appear there.

PS I'm with GBS: "Every profession is a conspiracy against the laity."

[PAXboy]

PS I'm with GBS: "Every profession is a conspiracy against the laity."

Very neat (as one would expect from such a source) and it also gives the explanation ... since the professions gang up on the laity, everyone wants to be in a profession.

Personally, I have always been outside every organisation I have ever belonged to. :E

[Final 3 Greens]

GBS spoke a lot of sense. Qui custodiet ipsos custodes?

Odd that pilots are not an acceptable signatory for passports, since they are on an easily traceable register at the CAA. Although ex RAF officers who are airline pilots are trusted to do the job.

And CORGI registered gas fitters are underrated - very skilled and do a good job in keeping people safe :ok:

[fyrefli]

I am a normal heterosexual male, but in this instance I would happily forgo the nubile female in favour of a 200 lb fit male who would be quite capable of dragging my 185 lb stunned arse out of a crashed airliner, and then go back for more.

I'm not sure I completely go with the above but I certainly agree with you that the pertinent point here is maximising survivors from survivable accidents. Crew training may give them a slight edge all other factors being equal but those other things will not be equal; the biggest delineator is always going to be how people respond in a "crisis". Now, you can't test people's reaction to extreme stress every time they get on a plane but I do worry at some of the people I've seen allowed to sit in the emergency exit rows. I forget which airline it was - I suspect it may have been BMI as I used to use them regularly but haven't for a while, although it may just be something EZY used to do but don't any more - but simply pointing out to people that they have chosen to sit in an emergency exit row and informing them of their responsibilities and directing them to study the procedures is in itself a bit of a self-selector. I've seen people moved due incapacity and I've also seen people self-select themselves out of an emergency exit row when their potential responsibilities have been pointed out to them. I'm thinking this is a good thing.

[PAXboy]

fyrefli Do you realise that you have just brought this thread right back on track?? How dare you!! Really, the impudence of some people who think they can just stroll into a thread on the fifth page and talk about the actual subject??? Hhuurummph :mad:

[Techman]

Now, you can't test people's reaction to extreme stress every time they get on a plane...
You can. It's called training. But don't mention that around here.

[fyrefli]

From KLM online checkin:

"You have entered your preference for an exit seat.
To sit in an exit seat, you must be willing and able to assist in the event
of an evacuation.

Does any of the following apply to you?

* You are traveling with a child younger than 13 years of age.
* You are unable to hear or understand instructions given by the crew members
in English or Dutch.
* You have a condition that might prevent you from performing your evacuation
functions or that might injure you while performing such functions."

And my sincere apologies, Paxboy ;)

Would this be the right point to state I don't completely agree with Techman? In reality training is the most most airlines have to go on but no amount of training stops certain people panicking; it just helps. I was once H&S officer in a large hotel for a few years and I've seen trained staff go to jelly and untrained customers solid as a rock in false alarm and real emergencies (e.g. 3am evacuations due to an actual fire).

But of course airlines should assume that their trained staff have an advantage. They also need to use all the information they can get about everyone else on board and a lot of it is right in front of their eyes. All airlines should do the above both at check-in and in the aircraft, where someone about whom there is any substantial doubt as to their physical aptitude in an emergency should be politely assisted to reseat themselves away from an emergency row. Yes, even if they've paid for the privilege. From a risk assessment perspective that's a no-brainer.

[Final 3 Greens]

Would this be the right point to state I don't completely agree with Techman?

Absolutely. What he says is not true, for the reasons you state.

There is a great difference between simulation and reality and the subsequent human reactions to each.

[perkin]

Pilots are trained almost to death in the sim for events such as engine failures in a twin at rotation, how often do you hear of them panicking? Rarely...Why? Because the sim is so realistic...Make your training as realistic as possible and if it happens for real, then its unlikely to freak anyone out too much. Cause high levels of stress, yes, but likely to be little panic as its a familiar situation.

[fyrefli]

That's as may be, Perkin, but we're in danger here of obsessing again on a technicality - no-one is going to remove crew from an emergency exit row - instead of real world differences between airlines, which could affect the number of people able to survive a survivable accident. Day in, day out, clearly physically unsuitable people are being allowed to sit in emergency exit rows.

[Final 3 Greens]

Perkin

I have undergone about 15 hours training in a full motion sim, including engine failure at rotation.

I have also experienced a real engine failure on take off in a Navajo, as handling pilot.

Trust me when I tell you that my emotional reaction to these events was quite different. However good the sim, you know that you will survive the detail. In the real world there is no such guarantee. Fortunately my experience ended with a low speed rejected take off, but my heart rate was thumping afterwards, as I nearly ran off the side of the runway due to the asymmetric thrust.

I would also hypothesis that there is a considerable difference in scenario between pilots sitting in the flight deck following their training to try and save the aircraft and sitting in passenger seats, for which they do not train regularly as far as I am aware..

As SXB says this point is largely irrelevant, since the emergency exit row seats are revenue seats.

It has been interesting to read how crews have put forward arguments to have these seats allocated to crew members and I note that Con Pilot said that everyone wants these seats for the same reasons.

If airlines choose to allocate these seats to frequent flyers, then they make a commercial decision that balances risk against benefit.

Airlines make these types of decisions regularly, for example when setting fuel policies and if they are happy to make the decisions and the regulators are happy with the degree of safety offered, then thats good enough for me.

[parabellum]

Finals 3 Greens - the very limited experience that you admit to leads me to think that you probably don't really know what you you are talking about, emotionally motivated but very little grasp on reality.

As Alexander Pope once said, "A little learning is a dangerous thing"

In future, please leave it to the professionals.

[PAXboy]

Naturally F3G can defend himself but I think that what he is saying, is that he has more experience in this than many pax who have simply paid extra to get into the exit row, or a pax placed there at random by the agent.

[Shack37]

Parabellum
Yes "a little learning is a dangerous thing"
Overconfident arrogance is not less so. Your 1000s of hour in the air or in the sim has not prepared you to be any more expert in a real evacuation situation than a frequent flyer with, for example, firefighting or rescue training, or simply common sense and a cool head.
If only we could all be like you professionals.:*
s37

[Final 3 Greens]

Dear Parabellum

I think that I know rather more than you do about emotional responses, classic and operant conditioning, shaping, behavioural training, autonomic responses and the unpredictability of human response to threats.

In this context I am the professional.

I mention a small amount of time in a simulator and my only live engine failure in the context of differentiating the personal emotional impact by a synthetic rather than a priori approach, in response to Perkin's post.

I make no comment about flying aeroplanes and am happy to leave that to those who hold APTLs.

Whether I would be any better than anyone else in the event of an emergency in an aircraft is a matter of conjecture and would be proven/refuted by experiencing the event. having survived one very serious fire in a building already, I am rather hoping to leave my reaction as a matter of conjecture.

Since you like quotes, try this one from John Major....

"Only in Britain could it be thought a defect to be 'too clever by half.' The probability is that too many people are too stupid by three-quarters."

[parabellum]

Oh well, I think this hamster wheel has just about run it's course.

Yes I agree a professional fire fighter, (is that a profession?;)) or someone trained in rescue would be an ideal person to have next to the over wing exit, as would aircrew who have been trained in safety and emergency procedures, including a limited amount of firefighting. These groups are trained to stick around and help others rather than make a run for it.

I certainly hope that none of us ever finds out the hard way just how well or badly we would react under emergency evacuation circumstances and I do think that the over wing should not be sold to the highest bidder.

On that happy note I'll exit the wheel.:)

[Final 3 Greens]

Parabellum

Responding to the reasonable tone of your last post, I attach a reference in which you and others may or may not be interested. Its old, but considered classic.

http://psychclassics.yorku.ca/Rivers/chap7.htm

The particular point of interest is the heading "Manipulative Activity" and you may find this interesting in the context of the author naming aeroplane pilots in this context.

You might wish to consider that manipulative activity requires someone to perform a series of actions, which aggregate to complex activity. These actions are learned (reinforced) by whatever method (e.g. training) and then the unconscious mind repeats these actions in the even of crisis.
So Rivers theory would tend to support your view of trained individuals reacting as trained.

Now for the tough bit. The training only works in context. Were I a pax in your aircraft and we suffered a dreadful mishap, I would expect you to react to your training and do your best until it was no longer possible. Volcanic ash and 747 springs to mind here, Capt Moody and his crew demonstrated manipulative activity to a very high standard.

So if a person is not in a position where they can apply the manipulative activity, there has to be some considerable uncertainty as to how they might react and the four other classic reactions, including flight and immobility.
The other tricky part is motivation, which impacts on behaviour.
Rivers published his work before Maslow's classic tome on human motivation, so did not synthesise this thinking.

Maslow's hierarchy of human need starts with the classic 'physiological', where the body reacts to an external stimulus without conscious intervention - if your hand feels pain, pull it away from the source of the pain.

In modern psychology autonomic reaction is recognised, where the body reacts to a threat and then the emotions follow the release of chemicals, e.g. adrenaline, that drive them; its hard to react in a calm and logical manner with a good deal of adrenaline pumping through your system.
I'll stop here before this gets too unintelligible and boring, but I hope this short insight may explain why I do not share your confidence that crew out of position will necessarily react any differently to anyone else - they might do, but then again they might not.
Edited to add: I'm not trying to start up the whole thread again, just thought some may be interested in the above.

[parabellum]

Well, almost out of the wheel!

Thanks F3G, very interesting reading.

"I do not share your confidence that crew out of position will necessarily react any differently to anyone else - they might do, but then again they might not".

Yes, it will be an individual thing and may depend on the strength and quality of the training, my hope would be that someone who has had some training would be a better option than someone who has had no training.
My background is forty four years of continuous training which goes some way to explain my faith in it. I really don't want to be put to the test, ever!

I accept that 90% of what River's says is likely to be true today but I would be interested to read what he would now say with the benefit of the last eighty odd years of civil aviation accidents and the information gleaned from them.

Two cases come to mind that highlight both personal qualities and the quality of training. In one case a very brave BOAC lady gave her life, as CC, trying to evacuate a disabled passenger from a burning B707 at LHR in 1968 and in another instance, somewhere in Europe I think, a smoke filled B707 made an emergency landing, all the crew got out and none of the passengers.

As far as this thread goes I believe that the bottom line is that anyone in an overwing exit seat should be capable of operating the exit and initiating an evacuation as quickly as possible, money or FF points should not be a factor. Now taking the second exit!:)

[PAXboy]

I'm glad that this thread has moved from the turbulent air ... in the meantime, I had listed the occasions when I was placed in jeopardy/crisis and considering how I have reacted. It was an interesting exercise and I shall not bore you with the details but they include:
various motor car accidents, mine and other peoples.
receiving bomb threat telephone calls at the organisations where I was working. That is, I was at a number of places where such calls were received in the late 1970s and early 1980s (civilian, not mil or Police).
Being half a mile away from one of those bombs (1983) and intimate involvement in the subsequent emergency procedures. That is because I was in charge of the telecommunications.I am known in my family (and former employers) as being 'good in a crisis' but how good would I be in an aircraft emergency? I can have no idea but, based on my life to date, 'reasonable' is probably the word.

So, why do I not push to get in the emergency row? The seats are often restricted in other ways, there is no big window, you cannot have your hand case with you at all times. Being of average height, the legroom is not of great value. But I often try and sit one row away from the exit ...

[Final 3 Greens]

I accept that 90% of what River's says is likely to be true today but I would be interested to read what he would now say with the benefit of the last eighty odd years of civil aviation accidents and the information gleaned from them.

I cannot speak for Rivers, but I would hypothesise that the safety record of the airlines suggests that their training programmes are highly effective when you look at the deaths per pax km stats.

I think our only difference in view is applying that training out of context and hopefully we'll never need to test our hypotheses :ok:

[AR1]

I'm a 'regular' flier. I always listen to the demos, and flightdeck chatter - see my BMI post elsewhere. On the subject of FF, I've been in enough lounges to recognise that half of them can barely walk to the plane, let alone open the door.
I've often thought, If I pull the mask, how hard do I pull it. What if it comes off! How heavy is that overwing exit door - although I'm sure if the **** hits the fan i'd be feeling so strong I wouldnt even notice. But worst of all, would I lose bowel control in that situation? I just dont know.

I've got MS flight sim, but it doesnt mean I can fly a plane.

So I'll leave the flying and pax care to those that do it for a living.:D

[Shack37]

AR1,
If pax can barely walk to the aircraft then they're not fit to fly and shouldn't be allowed aboard.
Emergency exit hatch weight is around 38lbs / 17.5kgms.
BA brief just says "pull mask towards you". Iberia brief says "pull the mask strongly/firmly towards you", take your pick.
If you should lose bowel control please make sure you're first out:yuk:
s37