PDA

View Full Version : Arrogant posters


marchino61
8th Sep 2008, 06:36
Does anyone else among the passengers here share my concern at a few (certainly not all) of the pilots posting here?

Their dismissive comments about passengers being "idiots" and "not fit for the gene pool" for example....

This concerns me on at last two levels:

1) Is it a good idea to have such contempt for those who pay your wages? (the name Gerald Ratner comes to mind here - Google it if you don't know the story)

2) (and this is what really worries me) do these pilots take the attitude of "I am a genius who can do no wrong" into the cockpit with them? Now that, for me, is a really scary thought...

What do other passengers think?

Romeo India Xray
8th Sep 2008, 07:14
I am both a regular passenger AND a regular pilot. I come to this part of the forum to answer questions and pass on some of the knowledge that I have ammased over an almost 20 year career.

Whilst it is a joy to answer some passenger questions it can become frustrating when people on here choose to ignore your explanation over their own assumptions or perceptions.

I certainly treat all people (and their questions) with total resepct, up to the point where I am ignored.

RIX

Avitor
8th Sep 2008, 07:35
I think we need straight talking on any forum. We need flight deck personnel to fire from the hip. We need to hear it as it is.
These folk spend a great deal of their lives and a lot of money on learning their profession before they can enter the flight deck, leave alone take command of a very expensive piece of machinery and be responsible for countless lives, in the air and on the ground.
It is also their responsibility, when on duty, to represent the company they are currently working for, dealing with the public, under those terms can be mighty frustrating I venture to suggest.
Long live the flight deck person who tells it as it is and may I always be on his/her flight. :D

marchino61
8th Sep 2008, 07:57
I feel there is a difference between "telling it like it is" and abusive and derogatory language.

I certainly don't see language like this on other forums I frequent.

west lakes
8th Sep 2008, 09:04
Does anyone else among the passengers here share my concern at a few (certainly not all) of the pilots posting here?



Not particulary, looking at passenger behaviour on some flights (mostly by a minority) and some unthought out comments by others.

Their dismissive comments about passengers being "idiots" and "not fit for the gene pool" for example

I often see reasonable responses by pilots (and cabin crew) that are countered by insults by passengers, if the pilots (and cabin crew) don't agree.


Is it a good idea to have such contempt for those who pay your wages


Just because an individual contributes towards someones wages, it does not automatically mean that individual is right.
I work in a service industry, where the above correlation regarding my wages is used, in similar circumstances the customer is usually correct in about 10% of disputes. In fact in a lot of circumstances if we were to "do what the customer wants" we would be breaking the law.

Nor do individuals have the right to speak on others behalfs. If I have a concern I will raise it on my own behalf.


(and this is what really worries me) do these pilots take the attitude of "I am a genius who can do no wrong" into the cockpit with them? Now that, for me, is a really scary thought


This assumes that the persona evident on this forum is the same as that in their normal working situation. I don't think that, in a lot of cases, this is the case


As these are anonymous forums the origins of the contributions may be opposite to what may be apparent.

marchino61
8th Sep 2008, 09:13
@west lakes -sorry, I cannot quote here for some reason.

- I did not say it was right for pax to make insulting and abusive comments either. If they do, should the "professionals" lower themselves to the same level?

- Whether the customer is correct or not, abusing him is not the answer. Certainly in a one on one situation (unlike here) it would simply be a provocation and make matters worse. (I also work in a service industry by the way, like most people these days). If someone really feels such contempt for his customers, perhaps he is in the wrong business?

Wireless
8th Sep 2008, 09:20
"I feel there is a difference between "telling it like it is" and abusive and derogatory language."

Hi Machino61.

Would you be able to give an example?

I can honestly say that as far as I can see, all the friends, collegues and fellow Pilots I've flown with hold professional pride in the highest regard. From my own experience, the crew I've flown with really value every single person that gets on board in so much as their safety (which is our job granted) and their custom. It's a bit cutting to assume that if you have had a direct response to a question on this forum, then we are all a bunch of cowboys in the flight deck. I would imagine than any genuine well meaning question would receive such a response so long as a disagreement didn't take place whether you're a passenger or not. Just remember this is an Industry Forum not an official Airline Public enquiry website, where although all are welcome, an honest and open viewpoint can be expressed. It's part of the attraction of the site. It's the online equivalent of walking into an airline crew room at the end of the eve after everyone's done 6 sectors :}

As a comparison, I know of several cases where public have spoken to flight crew as if they were dirt under their shoes. Most crew sigh, take it in their stride and accept that it's a product of today's consumer market. I suspect that today's low cost market has driven the attitude the general public has of air travel down, owing to the fact they are treated like cattle by said airlines.

west lakes
8th Sep 2008, 09:43
I think a part of the problem is in perception

I had a "discussion" with a customer a few months ago where I was actually exceeding our minimum requirements, to be met with a very forceful comment of "you can't do that"
I then had to explain in measured tones that I had every legal right to do what I proposed, I did not have to consult or actually tell the customer either. Customer then got angry having it explained as it is.

There is (still?) a perception that the customer is always right, in a lot of cases where legislation is involved that is not the case.

A case in point is the "Stupid Passenger Comments" thread in Cabin Crew.
The title is perhaps over the top, but the thread starter chose that. But look at it this way: -
Was it intended to mean primarally
Stupid passengers & their comments
or Passenger's stupid comments.
The first is perceived as insulting, the second is the probable intent.

(and don't tell me that anyone in any industry doesn't make a bit of comment about the unusual or off the wall conversations we all have with customers)

Wireless
8th Sep 2008, 09:53
The press doesn't help publishing articles on things like "dangerous go-arounds". Everyone's an expert these days :ugh:

Final 3 Greens
8th Sep 2008, 09:54
This is a pilot's forum.

I would expect it to reflect their perspectives.

Its some of the pax comments that scare me, as I am a FQTV and no doubt share the same cabins.

G-BPED
8th Sep 2008, 11:03
This is a pilot's forum.

I would expect it to reflect their perspectives.

Its some of the pax comments that scare me, as I am a FQTV and no doubt share the same cabins.

I would concur with F3G.

I feel the problems are caused when people with nothing more than a few "hours" on Microsoft FSX come to the "Rumour & News" section of the forum and give unqualified comments about something they clearly know nothing about.

If the questions or comments were posted in the Passenger/SLF part of the forum we would probably see less lashings by the flight crew.

That said I am not defending abusive comments in any way however, if you take a look through some of the postings especially in the Spanair accident or the Ryanir Depressurisation incident then you will see how frustrating it can be for the flight crews.

In my own field of expertise ( Film sound engineering ) I sometimes feel like strangling people who spout off about a subject they clearly know nothing about.

Regards,

G-BPED

jetset lady
8th Sep 2008, 11:51
Is it a good idea to have such contempt for those who pay your wages?

Here we go again. My pet hate! That statement in itself, to me, implies arrogance on your part. You pay my wages, therefore, you are always right and I should be forever subservient to you. It doesn't work like that! At the end of the day, it all goes in a big circle, and somewhere along the line, we all pay each others wages. It comes down to respect and old fashioned good manners, something which seems to be a rarity in this day and age.

Jsl

Wireless
8th Sep 2008, 12:10
Respect for paying wages.

I tip my hat to ya guvna. Shine your shoes Sir? :}

What about those involved in the BA777 incident. Wonder if they had the same attitude towards their Pilots and Cabin crew after they came away unharmed. Respect is a two way thing after all. I don't know of anyone I work with who has contempt for the passengers we carry. Quite the opposite. We go through an extraordinary amount of training to make sure you're safe after all. Respect is a two way street.

west lakes
8th Sep 2008, 12:36
I was pondering further over lunch and came up with this scenario

So you are the MD of a new airline, amongst all the other bits you need (aircraft, sales, routes etc.) you need crew.
So how many do you need and why?
Flight deck, well you need a pilot, but you think well trains and other forms of transport only have one driver, but you need two on the flight deck for passenger safety and because various legislation tells you you need them.
Cabin Crew, well you only fly short sectors, ground staff can get folks to their seats so why do you need cabin crew, for safety reasons and because legislation says you do.
Fine, now the flight crew have to be "locked" in by legislation so rarely are seen by the passengers. In fact the only evidence they exist is if they are seen through the F/D window on boarding and in the form of disembodied voices on the PA system.

So you've got some employees in the cabin, legally they are there to ensure passenger safety so, in theory, could sit around during the flight doing nothing else.

Ah, but you think, lets give them something else to do!
Lets get them to give/sell food to the passengers
Lets get them to sell duty free to the passengers
Lets get them to manage the IFE system

as if we do this it might encourage passengers to fly with us again.

Silly I know, but at the end of the day the prime reason crews are on aircraft is to ensure your safety not to serve your every need - a fact that a lot of passengers either don't know or if they use this site seem to forget

Rainboe
8th Sep 2008, 12:47
Do any of the aviation professionals here share my concern at most of the people posting here who think because they have taken a few passenger flights are now fit to act as aircraft accident investigators and pronounce opinions on safety issues as they do, all the while their anonymous background absolutely shielding the fact that they don't know what they are talking about?

This forum could quite as easily been a Doctor professional discussion forum. We would end up with people pretending they are Doctors advising on procedures, suggesting new ideas, demanding safety changes, and all the while they are really an accountant, or a dog trainer, or a plumber. Some of these plumbers can pretend they are fully trained pathologists, able to examine in minute detail what went wrong in the surgical disaster. Look at some of the threads in Rumours and News for evidence of non-professionals insisting they know better how to operate aeroplanes than professionals, or considering themselves to be 'accident investigators'. They take over the discussions completely!

That is why certain professionals get so impatient with these idiots- it gets dangerous giving them such a loud voice. But unless we have a forum where access is tightly controlled, people can get away with this nonsense.

As for paying my wages, passengers give me no pay! My employer pays me to complete the task allotted to me, which I do. Passengers pay the airlines, not the employees. When we understand that, passengers will be happier, and the employees will be happier. Try telling a Ryanair stewardess that you pay her wages. What sort of answer do you think you will get?

angels
8th Sep 2008, 12:56
Try telling a Ryanair stewardess that you pay her wages. What sort of answer do you think you will get?

'Que??' probably.

Sorry, couldn't resist it.

apaddyinuk
8th Sep 2008, 13:55
Sadly there are as many if not more SLF in here who too are arrogant and feel that as armchair pilots on MS Flight Sim they feel they have all the answers and can argue with the true professionals! And heaven forbid they have a golfing buddy who is a pilot because then they have all the ammunition they need!!!!!

As for pilots thinking most passengers are idiots, well they are not the ones who generally have to put up with the passengers from take off to touch down so they are more than likely just basing that assumption on what has been told about a few by the cabin crew inbetween coffee runs. Now only the cabin crew have the right to refer to all passengers as idiots!!!! :}

Rainboe
8th Sep 2008, 15:25
I passenger a lot. I sit there in horror watching people holding up papers during the safety briefing, reading, wiping kids noses, looking out of the window etc, while the cabin crew gamely go through the full briefing pantomime. They don't even look around and clock the nearest exit! These people I would call fools, idiots, twerps. It's something that could save your life. They fulfil the definition of those words. Come the time they actually need the emergency equipment in anger, they are confused sheep! 'What do I do with the oxygen mask?' 'Do I pull it, untangle it, stand up and breath into it?' 'Where's my nearest exit?' And as for Hadow seeing to his son first? Such people shouldn't be allowed out without a helmet on with a message on it 'please take care of me because I'm a bit stupid!'.

rogerk
8th Sep 2008, 15:53
Try the military side !!
A5hole senior officers who treated AAC helicopters as taxis.
So bad that observers had to open the door for them and if the rotor height allowed salute !!
Then one day there was a great big inclined drive failure - the taxi driver did an amazing job and came to rest albeit on his side at the edge of a field.
Praise for outstanding airmanship ??
Not a chance - "Could you radio for my staff car"
:eek::eek:

Wireless
8th Sep 2008, 16:50
That's true. It is annoying and dispiriting for the crew when all they see is the backs of the newspapers during the safety demo. Also what winds me up is everyone getting up before we've cut the fuel, killed the fires and flicked the pax belts sign. Bloody funny if we had a brake hyd failure (happened to me once) and we jumped the stand haha!


Please don't don't do these things :O

The Real Slim Shady
8th Sep 2008, 18:18
OK loudmouth g0bsh1te SLF if you think we are all dictatorial arrogant self aggrandisers ( made that word up probably, but, hey, I can I'm a pilot ;))

Situation: Passenger gets through security, boarding and all other aspects of the process of negotiating the AIRPORT with the internet check in boarding for his flight back to origin i.e the flight I'm operating is ABC - XYZ on 1 Jan, and he is clutching a XYZ - ABC ( printed on his own computer) for 3 Jan.

Not his problem as it is a genuine mistake: he thought he was printing a boarding card that covered both his his flights. First time he had used the internet check in facility and he ticked the "Print return boarding card box" in the genuine, but mistaken belief that it covered both flights.

He gets on board and the CC discover that he really shouldn't be on board.

It's his wife's birthday next day: there is only 1 flight per day and tomorrow's flight is fully booked. You can, quite legitimately, deny him carriage as he doesn't hold a valid boarding card for the flight.

He refuses to get off the aircraft when asked by the CC and ground staff.

What do you do?

Final 3 Greens
8th Sep 2008, 18:23
I passenger a lot. I sit there in horror watching people holding up papers during the safety briefing, reading, wiping kids noses, looking out of the window etc, while the cabin crew gamely go through the full briefing pantomime. They don't even look around and clock the nearest exit! These people I would call fools, idiots, twerps. It's something that could save your life. They fulfil the definition of those words. Come the time they actually need the emergency equipment in anger, they are confused sheep! 'What do I do with the oxygen mask?' 'Do I pull it, untangle it, stand up and breath into it?' 'Where's my nearest exit?' And as for Hadow seeing to his son first? Such people shouldn't be allowed out without a helmet on with a message on it 'please take care of me because I'm a bit stupid!'.

All that's fine, but unfortunately then the way some crew in uniform behave does not exactly set a great example.

e.g. a captain of a major European airline, positioning in uniform wlkaing round the cabin with the belt signs on and serving himself a cup of coffee in the galley in full sight of the first few rows of pax.

If a captain doesn't heed the safety briefing, why should the pax?

Also, crew not enforcing the seat belt sign has a similar effect - do they really mean it?

The concept of zero tolerance, in its original NYC sense, should be applied and if that means offloading pax who don't listen, then I for one would support that, even if it delays me.

So don't blame the passenger behaviour until the airlines get their act together.

The Real Slim Shady
8th Sep 2008, 18:25
e.g. a captain of a major European airline, positioning in uniform wlkaing round the cabin with the belt signs on and serving himself a cup of coffee in the galley in full sight of the first few rows of pax.

Crew are released when the Captain releases them even though the seatbelt is on.

Final 3 Greens
8th Sep 2008, 18:30
What do you do?

If you look at your employer's business strategy, which is cost differentiated (IMHO) and which has very clear T&Cs, then you should have him offloaded, as a cost differentiated business only stays cost differentiated in a service industry by enforcing T&Cs and allowing no exceptions.

It will not damage your employer's business, due to the nature of the modus operandii (which I find clever, if personally repulsive) and the word will get around his network to be more careful in future.

If he had wished for a full service, then he should have paid for it.

So offload him, any other action completely misses the point of the business you are in.

Final 3 Greens
8th Sep 2008, 18:32
Crew are released when the Captain releases them even though the seatbelt is on.

Please look at your PMs.

The Real Slim Shady
8th Sep 2008, 18:49
OK, 1 vote from F3G, he has to get off.

come on then loudmouth g0bsh1te SLF, let's have your solutions.

Oh, and you have a slot in 10 minutes and your scheduled departure is in 5 mins and the company require a written report for any delays.

The Real Slim Shady
8th Sep 2008, 19:02
OK, 29 viewing and not a reply.

You have now lost your slot and your new slot is in 2 hrs time.

See?

We work in a dynamic environment where we have to make decisions, no matter how unpopular.

BitMoreRightRudder
8th Sep 2008, 19:08
Let him sing happy birthday to his wife on your company phone, then boot him off. A nice mix of customer service and OTP.

The Real Slim Shady
8th Sep 2008, 19:14
RMR, doesn't work that way.

You have to come up with a real life solution.

Get off is too easy: think of the way he will have to get off. He has already refused to move.

Easy job being arrogant aircrew, isn't it?

OK loudmouth g0bsh1te SLF who know better, being as it's late, you can have 2 days to work the answer out.

We mere mortals get 2 or 3 minutes if we are lucky and have to get it right, otherwise we are criticised left, right and on PPRuNe.

BitMoreRightRudder
8th Sep 2008, 19:25
Don't worry Slim, it was ever-so-slightly tongue in cheek. Anyway the company don't give me a phone, so I couldn't offer it. This is one of those where I sit and let the captain earn his cash, while praying he doesn't ask what I think (!) And obviously remember how it was handled for the fateful day when I have to sign the techlog.

The Real Slim Shady
8th Sep 2008, 19:30
RMR, if I had a company phone I wold consider myself blessed ;)

But it probably wouldn't have any credit ;)

Wireless
8th Sep 2008, 20:04
Smile politely. Say you understand that it's his wife's Birthday but point out due to weather turning the schedule upside down, in order to get everyone where they are you're away from home, wearing the same shirt on an unsched' night stop having had a shortbread from the coffee counter for breakfast cos you were in the holiday Inn express, and you'll miss your wife's Birthday too but if he sticks on the plane, everyone will be missing their Wive's Birthdays/ Interviews/ train/ connection/ 10 min freeview on the playboy channel etc etc

But I did chose to do this so can't complain haha :p

west lakes
8th Sep 2008, 20:20
Pondering again

I wonder how many folks that come up with wonderful ideas actually are in the sort of occupation that puts them in the position of having to make that instant decision affecting safety, customer relations and costs and then possibly have to justify it to management?

TightSlot
8th Sep 2008, 20:21
Arrogance is a form of unpleasant human behavior that is sometimes exhibited: Some people are arrogant only very occasionally, some make a habit of behaving so regularly.

Pilots are human beings, and therefore will behave in this way too (it would be statistically remarkable if they didn't) - they will also exhibit a full range of other human behaviors, including, of course, all of the positive ones. Since FA's, Engineers, passengers and indeed everybody is also human, the same is true all round. You can find good and bad everywhere you look - attempting to draw any kind of conclusion from what is seen will usually be fruitless.

The overwhelming, massive majority of Flight & Cabin Crew are pleasant, skilled and well intentioned people, anxious to do a good job for their customers. A minority, of variable size, is probably unsuited to the job. The trick, for us, when dealing with passengers, is always to treat as you would wish to be treated yourself, and to remember that most people are pleasantly disposed and will remain so if dealt with courteously and intelligently. The trick for passengers, when dealing with Airline staff, is to do the same.

Finally, I suggest that it will always be possible to find instances of poor or inappropriate behavior (Walking Captains, drunken or rude passengers etc.). Using these comparatively rare instances as a basis for the creation of an opinion or a policy doesn't usually move things anywhere positive.

EI-CFC
8th Sep 2008, 23:25
One man's meat, another man's poison and all that..

Rush2112
9th Sep 2008, 03:23
How much of the perceived "arrogance" is due to the fact that we are reading what someone has written, rather than listening to a verbal communication and watching facial expressions and body language? A lot of times one can read something on the interweb thingy and think 'blimey, that's a bit rich' but it's not what the poster meant at all. I've done it myself and I'm pretty sure most of my readership has, if they would care to admit to it.

I take the point that lots of SLF (like me) travel a lot and thus think they are experts, or are overgrown children who don't understand that PS is not real life, and don't like it when a real expert contradicts them. No one likes being wrong, and especially being made to be seen to be wrong in public.

SNS3Guppy
9th Sep 2008, 04:40
Do any of the aviation professionals here share my concern at most of the people posting here who think because they have taken a few passenger flights are now fit to act as aircraft accident investigators and pronounce opinions on safety issues as they do, all the while their anonymous background absolutely shielding the fact that they don't know what they are talking about?


Yup.

come on then loudmouth g0bsh1te SLF, let's have your solutions.

Oh, and you have a slot in 10 minutes and your scheduled departure is in 5 mins and the company require a written report for any delays.


I believe we just found the arrogant, angry crewmember who forms the basis of this discussion.

justawanab
9th Sep 2008, 04:52
I don't travel a lot, well not now at least, neither do I think of myself as an expert in aviation. I do however know the fundamentals of flight, can describe the control surfaces of an aircraft and could successfully control an aircraft in flight should I need to so I'm not totally ignorant of the whole process. Because of this, and knowing that the main reason I don't fly professionally is that I couldn't afford the costs involved in qualifying nor am I sure I could perform adequately under pressure without assistance, I have a profound respect for those who do. However it does disturb me when certain members of that profession seem only too quick to suggest that they are virtually infallible and that anyone else who may seek to express an opinion, whether they be cattle class or cabin crew, is totally unworthy of any consideration.
Fortunately they seem to be in the minority.
I don't expect people to tell me how to do my job either, unless they are qualified at an equal or higher level or have more experience than me, however, when someone "outside" makes a suggestion I will listen and investigate, then if the suggestion has no basis for being I will explain in simple terms exactly why. I avoid the use of sarcasm and I avoid being patronising. There have been occasions where some of those suggestions have warranted further development and with the addition of my and other's expertise a simple "off -the-wall" idea has become practical and useful. I just didn't think of it at the time.
I also never fully trust those who believe they are foolproof.
No matter how good your training is, no matter how many hours you spend in the sim, no matter how much money your company invests in you, you will make a mistake at least once in your career. I'd much rather be flown by the pilot who can accept that and is willing to acknowledge it when it happens than the one who can't and won't.

Der absolute Hammer
9th Sep 2008, 04:53
Yes but, SNS3Guppy, just because one is arrogant, even angry and even rude does not make one incorrect?

Final 3 Greens
9th Sep 2008, 05:09
Tightslot

Finally, I suggest that it will always be possible to find instances of poor or inappropriate behavior (Walking Captains, drunken or rude passengers etc.). Using these comparatively rare instances as a basis for the creation of an opinion or a policy doesn't usually move things anywhere positive.

In the context of behavioural change, I would have to disagree with you.

Zero tolerance was a policy introduced in New York, which if you research it fully, started with the removal of graffitti from subway trains and other public places. The programme gained a head of steam over several years and the reduction of the crime rate in NYC is well known.

Someone needs to draw a line under unacceptable behaviour and let the people know it is not acceptable.

As a passenger in a commercial aircraft, I have no authority and cannot implement zero tolerance, but I would support the crew in the following areas

- enforcing the seat belt sign
- dealing with drunk or abusive people
- dealing with people who persist in using mobile phones against the rules
- etc

A positioning pilot walking around when the belt sign is on or using a mobile phone surreptitiously (as reported by a poster on another thread) acts as a very bad role model.

Zero tolerance requires that crew act as role models and then enforce the required behaviours to the same standard.

It is high time that we stamped on bad behaviour on aircraft.

SNS3Guppy
9th Sep 2008, 09:07
Yes but, SNS3Guppy, just because one is arrogant, even angry and even rude does not make one incorrect?


The question can only be answered in the context of a specific situation. At times directness is not only appropriate but warranted. In most cases, decorum and professionalism dictate that a less candid, more diplomatic approach is preferred.

Does being arrogant, angry, and rude make one incorrect? By technical subject matter perhaps not, but with respect to resolution of a conflict, or establishing the company presence and imagine, yes, it does.

What I see too often here, and it's really a concern brought up by the original poster, are individuals who may not have a full compendium of aeronautical knowledge at their whim, who ask a simple, innocent question. Not uncommonly we see them beaten and bludgeoned by pilots who act as though the individual should have been born with a doctorate in aeronautical science. This shouldn't be.

Now sometimes we see the opposite. Recently a poster on the tech forum asked if he should believe his aircraft flight manual regarding landing distance, or "wikipedia." As you might imagine, this elicited a number of sharp responses, including my own. Later, the poster revealed that he was a 15 year old young man, most likely a computer game player, asking from a much more basic level...had he revealed this information at the outset, the response would have been far different. As it was, once his case was established, many able posters were quick to provide good information.

In other recent cases, during technical discussions regarding critical safety of flight issues such as rejected takeoffs, posters have jumped in with an absolute lack of understanding, immediately critical, and certaily detrimental to the discussion. One can understand then, when the lack of patience displayed by the pilots participating in that forum, exceeded their tolerance. Directness in such a case would be, and was warranted.

In other cases individuals have entered the same forum asking the most basic of questions...how does a jet engine work, what's a compressor stall, how is lift formed...etc. Clearly these are people looking for information, and in nearly every case it's given generously. A simple, easy to understand reply is warranted, and there's no need for arrogance, or rudeness.

The specific situation dictates.

Some years ago I experienced a passenger who was quite over the top. He screamed and yelled, turned a purple color, balled up his fists, and was spitting as he talked through clenched teeth. He became an unpleasant character. I made an intermediate landing, and heard about enough as he demanded that I go fly him where he felt he should be. He made a similiar comment as someone earlier in this thread...that he was my employer, that he was paying my wages, and that I would do exactly as he said.

In that particular case it was a chartered flight in a corporate type aircraft. He was paying a lot of money to go somewhere. I told him very calmly that I was grounding the airplane and the flight based on his attitude, that he was behaving unsafely to be flown anywhere, and that his flight was over. He screamed and yelled and eventually calmed down. I made it clear to him that I have only one duty, and only one concern as the pilot in command of the airplane; safety of flight. That includes his safety, and the safety of the airplane. The "I'm paying your wage" arguement just doesn't cut it for me. I'm the pilot, it's my call, my authority, my responsibility, my duty.

The passenger isn't paying my wage. My employer is. However, even in the case of my employer, nobody is paying me enough to compromise, and nobody is going to win any points with me by trying to throw that in my face. "I'm paying your wage" doesn't hold a lot of water with me. If you're my passenger I'll accord you all the respect that's due a fellow human being regardless of whether you're flying for free or paying a hefty sum, and I expect the same in return...as well as respect for my position and the duty is entails. Once that relationship is compromised, I will do my utmost to restore it. Failing that, in the face of a passenger or customer (or employer) who elects to go beyond being civil, one may quickly learn that my own determination will quickly exceed theirs, and it's a fight they're not going to win.

Diplomacy is far more than a good idea, and where applicable, works best. Where it's not applicable, there are other appropriate means of handling a situation, particular to each case...but this is never preferred...by me, my true employer, or the passenger for whom I will bend over backward at any given moment to please.

Rainboe
9th Sep 2008, 10:08
What I see too often here, and it's really a concern brought up by the original poster, are individuals who may not have a full compendium of aeronautical knowledge at their whim, who ask a simple, innocent question. Not uncommonly we see them beaten and bludgeoned by pilots who act as though the individual should have been born with a doctorate in aeronautical science.
The way I see it, polite enquiries receive informative, courteous answers. I spend quite a lot of time answering sensible queries (in the right section!). But have a look at the major accident threads in Rumours and News! Full of non flyers acting as accident investigators, deciding how aviation should be changed and saying 'how it is'. I don't see that many polite enquiries, more blunt argumentive and outrageous statements, and so they shall be treated in return. The Ryanair depressurisation is a case in point.

The very anonymity of forums means that it is not apparent what basis people make enquiries from, and as you pointed out, the response could be inappropriate. I eventually deduced the young man was talking from a primitive basis and did not respond, but some did not see it. It behoves the original poster of any query to state from what basis he asks so that an appropriate answer can be framed.

I've been told 'I'm paying your wages!', I've been told 'you're lying to us!' and 'I'm a lawyer, I'm going to sue!' There are very easy responses. For the lying one, I had an outburst 'how DARE you accuse me of lying! I am not paid enough to lie to anybody so would you withdraw that PLEASE?'. The lawyer one I enjoy: dismiss it with 'please write to the customer service department with your complaint, now please excuse me I am VERY busy!' The wages one is good: 'Thank you Madam! I shall ensure it is well spent!'

AR1
9th Sep 2008, 11:33
real life's full of good people and bad people. Why would only the good people use the internet?

marchino61
9th Sep 2008, 13:57
Well, it is good to see the toxic people have reined themselves in, at least on this thread. Nice not to see mention of "idiots" and those who should remove themselves from the gene pool here......things are looking up :-)

The Real Slim Shady
9th Sep 2008, 16:39
In that particular case it was a chartered flight in a corporate type aircraft. He was paying a lot of money to go somewhere.

And I guess that following your arrogance he never used your company again.

10 out of 10, gold star and no tick.

When it comes to arrogant posters SNS3, you have the patent!

Tell what the solution is: you go and explain, quietly and calmly( borrowed from arrogant poster who knows better than anyone else - but he's probably "Murcain", redneck and proud of it) , that you can't carry him on the boarding card he is holding as you aren't permitted to, either by your airline, the CAA or the DFT.

You explain to him that his refusal to get off when asked is not helping the situation and that if he will accompany you to the gate you MAY be able to check him in, even though check in has technically closed, however, you can't guarantee anything, but will do your best.

If it doesn't work out, you will have to leave to him behind.

Fortunately, you manage to get him checked in and get a boarding card issued for the flight and make your slot.

On arrival the pax asks to visit the flightdeck, shakes your hand and offers his heartfelt thanks.

Arrogant my dear SNS3? Not at all.

I do my best on the basis that I would like to be treated the same way but get ticked off when loudmouth know it alls think they have a licence to complain about flight and cabin crew because they fly a freighter, or worse, have a PC with flight sim.

remarkablebean
9th Sep 2008, 17:18
Rainboe is right.

I realize I am new to this forum but not others, and I have been around the block, at least once.

I've checked out a number of threads on here, and some of the questions and observations made by passengers both on operational matters and even commercial ones are very rudimentary - and a lot of the answers given by those in the industry are comprehensive and well thought out. Others, well, are shirty and they should be kept to themselves...things like "Spotters stay out of this" are just plain stupid.

We also run into the same frustrations as you e.g. airport security lines and jobsworths implementing at-the-time politically expedient policies - please remember that too - AND it's not our fault the parking lot is full, or if Gatwick smells like a fish kettle.

In the middle of a discussion about the 777 incident, the idiotic postings on the Ryanair depressurization (I mean even that got me going) or one closer to my own heart, the A310 over Quebec, it is disheartening and annoying to have one liners thrown in when the discussion is serious and for those of us in the industry, informative and enjoyable. (Thanks for your comments on that btw Rainboe).

In terms of "we pay your wages" - well.....you buy a ticket or an IT package which includes an airfare, and some very little of that does help pay my mortgage - true. However, in the UK and Canada you also pay taxes for health care, and when you go to get an X-Ray, is that what you say to the radiologist or radiographer ? Or before surgery, you say the same thing to the heart specialist ? I dooooon't think so.

Those who work the cabin do sometimes get a lot of abuse from passengers, clients or guests - whatever you want to call them. They're there for your safety, and believe me, they know better. It's not their fault if the chocolate is no longer on your tray or if the portions are smaller - and it's not their fault either if the IFE breaks...if you don't like the service, get in touch with head office, cause they can't do anything about it. I'm sure when the service is reduced, and the crews are used to delivering the very best, their embarrassment is matched by the passengers dismay. Working with the traveling public is NOT for the faint hearted. As someone else posted "mutual respect" works wonders.

We should view this forum as a series of discrete sections and try to maintain them. If there is an operational matter which requires debate - such as the potential icing of fuel, or another incident which has broader consequences for other operators, then professionals debate. By all means observe!!

Would a non medical professional discuss non-evasive surgery for tissue detaching from the oventum on an internet board and get away with it ??

Ask questions and many many aviators being still very proud of what we do, will answer the questions as valuably as possible.

In return, afford a little respect and understanding if we're not always smiley and happy slappy - and remember where to point your complaints in future. Thanks very much!

P.S. Rant over.

wiggy
9th Sep 2008, 17:30
I think you sum it up very nicely in one statement when you post

"Would an non medical professional discuss non-evasive surgery for tissue detaching from the oventum on an internet board and get away with it"

No, quite rightly, they they wouldn't...
.

Abusing_the_sky
9th Sep 2008, 17:33
1) Is it a good idea to have such contempt for those who pay your wages? (the name Gerald Ratner comes to mind here - Google it if you don't know the story)



Dear Sir,
Please receive the attached 50p cheque as a full refund of the wages you claim you paid me:ok:


Like JSL mentioned, it's all a vicious circle; you pay my wages, i pay yours i.e. you are an optician, i need glassed, i pay you to get my glasses, you pay the factory who produces the frame, the factory pays the postman do deliver them and so on.... it's simple really.

And for my 2 cents, the pax do seem to be more confused than ever when anywhere near an airport; people are out of their comfort zone, it's stupid o'clock in the morning and they are not used to it, the airport is a big big building with lots of people, noise, millions of check in desks, police, dogs, security people and the list goes on, but they do change their behavior (i refer to the not so frequent fliers). They get anxious and what do they do? They take it out on "the uniform"; usually the cabin crew or the pilot when he/she is in sight. And it's not straight away, it's usually moaning about having to show the boarding card again or complaining in flight about temperature, seatbelt sign on, toilets busy, prices, other pax, you name it.
But do you see where I'm going with this? People, out of their comfort zone, are completely different people; hell, i go bananas when I'm ANYWHERE near a hospital:eek:


Rgds,
ATS

SNS3Guppy
9th Sep 2008, 18:22
And I guess that following your arrogance he never used your company again.


I don't believe in guesses or speculation. You "guess" incorrectly.

The passenger was a close friend of the CEO of the company. I called the CEO and spoke to him directly about the matter. I spoke to the passenger. He calmed down, ceased to be a safety risk, and I elected to continue with him tohis destination. It was my call.

Had he never used my company again, I couldn't have cared less.

Am I concerned that a passenger who throws tantrums, jumps up and down and screams loud enough that I could clearly hear him a hundred yards away, who's face turns purple with his rage, and who spits through clenched teeth doesn't fly with me again? Not in the least. My sole concern is safety of flight. I am paid for my judgement. If in my concern a passenger represents a safety risk...and this one did at the time, then that judgement is final...even the CEO understood that...and didn't question it. His advice to his good friend? Calm down and listen to the pilot.

Had you been there, of course, doubtless your unbridled wisdom might have merited some say in the matter. You were not, of course, and you do not. Enough said on that.

Wireless
9th Sep 2008, 18:31
Pilots are human beings, and therefore will behave in this way too (it would be statistically remarkable if they didn't) - they will also exhibit a full range of other human behaviors, including, of course, all of the positive ones. Since FA's, Engineers, passengers and indeed everybody is also human, the same is true all round. You can find good and bad everywhere you look - attempting to draw any kind of conclusion from what is seen will usually be fruitless.

The overwhelming, massive majority of Flight & Cabin Crew are pleasant, skilled and well intentioned people, anxious to do a good job for their customers. A minority, of variable size, is probably unsuited to the job. The trick, for us, when dealing with passengers, is always to treat as you would wish to be treated yourself, and to remember that most people are pleasantly disposed and will remain so if dealt with courteously and intelligently. The trick for passengers, when dealing with Airline staff, is to do the same.


I think Tightslot has summed it up. We have to be pleasant to security just as pax after being made to walk around in socks and feel like right old plums (mine normally have holes in too when it happens) so it all goes around :O

apaddyinuk
9th Sep 2008, 18:34
I commute between DUB and LHR before and after every duty so as a passenger as much as I am a crew member I see it all! I have seen fellow commuters (in uniform) chatting away or reading newspapers during the demo, I also have seen fellow commuters (in uniform) engaged in a conversation with fellow passengers actually make a point of stopping the conversation for the duration of the demo! So all in all its very relative to the individuals in question.

At the end of the day no airline controls its employees personalities and an interview is not a fail safe way of weeding those with the wrong personality out!

remarkablebean
9th Sep 2008, 18:42
Good Guppy!

In my top ten is a family of 4 going to Punta Cana, constantly being a pain in the butt in the cabin, almost disruptive to the point of no return (but calmed down after it was explained what would happen to them). Please remember we're there to operate safely from A to B - and cabin disruption to the level this lot were engaged in, I perceive as a very serious safety threat. Calmed, we proceed as planned to the DR.

The father of the troop on leaving told me I should have gone around (where I wondered), yelling at me the service was sh*t (it is a charter after all - no foie gras starters), he'd had a better flight on Angolan something or other (and survived), the movies were crap, and then capped it all by falling down the stairs onto the ramp.

Shame. Happy holidays buddy.

P.S. Paddy also makes a good point. In uniform commuting we all represent our employers/aviation professionals like it or not. Best behaviour required, otherwise we can't really show our disdain here or in the real world, can we ?

Wireless
9th Sep 2008, 18:58
Mmmm. Regarding getting through the net character wise. I agree to a certain extent that's true in lots of walks of life. However...

The Airline Industry is an odd fish. The Industry is one of the most tested and regulated there is. More so by far than the medical profession, if you believe what they teach you every year in CRM! Now. I'm not just talking about Pilot procedural, flying and Emergency training. We're assessed, in action, on line flights in EVERY ASPECT. Including how we act as personnel representing the position we hold within the company under public gaze. There's no faking this, even outside a line check. Sooner or later, any crew member who gives gives cause for concern about how they carry themselves during work, be it safety related or simply how they act around the paying passengers, will be picked up on. If not during a check flight then because any crew member worth his salt who has a genuine concern about someone will express it. It is the culture we work in, and it works. I'm proud of how flippin' good this industry is of looking at itself in an almost obsessive introspective way. So, yes, as humans the Character side will show and there will be lapses. E.G, the skipper talking during the demo, but I bet that skipper although he made a mistake in setting a bad example, will certainly be heavily checked and examined and will be ready when it comes to the crunch to take care if anything untoward happens.

remarkablebean
9th Sep 2008, 19:29
If we didn't give a crap we wouldn't be crafting diplomatic responses in "arrogant posters": we'd just tell everyone we don't like the sound of to go :mad: themselves and sit nicely. The perception of Joe and Josephine Public evidently matters a lot to us.

Wireless - well said too.

G SXTY
10th Sep 2008, 00:13
Like most professional pilots, I'm more than happy to answer questions from passengers and enthusiasts. I love it when people take an interest in my job and how I do it. Unfortunately however, a few people (and it is only a few) seem unable to accept the answers we give them. It can get a little wearing when we take the time to explain a concept or procedure, only to be cross-examined by someone who clearly has very little knowledge of the subject matter. Who knows, maybe some people just like to argue, but this thread is a 5 star gold-plated example:

http://www.pprune.org/passengers-slf-self-loading-freight/336582-ryanair-pilots-what-wrong-landings.html

The original poster wanted to know why Ryanair landings were harder than other airlines'. Several of us tried to explain that they are not, and any perceived hardness is due to the undercarriage design of the 737-800. The OP wouldn't have it. Note the same questions being asked over and over again, and note also the gradually rising level of frustration as people without any technical or operational qualifications persist in arguing the toss. Possession an airline gold card or 1,000hrs in MS Flightsim does not qualify one as an authority on how to land an airliner.

At the end of the day, this is a professional pilots' website, founded by a professional pilot for the benefit of other professional pilots and wannabes. Pax and enthusiasts are welcomed, and generally treated with patience and courtesy, but in return I would expect the courtesy of being listened to when I answer a question. If I'm not extended that courtesy, then - depending on the time of day, the state of my roster and the amount of red wine I've consumed - I may get a little ratty. I don't think I'm arrogant, just human.

Wireless
10th Sep 2008, 00:44
Reading that Ryanair thread makes one's bloody pressure rise and patience dwindle!

Well said G-SXTY. Can't say fairer than that!:D

Final 3 Greens
10th Sep 2008, 05:15
G-SXTY

I would suggest that the originator of that thread was probably aged about 13 3/4 :}

Please note that a good number of the FQTV SLFs (also regular posters in this forum) did support the pilots on that thread and were also surprised by the OPs inability to digest the very helpful explanations posted by a number of people who knew what they were talking about.

G SXTY
10th Sep 2008, 10:08
I had my suspicions . . .

Like I said it's only a small minority, and that's why I can still be bothered to post on here at 1am (nothing to do with a knackered body clock, honest). In any group of people you'll get the odd prat or two - we tend to forget the hundreds of passengers that are polite and courteous, while remembering the occasional clever sod who announces (and I quote) "that pilot landed at the wrong angle" or "there was no need for a landing like that, they get paid enough money."

C'est la vie. :)

Romeo India Xray
10th Sep 2008, 11:47
Talking about unwelcome/uneducated comments, was SLF with Mrs RIX right at the back of a 733 - During the flight a 30 something year old guy was waiting next to us for the toilet at the time when Mrs RIX was asking me about the noise of escaping air. My explanation included outflow valves, natural seepage etc. 30yo (drunkish) guy then decided to chirp up about how I didn't know anything, this plane is pressurised.

Classic......

Mrs RIX turned to me and said "Darling, how many of the 38 aircraft types you have flown have been pressurised?" :D

PilotsPal
10th Sep 2008, 12:27
This recurring point concerning passengers who time and time again trot out the old cliche ("I pay your wages" etc etc). Is there not more revenue to be earned from the non-self loading freight in the hold these days - low cost airlines excepted I guess.

DeRodeKat
10th Sep 2008, 20:26
I passenger a lot. I sit there in horror watching people holding up papers during the safety briefing, reading, wiping kids noses, looking out of the window etc, while the cabin crew gamely go through the full briefing pantomime. They don't even look around and clock the nearest exit! These people I would call fools, idiots, twerps. It's something that could save your life. They fulfil the definition of those words. Come the time they actually need the emergency equipment in anger, they are confused sheep! 'What do I do with the oxygen mask?' 'Do I pull it, untangle it, stand up and breath into it?' 'Where's my nearest exit?' And as for Hadow seeing to his son first? Such people shouldn't be allowed out without a helmet on with a message on it 'please take care of me because I'm a bit stupid!'.I passenger a lot too. For this reason I do not listen to the safety briefing because I know it by hard. As do a lot of other people on board. But I also do know where the emergency exit is. Always have a look while boarding.
On the other hand, totally agree with you: lots and lots of stupid comments by non-specialists in the professional sections of the forum

SNS3Guppy
10th Sep 2008, 21:03
I passenger a lot too. For this reason I do not listen to the safety briefing because I know it by hard. As do a lot of other people on board. But I also do know where the emergency exit is. Always have a look while boarding.


Who cares if you know it by heart? Do you ignore the takeoff briefing because you know it by heart, too?

The flight attendant as a qualified crewmember is providing a briefing...and you as a qualified crewmember ought to be paying attention. Whether you're part of that crew or not.

Personally, I remove the briefing card, open it up, and give the flight attendant my full attention during the briefing. It's good practice regardless of who is watching, and a good example to those around you.

justawanab
11th Sep 2008, 06:42
I passenger a lot too. For this reason I do not listen to the safety briefing because I know it by hard.What a stupidly arrogant attitude ... even more so if you are crew! :ugh:
I don't travel too much but I can still probably give a fair representation of a safety briefing, but the first thing I always do after stowing my carry on and doing up my seatbelt is to reach for the safety card, which I then read cover to cover. I then conscientiously watch and listen to the safety briefing. How am I to know that one day they may choose to change something significant? How am I to know that the one thing that sticks in my head this time around might be the one thing I need to know to save my life ... or the one minor item that I forgot isn't going to be the one that kills me or the person next to me?

Der absolute Hammer
11th Sep 2008, 07:53
Always pay attention during briefing. It is rude not to and you would be damned fool if you missed something.
You see, one thing that all passengers seem to not look at is what happens if their nearest Emergency Exit is blocked or unserviceable.
One always needs to check the next nearest, as well as the life jacket in place.
I also of long habit, always check and see if the the pax in the nearest EEs are drinking a lot of alcohol. Stupid neurosis? Perhaps, but I like to know who I have to help or maybe hysterical confused, deal with in emergency. Also, dangerous to say, but - always make mental assessment of cabin crew. Also check positions of fire extinguishers and smoke hoods. Not my job but I like to know.
So, is that arrogant? Perhaps, but the cabin crew are safer flying with me than with most!
(You can call that arrogant !)

DeRodeKat
11th Sep 2008, 08:08
What a stupidly arrogant attitude ... even more so if you are crew!Hey, guys, cool down a bit, OK? I am not a crew (unfortunately) by I am a frequent flier. I did listened to the briefings carefully some 10 - 15 years ago. But I flew often on major European carriers (LH, KLM, AirFrance, Austrian) and I had learned it by hard. I have found that there is no real difference between the airlines in terms of safety procedures. Moreover, nothing has really changed in those procedures in the past 10 - 15 years. Sorry, I am wrong: all flights has become non-smoking; and, lately, you are obliged keep your seat belt fast during the whole flight. Although I do not REALLY listen to the safety briefing, I can still hear whether there is anything new appeared there. And if I am flying 3 legs? 3 airplanes - 3 same briefings. Do you want me to listen attentively to all of them?
Regarding the show, I know how to fasten the seat belt and how to pull the oxygen mask and how to put the life vest on. So, I watch it really occasionally, mostly if the hostess is pretty :).

Globaliser
11th Sep 2008, 09:07
And if I am flying 3 legs? 3 airplanes - 3 same briefings. Do you want me to listen attentively to all of them?Yes, please. For the same reason that (as pointed out above) I want all of the crew to attend to their briefings meticulously, even though they know them off by heart even better than you do. And you should give yourself your own briefing on final approach as well. The reason is the same: You want everything to be absolutely fresh in your mind at the precise instant that you need it. There is no better way than doing a proper briefing.

DeRodeKat
11th Sep 2008, 09:41
OK, OK. Globaliser, you have convinced me. From now on I am going to be more attentive. Still hoping that I will never get into the real thing, though;)

Abusing_the_sky
11th Sep 2008, 10:33
Regarding the show, I know how to fasten the seat belt and how to pull the oxygen mask and how to put the life vest on. So, I watch it really occasionally, mostly if the hostess is pretty

A: with all due respect, it is not a show; you want a show go to the theater instead of being in my a/c (yes, i meant to be arrogant)
B: You know how to fasten your seatbelt and pull the oxygen mask and don on your life jacket, well done; however, may i suggest another reason why you should watch the safety demo: say last week you were in an a/c and you know the life jacket is underneath your seat. This week you jump in the same a/c (you think, because it's the same airline) and you're sure your life jacket is underneath your seat. You ignore the safety demo because "you know it by hard". Ah, but what you don't know is that in this a/c, the life jacket is in the panel above your head. It's the same manufacturer but newer series so the LJ's are stowed above your head. Just a simple example really, in case the sh!t hits the fan.
C: again, with all due respect, it doesn't really matter if the hostie is pretty or not; maybe the ugly one at the back will be the one who saves your behind should an emergency arise.

Sorry, got carried away. Back to do the safety demo now.

Rgds,
ATS

plumponpies
11th Sep 2008, 10:42
Listening to the safety brief apart from being important its also good manners!
Its not a big ask to stop what your doing for 2 minutes and pay attention.

VS-LHRCSA
11th Sep 2008, 10:57
Regarding the show, I know how to fasten the seat belt and how to pull the oxygen mask and how to put the life vest on. So, I watch it really occasionally, mostly if the hostess is pretty

Therein lies the problem. The word 'hostess' does not belong in aviation. They are cabin crew, cabin attendants or flight attendants and they are not to be 'looked at' they are there for your safety.

Final 3 Greens
11th Sep 2008, 12:17
they are not to be 'looked at' they are there for your safety.

In which case why are there strict dress codes applied?

They should wear tracksuits or similar clothing that are more practical in emergencies.

Too many absolutes get quoted on this BB.

Lookleft
11th Sep 2008, 12:41
For the same reason people generally wear business attire when they are at work. It projects an image and that image in an aircraft is one of professionalism and authority. For all those who travel as SLF the survival stats favour those who have paid attention during the brief and have some idea of what to do if the worst happens.

G SXTY
11th Sep 2008, 13:58
Oh dear.

I know the take off emergency brief off by heart and I can recite the engine failure drill from memory. I hear it every day I go flying, but when the other guy briefs me I put down the paperwork and listen to what he has to say. As others have said, it keeps it fresh and will save me valuable thinking time should we ever have a real emergency.

Few things wind me up as much as pax who can't be bothered to listen to the safety demo.

DeRodeKat
11th Sep 2008, 14:10
For all those who travel as SLF the survival stats favour those who have paid attention during the brief and have some idea of what to do if the worst happens.

How do you know? Give me a link to that stats, please. I still believe it is mainly a matter of luck. Sorry. I do understand the importance of the briefing and all the safety procedures but you clearly exaggerate it here.

ford cortina
11th Sep 2008, 14:49
It really makes my blood boil when I travel as pax and sit next to people ignoring safety briefings. Recently I flew back from Brussels and as a matter of course always count the number of rows between me and the exit. The guy next to me thought was mad and found it funny, so I explained to him if we has a fire on the ground and had to evacuate, I would know exactly how many rows I would have to crawl on the floor till I got to the exit. I also suggested that he not try to grab on to any of my clothing in this event as I would be more concerned of getting out of a smoke filled aircraft.
He watched the safety briefing, even turned his Laptop off and Blackberry as well.
I fly the 737 both Classic and NG and know the door exit opening by heart, but I always read the card and listen to the briefing, just in case.
I hope that those of you that know better than me are never between me and a door on that day, as I will go over you.

Der absolute Hammer
11th Sep 2008, 15:10
A Ford Cortina go over a Mercedes Benz.
HA!
My towel is the one on the exit!

ford cortina
11th Sep 2008, 15:15
DAH, yeah okay mate, but at least I know how to open the door.....

BTW I don't own a MB just a BMW Coupe.

BladePilot
11th Sep 2008, 15:20
DaH like your post. Ford Cortina good advice about counting the rows.

The publication 'Nuts' about Southwest Airlines is a great read. two chapters in particular which unfotunately can't be published here due to copyright laws.
Chapter 19 'Customers Come Second' (and still get great service)
Chapter 20 'Employees Come first' (great service begins at home)

Before you ask no I don't work for Southwest Airlines and no I am not on commission for pushing the book!

We Came
We Saw
We kicked Tail

Once deperated out of LHR on a very stormy night and as we taxied to the holding point the Captain took the time to say a few comforting words.

'we expect it to be a little rough during take-off so please listen carefully to the cabin crews safety briefing, check your seatbelt is fastened tightly and ensure you are aware of your surroundings and the location of the nearest emergency exit'! a bit unorthodox but it certainly got everyones attention! never heard a cabin so quiet and not a newspaper in sight!

anotherglassofwine
11th Sep 2008, 16:42
Rainboe has hit the nail on the head way back in post 42.

I've been a frequent visitor to this site the past 5 years. Everytime I have had a question it has been answered politely and in all cases by the appropriately qualified people.
I do think a lot of the issues mentioned in these threads are related to the rumours and news forum. I have never and probably will never post in an accident thread. I'm not qualified to throw my opinion in there. I frequently read these threads and can completely understand why some of the pros get annoyed and short with posts. Of all the industrys out there, it appears aviation has the most wannabes/so called experts/armchair quarterbacks of them all. I'm not sure why this is. The danger here is that pprune is often quoted in the media - and some of the posters haven't a clue what they are talking about. Furthermore, it appears to me that most newbies don't bother using the search before posting.. I think i've seen that dog barking in the a320 thread about 100 times!
The point is, this site was setup for Professional pilots and we as pax are indeed very lucky to have access to such a resource. We are being accomodated and I for one am grateful for that.
So if there is the odd tetchy reply - in most cases I think you will find it is warranted.
In my student days I had the pleasure of cleaning Aer Lingus aircraft during the summer holidays. Believe me, once you've cleaned a Futura charter in from gran Canaria, you get a good sense of what Cabin Crew have to deal with day in day out. After a saturday night shift in Dub I lregularly left the ramp thinking all pax were filthy lowlife scum!
Give the good folks a break - forums are a healthy way to let off a bit of steam.

AGOW

SNS3Guppy
11th Sep 2008, 18:37
How do you know? Give me a link to that stats, please. I still believe it is mainly a matter of luck. Sorry. I do understand the importance of the briefing and all the safety procedures but you clearly exaggerate it here.


Passengers such as yourself are a big part of the reason that crew might have some contept for the passenger; willful ignorance. Whether you believe it's "luck" or not, the briefing is being given by those who know and believe otherwise, and who are required by law to provide that briefing. Once you buy a ticket on that flight, you agree to the premise that you will follow and obey the directions of the crew who hold authority on that flight. You're subject to the direction of the crew, whether you like it or not. That direction starts with a simple briefing which is not entertainment, is not for your pleasure, but to save your life and the lives of those around you.

Let's say that as the cabin floods you panic and forget that you shouldn't inflate your vest until outside the cabin. I've seen it happen, even in training in dunk tanks and in the water...people in a hurry to fall back on basic instinct...they inflate the vest. Now you're bulky, now you have a hard time making it to the exit, and if the cabin is really flooding, you're held back by the boyant vest...and you're blocking everyone else. Not only will you likely drown, but also the people you're blocking...your ignorance and disbelief has just killed someone. Possibly a lot of someone's.

You flew on a Boeing last. Now you're on an airbus. You like the overwing exit aisle; it's got foot room. A rejected takeoff, there's a fire. Time to go. You didn't review the briefing; you know it by heart. But it's not in the forefront of your mind...the real reason it's given every time...and now you're trying to open the door the wrong way. Does this one flip up and out? Is it a door I set in the seat, or twist and throw out? I know it by heart...but how does this one work?

You're seated at the back of the airplane, in a DC-9. Just after takeoff you feel a roll and a drop and a bang, and next thing everyone is screaming and clambering as the aircraft shakes, smoke enters the cabin, masks and luggage drop, the fuselage starts to roll, and a bright orange glow is seen off one side of the airplane. As the aircraft comes to a rest, you've seen it all, heard it all, know it all...now it's all on you, the expert traveler who won't listen unless it's a pretty girl, to get the exit open. Do you know how to do that? Do you know how to jettison the tailcone? It's different on this airplane...but you know that because you're an expert traveler that doesn't need to listen, right? Or will an airplane full or terrified passengers die behind you as you try to figure outs, the exit in the dark, in the smoke, and on fire?

The aircraft floats, but as you go out the exit and into the cold water, looking for a raft that another passenger who didn't bother to listen was unable to inflate...you find that you successfully brought your seat cushion with you as a flotation device. Good for you. Except everyone else is wearing a life vest, and you're not. You didn't listen...this airplane was equipped with life vests and you're the only one who's going to be floating holding on to a water logged seat cushion for the next six hours. Way to go.

You've heard it before, you know that when the captain turns on the fasten seatbelts sign, you should put it on...but let's get real. You've had hundreds, if not thousands of hours in flight without any problem. How bad could it be, right? They wouldn't have served coffee and soda if it was going to be bad, right? Never mind that turbulence can slam you against the ceiling and break your back or neck, or throw you right out of your seat...you don't need to listen to the briefing or the cabin anouncements...you're smarter and more experienced than the crew, the manufacturer, the airline, the experts who wrote the briefing cards and the briefings...all of them. After all, you're a passenger.

Sure, in the briefing they tell you no smoking in the lavatory...but it's one cigarette, and you know that the airflow goes out the toilet...so what's wrong with that? Right? Other than fatalities that have resulted from not listening. Other than your impending arrest. Other than a crew getting an alarm and diverting to another airport. But you don't worry about it. You've heard the briefings, and it's all just a show, anyway. Right?

You can use your cell phone. The crew wouldn't know the difference. You're just texting your buddy to tell him you'll be late...as always...because the stupid airline can't seem to get you there on time. They wasted time with the briefing...which you know by heart...instead of getting the show on the road and getting you here. It's their fault, so you're justified in using your phone, right? Never mind that we can hear it in the cockpit over our headphones (you didn't know that, did you?), that it can interfere with navigational equipment and electronics (didn't know that either, did you?), and that there's a reason you're told in the briefing to turn it off.

We've come to a rest, but the cabin is full of smoke. They're calling for an evacuation, or something like that...don't really know because you don't listen to the cabin announcements...it's all just a show anyway...but there's so much smoke, eyes are burning, choking, must breathe. Can't see the exits now, which way is the front of the airpalne? Everybody is pushing and shoving, can't see the seats. Too much smoke. Everybody's fighting to go some direction, and some are crawling over the seatbacks. Every man for himself. They didn't listen to the briefing either. How to find an exit? Never mind that this aircraft has lighted floor signals directing you to an exit...that was in the brieifing...but that's all just for show.

The aircraft has come to a complete stop. Don't know what was wrong, but everyone's moving for the exites. We've been told to evacuate the airplane...gotta get that brief case. It's got important papers in it. Everyone else can wait two ticks...this is important. You're not going to let it burn up in the airplane. Yes, the briefing told you to leave all your belongings behind and proceed to the nearest exit, but not you. You don't need someone who's just there to look pretty and put on a show telling you how to do business; you're an expert, and a veteran traveller. You're going to take your bag with you. Possibly cut open the slide on the way down, possibly get stuck in the door way. Possibly have to discard it when the flight attendant takes it from you by the exit to expedite your egress (to save your life, you see)...but it's all about you. You're taking back the authority granted to the crew and keeping it for yourself. You know more than anyone else. You didn't listen to the briefing, don't want to hear it. You're taking your things and that's it. Too bad someone will die because the slide was punctured, or you were too slow in the door with your things, or others saw you grabbing your things and followed your poor example and did the same...but at least you'll have your bags and briefcase.

Sure, the briefing always tells you to put your tray tables and seatbacks in an upright position. Yeah, yeah, yeah. Heard it all before, yesterdays' news. Don't need to hear it again. Come on, for crying out loud. It's just a few inches of seat travel, it's not going to be the end of the world if you forget, right? Never mind that your seat was designed for impact with the seatback upright and locked, or that the tray table could do irreparable damage to you, or that your seat being back might prevent an egress by the people behind you, or that there may be any number of other reasons for it...you don't believe it, you think it's all for show, and you know more, right?

Wrong. You committed to listening to the briefing when you bought your ticket, and you committed to honoring and following that briefing as part of your contract with the airline as a passenger; it comes with the ticket. Your failure to listen carefully and obey places everyone at risk.

Now, as a veteran traveller you don't need to listen. We get it. You know more than anyone else. And you demand statistics to prove there's some reason you should listen. I'm not going to give you statistics. I will tell you that I'm a traveller too, as well as a reasonably experienced pilot and crewmember. I've had the additional benefit of emergency training, on aircraft and other venues...as this isn't my only career path. I was a firefighter for years, dealing with emergencies ranging from car fires to structure fires to extricating people who were trapped. I've been in the real thing many times, burning cars, burning aircraft, burning houses. I was a medic, and have been in the real situation on plenty of occasions where lives really do depend on doing what one is told. As a pilot I've been in an air crash, and I can tell you it's NOT academic, and certainly NOT a show. I've been in dunk tanks, been through company training in the water, putting out fires...all the hands-on training. I've been an instructor. I've been instructed. I hold multiple pilot, crew, and mechanic certificates, and have been around airplanes since I was a kid, mostly employed to fly them and work on them and protect them.

Know what? Every time I get on the airplane as a passenger...any airplane from a Cessna to a Boeing to an Airbus...I listen to the briefing, very carefully. I give my full attention, every bit of it. I remove the safety briefing card and read it. I reach for and feel for the life vest. Make sure my seat is upright, my cell off, and I count the seatbacks to every exit in the airplane so I can find them without looking. I note the distances as well as the obstacles, and make a note of how to do it if the aircraft is upside down and I'm on the ceiling. I make sure my seat belt isn't twisted, note the oxygen cover panels on the ceiling, ensure everything is secured and under the seat in front...and I pay attention. Even if it's multiple legs in one day. Perhaps you're such a veteran that you don't need to do these things...perhaps you know more than I do, more than the crew does, more than the flight attendant who is paid to be there to save your life, more than the airline, more than airbus or boeing or the company that wrote your safety briefing card, more than the designers of the airplane and the emergency equipment that's in it...but I really don't think so.

When I was eighteen and crop dusting, I flew behind a man who had been operating the same three airplanes for the last fifteen years. The airplanes were seemingly identical, save for the color of their paint. We had a yellow one, an orange one, and a blue one. Lain flew the blue one, except for today. He would be in the yellow airplane. As we held short of the runway doing our runup, Lain took extra time, and I grew impatient. I asked about the holdup. Finally when he was ready, we went flying. He took off, I took off, and we went to the fields.

Lain flew a little wider turns, not quite as aggressive, and I followed his lead. When we got back, I asked him what took so long. He told me that even though the airplane was seemingly identical, and even though he'd been flying the same airplanes for fifteen years and many thousands of hours, he recognized that he was intimately familiar with the blue airplane...and now was in a different airframe. It might stall a little differently, fly a little differently; bottom line, even though he was certainly an expert, he took nothing for granted, and took a little more time to familiarize himself, brief himself if you will, on the "new" airplane...the one he'd already flown for thousands of hours and many years. Perhaps it's just experience that teaches some of us that we don't know it all, that care and caution are prudent, and that a briefing really is worth something.

Here, we talk about arrogant pilots, but what I'm reading about are arrogant passengers...one who knows it all, has seen it all, and doesn't need the "show" or the repetition. I can tell you I haven't seen it all yet, but I can guarantee I've seen a whole lot more than you. I find it very important to sit and listen to the briefing each and every time. What's your excuse, again?

Final 3 Greens
11th Sep 2008, 19:31
For the same reason people generally wear business attire when they are at work. It projects an image and that image in an aircraft is one of professionalism and authority. For all those who travel as SLF the survival stats favour those who have paid attention during the brief and have some idea of what to do if the worst happens.

Sorry, but the airlines have constantly used "sex" to promote their services.

The poster made a comment that inferred s/he liked looking at the attractive crew members.

If survival safety was the ONLY consideration, the crew would be wearing nomex clothing oriented to that consideration.

e.g. grobags, not skirts.................

My point is that people on this board make naively realistic and absolute utterances which are complete b@llocks.

Of course the cabin crew are trained in safety and BA038 is an example of great work when confronted by an unbriefed and unexpected situation - my hat is off the that cabin crew :ok:

But to make absolute statements that the crew is there for safety only and not for the passengers comfort or indeed to be easy on the eye is patently the opinion of someone incapable of grown up thinking.

PS: for the avoidance of doubt, please give a clear and unambiguous definition of "business attire"

SNS3Guppy
11th Sep 2008, 19:41
FTG,

You may be tilting at semantics there. The primary purpose, the reason for being, and the whole reason for being in the cabin by the cabin crew is safety.

Airlines use the cabin crew for additional services and benefits; they attend to the passengers and are thus flight attendants. However, the only mandatory reason they're present, and the entire reason they're required, is safety of flight. Neither the FAA, nor CAA, nor any other regulatory body demands the use of flight attendants as a cabin accessory or decoration...the flight attendants are there for the benefit and safety of the passengers.

The training of a flight attendant with respect to egress, fire, safety, and security isn't just an extra thing that waitresses and fashion models are taught. Rather, it's the core of what they do. It's the meat and potatoes of being a flight attendant. Serving sandwiches and drinks is the fluff...it's something they do when there's time...but it's not the reason they're on board.

Certainly airlines have at times sought to capitalize on the asthetic benifits of the flight attendant. However, if you travel very widely you'll find that internationally this isn't the case. In fact, I see more middle aged and older frumpy and reasonably unattractive flight attendants these days than I see sex symbols...and I see a lot of male flight attendants, too. When it comes to the safety briefing, of course, I don't care what their appearance; they get my full attention and support all the same.

The flight attendant is NOT eye candy, and is far more than a waitress that gives a briefing at the start of the flight. A nurse in a hospital may bring a patient a drink, but is a trained and experienced medical professional who performs additional, menial duties in addition to important life-saving ones. The same can be said of the flight attendant. If the flight attendant is attractive, one may certainly appreciate it, but it's really irrelevant.

Final 3 Greens
11th Sep 2008, 19:52
Guppy

The primary purpose, the reason for being, and the whole reason for being in the cabin by the cabin crew is safety.

You need to get out more.

There you are asking how a poster knew he was in an aircraft at 36,500 ft when everyone knows BA has airshow and now you don't know that BA make an announcement that "The cabin crew are here MAINLY for your safety."

Serving sandwiches and drinks is the fluff...it's something they do when there's time...but it's not the reason they're on board.

Its called providing customer service and it is part of the reason they are on board, if they weren't we pax would travel with another carrier.

Time for you to take another load of rubber dog turds out to HK and leave those of us who spend a lot of time in the cabin who know what we are talking about to reconcile the fact that highly trained and capable crew also serve a customer service function for the majority of the time ALTHOUGH THEY PERFORM MAGNIFICENTLY LIKE THE CREW ON BA038 WHEN NECESSARY

Atishoo
11th Sep 2008, 20:01
For Rainboe..........

The way I see it, polite enquiries receive informative, courteous answers.

Like when i first joined Pprune and asked a question about a really scary bumpy flight i had just endured. (bearing in mind i am NOT A PILOT) so was totally clueless as to what I was experiencing. I seem to remember a less courteous answer. ;)

And I was being polite :{

SNS3Guppy
11th Sep 2008, 20:05
You need to get out more.

There you are asking how a poster knew he was in an aircraft at 36,500 ft when everyone knows BA has airshow and now you don't know that BA make an announcement that "The cabin crew are here MAINLY for your safety."


I guess that would make you one of the arrogant posters, wouldn't it? Just what we love...arrogant passengers. Would you care to tell me about how you pay my wage, too?

I spent a fair amount of time riding from A to B as a passenger. I don't believe I've ever been on a British Airways flight, however...hence my query as to what means the poster was using to determine his flight level. He may have been using a handheld GPS, you see...many do...and asking a simple question was necessary in order to know how to best answer his question...without the arrogance you seem to embrace.

Its called providing customer service and it is part of the reason they are on board, if they weren't we pax would travel with another carrier.

Time for you to take another load of rubber dog turds out to HK and leave those of us who spend a lot of time in the cabin who know what we are talking about to reconcile the fact that highly trained and capable crew also serve a customer service function for the majority of the time ALTHOUGH THEY PERFORM MAGNIFICENTLY LIKE THE CREW ON BA038 WHEN NECESSARY


Hmmm...I don't believe I've ever flown "rubber dog turds," though I suppose it's possible. I do get in and out of Hong Kong with some frequency, however.

You are an arrogant one, I'll give you that. I suppose as a passenger you would know much more than a trained, practicing, professional crewmember who's been doing this his entire life...thank you so much for your invaluable experience and insight. What would we do without you? I can't help but feel that our training is remiss without your guidance there to set us all straight. Would you perhaps consider blessing us all with the benefit of your expertise as a passenger to come tell us how to do our jobs? At your convenience, of course.

Services that a flight attendant may provide with respect to passenger comfort are in addition to, and over and above their primary function as safety specialists. The regulatory agencies that require them to be on board, and set specific requirements regarding just how many must be on board, do so based on safety in flight and on the ground. Not on how many crumb cakes can be served per hour or how much coffee might flow through a given size filter...and certainly not on the hemline or length of a skirt.

Final 3 Greens
11th Sep 2008, 20:14
I don't pay your wages or any other pilots.

I pay airlines a considerable amount of money as the person in my company who controls the corporate account.

Its up to them how they spend it.

If you can't figure out how cabin crew differentiate one airline from another, then I won't waste too much time on the concept.

Let me just try one simple metaphor....

Airline A employs ex Soviet bloc, NCO trained weightlifters and discus throwers, with limited language capabilities and constrained personalities as cabin crew - they are very well trained in their role and can be relied on for cool heads and adherence to SOPs in the event of an emergency.

Airline B employs degree educated, personable, multi lingual cabin crew, with individual personalities, who express themselves and interact with passengers, providing a really nice customer experience - they are very well trained in their role and can be relied on for cool heads and adherence to SOPs in the event of an emergency.

Which airline would be likely to attract more pax?

Final 3 Greens
11th Sep 2008, 20:20
Before anyone comments about airline A above, they are not meant to represent any particular carrier :}

yellowdog
11th Sep 2008, 22:11
"But to make absolute statements that the crew is there for safety only and not for the passengers comfort or indeed to be easy on the eye is patently the opinion of someone incapable of grown up thinking."

My opinion of you has just gone through the roof:eek:

What an obscene, stupid arrogant comment! I give you that we as cabin crew are there for your comfort, and I am happy with that. But to say that they are there to be easy on the eye:mad:

Does that mean you travel on my flights as I am male?

Get into the 21st century:yuk:

BelArgUSA
11th Sep 2008, 22:44
Well, I sometimes travel as SLF too.
If on my airline, the crew knows me, I do not listen to the briefing...
I do not read the evacuation card, especially for "my type" (747)...
xxx
When I travel with other air carriers, of course they do not know I am a pilot.
I listen to their briefing (often) and (often) read the evacuation card.
Particularly if is a type I am not too familiar with - Airbus...
This to compare to "ours" - to see if "theirs" are better.
xxx
SUGGESTION - if you want to be arrogant...
(1) LISTEN to their briefing and compare to your expert knowledge of briefings.
(2) READ the evacuation card (and compare), see if it is for this aircraft type.
Look for an error, or discrepancy... then growl...
xxx
Not too long ago, in Europe, I was SLF with airline "x", a 737-300, and had taken the evacuation card in hand to "compare" to "ours"... when I came to notice that it said "737-400" in the corner (showed 4 overwing exits rather than the 2 exits on a 737-300)... I was sitting in the overwing area, and could see this was a 300, not a 400...
xxx
Then I realized that ALL the evacuation cards in the seatback pockets indicated "737-400" around me... But I am not arrogant... After landing, I presented my business card "captain" - "airline" - "747" to the captain, a very nice gentleman, and mentioned the 737-400 cards located in a 737-300... He said... "yes, I know... our airline ran out of the 300 cards last week, they are supposed to be delivered end of the week, apparently this was approved by our director of operations..."
xxx
I could see the captain to be a little embarrassed - but I WAS NOT ARROGANT, NOR WAS HE... he and I knew it was a minor detail. After all, who are the people who steal evacuation cards as souvenirs...? Must certainly be other crewmembers... SLFs would never steal evacuation cards for their collection.
xxx
:E
Happy contrails

Final 3 Greens
12th Sep 2008, 04:57
Yellowdog

I think that you miss my point completely.

It is about how the airlines over the years have dressed and presented cabin crew and also how the cabin service differentiates one airline from another.

When industry posters say that crew are their for safety ONLY, this is clearly not the way the airlines wish the pax to see it, although I say again that I know the crew are trained to respond and deal with emergencies - the evacuation of BA038 reflects great credit on the BA crew.

Let me ask you this question, who would the average pax rather fly with on a transatlantic, given prices are similar (as that probbly drives most purchasing decisions)

- United, without food

- another airline, with food included

Is providing food a safety or comfort function?

I am assuming here that the cabin crew will be equally well trained at the safety aspect of their role.

Do I travel on your flights? Maybe, that depends who your employer is.

You'll recognise me if you do, as I am the quiet middle aged guy in business class who listens carefully to the briefing, very rarely asks you for anything, is polite and pleasant and spends most of the flight reading or using a laptop (in accordance with the airline rules), from which you may deduce I do not much care what age, sex, height/weight etc the crew are.

It was another poster who said he liked looking at the crew, not me :ugh:

marchino61
12th Sep 2008, 05:17
For anyone who thinks that no airline uses FAs as eye candy, I have two words: Singapore Air.

Final 3 Greens
12th Sep 2008, 06:20
Thank you Marchino061.

My point exactly, the key concept being "airlines use."

baftabill
12th Sep 2008, 07:11
From BA website:

Whatever we say, we'll never convince some people that working in Cabin Crew isn't all about jetting around the world and staying in exotic hotels. The truth is, it's about delivering outstanding customer service in all conditions. At its most fundamental level, we are responsible for passenger safety in the cabin. Beyond that, crews share a common goal - to see British Airways customers walk away at the end of a flight contented.

TightSlot
12th Sep 2008, 08:28
SNS3Guppy - Nobody else has said it, so I will - an excellent post back there and one that I shall treasure and keep up my sleeve for the next time somebody posts about why they don't need to watch the briefing because they are so experienced (I'm afraid it is a point of view that is regularly expressed).

From sad experience, I can tell you that you are flogging a dead horse. Some people (thankfully a minority) simply refuse to accept the facts, even in the face of logic and experience. They will never change. Engaging in discussion on the subject will involve you in a frustrating exchange where anecdotal evidence is presented as factual by those who consider themselves self-appointed experts. Save yourself the pain - with a minority, you have to accept that you won't win.

I'll leave this thread running for a while - it is likely to disintegrate further from an opening post that was, frankly, never likely to promote serious discussion. For those of you that do "Get It" - please see HERE (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FNmBauXYzgc) for my favorite youtube on the subject.

marchino61
12th Sep 2008, 10:32
@tightslot - well you may think that, but I could not possibly comment ;-)

Anyway, this thread has departed way off the discussion I intended. Instead it seems to have got hung up on badly behaved passengers, FA's skirts and other flight-related things - whereas I was mostly complaining about some people's behaviour on this forum.

Funny how the airline industry is somehow so different....I have worked in many, many companies and it is accepted by all that "the customer pays our wages".

They even have signs on the wall saying that, or something like "remember the customer comes first - without the customer none of us would be here". But it seems that does not apply to airlines? The airlines pay their staff without reference to the customer? This is what some people have told me....

EDIT: Loved the Harry Enfield clip!

baftabill
12th Sep 2008, 11:16
I quite agree. Airline professionals will HATE to be told this but you are out of step with the rest of the world.

Other industries are more successful in creating a customer-focussed attitude.

It's quite right that you can be honest about the daft things people do but there is a clear line between having a justified laugh at our expense and contempt for your passengers.

It's particularly obvious in the way you treat crew who make mistakes as opposed to passengers.

On a nearby thread you will see 'morons', 'idiots', 'not good breeding material', etc etc to describe passengers.

On the other side of the coin you (quite rightly) take a learning attitude to accidents. The crew aren't 'morons', they were unfortunate that all the holes lined up. They may have made a mistake but it is important to learn from that rather than concentrate on blame.

I think it's great that people like me can real PPrune, and post. But we bring our own perspective.

I doubt if many will agree but so be it.

ford cortina
12th Sep 2008, 11:37
Guppy, class absolute class. Thanks for putting into words things I have thought about over the years.

west lakes
12th Sep 2008, 11:43
Thinking about it I look at it this way: -

There are at least two distinct and separate aspects to the workings of the industry (and others) that may not be evident in others.

Customer Service
The speed of the check in, the quality of the service, the problem solving with customer complaints relevant to these issues, the comfort level on board, the time keeping, the getting you to the destination on time.

This is also the bit that airlines/staff can influence easily

This, from memory, is often the area where positive posts appear.

But, and this is a big but, often staff directly involved are not empowered by their employers to resolve matters instantly. Though sometimes they can (see the post regarding the boarding card mix up)

Flight safety and operations
This is the bit that is governed by legislation, safety culture, operational training and knowledge.
It seems that a lot of the sharp replies appear in this area
It seems that a lot of the arguments occur in this area
It seems that a lot of untrained posters try to influence this area (that is not to say they don't have some knowledge)

As an example, whilst the mobile phone argument is undecided by the legislators, no amount of I know better, I'm a mobile phone expert etc. can change an individual airlines approach to this matter.

This bit will, in some cases I guess, will require international changes to legislation - not easy for an individual or airline to influence.

But this is the bit that causes the most grief.

You can see the arguments that are ongoing, you can also see some of the "off-beat" comments that seek to stir up trouble, you can see the "I demand an answer to this question" (in one case recently that answer had been given).

As a case in point the flaps/slats arguments.

Think it through; to be effective, every airline in the world would have to change their procedures, they would, I assume, have to have regulatory permission to do so, they would as part of that process have to prove that it would overall improve safety (OK it would prevent 2 or 3 accidents over a long period) but, in reality, I don't think a nil accident rate is actually achievable in a lot of industries.

but that is a matter for the regulators to address, not individual airline staff.

So I can see a lot of frustration in replies when, often, the same technical reasons are being given but often are still met with "but I know better that the industry attitudes".

Bear in mind also that in a lot of cases the persona you see on these forums is NOT the actual persona of the individual!

To recap, do not confuse customer service related issues with technical issues - they are poles apart.

Der absolute Hammer
12th Sep 2008, 12:17
TightSlot...............

That was wonderfully funny! Harry E is very English at their bst.
But this briefing thing is serious is it not. It becomes a one up thing too?
'I am a frequent flyer, have done this flying thing before, watch me, I am to good for to pay attention to silly cow up front doing demonstration!' ?

Maybe the CAAs issue a notice to allow this sort of a pre safety announcement announcement?........
' Dear Ladies and Gentlemen, the Civil Aviation Authority asks us to tell you, because of recent aircraft disasters, to be attentive to the safety brief.'
Also....
'Please do not inflate your life jackets inside the aircraft, otherwise you become stuck in the emergency exit and maybe drown.'

CockpitThruster
12th Sep 2008, 12:33
Great post SNS3Guppy...shame that the common sense and experience that oozes from your words seem unappreciated here. :ugh:

VAFFPAX
12th Sep 2008, 13:44
There is telling it like it is and there is being rude.

There is no need to start calling people names just because they don't know, and there is no need to get rude either. Yes, SLF are 'cattle' to the f/o up front, but really, you can bring your point across without being insulting.

It helps pax-f/c interaction a lot more if you are a little patient with the people who are asking the questions.

I personally have always thought that once you start yelling insults, you've lost the argument, and you know it.

I try to impart whatever knowledge I have without any condescending attitude, after all, I've also been there before, and who knows, I might not have known something specific either.

:-)

S.

anotherglassofwine
12th Sep 2008, 14:58
To SNS3Guppy .
Simply the best post I have read on this website.
Something that every pax should read. I had never even considered how I would exit an aircraft if it was upside down - Something I will be doing from here on in.
Thank you for that.
AGOW

radeng
12th Sep 2008, 15:10
So I'm on a BA airbus. Overwing exit, jettison door through hatch.

I'm on an Amercia West airbus. Place hatch door on seat.

Why the inconsistency?

More difficult. A319 or A320. For water landing, exit through over wing exits.

A321, all exits - presumably because of different CoG. Could confuse.

Lifejackets. Don't say that the probability of there being enough aeroplane hanging together for anyone to be able to choose how to leave is fairly remote....

As far as DC9/MD80 tail cones - they always say these are opened by a crew member. What if the crew member is incapcitated?

Lacking explanation. If oxygen masks appear, there will be a sudden descent.
why not say so?

Finally, an overdue rule. PAX ignoring the safety briefing and being unable to answer a short exam will be ejected - from whatever height the aircraft is at!

VS-LHRCSA
12th Sep 2008, 15:25
Not all airlines use sex to sell. If that were the case then why would the five airlines I've worked for over the past 20 years employ me? I certainly wouldn't feature in any airline's calendar, that's for sure.

If we're going to go down the SQ route, why not ask one of the 'Singapore Girls' what it was like trying to conduct an evacuation from a burning fuselage in TPE while wearing a tight long dress and flip flops. What disgusts me is that nearly 10 years on, the uniform hasn't changed. What if that was YOUR sister or daughter?

apaddyinuk
12th Sep 2008, 18:21
Ah, well they have changed the shoes after that accident! LOL!

I love Pam Anns send up of that accident!

Final 3 Greens
12th Sep 2008, 19:23
An open letter to industry members

West Lakes post is balanced and rational and a fair summary.

To get back on message, i.e. to understand pax bahaviour, the industry posters on the thread would do well to reflect that people are flying more than ever and the industry (quite understandably) downplays potentially scary safety matters.

For example, to get attention on the safety brief, you could show the burning wreckage of a crash and then say "if you wish to improve your changes of surviving this, listen up for the next 3 minutes."

I would agree that this is not the way to go, but why don't safety briefs include important information such as the unpleasant smell from the O2 generators when activated? I would hypothesise that this is considered to be lingering on the unpleasant for too long.

Lets be honest, a very good pitch for business would be to use airline safety records to show how safe your employers are, but this is not done, no doubt for fear of scaring the punters.

What your industry breeds are a bunch of people who mainly never experience anything worse than slight turb and regard flying as being like a bus service.

You then wonder why they don't listen to the safety brief and you are amazed that they thing they are about to die when they experience a go around or a depressurisation - they have not been informed well enough by your industry about the flying experience , yet you blame them for this.

I have not yet seen a crew memeber use their delegated authority to ask anyone to stop talking during the brief, then again I have only taken over 1,000 flights, so one day it might happen - ignoring bad behaviour is condoning bad behaviour and you are colluding in a bad situation - tell them to shut up - I'll support you.

Tell them to sit down when the belt sign is on - you seldom do and it frustrates me - furthermore they are walking past my seat and my land on me if there is abig bump - act, don't moan - I'll support you - when you let them walk past my seat with the belt sign on YOU ARE FAILING ME.

Why don't the crew brief about condensation? I sat on an Airbus last Sunday and had to reassure the person next to me who thought we might be on fire - I should not have to be doing this - I pay the airline to brief the customers, but they fail regularly in this respect, also with regard to airframe generated noise on the BAE 146/RJ, which I have had to explain many, many times - why?

Furthermore, the lectures pax get from certain cabin crew members on this board are quite bizarre.

I am not trained on your aircraft/systems and I do pay close attention to the safety brief for this reason, but equally the CAA licenses me to command an aircraft and I have had to make tough decisions with weather and systems problems, which had I screwed up would have quite probably resulted in fatalities.

So please, unless you are also a licensed aircraft commander, pay some respect for MY training and experience - it may be limited compared to SNS Guppy's and others, but it is more than many people who post here and some of the posts are quite offensive to me - I have talked with cabin crew whose lack of understanding of an aircraft was quite unbelievable - not all, but professional pilots may well know what I mean.

Finally, face the facts.

To be cabin crew, you need a few O levels (2, I believe), so you don't need to be a genius to qualify for the job.

But the best cabin crew are total ambassadors for their companies and could probably hold down very senior positions in any sector if they wished to - I fly regularly with one purser who has a PhD and is used (part time) to teach by a very well respected university. He loves his airline job and is awesome in his performance of it, I had total respect for him.

Yes, the regulators insist on having crew trained to maintain safety and I say for the 4th time TOTAL RESPCT FOR THE CREW ON BA038, WHO REACTED DECISIVELY AND PROFESSIONALLY WHEN THE CHIPS WERE DOWN AND WITH APPARENTLY NO WARNING.

However, the main part of the job ( measured by % of time spent) is providing customer service, as the BA ad posted earlier makes quite clear.

What is the problem in recognising this? Why are people posting here that the only reason the crew is on board is to provide safety?

I am sure that Michael O'Leary would agree thtat providing in flight service is crucially important, Ryanair's income is no doubt influenced by the amount of extras his crews sell, but I have seen Ryanair crew immediately drop the service and imediately provide O2 and care to a pax with a medical problem - I made a point of seeing the #1 after the flgiht and telling him what a gret job he and his team did.

So please think about what I have written.

It's your perogative to reject if you wish, but you may choose to think about pax in another way.

SNS3Guppy
13th Sep 2008, 03:31
Why don't the crew brief about condensation? I sat on an Airbus last Sunday and had to reassure the person next to me who thought we might be on fire - I should not have to be doing this - I pay the airline to brief the customers, but they fail regularly in this respect, also with regard to airframe generated noise on the BAE 146/RJ, which I have had to explain many, many times - why?


You want a ground school...go pay a flight instructor. You don't get on a bus and expect the driver to teach you how to drive. You don't hire an attorney and expect a class on civil legislation. You don't visit the doctor and expect a briefing on chemistry or biology...nor is the doctor in expectation of or willing to provide it.

You're briefed on what you need to do in an emergency. Not on how clouds form, not on the tropopause, not of the physics of turbulence or the movement of frontal boundaries. You don't get briefed on all the sounds you may hear, such as fuel pumps or hydraulic pumps, or many of the other things which go on in the airplane. We don't particularly need to explain why we've selected a particular altitude, or tell you about the proximity of other traffic in flight, or even brief you on the where the bleed air you're breathing is coming from. We brief you on safety related items that may save your life or kill you in an emergency, and you're given just enough information. Extra information just clouds the issue, can be confused with important information, and really isn't something you need to have floating around in your head as you try to recall the critical life-or-death safety instructions.

Of course, why would we bother to give a detailed explaination on oxygen generators or overwing condensation...when people like yourself can't be bothered to listen to the important parts...the safety briefing that will save your life?

Again...it appears we need you to come into the training department and school us all with your expertise. We love arrogant passengers that do that.

TightSlot
13th Sep 2008, 08:49
I'm starting to look forward to waking up and checking this thread - this time F3G comes up with a zinger of a post!

Good stuff, guys..

Final 3 Greens
13th Sep 2008, 09:47
Guppy

That last post of yours requires some response.

You want a ground school...go pay a flight instructor. You don't hire an attorney and expect a class on civil legislation. You don't visit the doctor and expect a briefing on chemistry or biology...nor is the doctor in expectation of or willing to provide it.

I don't expect a ground school, but I am having to reassure nervous pax sitting next to me, it happens several times every year and it is NOT MY RESPONSIBILITY. I pay the airline a ticket price and that does not include an implied term and condition that I am a supernumary member of the crew, present to counsel nervous pax that known/predictable events, such as condensation and loud airframe fluting noises, are nothing to worry about.

If I go to a lawyer, I expect not only to receive advice, but also reasonable briefings as to any things that I may not be aware of, likewise I expect the doctor to give me enough information on the side effects of the drugs prescribed, so for example I don't worry if my urine turns yellow or my tongue turns black, but your argument is that this is normal and I don't need to know it.

Your logic looks pretty weak in context.

Recently, as you know from these boards, there was a serious incident caused by pax thinking their aircraft was on fire and attemptiong to enter the flight deck during the take off roll - this is completely unacceptable behaviour, but a contributing factor was their lack of understanding and my experience is that crews don't brief condensation (only heard it once), ergo it should be added when necessary to avoid a repeat of a totally unacceptable event. Just because the crew know it is normal and safe doesn't mean the pax doand there are many more people flying occasionally these days.

You're briefed on what you need to do in an emergency

Yes and part of that logic requires pax to recognise what is and isn't an emergency. A condensation incident has now resulted in a serious incident and the industry should take this lesson on board and deal with it my PAs when necessary. "Its normal, it's not a problem, just ignore it."

I think that if a further incident occured, with serious outcomes, a lawyer would be able to attack the airline for failing to apply diligence in preventing a repeat incident.

Of course, why would we bother to give a detailed explaination on oxygen generators

You need to give more than at present, because it can cause some panic when people smell the fumes or think the unit has failed, again recent anecdotal evidence supports this.

All that the PA needs to add is .... after pulling the mask, you may notice a chemical smell, this is normal" What is so difficult?

overwing condensation

What is overwing condensation? I am talking about condensation from the vents along the whole cabin, that at its most noticeable looks like fog or smoke .... and lots of it too under some circumstances

when people like yourself can't be bothered to listen to the important parts...the safety briefing that will save your life?

Guppy, have you tested your reading spectacle prescription recently?

......... I do pay close attention to the safety brief......

I am sorry,but your post is defensive and reflects exactly the sentiment baftabill expressed eloquently in an earlier post..

On a nearby thread you will see 'morons', 'idiots', 'not good breeding material', etc etc to describe passengers.

On the other side of the coin you (quite rightly) take a learning attitude to accidents. The crew aren't 'morons', they were unfortunate that all the holes lined up. They may have made a mistake but it is important to learn from that rather than concentrate on blame.

I put it to you (and your colleagues) again, the demographics of the travelling population have changed significantly in the past 20 years and the airlines have not changed their briefings to take this into account.

Also, the cabin crew are not assertive enough (generally, with some homourable exceptions) at reinforcing the behaviours mandated by the rules (talking during briefing, walking around with the belt signs on) and this is conditioning some pax that it is acceptable.

SNS3Guppy
13th Sep 2008, 17:13
Recently, as you know from these boards, there was a serious incident caused by pax thinking their aircraft was on fire and attemptiong to enter the flight deck during the take off roll - this is completely unacceptable behaviour, but a contributing factor was their lack of understanding and my experience is that crews don't brief condensation (only heard it once), ergo it should be added when necessary to avoid a repeat of a totally unacceptable event. Just because the crew know it is normal and safe doesn't mean the pax doand there are many more people flying occasionally these days.


No, I'm not aware of that incident, and don't particularly care. If people are stupid enough to rush the cockpit because they think they know more than the flight crew or believe they can do something the crew cannot...then perhaps they ought to be shot in the back of the head by an air marshall for posing a threat to safety of flight. You appear to suggest that such behavior from a passenger is in any way acceptable or tolerable, or even justifiable because the crew didn't take time to give them a ground school on cloud physics.

It's not justifiable. Don't congregate at the front of the airplane. That should be very clear. Don't congregate there for the restroom (water closet to some of you). Don't congregate there to share rumors, or discuss condensation, or do whatever else it is you think you're going to do...and if there's a perceived problem, notify your flight attendant and don't rush to the front of the airplane. Passengers have been killed by other passengers for doing that very thing. Don't do that.

If I go to a lawyer, I expect not only to receive advice, but also reasonable briefings as to any things that I may not be aware of, likewise I expect the doctor to give me enough information on the side effects of the drugs prescribed, so for example I don't worry if my urine turns yellow or my tongue turns black, but your argument is that this is normal and I don't need to know it.


Your attorney will give you the necessary information, without delving into unnecessary legal history or theory. Your doctor will tell you about your medication and give you the information necessary for your safety.

A lesson on cloud physics, delving into the mysteries of pressure and temperature and dewpoint, relative humidity, angle of attack, and other such information, won't get someone out the door alive in the event of a forced landing or rejected takeoff, won't help someone egress the airplane in an emergency, and won't help them put on their life jacket.

Simply because you want it, doesn't mean you're going to get it. You're getting critical need-to-know safety information, and that's it. You're not briefed on navigational techniques, on proximity of traffic and other aircraft, details on system fuel pressures, the mechanical function of the bleed air system, the location of electrical buses, the function of flaps and reversers, or any such thing. It's not necessary, and if you want all that, go hire a flight instructor.

I don't get in a taxi cab and expect to hear the driver explain to me the turn signals, the brake, the horn, or his technique for following other traffic...even though his driving may scare the hell out of me.

The truth is, passengers can't be bothered to comply with the minimal information they already have. Adding to it would be a waste of time.

I don't know what airline you ride on...but you seem to ride on airplanes in which passengers are constantly out of their seats and ignoring the commands of the flight crew. In the last week I've seen airplanes stopped during taxi or returning to the gate for passengers who wouldn't sit down, and diverted for passengers who wouldn't comply. I've seen in the past passengers removed from the flight for failure to comply. I've seen phones and other electronic devices confiscated for failure to turn them off. I've seen passengers threatened with removal from the airplane unless they comply...tactfully, of course...but clearly informed of their choice none the less.

Perhaps you ride on houlligan airways where anything goes...I generally don't, and tend to stick with more professional operators.

I don't expect a ground school, but I am having to reassure nervous pax sitting next to me, it happens several times every year and it is NOT MY RESPONSIBILITY. I pay the airline a ticket price and that does not include an implied term and condition that I am a supernumary member of the crew, present to counsel nervous pax that known/predictable events, such as condensation and loud airframe fluting noises, are nothing to worry about.


So what? Then don't counsel them. Your call. Based on your comments thus far, the passenger would be far better off without your "counsel," anyway.

Yes and part of that logic requires pax to recognise what is and isn't an emergency. A condensation incident has now resulted in a serious incident and the industry should take this lesson on board and deal with it my PAs when necessary. "Its normal, it's not a problem, just ignore it."

I think that if a further incident occured, with serious outcomes, a lawyer would be able to attack the airline for failing to apply diligence in preventing a repeat incident.


I'm not aware of this incident, but reflect back to my previous comments. Dirty, money grubbing lawyers will jump on anything they can to make a buck or a name for themselves...so what an attorney will or won't do in response to a legal and approved safety briefing isn't particularly relevant...the attorney will probably file suit anyway. Whether the attorney wins is another matter...and seldom related to the facts or the truth. When it comes to civil suits, anything goes.

What is overwing condensation? I am talking about condensation from the vents along the whole cabin, that at its most noticeable looks like fog or smoke .... and lots of it too under some circumstances


What is overwing condensation? Again...now's a good time to go get some instruction and learn...not really something to be covered in the briefing.

As far as a slight mist coming from the air cycle machines (air conditioning packs)...once more...not really something that needs to be included in a regular formatted briefing on critical need-to-know information. If someone sees misting from a gaspar vent, it's a simple matter to let the flight attendant know and ask the question. The appearance of such vapors isn't common, is very dependent on circumstances, and is a very minor thing. If passengers elect to disregard the briefing they've already been given and rush the cockpit looking for answers, then they're already a safety of flight risk and the real problem isn't failure to brief on the mechanical operation of the airplane, but a failure on their part to follow the briefing they've already been given.

The first time I saw mist from the packs was in a C-130 at night, and it was unexpected. The entire cockpit filled with a thick mist rising from the floor, and then the vent started spraying snow pellets in my face. Amazingly enough, without having been "briefed" on the phenomenon, I didn't get up and begin running about the airplane in panic. That would be inappropriate, you see.

Don't try to justify it because someone did something inappropriate and not in accordance with the briefing to sit down and remain seated, and belted...and not approach the front of the aircraft. Again, you're wanting additional information when passengers failed to comply with the most basic directions.

I put it to you (and your colleagues) again, the demographics of the travelling population have changed significantly in the past 20 years and the airlines have not changed their briefings to take this into account.


Really? You mean the airplane doesn't still have a mixture of businessmen, plumbers, doctors, housewives, screaming children, young married couples, traveling expert private pilots, jumpseating crewmembers, and the occasional odd fare by the tooth fairy? How have the demographics changed? We're flying a new breed of passenger today, are we? We need to do something special that hasn't been done before? Seat belts function differently today than they did, say, 40 years ago? Cabin air is breathed differently today? People float a little differently than they did 20 years ago? It's okay to leave the seatbacks not in the upright position? Passengers today have a greater right to disregard safety instructions and get up and rush the cockpit when they think they have the answers today, then?

We've already heard from the masses in this thread. Don't believe the safety briefings, period. Don't listen to them. Ignore them. You believe the flight attendants are there to sell sex. Crewmembers need to give a groundschool on the mechanical function of the airplane, yada, yada, yada. What you're not describing here is a need...just an arrogant passenger. Quite in time with the thread, of course, about arrogant posters.

You tried to lead us past sex sells now to ineffective crews and eye candy...so again I submit that you step up to the plate and instruct all of us in your expert ways. We don't need to tens of thousands of industry professionals who examine the briefings, the manufacturers who provide their own recommendations, the airline attorneys who have their valued input, the crew input, the history of mishap investigation and the changes thereof...we just need you. Stop what you're doing and start campaigning to make the changes you see fit. They probably won't happen...but you may provide some brief, and perhaps even welcome entertainment.

You need to give more than at present, because it can cause some panic when people smell the fumes or think the unit has failed, again recent anecdotal evidence supports this.

All that the PA needs to add is .... after pulling the mask, you may notice a chemical smell, this is normal" What is so difficult?


At Flight Level 350 to 410, time of useful consciousness is measured in seconds. As little as fifteen or so. Even less. During an explosive decompression, the cabin may fill with mist, It may get very loud. Ones ears may pop, and will certainly hurt. One may experienced ruptured eardrums. Rapid expansion of body gasses can cause severe pain, and sinuses may cause unspeakable pain (I can attest to this). Dental pain may be present. It's difficult to breathe. Depending on the nature of the decompression, a frost may cover everything. It gets cold. The airplane may appear full of smoke, and papers may be flying around or other signs of the decompression taking place. Historically passengers or crew have been forced out of the aircraft and into the night. The aircraft may be descending very rapidly.

In the meantime, the cabin crew is belting themselves in and going for their own oxygen (remember that pesky briefing...in an emergency secure your own mask first, then those of your loved ones around you?) Making a cabin anouncement, especially when the flight attendant hasn't been informed about the nature of the problem, may not be possible.

The cockpit crew has initiated an emergency descent, and aside from being on oxygen and facing the same physical threats that you're facing in the cabin, is having to fly the airplane, possibly with diminished capacity and diminished performance, coordinate with air traffic control, run multiple emergency checklists, and operate the 900 or so switches and controls in the cockpit that may be needing attention during the descent.

At this point in time, do you suppose that the smell of an oxygen generator, where it may occur, is of any particular concern? ("It's okay folks...we're in an emergency descent following an explosive decompression and the crew is fighting for your lives, but we just wanted you to know that the unpleasant smell is normal...we mean the chemical smell, not the methane and other scents that are completely overpowering the chemical smell right now...so relax, and thank you for flying Timbuktu Airways.").

Perhaps we need a briefing just for you.

"Ladies and gentlemen, welcome aboard Poxahonalahatchie Airways. My name is Glen and I'll be your non-sexual, unappealing man-servant today, charged with your utmost safety and the comfort of your culinary appetite. I would like to direct your attention to the cabin attendants around you as they explain the safety features of the airplane. Following that we will have a short course in the operation of the airplane and it's mechanical function, followed by a three part test. Study guides are in the seat backs in front of you. We caution you that a passing grade of 70% of higher will be required in order to be allowed to remain on this flight. A number 2 pencil has been provided for your convenience. If this becomes dull, please ring your attendant call button and another will be brought to you."

"First we have the seatbelts. These must be worn snug and tight, and low around the hips. We do this to prevent you from submarining out underneath them during a forward impact, though we should inform you that any vertical impact will likely crush and deform your spine, causing irreparable damage with which you'll have to live for the rest of your life. If your survive the burns, of course, or the lung damage from the ensuing fire. In order to fasten the seatbelt, place the metal ends together and snap, like this, and to undo them, pull on the little lever on the buckle. We ask that you remain seated for the entire flight and do not rush to the cockpit to question anything you might see or hear, because whatever you see or hear is perfectly normal. This includes banging, whizzing, beeping, groaning, bumps, mist, vapor, whistling noises, and that one sound that goes 'urk, urk, urk,' whatever it may be."

"Beneath your seat are life vests. Please find them now with both hands and let's pray they're still in place when the aircraft comes to a complete rest. If the cabin is filling with water rapidly, we need you to remove your shoes, put the vest over your head like this, and tie it around your body like this using a square knot. Not you, sir, that's a granny knot. I know, it's an easy mistake to make. Then bring it around the front, squirrel goes through the hole, around the tree, and there you have a bowline...no sir, that's a sheetbend, used for ropes of different diameters and not applicable in an aircraft, again, easy mistake to make, then pull tight. The vest is inflated by pulling on these tabs. No sir, not yet. It's okay, we'll get you another. For the rest of you, do not inflate your vests until you're outside the aircraft. If you happen to have been thrown clear, feel free to inflate your vest, so long as as you're not trapped beneath sinking wreckage, or near sharp objects. Speaking of sharp objects, don't forget the shark repellant...we have two types of sharks that we consider to be a threat on this route, and those would be the mako and the great white. In your seat back, behind your study guide and the quiz, you'll see a glossy color briefing card on surviving shark attacks. We find that striking the shark on the nose with the pommel of a knife has proven useful in the past, but are discouraging it now because of legal concerns for the safety of the shark, and because none of you have knives, save for the terrorists. You know who you are. Moving right along..."

"In the event of a loss of cabin pressure, masks will drop down from the ceiling. Now, I've arranged to have a cutaway model of the oxygen manifold present, and in your study guide you'll find an excellent diagram in Chapter 3 on the workings of the system. You'll see that this pin here, can everybody see that, must be removed in order to start the flow of oxygen. I'd like everyone to take a moment and remove the masks from the overhead stowage containers and place them over your face. Be careful to use the sterile wipes in the accessory packet in the seat back in front of you...the seat back which must remain upright for takeoff and landing, mind you...and clean your mask. Do not pull the pin. Take a moment to make the mask your friend, because if you don't get this right it may be the last thing you ever see. Get to know that mask. Become the mask. During the generation of oxygen, you may be able to smell something other than your neighbor's bowls, and if it's not the things flying around the cabin or the pervasive odor of vomit, then it's likely a minor chemical smell. This is normal, just like the little clear bag on the mask not inflating. This is a non-rebreather mask, as I'm sure many of you know, part of a diluter system (it will be on the test)...and I want you to remember this in the event our universe is coming apart, so you don't panic."

"If you'll kindly stow the masks, we call them the 'rubber jungle' back in the ceiling you'll notice a small eyeball type vent behind the mask stowage panel. We call this a gaspar vent. At some point during our flight, perhaps even in the next few minutes, you may see a mist coming from the vent. You'll feel cool air with it and a flow of air which is cool and refreshing, coming from that vent, and may not be able to put two and two together and determine that it's your air conditioning. In the event you have a complete meltdown and become deluded enough to believe the airplane is on fire and blowing smoke into the cabin...smoke which dissipates just like steam and is cold and not hot and which smells nothing like smoke, we just want you to know it's perfectly normal. In fact, it's a product of an air cycle machine, part of the air conditioning and pressurization packs, and we'll be talking about that in Chapter 6, Pneumatics, Air Conditioning, and Pressurization."

"For those seated in the exit aisles, we have a special mission for you. You need to be able to read and understand the exit directions, Operate the exits, exit the airplane, and give aid and assistance to other passengers as they leave the airplane. We want to stress that you only need to do this in an emergency...not when we arrive at the destination, and for heavens sake not right now when we're sitting at the gate. No, you can't go through a practice run. There are a few things we should tell you about this. One is that you shouldn't open the exits in flight. Two is that before exiting you should determine if there are large, sharp, twisted metal formations outside the window, that used to be part of the airplane. Three, you must determine if there's a fire out there. This can be typically recognized by the presence of smoke, and a reddish or yellowish glowing appearance, or possibly explosions just like you see in the movies. We encourage you to consider a different exit in the event you see the sharp pointy things, or the hot burning things. Fourth, you may need to exit by yourself, in the event any us are horribly mangled and unable to assist you or direct you when the time comes. Fifth, most of or survivors are at the back of the airplane, so those of you in the front sections ignoring this briefing and staring at my conservative yet innately attractive uniform may continue to do so. You will be going the way of the dodo, anyway. Sixth, once clear of the airplane, kindly move away from the wreckage, and do not walk back to take pictures with your cell phones, which must be turned off now thank you, of burning wheel assemblies, brake fires, or other interesting and unique vistas. We ask that you congregate as far from the airplane as possible, at a location which allows you both safety and a good viewing area in order to watch those of us who are unable to leave the airplane perish."

"We ask that no one tamper with the lavatory smoke detectors. This is a non-smoking flight, we hope. If it becomes a smoking flight due to any number of mechanical problems, you are still not authorized to use cigarettes, bongs, roach clips, pipes, hookas, cigars, or other lightable objects. Federal laws prohibit tampering, touching, photographing, making drawings or charcoal rubbings of, or writing songs about the smoke detectors. If you set one off, the cockpit crew will know about it, and in addition to diverting to another location and having you arrested, one or more crewmembers will come to your seat and beat you with a rolled up newspaper. Is that clear?"

"You, sir. Sit down. If you get up again, I shall break your legs. Thank you."

"Now then, if you will all open your study guides to page one, let us begin..."


We could go on all day...but perhaps just briefing on the basics is best for now...at least until you give us the benefit of your illuminating insight and change the world to match the latest "demographics" of the traveling public. Who knows, but you could be the one to reshape the face of modern air travel to your own arrogant image!

ford cortina
13th Sep 2008, 17:55
Wow, once again Guppy awesome simply awesome. Thankyou,. I could learn lots off you.

baftabill
13th Sep 2008, 18:28
No.

I think this is called Bunker Mentality.

west lakes
13th Sep 2008, 19:12
I can see merit in a lot of cases imparting more information during safety briefings.
But (sorry there has to be one)

It is already apparent that even if passengers listen to the briefing some don't take the information in (the not looking after themselves first - which is against most parents instincts, getting hand luggage to carry with them during an evacuation, not opening overwing exits even though they have probably been individually briefed)
So even if the information about the "burning smell" from oxygen candles is given, I really wonder how many will take it in?


An example from my line of work.
Customer with a failure in their electricity supply, late evening so for a number of reasons no work will be done until the morning.
A decision is made to connect a small portable generator to the house to maintain essentials.
Customer told by staff "this will only operate your fridge/freezer, your lights, TV and kettle, nothing else, no large appliances like washers, dishwashers, showers".

Two hours later frantic call from customer the generator has gone off as I switched the shower on
Team attends, restarts generator, repeats warning paying particular attention to the shower not being used.

07:30 another call from the customer, the generator went off when I switched the shower on

This was not the, shall we say, chav type this was an apparently professional family.


We didn't attend the second time- just left them off until we fixed the fault

As for the condensation from a/c units, seen that a few times in hot humid conditions when aircraft are boarding with APU running, a/c running and using steps to front and rear doors to board.
It was obvious to me and most other pax what it was and there was even some joking about it. (scheduled flight not charter)
Possibly though in some situations a clear PA from crew would not be unreasonable. Probably though in a lot of cases the crew are used to the effect and don't actually notice it, so don't comment prior to someone panicking - when it could be too late

Final 3 Greens
14th Sep 2008, 02:25
This is indeed the bunker mentallity.

For example, I say....

Recently, as you know from these boards, there was a serious incident caused by pax thinking their aircraft was on fire and attemptiong to enter the flight deck during the take off roll - this is completely unacceptable behaviour

Guppy replies

You appear to suggest that such behavior from a passenger is in any way acceptable or tolerable, or even justifiable because the crew didn't take time to give them a ground school on cloud physics.

Nothing like completely ignoring a point made in debate.

Then he completely misses the point of the Palma incident (through ignorance of it) and replies about shockwaves forming over the wings, when I ask him to clarify what he means, as I cannot believe that he is so uninformed as to miss the point of my comment, he gives a smart answer that I should seek flight instruction.

Guppy also thinks then perhaps they ought to be shot in the back of the head by an air marshall for posing a threat to safety of flight

I think that last statement is probably pretty insightful :eek:

Sadly, Guppy is postulating that gunplay is the panacea, instead of accepting that a quick PA from the crew, on demand, would increase flight safety.

So, I will end my comments on this thread, as Guppy obviously suffers from highly selective readiing skills and maybe a god complex and there is little point trying to reason with him.

SNS3Guppy
14th Sep 2008, 03:04
Sadly, Guppy is postulating that guns are the panacea instead of accepting that a quick PA from the crew, on demand, would increase flight safety.


No guppy is postulating that passengers who rush the cockpit after being told to sit down and stay away from the front of the airplane, knowing that there are consequences, face a potentially unpleasant outcome.

You see, the passengers already had a quick announcement from the flight crew...it's called the briefing, and in that briefing they've been told to sit down and keep their seat belts fastened, and not to congregate at the front of the airplane. Apparently they couldn't get that much right...and certainly deserve any fallout that might result. It's called safety of flight...and they jeopardized it...over MIST!!!

So, the end of my comments on this thread, as Guppy obviously suffers from highly selective readiing skills and maybe a god complex and there is little point trying to reason with him.


I was never interested in reasoning with you. It's a little like the briefings you clearly don't understand. Nobody's there to reason with you, either. The crew is there to tell you the way it will be, and you're there to do it. You want reasoning...go join a debate club.

Passagiata
14th Sep 2008, 05:56
I actually don't mind pilots being a bit rude from time to time. It's a forum for professionals, and I'd rather they were a bit clannish than watered down the standard of their membership or contributions. There have definitely been dumbass posts from people claiming to be expert - wasting everyone's time. If fools aren't suffered gladly, there will be fewer of them (us). I'm just delighted to be able to observe the conversations - and participate 'below the salt' :)

And thanks types like Unka Romeo India Xray for the patient replies to all & sundry!

Cheers

baftabill
14th Sep 2008, 06:22
Guppy...All the best