Safety briefs regs and checks. Who benefits and why? [Archive]

lowcostdolly

16th Sep 2009, 09:43

Morning all :ok:

Just recently when flying as crew I have been constantly questioned by the SLF re our safety regs and why they need to be obeyed. Some have been genuinely interested, some frustrated for various reasons and a few just downright rude and difficult.

Ever heard the line "the cabin crew are here to ensure your safety"? It's true.....that is our primary function on board. Once we have done this then we provide you with an onboard service. We are not employed as "trolley Dolly's" or any of the other cliches around :) We are highly trained professionals who at any time could be called upon to fire fight, resucitate someone, deliver a baby, manage a decompression situation in flight or evacuate a plane on the ground.

The CAA/DfT lay down certain mandatory regulations/procedures which a carrier is required to comply with to ensure their operators certificate. Some have to be followed to the letter some there is a certain amount of scope for the carrier to intepret. For instance you may have seen different variations of the flight deck door procedure on different airlines.

Some of these procedures which the CC carry out on behalf of the carrier who employs them can seem petty, demeaning and frustrating to the SLF most of whom do not know the reasons behind them and question rushed CC in flight. The CC may not have the time or would it be appropriate in some cases to give real reasons at that point. I just thourght it might help to post answers to the more common questions here.

1) I fly all the time so why do I need to watch/listen to the safety demo?
For exactly that reason. Familiarity breeds contempt and procedures can change since you last flew. Also ever noticed those around you who think an emergency could never happen to them? These are the ones who read, chat or sleep their way through the demo so won't have a clue where the exits are:ugh: We do this demo for the benefit of all SLF. We spend 4 weeks learning how and where to leave that plane....you have aprox 4 minutes to digest that info on taxi. It could save you life one day.

2) Why do I need to show my boarding pass again? Answered fully in another thread :ok:

3) Toddler son/daughter doesn't like sitting on their own. Can I have a belt so they can sit on my lap for take off/landing?
No they can't. It's a CAA reg that any child over 2 years has their own seat. The reason for this is that a child over two is considered too big to be adequately protected by the mother by the infant brace position and worse still it could cause injury to the child. This applies even if the infant is small or aged 2 years and 1 day. We have to have a standard. I'm a parent myself so do empathise on this one but I have to enforce it :)

4) Toddler son/daughter won't have his/her seatbelt done up what should I do?
Be a parent and take charge!!! When we land we will travel at approx 150 MPH down the runway. In a car would you let them dictate whether they sit restrained in their car seat?

5) Why can I not use the loo's just because the seatbelt sign is on?
The seatbelt is on for a reason which may not be immediatly apparent to you or even the CC . This is an instruction from the Capt which must be obeyed. There are no seatbelts in the loo so you re at risk of injury if you disregard this. Ask the CC if you can use the loo and you will be advised not too. If you sustain injury in this event don't bother trying to claim!!

6) Why does my Ipod need to be switched off for take off/landing?
So you can hear us peeps!! Take off and landing are classed as critical stages of flight and most incidents happen during this time. I usually have to touch the arm of the SLF I'm trying to communicate this instruction to. Enough said??

7)The sun is in my eyes why can I not close my window blind? "Stupid regulation".
No it's not. Lots of reasons for this but the most important is situational awareness in the cabin. Who remembers Kegworth where important lessons were learned and are now enforced? The flight deck have sophisticated warning systems but no wing mirrors.....they cannot see the wings or the engines. CC and the SLF can if the window blinds are open....do I need to explain more?

8) " If I want my bags by my feet why do you have a problem with this?"
It could impede your exit on evacuation and if you are in an aisle seat everyone else's as well:= If you are at the emergency exits and do this you will be told to move. Stow your bags appropiately for take off and landing peeps :ok:

9) Why can I not put my duty free bottles in the lockers??
Loads of reasons. Could fall out injuring somebody if it's a heavy bottle:(
Could leak over somebody. As CC if it leaks this is a major potential
problem.....fire!!!!:eek: Alchohol is flammable and could leak over the electrics.

The above is all what I have been challenged to justify over my past few flights so I'm not being patronising. Hope it helps with the queries and for accepting any instructions given on board.:)

strake

16th Sep 2009, 10:28

We are highly trained professionals who at any time could be called upon to fire fight, resucitate someone, deliver a baby, manage a decompression situation in flight or evacuate a plane on the ground.

Phew, all that from a three or four week training course. I'm surprised the rest of us bother to do five years medical study or go to university for at least three years to get a degree or take four years to become pilots etc etc..
The majority of frequent air travellers appreciate the work that all staff in airlines provide but I think you need to be a little more circumspect.
Whilst safety is important, so is service. You might be led to believe from your trainers that you are "safety staff" first but show me one advert from any airline, over any time period, which shows cabin crew doing anything other than being handsome/pretty whilst providing some form of service.
If you really want to change the way Cabin Crew are viewed, start with your management, not us.

VS-LHRCSA

16th Sep 2009, 10:47

It would be very difficult to show the safety side of the cabin crew position in an ad without potentially scaring many passengers. Perhaps that is why you won't see a commercial of showing an evacuation, or a crew doing CPR, or restraining a passenger having an overdose, or breaking up a couple who are fighting, etc. No-one is going to fly with an airline that confronts it's public with the realities in such a way, even though all airlines deal with the same issues regularly.

Probably the closest I have seen was a BA ad from around 1999 where a group of school children were playing musical chairs. Each child depicted had a caption of their future career. One boy missed out and started having a tantrum. A girl stood up and let him have her seat. Her cabin was something like 'future BA cabin crew member'.

Personally, I hated the ad because I saw it as rewarding bad behavior but I did show something beyond ordinary cabin service, ie: putting yourself out for the benefit of others.

jetset lady

16th Sep 2009, 10:47

Sorry, lowcostdolly. I appreciate what you are trying to say and agree with you in most parts. However, a few points....

We are not employed as "trolley Dolly's" or any of the other cliches around http://images.ibsrv.net/ibsrv/res/src:www.pprune.org/get/images/smilies/smile.gif

Erm...You might want to change your user name if you want people to take that point seriously!

1) I fly all the time so why do I need to watch/listen to the safety demo?
For exactly that reason. Familiarity breeds contempt and procedures can change since you last flew. Also ever noticed those around you who think an emergency could never happen to them? These are the ones who read, chat or sleep their way through the demo so won't have a clue where the exits are:ugh: We do this demo for the benefit of all SLF. We spend 4 weeks learning how and where to leave that plane....you have aprox 4 minutes to digest that info on taxi. It could save you life one day.

With all respect, I don't think passengers will swallow that we spend an entire 4 weeks training on exits/evacuation alone.

7)The sun is in my eyes why can I not close my window blind? "Stupid regulation".
No it's not. Lots of reasons for this but the most important is situational awareness in the cabin. Who remembers Kegworth where important lessons were learned and are now enforced? The flight deck have sophisticated warning systems but no wing mirrors.....they cannot see the wings or the engines. CC and the SLF can if the window blinds are open....do I need to explain more?

As you say, important lessons were learnt from Kegworth and new advisories did come into play. But this isn't a CAA enforcement, apart from at the emergency exits. Some airlines do not insist on all window blinds being open. Yes, it's certainly good practice, but it's down to the particular airline. And passengers that have used a variety of airlines will know this and come straight back at you. Better to say that, "It is our airlines policy....", and then go into your situational awareness bit if you feel you need to.

9) Why can I not put my duty free bottles in the lockers??
Loads of reasons. Could fall out injuring somebody if it's a heavy bottlehttp://images.ibsrv.net/ibsrv/res/src:www.pprune.org/get/images/smilies/sowee.gif
Could leak over somebody. As CC if it leaks this is a major potential
problem.....fire!!!!http://images.ibsrv.net/ibsrv/res/src:www.pprune.org/get/images/smilies/eek.gif Alchohol is flammable and could leak over the electrics.

Again, this is airline specific. Anything could fall out and injure someone. Plastic bottles of water/juice/milk etc. could leak. As for alcohol being flammable and starting a fire in a overhead locker, is this actually a likely scenario? Not being an electrician or engineer, I'd be interested to know if anyone has the answer, as it's not something I've ever heard of. I have worked for one airline that didn't allow duty free in the overhead lockers, but that was due to the fact that, in the case of a fire, heat rises, so better to have the most flammable liquids down as low as possible. There was nothing about them actually starting a fire.

I'm not trying to pull your post apart. As I said, I agree with a lot of what you say, but there are a lot of passengers out there that fly with many different airlines and that do have some knowledge. There are also a fair few that will be looking to catch you out. If you are going to put a list like this up, you need to be damned sure that what you write is fact.

Finally, you say that you don't mean to be patronising. Unfortunately, in the context of your post, smilies such as :ugh: and :=, come across as just that. But maybe that's just me!

Jsl

Malone

16th Sep 2009, 10:50

Strake,
Yet another condescending reply to a perfectly reasonable post by lcd.
We all know that CC are there for our safety and that this is their prime function. This is fairly self-evident to anyone with an ounce of intelligence!:ugh:
With regards to service, that is a different matter. If you think about it, the best people at this job can make it appear as if they are putting service first but are actually doing both!
I do know what you mean, some individuals do see the "safety" issue as a reason to act officiously. This happens on check-in as well, I had certain colleagues who fitted that bill!!
lcd, keep up the good work!!
:ok:

VS-LHRCSA

16th Sep 2009, 10:55

I flew with an airline that banned bottles in the overhead lockers, if anyone remembers Air 2000. They were pretty thorough when it came to SEP. I think it was something to do with findings from a crash investigation - possibly the Korean Airlines crash in Guam but don't quote me. Anyway, I remember it being a pain, especially with people sitting at the overwing exits where you couldn't stow anything on the floor or bottles in the overheads.

lowcostdolly

16th Sep 2009, 12:22

Strake Hi

I do have a degree actually and it took me four years to achieve it:8. Also I still not only practice in that field but it comes in very useful on a plane sometimes!

Jsl :cool:. Point taken on the username......chosen months ago and posts/views change :). The smilies are just my way of trying to lighten a post......again no offence intended and the facility is provided by pprune.

I am sure of my facts on this post. Firstly your very valid point re alchohol in the lockers starting a fire. I've not heard of this happening either but I'm sure you will agree the potential is there. Most of our procedures as CC are based on "unlikely events" and as you corectly point out some of the rationale's are airline specific. You come across as CC? Anything that leaks onto electrics has the potential to start a fire......I just used alchohol as the example. People generally don't purchase milk in duty free;)

Re window blinds. I would say that if this procedure is not applied that is airline specific. I have worked for 4 airlines post Kegworth and all implement this recommendation. However I could stand corrected on this. maybe they were the only 4 who do?

I just wanted to answer a few FAQ's by the SLF on this thread......nothing more:ok:

Jarvy

16th Sep 2009, 13:31

Well put lcd. As a regular flyer I am still amazed how a lot of SLF think the rules don't apply to them or that they know it all.
On sunday flying back from Orlando I told the two people in front of me that their seats should be in the upright posistion for taxiing and take off. It was made worst by the fact that the third person in the row worked for the airline and didn't say anything to them.
I couldn't care less about their comfort but in the event of an emergency the seat would have impeded my escape.
I suppose being 6' 1" and 240 lbs helps in puting my point across.

Agaricus bisporus

16th Sep 2009, 14:24

Duty free alcohol cannot even sustain a fire, let alone "start" one. It isn't strong enough. Alcohol is NOT flammable unless it is 100deg proof or over, that being more or less the definition of "proof". Duty free/airport sales is never over 75-80%.

Surely you don't think the industry would allow, let alone promote the sale and carriage of flammable liquids in the cabin?

"liquids leaking into the electrics..."??? Oh purleeese!
I think you'll find aircraft designers considered that possibility a long, long time ago and designed it out...(about the same time it was realised that aircraft might occasionally be exposed to rain)

As to why a duty free bottles not allowed in the overhead locker in case they fall on someone - I've never heard such tosh. What about the cases in the locker that weigh twenty times as much? Aren't they a 20 X greater hazard?
What airline bans this? I've never heard of it!

If we're going to ask people to conform to rules it behoves us to ensure they're sensible ones and based in fact and reality, or we run the risk of discrediting them before we've even started.

Even so, pax need to understand that CC are there for three reasons, and three reasons only. they are;
Safety
Safety,
and Safety.
(And bringing the pilots their tea, which is the same thing.)

Any other function carried out when not engaged in Safety is purely an ancilliary job, and is entirely optional at the Captain's, or the Purser's discretion.

Put up with it, and behave like an adult when asked to do something by your Safety Professionals.

jetset lady

16th Sep 2009, 15:40

lcd,

As said, I do agree with most of what you say and good on you for saying it, but I am trying to look at it from the perspective of passengers that may be looking to pick holes in your arguments. Once that happens, you've lost them on everything.

With regards to the window blinds, I can assure you that this is definitely airline specific and not a CAA reg. I am crew and work for a large UK airline, one that many frequent fliers will have probably have travelled on at some point. We do not request that blinds be open during take off and landing, unless sat by the emergency exits. Personally, I prefer your way, but rules is rules!

As for the alcohol side of things, I must have misunderstood you. I thought you were stating that no duty free should be put in the lockers, in particular, because alcohol is flammable. That was also my understanding at my previous airline although, as already stated, not due to the risk of leakage. Again, as previously said, I have no idea whether it could start a fire by leaking onto electrics from the hatracks, which is why I asked if an engineer or electrician knew the answer. You are, however, completely correct in that not many people buy milk airside, but many do carry baby milk, juices, fizzy drinks, water etc in hand luggage.

As an aside, Agaricus b, duty free alcohol isn't flammable? How's that work then? I've used brandy, bought in duty free, for cooking and managed to get a flame off it. It may not last long, but that's one little bit of brandy. Imagine loads of bottles of it, in the top half of the aircraft, where the heat will be at it's fiercest in the event of a fire. Are you actually telling me that the alcohol won't burn and elevate the situation, as that goes directly against every bit of training I've had on fire situations, regardless of where the bottles are. I'm not saying you're wrong, but it's a new one on me and something I shall look into further.

Surely you don't think the industry would allow, let alone promote the sale and carriage of flammable liquids in the cabin?

Actually, call me cynical, but considering the money it makes on them, then yep, I do think they'll allow it. After all, the bottles are made of glass and that's a threat in itself. Probably a higher threat, these days, than the contents.

Anyway, where was I? Oh yes! I'm not against you, lcd. We're on the same side and Christ knows, we need all the help we can get! But do you see where I'm coming from?

Jsl

P.S. That was just a friendly suggestion on the smiley thing. I'm a firm believer in using them to lighten the tone of a post. But others can take them the wrong way. However, that could be me seeing things that don't exist. My car seizing itself into a state of complete immobility on the way to work this morning has probably left me a little...erm...tense! :mad: ;)

Final 3 Greens

16th Sep 2009, 19:05

Hi Cart Tart, feedback from your friendly SLF

1) I fly all the time so why do I need to watch/listen to the safety demo?
See Ebbinghaus and memory decay. I take 100 sectors per year and listen to every brief, one encounters subfleets with different kit etc. However, the brief is crap and omits such important info as the O2 will smell 'hot' and the bag may not inflate when you are using it. Poor stuff IMHO.

2) Why do I need to show my boarding pass again? Answered fully in another thread. You don't on many airlines, including one which is much bigger than any UK airline.

3) Toddler son/daughter doesn't like sitting on their own. Can I have a belt so they can sit on my lap for take off/landing?
No comment

4) Toddler son/daughter won't have his/her seatbelt done up what should I do?
Be a parent and take charge!!! When we land we will travel at approx 150 MPH down the runway. In a car would you let them dictate whether they sit restrained in their car seat? on a train doing 180-200 mph (Eurostar), there are no seatbelts, so the logic behind this one is dodgy, but airlines must comply with the law, end of (IMHO trains need seat belts)

5) Why can I not use the loo's just because the seatbelt sign is on?
The seatbelt is on for a reason which may not be immediatly apparent to you or even the CC . This is an instruction from the Capt which must be obeyed. There are no seatbelts in the loo so you re at risk of injury if you disregard this. Ask the CC if you can use the loo and you will be advised not too. If you sustain injury in this event don't bother trying to claim!! If the CC don;t know why the belt sign is on after a reasonable short period, then there is a comms problem. Sadly, some if us who travel regularly have heard CC asking the tech guys to put the belt sign on to help with the service and sometimes US airlines keep the sign on for hours (literally) when it seems very smooth?????????

6) Why does my Ipod need to be switched off for take off/landing?
So you can hear us peeps!! Take off and landing are classed as critical stages of flight and most incidents happen during this time. I usually have to touch the arm of the SLF I'm trying to communicate this instruction to. Enough said?? No, the iPod may interfere with aircraft systems, so it needs to be off for that reason too

7)The sun is in my eyes why can I not close my window blind? "Stupid regulation".
There is no regulation against holding a newspaper or similar object across the sunny window.

8) " If I want my bags by my feet why do you have a problem with this?"
So long as it is under the seat in front (non exit rows), why do you have a problem with that?

9) Why can I not put my duty free bottles in the lockers?? I always put my booze in the overhead locker and have done for 33 years - that must be thousands of flights, nobody has ever said it shouldn;t go there, please will you quote a reference for this assertion?
Loads of reasons. Could fall out injuring somebody if it's a heavy bottle
Could leak over somebody. As CC if it leaks this is a major potential
problem.....fire!!!! Alchohol is flammable and could leak over the electrics. So can Alcohol

I form the impression that you may be new to the job and wish you an enjoyable career.

profot

16th Sep 2009, 20:05

four years is way too long for a pilot to train, i wouldn't want to fly with one that took any more than 2 years personally

Experience, well thats another thing, four years would be a minimum

west lakes

16th Sep 2009, 20:57

With the occasional, and I stress occasional, customer who decided that they do not need to comply with various regulations (in another industry BTW) and feel that all the rules should be broken just for their individual benefit, I usually use the following: -
As a company we have no choice but to operate within the laws and regulations that govern us. Is it not fair to expect customers to do the same?
If you don't agree with them, please feel free to take the matter up with the relevent government organisations.

Yes, within the above we will all do the best for the customer, but there are limits over which other customers will suffer just for the benefit of one!
But in this dog eat dog world, what does one customer care about others or the effect their demands have on employees and companies?

sea oxen

16th Sep 2009, 21:49

Wow, everyone has fisked this, so may I have a go?

(1) I fly all the time so why do I need to watch/listen to the safety demo?

Depends. If you have boarded an aircraft which is has been refuelled enroute to SYD from LHR and you are occupying the same seat, you'll already have seen the briefing (which, if you're on BA, will be toe-curlingly condescending in its dumbing-down - worth it just for that). It's good manners, though, to gaze at the hosties as they go through the motions.

They don't tell you how to count how many rows are ahead and behind of you. If there's smoke, do you have water and something with which to improvise a smoke mask? How will you get past that obese person behind you if she spills in the aisle? Do you have a torch? How do those doors open, anyway? It may be worth reading the card.

Sentient people will work this out for themselves when boarding, The safety briefing equates to tractor production statistics. Fine by me, as I know that the vast majority of my fellow travellers will (a) have taken no notice; and (b) will have forgotten, or not understood, everything that they've been told.

(6) Why does my Ipod need to be switched off for take off/landing?
So you can hear us peeps!!
Argh - 'peeps'!
Sry d00d i got earpluz in no law gainst tha isit.
People with iPods with cheap ear buds which force me to listen to their drivel should have have their eardrums slowly reamed in perpetuity.

F3G covered off the rest.

Having said all that, strake makes a good point. You could be the lousiest CC in the Universe and we're always more likely to die on the taxi ride to the airport. Primarily, we have the horn-rimmed glasses engineers, then the pilots, then the people who keep the birds running making this industry so safe, by and large. We have seen in the past heroic efforts by CC to safeguard their passengers, and these are rightly lauded.

In the grand scheme of things, though, being aboard an aircraft is probably the least scary thing I've done this week.

SO

SO

Rusland 17

17th Sep 2009, 06:36

I just wanted to answer a few FAQ's by the SLF on this thread......nothing moreI'm sure your intentions are good, and most of what you write is quite sensible, but you undermine yourself by repeatedly referring to your passengers as "self-loading freight". Even if it's a term cabin crew use between themselves, it is not a good idea to use it when talking to passengers, as you are here. It is offensive, and I know of no other business that would address its customers in such a way.

lowcostdolly

17th Sep 2009, 07:57

Rusland thank you for the feedback but with all due respect it was not me who named this forum. Maybe you should contact one of the Mods re your views?

How people view nicknames/use of smilies etc is very personal to them. I wouldn't imagine for one minute anyone involved in the naming of this forum at PPrune wants to cause offence and niether do I so apologies on my behalf if I have done so. Also you will hear passengers on this forum refer to themselves as the SLF so not everyone minds this term.

Actually in the 21 years I have been around aviation I had never heard this term until I joined PPrune this year. I think it's just meant tongue in cheek....nothing more. Thats certainly how I mean it :)

P.S I don't know it was PPrune who named this forum. I'm just guessing but I'm sure a mod will know

Wannabe Flyer

17th Sep 2009, 09:05

7)The sun is in my eyes why can I not close my window blind? "Stupid regulation".
No it's not. Lots of reasons for this but the most important is situational awareness in the cabin. Who remembers Kegworth where important lessons were learned and are now enforced? The flight deck have sophisticated warning systems but no wing mirrors.....they cannot see the wings or the engines. CC and the SLF can if the window blinds are open....do I need to explain more?Oops. Most CC i have asked told me that if the plane goes down (cabin largely intact) it is easier for the people outside to look in and not waste time in a rescue effort chasing after an empty seat/gauge the fire etc, which is why we have to keep windows open during landing and take of where the cabin stays largely intact incase of a :{.

As a SLF find that more plausible than your explanation simply because your suggestion indicates there should be no shades on the window at all as situational awareness is required in the entire duration of the flight and not only during certain times. I am assuming in cruise flight they are guessing there will be not much left of the cabin anyways in the case of an unfortunate incident so there is no point keeping them open then! :oh: But then again I am sure in the 4 weeks of training they would have given you a detailed explanation with re buttle viz a vis an SLF with 2 million miles and a curious mind! :rolleyes:

Which brings me to another question???? Why dont aircraft have those beautiful chrome side view mirrors :cool: on each side of the cockpit. Oooohhhhh I know I know, cause they cause drag and cause the new ones have cameras all over with live images in the cockpit!!!!!!!!! :ugh:

Shut that window!!!!!!! I need my sunglasses at night

TightSlot

17th Sep 2009, 09:32

SLF is a phrase that goes back to PPRuNe's origins. The forums were originally started as a bulletin board for Flight Crew only. A gradual expansion occurred during which this forum was started. SLF was (at that time) a phrase in occasional use by Pilots, particularly those previously flying freight - hence the forum title. I have never heard the phrase used by Cabin Crew, except within the confines of PPRuNe, where it tends to be used for simplicity, as a common term of reference. Truth be told, I've rarely heard the term used by Pilots either, outside of here. The phrase was never intended to be abusive, and I'd have to say that if you find it to be so, your skin is rather thin. The phrase is a form of jargon, much as is some of the language and phraseology used between medical staff - a certain kind of black humour that does not translate well to the uninitiated. I'm sure that some of you will choose to take offence - quite possibly the same people that appear to loathe flying, airlines and their staff in all forms. It is a genuine mystery why those who feel this way should regularly post here, or why, for example (there are others) a simple request for a cardboard boarding card at the door can spin out to multiple pages of vitriol. Still, I suppose that as long as you're polite to each other, such threads can roll on.

Window Shade Blinds (again) - At the risk of banging an old drum, there is a link to the multiple previous discussions on this subject in the forum FAQ. This might possibly be a good place to start.

Wannabe Flyer

17th Sep 2009, 10:04

I for one love the term SLF. I am one and think it is brilliant.

Shack37

17th Sep 2009, 11:26

fonejacker

17th Sep 2009, 12:32

I stumbled upon this thread and the boarding card one last week, and it has been providing me with top entertainment ever since!! So keep it coming peeps, especially the SLF getting all precious about being called SLF.

:D:D:D:D

Rusland 17

17th Sep 2009, 12:36

Rusland thank you for the feedback but with all due respect it was not me who named this forum...My use of the word "offensive" was, with hindisght, over the top, and not a true reflection of my feelings about the term I think "disrespectful" would have been closer to the mark.

There is a world of difference between using a term as a humorous title at the top of an internet forum and using it repeatedly as a synonym for "customer" or "passenger", particularly when addressing an audience comprised mainly of those very people. I doubt very much you would use it when announcing the boarding of a flight, or when welcoming passengers aboard a flight, so there seems little justification in using it as often as you do on an anonymous internet forum. The ease and frequency with which you use it does seem to indicate a certain lack of awareness. "Trolley dolly" is, similarly, a humorous and widely-used term to refer to cabin crew but I'm sure it would soon become tiresome if it were used every time a contributor to these forums wished to talk about the airline employees who take care of us inflight. I do not think that would show the level of respect that cabin crew expect and deserve.

I am certainly not someone who would ever use the phrase "I pay your wages" - in fact, the expression makes me cringe - but showing a little more respect to the people you are trained and paid to take care of might be a good idea. It may make some people - those who talk through the safety demos, use their Blackberries throughout the long taxi to the runway and question every instruction given pre-flight - consider your otherwise sensible words more carefully.

But this is drifting from the topic of the thread, and really not worth dragging out.

lowcostdolly

17th Sep 2009, 13:41

Rusland I did apologise for the offence I caused you (and maybe others ?) and the Moderator has explained the origins of this phrase which I was/am just using as a term of reference. Not enough? Clearly not so as of now I will refrain from using this term :ok:

Point taken on the flip side......."cart tart" is something I have just been labelled as by F3G. I've not risen to this because he/she probably means it humourously....hopefully! If not then I rest my case on the origins of this thread which was well intentioned.

Fonejacker I know what you mean!!!:) I started what I thought was the most boring thread in the world when I had a bad day before and got tetchy due to being constantly questioned by the pax. Even "cart tarts" are human with feelings as i'm sure you know:ouch:. The reaction here I didn't anticipate. Top entertainment? Wasn't my intention at all but a GSOH from all goes a long way sometimes.

shack 37.....I too flame my xmas pud with the same brandy you use that despite the post you quoted yes I can buy it on board in the name of ancillary revenue from my employer on certain routes :ok:. Works a treat doesn't it and my kids love it! Not so sure the pax would at 37,000 feet but what do I know??? I'm just the CC with fire training.

LCD signing off from this thread now....Going on my hols :)

Final 3 Greens

17th Sep 2009, 18:09

Lowcost dolly

Point taken on the flip side......."cart tart" is something I have just been labelled as by F3G.

Yes, in jest.

I refer to cabin crew as cabin crew (abbreviation CC), not flight attendants, trolley dolleys, hosties, plate layers, cart tarts etc....

I know that cabin crew are trained and many have type ratings and respect this. I have seen type rating exams for CC and am aware that some airlines test the CC during the briefing.

if you post on the SLF forum (we appreciate the title is tongue in cheek) and make multiple mentions of SLF in what was, frankly, a bit of a rant, then please don't be surprised to receive some incoming.

You'll also get some praise from others.

Enjoy your holiday.

rgbrock1

17th Sep 2009, 19:17

@final 3 greens:

I'm not sure ALL iPods, when turned on, would interfere with an aircraft's systems.
An iPod touch, perhaps. (WiFi enabled). An iPod Nano, doubtful. Hard drive-based iPods? In all likelihood, not at all.

Final 3 Greens

17th Sep 2009, 19:47

rgbrock1

I'm not sure either and the studies are inconclusive.

if you wish to be pedantic, the reason an iPod must be off for t/off and landing is that the regulatory authority says so, because it may interfere....

Now there may be a regulatory authorty out there that does not take this view, but it does not regulate the airlines I use.

The pragmatic approach is that it may interfere, so keep it switched off when directed and I support that.

rgbrock1

17th Sep 2009, 19:57

@F3G:

The regulatory agencies mandate that iPods, cell phones and laptops be turned off
during take-off and landing, be done so not because they interfere with an aircraft's systems but because in the case of the first two, the user may not hear CC instructions in case of an emergency. In the latter case ie, laptop use, also because of distraction but also because it MAY interfere with aircraft systems especially communications.
However, the jury is still out in the interference case.

Final 3 Greens

17th Sep 2009, 20:06

From the UK CAA Portable Electronic Devices | Information for Passengers | CAA (http://www.caa.co.uk/default.aspx?catid=1770&pagetype=90&pageid=9853)

My emboldening. PLease will you provide a reference to corrobaborate your statement?

General Policy: Use of non-Transmitting PEDs

Whilst the use of all PEDs is prohibited during the taxi, take-off and landing phases of flight, (when the passenger seat belt sign is on), use of PEDs that only produce spurious emissions are often permitted during the cruise phase of flight. However, the aircraft crew may require PED use to be suspended at any time, and such a request must be obeyed. Such a case might be if the crew suspects that the PED use is the cause of interference with aircraft systems.

Examples of PEDs that might be permitted to be used during the cruise phase of flight includes:

* laptop computers, PDAs and MP3 players (as long as they do not include wireless transmitting functions), and
* electronic games, DVD players, CD players, cassette players, video or "still" cameras and calculators.

The use of some mobile phones or PDAs is also permitted by some airlines as long as they are used in the "flight safe" mode only, and this mode is enabled before the PED is turned off before the start of the flight, so that it is already within the “flight safe” mode when it is turned back on in the permitted phase of flight.

The restriction on the use of PEDs applies to devices carried onboard by the passenger or provided to the passenger by the crew. It does not apply to time measuring equipment (watches etc) or implanted medical devices (pacemakers etc). Any medical devices that include a monitoring feature that includes a transmitting function to a medical centre should have this transmitting feature switched off during the flight – see general policy on use of transmitting PEDs.

Hunter58

17th Sep 2009, 21:56

I cannot understand why 'SLF' as a term would have any derogatory sense at all. Sound more like a compliment to me!

F3G, regarding no have your child on the lap (unsecured) for T/O or landing and comparing that to Eurostar.

There is s slight difference. Eurostar will use a vast number of miles to slow down, your average airplane will make iot within ONE. Your child is not going to be in your lap anymore, trust me.

I have been in one take-off reject at 80 kts, and that was already brutal.

Final 3 Greens

18th Sep 2009, 05:11

Hunter 58

There is s slight difference. Eurostar will use a vast number of miles to slow down,

Not necessarily. In the case of a train derailment, unsecured bodies will fly like bullets. Even if one disregards Eurostar a local regional train derailing at 80mph is still potentially catastrophic.

Sadly, the UK has plenty of evidence of this from the past 20 years.

To be clear, I was only illustrating why lowcostdolly's comparison with ground travel (car) could be countered by someone 'if its so dangerous why don't trains have seat belts?'

My conclusion was that trains should have seat belts, not that infants should be unsecured.

FYI, I have rejected a take off from 55 knots in a light aircraft on a short runway. Not in the same leagure of brutality as a jet at 80knots, but still a sobering experience.

Ancient Mariner

18th Sep 2009, 09:34

Duty free alcohol cannot even sustain a fire, let alone "start" one. It isn't strong enough. Alcohol is NOT flammable unless it is 100deg proof or over, that being more or less the definition of "proof". Duty free/airport sales is never over 75-80%.
Wrong on both accounts. Standard Whisky, Cognac, Vodka et all are in the region of 80 proof, or 40% and burns fine without being heated. You will find 50% Vodka at many duty free outlets and 60% is not uncommon. Stroh rum is one.
From their home page:
STROH Original is produced in 3 strengths - 40, 60 and 80% ABV. As for FA's being "Highly Trained Professionals" as safety is concerned. :hmm:
Per

Hunter58

18th Sep 2009, 11:45

F3G

the derailment would probably more be like a crash for the aircraft. Hard braking is an 'almost' everyday action, epecially after a 'soft' landing. I think the braking events are significanly more frequent.

I understood you did not want to promote the non-use of restraint systems.

Ancient Observer

18th Sep 2009, 11:56

SLF as a term may, or may not be "insulting". I believe that it is. Someone else may disagree. That's fine.

However, the use of the phrase/term is indicative of a sector that has little idea of the modern realities of customer service.

The (ex) civil servants that still inhabit big airline and other national carriers need to remove the various cultural bricks in the wall that relate back to their "old" days.

Each and every use of the term "Self loading freight" by someone in Aviation just shows how far Aviation has yet to move to truly serve its customers. Customers are the only reason nowadays for anyone in Aviation to have a job...........the Govt might save BoS, but it won't save either big airline or any other carrier.

sea oxen

18th Sep 2009, 22:57

Oh dear, thread drift everywhere here. Let's start:

EtOH is flammable, but when it's hydrous, it's in a nice sort of way, you know, when magicians set a handkerchief on fire and pass it through their hands. I imagine that in any event serious enough to spill the bins, drop the heavy bottles causing them to spray their contents only to be ignited by fires emanating from the wing box, it'd be the fuel tanks which would perturb me more.

Having survived two bottles of 80% Stroh rum in my lifetime, I'd be more scared of the passenger carrying it than any conflagration resulting from their spillage.

The expression 'SLF' is, in my opinion, not derogatory. If I am daft enough to again buy shares in an airline, these passengers - sweet little children with their doe-eyed parents - are units. My objective is to obtain as much profit from each unit as possible. The strategy is left to the management. I entrust them to decide how these units are treated. If the units are happy, they might return. If it costs more to make these units happy than to acquire new units - well, you see where I'm leading.

When you hop on a flight, have a look around you. How many of those other passengers could you like? And of those you couldn't - those incapable of any form of manners beyond grunting and asking for another Stella - how many would you like to greet, serve and generally be nice to in one day?

It is only reasonable that people who do need to tend to the people who can afford to fly - that is, everybody - might seek some solace in using a catchall expression to describe their payload. I am proud to be self-loading freight, and I hope that the sandwich chuckers and guys with big watches are in accord with that.

MP3/4 players before/after cruise: You don't allow me to smoke, so I'm sure you'll survive without my listening to your appalling taste in music for a bit. The crew will provide you with a colouring-in book if required, and can help you with it, too.

SO

Final 3 Greens

19th Sep 2009, 05:22

the derailment would probably more be like a crash for the aircraft. Hard braking is an 'almost' everyday action, epecially after a 'soft' landing. I think the braking events are significanly more frequent.

Agreed. Just for info, when I used to commute to London on the train, it was by no means unknown for firm braking to cause standing pax to slip or even fall, but I do agree that firm braking is not unusual on aircraft and do understand the concept of minimising runway occupancy.

But in the mind of an infrequent passenger who regards an aircraft as a totally safe mode of transport, I think one might still get some pushback from an argumentative person.

For example, I sat next to one individual who undid his belt when the aircraft was taxiing for take off (how stupid can you get?) and was only persuaded to refasten it when I pressed the call bell. No way was I going to have a heavy unsecured object next to me.

His reasoning was that he had taken 10 flights and take off was always smooth :ugh:

Where I disagree with lowcostdolly is in trying to make a generalization about someting that does not require it.

I think one is much safer in saying 'this is the law for aircraft, please obey it.)

Once again, just my opinion.

Hunter58

19th Sep 2009, 12:53

Ancient Observer

therefore you do regard the therm 'freight' as inferior to 'passenger'? You seem biased.

Payload is payload, and whether or not you call the load device a seat or a pallet, it is still there to ensure the safe transportaion of the payload. Added bonus of what is referred to as passenger is that contrary to freight they usually are able to load and offload themselves.

The airlines are offering a transportation service between two points on the planet. That is all. The rest is 'product enhancement'.

The most agressive and quite sucessful air carrier of the time is called Ryanair, you may have heard of them. They definitely do not have a reputation for excellent passenger handling skills.

HighFlyingSpanner

19th Sep 2009, 19:29

I pay for someone to re-fill my coffee cup, not lecture me on my so-called "safety".

Why should I sit down if I need a pee? Half the time aircrew simply forget to turn off the seatbelt signs.

Seems cabin crew have grown too big for their boots.

jetset lady

19th Sep 2009, 19:43

With an attitude like that HFS, you may just find that your coffee re-fill misses your cup...

With passengers like you, who needs external hazards? :rolleyes:

Virginia

19th Sep 2009, 19:44

HighFlyingSpanner, you are the one too big for your boots. It is CAA law that cabin crew are onboard and you must follow their lawful commands. Why is it that so many pax are so self entitled that they cannot follow instructions from the 'flying waiter' they percieve as being below them in social standing.

profot

19th Sep 2009, 20:00

Can you imagine sitting next to HFS

Nightmare

Final 3 Greens

20th Sep 2009, 04:55

HFS is a troll.

Please don't react to him.

Papa Sierra

20th Sep 2009, 06:58

Unfortunately in today's society there is always someone who thinks they either 1. know better or 2. feel that rules are for everyone else but them. HFS probably falls into the latter. It is for these two reasons that I dispute whether mobile phones can possibly have that serious an effect on an aircrafts systems. To my way of thinking, and backed up by the attitude of people like HFS, if there was a real danger with phones being left on, the onus would not be placed on the pax to switch them off. I rather fancy that they would either be removed and handed back later or at least checked to see if they were in fact off. Having said that, as a long time aviator I always pay attention to safety briefs and do exactly as I'm told by crew members.

Mr Optimistic

20th Sep 2009, 13:11

you guys could start a fight in an empty room. Very entertaining but so what ? If 'they' say open the blinds whats the issue with just opening them ? Do we have to know the reason and justification for everything ? Must say that the term 'slf' is amusing enough but the general tenor across the whole forum tends to an 'educated and knowledgeable us' versus an ignorant 'them' who put money before everything and regard the crew as servants.

I hate sitting next to a high percentage of dumb, overweight, drunk, ignorant fellow passengers so don't envy anyone who has to cater to their needs and be nice to them.

Bealzebub

20th Sep 2009, 17:31

Just to clarify a couple of disparate points for the few who may find it useful.

This website was created by two professional pilots, who intended that it should appeal to, and target professional pilots. Over the years it grew into a much more diverse site that attracted interest from beyond the initial target groups. This resulted in more forums being created to better streamline the primary interests of the wider groups being attracted to the site. This was one of the forums created as a result of that early expansion.

The forum descriptors as with many other things in pilots use of language, tends to run the spectrum from studied understatement to whimsical overstatement. The term Self loading freight is one born out of the latter. It is a whimsical statement not an attempt to insult or disrespect. Like it or not, the majority of people here would appreciate and understand the intention, even if they disliked the phrase. Paying passengers and customers, may convey the point in a more accurate, dry, and less whimsical way, but that takes away some of the flavour of the sites creation.

On to the subject of who benefits from safety briefs, regulations and checks.
A point to bear in mind is that many of the required checks fall to the Captains legal obligations to comply with the relevant statutes in a given jurisdiction, as well as the formal responsibilities that are either legislative, regulatory or company generated. For practical purposes many of these requirements have to be devolved to other crewmembers and compliance with them to the passengers on board.

As well as being a pilot, a Captain has the added responsibility for ensuring and being ultimately responsible to the relevant authority, for compliance. In order to effectively do this, the commanders responsibility and authority is granted by national law, international law and treaties, and the responsibility, authority and discretion, that is placed in the Captain by the employing company. In other words the captain has a number of legal obligations, however his authority is enshrined within that legal framework to ensure compliance.

Cabin crew act under the commanders authority in pusuit of their safety tasks and under the commanders general authority at all other material times. Obstructing or refusing to comply with their instruction then becomes a refusal to comply with the captains instruction and whatever consequences may result from that. However irksome it might sometimes be, the passenger has also contracted to comply with these requirements by accepting carrriage within the "general conditions of carriage." Your ticket is your contract, or the little box you tick online, is your acceptance. This provides the contract for civil remedy in addition to any other criminal action that may result from an offence.

Obviously 99.99% of people are aware of this generally, or with sufficient levels of common sense, such that serious problems do not arise. Likewise we accept that common sense is a two way street, and sometimes compromises may need to be made, although it may shift aspects of responsibility and liability away from those charged with ensuring compliance, to those who violate it. Taking the seatbelt sign as an example, if somebody has been instructed to keep it fastened, but elects not to, then any subsequent claim for damage resulting from that action may leave that passenger unprotected and worse still, potentially liable for damage or injury caused to others.