Cabin safety demonstration
Thread Starter
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Doncaster
Age: 50
Posts: 291
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Cabin safety demonstration
Something occurred to me earlier this week while trying to pay attention to a cabin safety demonstration, despite no clear view.
We had a flight on a 787. Like most long haul planes had seat back screens. However the. Demonstration was done manually.
Now I know that my daughter could not see anything, and indeed my own view was limited. Why on earth would they not use the tv's backed up by a manual demonstration?
We had a flight on a 787. Like most long haul planes had seat back screens. However the. Demonstration was done manually.
Now I know that my daughter could not see anything, and indeed my own view was limited. Why on earth would they not use the tv's backed up by a manual demonstration?
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Confoederatio Helvetica
Age: 68
Posts: 2,847
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I believe that manual demonstrations are required at random to keep the crew current. Or it could be a technical reason.
I was on a flight not so long ago where the lead announced "cabin crew manual demonstration". You could hear the groans and scrambling from all compass points.
I was on a flight not so long ago where the lead announced "cabin crew manual demonstration". You could hear the groans and scrambling from all compass points.
I just wish passengers would be courteous enough to stop talking, listening through their headphones, watching their phone videos/playing games etc to allow the safety briefing to be heard and seen. The level of disrespect is increasing and it's my life other passengers are putting at risk. I am always delighted when a demonstration is stopped and a PA call is made to tell everyone to pay attention. It's necessary EVERY time you fly.
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: East Anglia.
Posts: 416
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Passengers not paying attention is discourteous to cabin crew, no matter how many times safety has been put in front of them it should be heeded. Such are the vagaries of human nature.......'I do not need this'....Yes you do!
Thread Starter
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Doncaster
Age: 50
Posts: 291
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Although when you can't see very much it does not help with the interest....
Certainly we must be very unlucky as we had the manual demonstration both ways...
I do remember the groan on a BA flight when clearly the IFE decided that it was not playing the game that day... From what I recall, it then put up a 30 minute flight as to whether it would work at all...
Certainly we must be very unlucky as we had the manual demonstration both ways...
I do remember the groan on a BA flight when clearly the IFE decided that it was not playing the game that day... From what I recall, it then put up a 30 minute flight as to whether it would work at all...
It is usually a problem with the IFE system. The crew test the safety demo prior to boarding if there is a problem they get the manual kit ready.
Sometimes it works on the pre board test and then goes t***s up when its for real. That's when you hear the 'dreaded' announcement.
Sometimes it works on the pre board test and then goes t***s up when its for real. That's when you hear the 'dreaded' announcement.
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: last time I looked I was still here.
Posts: 4,507
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Passengers not paying attention is discourteous to cabin crew,
It is also discourteous to fellow pax who are trying to listen. In a cinema the other customers will tell them to pipe down, why not on an a/c?
Sometimes CA's stop and ask for attention. Personally I'd include the addictive, "some passengers are unfamiliar with these instructions and as a courtesy to them please STFU."
It is also discourteous to fellow pax who are trying to listen. In a cinema the other customers will tell them to pipe down, why not on an a/c?
Sometimes CA's stop and ask for attention. Personally I'd include the addictive, "some passengers are unfamiliar with these instructions and as a courtesy to them please STFU."
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Confoederatio Helvetica
Age: 68
Posts: 2,847
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Some airline simply put a recording on and then the crew and those pax,who don't speak that language, simply ignore it. Now that is discourteous and IMHO dangerous.
But it's done in English, some here will argue. That's good enough.
But it's done in English, some here will argue. That's good enough.
English and ..... but when you're flying from Basel, do you offer French or German as a recorded briefing in a second language ... I've heard both on many occasions but never together!
Maybe this won't go well here but I can sympathise with passengers who do not pay attention to safety briefings.
I try and look like I am paying attention out of politeness but after hearing the same briefings over and over again, it is hard to switch on.
It is a question of how we work around human behaviour. Telling people they must pay attention really doesn't work as much as we would like it to.
Many travelers have been on consecutive flights over several days and had the same briefing telling them how to fasten their seat belt and where the life vests are and that the emergency exits are where the crew are pointing (and the crew then wave their hands forwards and backwards which doesn't actually tell you where *your* nearest exit is) and after say 4 or 5 times hearing that same script and demonstration in the last 24 hours, any wonder people turn off?
What can be done? What is the needed information passengers must be familiar with?
For a first time flier, maybe how to fasten a seat belt but for most people, hearing that part of the briefing is the signal to switch off - the majority of travelers have been able to fasten their belts for years and being told and shown how it is done wears thin.
I do not have many answers to how this can be resolved but some of the videos that employ some measure of humour and novelty at least grab people's attention (like funny adverts - however even then seeing the same video time and time again gets tired). Maybe multiple videos not the same one every time so you get to see some novelty?
Really important things that make a difference in an emergency could be reinforced in other ways, not just the briefing.
Where is your *actual* nearest exit? (and the next nearest in the other direction) - perhaps each seat back should have a label indicating that for that seat?
Do not retrieve baggage from lockers in an evacuation. Perhaps labeling that on the lockers and on boarding passes?
The brace position - illustrated on the back of the seat?
Oxygen mask deployment and use? I don't know - but being told it in the middle of a script after people have switched off perhaps isn't working that well.
Much effort and money goes into analysing human behaviour, working out how humans' attention and interest can be grabbed by people selling things in the in-flight magazines. Perhaps some of that effort and ingenuity could be used in working out how to inform people of essential things they need to know when travelling in an aircraft?
I try and look like I am paying attention out of politeness but after hearing the same briefings over and over again, it is hard to switch on.
It is a question of how we work around human behaviour. Telling people they must pay attention really doesn't work as much as we would like it to.
Many travelers have been on consecutive flights over several days and had the same briefing telling them how to fasten their seat belt and where the life vests are and that the emergency exits are where the crew are pointing (and the crew then wave their hands forwards and backwards which doesn't actually tell you where *your* nearest exit is) and after say 4 or 5 times hearing that same script and demonstration in the last 24 hours, any wonder people turn off?
What can be done? What is the needed information passengers must be familiar with?
For a first time flier, maybe how to fasten a seat belt but for most people, hearing that part of the briefing is the signal to switch off - the majority of travelers have been able to fasten their belts for years and being told and shown how it is done wears thin.
I do not have many answers to how this can be resolved but some of the videos that employ some measure of humour and novelty at least grab people's attention (like funny adverts - however even then seeing the same video time and time again gets tired). Maybe multiple videos not the same one every time so you get to see some novelty?
Really important things that make a difference in an emergency could be reinforced in other ways, not just the briefing.
Where is your *actual* nearest exit? (and the next nearest in the other direction) - perhaps each seat back should have a label indicating that for that seat?
Do not retrieve baggage from lockers in an evacuation. Perhaps labeling that on the lockers and on boarding passes?
The brace position - illustrated on the back of the seat?
Oxygen mask deployment and use? I don't know - but being told it in the middle of a script after people have switched off perhaps isn't working that well.
Much effort and money goes into analysing human behaviour, working out how humans' attention and interest can be grabbed by people selling things in the in-flight magazines. Perhaps some of that effort and ingenuity could be used in working out how to inform people of essential things they need to know when travelling in an aircraft?
Join Date: Nov 1999
Posts: 2,312
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Jonkster, I both agree and disagree with what you say, and it is a subject we regard as being important.
To start with the contentious point. Thank you for giving the impression of paying attention, because in truth that is probably quite helpful. Repetition plays quite a significant part of how we conduct the whole operation. For example, every flight involves the crew briefing each other on the (hopefully) salient points of that particular phase of the flight. The "take off brief" will rarely involve something the crew hasn't considered many times before, but with emphasis on current "threats and errors" what it does do is to put the salient points back into pre-frontal cortex of the brain. In essence this is the brains "post it" note and moves that particular information back into the short term memory. This is important, because the onset of a "fight or flight" response is likely to cause heavy reliance on both survival (instinctive) memory, and what has been placed into that short term memory.
Take the seat belt scenario. There are many examples of potentially survivable accidents where victims who seemingly should have been able to escape are found still strapped in their seats and then seemingly overcome by a subsequent fatal event. Interviews with survivors sometimes reveal the difficulty they had getting out of their seat. In a "panic" or survival situation where the relevant escape actions weren't preeminent in the short term memory, the survival instinct was to rely on the instinctive response. That instinctive response was often to reach for the seatbelt release where it instinctively is everyday in your car, which (of course) isn't where it is in the aircraft!
I think that in many cases of "God not this stuff again" be it ahead or behind the flight deck door, the reality is that even though you may believe you have "switched off" More often than not that information is still refreshed in the prefrontal cortex and serves the intended purpose to some degree. Even if that is not universally the case, there is only so much you can do, and it is incumbent on those responsible to do it.
Where I do agree with you, is in how the delivery provides the best level of take up so that passengers and then crew minimize the time exposed to jeopardy and therefore optimise survivability. To their credit, some airlines (air New Zealand being one notable example) have put some serious thought, effort, and money into this subject. Humour is often successful, but it can be very subjective and still becomes stale with repeated exposure. Keeping the subject fresh has a significant cost element, and beyond the regulatory requirements, cost is always going to weigh heavily.
The reality (of course) is that commercial flying is extremely safe and routine, and dealing with the necessity of rare (but unpredictable) emergencies is always going to involve compromise. To that end I think we realistically have to accept some element of compromise. However, accepting the weaknesses of human behaviour (which to a greater or lesser degree we are all guilty of) I suspect the answer lies in a combination of better technical evolution, more effective education, and better human interaction between the crew and the passengers. Unfortunately, I doubt that will be a rapid development.
To start with the contentious point. Thank you for giving the impression of paying attention, because in truth that is probably quite helpful. Repetition plays quite a significant part of how we conduct the whole operation. For example, every flight involves the crew briefing each other on the (hopefully) salient points of that particular phase of the flight. The "take off brief" will rarely involve something the crew hasn't considered many times before, but with emphasis on current "threats and errors" what it does do is to put the salient points back into pre-frontal cortex of the brain. In essence this is the brains "post it" note and moves that particular information back into the short term memory. This is important, because the onset of a "fight or flight" response is likely to cause heavy reliance on both survival (instinctive) memory, and what has been placed into that short term memory.
Take the seat belt scenario. There are many examples of potentially survivable accidents where victims who seemingly should have been able to escape are found still strapped in their seats and then seemingly overcome by a subsequent fatal event. Interviews with survivors sometimes reveal the difficulty they had getting out of their seat. In a "panic" or survival situation where the relevant escape actions weren't preeminent in the short term memory, the survival instinct was to rely on the instinctive response. That instinctive response was often to reach for the seatbelt release where it instinctively is everyday in your car, which (of course) isn't where it is in the aircraft!
I think that in many cases of "God not this stuff again" be it ahead or behind the flight deck door, the reality is that even though you may believe you have "switched off" More often than not that information is still refreshed in the prefrontal cortex and serves the intended purpose to some degree. Even if that is not universally the case, there is only so much you can do, and it is incumbent on those responsible to do it.
Where I do agree with you, is in how the delivery provides the best level of take up so that passengers and then crew minimize the time exposed to jeopardy and therefore optimise survivability. To their credit, some airlines (air New Zealand being one notable example) have put some serious thought, effort, and money into this subject. Humour is often successful, but it can be very subjective and still becomes stale with repeated exposure. Keeping the subject fresh has a significant cost element, and beyond the regulatory requirements, cost is always going to weigh heavily.
The reality (of course) is that commercial flying is extremely safe and routine, and dealing with the necessity of rare (but unpredictable) emergencies is always going to involve compromise. To that end I think we realistically have to accept some element of compromise. However, accepting the weaknesses of human behaviour (which to a greater or lesser degree we are all guilty of) I suspect the answer lies in a combination of better technical evolution, more effective education, and better human interaction between the crew and the passengers. Unfortunately, I doubt that will be a rapid development.
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Confoederatio Helvetica
Age: 68
Posts: 2,847
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I agree Junkster that the timing and content of the safety demonstration need to be rethought.
Some things, like bags in the lockers, should be conveyed much earlier - I would say even before boarding. 'Learning' this while taxiing is too late.
A little more interaction might help. Asking pax to locate their two closest exits, and to count the rows. Why not say "Ladies and Gents, there is one thing you need to leave behind in the evacuation. What is it?" Or "Is this anyone's first flight? Hands up please" and then show them how the seatbelt works. (It is different than most first time flyers have ever seen) And not the same interaction every time.
Some of we SLF know the routine as well as many cabin crew. Before the briefing has started I have secured my carryon, buckled my belt, located my life jacket, counted the rows fore and aft to the nearest exits on both sides, located the panel for the O2, familiarised myself with exit openings (B737 particularly inconsistent here) etc.
What's being done today hasn't been looked at for decades and it should be. It seems these things only get reviewed following accidents.
Yes hairbrained ideas but what we are doing isn't really working - as evidenced by the disinterest of passengers.
Some things, like bags in the lockers, should be conveyed much earlier - I would say even before boarding. 'Learning' this while taxiing is too late.
A little more interaction might help. Asking pax to locate their two closest exits, and to count the rows. Why not say "Ladies and Gents, there is one thing you need to leave behind in the evacuation. What is it?" Or "Is this anyone's first flight? Hands up please" and then show them how the seatbelt works. (It is different than most first time flyers have ever seen) And not the same interaction every time.
Some of we SLF know the routine as well as many cabin crew. Before the briefing has started I have secured my carryon, buckled my belt, located my life jacket, counted the rows fore and aft to the nearest exits on both sides, located the panel for the O2, familiarised myself with exit openings (B737 particularly inconsistent here) etc.
What's being done today hasn't been looked at for decades and it should be. It seems these things only get reviewed following accidents.
Yes hairbrained ideas but what we are doing isn't really working - as evidenced by the disinterest of passengers.
Whilst many SLF travel with their favourite carrier time and time again, how many actually pay attention to "Please note your nearest exit" especially when an aircraft is all in EY config? The other point to note is a shorter taxi to the runway. I've been on several flights when the safety briefing has been shown during and after take off.
I have often thought it wood be good if there was an area in the airport terminal where you could practice putting on a life jacket and pulling down and putting on the oxygen mask. (I always have a vision of pulling so hard that the tube detaches!)
Thread Starter
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Doncaster
Age: 50
Posts: 291
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I've got a few thoughts...
How many of us need telling how to put on a seat belt? Extra words that encourage one to tone out.
Baggage - I get that we should leave baggage behind in an emergency. I also get that some people just don't get it. In recent evacuations where people have taken baggage has it made a difference? I mention as a discussion point more than anything else.
How many of us need telling how to put on a seat belt? Extra words that encourage one to tone out.
Baggage - I get that we should leave baggage behind in an emergency. I also get that some people just don't get it. In recent evacuations where people have taken baggage has it made a difference? I mention as a discussion point more than anything else.
I recall the article seemed to say that people went into a different mind set when things went wrong and were stressed and wanted to make it all more familiar and normal and safe - leaving your personal possessions behind was not what felt like normal or familiar or safe behaviour to many - despite being repeatedly yelled at by cabin crew to leave their bags, they automatically wanted their stuff with them.
I think showing that evacuation video with the aisles clogged would make for better compliance should the worst happen, than being told in a briefing not to get their bags if evacuating...
That's an interesting suggestion. Please do stay to enjoy the company.