Manning of Emeregency Exit row Seats
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: United Kingdom
Age: 39
Posts: 700
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
CAP789 sates:
Passengers likely to assist evacuation. Only those persons who appear reasonably fit and strong should be seated adjacent to self-help (type III and type IV) exits. So only able bodied persons should be sat there.
Doors 2/3 are type one doors and will be easy to operate as you simply need to life a handle, there will likely be power assist and an automatically deploying slide. The vestibule area is wide too and will allow for a much faster evacs.
Compare that to the over wings which can fiddly, heavy, and need to come inwards before they're thrown outwards and weigh around 16 kg. They are also within a fairly narrow area for people to get through and therefore it is important these be manned by suitable individuals.
Likely doors 2/3 are extremely easy and quick to use and requires minimum force when armed therefore there's no need to get anyone next to them as having someone sat next to it would only be marginally quicker than someone sat a few rows away. Let's face it, if it hit the fan people would be at the exits within a couple of seconds.
A321 doors are type 1 and then I don't see any risk involved with doors 2/3 being unoccupied however the over wing hatch type doors definitely do. I can't find any guidance material that states non type 3/4 type doors must be occupied.
I suppose every airline will have its own policy, but it would be interesting to see any official reference.
Additionally,nits not fair on the passenger who paid to sit there if people can just sit there for free. It may seem poor customer service to deny a volunteer to sit at the exit but it would also be much worse for the person who paid, when you sit there for free. I know I would.
Passengers likely to assist evacuation. Only those persons who appear reasonably fit and strong should be seated adjacent to self-help (type III and type IV) exits. So only able bodied persons should be sat there.
Doors 2/3 are type one doors and will be easy to operate as you simply need to life a handle, there will likely be power assist and an automatically deploying slide. The vestibule area is wide too and will allow for a much faster evacs.
Compare that to the over wings which can fiddly, heavy, and need to come inwards before they're thrown outwards and weigh around 16 kg. They are also within a fairly narrow area for people to get through and therefore it is important these be manned by suitable individuals.
Likely doors 2/3 are extremely easy and quick to use and requires minimum force when armed therefore there's no need to get anyone next to them as having someone sat next to it would only be marginally quicker than someone sat a few rows away. Let's face it, if it hit the fan people would be at the exits within a couple of seconds.
A321 doors are type 1 and then I don't see any risk involved with doors 2/3 being unoccupied however the over wing hatch type doors definitely do. I can't find any guidance material that states non type 3/4 type doors must be occupied.
I suppose every airline will have its own policy, but it would be interesting to see any official reference.
Additionally,nits not fair on the passenger who paid to sit there if people can just sit there for free. It may seem poor customer service to deny a volunteer to sit at the exit but it would also be much worse for the person who paid, when you sit there for free. I know I would.
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: Colchester
Age: 40
Posts: 454
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Per Ardua ad Astraeus
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: UK
Posts: 18,579
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The question, then, is is it acceptable to have an overwing exit that cannot be opened by said crew in the crush of an evacuation 'cos having opened 'their' exit they will not get across the aisle to the other. All for the sake of trying to 'grab' money off the punters.
It seems to me that if an 'overwing' row remains empty ('un-bought') at boarding the 'dosh' is lost anyway, so why not move an AB there in the interests of, heaven forbid, passenger and crew safety rather than profit?
It seems to me that if an 'overwing' row remains empty ('un-bought') at boarding the 'dosh' is lost anyway, so why not move an AB there in the interests of, heaven forbid, passenger and crew safety rather than profit?
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Earth
Posts: 309
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Just a technicality but Doors 3 on an A321 is not overwing!
You can't realy comare it to FR or U2 as they don't operate the A321 so all their aircraft have overwing exits.
On the A321 there is also only one member of cabin crew in the Front Galley and at Doors 2 to operate the doors in case of emergency. How do you suggest to solve the issue of having a pax closer to R1 when there is a bloody big galley in the way?
You can't realy comare it to FR or U2 as they don't operate the A321 so all their aircraft have overwing exits.
On the A321 there is also only one member of cabin crew in the Front Galley and at Doors 2 to operate the doors in case of emergency. How do you suggest to solve the issue of having a pax closer to R1 when there is a bloody big galley in the way?
Per Ardua ad Astraeus
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: UK
Posts: 18,579
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
.....and a good 'technical point' too! I can see I was misled by some of the posters into assuming these were passenger operated doors. They should, I assume, be operated by crew, so the question of who 'mans' these doors is still valid since I would have assumed there should be crew cover - or have the accountants won again?
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Scampton, Lincoln
Age: 69
Posts: 67
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I am grateful to you all for your comments, thank you. I do however still have concerns over this issue and the manning of emergecncy exit seats in general.
CEJM Whilst I bow to your superior knowledge of the A321 and probably every other civilian aircraft, I simply do not understand your apparaent cavalier attitude to the manning of the doors. I think we would all agree that the doors are there for a reason, and therefore not manning them, for ANY reason, but especially one regarding lack of payment, shows an unacceptable level of safety towards the pax. Infact, in my opinion, it is an unacceptable lack of safety, bordering on negligence frankly.
I still remember the Manchester 737 (I think) that caught fire on the runway and I have had a ground evacuation and seen at first hand the sheer panic, terror and total pandemonium that occurs, and this was for a precautionary evacuation. God only knows what it would have been like if the aircraft had actually been on fire.
My personal opinion is that, apart from moaning at the CAA (which I doubt will do any good) there is little that you can do other than complain at the time and ultimately boycott the airline in question. It is one of the reasons why I won't fly with some of the big Asian airlines, apart from their general safety record.
I'm afraid that any airline who thinks that £30.00 for a seat is more important that passenger lives (and lets face it, that's what we are talking about here) should NOT be in the aviation business at all, and should have their operators licence withdrawn.
That's it. rant over! A very Merry christmas to you all and all good wishes for a safe and Peacful 2015.
(ps, the Airline was Monarch if you hadn't already guessed!)
CEJM Whilst I bow to your superior knowledge of the A321 and probably every other civilian aircraft, I simply do not understand your apparaent cavalier attitude to the manning of the doors. I think we would all agree that the doors are there for a reason, and therefore not manning them, for ANY reason, but especially one regarding lack of payment, shows an unacceptable level of safety towards the pax. Infact, in my opinion, it is an unacceptable lack of safety, bordering on negligence frankly.
I still remember the Manchester 737 (I think) that caught fire on the runway and I have had a ground evacuation and seen at first hand the sheer panic, terror and total pandemonium that occurs, and this was for a precautionary evacuation. God only knows what it would have been like if the aircraft had actually been on fire.
My personal opinion is that, apart from moaning at the CAA (which I doubt will do any good) there is little that you can do other than complain at the time and ultimately boycott the airline in question. It is one of the reasons why I won't fly with some of the big Asian airlines, apart from their general safety record.
I'm afraid that any airline who thinks that £30.00 for a seat is more important that passenger lives (and lets face it, that's what we are talking about here) should NOT be in the aviation business at all, and should have their operators licence withdrawn.
That's it. rant over! A very Merry christmas to you all and all good wishes for a safe and Peacful 2015.
(ps, the Airline was Monarch if you hadn't already guessed!)
Join Date: Apr 2014
Location: Miles from where I want to be.
Age: 39
Posts: 220
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Just to play Devils advocate, airlines have been doing this for at least 20 years. Either you pay to sit at the exits or you must have status. I've not seen any evidence of airlines I fly with who don't have passengers sat by the over wing hatch type exits. And pax are shifted gratis as as and when needed.
Furthermore I don't see any evidence of safety being compromised by not having passengers sat by the easy/quick access exits but this is not the case with the over wing hatch types so your comment about an airline who charges to sit there going out of business is a bit odd to say the least.
What about the flag carriers who will only allow gold/silver/emerald/diamand/beige/whatever members to sit there whilst those who don't have a club card are stuck in the normal seats? Shal we shut them down too?
And lets be honest, you offered to sit there so you could stretch your legs NOT so that you can help operate said door.
Furthermore I don't see any evidence of safety being compromised by not having passengers sat by the easy/quick access exits but this is not the case with the over wing hatch types so your comment about an airline who charges to sit there going out of business is a bit odd to say the least.
What about the flag carriers who will only allow gold/silver/emerald/diamand/beige/whatever members to sit there whilst those who don't have a club card are stuck in the normal seats? Shal we shut them down too?
And lets be honest, you offered to sit there so you could stretch your legs NOT so that you can help operate said door.
Avoid imitations
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Wandering the FIR and cyberspace often at highly unsociable times
Posts: 14,576
Received 430 Likes
on
227 Posts
I flew back from the Med this summer on a "loco" airline and sat behind the centre fuselage emergency exit row. It became immediately obvious that the female passengers in those seats were extremely nervous about flying at all and were the worse for drink.
At the time I though to myself that irrespective of who sits in those emergency exit seats, if a dire enough situation arises and I get there before the £10 extra legroom pax get that door open, they will get all the help they need. They will probably get helped out, too.
At the time I though to myself that irrespective of who sits in those emergency exit seats, if a dire enough situation arises and I get there before the £10 extra legroom pax get that door open, they will get all the help they need. They will probably get helped out, too.
