Originally Posted by Carnage Matey!
To play devils advocate here, I don't think the risk of injury from an orderly evacuation from a 737 without it's nose gear is likely to be that significant. From a 747 yes, maybe even from an A320, but the 737 is low enough that you could step out of the front door and slide off the rear of the wings on your backside. Sitting in an aircraft thats just skidded half a mile along the runway on its engine cowls doesn't give me a warm and fuzzy feeling. If the geometry of the 737 is such that the engines remain clear of the ground when the nose gear is retracted then I'd reconsider, but the risk assessment from staying in an aircraft with potentially knackered engines versus a controlled evacuation with the majority of pax directed towards the forward exits suggests to me the latter option is the safer. We have to assess the risks in terms of probability mulitplied by severity.
Evac: Probabilty of injury high, severity of injury low = risk A
Sit tight: Probability of injury low, severity of injury (if plane goes up in smoke) massive = risk B
How high would the aft slides bewith a collapsed nose gear? Would people still try to use the aft slides in their haste? I forget which event it was but folks got seriously injured, if not killed, using slides that didn't reach the ground due to the unusual aircraft attitude.
Friend had folks panic and evac out of a 737 that had hot brakes. Minor event became an 'accident' due to folks getting injuried and getting hospitalized. If they'd just sat on their hands for a couple of minutes more they could have used the airstairs to deplane. Panic started and the injuries began. Few, but still injured with broken bones, etc.