Originally Posted by Jetset Lady
Sorry. I was agreeing with others in that there is only so much we can say in a briefing, hence the need for passengers to be able to feel they can put their trust in us. I wasn't talking specifically about condensation.
Like others on here (although I refer to previous threads in the main), I've often wondered why a reasonable amount of the briefing is taken up with "In the event of a landing on water...", since survivable landings on water with underslung engines aren't exactly common.
I also kind of wondered reading this thread why there isn't some more information about, for example, condensation, emergency descent and so on in the safety information. I guess one answer is it might frighten people - but perhaps only the kind of people sitting like startled rabbits while those of us who've listened to the briefing jump over them to find the exit behind us as fire breaks out. If you're going to tell people about the masks, why run the risk that half of them are too panicked to do as they're told because they don't understand why the aircraft is in a dive? A controlled emergency descent probably doesn't seem so controlled to most pax!
I also wonder whether, for those of us who are frequent fliers - indeed particularly now so many people are frequent fliers, having one, scarcely ever altered version of the safety briefing could not prove counter-productive in an incident. Are some people only going to realise at the crucial moment that, whilst they know the briefing off by heart (in multiple languages!), it has become so routine as to be just another set of noises.
But now I'm wandering off-topic!