4 x 4 BBC TV Programme on Air Safety

[Out Of Trim]

Being broadcasted tonight 23rd July at 1930 BBC1:-
4x4 New series in which four reporters offer different angles on a single issue beginning with air safety. Alan Whicker investigates traffic jams in the sky and goes in search of the worst bottlenecks, while John Stapleton reports on air rage and reveals astounding stories taken from a specially commissioned survey of airline staff. Kaye Adams finds out how safe airplane emergency exits are, testing the new narrower over-wing escape doors, and Denise Mahoney talks to pilots about the air routes they like to avoid, learning that flying over Africa to Kenya is a disquieting and isolated experience
:eek:

[A Very Civil Pilot]

From the reviews it look as if it would be more at home on Channel 5.

Next weeks should be good, Melinda Messenger is fronting it!!

[It's a Joke]

More like in the bin !!

:D :D :D :D :D

[mjenkinsblackdog]

Interesting program ,but its a shame the bbc never mentioned TICAS which is fitted to most modern aircraft fom the AIRBUS and BOEING stables.
BBC research let the side down here,otherwise quite interesting.

[Human Factor]

Correct me if I'm wrong, but if you listen to the briefing from the cabin crew regarding the overwing exits - once opened, they should be thrown out of the opening, not passed back into the cabin!!!!

Perhaps this explains why they took so long evacuating during their tests.

If in doubt, read the instructions ......

(Bet the Daily Mail has something to say tomorrow)

[747-436]

Didn't explain many facts behind ATC delays and such like. Typical Jornos trying to scare

[flypastpastfast]

Interesting to know that someone somewhere thinks its a good idea to make it harder for passengers to leave in an emergency.

Apart from the glossy razzmattaz at the start, I thought the approach was pretty well balanced for such a time slot.

Some good points on alcohol and passenger aggression.

[flypastpastfast]

I get the point you're making airforcenone, but the point they were trying to make was the difficulty some passengers may have in a real emergency lifting the hatch and pushing it out of the aircraft. I've been on aircraft before where I think the passengers at the exit wouldn't have a hope in hell of lifting (or possibly even opening) the hatch.

Does anyone know the weight of the hatches?

[Next Generation PSR]

Interesting that they focused on the overwing exits to sensationalise.

In most evacuations the majority of passengers evacuate using the main doors through which one can evacuate more than twice the amount of passengers.

The overwings are secondary exits.

What about the advances that have been made like the overwing exits on the B737-800 where they simply open out and up with power assist and no help from the passenger apart from pulling the handle.

I have to agree that it is a vicious circle in terms of selling alcohol on board to make up the salary - a true but bold statement
which few have made before - at least whilst being actually employed by an airline.

And what was Alan Whicker on? Looking at the screens and seeing wait automatically means you are delayed! In most cases it reads "wait in lounge" which simply means that the gate is yet to become available and does not necessarily mean a delay, come on Alan don't get drawn into the sensationalism, notice the quick editing when he asked the gate agent about the delay - obviously there probably wasn't one.

Most dangerous destinations JFK and the likes of Gambia and Mombasa, I'm sure these are challenging to you guys up front, but they hardly account for the bulk of the traffic which operates safely from the UK every day.

Passengers that say "oh I'd be pleased to go without a drinks service" yeah right, ever tried operating a charter flight without offering a bar service - It doesn't go down that well, I can tell you.

I really expected more unbiased factual information from the BBC - silly me!

[Dan Winterland]

And the way the lady journo deliberately left the overwing exit halfway in the hole to impede the first few after her to get out didn't go un-noticed.

Anything to improve the story.

[LTN man]

Dan Winterland. That was a rather poor comment you made about a journalist deliberately impeding the exists to improve a story. Let’s not forget Manchester, many people died because they could not get out of a burning jet that had come to a halt. :mad:

[Gash Handlin]

Airforcenone,

You hit another nail on the head there when you said "If you listen to the brief....Read the instructions"

How many pax these days actually bother to listen to the brief OR read the card? I bet the male pax that do watch the brief are only doing it to ogle the demonstrator!

Surely anything that highlights relevant safety issues is a good thing and I didn't think they were too sensational in that piece or the air rage bit.

And how many panacking pax in the caring sharing world we live in today would give a toss if they've blocked the exit with the door once they're outside, or am I being too cynical :rolleyes:

Alan Whicker and the Africa bits were laughable though.

[weetabix]

It concerns me that according to the programme, that timed tests by the CAA of the evacuation of aircraft didn't include the removal of the door which seemed to take at least five-ten seconds, and increase the anxiety in the aircraft.
Quite a large proportion of the 90 second time limit.

[Bagheera]

I attended Cranfield as part of my ATC course.
We tried out the evacuation simulator. The overwing exit weighs about 20-25 kgs and has a tendency to fall in on the person releasing it.
They told us that they did do tests with the door in place and that in order to create a panic situation they employed students and gave £20 to the first 20 out of the aircraft.
They had to cut short those experiments though because of the amount of injuries, including broken bones that occured!!!
PS very disappointed with the program in general and Alan Whicker in particular. Lets face it 30 mins is not enough time to cover any one of these stories sufficientley , let alone all four of them.

[ 24 July 2001: Message edited by: Bagheera ]

[raitfaiter]

Also nothing said about how seating and cabin materials have changed since manchester...which should (hopefully) make a big difference nowadays. At least they didn't start in on smokehoods again :)

[Mike Oscar]

I have to agree though, some of those overwing exits are very heavy.....and with a crush of people behind you trying to get out it becomes even harder to manoeuvre them, let alone throw them out of the hole as depicted on the safety briefs.

[Whossat Forrus]

Why not make sure there is always a bloke sitting next to the hatch, preferably one 5'2" tall and built like a brick built sh**ehouse. This way you won't get any women causing mayhem as they disappear under the door. Lets face it boys the second your missus decides something's a tadge heavy to get out of the car boot it's down with the golfing weekly and mind your back isn't it? :rolleyes:

[M.Mouse]

LTN Man

I think you will find that a few other factors were involved in the MAN tragedy. I recall in one of our SEP sessions being shown a video of interviews with the cabin crew on board that aircraft. I distinctly recall that many passengers sat still making no attempt to leave with the rear of the fuselage 'glowing red' around them.

I am sure that this can all be explained by a physchologist but the programme took a very superficial look at very complex subjects. Given the generally sensationalist and inaccurate broadcasting that is unfortunately the norm nowadays I didn't feel the programme was too outrageous.

[Vfrpilotpb]

Greetings Ppruners,
Having just flown to and from Cyprus in a 2 month old 737 of Helios Airways, outbound I was lucky enough to sit at the row 15 which is were one of the o/wing exits are, the next one is row 16, good space enough for the average sized clumsy human to stumble out from, however on the flight back I was unlucky to be sat at row 24 which is a very (typical ) tight fit for my height 5ft9" but I would be able to get out quickley enough in the case of any problem(I think), but sat next to me at the window on row 24 was a very nice man from Liverpool, he was 6ft 3" and weighed 27 stone( 378lbs) he was so big that he was partialy on my seat squab, he was full of apologie's for his trespass onto my seat but said he had mentioned his size to the airline who had said sorry you will have to take pot luck with the seating, I can tell you this guy as nice as he was would have to sacrifice himself to let all others of in front of him first for he would not and I repeat NOT be able to get through the emergency exits on this type of A/C, I wonder if the designers ever thought of our larger humans, for it seems that subsequent generations are getting bigger all the time, personally speaking I feel that the safety of passengers should be the first and only priority in the A/C designers mind, for if it were not for Pax where would the profit come from in flights, certainly not freight.
The problem is we all get on aircraft and put up with the cattle truck conditions, how many of you reading this, write to complain about the tightness of your last seat on any A/C :eek:

[moschops]

Let's not forget the Riyadh L-1011 either. :(

[Descend to What Height?!?]

During our annual safety training and dingy drills we were told at one point that some airlines have a policy on who gets to sit next to exits.
The theory was to put young fit single blokes next to all exits if possible. The reason was they will think only of themselves, so will want to get out fast. People traveling with a partner or family will try to put them first. Their priority will not be to open the door and get out come what may.

Does any one know if some airlines still have this policy? We did hear that some had to stop it due to the PC lobby, Discrimination on gender, size etc?

Personaly I prefer a full 4 or 5 point harness, or if not available, at least to have a rear facing seat. Then if we do come into sudden contact with the gound, then at least I have a chance of getting out, and not stuck in what is left of my seat with broken shins, knees and arms, with a very sore head! Oh forgot, costs money dosnt it for the slightly larger rear seats!

:mad:

[pulse1]

"The theory was to put young fit single blokes next to all exits if possible"

I was recently on a BA 737 and was asked to change places so that I could sit next to the emergency exit. Gosh, does that mean that BA class me as "young AND fit"? I feel better already.

[Plane Speaker]

There is no doubt that rearward facing seats offer safety benefits over forward facing, however with the crash loads being taken by the backrest and thus through the rear feet (although they would be facing forward) the mass of the seat would increase significantly, thus hugely damaging payload for the aircraft. Furthermore the cost of the seat would increase significantly. FYI an average price of a triple seat, no IFE and cloth covers is around £2700 each.
I recently enjoyed a BA flight to Hog Kong and sat in a window seat in J class. This seat faces aft and I must say I found it strange to sit with my back to the engine, and, even in level flight feel like I'm being tipped out of my seat. The climb was something else entirely. I don't believe that the travelling public would take to aft facing accomodation one bit....It'd cost more to travel and ultimately be less comfortable.

[ 24 July 2001: Message edited by: Plane Speaker ]

[tunturi]

Moschops:
>Let's not forget the Riyadh L-1011 either. <
What possible relevance has that got to do with this discussion. The aircraft was still pressurised. NOBODY could open ANY door.

[weetabix]

Refering to Bagheera's comment,
If in the TESTS the removal of O/W doors caused too many injuries to escaping students (winning £20 = many pints), shouldn't that have suggested that these doors would cause problems?
Without being an expert in A/C door design, it occurs to me that perhaps the doors might work better if they opened outwards -the other ones do! (I do know about the fuselage effectively being a pressure chamber etc.)

[edited to correct smelling pistakes]

[ 24 July 2001: Message edited by: weetabix ]

[rover2701]

I see nobody has picked up on the distance between seats at the overwing exit. I personaly think it is too narrow and the door is unwieldy and heavy especially for a slightly built female(thats not meant to be sexist). Increase the seat pitch and either have exits that open outwards like maindoors or have open assist that clears the opening :confused:

[basil fawlty]

just a couple of points.

1. Good to see Alan Whicker on the box again (this bloke has class), but I think that this was a totally inappropriate vehicle for him. He is a travel/lifestyle/human interest reporter and NOT an air transport industry expert. I think he was just presenting the material given to him, shallow and partly incorrect as it was.
2. Although serving alcohol on flights is no doubt a contributory factor with "air rage" incidents, the occurance of these events started to increase significantly when a lot of the airlines started to ban smoking on their services. How many of the "culprits" involved are smokers I wonder, suffering anxiety and withdrawal symptoms because they are prohibited from lighting up?

[LTN man]

Want to know what it is really like for passengers trying to get out of a burning aircraft then read the Air Accident report on Manchester at http://www.aaib.dtlr.gov.uk/formal/gbgjl/gbgjl.htm

[flypastpastfast]

vfrpilotpb and others have raised interesting points, especially how likely it is that an aircraft would be evacuated quickly.

It seems that the airline companies themselves will only take notice if another manchester accident takes place.

I cannot fathom the mentality that says, "if we increase exits/room at exit rows tickets will cost more" I mean, jesus christ - just do it. What would it mean, an extra 10-20 quid to give everyone on an aircraft a fighting chance to get off. If it is true that the space on wing exit rows is to be decreased, then I believe TV comapnies have every right (and my blessing) to be as sensationalist as possible. The stupidity behind such a move would be truly stunning.

As I've said before, it will be interesting watching a full charter config A380 evacuate.

As other have said, good to see Mr whicker again - a real travel journalist. Class.