How not to evacuate a plane

[Mark in CA]

A female passenger fell from a plane to the tarmac during an emergency evacuation at Budapest airport on March 23 after smoke filled the cabin, but it was later determined the smoke was not from the plane.

https://www.timesofisrael.com/israeli-woman-fighting-for-life-after-falling-out-of-door-of-plane/

[Mark in CA]

Is this plausible?

Attila Farkas, the chief executive officer of the Travel Service operating the Smart Wings flights, confirmed the incident. He said that the cause of the problem was that the engine of the vehicle pulling the plane was turned on right before they started to do the manoeuvre. It was cold, and given that it is an old, diesel-powered vehicle, the immense smog produced could easily fill the cabins.

Read more at: https://dailynewshungary.com/evacuation-slides-used-for-rescuing-passengers-from-a-plane-in-ferihegy/

[andrasz]

It was a charter flight operated on behalf Israir, filled with Israeli vacatoners returning home. As I'm sure all my Israely friends would nod in agreement, they can be the most unruly and at the same time assertive lot, I can well imagine that as smoke filled the cabin the pax overwhelmed the cabin crew who probably were not at the top of the profession either. (I flew TS once, they exhibited such a degree of unprofessionalism in the cabin that it was a firm never again experience...)

[Herod]

According to the Israeli report, the captain stated that the smoke was coming from outside. Despite this, the CC opened the doors and deployed the slides. One question: Why?

[Heathrow Harry]

panic................

[DirtyProp]

Agree with Harry.
The smoke probably caused a stampede that the CC were unable to control.
They don't call them cattle-class for nothing.

[4EvahLearning]

They don't call them cattle-class for nothing.

I am getting real sick of the privileged few on this forum making derogatory comments about those passengers who chose to or through monetary constraints, sit anywhere other than business or first class.

From what I can tell from these comments is that nobody sitting in business or first class has ever panicked, or been rude or overwhelmed, that those in "Cattle class" couldn't make a whole brain between them and act like morons on every occasion and at all times. Heaven forbid if they purchased an economy seat at a reduced rate because they must be significantly retarded. I wonder how these people function at all.

It must surely be nice to have the privilege of sitting in the "better" seats because you work in a profession where you can purchase them at a much reduced rate because what I can tell from this forum is that no-one working in the aviation industry except a lucky few, could afford the better seats as they are all paid a pittance.

[macdo]

I have to agree with Andraz above. I did a Israeli charter from London a few years back with a plane full of people off for a religious celebration. Unruly is an understatement, but not in the drunk lout way that is usual for British pax. These families just totally ignored everything anyone said, they were also incredibly nervous about flying, lots of prayers, and I have never been blessed so many times before and after departure. It was a very interesting day out, and I'm wouldn't be remotely surprised if there was mass panic at the first sign of smoke.

[Mikehotel152]

It must surely be nice to have the privilege of sitting in the "better" seats because you work in a profession where you can purchase them at a much reduced rate

I sympathise with your post. Very few pilots or aviation employees would be able or willing to pay the price for Business or First Class seats and travel as a company perk subsidised by full-fare pax. I expect most such full-fare seats are bought on company expenses anyway, with the beneficiaries not forking out their own money.

Back to thread: An unfortunate incident and an extension of the mentality that sees the entire cabin stand on taxi to gain a perceived advantage in the disembarkation queue. There's little that can be done to stifle these idiotic tendencies, I fear.

[RAT 5]

There's little that can be done to stifle these idiotic tendencies, I fear.

Assertive cabin crew, with megaphone, standing in the aisle with a strong command of "sit the f#%k down."

[DirtyProp]

I am getting real sick of the privileged few on this forum making derogatory comments about those passengers who chose to or through monetary constraints, sit anywhere other than business or first class.

Nothing wrong with paying as little as you can/want, but the issue here is not how little they pay but the way they behaved despite the Capt announcement.
Did that lady decide to jump off the plane onto the tarmac by herself? Or maybe she was pushed by the people behind her who couldn't wait to get out?

[Herod]

There's little that can be done to stifle these idiotic tendencies, I fear.

I found that, providing the cabin crew were seated, a little dab on the brakes before coming onto stand provided a salutary lesson. ;)

[scifi]

There again, burning Diesel Fuel does smell like burning Jet-A.
.

[pax britanica]

From a fair amount of experience, not badly just observations, Eastern /Central Europeans in uniform tend not to have a problem being assertive. However 4 cabin crew vs 120 or so scared pax isnt good odds is it.

Everyone likes to think-and if a Ppruner , say 'it shouldnt be done like this , or I would never do that but until the moment comes no one knows really what they would do.

If you have a a large group of inexperienced frightened travellers who have neither the airlines home language or English as something you use every day it is very easy to mis understand or panic .

Cd the over heads just be locked in an evac situation (wouldnt have worked here I know ) should the cabin crew be told they should block escape routes when its a false evac ? , long way down from a T7 or 380?

At the end of the day better this than the Saudia 1011 years ago

[RAT 5]

Much will depend on the quality of selection & training of CA's.
Questions raised.
First, assuming the reports are correct: Captain makes reassuring announcement that all is OK. Cabin crew open door without command. Why?
Pax exits before slide inflates, assuming it was armed. Wow, that was fast. Pax must have been in aisle of 1st 3 rows, at a guess. Did the pax demand the doors be opened and CA's panic?
To open a B737 door the CA is 'in' the exit. If the pax was in a panic dive before the slide was inflated I'd have thought they would have taken the CA with them.

Many aspects of this, as reported, seem very strange. The lawyers will have a real dilemma where to start. Who shall be the target? The airline will then counter sue. The film should be an interesting story.

[andrasz]

I've heard over the grapevine (but cannot verify) that #1 was already running and it blew the slide over causing the injury. Those in the pointy end were apparently caught unaware of the evacuaton. Have no info on whether the evac was initiated by CC or pax.

[poldek77]

Does it make a difference where the smoke originate from? The cabin is contaminated and staying inside may be life threatening...

[Piltdown Man]

A classic own goal. The animals and children got restless. A nasty pong from a poorly running tug and the great unwashed educated by Facebook, Twitter and Instagram determined that they will die unless they do something, no matter what anyone with more information says. Expensive mistake.

PM

[ZFT]

A classic own goal. The animals and children got restless. A nasty pong from a poorly running tug and the great unwashed educated by Facebook, Twitter and Instagram determined that they will die unless they do something, no matter what anyone with more information says. Expensive mistake.

PM

And I suspect, too early for any safety briefing to have been performed?

Years ago I witness a chaotic BA 74 evacuation at JNB during the pre briefing stage and this predated the great unwashed phenomenon.

We tend to forget that many pax travel once or twice in their lifetime, not once or twice a month like many of us unfortunates!

[wiggy]

Does it make a difference where the smoke originate from? The cabin is contaminated and staying inside may be life threatening..

Yes it does make a difference..because going outside through an exit may be even more life threatening....taking a worse case scenario do you want to open a door adjacent to a fire and let more smoke in, or perhaps evacuate onto a burning wing/down a rear slide into a fuel pool behind a burning engine?

In all honesty in the cabin you as an individual probably have little or even no idea as to the level, nature and location of an external threat. Performing a knee jerk “DIY” evacuation can actually raise the level of risk to everybody on board, as seems to have been demonstrated in this case.

There’s a heck of a lot more to a successful evacuation than simply throwing all the doors open..

[parabellum]

subsidised by full-fare pax.Staff travel is not subsidised by fare paying passengers. Staff travel is normally subject to load so the staff travel IF there is an empty seat. When staff travel on free tickets, possibly once a year, as a leave perk, they are usually 'firm' rather than sub-load but the priority is low and vulnerable to offloading. The amount paid by staff usually covers all the additional taxes and catering.


I am sick and tired of non aviation professionals who can't hide their jealousy of aviation staff but would guard the perks of their own profession with their life.

[Herod]

There’s a heck of a lot more to a successful evacuation than simply throwing all the doors open..

Agreed, and with the risk of injury, no captain is going to order an evacuation unless he considers it necessary. Thankfully, never had to order one myself.

[scifi]

I think the aviation industry, especially at that airport, needs to consider if their tugs are fit for purpose, and also why is the use of the evacuation slide just as life threatening as not using the slide (i.e. remaining in a hazardous cabin.)

I hope that the injured lady is able to make a full recovery.
.

[Heathrow Harry]

Staff travel is not subsidised by fare paying passengers. Staff travel is normally subject to load so the staff travel IF there is an empty seat. When staff travel on free tickets, possibly once a year, as a leave perk, they are usually 'firm' rather than sub-load but the priority is low and vulnerable to offloading. The amount paid by staff usually covers all the additional taxes and catering.


I am sick and tired of non aviation professionals who can't hide their jealousy of aviation staff but would guard the perks of their own profession with their life.

I'm afraid the SLC won't believe you......

[pilot9249]

Yes it does make a difference..because going outside through an exit may be even more life threatening....taking a worse case scenario do you want to open a door adjacent to a fire and let more smoke in, or perhaps evacuate onto a burning wing/down a rear slide into a fuel pool behind a burning engine?

In all honesty in the cabin you as an individual probably have little or even no idea as to the level, nature and location of an external threat. Performing a knee jerk “DIY” evacuation can actually raise the level of risk to everybody on board, as seems to have been demonstrated in this case.

There’s a heck of a lot more to a successful evacuation than simply throwing all the doors open..

I'm sat maybe 200 feet back from the flight crew.

I don't know what they know, but they can't see what I can see.

In any serious ground incident, the advantage may be 80/20 to the flight crew, but it sure as heck isn't 100/0.

My patience for the command will be deep and extensive based on a presumption of their profoundly superior knowledge.

But I don't have checklists to perform or hundreds of strangers to worry about.

If I'm burning or breathing smoke, I'm looking out the door and if I decide to then I'm leaving.

Hope to see you in court later.

[cactusbusdrvr]

I'm sat maybe 200 feet back from the flight crew.

I don't know what they know, but they can't see what I can see.

In any serious ground incident, the advantage may be 80/20 to the flight crew, but it sure as heck isn't 100/0.

My patience for the command will be deep and extensive based on a presumption of their profoundly superior knowledge.

But I don't have checklists to perform or hundreds of strangers to worry about.

If I'm burning or breathing smoke, I'm looking out the door and if I decide to then I'm leaving.

Hope to see you in court later.

Then you will be a statistic, and just prove the preconceptions that the cattle are not to be trusted. Without me running checklists and doing some pilot stuff and then giving the evacuation command you may exit into a running engine.

And the cabin crew are trained to assess the suitability of each exit so you don’t exit your ignorant self into a fire or inop slide.

[GrahamO]

Staff travel is not subsidised by fare paying passengers. Staff travel is normally subject to load so the staff travel IF there is an empty seat.


If staff paid for their flights, just like every other passenger, then airline revenues would increase and the cost of a commercial passenger ticket would be lower (Not a lot but these are facts)


So by giving away a ticket to staff for free the commercial passenger IS paying a higher cost.


This is simply proven by the fact that the company revenues are higher if they sold the ticket to the member of staff so the cost to a paying passenger is lower as the fixed costs get divided up by a larger number of passengers.


Two people on a two seater aircraft is a lower cost to the passenger if both pay. The same applies for larger aircraft as the price a passenger pays is related to the revenues the company makes and not just the numerical number of seats sold.

[parabellum]

sptraveller - Following your own instinct may well end in court with you being charged with manslaughter, opening a door based on what you see may cause fire to enter the cabin and asphyxiate most of the pax. When the fire occurs at an airport the fire services are usually on site within minutes, as little as a minute and a half has been recorded. The captain will be in radio contact with the fire chief and the fire chief often has the best picture of all, certainly far better than you, the fire chief will advise the captain and that may well involve telling the captain not to order an evacuation as the fire can be stopped from outside. There was a case in Singapore last year when exactly that happened, all the pax disembarked down steps, uninjured, caused a riot of protest here on PPRuNe from a bunch of self interested Rambos who wanted to open the doors prematurely, fortunately none were on board the aircraft that was involved.

[wiggy]

If staff paid for their flights, just like every other passenger, then airline revenues would increase and the cost of a commercial passenger ticket would be lower (Not a lot but these are facts)


So by giving away a ticket to staff for free the commercial passenger IS paying a higher cost.

.

maybe...OTOH...

1. “Giving always” Don’t think I have ever been given a free ticket for non-duty travel.

2. The tickets I purchase are standby...Probably 25% of the time the flights I have paid for are so full I end having paid up on flight deck jumpseat ....bit a poor show IMHO to charge the public rate for a seat that is not available to the general public.....no doubt you think differently...

3. Believe it or not ( I guess you won’t) These days company standby /jumpseat tickets are often pretty much pound for pound the same as a commercial bought well ahead of the flight....so fear you not, a lot of staff where I work actually do buy commercial tickets to remove the uncertainty of standby.


At many airline Staff travel is perhaps not quite the freebie perk you think it is, and methinks it is possible you are overestimating the effect on your travel budget.

[ZFT]

If staff paid for their flights, just like every other passenger, then airline revenues would increase and the cost of a commercial passenger ticket would be lower (Not a lot but these are facts)

So by giving away a ticket to staff for free the commercial passenger IS paying a higher cost.


This is simply proven by the fact that the company revenues are higher if they sold the ticket to the member of staff so the cost to a paying passenger is lower as the fixed costs get divided up by a larger number of passengers.


Two people on a two seater aircraft is a lower cost to the passenger if both pay. The same applies for larger aircraft as the price a passenger pays is related to the revenues the company makes and not just the numerical number of seats sold.

What is the source of your 'facts'?

[Chris2303]

If staff paid for their flights, just like every other passenger, then airline revenues would increase and the cost of a commercial passenger ticket would be lower (Not a lot but these are facts)

So by giving away a ticket to staff for free the commercial passenger IS paying a higher cost.




We do pay for our flights.

We get FOC tkts ONLY when travelling on duty

[Piltdown Man]

sptraveller - You will definitely see me and my company in court. Rabble like you are not suitable for air transport. Walk, go by car. But don’t fly.

PM

[Ian W]

I'm sat maybe 200 feet back from the flight crew.

I don't know what they know, but they can't see what I can see.

In any serious ground incident, the advantage may be 80/20 to the flight crew, but it sure as heck isn't 100/0.

My patience for the command will be deep and extensive based on a presumption of their profoundly superior knowledge.

But I don't have checklists to perform or hundreds of strangers to worry about.

If I'm burning or breathing smoke, I'm looking out the door and if I decide to then I'm leaving.

Hope to see you in court later.

With the current habit of everyone closing every blind in the cabin - nobody knows what the state is outside. The default behavior of 'window seat' pax on sitting in seat is to close the blind then go to sleep against it. I consider this a flight safety hazard if there is a ground or takeoff emergency, but it is never corrected by the crew who often demand all the blinds are closed on deplaning.

[bar none]

Graham O,

There seems to be a slight hint of green eyed monster in your post.

So to reassure you, and to set your mind at rest, short haul staff tickets are about the same price as advance booking full fare tickets when all the taxes etc are added on.

Your argument that if staff paid full fare prices would be cheaper does not hold water.
There can be a fair old saving on long haul but you are assuming that staff would travel anyway. If it is discretional travel most would not.

Also, even on long haul many staff would pay full fare to travel when they want to in order to book accommodation in advance, or to ensure a seat when they need it i.e. to weddings, funerals etc.

The main advantage of staff travel is the ability to buy tickets at the last minute or to cancel at the last minute without penalty.

[jurassicjockey]

If staff paid for their flights, just like every other passenger, then airline revenues would increase and the cost of a commercial passenger ticket would be lower (Not a lot but these are facts)


So by giving away a ticket to staff for free the commercial passenger IS paying a higher cost.


This is simply proven by the fact that the company revenues are higher if they sold the ticket to the member of staff so the cost to a paying passenger is lower as the fixed costs get divided up by a larger number of passengers.


Two people on a two seater aircraft is a lower cost to the passenger if both pay. The same applies for larger aircraft as the price a passenger pays is related to the revenues the company makes and not just the numerical number of seats sold.

Some interesting logic there. If we extrapolate that a bit, perhaps staff should pay the last second rate for the ticket. That would make your ticket price even lower. Or maybe we should pay the last second, business class rate for our ticket. Maybe you can suggest what rate we should pay for a ticket that doesn't actually come with a seat. Should the other passengers subsidize my hotel costs, when I can't get out of a city for 3 days.
About half of my travel is done on confirmed tickets now. Best case scenario, my staff travel works out to a really good seat sale with the advantage of last minute booking.
But how did we get here on a thread talking about evac?

[funfly]

It's not the so called 'free' travel that I find of concern, it's the arrogance of the flight crew towards their passengers, well demonstrated in this thread, that needs to be addressed.

[Capt Ecureuil]

It's not the so called 'free' travel that I find of concern, it's the arrogance of the flight crew towards their passengers, well demonstrated in this thread, that needs to be addressed.

I quite agree... It's absolutely disgusting that pilots on a profession pilots forum seem to think that they know better than a PPL holder not to mention the passengers down the back.

Sheeeeeze.... the arrogance of it :rolleyes:

[Piltdown Man]

funfly - By arrogance do you mean you don’t like the fact that others might know more than you? Or do you mean that we should respect the actions of people who decide to take a reckless course of action and possibly endanger others in the process? Or do you mean that no matter what we say, we are wrong and we should never expect passengers to do as they are told?

The truth, as painfull as it may be for you to accept, is that whenever you are on an aircraft and you are not the captain, someone else is in charge. You do as the person in charge says, it’s not up for dispute or debate. Our part is to do all we can to fly people as safely as we can from one place to another. When things go wrong we try an learn from our mistakes and those of others. And when sheer stupidity reads it’s ugly head, we call it out for what it is. We should not have to worry about offending some poor darlings feelings or upsetting snowflakes, especially on a website dedicated to professional pilots.

Finally, there’s at least two of us at the front of every flight. If you don’t like us please, please find another form of transport controlled by more sensitive, less arrogant people. Because we are not changing.

PM

[funfly]

By 'arrogance' I mean comments about your passengers such as:
They don't call them cattle-class for nothing.
the great unwashed
If you are prepared to publicly refer to your passengers as above then this does you little credit. I am sure that some of the better pilots contributing to this thread will have felt uncomfortable hearing a colleague referring to passengers like this.
I have every respect for the qualifications of the crew up front and some of the difficulties that you encounter, of course your passengers should take notice of instructions you provide and those who act stupid are stupid, my point is that it is unprofessional to refer to your customers generically, whoever they are, in a derogatory fashion.

[Chu Chu]

If the airline pays an employee a dollar, it costs the airline a dollar (actually more with employment taxes, etc.) If the airline gives the employee a dollar's worth of free travel (based on ordinary ticket prices), it costs the airline a lot less than a dollar. At some level, at least, the labor market is competitive, so an airline that gives staff free travel is likely to have lower ticket prices than one that doesn't. Within reason of course -- a job with no pay but unlimited travel privileges wouldn't be very attractive (though if your spouse had a good job . . .).

[parabellum]

My word funfly, you are a sensitive little snowflake. you said:
If you are prepared to publicly refer to your passengers as above then this does you little credit.
Well PPRuNe is a professional pilots forum, have you any idea how professional lawyers refer to their 'punters' or Doctors their patients? - PPRuNe is public only inasmuch as you are able to gain access to it, but it is not a public forum as such, designed for the general public, nor is it compulsory.

[nolimitholdem]

By 'arrogance' I mean comments about your passengers such as:


If you are prepared to publicly refer to your passengers as above then this does you little credit. I am sure that some of the better pilots contributing to this thread will have felt uncomfortable hearing a colleague referring to passengers like this.
I have every respect for the qualifications of the crew up front and some of the difficulties that you encounter, of course your passengers should take notice of instructions you provide and those who act stupid are stupid, my point is that it is unprofessional to refer to your customers generically, whoever they are, in a derogatory fashion.

You need to get over yourself. "The unwashed masses" is just a casual term referring to any crowd of punters that act in a herd mentality and is hardly limited to aviation.

If it offends you, just don't fly any more. Join the immaculately behaved and groomed passengers on the buses and trains. They'd be happy to have you.

[RatherBeFlying]

Israelis are most likely IDF trained, including in how to recognize and react assertively to emergencies.

Not having been there, none of us can comment knowledgeably on the habitability of the cabin. But if the cabin air is toxic and getting worse, it's time to leave.

[Council Van]

But if the cabin air is toxic and getting worse, it's time to leave.
It would be preferable if you would be kind enough to wait until the Captain and First Officer have had time to assess the situation and then work through the Evacuation Check list if they deem it necessary and reach

item No 8: Advise the Cabin to evacuate.

Item no 8 follows

item no 7: Engine start levers (both)...............................Cut off.

If you chose to leave prior to number 7 having been carried out you might end up getting sucked into a live engine or trying to jump down a slide that is being blown around by the engine exhaust and end up falling and possibly landing on your head!:ugh:

Someone always thinks they know better! However as in this unfortunate incident "if the cabin air is toxic and getting worse", it's not necessarily the time to leave.

[wiggy]

RBF..

Israelis are most likely IDF trained, including in how to recognize and react assertively to emergencies - How about for once giving some credit to the pilots on the flight deck, all of whom highly trained in recognizing and reacting to emergencies..? ( some might even be ex-mil to boot)

Not having been there, none of us can comment knowledgeably on the habitability of the cabin.

You are right, none of us were there, I guess not even you, however as it stands from the initial media report:

An airport towing tug emitted thick smoke that was sucked into the cabin by the plane’s air-conditioning system. Although the pilot repeatedly announced to passengers that the smoke was coming from outside and that there was no danger, those on board apparently left their seats and rushed the doors.

Again back to the comment that:

Israelis are most likely IDF trained, including in how to recognize and react assertively to emergencies.


That doesn't give them a get out of jail card...there patently wasn't an emergency was there? At least there wasn't one at a level that required an immediate evacuation - one that ended up with a woman VSI as a result of the chaos triggered by the passengers, not by the smoke from the tug..

I don't care whether the evacuees were IDF, SAS, the Welsh Male Voice choir or a bunch of Boy Scouts, ignoring the information given by trained individuals who could actually see the source of the problem, and instead evacuating towards a hazardous area is a really really P Poor decision....

[Gauges and Dials]

The problem many on this thread are overlooking, is this:

From back in the cheap seats, waiting for the captain's EV announcement means having faith that:

The folks up front in the cockpit are not incapacitated and are still in their seats,
The folks up front can clearly see what's going on, not only outside the aircraft but in the cabin as well.
The PA system is still working correctly.


That's a fair measure of faith to ask for. DIY evac might be the wrong choice in some cases, even calamitously wrong, but it is not an entirely insane one.

[Gauges and Dials]

An airport towing tug emitted thick smoke that was sucked into the cabin by the plane’s air-conditioning system. Although the pilot repeatedly announced to passengers that the smoke was coming from outside and that there was no danger, those on board apparently left their seats and rushed the doors.

To the extent that, up to this point, everything that every employee had said to the passengers, from reservation through ticket purchase, check-in, security, boarding, had turned out to have been 100% true, the passengers should have believed the pilots.

Pilots who want their passengers to believe them in emergency situations should encourage their airline to develop a reputation for scrupulous honesty in all interactions with passengers at all levels of the organization.

[arketip]

The problem many on this thread are overlooking, is this:

From back in the cheap seats, waiting for the captain's EV announcement means having faith that:

The folks up front in the cockpit are not incapacitated and are still in their seats,
The folks up front can clearly see what's going on, not only outside the aircraft but in the cabin as well.
The PA system is still working correctly.


That's a fair measure of faith to ask for. DIY evac might be the wrong choice in some cases, even calamitously wrong, but it is not an entirely insane one.

Although the pilot repeatedly announced to passengers that the smoke was coming from outside and that there was no danger

[Gauges and Dials]

Although the pilot repeatedly announced to passengers that the smoke was coming from outside and that there was no danger

You are referring to the particulars of this case. I was pointing out why it is that perfectly sane, reasonable passengers might, in many cases, attempt a DIY evac, even though it might be a very bad idea.

[Bend alot]

A few points.


The captain is very well trained in that he is communicating with the fire services that arrived on site "with in minutes" getting a better account of the situation while going thru a check list - what does the second pilot do while the communication with the fire services is happening?


The captain the person in charge is said to have made an announcement about smoke coming from outside and there was no danger!


Now I do believe once there is smoke in the cockpit there are procedures for flight crew to follow. Don the mask!! at this point the flight crew are in a different environment to the SLF and cabin crew. So the level of toxic smoke in the cabin will not be known as safe or not by the flight crew - a professional would follow procedure wouldn't they.


If the announcement was made by the captain, then clearly it was not presented well enough, and the captain lost control of his ship as a door was opened before his command.


As a result a person has sustained serious injury and the person in charge is responsible and accountable.


In hindsight the captain may have made a different announcement that contained more detail, in a different tone or requested a translated announcement by cabin crew or others - I don't know what options he had open to him, but what he did didn't work. Thinking of cargo as unwashed and other ways may have been how the SLF judged the captain, possible if he gave a little bit more concern for how others were feeling none of this would have happened.


Now the question is after this lady illegally vacated the aircraft, what seat in the court will the captain be sitting?

[ZFT]

The problem many on this thread are overlooking, is this:

From back in the cheap seats, waiting for the captain's EV announcement means having faith that:

The folks up front in the cockpit are not incapacitated and are still in their seats,
The folks up front can clearly see what's going on, not only outside the aircraft but in the cabin as well.
The PA system is still working correctly.


That's a fair measure of faith to ask for. DIY evac might be the wrong choice in some cases, even calamitously wrong, but it is not an entirely insane one.

1 I fail to see what difference it makes whether you are in the 'cheap' seats or not

2 Can you cite any case where any of your above examples occurred on an intact aircraft and a crew initiated evacuation didn't take place?

[Council Van]

A few points.


The captain is very well trained in that he is communicating with the fire services that arrived on site "with in minutes" getting a better account of the situation while going thru a check list - what does the second pilot do while the communication with the fire services is happening?


The captain the person in charge is said to have made an announcement about smoke coming from outside and there was no danger!


Now I do believe once there is smoke in the cockpit there are procedures for flight crew to follow. Don the mask!! at this point the flight crew are in a different environment to the SLF and cabin crew. So the level of toxic smoke in the cabin will not be known as safe or not by the flight crew - a professional would follow procedure wouldn't they.


If the announcement was made by the captain, then clearly it was not presented well enough, and the captain lost control of his ship as a door was opened before his command.


As a result a person has sustained serious injury and the person in charge is responsible and accountable.


In hindsight the captain may have made a different announcement that contained more detail, in a different tone or requested a translated announcement by cabin crew or others - I don't know what options he had open to him, but what he did didn't work. Thinking of cargo as unwashed and other ways may have been how the SLF judged the captain, possible if he gave a little bit more concern for how others were feeling none of this would have happened.


Now the question is after this lady illegally vacated the aircraft, what seat in the court will the captain be sitting?
What an absolute load of rubbish.

[Bend alot]

Ok maybe not policy for all.


https://www.pprune.org/tech-log/607179-flight-fire.html


But it is the captains responsibility to have reliable crew and to handle the situations that happen on "his" aircraft during his command.

Now as a previous poster stated the captain is in charge - that is not just a statement but requires actions. The captain of this flight clearly lost control and with not much doubt, with no knowledge to himself or the co-pilot.


Why?

[Council Van]

The captain of this flight clearly lost control
How do you know that? To make a statement like that you must either have been on the flight deck during this incident or be part of the investigation team and had access to the CVR.

I suspect neither case applies and you are writing an absolute load of rubbish. Pprune, full of non professional pilot crash and serious incident investigators.:ugh:

Why not leave the investigation to the Hungarian authorities, in due course they will publish a report which will be interesting and perhaps something that I can learn from.

[wiggy]

Now as a previous poster stated the captain is in charge - that is not just a statement but requires actions. The captain of this flight clearly lost control and with not much doubt, with no knowledge to himself or the co-pilot.

So you have passengers who off their own bat, have decided to evacuate...Short of appearing at the Flight Deck door armed with a 9mm what actions do you, in your expert option, think would have restored control?

FWIW the general feeling where I work is if one of these passenger induced foul ups starts (e.g. tailpipe flames/torching at night..odd smells) and doors get opened the safest course of action is carry out the evac checklist, that way hopefully people aren’t going to kill themselves evacuating from a rolling aircraft or evacuating into/behind a turning engine.....even somebody with the leadership skills of Rommel or Patton isn’t going to stop the stampede.

[josephfeatherweight]

It's never EVER appropriate for the SLF to decide to commence an emergency evac, unless the aircraft has crashed - I don't undertand how there can be debate on this...

[parabellum]

So the captain, FO and, say, six cabin crew are faced with 150 hysterical passengers and he is deemed to have lost control if they don't all sit down and listen to him? Don't think so.


Crew wearing oxygen masks in the cabin is usually part of depressurisation procedures, If there is the possibility of fire in the cabin you really don't want oxygen washing around your face.

[Bend alot]

How do you know that? To make a statement like that you must either have been on the flight deck during this incident or be part of the investigation team and had access to the CVR.

I suspect neither case applies and you are writing an absolute load of rubbish. Pprune, full of non professional pilot crash and serious incident investigators.:ugh:

Why not leave the investigation to the Hungarian authorities, in due course they will publish a report which will be interesting and perhaps something that I can learn from.



I base it on a body on the tarmac and a PPRune thread.


Sorry just a LAME.


Option is stop a tug as a captain that trows such smoke to cause a incident as this - a clear concern for other safety such as brakes in my opinion that this tug is not safe.

Ever seen a diesel engine run away?


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j4rMfrERpG8

[SamYeager]

There's been lots of discussion about the fact the captain announced there was no danger and the smoke was external. Do we know what the conditions were like inside the passenger cabin? I believe some (lots?) of smoke had entered the cabin, but not the cockpit(?), via the engines and aircon.


I can easily believe that a passenger seeing a fair amount of smoke, possibly increasing, in the cabin might think the safest thing to do is to evacuate regardless of any announcements that they may or may not have heard. I'm sure that the selective audio and visual span that some pilots have suffered from in past incidents is not unique to pilots.

[Adambrau]

There's been lots of discussion about the fact the captain announced there was no danger and the smoke was external. Do we know what the conditions were like inside the passenger cabin? I believe some (lots?) of smoke had entered the cabin, but not the cockpit(?), via the engines and aircon.


I can easily believe that a passenger seeing a fair amount of smoke, possibly increasing, in the cabin might think the safest thing to do is to evacuate regardless of any announcements that they may or may not have heard. I'm sure that the selective audio and visual span that some pilots have suffered from in past incidents is not unique to pilots.

After reading through this thread, it is redundantly clear that there are two sides to every story.

As a passenger, I will always listen to the PA announcements. As a NYer who lived through 9/11 (granted a unique horror), workers in the South Tower were told to remain in place and all was safe.

With social media increasingly a major contributor to a decline in public trust of authority, I feel the pain of the professionals at the pointy end, and cabin crew, dealing with the hysteria of the world we seem to inhabit.

Fly safe all.

[Gauges and Dials]

It's never EVER appropriate for the SLF to decide to commence an emergency evac, unless the aircraft has crashed - I don't undertand how there can be debate on this...

Sweeping statements like this are almost always wrong. I can think of dozens of scenarios in which a passenger is right to commence an emergency evac. Two off the top of my head:

Plane on stand; engines off; pax sitting near rear exit; hijacker racing toward cockpit; hijacker not yet in control of aircraft; crew all busy with hijacker.
Plane on stand; engines off; rapidly spreading fire breaks out two rows ahead of passenger who is seated at emergency exit...

[Gauges and Dials]

As a NYer who lived through 9/11 (granted a unique horror), workers in the South Tower were told to remain in place and all was safe.

This.

Please read it again.

If you still think that it is always correct to follow instructions coming across a PA system from someone who appears to be in a position of authority, please read it a third time.

If you still think that everyone should always obey the voice on the PA, then I don't think you and I can have a very useful conversation here.

[DirtyProp]

Fair enough.
Since the cattle was so eager to take responsibility for their own safety, may we expect them to take responsibility for the injuries they caused to the lady? Or will they expect the carrier to pay for it?

[SeenItAll]

While I do not know the exact language the captain used, but if he said only that the source of the smoke was external to the plane and not that the source was just the exhaust from a backfiring tug, could that not be interpreted by PAX as "there is a raging fire right outside the plane, but not to worry, it has not breached the fuselage." There are many examples of fires that are initially external to the fuselage quickly entering it. I would hesitate to say the PAX were idiots to have sought to evacuate.

[scifi]

Yes.. Quite agree.. Once the cabin was filled with acrid fumes, the flight was going nowhere. Even if there was no fire, would you like to sit with your clothes reeking of diesel fuel at the start of your holiday or business trip.?
.

[Gauges and Dials]

Fair enough.
Since the cattle was so eager to take responsibility for their own safety, may we expect them to take responsibility for the injuries they caused to the lady? Or will they expect the carrier to pay for it?

If you habitually refer to your paying customers as "cattle," may I suggest that you might be a lot happier flying for FedEx or Air Mobility Command rather than for an airline?

From the CxO suite right down to the frontline staff, airlines seem to have a terribly hard time coming to terms with the fact that they are in the hospitality business, not operating an industrial concern.

[Adambrau]

This.

Please read it again.

If you still think that it is always correct to follow instructions coming across a PA system from someone who appears to be in a position of authority, please read it a third time.

If you still think that everyone should always obey the voice on the PA, then I don't think you and I can have a very useful conversation here.

My point was that I have great respect for cockpit and cabin crew, and I listen to instructions as a pax. Very rarely, there are genuine situations where pax will question the authority. We don't need to agree, no offense taken.

[parabellum]

From the CxO suite right down to the frontline staff, airlines seem to have a terribly hard time coming to terms with the fact that they are in the hospitality business, not operating an industrial concern.


Not so. Scheduled and chartered aviation is definitely the transport business, the hospitality business takes over and ends at the hotel. What aviation professionals do get fed up with is passengers who have bought a ticket on a scheduled or charter service but think they have just exclusively chartered a jet. Expecting everyone will bow and scrape accordingly whilst acceding to their every whim, including allowing them to evacuate the aircraft if they feel like it because they think they know better than the trained professionals. Trained professionals who have every bit as much concern for their own safety as they do for their passengers.

[Tango and Cash]

From the CxO suite right down to the frontline staff, airlines seem to have a terribly hard time coming to terms with the fact that they are in the hospitality business, not operating an industrial concern.

:D:D:D

Yes, we "cattle" want safe, efficient, reasonably on-time operations, but some of us would prefer being treated like customers from time to time.

[Gauges and Dials]

Not so. Scheduled and chartered aviation is definitely the transport business, the hospitality business takes over and ends at the hotel. What aviation professionals do get fed up with is passengers who have bought a ticket on a scheduled or charter service but think they have just exclusively chartered a jet. Expecting everyone will bow and scrape accordingly whilst acceding to their every whim, including allowing them to evacuate the aircraft if they feel like it because they think they know better than the trained professionals. Trained professionals who have every bit as much concern for their own safety as they do for their passengers.

You're kind of making my point for me.

[DirtyProp]

If you habitually refer to your paying customers as "cattle," may I suggest that you might be a lot happier flying for FedEx or Air Mobility Command rather than for an airline?

From the CxO suite right down to the frontline staff, airlines seem to have a terribly hard time coming to terms with the fact that they are in the hospitality business, not operating an industrial concern.

You didn't answer the question.
Who's to take responsibility for that injured person? The cattle or the carrier?

And yes, I call them cattle because they behaved exactly like such.
You wanna be called Passenger? Start behaving like one.

[Chris2303]

Not so. Scheduled and chartered aviation is definitely the transport business, the hospitality business takes over and ends at the hotel. What aviation professionals do get fed up with is passengers who have bought a ticket on a scheduled or charter service but think they have just exclusively chartered a jet. Expecting everyone will bow and scrape accordingly whilst acceding to their every whim, including allowing them to evacuate the aircraft if they feel like it because they think they know better than the trained professionals. Trained professionals who have every bit as much concern for their own safety as they do for their passengers.

And most of we aviation professionals are human and we'd appreciate being treated with respect.

[DaveReidUK]

Trained professionals who have every bit as much concern for their own safety as they do for their passengers.

With some notable, heroic exceptions that we shouldn't forget.

"Miss Harrison was left alone to the task of shepherding passengers to the rear door and helping them out of the aircraft. She encouraged some passengers to jump from the machine and pushed out others. With flames and explosions all around her, making an escape from the tail of the machine impossible, she directed her passengers to another exit while she remained at her post. She was finally overcome while trying to save an elderly cripple who was seated in one of the last rows and whose body was found close to that of the stewardess. Miss Harrison was a very brave young lady who gave her life in her utter devotion to duty"(from Jane Harrison's George Cross citation)

[wiggy]

At the risk of re-entering the fray....TBH personally I'm not sure some of the language helps, but:

1. 9/11 has been brought up as perhaps justification for self help/ DIY whenever any threat is perceived. Can I ask what the current advice for evacuation from "ultra" high rise business premises in the States?

2. During a wide body evacuation a handful of years back a cabin crew member was very very nearly ejected onto the tarmac by a panicking passenger who refused to respect the shouted commands being given to "wait, wait....." and/or recognise the fact that the slide she was diving for was yet to fully inflate...if the crew member had actually fallen she would almost certainly have suffered serious injury or perhaps death..luckily she was restrained (i.e. her clothing grabbed) by another passenger who wasn't rushing headlong for the opening at all costs......

There are two sides to this...so I'll state this one last time for the hard of reading - there are very real risks to a self initiated DIY evacuation. That said, well, if you are still minded to rush headlong for the doors, just please don't injure or kill anybody else en-route.

[PA28161]

I found that, providing the cabin crew were seated, a little dab on the brakes before coming onto stand provided a salutary lesson. ;)

Well said! A friend of mine, SFO at the late Monarch, did this once when taxiing to the stand at BHX. It had the desired effect

[Hipennine]

Just a small point, but perhaps of critical importance, is the volume of flight deck announcements a pre-boarding check? I would say that on circa 25% of the flights I take, the FD announcements are so quiet as to be unintelligible. (unlike some of the CC announcements which are loud unintelligible gabble).

[Council Van]

Yes.. Quite agree.. Once the cabin was filled with acrid fumes, the flight was going nowhere. Even if there was no fire, would you like to sit with your clothes reeking of diesel fuel at the start of your holiday or business trip.?
.
Grow up and show that you have some common sense!

So 150 people don't smell of acrid diesel fumes but some lady has serious head injuries. Priorities, it is obviously more important to put your clothes before what could be life changing injuries.

The aircraft was fully serviceable, it was deemed to be safer to stay on board by the Captain, he clearly made the correct decision as by leaving before the aircraft had been shut down someone was very badly injured.

[Gauges and Dials]

You didn't answer the question.
Who's to take responsibility for that injured person? The cattle or the carrier?

And yes, I call them cattle because they behaved exactly like such.
You wanna be called Passenger? Start behaving like one.

That's an awfully high horse you're on there, Captain; the folks in the back are not military under your command, they are ordinary people who behave as ordinary people behave.

Human beings sometimes do things which turn out to be irrational and counterproductive. It's part of who we are.

In this particular case, it would appear that the passengers behaved according to human nature, to their detriment.

[Gauges and Dials]

Expecting everyone will bow and scrape accordingly whilst acceding to their every whim

I think 95% of passengers would happily skip the 'bow and scrape' bit and would be delighted if the airline staff would act professional, follow the airline's own rules and procedures consistently, and tell the truth.

because they think they know better than the trained professionals. Trained professionals who have every bit as much concern for their own safety as they do for their passengers.

We're forgetting that passengers, in deciding whether or not to listen to the PA, aren't going to draw a distinction between the trained professionals in the cockpit and other "airline employees" (a group that, in fact, includes ground staff at the airport and people who aren't even airline employees), and to the extent that these "airline employees" have demonstrated a general lack of a clue, have acted capriciously, have withheld important information, or have outright lied, passengers will decide accordingly whether or not to follow instructions.

[Gauges and Dials]

:

1. 9/11 has been brought up as perhaps justification for self help/ DIY whenever any threat is perceived. Can I ask what the current advice for evacuation from "ultra" high rise business premises in the States?


A reasonable assumption would be that any announcement you hear on the high-rise building's PA system is not being made by a person who has knowledge of the situation, but was recorded years or months earlier in a studio and is being automatically played by a control system based on sensor data. The sensor data may or may not be good, and the control system may or may not have been programmed correctly.

A second reasonable assumption would be that any employee of the building management company has, as his or her objectives, in declining order of priority:

Don't disrupt operations
Don't create bad PR
Don't disturb the tenants
Keep people safe

[wiggy]

Thanks....

[Ancient Mariner]

After reading all 80 posts, I wonder how many of you have been in an actual emergency, and how you would act in one outside your "professional" comfort zone?
That's where we SLF are.
Per

[wiggy]

:cool: I wonder how many of you have been in an actual emergency,

Me sir! me!...actually more than one .....and looking back at at least one them if those involved had simply panicked, everybody would have been farked...now with that out of the way...

and how you would act in one outside your "professional" comfort zone?


Try and follow the advice of any trained professionals on the scene....I rather assumed the same applied at sea?

( I still get the impression that some here, though not you AM, think "airline crewmember" and "trained professional" are a contradiction in terms...then they get upset when things get heated...)

[KenV]

Sweeping statements like this are almost always wrong. I can think of dozens of scenarios in which a passenger is right to commence an emergency evac. Two off the top of my head:

Plane on stand; engines off; pax sitting near rear exit; hijacker racing toward cockpit; hijacker not yet in control of aircraft; crew all busy with hijacker.
Plane on stand; engines off; rapidly spreading fire breaks out two rows ahead of passenger who is seated at emergency exit...

Hmmmmmm.

So out of the "dozens of scenarios you could think of" you chose two where it's WRONG to initiate your own evac!

How so? In the above scenarios the doors are almost certainly not armed. Do you know how to initiate slide inflation of an unarmed door? Do you "jump for it" without a slide? Do you encourage other passengers to exit with you? Do you encourage them to "jump for it" with you? Do you scream and shout, make a run for the rear doors, fight the crew stationed there so you can open an unarmed door, and generally cause a panic among the other passengers? Did you overlook a crew member and by your actions you prevent that crew member from assisting the others in taking down the hijacker? Do you know if there are other hijackers present and by your actions YOU could be mistaken for another hijacker? Did the "rapidly spreading fire" in the cabin get in from outside? Is the side you've chosen to exit the aircraft engulfed in flames and by opening the exit on that side you've made a bad situation much much worse? I could go on, but you get the point.

[DirtyProp]

That's an awfully high horse you're on there, Captain; the folks in the back are not military under your command, they are ordinary people who behave as ordinary people behave.

Human beings sometimes do things which turn out to be irrational and counterproductive. It's part of who we are.

In this particular case, it would appear that the passengers behaved according to human nature, to their detriment.

High horse? Seriously?
So, let me get this straight: the pax claims his/her "human" right to take matters into his/her own hands and play Hero of the Day but when things go sour he/she refuses the responsibilities and consequences of his/her own actions?
Well, ain't that awfully convenient.
For the third time: who's gonna take responsibility for those serious injuries? The carrier or those ordinary, sensitive pax which behaved like cattle?

[wiggy]

Ken

Good post, but what do we know about the subject...but probably completely pointless in a world where a lot of folks imagine themselves acting out the role of John McClane....

[Bergerie1]

KenV,

You are right, and there are even more scenarios I could offer where a passenger, perhaps with the best of intentions, may get it wrong. These things are rather more complicated than the average person may realise.

Please leave it to the professionals who will have discussed these issues endlessly and who will have practised how to assess the situation, to open the doors and to activate the slides.

Yes - of course the professional crew may get it wrong - but the untrained passenger is far, far more likely to make a major mistake and kill people.

[Ancient Mariner]

:cool:

Me sir! me!...actually more than one .....and looking back at at least one them if those involved had simply panicked, everybody would have been farked...now with that out of the way...



Try and follow the advice of any trained professionals on the scene....I rather assumed the same applied at sea?

( I still get the impression that some here, though not you AM, think "airline crewmember" and "trained professional" are a contradiction in terms...then they get upset when things get heated...)
It does apply at sea, the problem is when people panic. Listening to trained professional is suddenly not at priority any longer. Fires, perceived or real, can do strange things to a person's mind.
I've seen it happen, even to people who trained fire fighting on a weekly basis. At times reality sucks.
Per

[RAT 5]

I was told a story 30 years ago.

Scandinavian Caravelle lining up for takeoff. I can't remember the outside weather, but as thrust changes were made white vapour started to descend from the cabin ceiling.
It became quite thick, but, as we all know what is was (frost from aircon) there was no hot smell.
But in the dimmed cabin it looked like smoke.
Pax at the overwing had the hatches open just as PF was about to launch.
Fortunately the sharp cabin crew managed to alert the captain to STOP.

Ouch.

[Gauges and Dials]

1: what percentage of airline passengers ignore reasonable instructions and pop an exit when they shouldn't?

2: what percentage of ATPs deliberately crash their aircraft, killing all on board?

As long as #2 is larger than #1 (which it is, by a lot) perhaps all of us could quit with the "cattle" comments etc?

Anecdotes and the law if small numbers and all that...

[Gauges and Dials]

So, let me get this straight: the pax claims his/her "human" right to take matters into his/her own hands and play Hero of the Day but when things go sour he/she refuses the responsibilities and consequences of his/her own actions?


How can you possibly interpret anything I have written as being even remotely equivalent to that position?

For the third time: who's gonna take responsibility for those serious injuries? The carrier or those ordinary, sensitive pax which behaved like cattle?

Our legal system is not without its flaws, but I believe that, on balance, a court hearing from witnesses who were there would,more often than not, make the right call.
I an not privy to the facts and would not presume to make that call from my armchair

[Herod]

OK; a couple of points. Has it said anywhere what the level of smoke was? A mere whiff of exhaust, or a complete filling of the cabin with smoke?

Secondly, let's get off this mutual slagging between the passengers and the crew. It's been suggested that pax are so accustomed to airline staff being deceitful and untrustworthy, so why trust the PA? How about "Ladies and gentlemen, your captain. Your attention please..."?

[DirtyProp]

I an not privy to the facts and would not presume to make that call from my armchair
Fair point.
I realized I jumped the gun. Apologies, everyone.