FAA to be audited on cabin evacuation standards

[SeenItAll]

Evidently, the U.S. Department of Transportation (the FAA's parent) is going to evaluate the standards used by the FAA in certifying how quickly a plane can be evacuated. According to the article, there is a concern that as seat pitches have become tighter, and more pax are choosing to take their cabin luggage with them, that past tests of plane evacuation speeds may no longer be accurate. https://www.cnbc.com/2018/06/19/faa-faces-audit-of-airplane-evacuation-standards.html

[llondel]

If I was behind some idiot retrieving carry-on then I'd be inclined to shove them back into their seat so those who'd rather get off can get past. If you want to take your baggage then wait until last.

The seat pitch one is definitely a valid point though, it's not nearly as easy to get out from a window seat with the narrow pitch spacing. Not so applicable to the US, but last time I was on Ryanair, their safety information was printed on the back of the seat in front rather than on a card, and my vision is such that it was way too close for me to be able to read.

[SeenItAll]

And I also hope the audit also considers the facts that pax have become heavier, more of them have limited mobility, and more pets (excuse me, service animals) are being brought into the cabin.

[Centaurus]

I travelled on one of the Australian domestic LCC airlines a few days back. An A320. First time I have flown for ten years. The flight was full and I had a window seat. The CA's did the best they could to stuff large carry on bags into the overhead lockers. That is no glamour job anymore, that's for sure. As a former airline pilot I can say for sure that there was absolutely no way a evacuation could be completed in the 90 second regulatory limit. I must admit I felt a moment of panic once I was stuffed into my window seat and realised I would be trapped if something went wrong. It didn't help when the CA gabbled the safety briefing into her microphone so fast that few would have comprehended what she said. There would be chaos as people would have struggled trying to lift themselves out of their seats. Obese passengers abounded. Window seat passengers would have no hope.

[Timpsi]

When I fly some of the carriers in Europe, and especially with LCC, there is NO WAY an evacuation could be done in 90 seconds. Not with the kind of people on some of the flights... They seem to have no clue what flight they are on, where their seat is, where they're going, where to stuff their luggage. Sorry, but I don't trust those kind of people to contribute to a quick and effective evacuation if the situation would occur.

As for the seat pitching becoming tighter; it doesn't really help with smooth evacuations either.

[Daysleeper]

I think we need to stop fretting on the 90 second thing in the discussion. While 90 is the certification spec it has never been assumed that it can be achieved in normal operations with real passengers. The time allowed was originally 120 seconds, but in 1965 it was thought that newer slide designs would allow evacuation to be quicker and so 90 was selected. It doesn't really link to survivable cabin conditions or outcome studies. It's a bit like car fuel efficiency reports, a standardised way of assessing things but very different from real life.

That said I support a review of the standards with the changing demographic and physiology of travellers.

[double_barrel]

That said I support a review of the standards with the changing demographic and physiology of travellers.

Several times I have been seated in the overwing exit row of an Embraer 190 with a neighbor in the window seat who was so obese that they would certainly not be capable of opening the door and even if they could they literally could not fit through.

I also see an increase in the number of passengers, including in the exit row, using noise cancelling headphones attached to their own devices during takeoff and landing; so unable to hear any announcements.

And some cabin crew don't know or don't care. I have posted this before:
KQ takeoff run (https://www.pprune.org/safety-crm-qa-emergency-response-planning/566571-exit-row-rules.html#post9091657)

[Fortissimo]

There is a wealth of information on the subject in a new RAeS specialist paper: https://www.aerosociety.com/publications/specialist-paper-emergency-evacuation-of-commercial-passenger-planes/ (http://publications)

Cabin baggage is an issue but I think many of the problems come under the general heading of 'passenger behaviour'. Flying has now become so commonplace, and so safe, that people don't worry about their own safety and don't stop to consider the implications of their actions - though they will happily stop in the middle of an evacuation to get some juicy phone footage to boost their profiles on YoufTube or whatever.

I heard of one recent incident where a pax was removed from an exit row seat because they hadn't listened to the safety brief. If only more crews would do the same! Whenever I am in the cabin for departure I am always saddened to see how many pax ignore both the requests for them to pay attention and the briefings themselves. And for those who insist on removing their shoes before we have even left the gate, I always enjoy asking them how far they think they will be able to run barefoot through burning wreckage. :E

[Father Dick Byrne]

We all get hot under the collar over this issue, over baggage, over ‘behaviour’ (even when it can all be classified as ‘normal, human’), over people not watching what can be a god-awful and, to the passenger, meaningless, safety demo (the present BA one is trash and I refuse to pay attention to it for its interminable length).

Evacuations are not the rushes-to-death we consider them to be. They are generally benign events, or non-events.

Evacuations aren’t killing people. We can all afford to be rather more realistic and less precious.

Added to which, many of the tests generated unbelievable results in the first place. But that shouldn’t be a surprise to anyone who has realised that the most important thing in aviation is money.

The growing problems of obesity etc will become a matter of survival of the fittest if the chips are ever down - in the incredibly unlikely circumstances of a proper life-or-death evacuation, while making my escape I plan to show no quarter to those who’ve already given up on themselves. That said, I very rarely travel other than extremely close to an exit.

Why the DoT have a bee in their bonnet, I don’t know, but I guess others do. For the likely consequences, I refer you to the most important thing in aviation, above.

[tdracer]

You all realize of course that if they do change the rules, it won't be retro-active - currently certified aircraft would be unaffected. Even aircraft currently in development (e.g. 777X) would be unaffected because the cert basis is effectively frozen when the airframer makes the initial application (there is a five year limit - which can become a can of worms when there is a big delay such as happened on the 787).
In short, the first aircraft to be affected by any changes to the passenger evacuation standards hasn't been launched yet.

[jugofpropwash]

I've said before and will say again - if airlines would stop charging thru the nose for every piece of checked luggage, passengers would not insist on bringing all their worldly possessions into the cabin with them. Much easier for the attendants, and safer as well.

[Father Dick Byrne]

I've said before and will say again - if airlines would stop charging thru the nose for every piece of checked luggage, passengers would not insist on bringing all their worldly possessions into the cabin with them. Much easier for the attendants, and safer as well.

For me it’s nothing to do with charges, it’s the totally unreasonable 30-45 minute wait in reclaim for the fekin things to turn up, if they ever do. As an industry we have comprehensively and institutionally forgotten to look after our passengers properly, and then we blame them for their perfectly understandable reaction to our incompetence..

[Jason Middleton]

This is less of a problem in the Middle East, where some pax are already standing in the aisle getting their hand carry down while the aircraft is still on final approach! Loud advice from cabin crew and other pax seems to have little effect.

[llondel]

I've said before and will say again - if airlines would stop charging thru the nose for every piece of checked luggage, passengers would not insist on bringing all their worldly possessions into the cabin with them. Much easier for the attendants, and safer as well.

Usual practice seems to be to turn up at the gate and be prepared to gate-check for free if the airline requests it due to a full flight.

Perhaps what's needed is overhead bins with a central locking system so that they're locked from ten minutes before arrival (when all passengers should be seated anyway) until the seat-belt sign is switched off at the gate. That does then at least restrict people to taking whatever's under their seat and they may well have that in hand before it's their turn in the aisle.

They could be locked on departure until the seat belt sign is off too, there's always someone who gets up early.

[cooperplace]

I've previously advocated an improved safety video that shows 2 evacuation scenarios: (i) lots of people delay to grab luggage, half the pax get fried in the post-crash fire (could be done with dummies, obviously) and (ii) no-one grabs luggage and the last person leaves just as the fire takes hold. Hollywood could do a great job on this.

[RatherBeFlying]

A common thread in delayed evacuations is that the flight crew is working checklists while unaware of deteriorating airframe and cabin conditions. Understandably the workload is very high after a reject or landing with single or multiple failures.
​​​​​​
Video of the airframe and cabin would alert the cockpit to fire and smoke situations - that now remain blissfully out of their view - in time to initiate a successful evacuation.

[West Coast]

A common thread in delayed evacuations is that the flight crew is working checklists while unaware of deteriorating airframe and cabin conditions. Understandably the workload is very high after a reject or landing with single or multiple failures.
​​​​​​
Video of the airframe and cabin would alert the cockpit to fire and smoke situations - that now remain blissfully out of their view - in time to initiate a successful evacuation.


The alternative is a rushed evacuation which has its own concerns

[dsc810]

For me it’s nothing to do with charges, it’s the totally unreasonable 30-45 minute wait in reclaim for the fekin things to turn up, if they ever do. As an industry we have comprehensively and institutionally forgotten to look after our passengers properly, and then we blame them for their perfectly understandable reaction to our incompetence..


Not to mention that insurance companies will not insure valuables if put in hold baggage: they clearly regard airport baggage handlers as more bent than the average coat hanger.
So it all ends up in hand baggage.
Add on that the insurance companies will argue the toss endlessly if a high value item goes "missing" in the evacuation and subsequent return of the hand luggage back to the customer and you end up with the obvious result. That is unless the aircraft is actually disintegrating around them the passengers will take their hand luggage: end of story.

[RealFish]

This is gonna be the big thing. Will the new tests replicate the amount of people stopping to take all their items with them?
I must say I did imagine if I were ever in the back during an evac I’d be quite vocally telling pax bag down get out with maybe a few stronger words scattered in there too..


…or members of their family?

The proven practice of some loco's separating families (in an attempt to extract more money in seat reservation fees) is in my view an issue that the regulator should also take a look at. It is a natural instinct that family members will want to ensure the safety of their children / partners and as such it has the potential to inhibit evacuation.

[Centaurus]

The alternative is a rushed evacuation which has its own concerns
Read below for an example.

https://app.ntsb.gov/pdfgenerator/ReportGeneratorFile.ashx?EventID=20150908X35241&AKey=1&RType=HTML&IType=FA

[StAn gelo]

For me it’s nothing to do with charges, it’s the totally unreasonable 30-45 minute wait in reclaim for the fekin things to turn up, if they ever do. As an industry we have comprehensively and institutionally forgotten to look after our passengers properly, and then we blame them for their perfectly understandable reaction to our incompetence..
Not to mention the way luggage is thrown around by the baggage handlers with very little regard for the contents.....i've seen rubbish being put into a skip with more manners.....

[J.O.]

Perhaps what's needed is overhead bins with a central locking system so that they're locked from ten minutes before arrival (when all passengers should be seated anyway) until the seat-belt sign is switched off at the gate. That does then at least restrict people to taking whatever's under their seat and they may well have that in hand before it's their turn in the aisle.
Unfortunately, those locks would have to be held closed electrically. When the crew turned off aircraft power as part of the evacuation drill / checklist, those bins would automatically unlock.

[infrequentflyer789]

This is less of a problem in the Middle East, where some pax are already standing in the aisle getting their hand carry down while the aircraft is still on final approach! Loud advice from cabin crew and other pax seems to have little effect.

Obviously it didn't help with Saudia163. Or maybe that's why they do it...

[llondel]

Unfortunately, those locks would have to be held closed electrically. When the crew turned off aircraft power as part of the evacuation drill / checklist, those bins would automatically unlock.

You could design them the other way, so electrical power was required to open them but otherwise they'd remain shut. I appreciate there are other issues with that approach.

[J.O.]

You could design them the other way, so electrical power was required to open them but otherwise they'd remain shut. I appreciate there are other issues with that approach.

Chief among those concerns would be firefighting. A passenger’s phone catches fire and the fire compromises a circuit, removing power from the unlock switch and causing it to lock. There’s not a CAA on the planet who would agree to that one.

[double_barrel]

Chief among those concerns would be firefighting. A passenger’s phone catches fire and the fire compromises a circuit, removing power from the unlock switch and causing it to lock. There’s not a CAA on the planet who would agree to that one.
Anyway, the passengers would just stand around, fiddling with the catch and wondering why the locker would not open.

[RatherBeFlying]

Advise pax to take out items required during flight before stowing overhead. Inform pax passports and medications should always be kept on person.
FAs lock bins after safety briefing
During cruise FA can open individual bin if pax needs something, then relock it.
At arrival gate FAs unlock bins.

Abloy type cylinders would discourage brute force lock picking attempts:E

[Carbon Bootprint]

Advise pax to take out items required during flight before stowing overhead. Inform pax passports and medications should always be kept on person.
FAs lock bins after safety briefing
During cruise FA can open individual bin if pax needs something, then relock it.
At arrival gate FAs unlock bins.
Abloy type cylinders would discourage brute force lock picking attempts:E
Pretty reasonable stuff if the general lock/unlock can be accomplished remotely and not bin by bin. Otherwise, as for crew unlocking individual bins, it seems more feasible in Business class rather than Economy. I guess it'd be best to consult with the relevant Cabin Crew union for their thoughts on that.

[infrequentflyer789]

Inform pax passports and medications should always be kept on person.

That would be lovely, thanks, far more convenient.
Would you care to inform all the relevant ground authorities that the pax meds will be in a pill box (which I can fit on person, just) rather than in all its various oversized original packaging (which I can't).
If you don't mind, I won't hold my breath while we wait for the rules to change.

[Longtimer]

I think part of the problem is that the Seating Capacity for evacuation was at one time granted based on an actual demo, I was surprised to find that this is not the case for a lot of recent aircraft models.
FSIMS Document Viewer (http://fsims.faa.gov/PICDetail.aspx?docId=8900.1,Vol.3,Ch30,Sec9)

[autoflight]

Overhead bins obviously should be locked at certain times.i.e when the seat belts sign is on. The logic for powered on or powered off or both and for emergency locking or unlocking could be determined by consultation with manufacturers aviation authorities, airlines & crew.

The current situation with no lock is clearly unsafe.,

[Kerosene Kraut]

If you fly through turbulence the signs go on and people store their stuff they have used until then in the bins. This is when you want to lock the bins? So everything has to fly around the cabin possibly hitting people?
I'd prefer some clearer worded safety briefing about strictly not taking anything with you during evacuation and remaining seated until released.

[infrequentflyer789]

If you fly through turbulence the signs go on and people store their stuff they have used until then in the bins.

Never thought of that one - mostly because the last thing I'd plan to do in turbulence is undo the frickin seatbelt and stand up to put stuff back in the overheads.
Maybe your pax are different shape to me if they can put stuff back in the bins without undoing the seatbelt and becoming flying debris themselves.

[AVR4000]

Regarding locking the bins: Another option would be to lock them during take-off and landing, i.e. they are locked as long as the seat belt sign is on (and also to be kept locked during such conditions as an emergency landing). There's no reason to have them unlocked between the gate and FL100.

[J.O.]

There's no reason to have them unlocked between the gate and FL100.

Tell that to the cabin crew who’ve had to deal with fires in an OHB.

[AVR4000]

Tell that to the cabin crew who’ve had to deal with fires in an OHB.

The cabin crew can unlock them at any time. Obviously.

Such a lock should be controlled from the C/A stations or from the galleys (where it is logical to get water to suppress a battery fire anyway).

This is *if* such a locking system is created in the first place. I am not convinced but *if* regulators decide to implement such a thing, the most logical option is to lock them during the taxi and take-off and during approach.

I must admit that I am not totally sure about passengers grabbing their carry-on *if* the cabin is filling with black smoke (Manchester 1985 type of event). The cases I know about (including the EK521) where they brought their bags didn't have THAT bad of a condition inside the cabin (they took their bags because they didn't "perceive" the situation as "that" threatening).

They didn't bring bags in Manchester since it was full panic in the cabin shortly after the aircraft came to a complete stop. Even the most ignorant of ignorant's would realize that black smoke filling the cabin means DANGER.

[llondel]

Advise pax to take out items required during flight before stowing overhead. Inform pax passports and medications should always be kept on person.
FAs lock bins after safety briefing
During cruise FA can open individual bin if pax needs something, then relock it.
At arrival gate FAs unlock bins.

Abloy type cylinders would discourage brute force lock picking attempts:E

Side effect of this - FA walks from the front of the aircraft to the back, unlocking bins on the way. This would mean there is no point in leaping out of your seat until the FA pas passed by because all you'd do is impede progress and be unable to get your bag out. Obviously doesn't apply to the subset of people who don't have a bag in the overhead bin.

[WHBM]

Regarding gabbling of safety briefings, a related increasing aspect is multi-lingual briefings where it is just not apparent where the speaker has changed languages, because they do each element in both languages, done without even pausing for breath, before moving on to the next element. You often miss out absorbing half or more of your "own" language before realising it's for you. Only a few carriers have realised the issue and, for example, done the two languages by speakers of different gender to make the changeover more obvious.

I do notice that briefings have become more wordy and tedious than before, commonly with trivia. Stupid attempts to "dumb down" the approach with silly videos (BA, I'm looking at you and that ridiculous rabbit) appear counter-productive, looking at how many pax lose interest along the way.

They didn't bring bags in Manchester since it was full panic in the cabin shortly after the aircraft came to a complete stopManchester was an outward IT flight in the days when hardly any such pax took significant bags into the cabin.

The key to the whole issue is stopping pax taking full size suitcases into the cabin with them. If they manage to get to the gate with them (I recall a Middle East "duty free" selling substantial boxed TV sets post-security) they should be taken into the hold.