PDA

View Full Version : RUSSIAN MOSCOW ACCIDENT


runway16
7th May 2019, 10:06
The Russian Moscow air accident was most unfortunate given the loss of life that resulted.
There are several mentions of people who chose to get their carry-on bags instead of exiting the forward exit doors and slides at a faster rate. No doubt the Russian investigators will note this in their accident report which one would assume will be released for all interested parties to read and learn from.
Here in Australia we could learn something from the material gleaned from the media so far.
Emergency exits and carry on baggage.
Carry-on baggage.
In my passenger flights around the country I am shocked at the amount of carry on baggage passengers insist on carrying on. If I read the C/O bag limitations in terms of size, weight and numbers I say that a lot of people deliberately and knowingly breach the rules. To heck with the person who is seated below the baggage locker, the passenger with the excess bags is happy to take anyone else's bag space. I saw one case where a big fellow took the other persons baggage from above his seat and dumped it in the isle so that he could put his bags above his seat. Good one I thought! I mentally cheered.
Emergency exit rows.
In days gone by the emergency exit row was allocated to what I call fit and able persons who could assist in the case of an emergency. Moving forward we see the airlines selling seats in the emergency row regardless of whether the persons in that row could actually do the job of getting the emergency hatch open and be a commander to get slow pax out that exit.
I see little old ladies and gents allocated those emergency row seats. I see teenage girls just out from the how-little-can-we-wear contest (before someone speaks to us), allocated to those seats. No doubt they will sue the airline in the event of a crash fire. All that charred flesh.
Yes, I think that CASA and the airlines need to take stock of the Moscow accident and have a rethink re carry-on baggage and emergency row seat allocation before we have a like accident here.

Capn Bloggs
7th May 2019, 13:04
From The West today, by Geoff Thomas...
Retrieving overhead luggage makes air crashes more deadly

When is the tragic madness going to stop? Passengers insisting on taking their carry-on bags off a burning plane and videoing during the evacuation is possibly leading to tragic deaths.

It is reported that 41 of the 78 passengers and crew on Aeroflot flight SU-1492 from Moscow Sheremetyevo to Murmansk have died, possibly some trying to escape the inferno.

Video has emerged showing passengers filming from inside the doomed regional jet, while some passengers who did escape the conflagration are seen with their carry-on bags, which could have slowed the evacuation.

Passengers are supposed to be able to get off an aircraft with half the doors closed in just 90 seconds.

While Aeroflot says that the evacuation was completed in 55 seconds, those were the passengers and crew who survived ó 37 of them. Had the evvacuation been faster perhaps more could have escaped.

Airfares would have to triple if aviation regulators were to re-certify aircraft to the reality of these chaotic and tragic passenger evacuations.

There is no question that thoughtless passengers not following crew instructions are risking their lives, and those of fellow passengers, with the obsession for taking cabin baggage with them and videoing in an emergency.

In the evacuation certification tests for aircraft, the ďpassengersĒ are aircraft manufacturer employees who know the drill and they have no baggage. If regulators were to re-certify the long-range Boeing 777 to the reality of what happens, the aircraft would have to be recertified to just 183 passengers ó fewer than half its typical load.

But for smaller aircraft such as the widely used A320 ó and Boeing 737 ó which has a typical configuration of 180 mostly economy passengerrs, the impact would be devastating, with a new limit of just 65. That would mean a tripling of airfares to make the aircraft economically viable.

Authorities did express concerns after a British Airways incident in Las Vegas in 2015 when the highly respected British Civil Aviation Authority issued a blunt warning to its airlines: stop passengers taking their hand luggage off with them in an emergency evacuation.

Many airlines changed their safety instructions but the message appears lost on passengers.

The airline industry needs to take decisive action, perhaps by locking overhead lockers for take-off and landing, to prevent passengers taking baggage with them after a plane crash.

Or an extreme measure would be to ban carry-on baggage other than a small bag such as a backpack. It is sobering to consider that it quite often takes 40 minutes to board a plane because of passenger/baggage congestion.

Not only does taking your baggage dramatically slow the process, thereís a distinct possibility the bags with protruding metal parts will snag and then deflate the escape slides ó rendering them useless. And in the scramble to get oveerstuffed bags out of lockers, passengers may be knocked out and the aisle blocked for precious seconds.

There is also the very real prospect of passengers jumping on to the escape slide with their bag and knocking themselves or another passenger out, or even killing them. Duty-free alcohol is even more lethal because if the bottle breaks there is flammable liquid everywhere and broken glass.

And some passengers think itís smart to turn the disaster into a social media event.

Complicating matters is the fact airlines are not enforcing carry-on baggage limits for competitive reasons.

Copyright © 2019 The West Australian Newspaper

pithblot
8th May 2019, 01:05
I used to check my small overnight travel bag (8kg) in with my suitcase (15kg) and carry onboard just reading glasses, book and a bottle of water. Qantas recently stopped that by working to rule and charging per piece of checked baggage. Now they want to charge me $ 90 to put my overnight bag in the hold with my suitcase, despite the total weight being within the luggage weight limit. Needless to say, the bag now travels in the cabin.

Charging checked luggage by piece encourages passengers to put baggage in the overhaed lockers - where it doesn't belong.

obgraham
8th May 2019, 02:09
The airlines have it backwards. They should charge for carry-ons, and take checked bags free.

Buttscratcher
8th May 2019, 03:28
Doesn't make any difference; you just leave whatever on the aircraft and exit in an orderly manner.
whether its checked below or in the overhead makes no difference, it stays on the aircraft.
if you follow its instructions, that is.
So are you advocating checking your bags because you may be 'tempted' to retrieve them in an emergency evacuation?

AerialPerspective
8th May 2019, 04:44
The Russian Moscow air accident was most unfortunate given the loss of life that resulted.
There are several mentions of people who chose to get their carry-on bags instead of exiting the forward exit doors and slides at a faster rate. No doubt the Russian investigators will note this in their accident report which one would assume will be released for all interested parties to read and learn from.
Here in Australia we could learn something from the material gleaned from the media so far.
Emergency exits and carry on baggage.
Carry-on baggage.
In my passenger flights around the country I am shocked at the amount of carry on baggage passengers insist on carrying on. If I read the C/O bag limitations in terms of size, weight and numbers I say that a lot of people deliberately and knowingly breach the rules. To heck with the person who is seated below the baggage locker, the passenger with the excess bags is happy to take anyone else's bag space. I saw one case where a big fellow took the other persons baggage from above his seat and dumped it in the isle so that he could put his bags above his seat. Good one I thought! I mentally cheered.
Emergency exit rows.
In days gone by the emergency exit row was allocated to what I call fit and able persons who could assist in the case of an emergency. Moving forward we see the airlines selling seats in the emergency row regardless of whether the persons in that row could actually do the job of getting the emergency hatch open and be a commander to get slow pax out that exit.
I see little old ladies and gents allocated those emergency row seats. I see teenage girls just out from the how-little-can-we-wear contest (before someone speaks to us), allocated to those seats. No doubt they will sue the airline in the event of a crash fire. All that charred flesh.
Yes, I think that CASA and the airlines need to take stock of the Moscow accident and have a rethink re carry-on baggage and emergency row seat allocation before we have a like accident here.

Simple. Anyone who survives an accident or incident and emerges from the stricken aeroplane with their cabin baggage should be charged with attempted murder or some degree of manslaughter. People lose lives because of this idiotic behaviour and it needs to be treated as a serious (Federal) crime.

AerialPerspective
8th May 2019, 04:46
The airlines have it backwards. They should charge for carry-ons, and take checked bags free.

People should go to jail for stopping and retrieving their cabin baggage... if the 10 people behind them lose their lives as a result, they should be charged with 10 counts of murder.

ausworld
8th May 2019, 06:26
Agree

Just imagined if one of those that could not escape was a relative or friend let alone any passenger

Sicked by video of those people with bags looking back at the aircraft

Wonder how many their action caused the death of others

Pastor of Muppets
8th May 2019, 10:48
Saw an article today describing how the perceived selfish act of taking cabin baggage could in fact be a shock reaction.

Each time we travel by air and arrive at our destination, we undo our belts, gather our belongings and vacate.

The suggestion was made that passengers simply draw on memory rather than instruction during stressful/shocking situations.

Anyhoo, thought it interesting.....

PDR1
8th May 2019, 12:02
Agree

Just imagined if one of those that could not escape was a relative or friend let alone any passenger

Sicked by video of those people with bags looking back at the aircraft

Wonder how many their action caused the death of others

Perhaps, perhaps not. Firstly in a crash people are in a state of shock and may not be in a state of mind to think logically about leaving a bag behind. People often behave completely irrationally in these situations - it's called "disaster shock". Secondly If someone is standing in the isle in a queue to leave (as happened the one time I did an emergency evac) it can add no additional time or delay to reach into the locker and grab a bag. So you cannot assume that someone carrying a bag actually delayed anything - for all you know the bag they are carrying may simply be one that had fallen from a locker and was *blocking* the isle, so in carrying it away they are clearing an obstruction rather than creating one.

As to root causes - well once upon a time when we flew on airliners the ticket included baggage, so we put it in the hold. Then the mponey-grubbing crooks decided they could augment their bloated salaries by charging extra money for every pound of hold baggage. This encourages passengers to switch to carry -on baggage rather than be gouged yet again by the shysters and low-lifes who own and operate the airliners. So if you're looking for someone to prosecute for "murder" then start with thpose who caused it - the airlines themselves.

If having carry-on baggage is a safety issue then we should look to those responsible for the safety of the aeroplane to take the lead in changing the rules. We are constantly told that the Captain of the aeroplane has absolute authority over, and responsibility for, the safety of the aeroplane. So let's see him/her take responsibility - if these people had integrity then surely they would refuse to fly any aeroplane whose booking conditions discouraged hold baggage? After all, nothing should be allowed to compromise safety, should it...

PDR

Boston
8th May 2019, 12:12
Airlines spend a lot of money on interiors so why cant they include an option where if the Seat Belt Sign is on the O/H bins are locked.... if they are locked for an emergency landing or RTO then the pax cant even open the O/H bins to get their bags.

Traffic_Is_Er_Was
8th May 2019, 13:42
If the O'H's are locked, do the people standing trying to open them block the aisle for longer? In a heavy landing, or a crash, do the lockers pop open anyway, usually spilling the contents down onto the seats and aisle below?

tdracer
8th May 2019, 18:26
Airlines spend a lot of money on interiors so why cant they include an option where if the Seat Belt Sign is on the O/H bins are locked.... if they are locked for an emergency landing or RTO then the pax cant even open the O/H bins to get their bags.

A couple of weeks ago, I flew down to Las Vegas. During the flight, I watched a middle aged woman trying to open a locked lav door for a full minute - even though I could clearly see from 3 rows back that it was locked because it was occupied with the red 'occupied' clearly displayed on the door. How long do you think it would take this woman to figure out that the overhead bin was locked and to move on during an emergency evac?

Capn Bloggs
9th May 2019, 00:25
If having carry-on baggage is a safety issue then we should look to those responsible for the safety of the aeroplane to take the lead in changing the rules. We are constantly told that the Captain of the aeroplane has absolute authority over, and responsibility for, the safety of the aeroplane. So let's see him/her take responsibility - if these people had integrity then surely they would refuse to fly any aeroplane whose booking conditions discouraged hold baggage? After all, nothing should be allowed to compromise safety, should it...
How completely ridiculous.

machtuk
9th May 2019, 02:21
How completely ridiculous.

yeah I shook my head at this one also?

Some don't seem to realise that it's not just about collecting those bags it's the higher risk that the slides could be damaged/deflated by said luggage as well as increase the evac process at the slides jamming up precious space not to mention the extra injuries people would be at risk to with trying to jump down with hard shelled cases in tow? Amazing that a lot simply don't get it!

Johnny_56
9th May 2019, 07:01
Thereís a lot of talk about people collecting hand luggage during an evacuation in relation to this accident.

Why did the thing catch fire in the first place? It was clearly a very rough landing but for it to explode into flames seems pretty extreme! Is there an issue with the manufacture of these things?

Is there some problem with the controllability of these aircraft if they get struck by lightning, do they revert to a direct law setup like Airbus?

PDR1
9th May 2019, 07:17
How completely ridiculous.

Of course it is, or at least clearly more than a little tongue-in-cheek. But it's no more ridiculous that all this judgemental twattery about murder charges against people for what they did when under extreme stress in the middle of a developing disaster.

Focus on WHY people have so much carry-on stuff in the first place. That comes down to two things - the minor one is the delays in baggage recovery in a typical airport (I've spent over an hour standing in baggage reclaim many times), but the major one is the way airlines have decided that a ticket only entitles the passenger to travel with the clothes they stand in (and not too many of those). Everything else attracts punitive charges because they claim they can sell that cargo space, although interestingly the rate they want to charge for hold baggage is considerably more than the rate they charge for it as freight. I've always assumed this is because the freight rates are a competitive ,market while passenger baggage is a captive audience. So those who are naturally inclined to fraud and extortion (ie most of the airlines) cannot resist the opportunity to steal ever more money from their customers.

So if you're looking for someone who needs to be punished, or charged with conspiracy to murder [tongue in cheek], start with the airlines. The passengers come a long way down any list of blame-worthy people here.

PDR

morno
9th May 2019, 09:29
I disagree. Are you telling me that because you take so much luggage, itís so important that you get it before you evacuate? And if I took a small backpack which is only a couple of kilograms, then thatís also important to get it before evacuating? They take the same time to get out. And the same problem exists in that youíre holding people up.

They are disobeying instructions by crew. In Australia at least itís an offence.

I donít care if you are in a time of stress. If you hold up an evacuation and contribute to the death of someone, then you should be held accountable.

PDR1
9th May 2019, 14:12
I disagree. Are you telling me that because you take so much luggage, itís so important that you get it before you evacuate? And if I took a small backpack which is only a couple of kilograms, then thatís also important to get it before evacuating?


I don't know how you got that from what I wrote, but for clarification - this thread has split into two elements. On the one hand we have people criticising the passengers who took their bags with them when they left, and on the other hand we have people criticising passengers simply for having so much carry-on baggage (or indeed ANY carry-on baggage in some cases) at all, and hpow this creates the first problem.

Comments about the airlines' resposiboility are in response to the second question. People have carry-on baggage because the airlines explicitly encourage them to do so and discourage them from checking baggage into the hold. If you have a problem with that aspect then take it up with the airlines, because it's nothing to do with the passengers.

My view on passengers taking their carry-on with them is simply that most passengers are probably not capable of rational thought in such an emergency. I've been involved in one "emergency evacuation" that was pretty mild, in an old 747 classic that had a smoke-in-the-cabin even when one of the engines was started (I gather there was a minor oil puddle after mainteance on one engine). I was at the back in the smoking area (gives an idea how long ago this was!) and we stood in the isle seemingly for ages before we finally moved to the exit. I would have had enough time to get my carry-on bag, take valuables from it, put it back and probably make myself a coffee during that wait.

But I have been trapped in a burning building - my bedroom in my parents' home, to be precise (in 1982 - a few weeks before my 21st birthday). I awoke at around 2AM to find the house full of smoke and loud crackling from downstairs. I shouted and made sure I got an answer from all the other family members, and then I went to the phone extension in the room and spent several minutes trying to call the fire brigade. This was futile because I didn't even get a dial tone, but I still continued. By this stage the smoke was pretty choking and the heat was getting intense. Then I heard people shouting outside and realised that I really should be thinking more about joining them, so I picked up a chair and spend over a minute failing to smash the (safety glass) secondary double glazing on the window, culminating in the chair bouncing off the window hand smacking me hard in the head. That stopped me, and made me think (probably for the first time since waking up) and FINALLY it occured to me to just grab the screwdriver from my work bench, prise the clips of the double galing panel and remove the pane of glass so that I could open the window behind it and jump out. That delay gave me second-degree burns (which I still have some scars from), and it was over a year before I could sleep more than 10 mins at a stretch. So I KNOW (not a theory - a personal observation) that in these crisis situations people do not think or behave rationally, even when it's bleedin' obvious and someone is shouting at them. That's just the nature of the human condition when suffering adrenaline overdoses.

If you haven't been there then you're not in a position to stand in judgement over others. I won't ever look to jail people for being human. That would be stupid.
PDR

golfbananajam
9th May 2019, 14:33
I agree that the average human being will revert to type, or worse, in such scenario and it is for this very reason that emergency and military forces the world over spend a lot of time and money training so that dealing with high impact stress such as this does become second nature BUT younever know how good that training is until the real thing happens. That's why their training develops over time too, it's based on feedback (debriefing) form real events.

PDR1 sounds harrowing, glad you (finally) got out, I'm sure the rest of us can;t imagine what you went through

runway16
22nd May 2019, 23:17
From todays printed media news, QF cabin staff moved a gent who was 'well nourished' to use an expression, from an emergency seat row saying that he took up the space of one and half seats and had to use a seat belt extender. Said gent got upset and said things to and about QF and said staff.
All this comes on my earlier thread of 7 May following the Moscow crash in which I noted issues with cabin carry-on bags and the wrong allocation of the emergency exit row to people who were not 'fit and able people' to be useful in an emergency exit.
Could it be that airline(s) are taking note on at least the emergency row allocation that I raised in my 7 May thread?

morno
23rd May 2019, 00:28
From todays printed media news, QF cabin staff moved a gent who was 'well nourished' to use an expression, from an emergency seat row saying that he took up the space of one and half seats and had to use a seat belt extender. Said gent got upset and said things to and about QF and said staff.
All this comes on my earlier thread of 7 May following the Moscow crash in which I noted issues with cabin carry-on bags and the wrong allocation of the emergency exit row to people who were not 'fit and able people' to be useful in an emergency exit.
Could it be that airline(s) are taking note on at least the emergency row allocation that I raised in my 7 May thread?

Probabky not. Theyíre just doing their job.

turbantime
23rd May 2019, 00:46
Company and maybe CASA requirement means seat belt extensions can not be used at emergency exit rows.

Pinky the pilot
23rd May 2019, 10:12
There was a brief mention on the TV News this evening of the incident referred to by runway16. Some very brief footage was shown of the complainant.

Reaction in the Pinky Household was 'Well done Qantas':ok:

Sympathy level for complainant; Nil.

Sunfish
23rd May 2019, 10:13
I wear a shirt with a buttoned top pocket on international flights - for my passport. The rest of my baggage can burn in an emergency evacuation.

If we were really serious about evacuation:

- no duty free shopping.

- no flip flops or high heeled shoes.

- obese and frail people away from exits.

QF did the right thing by moving that obese man mountain from the exit row - he would have jammed the emergency exit like a cork in a bottle.

SOPS
23rd May 2019, 11:34
Just looked at the guys picture. Well done QF!!

sunnySA
23rd May 2019, 16:29
How do airlines apply RSA rules to those seated in an exit row? Would the RSA rules be different to those seated elsewhere?

missy
23rd May 2019, 16:32
I'm surprised that the safety briefing isn't re-done for the approach and landing. I recall Air Canada does but for other airlines? And in preparation for an emergency landing are passengers told to remove shoes?

machtuk
24th May 2019, 00:32
The grubby media sure do love a story like this! They play on the sympathy card a LOT! The guy was obviously unsuitable to be located in an emerg exit row but how did he get there in the first place? The trolley dollies are meant to be checking every boarding pass upon entering the cabin, exit rows would be well known so these people should never make it to their exit row seats in the first place! The Airlines should perhaps make it policy that anyone booking online for their seat that selects an exit row (and pays for it) has to check in at the counter beforehand to prove their suitability?
Flying is so common these days that there would be very few rules not known by very few people.

itsnotthatbloodyhard
24th May 2019, 00:51
How do airlines apply RSA rules to those seated in an exit row? Would the RSA rules be different to those seated elsewhere?

Fair question. I think the airlines might say that since itís illegal for anyone to be intoxicated on board an aircraft, nobody will be intoxicated and therefore thereís no problem. ;)

AerialPerspective
24th May 2019, 02:46
Of course it is, or at least clearly more than a little tongue-in-cheek. But it's no more ridiculous that all this judgemental twattery about murder charges against people for what they did when under extreme stress in the middle of a developing disaster.

Focus on WHY people have so much carry-on stuff in the first place. That comes down to two things - the minor one is the delays in baggage recovery in a typical airport (I've spent over an hour standing in baggage reclaim many times), but the major one is the way airlines have decided that a ticket only entitles the passenger to travel with the clothes they stand in (and not too many of those). Everything else attracts punitive charges because they claim they can sell that cargo space, although interestingly the rate they want to charge for hold baggage is considerably more than the rate they charge for it as freight. I've always assumed this is because the freight rates are a competitive ,market while passenger baggage is a captive audience. So those who are naturally inclined to fraud and extortion (ie most of the airlines) cannot resist the opportunity to steal ever more money from their customers.

So if you're looking for someone who needs to be punished, or charged with conspiracy to murder [tongue in cheek], start with the airlines. The passengers come a long way down any list of blame-worthy people here.

PDR

Being in a burning building is stressful too but I bet you'll find if someone does anything to impede evacuation... also in a commercial premises, they are in the frame for manslaughter. There is no reason why this scenario should be any different. It's called culpability. If they want to use stress as a defense, fine, but if the prospect is there and it stops one person from doing this and a life is saved, then it's worth it. Car accidents are stressful too... people are sometimes in shock, but if you seriously injure someone then drive off to get a quote to get your car repaired and leave the injured person to die then you go for a row of sh-t houses. No different in an aircraft cabin.

AerialPerspective
24th May 2019, 02:55
I don't know how you got that from what I wrote, but for clarification - this thread has split into two elements. On the one hand we have people criticising the passengers who took their bags with them when they left, and on the other hand we have people criticising passengers simply for having so much carry-on baggage (or indeed ANY carry-on baggage in some cases) at all, and hpow this creates the first problem.

Comments about the airlines' resposiboility are in response to the second question. People have carry-on baggage because the airlines explicitly encourage them to do so and discourage them from checking baggage into the hold. If you have a problem with that aspect then take it up with the airlines, because it's nothing to do with the passengers.

My view on passengers taking their carry-on with them is simply that most passengers are probably not capable of rational thought in such an emergency. I've been involved in one "emergency evacuation" that was pretty mild, in an old 747 classic that had a smoke-in-the-cabin even when one of the engines was started (I gather there was a minor oil puddle after mainteance on one engine). I was at the back in the smoking area (gives an idea how long ago this was!) and we stood in the isle seemingly for ages before we finally moved to the exit. I would have had enough time to get my carry-on bag, take valuables from it, put it back and probably make myself a coffee during that wait.

But I have been trapped in a burning building - my bedroom in my parents' home, to be precise (in 1982 - a few weeks before my 21st birthday). I awoke at around 2AM to find the house full of smoke and loud crackling from downstairs. I shouted and made sure I got an answer from all the other family members, and then I went to the phone extension in the room and spent several minutes trying to call the fire brigade. This was futile because I didn't even get a dial tone, but I still continued. By this stage the smoke was pretty choking and the heat was getting intense. Then I heard people shouting outside and realised that I really should be thinking more about joining them, so I picked up a chair and spend over a minute failing to smash the (safety glass) secondary double glazing on the window, culminating in the chair bouncing off the window hand smacking me hard in the head. That stopped me, and made me think (probably for the first time since waking up) and FINALLY it occured to me to just grab the screwdriver from my work bench, prise the clips of the double galing panel and remove the pane of glass so that I could open the window behind it and jump out. That delay gave me second-degree burns (which I still have some scars from), and it was over a year before I could sleep more than 10 mins at a stretch. So I KNOW (not a theory - a personal observation) that in these crisis situations people do not think or behave rationally, even when it's bleedin' obvious and someone is shouting at them. That's just the nature of the human condition when suffering adrenaline overdoses.

If you haven't been there then you're not in a position to stand in judgement over others. I won't ever look to jail people for being human. That would be stupid.
PDR

Sorry for your experience in the house, that would be a terrible situation and while you make some good points, how many wings were attached to the house and how many tonnes of fuel was contained in them. I'm not being flippant, but an aeroplane is not a house, it is a peculiarly shaped object with tonnes of fuel that makes it virtually a potential bomb. I'm not satisfied that the stopping to get cabin baggage isn't a product of the selfishness of the situation. You were trying to contact the Fire Brigade, then you were trying to open the window... these people were stopping to collect personal belongings because they thought that was more important than the people's lives behind them.

Propstop
24th May 2019, 06:14
In the 90s I was working in Riyan International Airport in Yemen. A Yemenia DHC-7 crew saw me at the aircraft I was looking after and asked me to inflate a partially deflated tyre as they were going back to Aden.
I did that quick job and was taken to the pax steps and given a cold bottle of water (40C on the tarmac). What I saw shocked me to the core; the emergency exit was packed to the roof with excess baggage. The only exit would have been the cabin door, but the baggage would have blocked that as well or the window exits at row 10 or thereabouts as it is many years since I worked on the dash sevens.
A week or so before a Yemenia B737 taxied to the end of the apron and shut down and the crew immediately vacated out the cockpit windows on the ropes with the cabin crew not far behind leaving the passengers on board. I was told there was a bomb scare on board, Bit like the Concordia captain who fell into a lifeboat.An hour later the pax were disembarked.
I saw similar on a flight I was on with Libyan Arab Airlines B727 from Tripoli to Zurich where the bags which would not fit into the lockers were piled in one exit. I was relieved to get safely to Zurich.
Travelling in Australia I have seen many unsuitable people in exit rows.

josephfeatherweight
24th May 2019, 09:05
I wear a shirt with a buttoned top pocket
Sunfish, whenever I have imagined you (when reading your posts), I have never, ever, had ANY doubt, that that would be what you were wearing...

givemewings
27th May 2019, 16:07
QF have been tough on exit rows for years.

As a "trolley dolly" with them, yes exit rows are known but you're mainly checking for fliggt number date and destination on a boarding pass. That's all you usually get to see before most pax yank the card back... ideally yes check for rows and direct but they can slip by. That's why the exit row briefs exist.

Nothing said the crew only noticed him after he was seated. They could well have spotted him as he was putting bags away. Usually on a 737 it's the L2A who manages the ow exit rows (it was back then, amyway). And if the aisle is full it can take some time to get to row 12 and 13/13 And 14 to brief (iirc for the 738)

As for people

most passengers are probably not capable of rational thought in such an emergency neither are most mums who shake their babies or leave them.in cars by mistake or people who cause traffic accidents generally dontvmean to but that doesn't mean due legal process goes by the wayside...

VH DSJ
28th May 2019, 02:52
As a "trolley dolly" with them, yes exit rows are known but you're mainly checking for fliggt number date and destination on a boarding pass. That's all you usually get to see before most pax yank the card back... ideally yes check for rows and direct but they can slip by. That's why the exit row briefs exist.



At many airports in the USA, when they scan your boarding pass at the gate to board the plane, an alert goes off if you've been assigned a seat in the exit row. This is so the gate agent can assess whether the person assigned an exit row seat is a suitable 'able-bodied person' (or 'ABP' as they call them there). Perhaps Australia should do the same if they don't already have this technology? It would be very easy to program in to the boarding pass scanner software, I'd imagine.

clakajak
28th May 2019, 04:37
I pax fairly often on Jetstar, and that’s exactly what happens when you scan at the gate. The alert goes off and you are then questioned on your suitability for exit row.

phone
29th May 2019, 06:00
That is terrible

Tankengine
29th May 2019, 11:36
That is terrible
Why?

I think it is very satisfactory.
In fact I think operational staff should have priority for the overwing exits on safety grounds.