RUSSIAN MOSCOW ACCIDENT
Thread Starter
RUSSIAN MOSCOW ACCIDENT
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.
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.
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 — 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 “passengers” 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 — fewer than half its typical load.
But for smaller aircraft such as the widely used A320 — and Boeing 737 — 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, there’s a distinct possibility the bags with protruding metal parts will snag and then deflate the escape slides — 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 it’s 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
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 — 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 “passengers” 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 — fewer than half its typical load.
But for smaller aircraft such as the widely used A320 — and Boeing 737 — 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, there’s a distinct possibility the bags with protruding metal parts will snag and then deflate the escape slides — 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 it’s 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
charging by piece for checked luggage doesn't help
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.
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?
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?
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.
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.
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.
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Sydney & Launceston, Australia
Age: 75
Posts: 10
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
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
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
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.....
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.....
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
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Aus
Posts: 12
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
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.
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?
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?
Originally Posted by PDR1
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...
Join Date: Sep 2018
Location: Melbourne
Posts: 2
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
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!
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!
There’s 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?
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?
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
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
I disagree. Are you telling me that because you take so much luggage, it’s so important that you get it before you evacuate? And if I took a small backpack which is only a couple of kilograms, then that’s also important to get it before evacuating? They take the same time to get out. And the same problem exists in that you’re holding people up.
They are disobeying instructions by crew. In Australia at least it’s an offence.
I don’t 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.
They are disobeying instructions by crew. In Australia at least it’s an offence.
I don’t 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.
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.
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
PDR1 sounds harrowing, glad you (finally) got out, I'm sure the rest of us can;t imagine what you went through