Swimming
Joined: Sep 2001
Posts: 606
Likes: 0
From: Hong Kong
Sick Squid,
I didn't say that every ditching would be unsurvivable. My point (which I must be making very badly because no-one seems to understand it) is that in terms of dollars per life saved the evidence I have seen has suggested that the money would be better spent on smoke-hoods rather than lifejackets. Clearly if sufficient money were available it would be best to have both. (And if passengers would accept it, backwards facing seats as well.)
Skypryncess,
As the link I gave previously showed, the Air Accident Investigation Board in the UK has recommended that smoke-hoods be fitted to all UK aircraft. Commercial considerations, in the form of pressure from the airlines on the Civil Aviation Authority which makes the regulations in the UK, meant that it did not happen. However much you may wish it not to be so, money is the determining factor here - smokehoods would have saved dozens if not hundreds of lives over the last 20 years.
Moreover, there are different types of equipment. As I understand it the recommendation in the UK was for smoke-hoods which would enable passengers to get out of the plane quickly without inhaling a load of smoke and toxic fumes. These could take the form of filters which would not have an oxygen source. I believe the PBE for cabin crew have oxygen on the basis that you will need to be in the smoke longer than most passengers.
The function of the headrest clothes is completely news to me - thanks for that - do any airlines actually bother to tell the passengers about this or is it supposed to be a secret?
I'm sorry that you see this as somehow a personal attack - it isn't meant that way. It's a pity also that you seem to regard passengers as "dead wood" in the event of an emergency. Many of the reports I have read on accidents suggest that "clued up" passengers can be a significant help in getting the panickers out of the cabin as quickly as possible.
I didn't say that every ditching would be unsurvivable. My point (which I must be making very badly because no-one seems to understand it) is that in terms of dollars per life saved the evidence I have seen has suggested that the money would be better spent on smoke-hoods rather than lifejackets. Clearly if sufficient money were available it would be best to have both. (And if passengers would accept it, backwards facing seats as well.)
Skypryncess,
As the link I gave previously showed, the Air Accident Investigation Board in the UK has recommended that smoke-hoods be fitted to all UK aircraft. Commercial considerations, in the form of pressure from the airlines on the Civil Aviation Authority which makes the regulations in the UK, meant that it did not happen. However much you may wish it not to be so, money is the determining factor here - smokehoods would have saved dozens if not hundreds of lives over the last 20 years.
Moreover, there are different types of equipment. As I understand it the recommendation in the UK was for smoke-hoods which would enable passengers to get out of the plane quickly without inhaling a load of smoke and toxic fumes. These could take the form of filters which would not have an oxygen source. I believe the PBE for cabin crew have oxygen on the basis that you will need to be in the smoke longer than most passengers.
The function of the headrest clothes is completely news to me - thanks for that - do any airlines actually bother to tell the passengers about this or is it supposed to be a secret?
I'm sorry that you see this as somehow a personal attack - it isn't meant that way. It's a pity also that you seem to regard passengers as "dead wood" in the event of an emergency. Many of the reports I have read on accidents suggest that "clued up" passengers can be a significant help in getting the panickers out of the cabin as quickly as possible.
Wicked Moderator
Joined: Mar 2000
Posts: 575
Likes: 0
From: I-
Try this....
www.flightsafety.org
Register, then look into publication jan_feb98 (about smokehoods)....
Also many more interesting stuff in this website (such as surviving a ditching and 1000 more interesting publications)... it's worth it
So... u have flown as much as a Cabin Crew??
Don't get me wrong, but how many SEP, First Aid and RT trainings have you done??
No, not the matter of being "sentimental" here just a matter of pax (with the right of giving an opinion) trying to get to know as much (or more) as we do ...
Just a matter of respecting our professionalism
www.flightsafety.org
Register, then look into publication jan_feb98 (about smokehoods)....
Also many more interesting stuff in this website (such as surviving a ditching and 1000 more interesting publications)... it's worth it
So... u have flown as much as a Cabin Crew??
Don't get me wrong, but how many SEP, First Aid and RT trainings have you done??
No, not the matter of being "sentimental" here just a matter of pax (with the right of giving an opinion) trying to get to know as much (or more) as we do ...
Just a matter of respecting our professionalism
Last edited by Xenia; 9th April 2002 at 20:12.
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 166
Likes: 0
From: Sydney Australia
Christep I don't think anyone in this industry would consider the pax "dead wood".
And their help in emergency situations as ABP's is appreciated in certain circumstances.
However, there is also the threat of a person not being properly trained misjudging the situation and causing an even greater problem.
No one is saying that the pax wouldn't be able to find their way out, or haul open an exit, or swim to safety them selves.
But unless they have had full competency training on that particular aircraft how could they possibly understand all the variables of an incident and the best way to approach an evacuation.
Speaking from experience Christep I have been involved in an emergency situation and I can tell you the hardest thing about it was stopping the pax from trying to take over the situation and opening exits that the crew deemed unsafe. ie twisted metal puncturing escape slides. It is not fun trying to stop 6" business men who are keen to get out your designated exit.
Information can be a dangerous thing in the wrong hands, thats why we leave things we don't kow enough about to the professionals. I would no sooner attempt to be a police officer for a day than pretend I could do whatever it is that you do aside from travelling as a pax.
I , like yourself, am not meaning to offend you but you should understand that many crew are sick and tired of not only having to justify their job roles, but also having to explain again and again our prime responsibilty as safety professionals.
We are trained, and trained well, to follow the procedures at all times. We do not defer from these procedures unless the company sees fit to initiate this. You should trust the fact these people are chosen for their abilities to get your arse off that aircraft not just fluff your pillow and serve you cocktails!
You are right about one thing. And that is that many decisions in this industry are based on the money factor. The companies that you chose to fly with are running a business and of course will attempt to make the highest margin of profit possible. But if you think it is at the expense of your safety then it is your choice at the end of the day whether to fly with them or not.
And as for your original questions regarding smokehoods and rear facing seats, well in time you may have them but not until the studies are done and the bean crunchers have counted. Personally I would need a lot of convincing that they would not be detrimental to an evacuation in terms of time taken to fit, or risk of hazard and impediment to the evacuation itself.
Lastly ( now I can get off my soapbox ) please don't mistake our pride and love for the job as being overly emotional. Don't take lightly that we do indeed put our lives at risk on a daily basis for our jobs. Everyday we take on this responsibility willingly.
Perhaps it is not what you are saying but the way you are saying it that is causing you to be misunderstood.
And their help in emergency situations as ABP's is appreciated in certain circumstances.
However, there is also the threat of a person not being properly trained misjudging the situation and causing an even greater problem.
No one is saying that the pax wouldn't be able to find their way out, or haul open an exit, or swim to safety them selves.
But unless they have had full competency training on that particular aircraft how could they possibly understand all the variables of an incident and the best way to approach an evacuation.
Speaking from experience Christep I have been involved in an emergency situation and I can tell you the hardest thing about it was stopping the pax from trying to take over the situation and opening exits that the crew deemed unsafe. ie twisted metal puncturing escape slides. It is not fun trying to stop 6" business men who are keen to get out your designated exit.
Information can be a dangerous thing in the wrong hands, thats why we leave things we don't kow enough about to the professionals. I would no sooner attempt to be a police officer for a day than pretend I could do whatever it is that you do aside from travelling as a pax.
I , like yourself, am not meaning to offend you but you should understand that many crew are sick and tired of not only having to justify their job roles, but also having to explain again and again our prime responsibilty as safety professionals.
We are trained, and trained well, to follow the procedures at all times. We do not defer from these procedures unless the company sees fit to initiate this. You should trust the fact these people are chosen for their abilities to get your arse off that aircraft not just fluff your pillow and serve you cocktails!
You are right about one thing. And that is that many decisions in this industry are based on the money factor. The companies that you chose to fly with are running a business and of course will attempt to make the highest margin of profit possible. But if you think it is at the expense of your safety then it is your choice at the end of the day whether to fly with them or not.
And as for your original questions regarding smokehoods and rear facing seats, well in time you may have them but not until the studies are done and the bean crunchers have counted. Personally I would need a lot of convincing that they would not be detrimental to an evacuation in terms of time taken to fit, or risk of hazard and impediment to the evacuation itself.
Lastly ( now I can get off my soapbox ) please don't mistake our pride and love for the job as being overly emotional. Don't take lightly that we do indeed put our lives at risk on a daily basis for our jobs. Everyday we take on this responsibility willingly.
Perhaps it is not what you are saying but the way you are saying it that is causing you to be misunderstood.
Last edited by Iguanahead; 9th April 2002 at 21:35.
Joined: Nov 2000
Posts: 3,261
Likes: 1
From: Europe
christep, to obtain my F/A licence I had to pass various exams (here in Europe some countries have a Civil Aviation exam for F/As, like France and Italy to name two, and btw swimming skills are a requirement). One of those included extracting an unconscious BIG pax from his seat and dragging him in the aisle. We are taught techniques for doing that and exercise regularly (even too much if you want my advice ).
Regarding the swimming skills, I believe it is superficial to say it is no use. There have been accidents, like the Minerva one in Genoa, where one pax with swimming skills saved the lives of the other pax by swimming to the emergency exits and opening them. In this case it couldn't be the F/A who was dead. But next time the F/A could be the only one to be able to swim, to know where to go and what to do.
). Regarding the swimming skills, I believe it is superficial to say it is no use. There have been accidents, like the Minerva one in Genoa, where one pax with swimming skills saved the lives of the other pax by swimming to the emergency exits and opening them. In this case it couldn't be the F/A who was dead. But next time the F/A could be the only one to be able to swim, to know where to go and what to do.
Last edited by flyblue; 10th April 2002 at 08:19.
Guest
Posts: n/a
Quite an interesting thread this.
Airlines ask for cabin crew to be confident swimmers, it's not cross channel stuff because if you ditch in the sea it's better if you don't swim. But if your confident in the water you can concentrate on other things besides just trying to stay afloat. It's not very nice in the water even if you have a life jacket on.
Years ago I did some sea survival training relating to my work in the yachting industry. This time of year in the Northern hemisphere the sea is at it's coldest. Unless you are kitted out in a full fighter pilot style immmersion suit your not even going to SURVIVE in the water more than 10 minutes and if you start swimming you live even less time.
Most ditchings are probably going to happen just after take off or just before landing so hopefully your in shallow water and rescue is not too far away.
Rule must be only ditch in the Maldives.
On the point of rear facing seats I seem to remember a while back being told this was not possible because if an overhead locker burst open on impact and the contents fell out the injuries to the passengers would be facial rather than the back of the head which can to an extent withstand greater impact.
Airlines ask for cabin crew to be confident swimmers, it's not cross channel stuff because if you ditch in the sea it's better if you don't swim. But if your confident in the water you can concentrate on other things besides just trying to stay afloat. It's not very nice in the water even if you have a life jacket on.
Years ago I did some sea survival training relating to my work in the yachting industry. This time of year in the Northern hemisphere the sea is at it's coldest. Unless you are kitted out in a full fighter pilot style immmersion suit your not even going to SURVIVE in the water more than 10 minutes and if you start swimming you live even less time.
Most ditchings are probably going to happen just after take off or just before landing so hopefully your in shallow water and rescue is not too far away.
Rule must be only ditch in the Maldives.
On the point of rear facing seats I seem to remember a while back being told this was not possible because if an overhead locker burst open on impact and the contents fell out the injuries to the passengers would be facial rather than the back of the head which can to an extent withstand greater impact.
Wicked Moderator
Joined: Mar 2000
Posts: 575
Likes: 0
From: I-
Here goes some more correct information:
Symptoms of extended exposure to water at different temperatures
Loss of use of hands and forearms:
3° C 15 minutes
9° C 20 minutes
21°C 3 hours
Loss of mental activity
3° C 45 minutes
9° C 1 hour
21° C 4 hours 30 minutes
Hypothermia and death
3° C 1 hour 5 minutes
9° C 1 hour 30 minutes
21° C 6 hours
Interesting, isn'it? therefore if it can help to answer to somebody's question, we are provided (when required so by law)with life/slide rafts to help survivors while waiting to be rescued.... knowing how to swimm could help, such as a little silly example, to rescue someone from the water to life/slide raft.... Probably you have realized by the chart given above there is not really a lot of time to waste after a ditching situation if your pax are having a bath.....
Another interesting finding from an FAA ditching survivors research in 1998.....
72% of pax needed specific or direct assistance in the use of the life vest. This became a critical problem because 30% of the pax could NOT swim.
42% of the pax later stated that they had not seen the life vest demo and 59% that they had not read the briefing card....
So, hopefully we all see why it is important to make every minute count in case of a ditching.... (both premeditated or unpremeditated)
Symptoms of extended exposure to water at different temperatures
Loss of use of hands and forearms:
3° C 15 minutes
9° C 20 minutes
21°C 3 hours
Loss of mental activity
3° C 45 minutes
9° C 1 hour
21° C 4 hours 30 minutes
Hypothermia and death
3° C 1 hour 5 minutes
9° C 1 hour 30 minutes
21° C 6 hours
Interesting, isn'it? therefore if it can help to answer to somebody's question, we are provided (when required so by law)with life/slide rafts to help survivors while waiting to be rescued.... knowing how to swimm could help, such as a little silly example, to rescue someone from the water to life/slide raft.... Probably you have realized by the chart given above there is not really a lot of time to waste after a ditching situation if your pax are having a bath.....
Another interesting finding from an FAA ditching survivors research in 1998.....
72% of pax needed specific or direct assistance in the use of the life vest. This became a critical problem because 30% of the pax could NOT swim.
42% of the pax later stated that they had not seen the life vest demo and 59% that they had not read the briefing card....
So, hopefully we all see why it is important to make every minute count in case of a ditching.... (both premeditated or unpremeditated)
Last edited by Xenia; 15th April 2002 at 19:57.
Guest
Posts: n/a
Interesting stuff there xenia,
The onset of death in very cold water is very worrying isn't it, wondering how long rescue will take.
This is an interesting site I found. It relates more to yachts and ships sinking mid ocean (ie possibly weeks in a raft at sea) but some points are interesting nevertheless.
http://www.ussartf.org/Survival%20at%20Sea.htm
The onset of death in very cold water is very worrying isn't it, wondering how long rescue will take.
This is an interesting site I found. It relates more to yachts and ships sinking mid ocean (ie possibly weeks in a raft at sea) but some points are interesting nevertheless.
http://www.ussartf.org/Survival%20at%20Sea.htm
Joined: Apr 2002
Posts: 16
Likes: 0
From: Sydney
christep, you have made it clear that there are many things that you don't know. While your knowledge of a few hollow statistics may impress your drinking buddies, clearly you are out of your depth. As for headrest clothes or smokehoods etc "dead wood" such as yourself will be instructed how and when to use it.
Joined: Sep 2001
Posts: 606
Likes: 0
From: Hong Kong
I find it quite sad that (with notable exceptions - thanks for useful data Xenia et al.) so many people here feel the need to get abusive and insulting in response to what seem to me to be reasonable questions.
I don't claim to know all the answers, and I had hoped that by entering into a dialogue with the professionals here I would be able to learn more about this area. It is sad that so many of you seem to think that the people who pay your wages are somehow not entitled to enquire about things affecting their safety.
Personally, if anyone happens to want to know more about my profession (which happens to be in telecoms) I am happy to try to explain as best I can. I am sure, for example, that if my answer to
"Why is it that making phone calls from Hong Kong to London is cheaper than from Birmingham?" was
"Don't worry your pretty little head about it - it's far too complicated and you couldn't possibly understand it"
then you would quite rightly get upset.
Stewardess007: I am sure there are many things that you don't know either, but my response to this is to try to learn, not to abuse people for doing so.
Anyway, in a final attempt to return to the topic...
Sick Squid: unfortunately the NTSB study you mentioned doesn't seem to be available from their website (although newer ones covering ground evacuation are). Does anyone know any online sources of data on ditching of commercial jets?
On the question of the head cloths as smoke filters, doesn't anyone else think it is strange that passengers are not informed of this possible use - maybe not in the demo/briefing, but at least on the safety card?
I don't claim to know all the answers, and I had hoped that by entering into a dialogue with the professionals here I would be able to learn more about this area. It is sad that so many of you seem to think that the people who pay your wages are somehow not entitled to enquire about things affecting their safety.
Personally, if anyone happens to want to know more about my profession (which happens to be in telecoms) I am happy to try to explain as best I can. I am sure, for example, that if my answer to
"Why is it that making phone calls from Hong Kong to London is cheaper than from Birmingham?" was
"Don't worry your pretty little head about it - it's far too complicated and you couldn't possibly understand it"
then you would quite rightly get upset.
Stewardess007: I am sure there are many things that you don't know either, but my response to this is to try to learn, not to abuse people for doing so.
Anyway, in a final attempt to return to the topic...
Sick Squid: unfortunately the NTSB study you mentioned doesn't seem to be available from their website (although newer ones covering ground evacuation are). Does anyone know any online sources of data on ditching of commercial jets?
On the question of the head cloths as smoke filters, doesn't anyone else think it is strange that passengers are not informed of this possible use - maybe not in the demo/briefing, but at least on the safety card?
Wicked Moderator
Joined: Mar 2000
Posts: 575
Likes: 0
From: I-
Christep,
There are "few" things pax are briefed on only when circumstances arise. Otherwise:
a) Safety Demo will last forever (honestly, if we have to instruct pax on all we know and all they'll need to do in case of this or that or the other... Just consider an initial course last in average 5 weeks!)
b) Briefing card will be an encyclopedia
c) Average pax reaction
... most of them hardly listen or care about basic safety briefing and demo anyway! 
Now, don't get me wrong, but I believe that you approched us in the wrong way, and with the wrong attitude.
As I see things you claimed to know as much as one of us do as "you flown as much hours as us" ....
Pax at the end of the day pay my wages, fair enough. I will treat them with respect, but I expect to be treated with respect as well.
They pay my wages, and I am there to look after their safety (first at all). Both with the knowledge I've gain over all those years and by training new cabin crew to be confident in SEPs.
Deep down I am a very good person, althought well known for having "a bit" of a strong personality
If you have any questions regarding Flight Safety I am sure all my wonderful PPrUNe team and myself will be more than pleased to give you an explanation.
Just remember to give us the credit we all deserve, and to approch us in a different way....
And as someone very wise said.....
here to save ur @ss, not to kiss it
There are "few" things pax are briefed on only when circumstances arise. Otherwise:
a) Safety Demo will last forever (honestly, if we have to instruct pax on all we know and all they'll need to do in case of this or that or the other... Just consider an initial course last in average 5 weeks!)
b) Briefing card will be an encyclopedia
c) Average pax reaction
... most of them hardly listen or care about basic safety briefing and demo anyway! Now, don't get me wrong, but I believe that you approched us in the wrong way, and with the wrong attitude.
As I see things you claimed to know as much as one of us do as "you flown as much hours as us" ....
Pax at the end of the day pay my wages, fair enough. I will treat them with respect, but I expect to be treated with respect as well.
They pay my wages, and I am there to look after their safety (first at all). Both with the knowledge I've gain over all those years and by training new cabin crew to be confident in SEPs.
Deep down I am a very good person, althought well known for having "a bit" of a strong personality
If you have any questions regarding Flight Safety I am sure all my wonderful PPrUNe team and myself will be more than pleased to give you an explanation.
Just remember to give us the credit we all deserve, and to approch us in a different way....
And as someone very wise said.....
here to save ur @ss, not to kiss it
Last edited by Xenia; 16th April 2002 at 09:44.
Joined: Sep 2001
Posts: 606
Likes: 0
From: Hong Kong
Xenia,
Thanks for the response, and again I apologise if my approach caused offence.
However, in fact you can go back and see that what I said was: "In the last couple of years I have spent as much of my life in planes as many cabin crew so I think that my safety there is something on which I have the right to an opinion. "
That is somewhat different from claiming to know as much as you do, which is not something I have said. And just to put some figures on it, for example, in calendar year 2000 I flew 182 sectors on 16 different airlines.
So anyway, can we close the question of my attitude, and return the the topic, on which I very respectfully ask the assembled experts...
1) Does anyone have any online sources for data on ditching of commercial jets?
2) Given mainfrog2's comments about locker burst, does anyone know what special measures, if any, BA had to take for their new business class where 50% of the seats face backwards?
3) (this is at least partly tongue-in-cheek) can anyone confirm that the main benefit of the brace position is that it gets the heads below the level of the top of the seats and therefore keeps the teeth close to the rest of the remains to facilitate identifaction, rather than having mass decapitation and more of a jigsaw puzzle?
Thanks for the response, and again I apologise if my approach caused offence.
However, in fact you can go back and see that what I said was: "In the last couple of years I have spent as much of my life in planes as many cabin crew so I think that my safety there is something on which I have the right to an opinion. "
That is somewhat different from claiming to know as much as you do, which is not something I have said. And just to put some figures on it, for example, in calendar year 2000 I flew 182 sectors on 16 different airlines.
So anyway, can we close the question of my attitude, and return the the topic, on which I very respectfully ask the assembled experts...
1) Does anyone have any online sources for data on ditching of commercial jets?
2) Given mainfrog2's comments about locker burst, does anyone know what special measures, if any, BA had to take for their new business class where 50% of the seats face backwards?
3) (this is at least partly tongue-in-cheek) can anyone confirm that the main benefit of the brace position is that it gets the heads below the level of the top of the seats and therefore keeps the teeth close to the rest of the remains to facilitate identifaction, rather than having mass decapitation and more of a jigsaw puzzle?
Guest
Posts: n/a
Like christep, I have been disappointed by some of the responses to his query. As intelligent (?) pax, we have to be aware that cabin staff:
- are highly trained (and probably underpaid ;-));
- take their safety responsibilities seriously; and
- get asked some damn silly questions:
but I'm not sure that excuses the tone of some of the responses that have been given here.
I feel I can understand why some issues aren't dealt with, or are dealt with in a vaguely comforting way, in the safety briefing: though I do treasure the videos that show pax calmly helping each other put on oxy masks (and "breathing normally"), and particularly the wonderful BA lady who stands at the top of the slide blowing her whistle!
I do feel, however, that more information could be provided on (a) the brace position, and (b) smoke protection. As regards (a), I feel this might just help discourage the morons who feel entitled to recline their seats before takeoff, thus depriving the pax behind of the opportunity to adopt the brace position. As regards (b), like christep I had never realised the designed role of the seat clothing. I do feel that this, and any other useful information, should be made available to pax in the safety card. Who knows, if airlines start addressing the real issues in the safety card, they could find pax taking more notice. Think, for instance, of the greatly heightened pax awareness surrounding hijack issues in the wake of Sept 11th last.
One last thing: I hope it never comes to be considered "out of order" for denizens of one forum to raise - politely - issues in other forums, if the subject matter seems to demand it.
One really last thing: if it's true about the teeth, christep, you're going to have a hard job keeping your tongue in your cheek
- are highly trained (and probably underpaid ;-));
- take their safety responsibilities seriously; and
- get asked some damn silly questions:
but I'm not sure that excuses the tone of some of the responses that have been given here.
I feel I can understand why some issues aren't dealt with, or are dealt with in a vaguely comforting way, in the safety briefing: though I do treasure the videos that show pax calmly helping each other put on oxy masks (and "breathing normally"), and particularly the wonderful BA lady who stands at the top of the slide blowing her whistle!
I do feel, however, that more information could be provided on (a) the brace position, and (b) smoke protection. As regards (a), I feel this might just help discourage the morons who feel entitled to recline their seats before takeoff, thus depriving the pax behind of the opportunity to adopt the brace position. As regards (b), like christep I had never realised the designed role of the seat clothing. I do feel that this, and any other useful information, should be made available to pax in the safety card. Who knows, if airlines start addressing the real issues in the safety card, they could find pax taking more notice. Think, for instance, of the greatly heightened pax awareness surrounding hijack issues in the wake of Sept 11th last.
One last thing: I hope it never comes to be considered "out of order" for denizens of one forum to raise - politely - issues in other forums, if the subject matter seems to demand it.
One really last thing: if it's true about the teeth, christep, you're going to have a hard job keeping your tongue in your cheek
