Evacuation Command
Thread Starter
Joined: Oct 1998
Posts: 413
Likes: 0
From: Australia
Evacuation Command
Hi,
I am looking for feedback on what other airlines use for the flight deck command for a passenger evacuation. A previous thread years back suggested some carriers may use a covert command to avoid passengers prematurely moving to exits before they were open and ready for use. My curiosity is whether this is still the case and how widespread is this type of signal in the industry. Is there any published study to support this?
My airline uses "This is the captain, evacuate evacuate."
I am looking for feedback on what other airlines use for the flight deck command for a passenger evacuation. A previous thread years back suggested some carriers may use a covert command to avoid passengers prematurely moving to exits before they were open and ready for use. My curiosity is whether this is still the case and how widespread is this type of signal in the industry. Is there any published study to support this?
My airline uses "This is the captain, evacuate evacuate."
Joined: May 2009
Posts: 725
Likes: 0
From: VHHH Ocean 2D
Nope, we don't even nominate the exits anymore. We did in past airlines but that is left to the CC to determine these days.
I am very pro-CC and treat them with the ultimate of respect for the very difficult job they do day-in day-out. However their situational awareness leaves a lot to be desired in most normal situations - made much worse by a tiny cabin window they have to look out of in terms of emergencies.
Surely you have the bigger picture when it comes to evacuation?: Engines on fire, prevailing winds blowing said fire in direction of evacuees, live runway/ taxiway on a specific side of the aircraft, a known spillage on one side that the CC would have no way of knowing etc.
The above are just a few things I can think of as to why CC should never be given the authority to decide what side an evacuation should be made on.
Of course in the event of no communication between flight deck and cabin due to a catastrophic failure, then obviously CC need to make that decision.
Also regardless of what the Captain says, CC should always do their usual checks before they open their respective exit.
Joined: Sep 2010
Posts: 889
Likes: 3
From: UK
Cabin crew only initiate an evacuation in 'clearly catastrophic circumstances' otherwise wait for evacuation to be initiated from flight deck.
Of course there is always the chance that it is not catastrophic but cabin crew are trained to make a good decision and what constitutes circumstances of evacuation.
One earlier comment here refers to undo straps I don't think that is the right terminology that passengers would understand. It should be unfasten seat belts in all airlines.
Of course there is always the chance that it is not catastrophic but cabin crew are trained to make a good decision and what constitutes circumstances of evacuation.
One earlier comment here refers to undo straps I don't think that is the right terminology that passengers would understand. It should be unfasten seat belts in all airlines.
Joined: Feb 2003
Posts: 2,291
Likes: 9
From: BHX LXR ASW
I would imagine most evacuations will be based on NITS - nature - information - time available - special instructions.
Catastrophic circumstances would require cabin crew to initiate an evacuation based on the event. At least that was what I was taught in BA years ago.
Catastrophic circumstances would require cabin crew to initiate an evacuation based on the event. At least that was what I was taught in BA years ago.
Joined: Jun 2002
Posts: 3
Likes: 5
From: Wor Yerm
A typical flow for us would be:
Something goes wrong - Stop aircraft - Apply parking brake - Announce "Cabin crew and passengers: Remain Seated" - Start configuring for an evacuation and shut engines down - Announce "Evacuate Aircraft."
The choice of doors will be made by the cabin crew. They will be closer to the problem and better placed to make the call.
PM
Something goes wrong - Stop aircraft - Apply parking brake - Announce "Cabin crew and passengers: Remain Seated" - Start configuring for an evacuation and shut engines down - Announce "Evacuate Aircraft."
The choice of doors will be made by the cabin crew. They will be closer to the problem and better placed to make the call.
PM
Thread Starter
Joined: Oct 1998
Posts: 413
Likes: 0
From: Australia
In the past I worked for a company that had flight crew nominate exits and there was no issue. I had no issue. It was always the caveat that if a nominated exit was not useable, it didn't get opened by the CC. I agree entirely that there are some circumstances where the FC might just have a better idea of where the dangers are outside, dangers that won't be immediately visible when checking outside conditions from a door viewing window. I would have to research the history to my present procedures, they have been in place since day one.Most likely borrowed from someone. After all how else do most airlines get the initial manual suits up and running? The matter has been discussed a few times over the years but there has been no will to change it. Personally I prefer the FC to nominate. I then trust the CC to make the correct assessment based on what they can see. Its a grey area at best.
Not sure where the covert evac signal originated, I haven't seen it appear in a discussion forum since 2009 so maybe it has passed away into the ether.
Not sure where the covert evac signal originated, I haven't seen it appear in a discussion forum since 2009 so maybe it has passed away into the ether.
Joined: May 2001
Posts: 495
Likes: 0
From: Earth
Historically, it was considered 'unwise' to use exits on the same side as an engine fire to evacuate. e.g."Evacuate starboard side only" PA.
Since the Airtours B737 disaster at Manchester Airport, when such a PA was made by the Cpt, the philosophy remains, but in theory only. In the Manchester disaster ALL the main exits on the starboard side were affected by fire (AFT right) or jammed (FWD right) leaving the pax controlled right overwing exit as the only means of escape!
The FWD left door was eventually used and 17 pax escaped using this door, which was 'on the same side as the fire.'
On larger aircraft, the distance between FWD and AFT most doors and the engines is quite considerable. C/C should therefore be taught to assess the usability of each exit, regardless of which side of the aircraft the fire is on, before using it.
The Captain may still nominate exits, based on information from ATC or emergency services, but, as proved in Manchester, usable exits on the other side should not be discounted.
Since the Airtours B737 disaster at Manchester Airport, when such a PA was made by the Cpt, the philosophy remains, but in theory only. In the Manchester disaster ALL the main exits on the starboard side were affected by fire (AFT right) or jammed (FWD right) leaving the pax controlled right overwing exit as the only means of escape!
The FWD left door was eventually used and 17 pax escaped using this door, which was 'on the same side as the fire.'
On larger aircraft, the distance between FWD and AFT most doors and the engines is quite considerable. C/C should therefore be taught to assess the usability of each exit, regardless of which side of the aircraft the fire is on, before using it.
The Captain may still nominate exits, based on information from ATC or emergency services, but, as proved in Manchester, usable exits on the other side should not be discounted.
Thread Starter
Joined: Oct 1998
Posts: 413
Likes: 0
From: Australia
And that would suggest that it is in fact best left to the CC to decide which exits are best for use. Interesting debate on this point. Evacuations should only be carried out in circumstances where there is immediate threat to the safety of crew and passengers meaning that once the captain has nominated exits, it becomes a moot point if the CC assess doors and have the liberty to use which ever exits appears safe, as they are expected to do.
Do any of you specific procedures or training in the removal of "deranged" passengers in an evacuation. This term is straight from our regs, I assume it MAY allude to removal of restrained passengers (had they been a threat inflight) however the context of the reg is not specific on this point. It could be assumed that it refers to a passenger that becomes deranged in the emergency event and subsequently become an obstruction to other pax. However the specific use of the word "deranged" in the regs in relation to evacuations implies something more than simply an ineffectual person.
Do any of you specific procedures or training in the removal of "deranged" passengers in an evacuation. This term is straight from our regs, I assume it MAY allude to removal of restrained passengers (had they been a threat inflight) however the context of the reg is not specific on this point. It could be assumed that it refers to a passenger that becomes deranged in the emergency event and subsequently become an obstruction to other pax. However the specific use of the word "deranged" in the regs in relation to evacuations implies something more than simply an ineffectual person.
Joined: Jul 2010
Posts: 440
Likes: 0
From: UK. East Mids.
In terms of dealing with "non standard" passengers. The only times it is really referred to in our manuals is for a Planned Ditching, where we would un-restrain a restrained passenger, and also in regard to someone obstructing the exit, which is worded something like "If a passenger were to pause and cause an obstruction, push them out of the exit in any position" as a pose to the instructions about "accepted" ways of pushing someone out of the door if they momentarily hesitate and impede the passenger flow etc...
Joined: Oct 2007
Aviation Qualifications: ATPL
Posts: 1,028
Likes: 121
From: Wherever I go, there I am
Very interesting to see the differences. The places I've worked have used "Evacuate, Evacuate, Evacuate" and leave the direction up to the Flight Attendants. The thinking behind not giving a direction is that in many aircraft, my left is my in-charges right. Even though there should be a standard "left" and "right," it's a risk that need not be taken in a high risk, high stress environment such as an emergency. The same logic exists behind not calling "Remain Seated, Remain Seated," then calling for the evacuation; it sends mixed signals to the passengers, and in our manuals, "Remain Seated" advises the FA's to stop their silent review.
No right or wrong exists though, so long as both pilots and flight attendants are operating from the same playbook.
As for restrained passengers, here in Canada they get uncuffed, regardless of how bad they were. It falls under the human rights act, rather than any aviation regulation. Any person with a physical or mental impairment is assigned a Able Bodied Passenger if they don't already have an escort. Of course, that all goes out the window for an unplanned emergency.
No right or wrong exists though, so long as both pilots and flight attendants are operating from the same playbook.
As for restrained passengers, here in Canada they get uncuffed, regardless of how bad they were. It falls under the human rights act, rather than any aviation regulation. Any person with a physical or mental impairment is assigned a Able Bodied Passenger if they don't already have an escort. Of course, that all goes out the window for an unplanned emergency.
Joined: May 2001
Posts: 495
Likes: 0
From: Earth
Our SOP's state that a physically restrained pax should be released from the 'restraint kit' once the first door is opened for an evacuation. The buckles of the restraint straps would be released and they would exit the aircraft, still handcuffed, and having to carry the attached strap.
Thread Starter
Joined: Oct 1998
Posts: 413
Likes: 0
From: Australia
We have the same procedure for a restrained pax but the Civil Aviation Orders suggests there should be a procedure for handling in emergencies and emergency evacuations.... deranged passengers among other things. The context almost suggests that this derangement presents itself in the middle of the emergency or emergency evacuation. Strange yet its been there for decades. Id say improvisation is the best procedure because it would be very difficult to encapsulate all the possible ways this could play out in a single procedure.
How about the Brace commands, does your operation have crew ceasing them at the first sign of impact or when the aircraft comes to a stop. We have until stopped but if you are having a crash or non-normal event such as gear up, nobody will hear a damn thing and there is added risk of forward facing crew biting off a tongue in very high G forces.
How about the Brace commands, does your operation have crew ceasing them at the first sign of impact or when the aircraft comes to a stop. We have until stopped but if you are having a crash or non-normal event such as gear up, nobody will hear a damn thing and there is added risk of forward facing crew biting off a tongue in very high G forces.
Joined: May 2001
Posts: 495
Likes: 0
From: Earth
Our brace commands are to be continued until the aircraft comes to a complete stop.
Interestingly, despite the studies following the injuries sustained during the Kegworth B737 crash in the UK, there is not a standard, recommended brace position world-wide.
Unpremeditated brace commands also vary. Ours used to be "bend down, grab your ankles." After the changes to the standard brace position in the UK, following Kegworth, I suggested these were changed to "bend down, protect your head" which actually is much more effective and has been adopted by my company.
Interestingly, despite the studies following the injuries sustained during the Kegworth B737 crash in the UK, there is not a standard, recommended brace position world-wide.
Unpremeditated brace commands also vary. Ours used to be "bend down, grab your ankles." After the changes to the standard brace position in the UK, following Kegworth, I suggested these were changed to "bend down, protect your head" which actually is much more effective and has been adopted by my company.
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 469
Likes: 0
From: Sussex,UK
It's the same with us in respect of how long to keep up the command, however, we use the simple command of "Brace! Brace!" Having worked for an airline that used, "Get your heads down, get your heads down!", I have to admit to finding our command much easier to keep up at high volume for what could be a fair amount of time. We also do it in tandem from front to back and/or side to side, depending on aircraft type so you'll hear the commands alternately from the left and right, back to front. Again, that gives us half a chance to keep it going, while grabbing a breath in between. Having said that, in all honesty, I'm not entirely sure it matters what you shout or whether the passengers will even be able to make out what you are saying in true emergency. I'd have thought the most important part of any emergency command would be to keep it simple and direct.
As far as adding directions to an evacuation command, while I agree with what has been said so far, this is one of my bug bears in the current company. The command in such circumstances is "Evacuate, evacuate, hazard on left/right.." If part of the message is lost in the general melee, all you hear is "Evacuate......Left" Which way are you going to go? We cabin crew have always been taught to only ever give positive commands for that exact reason. I did try to very politely bring this up after a mock up scenario but was shot down in flames by a training Captain.
As far as adding directions to an evacuation command, while I agree with what has been said so far, this is one of my bug bears in the current company. The command in such circumstances is "Evacuate, evacuate, hazard on left/right.." If part of the message is lost in the general melee, all you hear is "Evacuate......Left" Which way are you going to go? We cabin crew have always been taught to only ever give positive commands for that exact reason. I did try to very politely bring this up after a mock up scenario but was shot down in flames by a training Captain.
