Pax:F/A Ratio in the Netherlands?
Hey there can anyone answer this quick one?
Here in Canada it is 1:40 (Although, some airlines operate as 1:50) Curious to know and thanks in advance. Regards, M. |
Hi M,
There's 4 or 5 different airlines operating out of the Netherlands, and different ratios in different classes obviously. For economy, 1:50 where I work. For business, 1 : approx 25 Out of curiosity, why are you asking? :) |
Originally Posted by c3000
(Post 2992107)
Hey there can anyone answer this quick one?
Here in Canada it is 1:40 (Although, some airlines operate as 1:50) Curious to know and thanks in advance. Regards, M. Most of the rest of the world, including the European Joint Aviation Authorities Joint Aviation Requirements (JARs), require that there be one cabin crew member for every 50 passenger seats (1:50) installed on the same deck of the aeroplane. There are additional requirements if there were any special considerations arising from the certification emergency evacuation demonstration. The main difference with the various regulatory authorities is that the Canadian requirements are based upon the number of passengers actually on board whereas the European requirements are based upon the number of seats installed in the aircraft, whether occupied or not. |
CD, your answer leaves me even more mystified, as you appear to have known the answer from the start? Anyroads, here is the relevant JAR-OPS section:
JAR-OPS 1.990. Number and composition of Cabin Crew. (See IEM OPS 1.990) (a) An operator shall not operate an aeroplane with a maximum approved passenger seating configuration of more than 19, when carrying one or more passengers, unless at least one cabin crew member is included in the crew for the purpose of performing duties, specified in the Operations Manual, in the interests of the safety of passengers. (b) When complying with sub-paragraph (a) above, an operator shall ensure that the minimum number of cabin crew is the greater of: (1) One cabin crew member for every 50, or fraction of 50, passenger seats installed on the same deck of the aeroplane; or (2) The number of cabin crew who actively participated in the aeroplane cabin during the relevant emergency evacuation demonstration, or who were assumed to have taken part in the relevant analysis, except that, if the maximum approved passenger seating configuration is less than the number evacuated during the demonstration by at least 50 seats, the number of cabin crew may be reduced by 1 for every whole multiple of 50 seats by which the maximum approved passenger seating configuration falls below the certificated maximum capacity. (c) The Authority may under exceptional circumstances require an operator to include in the crew additional cabin crew members. (d) In unforeseen circumstances the required minimum number of cabin crew may be reduced provided that: (1) The number of passengers has been reduced in accordance with procedures specified in the Operations Manual; and (2) A report is submitted to the Authority after completion of the flight. Also, there is a rumour floating about that some airlines are cinsidering training 2 different types of cabin crew for LH. Fully SEP qualified to make up the MinReqCC numbers, and service-only; trained to flesh out the rest for service purposes. In countries where there is a legal requirement for a Cabin Crew licence, this will not be easy to implement. The Netherlands does not have a Cabin Crew Licence. :( |
Originally Posted by Juud
(Post 2992996)
CD, your answer leaves me even more mystified, as you appear to have known the answer from the start?
Originally Posted by Juud
(Post 2992996)
Also, there is a rumour floating about that some airlines are cinsidering training 2 different types of cabin crew for LH. Fully SEP qualified to make up the MinReqCC numbers, and service-only; trained to flesh out the rest for service purposes.
See the file called Air France Accident in Toronto Aircraft Cabin Safety Symposium, February 2006 |
You are absolutely correct CD.
I should have read the usernames instead of glancing at them. :ouch: Next one; I can open all the links to the papers in your link except for the AF one. :ugh: Any suggestion because I would love to read it. I seem to remember that they evacuated that aircraft in record time.- Now we as CC would say more power to them for doing that. Scarily, I can envisage beancounters turning that same fact into 'if they could do it with only MinReq CC, there's money to be saved' Also, France does have the Cabin Crew licence and they still manage to get away with this? Bad news. |
Strange... The file does seem to be corrupt. Hopefully, they can get it repaired. I do have a copy of the file as I attended the Symposium this year. Much of the presentation consisted of photos but two slides contained the following information:
TSB Accident Investigation - Air France Cabin Safety Issues * Qualification of Supplemental Cabin Crew * Recommended Brace-for-impact Positions * Brace Commands in Unexpected Evacuations * Premature / Un-commanded Opening of Exit Door * Slide Failure * Language of Shouted Emergency Commands * Viewing Windows in Emergency Exit Doors * Securing Items-of-Mass in The Cabin * Cabin Crew Use of Able-Bodied-Passengers * Dual Lane Slides * Carry-On-Baggage * Smoke Hood Design * Emergency Power Supply * Activation of Evacuation Alert Systems I understand that the final report is expected in the Spring so it should be interesting to see what the findings are on the issues. |
Regarding AF CC and A/C qualifications, the rule is that there must be on board the minimum of "A/C qualified" CC, but that doesn't mean that they were not "qualified" CC! All CC in the YYZ flight were licensed CC with France's DGAC (local CAA or FAA) CC licence. Which means that you do have on board the mimum required of "A/C qualified" CC plus other licensed CC. And the licenced but "non qualified on A/C" can only cover certain positions (must always be coupled with a qualified CC for Safety positions).
Frankly this doesn't seem to me less safe at all than what some US airline do, like qualifying CC on 12 types (heard it from the horse's mouth at the SFO Airbus Training Symposium in October). How "qualified" can you be with 12 A/C types jumbling in your head? Any HF expert would laugh at it (if anyone ever asked his/her opinion on the matter :rolleyes: ). There have been cases ( presented at the SFO Symposium) where the US CC were mistaken during emeergencies about calls that meant different things on different aircraft (how couldn't they, with 12 aircraft to keep in mind?) In France, keeping in mind HF issues, CC are limited to 3 types (when working full time), but can still be supplemental to the minimum of CC required. And don't forget that holding a CC licence (which takes months to obtain) means that you have to be examined twice (written and practical exam) by the Authority to grant an acceptable level of knowledge and skills. |
Passengers or seats?
Are the JAR requirements defined per passenger or per seat?
The US requirements seem to be 1 flight attendant per 50 seats irrespective of the number of passengers - so a 747 with 589 seats that happens to have 1 passenger aboard would need the minimum complement of 12 flight attendants. Canada requires 1:40, and one country at least requires 1:36 - but at least in the case of 1:36, it is defined as 1 flight attendant per 36 passengers actually aboard, so that crew can be decreased in case of light loads. |
(1) One cabin crew member for every 50, or fraction of 50, passenger seats installed on the same deck of the aeroplane; or |
All times are GMT. The time now is 10:47. |
Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.