Climb and Descent Procedures - Use of the "Fasten Seat Belt" Sign (Revised Procedure)
 

no doubt everyone has seen the revised seat belt procedure, with the increased (and unnecessary?) PA's from the flight crew...

any thoughts?

Minimums!

As I read it just one extra mini-PA? Ask Neil P...

Just aligning procedures with Qantas .... almost identical.

Once upon a time, like recently, you would just about fail a command course if you dared make a P.A whilst the aircraft was on climb or descent!! What has suddenly made it safer??? Oh yeah ISD...

If you ask me it is just another wannabe on the 3rd floor who wants to implement something for the sake of justifying his management position...

....or his job :mad:

just came back from a CX long haul flight few weeks back.

My observations:

CX is overly paranoid with the seatbelt sign in light turbulence. rediculous.
CX has WAY WAY too many pa's already. Enough with it. Inane crap is standard for airline pa's I know - we all do it. But enuff. Please. Especially in 18 different languages.

my 2 cents less tax.

DTH

You will find a varying degree of paranoid use of seatbelt signs. Some will turn them on with a fart while others seem to wait until the acft is upside down before the consider it.

Also at certain times it may be more prudent than others to be over cautious such as during hot food and beverage service while other times during "sleep" it may be left off to prevent that "unnecessary" PA.

A bloke in America has just been awarded over 2 million dollars for being blind drunk and falling into the path of a subway train injuring himself in the process. This story itself shows the world we live in and maybe you can appreciate that having a more cautious approach sometimes may help in the ass covering later.

There's a long history behind the seatbelt sign and the associated PAs that go with it to prevent the rash of pax and cabin crewmembers getting hurt. It's actually an old issue and like many other industry wide safety and procedural SOP's, cathay is behind the loop on this one as well. But better late than never. The current team is aligning and catching up in a deliberate manner, for that you can't fault them. We're literally 20 years behind the rest of the industry around here, better catch up or we'll get bitten in the @$$ and have to learn the lessons the hard way rather than learn from other people's mistakes. We're no different from any other airline out there, if they make a f'up having the same procedures as ours which failed to prevent it, we better be pro-active and fix ours as well before we have the same accident/incident. Otherwise we're very stupid for not learning from other people's mistake!

Cockpit-cabin crew communications and interaction around here is severly lacking without getting into reasons why, unfortunately. But even disregarding that fact, you can't rely on a ding to pass along important indications to the cabin. That method is pretty much outdated and used less and less today. Making a quick PA leaves no question or doubt. CRM as a whole is 20 years behind around here. What we call CRM around here, even in the cockpit alone, is not recognized as such at most other airlines. Change for the better is good. Resistance to change is human nature. If you haven't gotten used to the periodic changing of the SOP's by now or can't see the need for it, you're in the wrong business.

I concur with DTH... I haven't seen any varying degree of application with regard to the use of the seat belt sign on CX over the last few years. With the merest hint of light chop, on it goes... along with the accompanying P.A.'s. There are so many occasions when, by the very nature of the offending 'chop', it's almost certainly not going to present any nasty surprises yet still, it seems, CX flicks the switch making for an unnecessarily restless nights sleep. Other reputable airlines on the same route, in the same conditions, don't seem to exercise the same paranoia? I speak from repeated experience too.

"Change for the better is good. Resistance to change is human nature. If you haven't gotten used to the periodic changing of the SOP's by now or can't see the need for it, you're in the wrong business."

i understand the need for change, and i too believe that change is for the better, but i chose to not blindly follow someone else's change without asking what the reason behind it is. this was not about the periodic changing of the SOP's, im just trying to get some idea of why the procedure calls for extra PAs.

i just dont understand why the seatbelt sign cant convey the same information as a (now redundant) PA.

Minimums!

Coz you'll get sued for DVT!

"It's the only thing that's going to protect the crew from a lawsuit"

No, the thing that will protect you from litigation, in a HKG registered aircraft, is that its . . . . . a HKG registered aircraft.

Guys, dont panic. Its not the US or Oz.

....as mentioned above, it's someone on the 3rd floor trying to make a difference.
Just like pre-Command and SO technical interviews. Just like all the homework before the RT's. The route briefing exam, on and on....
Everytime there is a shuffle on the 3rd floor; someone has to appear to be making a difference. Whether it's better, more efficient or safer has yet to be determined.
As for the actual subject of "seat belts", we are not in the lawyer-friendly USA so put 'em on when it's needed, not cause your scared to get sued.

When the seat belt sign is turned on, why do a PA especially on a night flight when most people are asleep? BA don't and the Cabin Crew just go around checking. PAs are a real pain for the traveler and as so many no one listens anyway! Let's turn off the music as well!

The initial 'welcome aboard' PA from the flight deck which, by me at least, always includes an instruction to keep seat-belts comfortably fastened whenever seated. Would this not cover us legally if some litigious idiot tried it on? Assuming that he was seated at the time of the incident...

That just about sums up Cathay's attitude: we invented aviation and the rest of the world just doesn't know what they are doing. :ugh:

It is this attitude that has led to previous Cathay mistakes. Trust me, good sense applies no matter where you are, and that is a reality. Pretending that some things don't apply to you leads to multi-million dollar fines. Just ask the head of cargo. :hmm:

Errrmmmm.....
 

Huh? I was just on a Qantas flight to and from Australia about a week ago... On all 4 sectors... I don't recall they have "Cabin Crew... 30 mins to landing"... nor do they have "Cabin Crew... please be seated for landing"... All Qantas have was "Cabin Crew... please prepare cabin for landing"... that's the only announcement I heard from the cockpit crew...

To be honest, the "30 mins to landing" call is silly... since the captain will make a pre-landing speech, that should be treated as 30 mins to landing / top of descent to the cabin crew... so no extra call should be needed... however, the last two... "prepare cabin for landing" and "be seated for landing"... I can understand why they should have it...

I agree that a PA when the seat belt sign comes on is not required as the cabin crew do a visual check. However the visual check is no more than a quick walk through the cabin, I have seen on numerous occasions that they do not pick up belts that are not fastened. Another point is that even when the signs are on the cabin crew usually do not stop people from getting up. Try to get up on QANTAS and you will know about it.
As for the new PAs from the cockpit I really do not see how they convey and more information than our current procedures.