Pondlife
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Home
Posts: 903
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If it is not nailed down some one will take it. Applies to beer mats or life jackets 
Been happening over the last twenty five years sure it happened before that and certain it will carry on happening
Mowgli aims to have 100% survival but in the two incidents that have occurred over the last 35 years (pretty good statistic) luck will have played a large part in survival rate. For those incidents survival rate was approx 50%
Consider the variables that exist in getting the ditching exact. Swell, crest of the wave prevalent wind direction to name a few. Couple that with the stress level which might be increased due to the fact that one has screwed up on the fuel calculation that has now landed(no pun intended) you in this predicament. May be just to many variables with out the intervention of lady luck to assure 100% survival rate.
In my simulator experience have never acted out the scenario of controlled ditching into water let alone a discussion as part of recurrent training
Been happening over the last twenty five years sure it happened before that and certain it will carry on happening
Mowgli aims to have 100% survival but in the two incidents that have occurred over the last 35 years (pretty good statistic) luck will have played a large part in survival rate. For those incidents survival rate was approx 50%
Consider the variables that exist in getting the ditching exact. Swell, crest of the wave prevalent wind direction to name a few. Couple that with the stress level which might be increased due to the fact that one has screwed up on the fuel calculation that has now landed(no pun intended) you in this predicament. May be just to many variables with out the intervention of lady luck to assure 100% survival rate.
In my simulator experience have never acted out the scenario of controlled ditching into water let alone a discussion as part of recurrent training
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Now back in England
Age: 84
Posts: 36
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
At the end of last year I flew from Spain to England on one of the low cost operators that frequent that route. As a safety conscious ex Airline member, I perused the safety documents and listened/watched the safety demo. Apart from the fact that it was the worst safety demo that I have ever seen, I realised that the safey docs allocated to my seat were for a 737-200 instead of the 737-400 that we were on. The emergency exits did not correspond etc. This was brought to the attention of the cabin crew who were simply dismissive and appeared not to care.
The unlockable seat back on the occupied seat back in front of me was similarly ignored.
I wrote to the IAA and explained the situation and received confirmation that indeed there was cause for concern.
Some time later I had a phone call from the IAA Inspector and during the course of the conversation he told me that not only do safety docs go missing from the aircraft but there is a trend for seat belts to be removed as well because the buckles are regarded as "fashion accessories"
I did say that it must be very difficult for the c/crew to check everything on QTR's but apparently it is the responsibility of the engineering staff to check these items. I do find this as curious.
The unlockable seat back on the occupied seat back in front of me was similarly ignored.
I wrote to the IAA and explained the situation and received confirmation that indeed there was cause for concern.
Some time later I had a phone call from the IAA Inspector and during the course of the conversation he told me that not only do safety docs go missing from the aircraft but there is a trend for seat belts to be removed as well because the buckles are regarded as "fashion accessories"
I did say that it must be very difficult for the c/crew to check everything on QTR's but apparently it is the responsibility of the engineering staff to check these items. I do find this as curious.
Join Date: Sep 1999
Location: UK
Posts: 116
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Engineer
I appreciate that ditching would present great difficulties, but in the Comoros islands case with the 767, from the amateur video it appeared that the aircraft wing hit the water first with a considerable angle of bank. Despite this, and the susequent catapulting of the fuselage, there were still 56 survivors. If the wings had been level on impact with the water, I contend that many more would have survived.
As far as stress is concerned, surely coping with it is what we are paid to do? Not to mention the survival instinct - there would be no other options.
I defend my aim of 100% survival. I aim for a perfect sim ride, that doesn't mean I will actually achieve it!
I appreciate that ditching would present great difficulties, but in the Comoros islands case with the 767, from the amateur video it appeared that the aircraft wing hit the water first with a considerable angle of bank. Despite this, and the susequent catapulting of the fuselage, there were still 56 survivors. If the wings had been level on impact with the water, I contend that many more would have survived.
As far as stress is concerned, surely coping with it is what we are paid to do? Not to mention the survival instinct - there would be no other options.
I defend my aim of 100% survival. I aim for a perfect sim ride, that doesn't mean I will actually achieve it!
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Home
Posts: 903
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Mowgli not doubting capabilities before they are tested. But if you do not test your ability before the incident how can you acheive your aim.
Will reiterate how often is ditching on water practiced or discuss in the sim check. Slightly different from a V1 cut on take off.
Take a look at the survival rate on the DC9 that 6_DoF posted and this aircraft floated for approx six minutes.
As for the stress it is not about what you are paid surely but the professionalism you exhibit. When your sphincter is going ten to the dozen can be a levelling experience
Will reiterate how often is ditching on water practiced or discuss in the sim check. Slightly different from a V1 cut on take off.
Take a look at the survival rate on the DC9 that 6_DoF posted and this aircraft floated for approx six minutes.
As for the stress it is not about what you are paid surely but the professionalism you exhibit. When your sphincter is going ten to the dozen can be a levelling experience
Join Date: Sep 1999
Location: UK
Posts: 116
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Engineer
I agree that ditching is rarely discussed and seldom, if ever, practised in the sim. There isn't time available and so the priority is given to other "situations". I believe our difference of opinion is one of my interpretation of the word "aim" compared with your interpretation.
Aiming for the perfect result is a target. I aim for a perfect landing. I aim to push back on time. It is achievable most of the time. Within 15 mins is probably achievable 90% of the time.
I agree that ditching is rarely discussed and seldom, if ever, practised in the sim. There isn't time available and so the priority is given to other "situations". I believe our difference of opinion is one of my interpretation of the word "aim" compared with your interpretation.
Aiming for the perfect result is a target. I aim for a perfect landing. I aim to push back on time. It is achievable most of the time. Within 15 mins is probably achievable 90% of the time.
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Home
Posts: 903
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Aiming to achieve a perfect landing will be increased with the frequency that you carry out the task.
The more landings on an aircraft type increases the chances of the perfect landing. Thus experience will result in you achieving your 100% aim.
Silimiar with the on time push back the more experience you have of what can go wrong ie slow boarding baggage ramp staff etc will increase your ability to pre-empt potential short falls resulting in possible 100% aim achievement.
My view is about practicality and realism. On an engine fire which is practiced to death in the sim (more than 6 times per sim session/sometimes 4 sessions a year) no problem if it happens for real. 100% aim will be achieved.
Ditching well that is another ball game.
Not sure if you remember the Souix City crash of the United DC10. After the crash United reproduced the scenerio in the simulator. Apparently not a single crew could land the aircraft, but a lots of crashes.
It was then incorporated into the training program resulting in a 100% improvement. Practice makes perfect resulting in possible 100% aim
The more landings on an aircraft type increases the chances of the perfect landing. Thus experience will result in you achieving your 100% aim.
Silimiar with the on time push back the more experience you have of what can go wrong ie slow boarding baggage ramp staff etc will increase your ability to pre-empt potential short falls resulting in possible 100% aim achievement.
My view is about practicality and realism. On an engine fire which is practiced to death in the sim (more than 6 times per sim session/sometimes 4 sessions a year) no problem if it happens for real. 100% aim will be achieved.
Ditching well that is another ball game.
Not sure if you remember the Souix City crash of the United DC10. After the crash United reproduced the scenerio in the simulator. Apparently not a single crew could land the aircraft, but a lots of crashes.
It was then incorporated into the training program resulting in a 100% improvement. Practice makes perfect resulting in possible 100% aim
Guest
Posts: n/a
docs allocated to my seat were for a 737-200 instead of the 737-400
As I travel frequently on both types, I am aware of the main differences in the OW exits etc, so I didn't make a big issue of it, just mentioned it during the drinks service.
Within 2 minutes, the purser appeared with a correct card and expressed thanks for mentioning it - a very professional response.
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Netherlands
Posts: 18
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
On a cheap flight back home I noticed that our entire row lacked the safety instructions card. I informed a flight attendant about this and as a result I ended up sitting in the first row with twice the legroom... oh and there was no card there either. Such a number of cards are nicked from the aircraft on a daily basis that they just don't have enough on board to replace them on a single day.
The demo was a farce, the attendants made a comedy out of it which of course was appreciated by most of the passengers but which made me think to myself "kiddo, when the proverbial sh!t hits the fan you're on your own."
At least I sat comfortably
The demo was a farce, the attendants made a comedy out of it which of course was appreciated by most of the passengers but which made me think to myself "kiddo, when the proverbial sh!t hits the fan you're on your own."
At least I sat comfortably
Join Date: May 2005
Location: USA
Posts: 185
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The demo was a farce, the attendants made a comedy out of it which of course was appreciated by most of the passengers but which made me think to myself "kiddo, when the proverbial sh!t hits the fan you're on your own."
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: venus
Posts: 82
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Point taken about life jackets, but if my post was read carefully, I asked when was the last time liferafts were used in earnest?
It's all very well having escape slides doubling up as rafts; you might as well, but purpose built liferafts along with their weight and complexity (stowage etc.) is surely another story?
There is an argument that they might be of use sometime, but when?
We might just as well invest in expensive bang seats for suitably qualified passengers so that the good Lord could spare the likes of Mr Clever Dick Mowgli should the occasion arise when he wasn't looking out of the big windows in front and practising his brand of perfection!
It's all very well having escape slides doubling up as rafts; you might as well, but purpose built liferafts along with their weight and complexity (stowage etc.) is surely another story?
There is an argument that they might be of use sometime, but when?
We might just as well invest in expensive bang seats for suitably qualified passengers so that the good Lord could spare the likes of Mr Clever Dick Mowgli should the occasion arise when he wasn't looking out of the big windows in front and practising his brand of perfection!
Last edited by oscarh; 6th Jul 2005 at 14:57.
Bludger extraordinaire
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: London/Frankfurt
Posts: 194
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Any sailor who would use an airline lifejacket on a yacht should be keel-hauled. Apart from the fact that it's stolen, they are unsuitable for a sailing vessel.
BOFH
BOFH
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: Europe
Posts: 1,109
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Lifejackets are improving the safety but not that much as assumed.
Controlled ditching is a very rare case. You would not need a lifejacked after uncontrolled ditching.
OK, if you there is a ditching somewhere in Carribean, and you have managed to escape unhurt, and you are lucky to avoid sharks, lifejacket could save your live.
Many years ago I have passed SOLAS (Safery Of the Live On the Sea) training program, which is mandatory for all professional seamen, and can assure you that you will not survive in the Baltic or Nothern Sea (and all similar places) from October to April for more than a 5 to 30 minutes, doesnt matter if you are wearing the livejacket or not.
If someone really considers that livejackets are really improving the safety then they should start to press for mandatory ejection seats for the passengers... Ejections seats will double or triple the industry expenses (which will be passed on to the passengers) but they will save much more lives and will improve the pax safety even if every second pax will not survive after ejection...
Controlled ditching is a very rare case. You would not need a lifejacked after uncontrolled ditching.
OK, if you there is a ditching somewhere in Carribean, and you have managed to escape unhurt, and you are lucky to avoid sharks, lifejacket could save your live.
Many years ago I have passed SOLAS (Safery Of the Live On the Sea) training program, which is mandatory for all professional seamen, and can assure you that you will not survive in the Baltic or Nothern Sea (and all similar places) from October to April for more than a 5 to 30 minutes, doesnt matter if you are wearing the livejacket or not.
If someone really considers that livejackets are really improving the safety then they should start to press for mandatory ejection seats for the passengers... Ejections seats will double or triple the industry expenses (which will be passed on to the passengers) but they will save much more lives and will improve the pax safety even if every second pax will not survive after ejection...
Join Date: May 2002
Location: In a hole, in the garden.
Posts: 56
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Oscarh and Engineer....I appreciate the points you are both making when I hacked through this post.....What I don't get is your objection to Mowgli's aim for 100%!!!!
Now I am no statitician, but 100% aim is good right???? What I am is a passenger and traveller on an aircraft!!! Any pilot who in a crash situation aims for 100% survival has my vote!!!! So thank the Lord for the likes of 'Clever Dick Mowgli' and 'their brand of perfection!'
Now I am no statitician, but 100% aim is good right???? What I am is a passenger and traveller on an aircraft!!! Any pilot who in a crash situation aims for 100% survival has my vote!!!! So thank the Lord for the likes of 'Clever Dick Mowgli' and 'their brand of perfection!'
Join Date: May 2002
Location: In a hole, in the garden.
Posts: 56
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Well who's been doing their homework??!!!!!
I don't actually know who Mowgli is (not that I'll be believed.) Indeed I have checked his/her profile and I am non the wiser but his/her posts have made a lot of sense! If you track back and do your detective bit it all stems back to a post made in defence of SLF such as myself! Somebody who sits 'with the big windows' Had labelled a lot of us 'down back' in very uncomplimentary terms...Mowgli defended us......so I watch for his/her name and try to return the odd favour....I appreciate this is a forum for Professional pilots and those in the industry (I am neither) but as a passenger I do like to know what goes on.....Now if you'd like to check my other posts....There was a particularly good one on animal transportation.....(again my other interest) So if your not busy....Any info. on how to get a very large dog to America/Canada???????
But back on track...I stand by what I say and without this degenerating into a 'chicken and egg' debate...Surely to aim for 100% however unrealistic is better than not to aim at all.
(I am truly a fan of Mowgli now after this debate!)
I don't actually know who Mowgli is (not that I'll be believed.) Indeed I have checked his/her profile and I am non the wiser but his/her posts have made a lot of sense! If you track back and do your detective bit it all stems back to a post made in defence of SLF such as myself! Somebody who sits 'with the big windows' Had labelled a lot of us 'down back' in very uncomplimentary terms...Mowgli defended us......so I watch for his/her name and try to return the odd favour....I appreciate this is a forum for Professional pilots and those in the industry (I am neither) but as a passenger I do like to know what goes on.....Now if you'd like to check my other posts....There was a particularly good one on animal transportation.....(again my other interest) So if your not busy....Any info. on how to get a very large dog to America/Canada???????
But back on track...I stand by what I say and without this degenerating into a 'chicken and egg' debate...Surely to aim for 100% however unrealistic is better than not to aim at all.
(I am truly a fan of Mowgli now after this debate!)
Join Date: May 2002
Location: In a hole, in the garden.
Posts: 56
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Oscarh...
Thank you for your response. I can see everything to be totally understandable in your post and well....as a passenger extremely encouraging! I can not agree more that practice makes perfect and that standards should be met. Again when humans are involved 'the best' is all we can hope for, but hopefully the best can be an improvement on a basic standardisation! I never considered the 'moveable feast' aspect of the standards and now I understand. Thankyou. I just thought of 100% in this case to translate to 'doing all one can in a very undesirable situation'(ditching/crash scenario)
One day I shall invent a '100%' that suits all and makes me lots of money!!!!It beats being a bored housewife!!!!
(Any confusion with the log in El Mirador stems from the fact I sometimes creep in under my husbands log in name ...)
Thank you for your response. I can see everything to be totally understandable in your post and well....as a passenger extremely encouraging! I can not agree more that practice makes perfect and that standards should be met. Again when humans are involved 'the best' is all we can hope for, but hopefully the best can be an improvement on a basic standardisation! I never considered the 'moveable feast' aspect of the standards and now I understand. Thankyou. I just thought of 100% in this case to translate to 'doing all one can in a very undesirable situation'(ditching/crash scenario)
One day I shall invent a '100%' that suits all and makes me lots of money!!!!It beats being a bored housewife!!!!
(Any confusion with the log in El Mirador stems from the fact I sometimes creep in under my husbands log in name ...)
