The most irresponsible comment by a journalist dealing with BA038
Thread Starter
Join Date: May 2001
Location: london,england
Age: 65
Posts: 177
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The most irresponsible comment by a journalist dealing with BA038
Excuse the delay in writing this, but have been away with no internet connection!!
I was listening to one of the London 'talk' stations and heard the presenter covering the BA038 incident comment that she makes a point of never listening to the safety briefings - indeed she seemed to think that this briefing causes a negative atmosphere.
Gadzooks I thought...she's got a zillion listeners (some of whom rang in to complain at this), but if more passengers thought that this intentional lack of attention was a good idea, then we'd never get the passengers off in 90 seconds...can you imagine how many injuries we could have been dealing with??
Air incidents make big news - do we really want a journalist 'dis-ing' the safety briefing????????
I was listening to one of the London 'talk' stations and heard the presenter covering the BA038 incident comment that she makes a point of never listening to the safety briefings - indeed she seemed to think that this briefing causes a negative atmosphere.
Gadzooks I thought...she's got a zillion listeners (some of whom rang in to complain at this), but if more passengers thought that this intentional lack of attention was a good idea, then we'd never get the passengers off in 90 seconds...can you imagine how many injuries we could have been dealing with??
Air incidents make big news - do we really want a journalist 'dis-ing' the safety briefing????????
Last edited by 727 exec; 21st Jan 2008 at 22:40.
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Closer than you think
Posts: 90
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
From what I've seen in most aircraft, you don't have to be an LBC listener to think you can carry on reading the paper during the safety brief. I find it's usually the know-it-alls who think their ClubCard and frequent-flyer miles will get them out the door when the balloon goes up.
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Hunched over a keyboard
Posts: 1,193
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I think itīs fair to say that if you are about to fly your third sector in as many days as a passenger in a B737-400, you're probably as aware of the drills as you're ever going to be! Enough repetitions commit the briefing to memory (it's what we do as pilots with our emergency brief etc.).
I listen and look at the cabin crew out of respect for them and their job, but to be frank I don't need to. However, I do read the card and check out the location of the exits as I board. I also know how to work the seat belt buckle as it's identical to the ones on my 1969 MG!
I listen and look at the cabin crew out of respect for them and their job, but to be frank I don't need to. However, I do read the card and check out the location of the exits as I board. I also know how to work the seat belt buckle as it's identical to the ones on my 1969 MG!
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Hunched over a keyboard
Posts: 1,193
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
As I say, if it's your third trip in as many days, you should be able to remember (I know I would).
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: UK
Posts: 137
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I'm in a similar situation to Moggiee so permit me to answer from my memory of my last flight.
In the event of landing on water please evacuate the plane via the overwing emergency exits. Should the front exits be above the waterline and if directed by crew then these can be used.
Given I normally sit close to the front I'm not overly bothered about the rear exits as if the worst comes to the worst many pax behind me will already have found their way out (or not as the case may be).
I too extend the courtesy to the crew of at least listening to their messages and feel it's the least that people can do.
In the event of landing on water please evacuate the plane via the overwing emergency exits. Should the front exits be above the waterline and if directed by crew then these can be used.
Given I normally sit close to the front I'm not overly bothered about the rear exits as if the worst comes to the worst many pax behind me will already have found their way out (or not as the case may be).
I too extend the courtesy to the crew of at least listening to their messages and feel it's the least that people can do.
Water borne evacuation?
Just hope that whoever opens the doors has the good luck or cool headed judgement to pick only doors above the water line...........
Just hope that whoever opens the doors has the good luck or cool headed judgement to pick only doors above the water line...........
Join Date: May 2000
Location: Seattle
Posts: 3,196
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Give me 30 seconds with the safety card and I could!
As I say, if it's your third trip in as many days, you should be able to remember (I know I would).
As I say, if it's your third trip in as many days, you should be able to remember (I know I would).
As for the "third trip" part, that's not the case at all. It would be the case ONLY if you had traveled ONLY on one airplane type/configuration. Put an A320 or ERJ into the mix, and the whole theory goes up in flames!
So, if you MUST read something during the brief, browse through the safety card one more time. I still do -- EVERY flight!
Intruder, quick now. What is the likelihood of moggiee being alive after your water landing?
I worked for an organisation that, unfortunately, showed that he wouldn't be. So he might as well nick the lifejacket when you do repatriate him with terra firma and use it when he goes sailing and it might be of some use.
I worked for an organisation that, unfortunately, showed that he wouldn't be. So he might as well nick the lifejacket when you do repatriate him with terra firma and use it when he goes sailing and it might be of some use.
Join Date: Feb 1999
Location: MAN
Posts: 804
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Richard Quest on CNN - his report was virtually total piffle, utter tosh.
He was spilling total stool from start to finish, flaps, engines, pilots, landing, all related comment were BS.
These Guys did a great job in not Stalling and maintaining the best profile in the face of GPWS, Stick Shaker, EICAS warnings, Screens flickering as Gen's drop off line. They did a fine job.
Having seen the grainy footage of the last minute of the flight, the tail must have struck the ground first. The FO was managing the aircraft on the edge of the stall, must be at least 25 Degrees nose up.
He was spilling total stool from start to finish, flaps, engines, pilots, landing, all related comment were BS.
These Guys did a great job in not Stalling and maintaining the best profile in the face of GPWS, Stick Shaker, EICAS warnings, Screens flickering as Gen's drop off line. They did a fine job.
Having seen the grainy footage of the last minute of the flight, the tail must have struck the ground first. The FO was managing the aircraft on the edge of the stall, must be at least 25 Degrees nose up.
Guest
Posts: n/a
k3lvc
In the event of landing on water please evacuate the plane via the overwing emergency exits. Should the front exits be above the waterline and if directed by crew then these can be used.
In the event of landing on water please evacuate the plane via the overwing emergency exits. Should the front exits be above the waterline and if directed by crew then these can be used.
When was the last landing on water (of a commercial passenger flight) where that could have been done ?
Graham
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Hong Kong
Posts: 606
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Any sensible cost benefit analysis would remove life jackets from commercial jets - the huge environmental cost of the extra fuel needed to carry millions of them around the sky each day is way out of proportion to an infinitessimally small theoretical benefit. They are there as a hangover from the flying boat days when they did have a justifiable purpose.
^^^
I am reminded of the Billy Connolly segment where the advice is to all throw your life jackets at once and shout 'go away, nasty mountain!'
In case you're wondering, I still haven't worked out how to use the quotes on this board.
I think christep has a valid point especially when flying from (say) Perth to Melbourne, Jakarta to Jogyakarta, Bangkok to Khon Kaen, all sectors I have done which don't involve much flying over watery bits!
I am reminded of the Billy Connolly segment where the advice is to all throw your life jackets at once and shout 'go away, nasty mountain!'
In case you're wondering, I still haven't worked out how to use the quotes on this board.
I think christep has a valid point especially when flying from (say) Perth to Melbourne, Jakarta to Jogyakarta, Bangkok to Khon Kaen, all sectors I have done which don't involve much flying over watery bits!
Guest
Posts: n/a
christep
There has never been a landing of a commercial jet with under wing engines on open water in a way where the safety briefing had any relevance whatsoever.
Any sensible cost benefit analysis would remove life jackets from commercial jets - the huge environmental cost of the extra fuel needed to carry millions of them around the sky each day is way out of proportion to an infinitessimally small theoretical benefit.
There has never been a landing of a commercial jet with under wing engines on open water in a way where the safety briefing had any relevance whatsoever.
Any sensible cost benefit analysis would remove life jackets from commercial jets - the huge environmental cost of the extra fuel needed to carry millions of them around the sky each day is way out of proportion to an infinitessimally small theoretical benefit.
As I suspected and I agree. Yet lightweight smoke hoods have been continually rejected. How daft is that ?
The Reverend
Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: Sydney,NSW,Australia
Posts: 2,020
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I think all door exit (other than overwing) evacuation slides are slide rafts which would be deployed by the cabin crew who are trained in all aspects of slide deployment evaluation, use and detachment as neccesary. Other than the life vest demonstration and instruction for inflation after exiting, I have never heard any instruction as to door usage in case of ditching.
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: UK
Posts: 32
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
From what I've seen in most aircraft, you don't have to be an LBC listener to think you can carry on reading the paper during the safety brief. I find it's usually the know-it-alls who think their ClubCard and frequent-flyer miles will get them out the door when the balloon goes up.
I for one note carefully my relative position to the exits when i get to my seat, and as other pax take their seats I assess which exit is going to be the easiest to head for if I have to.
I keep passport and wallet in my trouser pocket, and don't kick off my shoes until in cruise and the seatbelt sign is off.
Then I sit back and ignore the safety briefing which I am seeing for the third time this week, because let's face it - you can tell me a hundred times how to tie the lifejacket or don an oxygen mask, but until I have to do for real in the fear of death I'm really not going to know how to do it.
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Melbourne
Posts: 62
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
All well and good, seasoned travellers - but I suspect that idiot broadcaster's audience were not regular passengers.
It's a matter of optimisation: the more readiness/knowledge on the part of any given passenger, the smoother an evacuation will be.
Factors include the intrinsic stress of take-offs for most passengers: e.g. reading the safety card of itself has a de-stressing benefit. (sense of doing something active in a powerless situation)
And don't make the mistake of thinking that as a seasoned passenger you are necessarily going to perform better in an emergency. Passengers may believe they have taken in all the information many times - but, again, the stress component lessens their ability to take it in, and recent repetition becomes important. In a state of confusion and mayhem you will remember recent repetitions, and recently rehearsed scenarios.
I expect there is a relevant de-stressing component in the safety message for the flight crew as well - they don't know who among their passengers is a seasoned traveller ignoring the briefing because they are actually familiar with their location and the layout of that exact plane from the very last time they flew (in an emergency situation, any analysis will be an impossibilty other than in the coolest of customers). So if everyone is watching, learning or re-memorising, so much the less concern for the flight attendant that one or two might hold things up.
In days when I knew less about aircrash survival I'm guilty of ignoring the safety briefings and even failing to check the exit plan thoroughly. Not these days. These days, for example, I actually count AND discreetly pat the back of the seats to the exit the first time I head for the toilet, because that reinforces the message for a day when my brain will be relying on recent rehearsals. I don't go so far as to crawl on the floor, but I also rehearse a floor crawl past those same seats in my head.
Rehearsed information is of more use. This I knew from professional knowlege in other areas, but interestingly it was reinforced in a doco on air safety aired recently in Australia.
It's a matter of optimisation: the more readiness/knowledge on the part of any given passenger, the smoother an evacuation will be.
Factors include the intrinsic stress of take-offs for most passengers: e.g. reading the safety card of itself has a de-stressing benefit. (sense of doing something active in a powerless situation)
And don't make the mistake of thinking that as a seasoned passenger you are necessarily going to perform better in an emergency. Passengers may believe they have taken in all the information many times - but, again, the stress component lessens their ability to take it in, and recent repetition becomes important. In a state of confusion and mayhem you will remember recent repetitions, and recently rehearsed scenarios.
I expect there is a relevant de-stressing component in the safety message for the flight crew as well - they don't know who among their passengers is a seasoned traveller ignoring the briefing because they are actually familiar with their location and the layout of that exact plane from the very last time they flew (in an emergency situation, any analysis will be an impossibilty other than in the coolest of customers). So if everyone is watching, learning or re-memorising, so much the less concern for the flight attendant that one or two might hold things up.
In days when I knew less about aircrash survival I'm guilty of ignoring the safety briefings and even failing to check the exit plan thoroughly. Not these days. These days, for example, I actually count AND discreetly pat the back of the seats to the exit the first time I head for the toilet, because that reinforces the message for a day when my brain will be relying on recent rehearsals. I don't go so far as to crawl on the floor, but I also rehearse a floor crawl past those same seats in my head.
Rehearsed information is of more use. This I knew from professional knowlege in other areas, but interestingly it was reinforced in a doco on air safety aired recently in Australia.