Arrogant posters

[VAFFPAX]

There is telling it like it is and there is being rude.

There is no need to start calling people names just because they don't know, and there is no need to get rude either. Yes, SLF are 'cattle' to the f/o up front, but really, you can bring your point across without being insulting.

It helps pax-f/c interaction a lot more if you are a little patient with the people who are asking the questions.

I personally have always thought that once you start yelling insults, you've lost the argument, and you know it.

I try to impart whatever knowledge I have without any condescending attitude, after all, I've also been there before, and who knows, I might not have known something specific either.

:-)

S.

[anotherglassofwine]

To SNS3Guppy .
Simply the best post I have read on this website.
Something that every pax should read. I had never even considered how I would exit an aircraft if it was upside down - Something I will be doing from here on in.
Thank you for that.
AGOW

[radeng]

So I'm on a BA airbus. Overwing exit, jettison door through hatch.

I'm on an Amercia West airbus. Place hatch door on seat.

Why the inconsistency?

More difficult. A319 or A320. For water landing, exit through over wing exits.

A321, all exits - presumably because of different CoG. Could confuse.

Lifejackets. Don't say that the probability of there being enough aeroplane hanging together for anyone to be able to choose how to leave is fairly remote....

As far as DC9/MD80 tail cones - they always say these are opened by a crew member. What if the crew member is incapcitated?

Lacking explanation. If oxygen masks appear, there will be a sudden descent.
why not say so?

Finally, an overdue rule. PAX ignoring the safety briefing and being unable to answer a short exam will be ejected - from whatever height the aircraft is at!

[VS-LHRCSA]

Not all airlines use sex to sell. If that were the case then why would the five airlines I've worked for over the past 20 years employ me? I certainly wouldn't feature in any airline's calendar, that's for sure.

If we're going to go down the SQ route, why not ask one of the 'Singapore Girls' what it was like trying to conduct an evacuation from a burning fuselage in TPE while wearing a tight long dress and flip flops. What disgusts me is that nearly 10 years on, the uniform hasn't changed. What if that was YOUR sister or daughter?

[apaddyinuk]

Ah, well they have changed the shoes after that accident! LOL!

I love Pam Anns send up of that accident!

[Final 3 Greens]

An open letter to industry members

West Lakes post is balanced and rational and a fair summary.

To get back on message, i.e. to understand pax bahaviour, the industry posters on the thread would do well to reflect that people are flying more than ever and the industry (quite understandably) downplays potentially scary safety matters.

For example, to get attention on the safety brief, you could show the burning wreckage of a crash and then say "if you wish to improve your changes of surviving this, listen up for the next 3 minutes."

I would agree that this is not the way to go, but why don't safety briefs include important information such as the unpleasant smell from the O2 generators when activated? I would hypothesise that this is considered to be lingering on the unpleasant for too long.

Lets be honest, a very good pitch for business would be to use airline safety records to show how safe your employers are, but this is not done, no doubt for fear of scaring the punters.

What your industry breeds are a bunch of people who mainly never experience anything worse than slight turb and regard flying as being like a bus service.

You then wonder why they don't listen to the safety brief and you are amazed that they thing they are about to die when they experience a go around or a depressurisation - they have not been informed well enough by your industry about the flying experience , yet you blame them for this.

I have not yet seen a crew memeber use their delegated authority to ask anyone to stop talking during the brief, then again I have only taken over 1,000 flights, so one day it might happen - ignoring bad behaviour is condoning bad behaviour and you are colluding in a bad situation - tell them to shut up - I'll support you.

Tell them to sit down when the belt sign is on - you seldom do and it frustrates me - furthermore they are walking past my seat and my land on me if there is abig bump - act, don't moan - I'll support you - when you let them walk past my seat with the belt sign on YOU ARE FAILING ME.

Why don't the crew brief about condensation? I sat on an Airbus last Sunday and had to reassure the person next to me who thought we might be on fire - I should not have to be doing this - I pay the airline to brief the customers, but they fail regularly in this respect, also with regard to airframe generated noise on the BAE 146/RJ, which I have had to explain many, many times - why?

Furthermore, the lectures pax get from certain cabin crew members on this board are quite bizarre.

I am not trained on your aircraft/systems and I do pay close attention to the safety brief for this reason, but equally the CAA licenses me to command an aircraft and I have had to make tough decisions with weather and systems problems, which had I screwed up would have quite probably resulted in fatalities.

So please, unless you are also a licensed aircraft commander, pay some respect for MY training and experience - it may be limited compared to SNS Guppy's and others, but it is more than many people who post here and some of the posts are quite offensive to me - I have talked with cabin crew whose lack of understanding of an aircraft was quite unbelievable - not all, but professional pilots may well know what I mean.

Finally, face the facts.

To be cabin crew, you need a few O levels (2, I believe), so you don't need to be a genius to qualify for the job.

But the best cabin crew are total ambassadors for their companies and could probably hold down very senior positions in any sector if they wished to - I fly regularly with one purser who has a PhD and is used (part time) to teach by a very well respected university. He loves his airline job and is awesome in his performance of it, I had total respect for him.

Yes, the regulators insist on having crew trained to maintain safety and I say for the 4th time TOTAL RESPCT FOR THE CREW ON BA038, WHO REACTED DECISIVELY AND PROFESSIONALLY WHEN THE CHIPS WERE DOWN AND WITH APPARENTLY NO WARNING.

However, the main part of the job ( measured by % of time spent) is providing customer service, as the BA ad posted earlier makes quite clear.

What is the problem in recognising this? Why are people posting here that the only reason the crew is on board is to provide safety?

I am sure that Michael O'Leary would agree thtat providing in flight service is crucially important, Ryanair's income is no doubt influenced by the amount of extras his crews sell, but I have seen Ryanair crew immediately drop the service and imediately provide O2 and care to a pax with a medical problem - I made a point of seeing the #1 after the flgiht and telling him what a gret job he and his team did.

So please think about what I have written.

It's your perogative to reject if you wish, but you may choose to think about pax in another way.

[SNS3Guppy]

Why don't the crew brief about condensation? I sat on an Airbus last Sunday and had to reassure the person next to me who thought we might be on fire - I should not have to be doing this - I pay the airline to brief the customers, but they fail regularly in this respect, also with regard to airframe generated noise on the BAE 146/RJ, which I have had to explain many, many times - why?

You want a ground school...go pay a flight instructor. You don't get on a bus and expect the driver to teach you how to drive. You don't hire an attorney and expect a class on civil legislation. You don't visit the doctor and expect a briefing on chemistry or biology...nor is the doctor in expectation of or willing to provide it.

You're briefed on what you need to do in an emergency. Not on how clouds form, not on the tropopause, not of the physics of turbulence or the movement of frontal boundaries. You don't get briefed on all the sounds you may hear, such as fuel pumps or hydraulic pumps, or many of the other things which go on in the airplane. We don't particularly need to explain why we've selected a particular altitude, or tell you about the proximity of other traffic in flight, or even brief you on the where the bleed air you're breathing is coming from. We brief you on safety related items that may save your life or kill you in an emergency, and you're given just enough information. Extra information just clouds the issue, can be confused with important information, and really isn't something you need to have floating around in your head as you try to recall the critical life-or-death safety instructions.

Of course, why would we bother to give a detailed explaination on oxygen generators or overwing condensation...when people like yourself can't be bothered to listen to the important parts...the safety briefing that will save your life?

Again...it appears we need you to come into the training department and school us all with your expertise. We love arrogant passengers that do that.

[TightSlot]

I'm starting to look forward to waking up and checking this thread - this time F3G comes up with a zinger of a post!

Good stuff, guys..

[Final 3 Greens]

Guppy

That last post of yours requires some response.

You want a ground school...go pay a flight instructor. You don't hire an attorney and expect a class on civil legislation. You don't visit the doctor and expect a briefing on chemistry or biology...nor is the doctor in expectation of or willing to provide it.

I don't expect a ground school, but I am having to reassure nervous pax sitting next to me, it happens several times every year and it is NOT MY RESPONSIBILITY. I pay the airline a ticket price and that does not include an implied term and condition that I am a supernumary member of the crew, present to counsel nervous pax that known/predictable events, such as condensation and loud airframe fluting noises, are nothing to worry about.

If I go to a lawyer, I expect not only to receive advice, but also reasonable briefings as to any things that I may not be aware of, likewise I expect the doctor to give me enough information on the side effects of the drugs prescribed, so for example I don't worry if my urine turns yellow or my tongue turns black, but your argument is that this is normal and I don't need to know it.

Your logic looks pretty weak in context.

Recently, as you know from these boards, there was a serious incident caused by pax thinking their aircraft was on fire and attemptiong to enter the flight deck during the take off roll - this is completely unacceptable behaviour, but a contributing factor was their lack of understanding and my experience is that crews don't brief condensation (only heard it once), ergo it should be added when necessary to avoid a repeat of a totally unacceptable event. Just because the crew know it is normal and safe doesn't mean the pax doand there are many more people flying occasionally these days.

You're briefed on what you need to do in an emergency

Yes and part of that logic requires pax to recognise what is and isn't an emergency. A condensation incident has now resulted in a serious incident and the industry should take this lesson on board and deal with it my PAs when necessary. "Its normal, it's not a problem, just ignore it."

I think that if a further incident occured, with serious outcomes, a lawyer would be able to attack the airline for failing to apply diligence in preventing a repeat incident.

Of course, why would we bother to give a detailed explaination on oxygen generators

You need to give more than at present, because it can cause some panic when people smell the fumes or think the unit has failed, again recent anecdotal evidence supports this.

All that the PA needs to add is .... after pulling the mask, you may notice a chemical smell, this is normal" What is so difficult?

overwing condensation

What is overwing condensation? I am talking about condensation from the vents along the whole cabin, that at its most noticeable looks like fog or smoke .... and lots of it too under some circumstances

when people like yourself can't be bothered to listen to the important parts...the safety briefing that will save your life?

Guppy, have you tested your reading spectacle prescription recently?

......... I do pay close attention to the safety brief......

I am sorry,but your post is defensive and reflects exactly the sentiment baftabill expressed eloquently in an earlier post..

On a nearby thread you will see 'morons', 'idiots', 'not good breeding material', etc etc to describe passengers.

On the other side of the coin you (quite rightly) take a learning attitude to accidents. The crew aren't 'morons', they were unfortunate that all the holes lined up. They may have made a mistake but it is important to learn from that rather than concentrate on blame.

I put it to you (and your colleagues) again, the demographics of the travelling population have changed significantly in the past 20 years and the airlines have not changed their briefings to take this into account.

Also, the cabin crew are not assertive enough (generally, with some homourable exceptions) at reinforcing the behaviours mandated by the rules (talking during briefing, walking around with the belt signs on) and this is conditioning some pax that it is acceptable.

[SNS3Guppy]

Recently, as you know from these boards, there was a serious incident caused by pax thinking their aircraft was on fire and attemptiong to enter the flight deck during the take off roll - this is completely unacceptable behaviour, but a contributing factor was their lack of understanding and my experience is that crews don't brief condensation (only heard it once), ergo it should be added when necessary to avoid a repeat of a totally unacceptable event. Just because the crew know it is normal and safe doesn't mean the pax doand there are many more people flying occasionally these days.

No, I'm not aware of that incident, and don't particularly care. If people are stupid enough to rush the cockpit because they think they know more than the flight crew or believe they can do something the crew cannot...then perhaps they ought to be shot in the back of the head by an air marshall for posing a threat to safety of flight. You appear to suggest that such behavior from a passenger is in any way acceptable or tolerable, or even justifiable because the crew didn't take time to give them a ground school on cloud physics.

It's not justifiable. Don't congregate at the front of the airplane. That should be very clear. Don't congregate there for the restroom (water closet to some of you). Don't congregate there to share rumors, or discuss condensation, or do whatever else it is you think you're going to do...and if there's a perceived problem, notify your flight attendant and don't rush to the front of the airplane. Passengers have been killed by other passengers for doing that very thing. Don't do that.

If I go to a lawyer, I expect not only to receive advice, but also reasonable briefings as to any things that I may not be aware of, likewise I expect the doctor to give me enough information on the side effects of the drugs prescribed, so for example I don't worry if my urine turns yellow or my tongue turns black, but your argument is that this is normal and I don't need to know it.

Your attorney will give you the necessary information, without delving into unnecessary legal history or theory. Your doctor will tell you about your medication and give you the information necessary for your safety.

A lesson on cloud physics, delving into the mysteries of pressure and temperature and dewpoint, relative humidity, angle of attack, and other such information, won't get someone out the door alive in the event of a forced landing or rejected takeoff, won't help someone egress the airplane in an emergency, and won't help them put on their life jacket.

Simply because you want it, doesn't mean you're going to get it. You're getting critical need-to-know safety information, and that's it. You're not briefed on navigational techniques, on proximity of traffic and other aircraft, details on system fuel pressures, the mechanical function of the bleed air system, the location of electrical buses, the function of flaps and reversers, or any such thing. It's not necessary, and if you want all that, go hire a flight instructor.

I don't get in a taxi cab and expect to hear the driver explain to me the turn signals, the brake, the horn, or his technique for following other traffic...even though his driving may scare the hell out of me.

The truth is, passengers can't be bothered to comply with the minimal information they already have. Adding to it would be a waste of time.

I don't know what airline you ride on...but you seem to ride on airplanes in which passengers are constantly out of their seats and ignoring the commands of the flight crew. In the last week I've seen airplanes stopped during taxi or returning to the gate for passengers who wouldn't sit down, and diverted for passengers who wouldn't comply. I've seen in the past passengers removed from the flight for failure to comply. I've seen phones and other electronic devices confiscated for failure to turn them off. I've seen passengers threatened with removal from the airplane unless they comply...tactfully, of course...but clearly informed of their choice none the less.

Perhaps you ride on houlligan airways where anything goes...I generally don't, and tend to stick with more professional operators.

I don't expect a ground school, but I am having to reassure nervous pax sitting next to me, it happens several times every year and it is NOT MY RESPONSIBILITY. I pay the airline a ticket price and that does not include an implied term and condition that I am a supernumary member of the crew, present to counsel nervous pax that known/predictable events, such as condensation and loud airframe fluting noises, are nothing to worry about.

So what? Then don't counsel them. Your call. Based on your comments thus far, the passenger would be far better off without your "counsel," anyway.

Yes and part of that logic requires pax to recognise what is and isn't an emergency. A condensation incident has now resulted in a serious incident and the industry should take this lesson on board and deal with it my PAs when necessary. "Its normal, it's not a problem, just ignore it."

I think that if a further incident occured, with serious outcomes, a lawyer would be able to attack the airline for failing to apply diligence in preventing a repeat incident.

I'm not aware of this incident, but reflect back to my previous comments. Dirty, money grubbing lawyers will jump on anything they can to make a buck or a name for themselves...so what an attorney will or won't do in response to a legal and approved safety briefing isn't particularly relevant...the attorney will probably file suit anyway. Whether the attorney wins is another matter...and seldom related to the facts or the truth. When it comes to civil suits, anything goes.

What is overwing condensation? I am talking about condensation from the vents along the whole cabin, that at its most noticeable looks like fog or smoke .... and lots of it too under some circumstances

What is overwing condensation? Again...now's a good time to go get some instruction and learn...not really something to be covered in the briefing.

As far as a slight mist coming from the air cycle machines (air conditioning packs)...once more...not really something that needs to be included in a regular formatted briefing on critical need-to-know information. If someone sees misting from a gaspar vent, it's a simple matter to let the flight attendant know and ask the question. The appearance of such vapors isn't common, is very dependent on circumstances, and is a very minor thing. If passengers elect to disregard the briefing they've already been given and rush the cockpit looking for answers, then they're already a safety of flight risk and the real problem isn't failure to brief on the mechanical operation of the airplane, but a failure on their part to follow the briefing they've already been given.

The first time I saw mist from the packs was in a C-130 at night, and it was unexpected. The entire cockpit filled with a thick mist rising from the floor, and then the vent started spraying snow pellets in my face. Amazingly enough, without having been "briefed" on the phenomenon, I didn't get up and begin running about the airplane in panic. That would be inappropriate, you see.

Don't try to justify it because someone did something inappropriate and not in accordance with the briefing to sit down and remain seated, and belted...and not approach the front of the aircraft. Again, you're wanting additional information when passengers failed to comply with the most basic directions.

I put it to you (and your colleagues) again, the demographics of the travelling population have changed significantly in the past 20 years and the airlines have not changed their briefings to take this into account.

Really? You mean the airplane doesn't still have a mixture of businessmen, plumbers, doctors, housewives, screaming children, young married couples, traveling expert private pilots, jumpseating crewmembers, and the occasional odd fare by the tooth fairy? How have the demographics changed? We're flying a new breed of passenger today, are we? We need to do something special that hasn't been done before? Seat belts function differently today than they did, say, 40 years ago? Cabin air is breathed differently today? People float a little differently than they did 20 years ago? It's okay to leave the seatbacks not in the upright position? Passengers today have a greater right to disregard safety instructions and get up and rush the cockpit when they think they have the answers today, then?

We've already heard from the masses in this thread. Don't believe the safety briefings, period. Don't listen to them. Ignore them. You believe the flight attendants are there to sell sex. Crewmembers need to give a groundschool on the mechanical function of the airplane, yada, yada, yada. What you're not describing here is a need...just an arrogant passenger. Quite in time with the thread, of course, about arrogant posters.

You tried to lead us past sex sells now to ineffective crews and eye candy...so again I submit that you step up to the plate and instruct all of us in your expert ways. We don't need to tens of thousands of industry professionals who examine the briefings, the manufacturers who provide their own recommendations, the airline attorneys who have their valued input, the crew input, the history of mishap investigation and the changes thereof...we just need you. Stop what you're doing and start campaigning to make the changes you see fit. They probably won't happen...but you may provide some brief, and perhaps even welcome entertainment.

You need to give more than at present, because it can cause some panic when people smell the fumes or think the unit has failed, again recent anecdotal evidence supports this.

All that the PA needs to add is .... after pulling the mask, you may notice a chemical smell, this is normal" What is so difficult?

At Flight Level 350 to 410, time of useful consciousness is measured in seconds. As little as fifteen or so. Even less. During an explosive decompression, the cabin may fill with mist, It may get very loud. Ones ears may pop, and will certainly hurt. One may experienced ruptured eardrums. Rapid expansion of body gasses can cause severe pain, and sinuses may cause unspeakable pain (I can attest to this). Dental pain may be present. It's difficult to breathe. Depending on the nature of the decompression, a frost may cover everything. It gets cold. The airplane may appear full of smoke, and papers may be flying around or other signs of the decompression taking place. Historically passengers or crew have been forced out of the aircraft and into the night. The aircraft may be descending very rapidly.

In the meantime, the cabin crew is belting themselves in and going for their own oxygen (remember that pesky briefing...in an emergency secure your own mask first, then those of your loved ones around you?) Making a cabin anouncement, especially when the flight attendant hasn't been informed about the nature of the problem, may not be possible.

The cockpit crew has initiated an emergency descent, and aside from being on oxygen and facing the same physical threats that you're facing in the cabin, is having to fly the airplane, possibly with diminished capacity and diminished performance, coordinate with air traffic control, run multiple emergency checklists, and operate the 900 or so switches and controls in the cockpit that may be needing attention during the descent.

At this point in time, do you suppose that the smell of an oxygen generator, where it may occur, is of any particular concern? ("It's okay folks...we're in an emergency descent following an explosive decompression and the crew is fighting for your lives, but we just wanted you to know that the unpleasant smell is normal...we mean the chemical smell, not the methane and other scents that are completely overpowering the chemical smell right now...so relax, and thank you for flying Timbuktu Airways.").

Perhaps we need a briefing just for you.

"Ladies and gentlemen, welcome aboard Poxahonalahatchie Airways. My name is Glen and I'll be your non-sexual, unappealing man-servant today, charged with your utmost safety and the comfort of your culinary appetite. I would like to direct your attention to the cabin attendants around you as they explain the safety features of the airplane. Following that we will have a short course in the operation of the airplane and it's mechanical function, followed by a three part test. Study guides are in the seat backs in front of you. We caution you that a passing grade of 70% of higher will be required in order to be allowed to remain on this flight. A number 2 pencil has been provided for your convenience. If this becomes dull, please ring your attendant call button and another will be brought to you."

"First we have the seatbelts. These must be worn snug and tight, and low around the hips. We do this to prevent you from submarining out underneath them during a forward impact, though we should inform you that any vertical impact will likely crush and deform your spine, causing irreparable damage with which you'll have to live for the rest of your life. If your survive the burns, of course, or the lung damage from the ensuing fire. In order to fasten the seatbelt, place the metal ends together and snap, like this, and to undo them, pull on the little lever on the buckle. We ask that you remain seated for the entire flight and do not rush to the cockpit to question anything you might see or hear, because whatever you see or hear is perfectly normal. This includes banging, whizzing, beeping, groaning, bumps, mist, vapor, whistling noises, and that one sound that goes 'urk, urk, urk,' whatever it may be."

"Beneath your seat are life vests. Please find them now with both hands and let's pray they're still in place when the aircraft comes to a complete rest. If the cabin is filling with water rapidly, we need you to remove your shoes, put the vest over your head like this, and tie it around your body like this using a square knot. Not you, sir, that's a granny knot. I know, it's an easy mistake to make. Then bring it around the front, squirrel goes through the hole, around the tree, and there you have a bowline...no sir, that's a sheetbend, used for ropes of different diameters and not applicable in an aircraft, again, easy mistake to make, then pull tight. The vest is inflated by pulling on these tabs. No sir, not yet. It's okay, we'll get you another. For the rest of you, do not inflate your vests until you're outside the aircraft. If you happen to have been thrown clear, feel free to inflate your vest, so long as as you're not trapped beneath sinking wreckage, or near sharp objects. Speaking of sharp objects, don't forget the shark repellant...we have two types of sharks that we consider to be a threat on this route, and those would be the mako and the great white. In your seat back, behind your study guide and the quiz, you'll see a glossy color briefing card on surviving shark attacks. We find that striking the shark on the nose with the pommel of a knife has proven useful in the past, but are discouraging it now because of legal concerns for the safety of the shark, and because none of you have knives, save for the terrorists. You know who you are. Moving right along..."

"In the event of a loss of cabin pressure, masks will drop down from the ceiling. Now, I've arranged to have a cutaway model of the oxygen manifold present, and in your study guide you'll find an excellent diagram in Chapter 3 on the workings of the system. You'll see that this pin here, can everybody see that, must be removed in order to start the flow of oxygen. I'd like everyone to take a moment and remove the masks from the overhead stowage containers and place them over your face. Be careful to use the sterile wipes in the accessory packet in the seat back in front of you...the seat back which must remain upright for takeoff and landing, mind you...and clean your mask. Do not pull the pin. Take a moment to make the mask your friend, because if you don't get this right it may be the last thing you ever see. Get to know that mask. Become the mask. During the generation of oxygen, you may be able to smell something other than your neighbor's bowls, and if it's not the things flying around the cabin or the pervasive odor of vomit, then it's likely a minor chemical smell. This is normal, just like the little clear bag on the mask not inflating. This is a non-rebreather mask, as I'm sure many of you know, part of a diluter system (it will be on the test)...and I want you to remember this in the event our universe is coming apart, so you don't panic."

"If you'll kindly stow the masks, we call them the 'rubber jungle' back in the ceiling you'll notice a small eyeball type vent behind the mask stowage panel. We call this a gaspar vent. At some point during our flight, perhaps even in the next few minutes, you may see a mist coming from the vent. You'll feel cool air with it and a flow of air which is cool and refreshing, coming from that vent, and may not be able to put two and two together and determine that it's your air conditioning. In the event you have a complete meltdown and become deluded enough to believe the airplane is on fire and blowing smoke into the cabin...smoke which dissipates just like steam and is cold and not hot and which smells nothing like smoke, we just want you to know it's perfectly normal. In fact, it's a product of an air cycle machine, part of the air conditioning and pressurization packs, and we'll be talking about that in Chapter 6, Pneumatics, Air Conditioning, and Pressurization."

"For those seated in the exit aisles, we have a special mission for you. You need to be able to read and understand the exit directions, Operate the exits, exit the airplane, and give aid and assistance to other passengers as they leave the airplane. We want to stress that you only need to do this in an emergency...not when we arrive at the destination, and for heavens sake not right now when we're sitting at the gate. No, you can't go through a practice run. There are a few things we should tell you about this. One is that you shouldn't open the exits in flight. Two is that before exiting you should determine if there are large, sharp, twisted metal formations outside the window, that used to be part of the airplane. Three, you must determine if there's a fire out there. This can be typically recognized by the presence of smoke, and a reddish or yellowish glowing appearance, or possibly explosions just like you see in the movies. We encourage you to consider a different exit in the event you see the sharp pointy things, or the hot burning things. Fourth, you may need to exit by yourself, in the event any us are horribly mangled and unable to assist you or direct you when the time comes. Fifth, most of or survivors are at the back of the airplane, so those of you in the front sections ignoring this briefing and staring at my conservative yet innately attractive uniform may continue to do so. You will be going the way of the dodo, anyway. Sixth, once clear of the airplane, kindly move away from the wreckage, and do not walk back to take pictures with your cell phones, which must be turned off now thank you, of burning wheel assemblies, brake fires, or other interesting and unique vistas. We ask that you congregate as far from the airplane as possible, at a location which allows you both safety and a good viewing area in order to watch those of us who are unable to leave the airplane perish."

"We ask that no one tamper with the lavatory smoke detectors. This is a non-smoking flight, we hope. If it becomes a smoking flight due to any number of mechanical problems, you are still not authorized to use cigarettes, bongs, roach clips, pipes, hookas, cigars, or other lightable objects. Federal laws prohibit tampering, touching, photographing, making drawings or charcoal rubbings of, or writing songs about the smoke detectors. If you set one off, the cockpit crew will know about it, and in addition to diverting to another location and having you arrested, one or more crewmembers will come to your seat and beat you with a rolled up newspaper. Is that clear?"

"You, sir. Sit down. If you get up again, I shall break your legs. Thank you."

"Now then, if you will all open your study guides to page one, let us begin..."


We could go on all day...but perhaps just briefing on the basics is best for now...at least until you give us the benefit of your illuminating insight and change the world to match the latest "demographics" of the traveling public. Who knows, but you could be the one to reshape the face of modern air travel to your own arrogant image!

[ford cortina]

Wow, once again Guppy awesome simply awesome. Thankyou,. I could learn lots off you.

[baftabill]

No.

I think this is called Bunker Mentality.

[west lakes]

Processing Information

I can see merit in a lot of cases imparting more information during safety briefings.
But (sorry there has to be one)

It is already apparent that even if passengers listen to the briefing some don't take the information in (the not looking after themselves first - which is against most parents instincts, getting hand luggage to carry with them during an evacuation, not opening overwing exits even though they have probably been individually briefed)
So even if the information about the "burning smell" from oxygen candles is given, I really wonder how many will take it in?


An example from my line of work.
Customer with a failure in their electricity supply, late evening so for a number of reasons no work will be done until the morning.
A decision is made to connect a small portable generator to the house to maintain essentials.
Customer told by staff "this will only operate your fridge/freezer, your lights, TV and kettle, nothing else, no large appliances like washers, dishwashers, showers".

Two hours later frantic call from customer the generator has gone off as I switched the shower on
Team attends, restarts generator, repeats warning paying particular attention to the shower not being used.

07:30 another call from the customer, the generator went off when I switched the shower on

This was not the, shall we say, chav type this was an apparently professional family.


We didn't attend the second time- just left them off until we fixed the fault

As for the condensation from a/c units, seen that a few times in hot humid conditions when aircraft are boarding with APU running, a/c running and using steps to front and rear doors to board.
It was obvious to me and most other pax what it was and there was even some joking about it. (scheduled flight not charter)
Possibly though in some situations a clear PA from crew would not be unreasonable. Probably though in a lot of cases the crew are used to the effect and don't actually notice it, so don't comment prior to someone panicking - when it could be too late

[Final 3 Greens]

This is indeed the bunker mentallity.

For example, I say....

Recently, as you know from these boards, there was a serious incident caused by pax thinking their aircraft was on fire and attemptiong to enter the flight deck during the take off roll - this is completely unacceptable behaviour

Guppy replies

You appear to suggest that such behavior from a passenger is in any way acceptable or tolerable, or even justifiable because the crew didn't take time to give them a ground school on cloud physics.

Nothing like completely ignoring a point made in debate.

Then he completely misses the point of the Palma incident (through ignorance of it) and replies about shockwaves forming over the wings, when I ask him to clarify what he means, as I cannot believe that he is so uninformed as to miss the point of my comment, he gives a smart answer that I should seek flight instruction.

Guppy also thinks

then perhaps they ought to be shot in the back of the head by an air marshall for posing a threat to safety of flight

I think that last statement is probably pretty insightful

Sadly, Guppy is postulating that gunplay is the panacea, instead of accepting that a quick PA from the crew, on demand, would increase flight safety.

So, I will end my comments on this thread, as Guppy obviously suffers from highly selective readiing skills and maybe a god complex and there is little point trying to reason with him.

[SNS3Guppy]

Sadly, Guppy is postulating that guns are the panacea instead of accepting that a quick PA from the crew, on demand, would increase flight safety.

No guppy is postulating that passengers who rush the cockpit after being told to sit down and stay away from the front of the airplane, knowing that there are consequences, face a potentially unpleasant outcome.

You see, the passengers already had a quick announcement from the flight crew...it's called the briefing, and in that briefing they've been told to sit down and keep their seat belts fastened, and not to congregate at the front of the airplane. Apparently they couldn't get that much right...and certainly deserve any fallout that might result. It's called safety of flight...and they jeopardized it...over MIST!!!

So, the end of my comments on this thread, as Guppy obviously suffers from highly selective readiing skills and maybe a god complex and there is little point trying to reason with him.

I was never interested in reasoning with you. It's a little like the briefings you clearly don't understand. Nobody's there to reason with you, either. The crew is there to tell you the way it will be, and you're there to do it. You want reasoning...go join a debate club.

[Passagiata]

I actually don't mind pilots being a bit rude from time to time. It's a forum for professionals, and I'd rather they were a bit clannish than watered down the standard of their membership or contributions. There have definitely been dumbass posts from people claiming to be expert - wasting everyone's time. If fools aren't suffered gladly, there will be fewer of them (us). I'm just delighted to be able to observe the conversations - and participate 'below the salt'

And thanks types like Unka Romeo India Xray for the patient replies to all & sundry!

Cheers

[baftabill]

Guppy...All the best