How about a fine/prison for taking luggage down the slide?
Join Date: Nov 2015
Location: Mordor
Posts: 1,315
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Join Date: Nov 2015
Location: Mordor
Posts: 1,315
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Man A is last to leave and is reaching for his carry-on bag when Man B (behind him) stops him doing so because it's against the rules and selfish. Man A survives, but loses a few family possessions (which have sentimental value) when the aeroplane burns out because .
Man C, father of Man A is a powerful and rather ruthless gangster whose treasured items Man B has just caused to be destroyed.
What are the chances of Man A avoiding wearing concrete swimming shoes within the year?
PDR
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: UK.
Posts: 4,391
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
PDR1 and others: Just accept that you will never win any argument that it is OK to open overhead lockers during an evac.
It is not.
p.s
So he's going to murder his own son? I know they can be slightly irritating at times but . . .
It is not.
p.s
Man C, father of Man A is a powerful and rather ruthless gangster whose treasured items Man B has just caused to be destroyed.
What are the chances of Man A avoiding wearing concrete swimming shoes within the year?
What are the chances of Man A avoiding wearing concrete swimming shoes within the year?
Join Date: Nov 2015
Location: Mordor
Posts: 1,315
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
PDR
Son of Slot
Super Senior Moderator
Super Senior Moderator
There is a long established rule in PPRuNe: 'Play the ball not the player'. It is possible to disagree with a view without insulting the person who wrote it.
I address this to all, not just recent posters.
I address this to all, not just recent posters.
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Cloud 9
Posts: 2,948
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Just one example, please, where taking any item from an overhead bin has caused death or injury. Just one and I'll shut up.
Well bucket & spaders will be bucket & spaders, brains in neutral and all that, and I got clonked around the head by a litre of whatever is was by some idiot who couldn't exercise caution or indeed any common bl00dy sense.
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Confoederatio Helvetica
Age: 68
Posts: 2,847
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
PF,
Couldn't agree more, one must always be very careful opening the overheads, even in a non-emergency. But we are hearing that one is putting others at risk in an emergency, without empirical data to support such comments.
I admit it sounds right and seems to make sense. BUT in a series of recent incidents; AF in YYZ; BA at LHR; BR at SFO; EK at DXB we have seen some 'break' the rule without apparent consequences.
Perhaps if the rule was changed to say a 'small purse or hand bag' from 'under the seat in front' it would reduce the opening of bins, and give passengers the assurance that some of their meds, documents and valuables can be safeguarded.
During a normal disembarkation it isn't getting stuff from the lockers that slows things down its the single door and dawdlers.
Couldn't agree more, one must always be very careful opening the overheads, even in a non-emergency. But we are hearing that one is putting others at risk in an emergency, without empirical data to support such comments.
I admit it sounds right and seems to make sense. BUT in a series of recent incidents; AF in YYZ; BA at LHR; BR at SFO; EK at DXB we have seen some 'break' the rule without apparent consequences.
Perhaps if the rule was changed to say a 'small purse or hand bag' from 'under the seat in front' it would reduce the opening of bins, and give passengers the assurance that some of their meds, documents and valuables can be safeguarded.
During a normal disembarkation it isn't getting stuff from the lockers that slows things down its the single door and dawdlers.
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: UK.
Posts: 4,391
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Perhaps if the rule was changed to say a 'small purse or hand bag' from 'under the seat in front' it would reduce the opening of bins, and give passengers the assurance that some of their meds, documents and valuables can be safeguarded.
Join Date: Aug 2016
Location: Legnano (MI), Italy
Posts: 2
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
PF,
Couldn't agree more, one must always be very careful opening the overheads, even in a non-emergency. But we are hearing that one is putting others at risk in an emergency, without empirical data to support such comments.
I admit it sounds right and seems to make sense. BUT in a series of recent incidents; AF in YYZ; BA at LHR; BR at SFO; EK at DXB we have seen some 'break' the rule without apparent consequences.
Perhaps if the rule was changed to say a 'small purse or hand bag' from 'under the seat in front' it would reduce the opening of bins, and give passengers the assurance that some of their meds, documents and valuables can be safeguarded.
During a normal disembarkation it isn't getting stuff from the lockers that slows things down its the single door and dawdlers.
Couldn't agree more, one must always be very careful opening the overheads, even in a non-emergency. But we are hearing that one is putting others at risk in an emergency, without empirical data to support such comments.
I admit it sounds right and seems to make sense. BUT in a series of recent incidents; AF in YYZ; BA at LHR; BR at SFO; EK at DXB we have seen some 'break' the rule without apparent consequences.
Perhaps if the rule was changed to say a 'small purse or hand bag' from 'under the seat in front' it would reduce the opening of bins, and give passengers the assurance that some of their meds, documents and valuables can be safeguarded.
During a normal disembarkation it isn't getting stuff from the lockers that slows things down its the single door and dawdlers.
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Cloud 9
Posts: 2,948
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
ExXB,
It seems that each and every time I fly, and after landing, the cabin crew make an announcement to remain seated until the seat belt sign has been switched off ... Yet on each and every flight pax are out of their seats and at those bins in contravention of the announcement that was made only moments earlier.
Alas the overhead bins have become an addiction and probably the only way to cure it would be to remove them!
It seems that each and every time I fly, and after landing, the cabin crew make an announcement to remain seated until the seat belt sign has been switched off ... Yet on each and every flight pax are out of their seats and at those bins in contravention of the announcement that was made only moments earlier.
Alas the overhead bins have become an addiction and probably the only way to cure it would be to remove them!
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Confoederatio Helvetica
Age: 68
Posts: 2,847
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
PF, again don't disagree.
I'm just not convinced a problem exists. Four recent 'unscheduled hull retirements', as I listed above, suggest there is not a problem.
The problem is that 'everyone knows' passengers should leave everything behind, but fail to realise that simply isn't going to happen.
I'm just not convinced a problem exists. Four recent 'unscheduled hull retirements', as I listed above, suggest there is not a problem.
The problem is that 'everyone knows' passengers should leave everything behind, but fail to realise that simply isn't going to happen.
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Cloud 9
Posts: 2,948
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
ExXb,
Have you actually jumped down a slide?
I jumped down a slide of an A300 sized mock-up, as one jumps one can barely see the slide surface that one's bum is to subsequently make contact with, one's bum makes contact with it some halfway to the ground before one needs to apply braking action by sitting upright ... I can't realistically imagine doing this with an armful of bag(s)!
I'd suggest that people on slides with bags or whatever represent a danger to those jumping behind them.
P.S. But we enjoyed ourselves so much we went back up the top to jump down the slide again ... and again
Have you actually jumped down a slide?
I jumped down a slide of an A300 sized mock-up, as one jumps one can barely see the slide surface that one's bum is to subsequently make contact with, one's bum makes contact with it some halfway to the ground before one needs to apply braking action by sitting upright ... I can't realistically imagine doing this with an armful of bag(s)!
I'd suggest that people on slides with bags or whatever represent a danger to those jumping behind them.
P.S. But we enjoyed ourselves so much we went back up the top to jump down the slide again ... and again
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: UK.
Posts: 4,391
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Confoederatio Helvetica
Age: 68
Posts: 2,847
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
PF, no I haven't. Be hundreds of others have, some with their carry-on. And nothing suggests those actually representing a danger to themselves or those following.
Yes I know it sounds right, but that's what everyone said before they lifted the ban on using small electric devices on the ground.
I think it would be better to realise that, for whatever reason, passengers will continue to do this. Rules, and procedures, should be developed in that knowledge to mitigate what could happen. Sticking ones head in the sand is OK for ostriches, but not an intelligent species.
Yes I know it sounds right, but that's what everyone said before they lifted the ban on using small electric devices on the ground.
I think it would be better to realise that, for whatever reason, passengers will continue to do this. Rules, and procedures, should be developed in that knowledge to mitigate what could happen. Sticking ones head in the sand is OK for ostriches, but not an intelligent species.
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Wherever I go, there I am
Age: 43
Posts: 767
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Rules, and procedures, should be developed in that knowledge to mitigate what could happen. Sticking ones head in the sand is OK for ostriches, but not an intelligent species.
The idea of a fine or jail time would require that someone goes back through and obtain evidence that person A or person B did indeed leave an aircraft under an evacuation order with personal belongings. Plus, people still murder others on a daily basis knowing full well what the consequences are, so I don't think that will work.
From where I sit as a Captain who may possibly have to give an evacuation order one day, I don't care if you have treasured belongings in the overhead bin or even a small bag with insulin, as was previously mentioned - chances are very high we are somewhere that can replace any or all of your things and guess what - you're going to the hospital anyways, so those medical issues you have can be looked after.
Instead, maybe we need to look at the way we describe an evacuation to passengers in the first place. Too many times these safety messages try and convey a sense of calmness or hilarity to a situation that will be anything but. To someone who has stood beside the burning hull of an aircraft watching two of their friends die, I can tell you that I cringe when I hear someone joke that "there are many ways to leave your lover but only four ways of leaving this aircraft" or other form of similar filth.
I think we go the very hard road and actually describe to people during a safety briefing exactly what will happen and what the consequences will be, for example "In the event you hear the command evacuate, evacuate, evacuate, you will release your seat belt, stand up and proceed to your nearest emergency exit without pause or delay. Failure to do so may cause you or those around you serious bodily injury up to and including death. Your flight attendants are pointing to your nearest exit now."
You imply that humanity is intelligent, so I'll agree with your first sentence.
The idea of a fine or jail time would require that someone goes back through and obtain evidence that person A or person B did indeed leave an aircraft under an evacuation order with personal belongings. Plus, people still murder others on a daily basis knowing full well what the consequences are, so I don't think that will work.
From where I sit as a Captain who may possibly have to give an evacuation order one day, I don't care if you have treasured belongings in the overhead bin or even a small bag with insulin, as was previously mentioned - chances are very high we are somewhere that can replace any or all of your things and guess what - you're going to the hospital anyways, so those medical issues you have can be looked after.
Instead, maybe we need to look at the way we describe an evacuation to passengers in the first place. Too many times these safety messages try and convey a sense of calmness or hilarity to a situation that will be anything but. To someone who has stood beside the burning hull of an aircraft watching two of their friends die, I can tell you that I cringe when I hear someone joke that "there are many ways to leave your lover but only four ways of leaving this aircraft" or other form of similar filth.
I think we go the very hard road and actually describe to people during a safety briefing exactly what will happen and what the consequences will be, for example "In the event you hear the command evacuate, evacuate, evacuate, you will release your seat belt, stand up and proceed to your nearest emergency exit without pause or delay. Failure to do so may cause you or those around you serious bodily injury up to and including death. Your flight attendants are pointing to your nearest exit now."
The idea of a fine or jail time would require that someone goes back through and obtain evidence that person A or person B did indeed leave an aircraft under an evacuation order with personal belongings. Plus, people still murder others on a daily basis knowing full well what the consequences are, so I don't think that will work.
From where I sit as a Captain who may possibly have to give an evacuation order one day, I don't care if you have treasured belongings in the overhead bin or even a small bag with insulin, as was previously mentioned - chances are very high we are somewhere that can replace any or all of your things and guess what - you're going to the hospital anyways, so those medical issues you have can be looked after.
Instead, maybe we need to look at the way we describe an evacuation to passengers in the first place. Too many times these safety messages try and convey a sense of calmness or hilarity to a situation that will be anything but. To someone who has stood beside the burning hull of an aircraft watching two of their friends die, I can tell you that I cringe when I hear someone joke that "there are many ways to leave your lover but only four ways of leaving this aircraft" or other form of similar filth.
I think we go the very hard road and actually describe to people during a safety briefing exactly what will happen and what the consequences will be, for example "In the event you hear the command evacuate, evacuate, evacuate, you will release your seat belt, stand up and proceed to your nearest emergency exit without pause or delay. Failure to do so may cause you or those around you serious bodily injury up to and including death. Your flight attendants are pointing to your nearest exit now."
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Cloud 9
Posts: 2,948
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Too many times these safety messages try and convey a sense of calmness or hilarity
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IIzUnVlkaHg
