Like others on here (although I refer to previous threads in the main), I've often wondered why a reasonable amount of the briefing is taken up with "In the event of a landing on water...", since survivable landings on water with underslung engines aren't exactly common.

I also kind of wondered reading this thread why there isn't some more information about, for example, condensation, emergency descent and so on in the safety information. I guess one answer is it might frighten people - but perhaps only the kind of people sitting like startled rabbits while those of us who've listened to the briefing jump over them to find the exit behind us as fire breaks out. If you're going to tell people about the masks, why run the risk that half of them are too panicked to do as they're told because they don't understand why the aircraft is in a dive? A controlled emergency descent probably doesn't seem so controlled to most pax!

I also wonder whether, for those of us who are frequent fliers - indeed particularly now so many people are frequent fliers, having one, scarcely ever altered version of the safety briefing could not prove counter-productive in an incident. Are some people only going to realise at the crucial moment that, whilst they know the briefing off by heart (in multiple languages!), it has become so routine as to be just another set of noises.

But now I'm wandering off-topic!

Faced with two risky options ...
 

Reading this thread ... several people have tried to relate the passenger behaviour to lack of IQ, intelligence, common sense etc. I'm not sure that's relevant as I'm convinced that many rational people are capable of such behaviour under certain circumstances.

Imagine being a passenger on board, during the takeoff roll you are suddenly faced in your own mind with the unexpected but direct and immediate prospect of being incinerated if the takeoff continues with images of a flaming concorde looming in the front of your mind. Taking the highly risky and extremely drastic step of standing up and banging on the cockpit door even at such a critical point might, by comparison, seem like a good idea.

I reckon those passenger knew full well the serious risks involved in standing up during the takeoff but felt they were facing a far more unpalatable option ....

Lol, shame it didn't happen before V1!

If it did and i was PIC i would simply slam on the brakes and apply thrust reverse!

Then the passengers can't go off and complain because it was all their fault andn were affecting the aircraft's safety in the first place!

Not a cheap flight
 

Some contributors to this forum appear to link this type of behaviour to the ability to travel provided by low air fares.
Believe me the only people travelling cheaply on this flight were the cabin and flight crews.
All the passengers were flying back to Northern Ireland after spending the province's traditional July holiday in Majorca - a very expensive time to fly anywhere from Belfast.
Most of those on the aircraft would have been IT passengers with a fortnight's apartment holiday for two people costing more than £1000. The bill for a family would, of course, be much greater and once you decide you want to stay in a hotel the prices just spiral.
We paid almost £2000 for 10 days bed and breakfast in Puerto Pollensa.
Anyond travelling flight only on the bmi aircraft would also have paid a great deal of money for the privilege. The Falcon website is quoting a return fare of £325 for the equivelant dates next year (July 4 returning July 19).

As a frequent business flyer ( 126 flights in the last twelve months alone )who is scared ****less of flying most of the time I've only ever seen this happen once on an aer lingus flight from Dublin to Manchester about 10 years ago.

The plane landed and we were heading for the gate, what at first appeared to be smoke started appearing at the side of the ceiling ( sorry i'm sure there is a technical term )

At first I thought it was smoke but remember that smoke accumulates and steam dissapates so I reassured myself today was not my day.

But someone else shouted "jesus we're on fire...." and panic ensued, after a short while the pilot came on the wire to explain it was steam due to high humidity

Now in all my time flying as a pax i have never ever heard a pilot pro-acively explain this item.

I've only seen it 3 times,

good communication
 

Every word, facial expression and action of uniformed cabin crew shape the feeling inside an aircraft. A PA announcement would have gone a long way to avoiding the situation.

Way back in the 1990's Ansett New Zealand were flying Bae 146 fleet and marketing them under name of 'whisper jets'. The quiet operation of these planes leads to hydraulic/mechanical noises sounding very loud to passengers. This fact was part of pre-departure PA announcements to put minds at ease.

Hi All,

i find this thread very interesting indeed!
as an licenced engineer of a few years i have experiences from both sides.

i am a flyer but not a nervous passenger. i can however understand the concerns of nervous passengers during flights.
i would say to any nervous flyer to ask cabin crew about any item they are not happy about during the flight(but not at take off). there should be no such thing as a stupid question to the crew if the passenger thinks it involves the aircraft airworthiness. any crew that ignores a passenger(maybe it is an aircraft engineer on holidays) does so at their peril.

in my opinion the majority of cabin crew(in my airline anyway) have no idea what is normal or abnormal. i have been asked questions by crew which turn out to be normal events but never do i laugh or ridicule them for asking!! the worst thing would be for them to stop asking and hence stop learing about their aircraft.

i once had a passenger who claimed to be an engineer(cant remember which type) but she wouldnt leave her seat until she had talked to maintenance.
when i arrived she said their was a problem with the aircraft pressurisation because some ice had formed on the outer pane of her pax window.
i told her this was normal but i suppose she(been an engineer n all) thought i had no clue what i was talking about.

Just for the record
 

As a journalist I really couldn't let this one pass. I contacted the bmi press office where I was initially told they had heard of the thread on pprune but their operations department had no record of the incident so they could be of no further help.
I then contacted the Civil Aviation Authority Press Office. A press officer confirmed the incident had occurred. He said approximately 15 passengers were involved and moved forward as far as row three during the take-off roll.
He also confirmed some passengers were still standing when the aircraft became airborne but denied any passengers had been banging on the cockpit door.
The CAA report states passengers were reassured by cabin crew and the captain. It also said the flight proceeded without incident.
I went back to bmi where the press office conceded defeat and issued a statement giving more or less identical details. Their press officer also denied any passengers had reached the cockpit door.