4 x 4 BBC TV Programme on Air Safety
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: RAF Lincolnshire
Posts: 111
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
During our annual safety training and dingy drills we were told at one point that some airlines have a policy on who gets to sit next to exits.
The theory was to put young fit single blokes next to all exits if possible. The reason was they will think only of themselves, so will want to get out fast. People traveling with a partner or family will try to put them first. Their priority will not be to open the door and get out come what may.
Does any one know if some airlines still have this policy? We did hear that some had to stop it due to the PC lobby, Discrimination on gender, size etc?
Personaly I prefer a full 4 or 5 point harness, or if not available, at least to have a rear facing seat. Then if we do come into sudden contact with the gound, then at least I have a chance of getting out, and not stuck in what is left of my seat with broken shins, knees and arms, with a very sore head! Oh forgot, costs money dosnt it for the slightly larger rear seats!
The theory was to put young fit single blokes next to all exits if possible. The reason was they will think only of themselves, so will want to get out fast. People traveling with a partner or family will try to put them first. Their priority will not be to open the door and get out come what may.
Does any one know if some airlines still have this policy? We did hear that some had to stop it due to the PC lobby, Discrimination on gender, size etc?
Personaly I prefer a full 4 or 5 point harness, or if not available, at least to have a rear facing seat. Then if we do come into sudden contact with the gound, then at least I have a chance of getting out, and not stuck in what is left of my seat with broken shins, knees and arms, with a very sore head! Oh forgot, costs money dosnt it for the slightly larger rear seats!
"The theory was to put young fit single blokes next to all exits if possible"
I was recently on a BA 737 and was asked to change places so that I could sit next to the emergency exit. Gosh, does that mean that BA class me as "young AND fit"? I feel better already.
I was recently on a BA 737 and was asked to change places so that I could sit next to the emergency exit. Gosh, does that mean that BA class me as "young AND fit"? I feel better already.
There is no doubt that rearward facing seats offer safety benefits over forward facing, however with the crash loads being taken by the backrest and thus through the rear feet (although they would be facing forward) the mass of the seat would increase significantly, thus hugely damaging payload for the aircraft. Furthermore the cost of the seat would increase significantly. FYI an average price of a triple seat, no IFE and cloth covers is around £2700 each.
I recently enjoyed a BA flight to Hog Kong and sat in a window seat in J class. This seat faces aft and I must say I found it strange to sit with my back to the engine, and, even in level flight feel like I'm being tipped out of my seat. The climb was something else entirely. I don't believe that the travelling public would take to aft facing accomodation one bit....It'd cost more to travel and ultimately be less comfortable.
[ 24 July 2001: Message edited by: Plane Speaker ]
I recently enjoyed a BA flight to Hog Kong and sat in a window seat in J class. This seat faces aft and I must say I found it strange to sit with my back to the engine, and, even in level flight feel like I'm being tipped out of my seat. The climb was something else entirely. I don't believe that the travelling public would take to aft facing accomodation one bit....It'd cost more to travel and ultimately be less comfortable.
[ 24 July 2001: Message edited by: Plane Speaker ]
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: uk
Posts: 44
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Moschops:
>Let's not forget the Riyadh L-1011 either. <
What possible relevance has that got to do with this discussion. The aircraft was still pressurised. NOBODY could open ANY door.
>Let's not forget the Riyadh L-1011 either. <
What possible relevance has that got to do with this discussion. The aircraft was still pressurised. NOBODY could open ANY door.
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: Brighton, Sussex, United Kingdom
Posts: 36
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Refering to Bagheera's comment,
If in the TESTS the removal of O/W doors caused too many injuries to escaping students (winning £20 = many pints), shouldn't that have suggested that these doors would cause problems?
Without being an expert in A/C door design, it occurs to me that perhaps the doors might work better if they opened outwards -the other ones do! (I do know about the fuselage effectively being a pressure chamber etc.)
[edited to correct smelling pistakes]
[ 24 July 2001: Message edited by: weetabix ]
If in the TESTS the removal of O/W doors caused too many injuries to escaping students (winning £20 = many pints), shouldn't that have suggested that these doors would cause problems?
Without being an expert in A/C door design, it occurs to me that perhaps the doors might work better if they opened outwards -the other ones do! (I do know about the fuselage effectively being a pressure chamber etc.)
[edited to correct smelling pistakes]
[ 24 July 2001: Message edited by: weetabix ]
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: Englands newest City
Posts: 104
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I see nobody has picked up on the distance between seats at the overwing exit. I personaly think it is too narrow and the door is unwieldy and heavy especially for a slightly built female(thats not meant to be sexist). Increase the seat pitch and either have exits that open outwards like maindoors or have open assist that clears the opening 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Posts: 130
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
just a couple of points.
1. Good to see Alan Whicker on the box again (this bloke has class), but I think that this was a totally inappropriate vehicle for him. He is a travel/lifestyle/human interest reporter and NOT an air transport industry expert. I think he was just presenting the material given to him, shallow and partly incorrect as it was.
2. Although serving alcohol on flights is no doubt a contributory factor with "air rage" incidents, the occurance of these events started to increase significantly when a lot of the airlines started to ban smoking on their services. How many of the "culprits" involved are smokers I wonder, suffering anxiety and withdrawal symptoms because they are prohibited from lighting up?
1. Good to see Alan Whicker on the box again (this bloke has class), but I think that this was a totally inappropriate vehicle for him. He is a travel/lifestyle/human interest reporter and NOT an air transport industry expert. I think he was just presenting the material given to him, shallow and partly incorrect as it was.
2. Although serving alcohol on flights is no doubt a contributory factor with "air rage" incidents, the occurance of these events started to increase significantly when a lot of the airlines started to ban smoking on their services. How many of the "culprits" involved are smokers I wonder, suffering anxiety and withdrawal symptoms because they are prohibited from lighting up?
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Luton
Posts: 140
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Want to know what it is really like for passengers trying to get out of a burning aircraft then read the Air Accident report on Manchester at http://www.aaib.dtlr.gov.uk/formal/gbgjl/gbgjl.htm
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: London
Posts: 94
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
vfrpilotpb and others have raised interesting points, especially how likely it is that an aircraft would be evacuated quickly.
It seems that the airline companies themselves will only take notice if another manchester accident takes place.
I cannot fathom the mentality that says, "if we increase exits/room at exit rows tickets will cost more" I mean, jesus christ - just do it. What would it mean, an extra 10-20 quid to give everyone on an aircraft a fighting chance to get off. If it is true that the space on wing exit rows is to be decreased, then I believe TV comapnies have every right (and my blessing) to be as sensationalist as possible. The stupidity behind such a move would be truly stunning.
As I've said before, it will be interesting watching a full charter config A380 evacuate.
As other have said, good to see Mr whicker again - a real travel journalist. Class.
It seems that the airline companies themselves will only take notice if another manchester accident takes place.
I cannot fathom the mentality that says, "if we increase exits/room at exit rows tickets will cost more" I mean, jesus christ - just do it. What would it mean, an extra 10-20 quid to give everyone on an aircraft a fighting chance to get off. If it is true that the space on wing exit rows is to be decreased, then I believe TV comapnies have every right (and my blessing) to be as sensationalist as possible. The stupidity behind such a move would be truly stunning.
As I've said before, it will be interesting watching a full charter config A380 evacuate.
As other have said, good to see Mr whicker again - a real travel journalist. Class.
