4 x 4 BBC TV Programme on Air Safety
Thread Starter
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Horsham, England, UK. ---o--O--o---
Posts: 1,185
Received 4 Likes
on
2 Posts
4 x 4 BBC TV Programme on Air Safety
Being broadcasted tonight 23rd July at 1930 BBC1:-
4x4 New series in which four reporters offer different angles on a single issue beginning with air safety. Alan Whicker investigates traffic jams in the sky and goes in search of the worst bottlenecks, while John Stapleton reports on air rage and reveals astounding stories taken from a specially commissioned survey of airline staff. Kaye Adams finds out how safe airplane emergency exits are, testing the new narrower over-wing escape doors, and Denise Mahoney talks to pilots about the air routes they like to avoid, learning that flying over Africa to Kenya is a disquieting and isolated experience
4x4 New series in which four reporters offer different angles on a single issue beginning with air safety. Alan Whicker investigates traffic jams in the sky and goes in search of the worst bottlenecks, while John Stapleton reports on air rage and reveals astounding stories taken from a specially commissioned survey of airline staff. Kaye Adams finds out how safe airplane emergency exits are, testing the new narrower over-wing escape doors, and Denise Mahoney talks to pilots about the air routes they like to avoid, learning that flying over Africa to Kenya is a disquieting and isolated experience
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: london
Posts: 390
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Interesting program ,but its a shame the bbc never mentioned TICAS which is fitted to most modern aircraft fom the AIRBUS and BOEING stables.
BBC research let the side down here,otherwise quite interesting.
BBC research let the side down here,otherwise quite interesting.
Couldonlyaffordafiver
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: The Twilight Zone near 30W
Posts: 1,934
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Correct me if I'm wrong, but if you listen to the briefing from the cabin crew regarding the overwing exits - once opened, they should be thrown out of the opening, not passed back into the cabin!!!!
Perhaps this explains why they took so long evacuating during their tests.
If in doubt, read the instructions ......
(Bet the Daily Mail has something to say tomorrow)
Perhaps this explains why they took so long evacuating during their tests.
If in doubt, read the instructions ......
(Bet the Daily Mail has something to say tomorrow)
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: London
Posts: 94
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Interesting to know that someone somewhere thinks its a good idea to make it harder for passengers to leave in an emergency.
Apart from the glossy razzmattaz at the start, I thought the approach was pretty well balanced for such a time slot.
Some good points on alcohol and passenger aggression.
Apart from the glossy razzmattaz at the start, I thought the approach was pretty well balanced for such a time slot.
Some good points on alcohol and passenger aggression.
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: London
Posts: 94
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I get the point you're making airforcenone, but the point they were trying to make was the difficulty some passengers may have in a real emergency lifting the hatch and pushing it out of the aircraft. I've been on aircraft before where I think the passengers at the exit wouldn't have a hope in hell of lifting (or possibly even opening) the hatch.
Does anyone know the weight of the hatches?
Does anyone know the weight of the hatches?
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: London, England.
Posts: 13
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Interesting that they focused on the overwing exits to sensationalise.
In most evacuations the majority of passengers evacuate using the main doors through which one can evacuate more than twice the amount of passengers.
The overwings are secondary exits.
What about the advances that have been made like the overwing exits on the B737-800 where they simply open out and up with power assist and no help from the passenger apart from pulling the handle.
I have to agree that it is a vicious circle in terms of selling alcohol on board to make up the salary - a true but bold statement
which few have made before - at least whilst being actually employed by an airline.
And what was Alan Whicker on? Looking at the screens and seeing wait automatically means you are delayed! In most cases it reads "wait in lounge" which simply means that the gate is yet to become available and does not necessarily mean a delay, come on Alan don't get drawn into the sensationalism, notice the quick editing when he asked the gate agent about the delay - obviously there probably wasn't one.
Most dangerous destinations JFK and the likes of Gambia and Mombasa, I'm sure these are challenging to you guys up front, but they hardly account for the bulk of the traffic which operates safely from the UK every day.
Passengers that say "oh I'd be pleased to go without a drinks service" yeah right, ever tried operating a charter flight without offering a bar service - It doesn't go down that well, I can tell you.
I really expected more unbiased factual information from the BBC - silly me!
In most evacuations the majority of passengers evacuate using the main doors through which one can evacuate more than twice the amount of passengers.
The overwings are secondary exits.
What about the advances that have been made like the overwing exits on the B737-800 where they simply open out and up with power assist and no help from the passenger apart from pulling the handle.
I have to agree that it is a vicious circle in terms of selling alcohol on board to make up the salary - a true but bold statement
which few have made before - at least whilst being actually employed by an airline.
And what was Alan Whicker on? Looking at the screens and seeing wait automatically means you are delayed! In most cases it reads "wait in lounge" which simply means that the gate is yet to become available and does not necessarily mean a delay, come on Alan don't get drawn into the sensationalism, notice the quick editing when he asked the gate agent about the delay - obviously there probably wasn't one.
Most dangerous destinations JFK and the likes of Gambia and Mombasa, I'm sure these are challenging to you guys up front, but they hardly account for the bulk of the traffic which operates safely from the UK every day.
Passengers that say "oh I'd be pleased to go without a drinks service" yeah right, ever tried operating a charter flight without offering a bar service - It doesn't go down that well, I can tell you.
I really expected more unbiased factual information from the BBC - silly me!
And the way the lady journo deliberately left the overwing exit halfway in the hole to impede the first few after her to get out didn't go un-noticed.
Anything to improve the story.
Anything to improve the story.
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Luton
Posts: 140
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Dan Winterland. That was a rather poor comment you made about a journalist deliberately impeding the exists to improve a story. Let’s not forget Manchester, many people died because they could not get out of a burning jet that had come to a halt. 
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: err not tellin anymore
Posts: 161
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Airforcenone,
You hit another nail on the head there when you said "If you listen to the brief....Read the instructions"
How many pax these days actually bother to listen to the brief OR read the card? I bet the male pax that do watch the brief are only doing it to ogle the demonstrator!
Surely anything that highlights relevant safety issues is a good thing and I didn't think they were too sensational in that piece or the air rage bit.
And how many panacking pax in the caring sharing world we live in today would give a toss if they've blocked the exit with the door once they're outside, or am I being too cynical
Alan Whicker and the Africa bits were laughable though.
You hit another nail on the head there when you said "If you listen to the brief....Read the instructions"
How many pax these days actually bother to listen to the brief OR read the card? I bet the male pax that do watch the brief are only doing it to ogle the demonstrator!
Surely anything that highlights relevant safety issues is a good thing and I didn't think they were too sensational in that piece or the air rage bit.
And how many panacking pax in the caring sharing world we live in today would give a toss if they've blocked the exit with the door once they're outside, or am I being too cynical
Alan Whicker and the Africa bits were laughable though.
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: Brighton, Sussex, United Kingdom
Posts: 36
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It concerns me that according to the programme, that timed tests by the CAA of the evacuation of aircraft didn't include the removal of the door which seemed to take at least five-ten seconds, and increase the anxiety in the aircraft.
Quite a large proportion of the 90 second time limit.
Quite a large proportion of the 90 second time limit.
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: Edinburgh
Posts: 92
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I attended Cranfield as part of my ATC course.
We tried out the evacuation simulator. The overwing exit weighs about 20-25 kgs and has a tendency to fall in on the person releasing it.
They told us that they did do tests with the door in place and that in order to create a panic situation they employed students and gave £20 to the first 20 out of the aircraft.
They had to cut short those experiments though because of the amount of injuries, including broken bones that occured!!!
PS very disappointed with the program in general and Alan Whicker in particular. Lets face it 30 mins is not enough time to cover any one of these stories sufficientley , let alone all four of them.
[ 24 July 2001: Message edited by: Bagheera ]
We tried out the evacuation simulator. The overwing exit weighs about 20-25 kgs and has a tendency to fall in on the person releasing it.
They told us that they did do tests with the door in place and that in order to create a panic situation they employed students and gave £20 to the first 20 out of the aircraft.
They had to cut short those experiments though because of the amount of injuries, including broken bones that occured!!!
PS very disappointed with the program in general and Alan Whicker in particular. Lets face it 30 mins is not enough time to cover any one of these stories sufficientley , let alone all four of them.
[ 24 July 2001: Message edited by: Bagheera ]
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Gods Country
Posts: 187
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Also nothing said about how seating and cabin materials have changed since manchester...which should (hopefully) make a big difference nowadays. At least they didn't start in on smokehoods again 
Join Date: Dec 2000
Posts: 28
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I have to agree though, some of those overwing exits are very heavy.....and with a crush of people behind you trying to get out it becomes even harder to manoeuvre them, let alone throw them out of the hole as depicted on the safety briefs.
Join Date: Jul 2000
Posts: 53
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Why not make sure there is always a bloke sitting next to the hatch, preferably one 5'2" tall and built like a brick built sh**ehouse. This way you won't get any women causing mayhem as they disappear under the door. Lets face it boys the second your missus decides something's a tadge heavy to get out of the car boot it's down with the golfing weekly and mind your back isn't it?
Controversial, moi?
LTN Man
I think you will find that a few other factors were involved in the MAN tragedy. I recall in one of our SEP sessions being shown a video of interviews with the cabin crew on board that aircraft. I distinctly recall that many passengers sat still making no attempt to leave with the rear of the fuselage 'glowing red' around them.
I am sure that this can all be explained by a physchologist but the programme took a very superficial look at very complex subjects. Given the generally sensationalist and inaccurate broadcasting that is unfortunately the norm nowadays I didn't feel the programme was too outrageous.
I think you will find that a few other factors were involved in the MAN tragedy. I recall in one of our SEP sessions being shown a video of interviews with the cabin crew on board that aircraft. I distinctly recall that many passengers sat still making no attempt to leave with the rear of the fuselage 'glowing red' around them.
I am sure that this can all be explained by a physchologist but the programme took a very superficial look at very complex subjects. Given the generally sensationalist and inaccurate broadcasting that is unfortunately the norm nowadays I didn't feel the programme was too outrageous.
Senis Semper Fidelis
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: Lancashire U K
Posts: 1,288
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Greetings Ppruners,
Having just flown to and from Cyprus in a 2 month old 737 of Helios Airways, outbound I was lucky enough to sit at the row 15 which is were one of the o/wing exits are, the next one is row 16, good space enough for the average sized clumsy human to stumble out from, however on the flight back I was unlucky to be sat at row 24 which is a very (typical ) tight fit for my height 5ft9" but I would be able to get out quickley enough in the case of any problem(I think), but sat next to me at the window on row 24 was a very nice man from Liverpool, he was 6ft 3" and weighed 27 stone( 378lbs) he was so big that he was partialy on my seat squab, he was full of apologie's for his trespass onto my seat but said he had mentioned his size to the airline who had said sorry you will have to take pot luck with the seating, I can tell you this guy as nice as he was would have to sacrifice himself to let all others of in front of him first for he would not and I repeat NOT be able to get through the emergency exits on this type of A/C, I wonder if the designers ever thought of our larger humans, for it seems that subsequent generations are getting bigger all the time, personally speaking I feel that the safety of passengers should be the first and only priority in the A/C designers mind, for if it were not for Pax where would the profit come from in flights, certainly not freight.
The problem is we all get on aircraft and put up with the cattle truck conditions, how many of you reading this, write to complain about the tightness of your last seat on any A/C
Having just flown to and from Cyprus in a 2 month old 737 of Helios Airways, outbound I was lucky enough to sit at the row 15 which is were one of the o/wing exits are, the next one is row 16, good space enough for the average sized clumsy human to stumble out from, however on the flight back I was unlucky to be sat at row 24 which is a very (typical ) tight fit for my height 5ft9" but I would be able to get out quickley enough in the case of any problem(I think), but sat next to me at the window on row 24 was a very nice man from Liverpool, he was 6ft 3" and weighed 27 stone( 378lbs) he was so big that he was partialy on my seat squab, he was full of apologie's for his trespass onto my seat but said he had mentioned his size to the airline who had said sorry you will have to take pot luck with the seating, I can tell you this guy as nice as he was would have to sacrifice himself to let all others of in front of him first for he would not and I repeat NOT be able to get through the emergency exits on this type of A/C, I wonder if the designers ever thought of our larger humans, for it seems that subsequent generations are getting bigger all the time, personally speaking I feel that the safety of passengers should be the first and only priority in the A/C designers mind, for if it were not for Pax where would the profit come from in flights, certainly not freight.
The problem is we all get on aircraft and put up with the cattle truck conditions, how many of you reading this, write to complain about the tightness of your last seat on any A/C
