Swiss evacuates in Thessalonique
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Somewhere probing
Posts: 301
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Uhm, one might say that as a result of CabinCrew taking unilateral action to evacuate, as a result of witnessing a tail-pipe fire (if that indeed was what it was), they rather recklessly exceeded their reemit, in as much that most airlines only allow CabinCrew to order an evacuation if the situation is quite obviously 'catastrophic' - and there's the rub....... define catastrophic ?! ( and I'm afraid to report that, as alluded to above, some 'cabin safety specialists' 
are not clear about what is catastrophic and what is not ), e.g. and using words which mean something similar - how about: disastrous, calamitous, shattering, appalling, terrible, ruinous, tragic, cataclysmic - accordingly the definition of 'catastrophic' has been a mute point for a long time.
Now in this instance one can suppose they had not hit anything, they had not crashed, and the aircraft had not come apart, etc, so just what therefore was the justification to initiate an evacuation - was it really a 'catastrophic' situation ? Did the cabin crew really think it through, did the thought cross their mind that the flight crew might just indeed be 'working the problem' and need some time to do so, did they contact the flightdeck (whom maybe did not respond straight away because they were working the problem), or was it simply a case of blind panic ?
And before anybody says it, "yes, I do remember Manchester" - i.e. where burning fuel was pooling under the aircraft, smoke and flames were entering the cabin (which sounds kind of catastrophic to me).
Maybe a little perspective might help here too, e.g. the time from your first flying lesson to sitting in the LHS of an airliner is typically many (read, MANY) years because you need the experience and must be able to exhibit sound judgement before you're to be trusted with the lives of hundreds.
However (and I mean NO disrespect) the time it takes to train to become a No.1 / CSD / Purser with some airlines can be as quick as a few months, and you can take somebody off the street and train them to be CabinCrew in anything from 10 days to 6 weeks - and yet some people are proposing that this then provides them with the knowledge, experience and decision making skills to decide that it's better to be outside the aircraft than inside it ? Well not imho it doesn't.
Yes we are all part of a team, but there is an authority gradient and it's there for a good reason - however unfortunately (and again, imho) some have it in their head ( maybe from how they've been taught CRM and / or modern education ? ) that aboard the aircraft we are all 'equal' and that each has an equal say in how the aircraft is operated and can make decisions accordingly - wrong ! - and I can only surmise that some of the comments above promoting that CabinCrew can initiate an evacuation when it is not yet catastrophic are coming from people who have little or no real knowledge or understanding of airline(r) operations.
Plain and simple the way it should be done is that the Captain alone makes the decision to evacuate the aircraft and only in EXCEPTIONAL circumstances ( e.g. the aircraft is involved in a 'catastrophic' incident ) are the CabinCrew allowed to make the same decision off their own back.
Outside of that ( imho ) CabinCrew, engineers, ramp staff would all benefit from occasionally being included in our (six monthly) simulator refreshers - observing from the sim jumpseat - as it would then give them a chance to see that when things do go wrong (and they do) just what the timeline is between something happening, us recognising it, then resolving what to do about it, and actioning the plan ( i.e. applying DODAR ), as well as the need for accurate communications across the flight deck door ( which of course is now locked !
)
are not clear about what is catastrophic and what is not ), e.g. and using words which mean something similar - how about: disastrous, calamitous, shattering, appalling, terrible, ruinous, tragic, cataclysmic - accordingly the definition of 'catastrophic' has been a mute point for a long time.Now in this instance one can suppose they had not hit anything, they had not crashed, and the aircraft had not come apart, etc, so just what therefore was the justification to initiate an evacuation - was it really a 'catastrophic' situation ? Did the cabin crew really think it through, did the thought cross their mind that the flight crew might just indeed be 'working the problem' and need some time to do so, did they contact the flightdeck (whom maybe did not respond straight away because they were working the problem), or was it simply a case of blind panic ?
And before anybody says it, "yes, I do remember Manchester" - i.e. where burning fuel was pooling under the aircraft, smoke and flames were entering the cabin (which sounds kind of catastrophic to me).
Maybe a little perspective might help here too, e.g. the time from your first flying lesson to sitting in the LHS of an airliner is typically many (read, MANY) years because you need the experience and must be able to exhibit sound judgement before you're to be trusted with the lives of hundreds.
However (and I mean NO disrespect) the time it takes to train to become a No.1 / CSD / Purser with some airlines can be as quick as a few months, and you can take somebody off the street and train them to be CabinCrew in anything from 10 days to 6 weeks - and yet some people are proposing that this then provides them with the knowledge, experience and decision making skills to decide that it's better to be outside the aircraft than inside it ? Well not imho it doesn't.
Yes we are all part of a team, but there is an authority gradient and it's there for a good reason - however unfortunately (and again, imho) some have it in their head ( maybe from how they've been taught CRM and / or modern education ? ) that aboard the aircraft we are all 'equal' and that each has an equal say in how the aircraft is operated and can make decisions accordingly - wrong ! - and I can only surmise that some of the comments above promoting that CabinCrew can initiate an evacuation when it is not yet catastrophic are coming from people who have little or no real knowledge or understanding of airline(r) operations.
Plain and simple the way it should be done is that the Captain alone makes the decision to evacuate the aircraft and only in EXCEPTIONAL circumstances ( e.g. the aircraft is involved in a 'catastrophic' incident ) are the CabinCrew allowed to make the same decision off their own back.
Outside of that ( imho ) CabinCrew, engineers, ramp staff would all benefit from occasionally being included in our (six monthly) simulator refreshers - observing from the sim jumpseat - as it would then give them a chance to see that when things do go wrong (and they do) just what the timeline is between something happening, us recognising it, then resolving what to do about it, and actioning the plan ( i.e. applying DODAR ), as well as the need for accurate communications across the flight deck door ( which of course is now locked !
)
Last edited by Devils Advocate; 25th Jul 2002 at 07:48.
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Somewhere probing
Posts: 301
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
CRM = "Crew Resource Management", right ?! ( stemming from the previous Cockpit Resource Management - which was heavily orientated towards FlightDeck crew only - latterly adapted to include CabinCrew and others )
So Robo - one imagines that in the above you mean that the CabinCrew did not exhibit good CRM, i.e. being that they're part of the aircraft crew did they inform the FlightCrew that they were going to evacuate ? Were they talking on 121.6 to the fire brigade and the control tower about what the people outside the aircraft could see and were doing ? Just what coordination did they proffer towards helping coordinate the evacuation, other than telling the pax to get out ?
Perhaps to make the point, how about if when the cabin is too hot the cabin crew come in to the flight deck, help themselves to the overhead panel and start tinkering with the pneumatics and temperature controls ( and believe when I say that I have had first hand experience of that happening ! ) would you as a pilot think that was acceptable, and if not why not ? ( and I'm sure that you'll see where I'm gonna take this )
So Robo - one imagines that in the above you mean that the CabinCrew did not exhibit good CRM, i.e. being that they're part of the aircraft crew did they inform the FlightCrew that they were going to evacuate ? Were they talking on 121.6 to the fire brigade and the control tower about what the people outside the aircraft could see and were doing ? Just what coordination did they proffer towards helping coordinate the evacuation, other than telling the pax to get out ?
Perhaps to make the point, how about if when the cabin is too hot the cabin crew come in to the flight deck, help themselves to the overhead panel and start tinkering with the pneumatics and temperature controls ( and believe when I say that I have had first hand experience of that happening ! ) would you as a pilot think that was acceptable, and if not why not ? ( and I'm sure that you'll see where I'm gonna take this
)
Devils Advocate is quite right in his summary of the situation. Ordering an evacuation is about the biggest decision you will ever have to make in the left seat of an airliner, I can think of no circumstances in which the cabin crew should start an evacuation without first attempting to contact the Captain. If they try and fail to make contact due to a crash impact etc. then quite clearly they are on their own and must get on with what they think is best. The Swiss incident and one a few years ago in my own company clearly showed the fact that the cabin crew are not in a position to make that sort of decision in the vast majority of cases.
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: Uranus
Posts: 450
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Seriph,
I'm not going to cross swords with you - you do a good enough job of letting yourself down without me needing to help you..........
As 411A quite rightly said Devils Advocate summed it up nicely.
While we are discussing the matter however, would you care to elaborate on your comments regarding European cabin crew vs. the rest of the World? Also we are all waiting for your explanation of your reference to sobriety.
Do I need really ask why I'm suspect?
I'm not going to cross swords with you - you do a good enough job of letting yourself down without me needing to help you..........
As 411A quite rightly said Devils Advocate summed it up nicely.
While we are discussing the matter however, would you care to elaborate on your comments regarding European cabin crew vs. the rest of the World? Also we are all waiting for your explanation of your reference to sobriety.
Do I need really ask why I'm suspect?
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: UK
Posts: 105
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
On the contrary Devils Advocate…
The circumstances are far from clear in the Swiss incident – and I’m the first to agree that the inherently risky process of a ground evacuation might not have been appropriate in that particular instance. I also feel that the any decision to evacuate should involve the flight deck crew.
However, what concerned me was the tone the tone of a number of postings which seem to suggests that anyone rear of the flight deck have little to offer in helping to prevent accidents. Comments such as ….
‘Some cabin crew have strange ideas’
‘Many of the FA's I have noticed over the years did not know what time of day it was, let alone...what was 'fit’’
…suggest that some people are totally dismissive of any input that their cabin crew might make.
I consider myself very lucky, the back of my aircraft is patrolled by an Air Load Master who has received training which allows him to provide a good deal of useful input during emergencies. However, we also carry Air Stewards on occasions. These guys are really there to assist during ground evacuations and although trained to do this task they are generally lacking in flying experience. However, if either of these guys comes up on intercom I’d treat what they have to say seriously. Maybe with the Air Steward I might have to work harder to ascertain the exact nature or extent of a problem but his input could still avert an accident or incident. If people persist in creating a culture where cabin crew are expected to have no thoughts beyond serving lunch then that’s all they will do and a potential source of useful inputs will be lost - and hey, maybe some aircraft too.
The circumstances are far from clear in the Swiss incident – and I’m the first to agree that the inherently risky process of a ground evacuation might not have been appropriate in that particular instance. I also feel that the any decision to evacuate should involve the flight deck crew.
However, what concerned me was the tone the tone of a number of postings which seem to suggests that anyone rear of the flight deck have little to offer in helping to prevent accidents. Comments such as ….
‘Some cabin crew have strange ideas’
‘Many of the FA's I have noticed over the years did not know what time of day it was, let alone...what was 'fit’’
…suggest that some people are totally dismissive of any input that their cabin crew might make.
I consider myself very lucky, the back of my aircraft is patrolled by an Air Load Master who has received training which allows him to provide a good deal of useful input during emergencies. However, we also carry Air Stewards on occasions. These guys are really there to assist during ground evacuations and although trained to do this task they are generally lacking in flying experience. However, if either of these guys comes up on intercom I’d treat what they have to say seriously. Maybe with the Air Steward I might have to work harder to ascertain the exact nature or extent of a problem but his input could still avert an accident or incident. If people persist in creating a culture where cabin crew are expected to have no thoughts beyond serving lunch then that’s all they will do and a potential source of useful inputs will be lost - and hey, maybe some aircraft too.
ex-Tanker
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: Luton Beds UK
Posts: 907
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
So the lesson is...? If there is an unusual occurrance and if there is time, as there was in this case, contact the cockpit crew before taking any action.
An evac occurred on a Swissair MD-80 in CDG during pushback - much to the surprise of the cockpit crew - due to smoke from a ground vehicle entering the cabin and setting off the rear toilet smoke alarm, which was similar sounding to the evac signal fitted at that time.
Following that incident, the books were revised as to definition of when the cabin crew could initiate an evac. on ground - including the stipulation that the aircraft stand still, as well as the catastrophic points (ditching, severe damage and explosive fire) mentioned above. At that time the tailpipe fire was even taught as an example for not evacuating.
Time passes, people change and history repeats itself unfortunately.
An evac occurred on a Swissair MD-80 in CDG during pushback - much to the surprise of the cockpit crew - due to smoke from a ground vehicle entering the cabin and setting off the rear toilet smoke alarm, which was similar sounding to the evac signal fitted at that time.
Following that incident, the books were revised as to definition of when the cabin crew could initiate an evac. on ground - including the stipulation that the aircraft stand still, as well as the catastrophic points (ditching, severe damage and explosive fire) mentioned above. At that time the tailpipe fire was even taught as an example for not evacuating.
Time passes, people change and history repeats itself unfortunately.
Guest
Posts: n/a
I get a bit worried when I read some of the posts frm CC on this forum.
I have a PPL, several hundred hours and over 20 hours in seriously run jet sim sessions, including simmed engine fires etc.
Also, I have flown regularly ince 1976, logging thousands of hours as pax and seeing a few "unusual " occurences.
In the back of a airliner, unless the wing was ablaze to an extent where it was about to fall off, I would find it very difficult to judge whether an evacuation was required - I simply do not have the level of training, systems understanding or experience.
With the very greatest of respect to CC, whom I respect for their knowledge of cabin procedures and generally very professional approach, I doubt that they would be in a better position than I.
So it seems, from the perspective of this regular SLF (and thus some part contributor to airline coffers), that the command authority should reside in the flightdeck with the people who are trained on the systems and have the experience to make the right decisions.
This is in no way meant to demean CC, who have an important part to play in the team, especially in feedng information to flightdeck, but it seems to me that as a rule of thumb that the captain should make the calls about evacuations.
I have a PPL, several hundred hours and over 20 hours in seriously run jet sim sessions, including simmed engine fires etc.
Also, I have flown regularly ince 1976, logging thousands of hours as pax and seeing a few "unusual " occurences.
In the back of a airliner, unless the wing was ablaze to an extent where it was about to fall off, I would find it very difficult to judge whether an evacuation was required - I simply do not have the level of training, systems understanding or experience.
With the very greatest of respect to CC, whom I respect for their knowledge of cabin procedures and generally very professional approach, I doubt that they would be in a better position than I.
So it seems, from the perspective of this regular SLF (and thus some part contributor to airline coffers), that the command authority should reside in the flightdeck with the people who are trained on the systems and have the experience to make the right decisions.
This is in no way meant to demean CC, who have an important part to play in the team, especially in feedng information to flightdeck, but it seems to me that as a rule of thumb that the captain should make the calls about evacuations.
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: western europe
Posts: 1,367
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
L1011 ..........
A summary on this incident is noted in the following link ...
http://www.airdisaster.com/special/special-sa163.shtml
http://www.airdisaster.com/special/special-sa163.shtml
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: Arizona USA
Posts: 8,571
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Lets face facts.
Cabin crew should stick to slinging the hash, serving the necessary liquid refreshments...and stop thinking they are "in charge". If they want to be constructive, then use the interphone.
Far too many CC have in their brains(?) the thought that they "know" far more then the tech crew about "items technical".
Many I suspect are frustrated in their positions...but they will just have to "get over it". In doing so, they would make everyones duties more enjoyable.
Cabin crew should stick to slinging the hash, serving the necessary liquid refreshments...and stop thinking they are "in charge". If they want to be constructive, then use the interphone.
Far too many CC have in their brains(?) the thought that they "know" far more then the tech crew about "items technical".
Many I suspect are frustrated in their positions...but they will just have to "get over it". In doing so, they would make everyones duties more enjoyable.
Last edited by 411A; 26th Jul 2002 at 02:36.
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: uk
Posts: 168
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Yep and I bet that if he were a pax on the Saudi 1011 he would have sat quietly and burned while the cabin crew did the same because the 'Gods' up front weren't with it. 3 Greens, stick to your Cessna leave professional aviation to those who do it. Senior cabin crew are not imbeciles, they've been around awhile. Those who query my comments ao sobriety, I meant the flight deck.
Guest
Posts: n/a
Seriph
You demonstrate why others on this forum treat you with little respect.
I do not fly a Cessna for your information, but you probably do not have the wit to realise that the Cessna company are the worlds largest manufacturer of business jet aircraft and therefore your childish term of derision is as misplaced as your attitude.
As for the L1011 incident, that happended in the last century and lessons were learned.
As made clear in my post, I have a high regard for cabin crew doing the job that they are trained for. I never indicated that they are imbeciles and I know from working at a major airline that many cabin crew are highly intelligent and qualified people.
You demonstrate why others on this forum treat you with little respect.
I do not fly a Cessna for your information, but you probably do not have the wit to realise that the Cessna company are the worlds largest manufacturer of business jet aircraft and therefore your childish term of derision is as misplaced as your attitude.
As for the L1011 incident, that happended in the last century and lessons were learned.
As made clear in my post, I have a high regard for cabin crew doing the job that they are trained for. I never indicated that they are imbeciles and I know from working at a major airline that many cabin crew are highly intelligent and qualified people.
Keeping Danny in Sandwiches
Join Date: May 1999
Location: UK
Age: 76
Posts: 1,294
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Seriph,
Some years ago a British company wanted to make the Purser in command if the Captain was incapacitated. Luckily good sense prevailed when the CAA refused to allow it. You sound as if you come from that same school of thought. Your Profile carries no clue but your threads do.
Some years ago a British company wanted to make the Purser in command if the Captain was incapacitated. Luckily good sense prevailed when the CAA refused to allow it. You sound as if you come from that same school of thought. Your Profile carries no clue but your threads do.
Arrogance!!
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: Arizona USA
Posts: 8,571
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
sweety
The regulatory authorities, the companies and the flying public KNOW who is in charge...and it ain't the cabin crew, so get used to it.
If you want tech advise, use the interphone...you know, that item on the bulkhead by the door that looks like a telephone.. 
The regulatory authorities, the companies and the flying public KNOW who is in charge...and it ain't the cabin crew, so get used to it.
If you want tech advise, use the interphone...you know, that item on the bulkhead by the door that looks like a telephone..
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Kagerplassen
Posts: 223
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Those FAs with brains are able to know if the plane just crashed, or if the flight crew is well able to observe and to act. Don't forget an evacuation is a procedure which usually causes a lot of injures, which can and should be prevented if possible.
The example 411A keeps referring to in several threads on the PPRUNE forum, from his own experience, shows a lot about why contact with the flight crew is important.
The diversity amongst cabin crew is gigantic, I've flown with the best professionals, but I have to admit, with the dummest on earth as well.
In the Lufthansa A320 rwy-overrun-accident in Warsaw the cabin crew initiated the evacuation, and saved the life of one cockpitmember by doing so. Those FAs used their possibility of initiating the evacuation in the right moment, namely where the flight crew both are incapacitated and there is an imminent danger to the lives on board.
If you see flames coming from an engine, while I'm in the cockpit, alive and kickin', PLEASE call us over interphone! It is possible we are not aware of flames coming from the engine, and also it is possible we are aware, but due to several reasons one single FA in the back will never be able to know from his/her position, decide not to evacuate. Maybe we want to taxi forward, maybe we already solved the problem and the fire will extinguish, maybe the fire crew is already standing next to us?
Sweety, 411A's tone in his posts might not be very friendly towards cabin crew, but the point he is making is very valid:
P77
The example 411A keeps referring to in several threads on the PPRUNE forum, from his own experience, shows a lot about why contact with the flight crew is important.
The diversity amongst cabin crew is gigantic, I've flown with the best professionals, but I have to admit, with the dummest on earth as well.
In the Lufthansa A320 rwy-overrun-accident in Warsaw the cabin crew initiated the evacuation, and saved the life of one cockpitmember by doing so. Those FAs used their possibility of initiating the evacuation in the right moment, namely where the flight crew both are incapacitated and there is an imminent danger to the lives on board.
If you see flames coming from an engine, while I'm in the cockpit, alive and kickin', PLEASE call us over interphone! It is possible we are not aware of flames coming from the engine, and also it is possible we are aware, but due to several reasons one single FA in the back will never be able to know from his/her position, decide not to evacuate. Maybe we want to taxi forward, maybe we already solved the problem and the fire will extinguish, maybe the fire crew is already standing next to us?
Sweety, 411A's tone in his posts might not be very friendly towards cabin crew, but the point he is making is very valid:
If they want to be constructive, then use the interphone.
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: Uranus
Posts: 450
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Seriph,
Hello - is there anybody there??
Either you are a deliberate wind-up merchant or just plain stupid or both.
The utter bollo*ks you talk is quite amazing - you refer to "the gods up front" and say things like " leave professional aviation to those who do it", what planet are you from?
What exactly are you implying when referring to "flight deck sobriety".
As I said last time - Tailscrape described you very well...........airhead.
Hello - is there anybody there??
Either you are a deliberate wind-up merchant or just plain stupid or both.
The utter bollo*ks you talk is quite amazing - you refer to "the gods up front" and say things like " leave professional aviation to those who do it", what planet are you from?
What exactly are you implying when referring to "flight deck sobriety".
As I said last time - Tailscrape described you very well...........airhead.
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Kagerplassen
Posts: 223
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
My guess is Seriph is serving drinks all day, waiting for his moment of fame, where the flight crew is drunk (again 
), crashes a plane and he becomes the hero of the passengers, when bravely leading them over the flamefilled apron.
), crashes a plane and he becomes the hero of the passengers, when bravely leading them over the flamefilled apron.