FAA to be audited on cabin evacuation standards
Thread Starter
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Potomac Heights
Posts: 470
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
FAA to be audited on cabin evacuation standards
Evidently, the U.S. Department of Transportation (the FAA's parent) is going to evaluate the standards used by the FAA in certifying how quickly a plane can be evacuated. According to the article, there is a concern that as seat pitches have become tighter, and more pax are choosing to take their cabin luggage with them, that past tests of plane evacuation speeds may no longer be accurate. https://www.cnbc.com/2018/06/19/faa-...standards.html
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: San Jose
Posts: 727
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If I was behind some idiot retrieving carry-on then I'd be inclined to shove them back into their seat so those who'd rather get off can get past. If you want to take your baggage then wait until last.
The seat pitch one is definitely a valid point though, it's not nearly as easy to get out from a window seat with the narrow pitch spacing. Not so applicable to the US, but last time I was on Ryanair, their safety information was printed on the back of the seat in front rather than on a card, and my vision is such that it was way too close for me to be able to read.
The seat pitch one is definitely a valid point though, it's not nearly as easy to get out from a window seat with the narrow pitch spacing. Not so applicable to the US, but last time I was on Ryanair, their safety information was printed on the back of the seat in front rather than on a card, and my vision is such that it was way too close for me to be able to read.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Potomac Heights
Posts: 470
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
And I also hope the audit also considers the facts that pax have become heavier, more of them have limited mobility, and more pets (excuse me, service animals) are being brought into the cabin.
I travelled on one of the Australian domestic LCC airlines a few days back. An A320. First time I have flown for ten years. The flight was full and I had a window seat. The CA's did the best they could to stuff large carry on bags into the overhead lockers. That is no glamour job anymore, that's for sure. As a former airline pilot I can say for sure that there was absolutely no way a evacuation could be completed in the 90 second regulatory limit. I must admit I felt a moment of panic once I was stuffed into my window seat and realised I would be trapped if something went wrong. It didn't help when the CA gabbled the safety briefing into her microphone so fast that few would have comprehended what she said. There would be chaos as people would have struggled trying to lift themselves out of their seats. Obese passengers abounded. Window seat passengers would have no hope.
Last edited by Centaurus; 21st Jun 2018 at 14:42.
Join Date: Apr 2014
Location: Sweden
Posts: 56
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
When I fly some of the carriers in Europe, and especially with LCC, there is NO WAY an evacuation could be done in 90 seconds. Not with the kind of people on some of the flights... They seem to have no clue what flight they are on, where their seat is, where they're going, where to stuff their luggage. Sorry, but I don't trust those kind of people to contribute to a quick and effective evacuation if the situation would occur.
As for the seat pitching becoming tighter; it doesn't really help with smooth evacuations either.
As for the seat pitching becoming tighter; it doesn't really help with smooth evacuations either.
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: n/a
Posts: 1,425
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I think we need to stop fretting on the 90 second thing in the discussion. While 90 is the certification spec it has never been assumed that it can be achieved in normal operations with real passengers. The time allowed was originally 120 seconds, but in 1965 it was thought that newer slide designs would allow evacuation to be quicker and so 90 was selected. It doesn't really link to survivable cabin conditions or outcome studies. It's a bit like car fuel efficiency reports, a standardised way of assessing things but very different from real life.
That said I support a review of the standards with the changing demographic and physiology of travellers.
That said I support a review of the standards with the changing demographic and physiology of travellers.
I also see an increase in the number of passengers, including in the exit row, using noise cancelling headphones attached to their own devices during takeoff and landing; so unable to hear any announcements.
And some cabin crew don't know or don't care. I have posted this before:
KQ takeoff run
Last edited by double_barrel; 20th Jun 2018 at 13:58.
There is a wealth of information on the subject in a new RAeS specialist paper: https://www.aerosociety.com/publications/specialist-paper-emergency-evacuation-of-commercial-passenger-planes/
Cabin baggage is an issue but I think many of the problems come under the general heading of 'passenger behaviour'. Flying has now become so commonplace, and so safe, that people don't worry about their own safety and don't stop to consider the implications of their actions - though they will happily stop in the middle of an evacuation to get some juicy phone footage to boost their profiles on YoufTube or whatever.
I heard of one recent incident where a pax was removed from an exit row seat because they hadn't listened to the safety brief. If only more crews would do the same! Whenever I am in the cabin for departure I am always saddened to see how many pax ignore both the requests for them to pay attention and the briefings themselves. And for those who insist on removing their shoes before we have even left the gate, I always enjoy asking them how far they think they will be able to run barefoot through burning wreckage.
Cabin baggage is an issue but I think many of the problems come under the general heading of 'passenger behaviour'. Flying has now become so commonplace, and so safe, that people don't worry about their own safety and don't stop to consider the implications of their actions - though they will happily stop in the middle of an evacuation to get some juicy phone footage to boost their profiles on YoufTube or whatever.
I heard of one recent incident where a pax was removed from an exit row seat because they hadn't listened to the safety brief. If only more crews would do the same! Whenever I am in the cabin for departure I am always saddened to see how many pax ignore both the requests for them to pay attention and the briefings themselves. And for those who insist on removing their shoes before we have even left the gate, I always enjoy asking them how far they think they will be able to run barefoot through burning wreckage.
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: Rugged Island
Posts: 1
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
We all get hot under the collar over this issue, over baggage, over ‘behaviour’ (even when it can all be classified as ‘normal, human’), over people not watching what can be a god-awful and, to the passenger, meaningless, safety demo (the present BA one is trash and I refuse to pay attention to it for its interminable length).
Evacuations are not the rushes-to-death we consider them to be. They are generally benign events, or non-events.
Evacuations aren’t killing people. We can all afford to be rather more realistic and less precious.
Added to which, many of the tests generated unbelievable results in the first place. But that shouldn’t be a surprise to anyone who has realised that the most important thing in aviation is money.
The growing problems of obesity etc will become a matter of survival of the fittest if the chips are ever down - in the incredibly unlikely circumstances of a proper life-or-death evacuation, while making my escape I plan to show no quarter to those who’ve already given up on themselves. That said, I very rarely travel other than extremely close to an exit.
Why the DoT have a bee in their bonnet, I don’t know, but I guess others do. For the likely consequences, I refer you to the most important thing in aviation, above.
Evacuations are not the rushes-to-death we consider them to be. They are generally benign events, or non-events.
Evacuations aren’t killing people. We can all afford to be rather more realistic and less precious.
Added to which, many of the tests generated unbelievable results in the first place. But that shouldn’t be a surprise to anyone who has realised that the most important thing in aviation is money.
The growing problems of obesity etc will become a matter of survival of the fittest if the chips are ever down - in the incredibly unlikely circumstances of a proper life-or-death evacuation, while making my escape I plan to show no quarter to those who’ve already given up on themselves. That said, I very rarely travel other than extremely close to an exit.
Why the DoT have a bee in their bonnet, I don’t know, but I guess others do. For the likely consequences, I refer you to the most important thing in aviation, above.
You all realize of course that if they do change the rules, it won't be retro-active - currently certified aircraft would be unaffected. Even aircraft currently in development (e.g. 777X) would be unaffected because the cert basis is effectively frozen when the airframer makes the initial application (there is a five year limit - which can become a can of worms when there is a big delay such as happened on the 787).
In short, the first aircraft to be affected by any changes to the passenger evacuation standards hasn't been launched yet.
In short, the first aircraft to be affected by any changes to the passenger evacuation standards hasn't been launched yet.
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Connecticut, USA
Age: 64
Posts: 252
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I've said before and will say again - if airlines would stop charging thru the nose for every piece of checked luggage, passengers would not insist on bringing all their worldly possessions into the cabin with them. Much easier for the attendants, and safer as well.
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: Rugged Island
Posts: 1
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I've said before and will say again - if airlines would stop charging thru the nose for every piece of checked luggage, passengers would not insist on bringing all their worldly possessions into the cabin with them. Much easier for the attendants, and safer as well.
Join Date: Jun 2018
Location: SYDNEY, NSW
Posts: 7
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
This is less of a problem in the Middle East, where some pax are already standing in the aisle getting their hand carry down while the aircraft is still on final approach! Loud advice from cabin crew and other pax seems to have little effect.
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: San Jose
Posts: 727
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I've said before and will say again - if airlines would stop charging thru the nose for every piece of checked luggage, passengers would not insist on bringing all their worldly possessions into the cabin with them. Much easier for the attendants, and safer as well.
Perhaps what's needed is overhead bins with a central locking system so that they're locked from ten minutes before arrival (when all passengers should be seated anyway) until the seat-belt sign is switched off at the gate. That does then at least restrict people to taking whatever's under their seat and they may well have that in hand before it's their turn in the aisle.
They could be locked on departure until the seat belt sign is off too, there's always someone who gets up early.
I've previously advocated an improved safety video that shows 2 evacuation scenarios: (i) lots of people delay to grab luggage, half the pax get fried in the post-crash fire (could be done with dummies, obviously) and (ii) no-one grabs luggage and the last person leaves just as the fire takes hold. Hollywood could do a great job on this.
Delayed Evacuation
A common thread in delayed evacuations is that the flight crew is working checklists while unaware of deteriorating airframe and cabin conditions. Understandably the workload is very high after a reject or landing with single or multiple failures.
Video of the airframe and cabin would alert the cockpit to fire and smoke situations - that now remain blissfully out of their view - in time to initiate a successful evacuation.
Video of the airframe and cabin would alert the cockpit to fire and smoke situations - that now remain blissfully out of their view - in time to initiate a successful evacuation.
A common thread in delayed evacuations is that the flight crew is working checklists while unaware of deteriorating airframe and cabin conditions. Understandably the workload is very high after a reject or landing with single or multiple failures.
Video of the airframe and cabin would alert the cockpit to fire and smoke situations - that now remain blissfully out of their view - in time to initiate a successful evacuation.
Video of the airframe and cabin would alert the cockpit to fire and smoke situations - that now remain blissfully out of their view - in time to initiate a successful evacuation.
The alternative is a rushed evacuation which has its own concerns
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: UK
Posts: 3
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
For me it’s nothing to do with charges, it’s the totally unreasonable 30-45 minute wait in reclaim for the fekin things to turn up, if they ever do. As an industry we have comprehensively and institutionally forgotten to look after our passengers properly, and then we blame them for their perfectly understandable reaction to our incompetence..
So it all ends up in hand baggage.
Add on that the insurance companies will argue the toss endlessly if a high value item goes "missing" in the evacuation and subsequent return of the hand luggage back to the customer and you end up with the obvious result. That is unless the aircraft is actually disintegrating around them the passengers will take their hand luggage: end of story.
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Lichfield UK
Posts: 164
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
This is gonna be the big thing. Will the new tests replicate the amount of people stopping to take all their items with them?
I must say I did imagine if I were ever in the back during an evac I’d be quite vocally telling pax bag down get out with maybe a few stronger words scattered in there too..
The proven practice of some loco's separating families (in an attempt to extract more money in seat reservation fees) is in my view an issue that the regulator should also take a look at. It is a natural instinct that family members will want to ensure the safety of their children / partners and as such it has the potential to inhibit evacuation.
The alternative is a rushed evacuation which has its own concerns
https://app.ntsb.gov/pdfgenerator/Re...=HTML&IType=FA