Lauda 320 UK report
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: uk
Age: 74
Posts: 119
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The only way to stop passengers evacuating with their carry-on baggage is to make them check it in. The majority of airlines now offer 'Hand-baggage only' fares so the consumer thinks he can get a better deal by carrying a smaller suitcase onboard. This behaviour is completely driven by commercial considerations and is patently to the detriment of Flight Safety.
Join Date: Aug 2016
Location: Scotland
Posts: 21
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Thank you A 37575 for a very interesting article on night vision: first time I ever flew (1979, Air Malta) cabin lights were dimmed for a few minutes before, and maybe 1 minute after, takeoff; explained to passengers that it was to maintain night vision. Flew KLM Schipol - Gla a few years ago, and while taxying, cabin lights were dimmed and turned to full power a few seconds later (and perhaps 5 min before takeoff) - don't think cabin crew had any idea of why they were doing it ! Seems it's a waste of time anyway, and with today's a/c equipped with floor emergency lighting, is unnecessary. Was interested to learn about 20 min adjustment to "full" night vision - implications for crew on a ship's bridge.
I know most of the pax don't have the experience of incident reports that posters here do, but the follow-up of "leave your bags behind" has been regularly subject to adverse comment by those who have followed the regulations, which of course the investigators never report on, it being left to the general media. Instead of returning items as a matter of priority, investigating authorities have this "touch nothing till we all come" attitude which leads to possessions, correctly left behind, being inaccessible for days, for no purpose. Car keys to drive home, car park tickets, passports, credit cards, money, all that. Eventual recovery has the items "lost" (no surprise there, especially the valuable ones), returned way after the event, etc. Sure, you should have these on the person, and normally you would, but as security in departures has likely just made you take all this stuff out of your pockets and put it into your laptop bag, there's generally a good proportion still there.
Two recent major evacuations had major criticisms of all this, including passengers being left with no means to continue their own journey. It's especially bad at outstations with just a handling agent, but happens at main hubs as well. The pax from the BA evacuation at Las Vegas were taken to hotels, on BA's account, but those unable to produce a credit card, left behind in the aircraft, for the slightest incidentals on top they might use were given the bum's rush in no uncertain terms by standard US hotel check-in procedures. And you try and board the replacement aircraft with no passport ...
Two recent major evacuations had major criticisms of all this, including passengers being left with no means to continue their own journey. It's especially bad at outstations with just a handling agent, but happens at main hubs as well. The pax from the BA evacuation at Las Vegas were taken to hotels, on BA's account, but those unable to produce a credit card, left behind in the aircraft, for the slightest incidentals on top they might use were given the bum's rush in no uncertain terms by standard US hotel check-in procedures. And you try and board the replacement aircraft with no passport ...
Join Date: Apr 2019
Location: EDSP
Posts: 334
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Very sensible comment. Stuck in a country where every employee - even at a coffee bar - has to follow processes with the flexibility of a drilled monkey, without existence defining credit card or social security number and passport, that's a perspective. Do also include prescription medicine, which is hard to replace within hours and will cost a fortune in fees for a consultancy you will not get without credit card ...
WHBM, That’s a fair point. Personally, I always keep phone, wallet and passport in my pocket for that reason. Some people would also be very reluctant to abandon required medicines.
For those without pockets, perhaps an approved very small grab bag could be defined. Maybe explicitly advising that as part of the passenger brief would act as a reminder to leave everything else behind in case of an evacuation?
For those without pockets, perhaps an approved very small grab bag could be defined. Maybe explicitly advising that as part of the passenger brief would act as a reminder to leave everything else behind in case of an evacuation?
"Mildly" Eccentric Stardriver
I do the same as double_barrel. However, back in about '07 there was a security alert in UK which resulted in all possessions going into the hold. I was travelling with just hand-luggage, but that, including car keys and phone, had to go in the hold. We were allowed to retain only wallets and passports. If that bag had been lost (and remember, this was applying to ALL UK departures), I would have ended up at destination without the keys for the car, which was in the park. Also, no phone to call my wife to collect me. Stuff of nightmare. Luckily the bag arrived safely, but it had been a worrying flight.
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: UK
Posts: 546
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Whilst there is always a price to pay for convenience, would you be happy to state to a fatal aircraft investigation board that your convenience was more important than the lives lost of the people sat behind you, lives lost because you needed your carry on from the overhead bin? Or would you be happy telling the family of a deceased passenger that their loved one died because you didn't want the inconvenience of checking in to a hotel without a credit card? The answer will determine what kind of person you are, and what kind of world you wish to live in. I know where I stand and I vote for lockable overhead bins.
"Mildly" Eccentric Stardriver
asdf1234. IF you read my post, you would see that I do the same as double_barrel. That is, I have my wallet, passport, keys and phone in my pockets, so I DO NOT have to remove anything from the overhead bin. My post concerned the day that even car keys and phone could not be carried on board, even in pockets. Next time, please read before ranting.
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: UK
Posts: 546
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
HEROD - I don't rant here, ever. My comments were not directed at you, witness my comments about checking in to a US hotel which you had not referred to in your post. I reply to the last comment as I find it hard to find the "Reply to thread" button.
Join Date: Apr 2019
Location: EDSP
Posts: 334
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Nobody said he/she would behave like that in case of emergency.
We would only see reasons why people would behave like that beyond pure dumbness.
Regarding my personal philosophy... I always used to have my passport only on the body, however I definetily approve that I would most likely be shelterless in some parts of the world without CC, so I'll add one in future - the whole wallet would be to cumbersome.
Not needing medication, I see this as a big issue, though. You can see the amount some people carry at security check. I can see why people would not want to leave without.
We would only see reasons why people would behave like that beyond pure dumbness.
Regarding my personal philosophy... I always used to have my passport only on the body, however I definetily approve that I would most likely be shelterless in some parts of the world without CC, so I'll add one in future - the whole wallet would be to cumbersome.
Not needing medication, I see this as a big issue, though. You can see the amount some people carry at security check. I can see why people would not want to leave without.
Whilst there is always a price to pay for convenience, would you be happy to state to a fatal aircraft investigation board that your convenience was more important than the lives lost of the people sat behind you, lives lost because you needed your carry on from the overhead bin? Or would you be happy telling the family of a deceased passenger that their loved one died because you didn't want the inconvenience of checking in to a hotel without a credit card? The answer will determine what kind of person you are, and what kind of world you wish to live in. I know where I stand and I vote for lockable overhead bins.
Regarding your big bunch of house keys, a standard evacuation briefing is to "remove sharp objects from your pockets as they may tear the slide". Now apart from the fact that genuinely sharp objects were banned by security from about 50 years ago, what can this apply to other than such keys. And yet there is a desire among the aviation-knowledgeable above to have them with you. Incidentally, being aware of the heavyweight structure of such slides, has anyone ever known them to be torn by possessions. "Remove high heeled shoes" is another one. What provision is made to continue walking afterwards.
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: UK
Posts: 546
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
EASA action
The AAIB report reminds us that "CS-25.80312 requires that all passengers and crew can be evacuated within 90 seconds." and that the EASA "...stated that emergency evacuations had also been captured as a candidate
safety issue within their safety risk portfolio for commercial air transport (fixed wing)...".
The AAIB Safety Recommendation to include carry-on luggage in the CS.25 timed evacuation will show that aircraft can no longer be evacuated in 90 seconds due to pax behaviour.
Let's hope the EASA are quick to act.
safety issue within their safety risk portfolio for commercial air transport (fixed wing)...".
The AAIB Safety Recommendation to include carry-on luggage in the CS.25 timed evacuation will show that aircraft can no longer be evacuated in 90 seconds due to pax behaviour.
Let's hope the EASA are quick to act.
Join Date: Sep 2018
Location: Yorkshire
Posts: 255
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I agree with a lot of the posters here that the "passport, wallet and phone in your pockets" is good enough, leave the rest.
However, I spoke to someone yesterday who said they don't have pockets that would carry all that so would have to carry off a small bag... I suggested that that would result in one hand being occupied holding it and not available to help themselves if really needed. My suggestion was a 'waist belt' for those things to which the answer was "but they're not comfortable" so my answer was "Wear it for take-off and landing and have it off for the rest of the time", which was taken as a good suggestion.
Regarding
... people should do some thinking for themselves. Do they have appropriate footwear for any evacuation? We always wear our hiking boots onto a flight rather than pack bulky items like that, but we don't wear them for the whole flight -- however they stay fully laced up until comfortably after take-off and are laced up again well before landing, just in case we need to get out in a hurry. I cannot understand people who are only in their bare or stocking-ed feet for take off and landing, how are they going to run away from the aeroplane with possible broken bits around? Like that lady in the high heels...
People do need to think for themselves.
It is time that a prosecuting authority took to prosecuting everyone who leaves an evacuated aircraft with hand baggage. The legal situation should be absolutely clear cut and some highly publicised prosecutions with severe penalties are needed to get the message home.
However, I spoke to someone yesterday who said they don't have pockets that would carry all that so would have to carry off a small bag... I suggested that that would result in one hand being occupied holding it and not available to help themselves if really needed. My suggestion was a 'waist belt' for those things to which the answer was "but they're not comfortable" so my answer was "Wear it for take-off and landing and have it off for the rest of the time", which was taken as a good suggestion.
Regarding
"Remove high heeled shoes" is another one. What provision is made to continue walking afterwards.
People do need to think for themselves.
It is time that a prosecuting authority took to prosecuting everyone who leaves an evacuated aircraft with hand baggage. The legal situation should be absolutely clear cut and some highly publicised prosecutions with severe penalties are needed to get the message home.
The AAIB report reminds us that "CS-25.80312 requires that all passengers and crew can be evacuated within 90 seconds." and that the EASA "...stated that emergency evacuations had also been captured as a candidate
safety issue within their safety risk portfolio for commercial air transport (fixed wing)...".
safety issue within their safety risk portfolio for commercial air transport (fixed wing)...".
P124 & P297.
Join Date: Apr 2019
Location: EDSP
Posts: 334
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Regarding... people should do some thinking for themselves. Do they have appropriate footwear for any evacuation? We always wear our hiking boots onto a flight rather than pack bulky items like that, but we don't wear them for the whole flight -- however they stay fully laced up until comfortably after take-off and are laced up again well before landing, just in case we need to get out in a hurry. I cannot understand people who are only in their bare or stocking-ed feet for take off and landing, how are they going to run away from the aeroplane with possible broken bits around? Like that lady in the high heels...
However as long as people can be seen climbing mountains in flip-flops, and a certain type of female business traveller is on board -
this is not going to happen.
It is time that a prosecuting authority took to prosecuting everyone who leaves an evacuated aircraft with hand baggage. The legal situation should be absolutely clear cut and some highly publicised prosecutions with severe penalties are needed to get the message home.
However it's still not going to help. Evacuations are fortunately rare events and if they happen SLF will have all different things in their heads but not the criminal code of some country they might be accidentally visiting. So beyond retalliation nothing is gained.
Anyway. This incident was not a real emergency evacuation but erroneous one, initiated by a rogue trolley dolly. Devil's advocate asking, if that changes anything? What about refusing to leave the plane while an engine is still running - and no fire apperent. Would't that be sensible?
Before we get too deep in redesigning rules and regulations. Just remember that people pay for a cheap ride with similar comfort to a bus or train when taken in total. Except they get there faster. It isn't a case of being stupid as it's more like their freedom for their idea of comfort. Just nobody buys a ticket to experience a carnival ride with a rough ending
So you're not about to change people when it comes to less comfort for the price
So you're not about to change people when it comes to less comfort for the price
Regarding... people should do some thinking for themselves. Do they have appropriate footwear for any evacuation? ... People do need to think for themselves ... It is time that a prosecuting authority took to prosecuting everyone who leaves an evacuated aircraft with hand baggage.
