Thanks Wiggy
 

Thanks for that link. But I think its instructive to go back to the thread here on pprune, because you will see much of the same attitudes then as are expressed here, except what is interesting is that passengers who decided to intervene and take charge of their own destiny were slagged off as cretins, even though their grasp of the seriousness of the situation was better than the CC's.
sf

How do you come to that conclusion? The cabin crew were evacuating the passengers, before themselves, from a potentially deadly situation. Some of the passengers were trying to stop the evacuation from happening.

If their grasp of the situation was better than the cabin crew then what on earth were the trying to accomplish. Manslaughter?

Running in
 

Clearly you have not said your piece so why say so ?

Clearly you have decided that no matter what the airline is totally responsible for tha actions of all the passengers and that absolves the passengers from all responsabiltity.

My stance is that the passengers should be provided with the means and information to get them off the aircraft should an emergency situation arise, as four cabin crew can't be expected to personally escort 180 passengers to the exit individually it stands to reason that the passengers have to at least listen to the safety briefing to ensure their personal safety.

You seem to have nothing constructive to say and all you do say is just negative, dispite a number of people from within the industry making constructive comments, so other people on this forum can see why I think that you are just another troll.

If you want me and others to amend. their opinions you need to become reasonable, constructive and practical.

Swordfish41,

I may not have been very clear. What I meant was that before working on the 737, I had never noticed that there was no slide from the over wing exit rather than that I didn't actually realise that until reading this thread. As I said, it is easy to forget that while we know the characteristics of the particular types we operate on inside out, it is sometimes easy to forget that for many passengers the aircraft is an alien environment. What may seem obvious to us after years of familiarity, isn't to them.

With regards the evacuation, I said that we are responsible for giving them the information they need to help get themselves out of the aircraft. That doesn't mean that we just open the door and lead the way down the slide, tempting though that may be. It means that in certain circumstances, if they are getting into trouble towards the centre of the aircraft for example, while we are evacuating other passengers at the doors, we might not even be able to get to them in time to help them. If a serious fire is involved that's more or less a certainty, although it won't be for want of trying I can assure you. Then there's the possibility that we may be injured or worse ourselves. Therefore, we have to ensure that during the briefing, we give as much information as we can to give people the best chance in a worst case scenario but without giving them so much that they end up zoning out before the end. Does that make more sense?

Finally, I can't speak for other airlines but our over wing briefing consists of door operation, instructions on the seat back, safety card, suitability check and willingness of passenger to operate exit if necessary. I do and have moved unsuitable passengers. If it's explained properly, most are happy to move. Those that refuse are given the option of another seat or the airbridge.

There were 3 smoke/fire incidents on B737 in a matter of days. Corendon, Turkey with evac, Jet 2 with evac and Transavia with diversion to Zagreb. Transavia hasn't even been mentioned here and Corendon tread almost died out.
It all come down to if Jane, or whatever is the name, is stupid.
I would suggest to everyone who want to post here to read last post by captplaystation on Corendon tread.

Capt In @ post 194
 

Did your colleague make his mistake (we've all made mistakes) because he didn't bother to read the manuals or the SOP, or because he was reading the newspaper when the mission was being explained?
Did he then go to the media and say how chaotic and frightening it was?
Did he abdicate responsibility for his own safety and the safety of others?
Did he go straight to Money Grabbers 4 U to see how much he could screw out of the system?
Everyone makes mistakes. Some learn from them, and so safety proceedures evolve. Hey, maybe even passenger briefings.
Some seem determined never to learn.....

Well this thread has certainly gone down a blind alley. Time to disembark I think.


As mere SLF though, I will say this:
I am far more terrified at the prospect of "A and C" or "Lord Spandex Masher", who have thus far shown themselves utterly incapable of introspection or any interest in process improvement, being involved in any way in any safety critical industry - let alone carriage of souls - than I am of meeting Jean during an evacuation.

You're a disgrace to your profession.


Absolutely all credit though to a few though, not least "jetset lady."

JSL
 

Jet Set Lady,
as I said I don't want to put words into your mouth, and If you think I've misrepresented what you said then I apologise. All I can say about the one to one briefing is that in my experience its honoured more in the breach. Clearly in your experience it isn't. I certainly understand the problems you have in trying to impart all the safety information in the time that you have, within the limits of excited or apprehensive passengers attention span. I also appreciate that if there was a serious fire you would have your hands full. You certainly seem to realise that. In fact this is why I and I think some others on this thread are saying that we get alarmed when some posters just want to say the system for evacuating passengers is fine/the best we can do, the problem is the plebs we have to carry. They're stupid, or drunk, or uneducated. ( I don't include you in this.)
The truth is almost every incident of an emergency evacuation throws up some problems, which in a more serious set of circumstances would be fatal. And it would be fatal both for the cretins and those who read the safety card in equal measure. So we should stop being complacent.

There is a rope in the door frame of the 737 (over wing) and a yellow painted tie down on the wing surface - this is to aid evacuation from overwing exits .?

What's that all about ? Given the cabin crew are at the front and rear of the aircraft , ever seen one used ? It's such a secret , Pax would never know its there !!
IF the passengers found it and attached it to the wing - it would lead you to the middle of the wing - yep straight in the direction you don't want to be going .....

SLF and proud
 

I think that you misrepresent me and have only skimmed my posts, in at least three of them I urge the quest for better communication to be used when the safety brief is given.
The major problem however is the passengers who are determined to ignore the brief, the reason for this is unclear to me but a quick look around the cabin of any flight and you will see this behaviour.

I am pragmatic about safety and can't see any way forward with cabin safety if a large proportion of the passengers are immune from taking in any safety information no matter how well the industry presents it.

In the airline I work for the captain's last task in an evacuation is to take a PBE and a Flashlight and to search the cabin for incapacitated passengers and leave the aircraft by the rear door, as you might have guessed that will have a detrimental effect on my life expectancy. I will no doubt be risking my life for those who have become incapacitated because they did not take the trouble to read the escape instructions.

If this us being a disgrace to the profession then so be it but at least I am not viewing the situation through the eyes of the politically correct who totally reject the personal responsibility that a passenger holds for their own safety and the safety of others.

SLF, you are, of course, entitled to your opinion.

However, I am not involved in developing or improving processes. That isn't my job. I am though involved in the "carriage of souls" (although I prefer to call them people) in a very safety critical environment, I have been for nearly two decades and I haven't lost one yet. As such I am very aware of the need for my passengers to follow those safety critical instructions.

I would ask you quite how you know I am incapable of introspection because of one view point I am expressing on this forum?

Well I think if regulators were serious about safety then ;

1. It would be investigated why there is almost an evac once a week for ground cockpit/cabin smoke issues ( poor procedures / tight turnaround times ? )

2. All window exits, all types would be equipped with slides.

3. A cabin crew seat would be in the exit rows.

4. Exit rows would be occupied (2 recent flights I travelled on, 2 different carriers had empty exit rows as nobody would pay for them.)

5. Excess cabin baggage wouldn't be stuffed in the hold at last minute without a thought for the contents.

6. Cabin PAs would be made audible.

Anyone who portrays passengers en masse as " stupid" does not deserve to be in the pointy end. Especially so, when some of these very people check their mobiles on finals, take off from taxyways, can't recognise a stall, land at the wrong airport, fail to lower flaps in an evac & more....

We are all human, we all make mistakes, sometimes stupid. Stop bitching about each side of the fence & work together to improve, educate & learn, no matter what our position is.

Surely the 'drop' isn't 12'? If so, then that distance at speed, isn't acceptable for people to fall onto tarmac.

In many years experience as SLF, I recall only two occasions when I have been seated in a window exit row on a short-haul flight. On both occasions I was fully briefed by a cabin crew member, and on one of them I was asked to move into the otherwise empty exit row. So some crew of some carriers do do the job properly.

As regards briefings, how about turning off all lights, including reading lights, except for spotlights on the persons giving the demonstration.

As regards evacuation process improvements, why not identify the row numbers of the exit rows? They are well-defined, but never, im my experience, announced. To go with this, attach large, legible row numbers to the aisle seats at headrest of armrest level. To avoid people trying to take bulky luggage with them, enforce the rules on size, and also reduce the maximum size.

Road hog
 

The drop is about 12 feet from the top surface of the wing to the ground, you go down the flaps at about a 40 degree incline and the bottom of the flap is about 4 feet above the ground. It is not a 12 foot vertical drop to the ground !

I hope that clarifies the situation

Seems even some crew may have an issue with going down the flaps? Anything special about a Nimrod?...

Key Publishing Ltd Aviation Forums - View Single Post - Victor XL231 And Nimrod XV250 Work Diary

Over react to an unusual situation? OR take a fire into the air ?

Which option is better ?

Oh and in the time taken to read this post you have to make that call !

I have no doubt that if Shy Talk is correct in what he as written the cabin crew took the correct action, even if investigation finds that there was no fire/overheat on the aircraft.

Perhaps someone can confirm whether Jet2 do "packs-off" take offs on their 738's. If they do, then that would put paid to the water vapour theory (unless they run the packs/APU for takeoff).

Water vapour tends to evaporate almost instantly as it enters the cabin - it doesn't "fill" the cabin! Additionally the conditions hardly seem conducive to water vapour (GLA at 7am in Oct is not the same as a muggy IBZ at 32C in summer!)

It must that've been something pretty spectacular for the CC to make the call - but if in doubt....... no doubt.

Running In - you say it's the cabin crews responsibility to get pax off. Now that's all well and good however what if the cabin crew are unconscious? Should the passengers just sit and wait for the emergency services to arrive? Overweight exits are "self help". Passengers need to open and operate these exits themselves. Cabin crew are not stationed by these exits. So therefore passengers must take responsibility for their own safety too. Time and conditions permitting (I'm sure you could understand nobody would run into a wall of flames) cabin crew will check for pax left behind which is the point if the smoke filled cabin training.

Any more updates on the source of the smoke?

Shy Talk
 

As you say it will come out in the wash, however I am always very reluctant to criticize people who have to make life or death decisions in a split seconds.

I am just an Internet observer of the situation and am not in a position to comment on what the cabin crew did or did not see but I would far rather see ten evacuations on the ground if that prevents one aircraft getting airborne with a real fire.