anengineer is totally correct. The "System" and by that I mean regulators, operators and manufacturers, has to spend more time considering events surrounding evacuations. It is clear that as flight crew we have very little time to acquire sufficient information to justify an evacuation yet with a possible fire, we may feel we have to react without out it. Until we are given more guidance we will have more (just like in the sim.) Smoke-Stop-Evacuate situations. I think we should spend more to see if what we do now is really a sensible way of doing things.

Then we must seriously look at passenger briefings and passenger behavior - under stress. I believe most airline passenger briefings are a complete waste of everybody's time and effort. Nobody listens for a start and secondly, the briefings lack presence and honesty. Maybe we should consider "bite sized" briefings just before the event? Do passengers really need a seat belt briefing? Is the oxygen mask briefing correct? And so on...

Then we have to consider passenger actions when it all goes wrong. What is clear is that when it does wrong, the average cabin is split into about three camps. Those who are going to live, those who'll probably die and those in the middle. Like for example, the passengers in the hijacked Ethiopian 767 who inflated their life jackets before the aircraft ditched. Here, if we are to believe a lady who found herself on the wing of the Glasgow 737, she considered that there was no way down because there was no slide. But what did the safety card show show, the one which she was asked to read before departure? Also, she went to say that two girls jumped down without injury. But she's on an aircraft wing after having be told to evacuate - just what do have to do to make this lady jump? Unless planning takes into account (or totally ignores) the "lady on the SPT onimbus," we'll not have a worthy evacuation system. I say worthy because we have to have a system that is built for the majority of passengers - because if we build a system robust enough to protect the dumbest and least able we won't be able to go flying. And this is where we must be honest. And finally, we must be totally clear that not every person will be able to evacuate an aircraft a certain amount of time, which may have consequences!

In passing, we should also consider that we will have what might be described as "useful" people in the cabin as well. The guys who were helping fellow passengers to clear the bottom of the slides in Glasgow were doing remarkable job. Considering a total lack of briefing (which takes to the above) and preparation and the fact that they believe they were close to a burning aircraft, they did an excellent job.

Which leads us on to our last line of defence - Cabin Crew. It sounds like this crew did a good job. They shouted at the passengers to get out and carried on doing so until they did. It looks like all the doors were opened and all the slides we deployed. They should be congratulated.

Finally lawyers - what do we have to do before this corrosive scum damage our lives more than they are already doing?

Just for those with cutting remarks on here, this is the reality.

Looks like they are getting loads of practice at Glasgow....A Thomas Cook flight had to evacuate the week before.....

60 passengers evacuated via emergency chutes after Thomas Cook plane fills with smoke - AOL Travel UK

"We were accelerating very, very hard down the runway at this stage and I was about to scream out to the cabin crew when obviously the pilot realised there was something wrong and he immediately throttled the engines back and put the brakes on. It's the hardest braking I've ever experienced in my life.
"There was a stunned silence when we stopped, everyone was in shock. The captain called the cabin crew into the cockpit and a few minutes later yelled 'evacuate, evacuate'.

It was only afterwards that people began to shake and realise exactly what had happened."

Mr Divers said the crew were "brilliant" and the captain should be praised for running up and down the cabin to ensure everyone was off the plane before him.
Natalie Crawford, from Cumbernauld, North Lanarkshire, said it was a "scary experience", adding: "Just as the plane was about to lift off, there was a strong smell of smoke and the cabin instantly filled up.

What made it worse was the lights were out because it was an early morning flight. Myself and my family were going for a long weekend to Benidorm for my dad's 50th. Although we're all ok it has been a scary experience."
The incident happened at around 7.40am and the runway was closed until 10am, causing serious disruption to flights to and from the airport.

flights were cancelled, including two inbound flights from London City and Gatwick airports, 14 departures were delayed and six arrivals were diverted to Edinburgh, Manchester, Prestwick and Aberdeen airports.

police spokesman said passengers on the Boeing 737-800 had been evacuated as a precaution.

A statement from Jet2 said: "This morning's flight LS177 from Glasgow Airport to Alicante made an emergency stop on the runway just prior to take-off. The aircraft was forced to curtail take off due to smoke in the cabin."
A passenger plane has made a safe emergency landing at Dublin Airport after crew detected smoke in the cockpit.

This idiotic theory of dimming the cabin lights for take off and landing in order to permit night visual adaption is nothing but a dangerous myth perpetuated over decades. It ignores the fact that night adaption is ruined with overhead reading lights on in the passenger cabin.

Even the flight deck crew have no night adaption since the landing lights and airport lights put paid to that. With the cabin lights on dim, and seat backs erect, if is often difficult for passengers to see over the heads of passengers in front of them to spot how many rows to the nearest exit and the overhead emergency lights are too dim,especially those wearing glasses..

It would make far more sense to have the cabin lights set in the bright setting for take off and landing so that passengers can see better in the cabin if an emergency evolves at night.

Plus a useful little hint for female passengers to avoid friction burns when going down a slide. Stick the emergency instruction card located in your seat pocket, underneath your apparel particularly if it is synthetic material. It prevents friction burns.

Fire guys a bit slow off the blocks there matelot :sad:

pilots
 

i think the pilots did a. great job. its in the hands of the aaib.

Regarding this old aircraft argument...

It is nonsense. Age is irrelevant. Its how the airline maintains the aircraft. And the vast majority of parts will have been changed since its original fit.

A bit like Trigger's broom - 20 new handles and brushes!

Heck, cargo airlines still use ancient B727s! Just looking on Airfleets for an example. Fedex have an MSN 162 A310-200. And they operate absolutely fine. Even Delta Connection use 38 year old B737-200!

There was some comment about the age of Monarch aircraft previously. As I said on the thread, Monarch has some of the best facilities in Europe and maintains to world class standards.

The difference between a 737 and an A 320 is probably not clear to most passengers, and so the fact that the Boeing has no wing slides will be a surprise.

Well I am not a fire chief, but the reaction to that Chinese 737 fire looked a total shambles.

One and half units arriving at 4 minutes 30. Also did the 'half' run out of retardant mid stream?:ouch:

And also...
 

It's also worth examining what lighting is the most effective for enabling effective evacuations during darkness. Part of this consideration will be the lighting level just prior to initiating an evacuation. It's standard with most airlines to turn the engines and APU off prior to evacuation, thus removing power to the busses that power normal cabin lighting. This in turn normally turns on the emergency lighting systems. And while we are here, does an evacuation alarm work? What is its precise function?

Just a little extra to matelo's post - with a bloody great fire at Okinawa, a "First World" airport, it took at least 4 mins 40 seconds for the first fire fighting measures to be taken. At Glasgow, the boys (& girls?) with the blue lights observed the evacuation.

"Are you saying they are stupid for using the wing exit or for expecting some way down to the ground from there? "

Anyone who has read the safety card knows full well there are no chutes on the wings.

Then again, it's a flight from Glasgow so it could well be the shoplifting alarm on the doors.....

As a Glaswegian I really laughed out loud at that. I thought that it was only armed into and out of Liverpool.

Evacuation precaustions
 

It may be conforting for some to decide that anyone taking an action he/she doesn't understand must be stupid but it could be he/she doesn't understand

Dimming to preserve night vision is far from ridiculous. Night vision repair takes a finite time and the brighter the previously light the longer night adaption takes

Best results are if the cabin lights prior to the event are of the same brilliance as the inner outer emergency lights

Two points:

- Nobody reads those cards or listens to the instruction. And even if they do, they won't take it too seriously (apart from the people with fear of flying). Maybe people are stupid, or maybe they are mollified by the exceptional safety record of the industry. The chance or rather danger that I need this information is very small.

- Standing on a wing is a very unusual situation to be in for an average passenger. While sliding down at the doors seems to be natural (the usual way out and a mode of transportation we all know from childhood), a high wing with the big turbines underneath is evil territory. Expecting from people in this tense situation at this place to understand to use the flaps for getting down is in my view ludicrous. Bad design.

That china response was poor.

As previously mentioned 4.40+ for first tender, all retardent applied to nose and starboard, none to port meaning that whilst the stbd fire is extinguished its still raging on the portside at 8.30+


Whatever happened to ICAO 2min response times...

Even if you know there are no slides from the wing I bet many are surprised how high up they are. Pretty sure it would take quite a lot of smoke to persuade some people to jump.

Burnie5204

90 seconds

No deaths !
 

What I can't understand from looking at the photos is how all those people were ruining around a live airfield without HI-Vis jackets and yet nobody in this very hazardous area was badly injured or killed.

If the passengers actually listened and read the safety card and accepted the 'one on one brief' the cabin crew do to the passengers on the over wing exist then its there own fault.

If you jump off the wing from the wing root it's not high at all, you can touch the flap on the walk around. All you have to do is FOLLOW the arrows on the wing which designate you where to walk, sit your fat/or drunk ass down and slide down the flap.

As usual it's a case of 'it won't happen to me'! The crew involved did exactly what the book said.

Well done to those involved.

Jean Walker ther lady who posted that there were no chutes from the wing is clearly a very stupid person, she has been told in the safety brief how to get out, it is also on the safety card in the seat pocket that she has been asked to read.

If she ( and others) are unable to take responsabiltity for their own safety then if they are injured or killed it is their own fault.

Today's society is full of people who are unable or unwilling to take personal responsabiltity for their actions, perhaps the death of a few of them would remind the rest that the safety brief is for their benefit ......not just a cabin crew dance!