Are the airlines really saving that much by encouraging passengers to lug everything into the cabin with them? How many flight attendants are injured helping people with their bags, or having bags fall on them? How much time is wasted when people try to bring bags on board that don't fit, and have to be moved to the hold?

Southwest allows for 2 free bags apparently it works financially for them?

Perhaps the overhead storage needs to be done away with, and passengers need to be convinced that it's a perk, rather than an inconvenience. Surely it would be much faster going thru security if people were limited to a purse/briefcase/laptop carrier that would fit under their seat, rather than hauling big heavily packed wheelies that need to be carefully scanned? Safety would be enhanced, not only in an accident, but from the perspective of someone sneaking something on board.

Auxtank, static dischargers are unrelated to lightning protection. Basically you're talking the difference between a slowly increasing voltage (static electricity) and near instantaneous, very high lightning induced voltage spikes.
Apples and bananas....

Native Russian speaker, not a pilot, so please forgive my ignorance of standard operating procedures and terminology.

RBC, which is kind of like the CNBC of Russia is reporting that the pilots failed to turn off the engines after the landing. They were on the whole time until the firetrucks put them out. As to why the firetrucks were not deployed, earlier - perhaps this is noteworthy. Baza.io has the transcript of comms between the pilots an tower. While the pilots declared pan-pan, they said that they did not require assistance. Here's the crucial bit:

Translation:

There's a seating chart out there which i'm not allowed to post. You can find it by going to the site pikabu which one user posted earlier and it's in the comments there. On the left side of the plane, some people survived - 13B, 15B, 18A. Everyone else in rows 13 thru 20 perished. Row 11 all gone too.
The passenger in 18A apparently bolted to the exit after the first bounce.

My own observation - flight attendants always say that in case of emergency, head for the nearest exit. Clearly, that was the wrong move for anyone at the back of the plane, and heading towards the front would have been the correct survival strategy. I wonder if any passengers at the back were confused whether to move to the front or follow the traditional guidelines. It was a very quickly developing situation.

Dear God, no! There is little enough leg room in economy as it is, without clogging up space with bags under the seats.

Post-fire closeup photos (eg. on AVH) clearly show slats/flaps extended in normal landing config (~25 deg by the look of it)

This raises the question of whether the strip lighting on the aisle floor designed to guide passengers to the exit would only come on in an emergency to guide passengers to emergency exits that had been opened or whether it all comes on together regardless that it might guide you in the wrong direction? Not something I've ever considered as a passenger before.

IIRC, All together. The cabin crew is supposed to use the Mark 1 eyeball to ensure it is safe to use the exit.

In the light of this accident overhead bins should be made lockable for takeoff and landing.

There is a very lengthy discussion about evacuation procedures in the link posted earlier: https://www.aerosociety.com/media/85...anes-paper.pdf

The number of cabin crew, and their seat locations, relative to both the passengers and the exits, is critical in "marshaling" during a chaotic evacuation. Many lessons were learned from the Manchester disaster, though the location of the fire, and exit configuration were somewhat different: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Britis...t_28M#Accident

See above discussion.

And countless others on the same topic on PPRuNe ...

It's not going to happen.

Interesting perspective, thanks for the reply.

No idea why my post was deleted, mods?

Another passenger video ...
https://www.liveleak.com/view?t=aOnbL_1557230227

Are you talking about this Foto? Perhaps it is take off flaps?
http://avherald.com/img/aeroflot_su9...w_190505_4.jpg

https://cimg3.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune....11c53445ac.jpg

If any airline were to start flying without seatbelts, they would surely gain at least a 10% added revenue; not only from the savings in equipment and weight, but also adding to increased interest from the flying Joe public, to whom the standard safety measures clearly constitute a nuisance. And yet, not even the cheapest of LOCOs have used this strategy, and apparently no major airline whatsoever since about nearly 100 years. So it works to require a measure of added safety, even if it appears unpopular, to the airline and the populace. If it is a matter of "well, it makes sense to use a seatbelt, because in an extraordinary circumstance, it may prevent injury to yourself and other passengers and crew (in case of hitting the ceiling and get tossed onto someone else)". Why then is it constantly said in this and other similar threads that the same will never work for restrictions on the size of carry on luggage, even though the precise same reasoning (apart from the ceiling thing) applies? Oh, you say that there is a SARP that covers the seatbelt rule, so that airlines are forced to obey it, but there is no SARP for huge chunks of in-cabin baggage. The Standard And Recommended Practices of the Chicago Convention are actually subject to amendments. So would that not be the right place to start?

It's an interesting document but it would appear to suggest that the only thing that will stop passengers from following the route indicator lights to an exit that is not operational is the cabin crew diverting them. That might not work so well if the cabin crew have already succumbed to fire/smoke or other injuries or the cabin environment is too chaotic to understand their vocal commands.

Whenever I seat by the window, I have my backpack with me between my shins. No problem in case of most carriers. I am 183 cm tall, not a short pal. This way I can reach my ebook, camera, whatever else at any moment.

Even during a 10 hours flight? Is it properly tucked below the seat? etc...

One pax said (can't find the quote anymore, it is buried here somewhere) "That people leaving with carry on weren't an issue during this evacuation.
According to him it didn't slow down people."

What did is Furnace and heavy smoke. People in the back had no chances unless they bolted from their seat going forward, before even the aircraft came to rest.
So can we give a rest with this luggage issue in this topic!? Or just start another one specific to it.

They actually say "the nearest AVAILABLE exit"

Absolutely.! same old story here since decades as soon as we see pictures with pax leaving with luggage. nothing new, :hmm:

Hides unfortunately the very interesting discussion started about flying/landing an SSJ in direct law., POI, etc...

The question is about the lights in the floor, the aisle floor lighting, which is a good question.