Pax evacuation
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: northside
Posts: 472
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
But if you read the entire report and not just the Captains comments you will notice that a concluision of the accident was
This was noted as a significant active failure of the crew. I.E. the Captain and Crew failed in their main responsibility which is to ensure the safety of their passengers.
The flight crew did not consider all relevant issues when deciding not to conduct an immediate evacuation
Moderator
Join Date: Feb 1998
Location: Europe
Posts: 3,051
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
YOu are making my point. Failing to consider all relevant issues is entirely different from
Your comment is ignorant.
the Cabin Crew couldn't be bothered evacuatiing.
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Sydney Australia
Posts: 166
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
southside why would you say such a ridiculous thing? I don't understand what you get out of it exactly.
Reading reports and guessing what actually occurred doesn't give you an informed opinion. I find your post childish and offensive. I guess you would have done everything differently faced with the same scenario, nothing like living someone else's life in the safety of make believe.
Reading reports and guessing what actually occurred doesn't give you an informed opinion. I find your post childish and offensive. I guess you would have done everything differently faced with the same scenario, nothing like living someone else's life in the safety of make believe.
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: The nearest white sandy beach
Posts: 285
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If the aircraft is intact (in QF1 it was), and there is no risk of danger to pax/crew to remain on board then why initiate an evacuation? Whilst true the aircraft was on the 19th hole rather than at an aerobridge, surely it is the sensible thing to have a precautionary disembarkation as opposed to a full scale evac where there will undoubtedly be some dire consequences for the evacuating pax.
Seems quite sensible to me.
SG
Seems quite sensible to me.
SG
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Australia
Posts: 1,414
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Silly though this may sound, I sometimes wonder if the lack of respect engendered by the antics of some flight attendants during the flight may cause passengers in an emergency evacuation, to ignore their implored instructions.
Many low cost carriers have their flight attendants act the fool and even supply them joke books to "entertain" the masses. Virgin Blue in Australia are known to throw a toilet roll down the aisle and gaily ask the passengers to have a competition to guess how long is the bit of paper.
Same airline gives its flight attendants free reign to make up their own "jokes" such as telling passengers that the aircraft is going to a different destination than they expect.
The captain and first officer are dressed in "casual" khaki garb, leather jackets and baseball caps and are called "Mate" by the flight attendants. The idea is to project to the blue singlet and thongs bogans down the back that this is a FUN FUN FUN airline.
Suddenly there is a emergency evacuation and the pretty, young, and well endowed flight attendants suddenly try and put on stern expressions and squeak in loud voices GET OUT, GET OUT, GET OUT! You are bloody kidding says the bogans - wait till I get my carry on baggage and booze.. No respect for authority even in an emergency. Because the airline image is anti-authority - its FUN, see?
Contrast that scene with a highly professional flight and cabin crew dressed in proper airline uniforms readily recognisable as authoritive figures whose orders over the PA demand to be obeyed without question.
The image of authority is vital to frightened or even aggressive passengers. Some LLC project the opposite image and this can prove disastrous when the chips are down.
Many low cost carriers have their flight attendants act the fool and even supply them joke books to "entertain" the masses. Virgin Blue in Australia are known to throw a toilet roll down the aisle and gaily ask the passengers to have a competition to guess how long is the bit of paper.
Same airline gives its flight attendants free reign to make up their own "jokes" such as telling passengers that the aircraft is going to a different destination than they expect.
The captain and first officer are dressed in "casual" khaki garb, leather jackets and baseball caps and are called "Mate" by the flight attendants. The idea is to project to the blue singlet and thongs bogans down the back that this is a FUN FUN FUN airline.
Suddenly there is a emergency evacuation and the pretty, young, and well endowed flight attendants suddenly try and put on stern expressions and squeak in loud voices GET OUT, GET OUT, GET OUT! You are bloody kidding says the bogans - wait till I get my carry on baggage and booze.. No respect for authority even in an emergency. Because the airline image is anti-authority - its FUN, see?
Contrast that scene with a highly professional flight and cabin crew dressed in proper airline uniforms readily recognisable as authoritive figures whose orders over the PA demand to be obeyed without question.
The image of authority is vital to frightened or even aggressive passengers. Some LLC project the opposite image and this can prove disastrous when the chips are down.
A37575, not silly at all. Respect, gravitas, command, authority, etc are vital qualities for all cabin crew. Most of these attributes are reinforced though personality and behaviour, and uniform and communication add weight particularly in an emergency.
Thus beware the ‘fancy dress’ uniforms, and chatty or demure cabin – pax interface.
Thus beware the ‘fancy dress’ uniforms, and chatty or demure cabin – pax interface.
