MilesBuzz! - Please Remain Seated at ALL Times- More Rules to Flying?

It seems apart from Air Marshalls, more security, no knives, no food, no drinks- we have possibly yet another rule that just takes the joy out of flying. How long will this continue and can we expect no carry ons nor pre assigned seats?

As mentioned in Washington Post today:
"Due to heightened security at National, passengers must be seated for the entire duration of the flight to Washington. . . . If you have go to use the restrooms, do it now." Almost as an afterthought, the gate attendant added: "We'd like to welcome you back to service to National."


http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/nation/specials/attacked/A5682-2001Oct4.html



------------------
"Fly me to the moon and let me earn alot of miles."

Oh, for God's sake, this is getting out of control. Yeah, that's smart, make people feel afraid just when they're getting their confidence up.

The ultimate in locking the barn doors after the horses are gone. We're always fighting the last war, and this is just more proof of it.

Does anyone really think bin Laden and his evil subhumans will try the same trick again?

There are always others that are less innovative.

When AS resumes its SEA-DCA flight, I sure hope they don't try imposing that rule.

If its SEA-DCA, I hope I'm not sitting next to the pax who decides to abide by the no restroom rule. Or should I just bring lots of towels in my carry on?

I think things will settle down eventually. I was on a ORD-EWR flight earlier this week. The pilot mentioned that as part of the "new normal" of flying he didn't want pax congregating in the galleys while waiting for the lavs. Other than that, there were no restrictions on movement in the cabin aside from the fasten seatbelt indicator.

------------------
Who is John Galt?
------------------

I doubt that somebody who plans on hijacking a plane will be stopped by a flight attendant's instruction to "sit down!"

They might as well keep DCA closed if this is going to be the rule. Have the terrorists won?

"Torrorism" victory is not knocking down a building or killing so many people. It's victory is "terror". It wins by making those who survive scared. I don't know if they've won if they get us to impose such rules for commercial air travel, but they are deffinitely well on their way.
Obviously we have to review security measures. But we have to make sure we do it in a balanced manner. To go overboard because of fear would indeed be handing the terrorists their victory.

Don't forget to pack your Depends with this one!

And what about all of the scuttlebutt about the "Economy Class Syndrome" they were touting at the beginning of the year? We were all told to stretch our legs during the flight so we could all avoid the Deep Vein Thrombosis.

I have a better rule...why not just ban passengers on all commercial flights? We have good teleconferencing capabilities now...with rules like this one, we will force our airline companies out of business for certain!

Check out http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/Forum71/HTML/005754.html
"My LHR-JFK Captain "takes charge"

Ummm...people...aren't you missing something here:

It was a 40 minute flight!!!

That's barely enough time to get up to cruise altitude before starting the descent!

You can't stay in your seat for 40 minutes???

Now, if the flight was longer, I think such a rule would stink and would probably test it by having to use the lavatory. Along with a bunch of other people, I'm sure.

RAD

<font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">Originally posted by RAD:
Ummm...people...aren't you missing something here:

It was a 40 minute flight!!!

That's barely enough time to get up to cruise altitude before starting the descent!

You can't stay in your seat for 40 minutes???

Now, if the flight was longer, I think such a rule would stink and would probably test it by having to use the lavatory. Along with a bunch of other people, I'm sure.

RAD</font>

I agree with RAD, sitting for a 40 minute flight between LGA & DCA will not kill anyone. However, I don't think the sitting rule applies to SEA-DCA.

It's the principle that's important. No standees does not reduce the probability of a successful hijacking. This is just as dumb as banning nail clippers.

The fact that it's a 40 minute flight only means that most people will remain seated anyway. So what?

The problem is that a simple choice is being removed for no good reason. I like reason, and I like having choices.

<font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">Originally posted by JS:
It's the principle that's important. No standees does not reduce the probability of a successful hijacking. This is just as dumb as banning nail clippers.

The fact that it's a 40 minute flight only means that most people will remain seated anyway. So what?

The problem is that a simple choice is being removed for no good reason. I like reason, and I like having choices.</font>


Agreed! Keeping people seated, checking their ID's 46 times before they get on the plane, and banning nail clippers is no cure for a sick mind...it only punishes the majority of us who aren't causing any problems. We need to improve our safety standards, but we need to use our reason in doing so.

I don't buy the 40 minute argument. It only makes sense to have such a rule if it reduces the chance of a hijacking. If it does, than what are you saying- we'll have no hijacking of 40 minute fligths, but if it's trascon, hijackers are welcome?

I can hear them in the terrorist camps now. "We can not hijack a plan because they have a new rule not allowing us to stand up. What should we do now?"

Duh, hello? If you are going to hijack a plane, do you really care about the rules.

AND, if you really have to go the bathroom, are they going to arrest you? I cann't wait until the media gets ahold of this one.

"Sanity has left the terminal"

OK, I might be wrong but my take on the WHOLE security situation is that the only REALLY effective measures for decreasing the chance of a hijacking take place behind the scenes. The problem is that what is done behind the scenes does not give the average Joe (or Jane) any additional sense of security. Hence we place moronic restrictions and checks that are highly visible to convince the public we are taking measures to increase the security of air travel. As the public starts to "feel" safe again you will see many of these restrictions slowly fazed out. This has already started - LAX now allowing curb side drop off and check-in, NW allowing online check in...etc. I only hope truely effective measures will be put and stay in place.

<font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">Originally posted by flaco:
I don't buy the 40 minute argument.</font>

I don't buy it either! My only point was that in all the kvetching that was going on in this thread, nobody pointed out the obvious factor of the original post -- a 39 minute flight.

I'm just as ticked off about the stu...er, silly changes the FAA, airlines and airports have instituted that have NO real effect on security but make our traveling lives harder to bear.

I'm all for the behind-the-scenes changes but it's nature of the beast: we won't know about them because they ARE behind-the-scenes. Perhaps the bureaucrats feel they have to have some kind of show so the unwashed masses think "something" is being done.

RAD

[QUOTE]Originally posted by RAD:
Ummm...people...aren't you missing something here:

[b]It was a 40 minute flight!!!

Sure its a 40 min flight, But if you have to go to the bathroom...you have to go!!

Although the flight may be 40 minutes from takeoff to landing, the trip from bathroom to bathroom may be considerably longer if the plane's lavatory is off-limits. I figure 10 minutes from the last clear shot at the departure bathrooms to the time to board the plane, followed by 10-20 minutes on the ground, followed by 40 minutes of flight, followed by 10 minutes to taxi, park, get off, and get to the arrival lavatory: about 70-80 minutes. Still not a long time, but not just 40 minutes of trying to hold it in. http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/wink.gif

The object of having passengers remain in their seats is not to prevent hijackers from standing up. It is to prevent passengers from getting hurt.

My son is a commercial airline pilot. He told me that passengers need to remain in their seats with their seat belts on because should anything happen re hijacking the pilots will be doing things such as flipping the plane over, taking the plane into a dive, etc. Whoever is standing will be thrown around the cabin and, most likely, killed.They know that there may be passengers hurt if they are not sitting down with their seat belts on but this will definitely get rid of the hijackers ability to function, much less live.

<font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">Originally posted by RAD:
It was a 40 minute flight!!!

RAD[/B]</font>

Sure, but for some strange reasom people do funny things on board that they never do on the ground:

Drink loads of BM's
Visit the toilet every 30 minutes

If you put 30 people in a room on the ground with a toilet almost nobody will need to go, when they are in the air they probably have to queue up...

<font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">Originally posted by PointsGalore:
The object of having passengers remain in their seats is not to prevent hijackers from standing up. It is to prevent passengers from getting hurt.

My son is a commercial airline pilot. He told me that passengers need to remain in their seats with their seat belts on because should anything happen re hijacking the pilots will be doing things such as flipping the plane over, taking the plane into a dive, etc. Whoever is standing will be thrown around the cabin and, most likely, killed.They know that there may be passengers hurt if they are not sitting down with their seat belts on but this will definitely get rid of the hijackers ability to function, much less live.</font>

Hey - if there is a hijacking and some of us get killed in the process, so be it.

But to make millions of people each week stay seated "in case" this happens is stupid.

As said by so many, we (gov't, airlines, etc), are taking these steps because they know most people will say "If that is the cost of being safe, okay with me"

What none of them have realized, these steps do not "make us safe". We need to get on with our lives.

Some of these steps would be like a Doctor treating the common cold. Okay, Mr Patient, here is what we are going to do - I am going to cover you mouth and nose and stop all air from getting into your system. Feel healthier now?

I heard the rule was no one permitted out of their seats for 30 minutes after takeoff from DCA or within 30 minutes of landing. At least their is SOME logic to that.

<font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">Originally posted by ScottC:
If you put 30 people in a room on the ground with a toilet almost nobody will need to go, when they are in the air they probably have to queue up...</font>

Airplane cabins are pressurized to somewhere around 70% of normal atmospheric pressure -- equivalent to an altitude of 8,000 ft. One biological response to this decrease in pressure and oxygen availabilty is for the kidneys to work overtime removing water from the blood in order to reduce blood pressure and/or increase hematocrit (I think the exact reasons are not entirely understood). Given that the cabin air is also extremely dry, people need to drink more than usual, and...

I flew roundtrip this weekend on USAirways. Everything on the plane was exactly the same as before 9-11. Same security announcements. Same cheerful pilot talking to us at opportune times. Same flight attendants coming through the cabin. People allowed to go to the restroom when they want.

I felt _safe_ and _comfortable_ on those flights. It was an extremely pleasant experience and makes me want to fly again. Let security weed out the terrorists. Then let a fortified cockpit door protect the pilots. If a terrorist is on my plane, the pax will deal with it, one way or the other. Otherwise, I suggest everyons sit back, relax, and enjoy the flight.

<font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">Originally posted by BeantownFlyer:
I heard the rule was no one permitted out of their seats for 30 minutes after takeoff from DCA or within 30 minutes of landing. At least their is SOME logic to that.</font>

Yes there is logic. It is now illegal to stand up and hijack a plane. If someone tries, we can slap them with the no standing rule and haul them off the jail and all will be fine.

It is not so much the flight time of 40 minutes that is a concern. We all know that there is more time involved, minimum 10 minutes before departure time and then say 10 minutes to exit plan- all of which adds up to 1 hour minimum. And don't forget to count delays as well!

------------------
"Fly me to the moon and let me earn alot of miles."

As an employee in the field, the RULE , per the FAA memo to the Metro Washington Airports Authority is that the seat belt sign must remain on for the first 30 minutes of the flight from DCA and must be enforced. After that, it is crew's decision. However, lining up for the potty is a big no-no at any time. These are the actual FAA rules, so airlines' own may be stricter.

<font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">Originally posted by TrojanHorse:
If its SEA-DCA, I hope I'm not sitting next to the pax who decides to abide by the no restroom rule. Or should I just bring lots of towels in my carry on?</font>

be careful... if the powers that be have their way, you won't even be allowed the carry-on!

"you vill sit there, und you vil like it! all zee way to zeattle! zee attendant vil be around on arrival to unlock your restraint. und thank you for flying vith air over-react"

<font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">Originally posted by zzflyer:
As an employee in the field, the RULE , per the FAA memo to the Metro Washington Airports Authority is that the seat belt sign must remain on for the first 30 minutes of the flight from DCA and must be enforced. After that, it is crew's decision. However, lining up for the potty is a big no-no at any time. These are the actual FAA rules, so airlines' own may be stricter.</font>

Is anyone home at the FAA?
I do not have exact data, but isn't it about 5-10 minutes from BWI or IAD? In 30 minutes you are way past these airports, along with a few others. Philly, Richmond,others?

It looks like the FAA is trying to take away many more freedoms than the terrorists are.

The goal is to make air travel uncomfortable and unpleasent. This way, high-brow, discerning terrorists will not want to be inconvienienced by "security" measures. Instead, these people will stay home and adopt pro-American ideals.

CNN is reporting that the FAA will announce later today or tomorrow that the new "security" policy is one carry-on per person plus one "personal" item, like a briefcase or purse. Obviously, you couldn't hijack an airplane with only a laptop bag and an roll-a-board.

d