Originally Posted by
Waterhorse
So when the passengers (many) were all getting excited about something external to the aircraft, the IFM would not have known what it was that was exercising them. Would you consider it to have been professional to blithely carry on with the safety demo had the thing turned out to have been something that required a more+immediate reaction from the IFM, like a fire on the wing? My point is that should a large number of passengers all start ignoring the demo to look outside with some level of excitation, it IS actually professional for a member of crew to find out what that thing might be. The safety demo can be restarted or rerun, but judgements made after the fact, in the full knowledge of what the distraction was are missing a far more important and wider safety point.
Sometimes passengers know more than the flight crew, sometimes not, but to ignore them because an SOP is being carried out seems a little like putting the cart before the horse. I’m thinking on the Kegworth crash where the passengers certainly knew more than the crew, but their concerns were not paid listened to.
The real world is a messy place, and people do not always get it right, however the time to address this is at the time, to the people involved, not later on a forum, looking for some “permission” to make a complaint. Safety is not an issue to be put off till later, deal with it immediately. Complaining later is worth doing but if it is obvious that one should do it, then crack on, don’t come on a forum looking for an attaboy, aren’t you and eagle eyed observer who knows things, type affirmation.
I find it very odd that a BA forum isn't a place to note an interesting and very uncommon experience when flying BA. Especially a safety related one. But again someone with a perfectly reasonable issue for discussion is being told to go away and accused of looking for an attaboy. Such a bizarre way to respond to them. Maybe I'm crazy but perhaps, just perhaps, they thought they might get some useful advice here rather than being ridiculed.
I think it's an extremely generous interpretation to say that the IFL was looking out if the window out of concern for safety. Given none of us were there, and the OP was, perhaps we shouldn't be inventing our own scenarios and then acting as they were fact with which to dismiss their concern. From their report my impression is that, at least the second time, the IFL knew exactly what was going on.
Why is it so predictable how these threads will go? A non well known member posts an issue, and gets told they have got it all wrong and actually people who weren't there somehow know what was actually happening and they should never have come to the forum at all. Not exactly welcoming is it? Yet somehow it is allowed to happen every time. I also don't see why they are being told it has to be dealt with in the moment or never. Firstly, I can imagine what kind of reception a passenger might get from the crew if they raise this at the time. Noone wants to make their own flight uncomfortable. Secondly, if it leads to a reminder being sent internally that might be useful; it might suggest a wider lapse in focus on the importance of the safety briefing.
Maybe you could ask the OP if there was any chance your invented scenario had happened? Out of interest, would your opinion change if it turns out they were definitely just having a curious look at the royals and missed part of the briefing to do? Presumably you have no problem offering an opinion about a hypothetical scenario since you've already done so about your own hypothetical.
I should say I don't think it's a huge issue, and not worthy of anything more than a reminder. But it is certainly note worthy and I don't know why it can't be taken in that spirit and a civil discussion had without immediately questioning the ops character and motives.