Safety video mishap...
 

Strange mishap with the recorded safety video on the IFE recently.

AC1254 YYZ-CUN 19-Oct, only the audio plays - no video at all. Screens are all red (can't remember if it was "Passenger Announcement" or "Welcome Aboard"), but regardless thought it was extremely unusual. Was row 13 (A320) and the FA positioned at the front of the Y cabin as well as the SD in J both definetely noticed but didn't seem to care. The Y cabin FA was engaged in conversation with a lady in the last row of J for half the video, then making faces with a baby in 12B for the other half of the video (didn't think that was "proper" either, but whatev). Was waiting for them to bust out the old demo kits but alas they never did. IFE worked as normal once airborne (including moving map :D)

Strangely enough AC145 YYZ-YYC 26-Oct, the video is cutoff by a remarkably short taxi and then the "flight attendants take position for takeoff" just before the oxygen mask portion of the video. Safety video is turned off at that point. As soon as we get to cruising altitude, and before the seatbelt sign goes off, SD makes an announcement over the PA to please pay attention to the following additional safety info. They bust out the demo kits, 2 FA's are in the cabin and sure enough, they demo just the oxygen masks and the life vests.

Me thinks the former is a pretty big no-no, and the latter was well handled by a SD thinking on his feet, yes??

I actually think the latter was a much bigger no-no. I don't believe they're allowed to take off before the safety briefing is complete. I've been on another flight where we were next in line for takeoff but gave up our spot to another plane because our safety briefing wasn't complete.

Maybe they've finally realized that anyone who's ridden in a car in the past 50 years probably already knows how to fasten a seat belt? :D

I was on a United Express flight a few years ago when a bunch of us started doing the actions along with the FA... she stops and goes "do you guys want to get up and do this?" We didn't, but that'd been a hoot.

I suspect both are serious Transport Canada safety violations that would get the crew in serious trouble. I would report this since everyone's safety is compromised if some are not aware what to do.

The seat belt instructions were added to the safety demonstration at the recommendation of the Bureau d'Enquêtes et d'Analyses following the crash of Air France flight 296 in 1990. Several passengers in that accident had difficulty releasing their seat belts.

Southwest FA: "...It works just like every other seatbelt, and if you don't know how to operate one, you probably shouldn't be out in public unsupervised".

I was on an AC flight this summer where the video cut out and the FAs had to go old-school and do a safety demo themselves. They weren't to thrilled but that's the law.

Airplane seatbelts operate differently than car seatbelts .
Since I fly more than I drive, maybe my car should have a safety video!

If the video was in one language, taking off before completion wouldn't be an issue.

In the event of a short taxi and insufficient time to complete the briefing, oxygen and lifevest demonstrations can be performed after take-off and when the seat belt sign has been extinguished as per T.C. regulations.

Thanks for bringing actual information. :)

Is this always allowed? IMO, in cases where the ascent phase of the flight path passes over a significant body of water, it should be mandatory to complete the lifevest demo before takeoff. After all, takeoff and landing are the most dangerous parts of the flight.

Like at YTO?

The one that immediately comes to mind is the Hudson River one - 6 minutes after takeoff. I know I would want to know where the lifevests were! You'd have thought Lake Ontario would be pretty close 'ditching' ground should a plane need to after YYZ - it is probably the nearest 'unpopulated' area (no idea pilot protocol, just civvy logic!)

Whilst most people on here could find and put on their life vests with their eyes closed (which is handy, because that is what mine would be if we were doing a crash landing!) there are first time flyers, those who have never watched the safety video because their newspaper is far more interesting etc etc. Also, what I haven't noticed recently is the announcements that used to be made about crew distributing life cots for infants - does that still happen (in the video and in real life)?

As per MOT requirements, lifevest demonstrations are a legal requirement for flights which travel more than 50 nautical miles from shore. Lifevest demos are permitted after take-off, but must take place prior to the over water segment of the flight.

Thanks for the rule, screwy tho it seems. Guess people are expected to swim 49 miles or less back to shore, but 50 is too much ;)

I think 50 miles is a realistic gliding distance from cruising altitute should engine power be lost.

i dont think we are critizing the adherence to the rule....rather we find the rule itself weird....

like the Sully incident.... cant figure out the vests because we were not advised might be a little problematic..... and many airports are near water bodies and some airports are at the edge of a lake or an ocean etc....

i still cannot figure out why if a plane travels within 50 nautical miles they dont need lifevests at all, instead a seat could be used as a flotation device...... seriously i want to see someone demonstrate at 40 nautical miles out in the Atlantic Ocean on a Noreaster holding to that flotation device for 2 hours while waiting for the coast guard

TC sure makes 50 nautical miles sound like a 50 meter swimming pool

Gliding maybe, although I think that depends on starting speed and altitude before loss of power, right after take off I am guessing unlikely (is take off over the lake, a la porter, bet you can't glide to Hamilton) but with no power you cannot presumably do a controlled landing - ditching in water seems a far more likely scenario than taking your chances over the GTA to me (just like the Hudson was way more attractive for landing than Manhattan)

Do pods even float?

doubt so....... thats why they have flotation devices

Gliding 50 nautical miles (304,000 feet) from an altitude of say, 39,000 feet would necessitate almost an 8:1 ratio. Most aircraft have L/D (very similar to glide) ratios in the upper teens, implying that it should be possible to reach shore under favourable wind and airspeed mgmt conditions, plus a bit of margin to then find a suitable landing spot. Perhaps an airline pilot could better comment.