FlyerTalk Forums

FlyerTalk Forums (https://www.flyertalk.com/forum/index.php)
-   Air Canada | Aeroplan (https://www.flyertalk.com/forum/air-canada-aeroplan-375/)
-   -   AC Carry-On example...again (https://www.flyertalk.com/forum/air-canada-aeroplan/1708662-ac-carry-example-again.html)

PLeblond Sep 8, 2015 7:42 pm

AC Carry-On example...again
 
Mods... apologies. I know there are a few carry-on enforcement threads, but I cannot find them. Please merge where you see fit.

For everyone who still thinks carry-on is a good idea... Here is the ultimate example of how stupid human beings are. An emergency evacuation of a burning plane and 25% of the people in this plane decided to grab their CARRY-ON before evacuating. If people don't think that this isn't a reason to ban carry-on...then we need someone to protect ourselves from our own stupidity.

Humans are too stupid to leave their belongings on a plane, so no one should. Period.

http://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2...-airport#img-1

Apologies. Apparently I am unable to post a picture, but if you will follow this link: http://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2...-vegas-airport you will clearly see idiotic morons who took the time to grab their carry-on in a real emergency. Wow...

superangrypenguin Sep 8, 2015 7:46 pm

How is this specific to AC :p

But yes, I absolutely agree. This is 100% stupid. But the occurrence is so rare that it doesn't justify getting rid of carry ons all together. On occasion, a plane crashes. Should we ban flying then?

Life's about balancing risk vs convenience.

Sean Peever Sep 8, 2015 7:46 pm


Originally Posted by PLeblond (Post 25396438)
Mods... apologies. I know there are a few carry-on enforcement threads, but I cannot find them. Please merge where you see fit.

For everyone who still thinks carry-on is a good idea... Here is the ultimate example of how stupid human beings are. An emergency evacuation of a burning plane and 25% of the people in this plane decided to grab their CARRY-ON before evacuating. If people don't think that this isn't a reason to ban carry-on...then we need someone to protect ourselves from our own stupidity.

Humans are too stupid to leave their belongings on a plane, so no one should. Period.

http://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2...-airport#img-1

I don't know if banning all carry-on is the solution but I will agree these people are a prime example of what's wrong with humanity. "oh, the plane is on fire, I better grab my carry on"

But banning all carry-on is a bit of an overreaction. It would be like banning booze because someone drinks 12 gins or spills booze on himself.

PLeblond Sep 8, 2015 7:49 pm


Originally Posted by Sean Peever (Post 25396457)
I don't know if banning all carry-on is the solution but I will agree these people are a prime example of what's wrong with humanity. "oh, the plane is on fire, i better grab my carry on"

But banning all carry-on is a bit of an overreaction. It would be like banning booze because someone drinks 12 gins or spills booze on himself.

A drunk guy spilling booze on himself won't impede my evacuation of a burning plane.

Also: same reason an FAs should cut off passengers after a certain number of drinks.

PLeblond Sep 8, 2015 7:51 pm


Originally Posted by superangrypenguin (Post 25396454)
How is this specific to AC :p

But yes, I absolutely agree. This is 100% stupid. But the occurrence is so rare that it doesn't justify getting rid of carry ons all together. On occasion, a plane crashes. Should we ban flying then?

Life's about balancing risk vs convenience.

I asked the mods to merge it with the other threads where I have said carry on is dangerous.

Actually... the carry-on isn't dangerous. Its the (25% of the) idiots who can't live without it who are. Hence... ban carry-on.

24left Sep 8, 2015 7:53 pm

Image as per PLeblond

http://s9.postimg.cc/n4va0kj8f/image.png

PLeblond Sep 8, 2015 7:54 pm


Originally Posted by 24left (Post 25396495)

Thank you 24left.

I was too angered to figure it out.

Idiots on a plane..... wow.

Sean Peever Sep 8, 2015 7:54 pm


Originally Posted by PLeblond (Post 25396470)
A drunk guy spilling booze on himself won't impede my evacuation of a burning plane.

Also: same reason an FAs should cut off passengers after a certain number of drinks.

Respectfully, I disagree. If someone is really really drunk it will impede my evacuation of a burning plane :P.

Also: There are many reports of FA's cutting off pax, it does happen! But you can't tie it to a certain number. Some people can hold more, some people can hold less (weight, sex, age, race, all makes a difference). Also you have NO idea how much someone drank before boarding - maybe 1 is too many for some people who went to town before boarding.

PLeblond Sep 8, 2015 8:00 pm


Originally Posted by Sean Peever (Post 25396500)
Respectfully, I disagree. If someone is really really drunk it will impede my evacuation of a burning plane :P.

Also: There are many reports of FA's cutting off pax, it does happen! But you can't tie it to a certain number. Some people can hold more, some people can hold less (weight, sex, age, race, all makes a difference). Also you have NO idea how much someone drank before boarding - maybe 1 is too many for some people who went to town before boarding.

I said it was a reason why passengers need to be cut off at a certain point. FAs usually have the time to asses passengers.

we're on the same page.

Also, this happened on take off. Passengers could have been drunk on boarding. Very hard to control. Carry-on... very easy.

YOWgary Sep 8, 2015 8:07 pm

Easy answer. Tied to the evacuation slide controls is a button that electronically locks the overhead bins.

superangrypenguin Sep 8, 2015 8:08 pm


Originally Posted by PLeblond (Post 25396533)
I said it was a reason why passengers need to be cut off at a certain point. FAs usually have the time to asses passengers.

we're on the same page.

Also, this happened on take off. Passengers could have been drunk on boarding. Very hard to control. Carry-on... very easy.

So you'd choose to inconvenience so many people, kill off that ancillary fee for the tiny tiny risk that this could happen?

I find this very odd. I know what you enjoy doing as a hobby. THAT is infinitely more risky. We should ban THAT before this!


Originally Posted by yvrgary (Post 25396575)
Easy answer. Tied to the evacuation slide controls is a button that electronically locks the overhead bins.

A most excellent idea.

Sean Peever Sep 8, 2015 8:08 pm


Originally Posted by yvrgary (Post 25396575)
Easy answer. Tied to the evacuation slide controls is a button that electronically locks the overhead bins.

And add a charge of manslaughter to anyone who takes a bag for the people who don't make it off.

YOWgary Sep 8, 2015 8:09 pm

Jeez, 57% LF probably helped. People grabbing carry-ons gets massively more dangerous on a full flight.

eigenvector Sep 8, 2015 8:10 pm

These passengers should be charged by US aviation authorities and banned for life from BA. By blocking the aisle to grab bags, they certainly imperiled the lives of those behind them. Shameful.

radnub Sep 8, 2015 8:11 pm


Originally Posted by 24left (Post 25396495)

It's cool if I just push past these people if I'm ever in this situation right? I sorta don't want to die because I'm too polite. It's what I picture the guy in the foreground did minutes before this picture.

I'm not against carry-on bags because that's just not reality but I'm open to becoming very forceful if I see someone reach up to grab a bag (a bag!) in a fire. Idiots!


Originally Posted by yvrgary (Post 25396575)
Easy answer. Tied to the evacuation slide controls is a button that electronically locks the overhead bins.

Brilliant!


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 4:31 pm.


This site is owned, operated, and maintained by MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. Copyright © 2026 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Designated trademarks are the property of their respective owners.