IAN-UK

So perhaps "education" of this type could be the preferred way to go, rather than the heavy-handed approach of prosecution. The provisions under the air navigation order are there if required - so perhaps education could work hand in hand with greater public awareness of that legislation.

Gordon Ramsay and friends also show us how to unfasten seat belts. This, apparently, because in the panic of life-threatening situations passengers revert to the more familiar world of car sea-belts, or simply forget completely they are belted in. In that fudge of panic it might be an ingrained mantra of advice rather than fear of prosecution that leads passenger to abandon a visceral urge not to leave valuables behind.



Enlightening public opinion did a lot to establish seat belt use as a norm, and drink driving as a no-no. Seems it hasn't worked as well with mobile phone use while driving, but there again neither has the threat of prosecution.

Tobias-UK

No, of course not but the message will be getting out that you must not take bags off the aircraft with you in an evacuation.

There are already legal sanctions available where crew breach the ANO. There is a huge difference between crew and passenger behaviour in emergency situations, I trust crew to make the correct decisions regarding my safety and intend to follow their instructions should I find myself in the unfortunate position of having to evacuate an aircraft.

Crew are trained, they may be aware of dangers that I may not, by their very nature these events are fast moving, variable and changing. If a crew member acted recklessly or negligently I would expect the necessary authorities would likely take the appropriate action including sanctions and/or a potential prosecution.

They may attempt to justify their actions based on outcome but if they have acted recklessly or negligently the fact of a positive outcome would only act in mitigation, it would not necessarily amount to a defence of their actions (should those actions be deemed improper).

The passenger taking a bag down the slide can similarly use the fact that no one was injured or otherwise placed in any additional danger as part of their mitigation, it should not and does not excuse them for what they did. Publicising such prosecutions would serve to remind the flying public to leave everything behind in an evacuation.

No one is suggested that it is a black and white matter, but anything that can potentially save a life or reduce the risk of injury should be considered.

Indeed, my view is that it is not about the threat of prosecution that is important but the message to others that this behaviour is wrong, that it is potentially dangerous and life threatening. If people start hearing of prosecutions they will hear the message.

Ancient Observer

I am fortunate to not have been involved in aircraft emergency situations. However, in a previous life, I was trained in dealing with emergencies. (Evacuating a chlorine filled room, for instance)
However, this one has me puzzled. If the timings given above are correct, there was a 10 minute gap between landing and getting off the plane.
As an ignorant slf, 10 minutes would not seem to me to be an "emergency".
All the rules about aisle width, seating arrangements and etc were created to minimise the time taken for an emergency evacuation.
Was this an emergency evacuation? If it was, why did it not start 10 minutes earlier?

Tobias-UK

Because these situations are fluid, developing. Maybe the captain believed initially that an evacuation was the more dangerous option or that the situation was improving or that the situation became more serious and the eventual evacuation was the best course?

We don't know enough about the event and the timeline. When the investigation is concluded we might get some answers.

LHR/MEL/Europe FF

The trust in crew is admirable, but is it always supported?

Crew delays in evacuating the aircraft were experienced in the QF1 at BKK, Asiana at SFO, SQ's wing on fire at Changi, Saudia...

Here's a video clip of the SQ wing on fire but no evacuation was ordered: https://www.theguardian.com/world/20...rgency-landing

Where is the advocate for the passenger?

xPositor

Since someone else recommended it here on FT, I now use an for my "at seat" essentials. Just the right size - enough space to hold passport, wallet, phone, spectacles and (in ear) headphones. Room left to put your car keys. Carry on then goes overhead. Even better, keeps everything together at your seat, and avoids the "if your personal electronic device should be lost in the seat, please inform a member of cabin crew" issues, and is a godsend in a CW seat.

HowMayIHelp

G-BUSI

G-MEDN has returned to LHR from Valencia this afternoon.

nldogbert

Stumbled upon this new safety video by JAL (thanks to JalPak) on the JL forum

This is what all airlines should do - Highlight the consequnce of trying to bring your hand luggage with you and when it get's stuck blocking the escape route for all behind you. - instead of making some nice fancy videos which does not serve it's purpose when a real emergency happens.

Cheers!

Concerto

It's good but it's far far too long. In this time of smartphone addicts with an attention span of 2.1 seconds, nobody will watch it, especially the bit about not taking baggage some three and a half minutes in.

LHR/MEL/Europe FF

I like the idea and the graphics to show the potential dangers of trying to retrieve cabin baggage.

However, there is also reasoning behind the 'fancy' videos... which is all about engagement. Make a boring video and no one will watch it. Make them interesting and change them regularly then even the most hardened road warrior might occasionally pay attention.

PUCCI GALORE

corporate-wage-slave

I like the video, but unfortunately the "me, me, me" personality trait doesn't do safety videos, and probably Mr. Ramsay was our best hope. If someone has "very important documents", they are going to try to take them with them, and the only hope really is that cabin crew snatch them off people and toss them behind them before the evacuation slide gets damaged. The utterly annoying thing about that is that as an older guy I would hope (is that realistic?) that I would hold back - to ensure that those with their whole lives ahead of them get out first. But I wouldn't be exactly amused if they had destroyed the evacuation route in the process.

G-BUSI

I would suggest unrealistic, as the natural human instinct to save oneself would kick in with the adrenaline pumping around the system. Fight or flight and all that.

HowMayIHelp