GadgetFreak

The longest I have seen it on was today. Eleven hours and forty seven minutes. The entire flight The problem was of course that after a while everyone ignored it. Most of the flight was quite smooth. So when we did hit a few patches of mild turbulence, they really couldnt even turn the sign on. And as we were nearing the end of the flight the pilot came on the PA and said we would be landing soon so if people needed to use the facilities now would be a good time. But the light stayed on throughout. I don't really get the point of that.

will2288

What was the route?

He must have forgotten, right? You would think the FAs would say somthing at some point.

GadgetFreak

Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (Linux; U; Android 2.3.3; en-us; pcdadr6350 Build/GRI40) AppleWebKit/533.1 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/4.0 Mobile Safari/533.1)

NRT-JFK. Yea, I kept waiting for it to go off but it never did. It was a great flight, excellent FAs. I just found it odd.

prof

In my experience, US airlines tend to be very quick to put the seatbelt sign on (even the mildest bit of turbulence can bring it on), and tend to leave it on for very long stretches of smooth air afterwards. This ends up defeating the purpose of the seatbelt sign because it comes to mean nothing at all. Most foreign carriers put the seatbelt sign on when they encounter or anticipate significant turbulence (not just a few bumps), and turn it off as soon as they get back into smooth air. That way, the sign is taken seriously, which i think makes much more sense from a safety standpoint. I've always assumed that the difference has to do with fear of lawsuits in the US: the airline wants to be in a position of having warned people just in case . . .

brp

I generally ignore the sign if things are not turbulent, haven't been for a while and the sign is on for longer than I deem appropriate. Can't recall ever having a FA make a comment and I have to walk right by them to use the F lav. Actually.keeping it on would work better for me as the people who do adhere wouldn't be using the lav

Cheers.

Ceteris Paribus

AA FA's are typically nicer to the "enforcement" compare to the more militant UA FA's... but 11:47 worth of Seat Belt advertisement begs the question: "what's the purpose?'
On a similar note... the No Smoking sign is off in the Mad Dogs that I routinely take out of DFW... does this mean for the hearing impaired that it is ok to smoke?

BrianV

I sometimes feel like AA leaves it on to reduce congestion in the aisles as I find it to be on nearly all of the time. I completely ignore it, but I also only get up when there's no bathroom line and I don't do the galley stretch or any of that crap, I take care of business and promptly return to my seat.

brp

Yeah, that's a better way to say what I said. If it's off, I may stand for a bit and stretch. If it's on, I'll still get up to go to the lav, but only when unoccupied, or door just opening...and then sit again.

Cheers.

CreditRocks

I agree with you there regarding US vs foreign carriers haha. Damn those lawsuits.

emma dog

If this was a real phenomenon, the foreign carriers would do the same things when flying to/from the US.

I vote that it's a cultural thing... The FAs and pilots don't like people milling around the cabin.

sluggoaafa

There is a permanent placard for the "No Smoking" sign on the MD80s. A few years ago, the bulbs were taken out to reduce the weight on the a/c.

I would much rather see the No Smoking sign turned to "Turn off Electronic Devices" since you can't smoke on US Carriers anyway

Either way, you never know when Turbulence is going to occur. I keep my seatbelt on when traveling as a pax ALL the time. I see many people unbuckle their seatbelts the first chance they get.

MIA to DCA flt diverted due to turbulence
Plane diverted to Charleston airport after pax injured due to turbulence
UAL Flt 967: Turbulence caused 22 injuries on plane diverted to DEN
Flight diverted due to Turbulence
Flight Global: FAA Publicity drive aims to curb turbulence injuries
Airsafe: Turbulence risks to airline pax
Airline passenger's paralysis puts focus on turbulence
Turbulence hurts: Leading cause of in-flight injuries
Alaska Airlines FAs file claim over air-turbulence injuries
In Turbulent Air, FAs face risk
(the list goes on and on)

mdavies

Really? how much weight did the bulbs add vs. the cost of removing all of them and sticking the permanent stickers over where they used to be?

emma dog

I suspect it relates to maintenance issues of replacing the light bulbs and the recurring costs for something that is always on versus weight.

BonzoESC

Don't be afraid to ring the FAs and ask them if the sign has been on for a while without any turbulence, especially if your fellow passengers are moving around. If the pilots have forgotten, the FA will be glad to remind them. If it's on for safety, the FAs will make an announcement.

ESpen36

I suspect the pilots just forget that they left it on. I fly a lot of long-hauls and frequently the sign is on the entire flight. Nobody pays any attention.

In fact, sometimes when turbulence actually occurs, the pilots have to "toggle" the sign, turning it off and then back on to get people's attention, because it was already on!