FlyerTalk Forums

FlyerTalk Forums (https://www.flyertalk.com/forum/index.php)
-   TravelBuzz (https://www.flyertalk.com/forum/travelbuzz-176/)
-   -   No tablet use in exit row during taxi/takeoff/landing? (https://www.flyertalk.com/forum/travelbuzz/1986558-no-tablet-use-exit-row-during-taxi-takeoff-landing.html)

lowfareair Sep 9, 19 9:36 am

No tablet use in exit row during taxi/takeoff/landing?
 
Was flying Level yesterday ORY-EWR in the exit row (Exit door on an A332). On descent, the FA instructed I needed to put my tablet (LG tablet about the size of an iPad mini) and Bose headphones that I was wearing away in the overhead, saying that we are not allowed to use them during taxi/takeoff/landing in the exit row.

I've never heard that and have sat in the exit row with that exact same tablet/headphones on many flights on various airlines, including during takeoff on this flight when another flight attendant was sitting directly across from me in her jumpseat and didn't say a peep.

Was the F/A on landing wrong there or is it just a loosely enforced rule?

Often1 Sep 9, 19 11:06 am

There is no such thing as "various airlines." If not required by French or US law, it is a matter of air carrier policy which is then filed with the relevant aviation safety agences. What some other carrier does is not directly relevant.

lowfareair Sep 10, 19 3:58 am


Originally Posted by Often1 (Post 31506934)
There is no such thing as "various airlines." If not required by French or US law, it is a matter of air carrier policy which is then filed with the relevant aviation safety agences. What some other carrier does is not directly relevant.

I understand, I was just stating that I haven't seen this when flying on other airlines, including BA or Iberia (same parent company). It could also be an FAA or EASA thing that just is loosely enforced, hence why I mentioned I haven't seen it before.

nancypants Sep 10, 19 4:01 am

Headphones, especially but not limited to Bluetooth ones, I have definitely known to be an issue

is it possible that the tablet alone would have been ok?

Annalisa12 Sep 10, 19 4:39 am

I can see it may be a problem. If there is an emergency and everyone trying to get out and you've dropped the tablet on the ground and people are slipping on it as they try and evacuate thus delaying the evacuation.

pauq Sep 10, 19 5:55 am

I believe both the FAA and the EASA have regulations regarding these issues:

You are not supposed to use any headphones, noise cancelling specially, during takeoff and landing so you can hear any announcements in case there is an emergency.

As for electronic devices in general, you should stow them for takeoff and landing so they don't (1) become a projectile and injure yourself or other people in case of a crash landing, rejected takeoff etc., or (2) get in the way in case of a evacuation. The bigger the device the the bigger the risk so phones are usually left alone while laptops are usually forbidden. Tablets are the middle ground which might not catch the attention of the FA most of the time.

IMHO, there is no good reason to use a tablet, or a phone for that matter, during takeoff or landing and it should be better enforced. Risking turning your device into a projectile is not worth 5 extra minutes of screen time.

Nhilar Sep 10, 19 8:40 am

Meh
 
I agree with you in principle, but it does not really matter, the number of whole plane threatening events ( I am not talking about the daily happening like aborted landings, engine trouble that causes reroute to the nearest airport, etc etc
) in which there are survivors is vanishing small...so small that when it does happen they become the subjects of major motion pictures.

I travel alot, I have come to terms with the near certainty that in a major incident at altitude or a double engine failure at take off, that I am probably going to die. It is not like other forms of transportation where you can just stop or pull over. The best you can do is insure properly and understand that life threatening events are rather rare.

So my takeaway is to follow the guidelines, they make you feel better and allow for smoother travel - but generally will not enhance your survival odds when something really really bad happens.

nancypants Sep 10, 19 10:55 am

This “most accidents are not survivable” (paraphrase of previous post) is a total myth-NTSB figures, 95% survival rate, with survival from “serious incidents” 55%

source: https://flightsafety.org/fsd/fsd_oct01.pdf

you could say it’s highly unlikely to have an accident in the first place but saying it’s highly unlikely to survive once an accident happens is complete bollocks

dinoscool3 Sep 10, 19 10:58 am


Originally Posted by pauq (Post 31509540)
I believe both the FAA and the EASA have regulations regarding these issues:

You are not supposed to use any headphones, noise cancelling specially, during takeoff and landing so you can hear any announcements in case there is an emergency.

As for electronic devices in general, you should stow them for takeoff and landing so they don't (1) become a projectile and injure yourself or other people in case of a crash landing, rejected takeoff etc., or (2) get in the way in case of a evacuation. The bigger the device the the bigger the risk so phones are usually left alone while laptops are usually forbidden. Tablets are the middle ground which might not catch the attention of the FA most of the time.

IMHO, there is no good reason to use a tablet, or a phone for that matter, during takeoff or landing and it should be better enforced. Risking turning your device into a projectile is not worth 5 extra minutes of screen time.

Do you read during take-off and landing? Books can pretty quickly become "projectiles" too.

Nhilar Sep 10, 19 11:03 am


Originally Posted by nancypants (Post 31510453)
This “most accidents are not survivable” is a total myth-NTSB figures, 95% survival rate, with survival from “serious incidents” 55%

source: https://flightsafety.org/fsd/fsd_oct01.pdf

you could say it’s highly unlikely to have an accident in the first place but saying it’s highly unlikely to survive once an accident happens is complete bollocks


Not to be flippant, your response is incredibly insulting as it appears you are putting words in my mouth (specifically please identify where I said "most accidents are not survivable" - since you put it in quotes you are clearly identifying me as the speaker - if you can't find where I said that, your credibility is really in question in my mind) and it seems you really did not read what I wrote in terms of qualification of what types of accidents I am speaking about...most aircraft accidents are minor. But there is no way you are surviving an aircraft breakup at altitude or a double engine failure in the critical zone on take-off. But maybe you chose to ignore what I wrote to make your point?

nancypants Sep 10, 19 11:52 am


Originally Posted by Nhilar (Post 31510492)
Not to be flippant, your response is incredibly insulting as it appears you are putting words in my mouth (specifically please identify where I said "most accidents are not survivable" - since you put it in quotes you are clearly identifying me as the speaker - if you can't find where I said that, your credibility is really in question in my mind) and it seems you really did not read what I wrote in terms of qualification of what types of accidents I am speaking about...most aircraft accidents are minor. But there is no way you are surviving an aircraft breakup at altitude or a double engine failure in the critical zone on take-off. But maybe you chose to ignore what I wrote to make your point?

I hear what you’re saying, and i’m sorry if you feel insulted, that wasn’t my intention. It was a general comment. You were not quoted or referenced

of course in a high altitude in flight break up access to exit rows is not relevant, neither is the condition of the exit rows at take off or landing. So perhaps you could also reconsider your flippancy and phrasing about things

nb I would also challenge your “no way are you surviving a double engine failure in the critical zone at take off”- and that is a direct quote 😉. I didn’t even quote you in the first instance so i’d perhaps check your offence level regardless

pauq Sep 13, 19 3:20 am


Originally Posted by dinoscool3 (Post 31510467)
Do you read during take-off and landing? Books can pretty quickly become "projectiles" too.

No, I don't. As I said, 5 minutes without a screen or reading material is not a big deal. However, magazines and pocketbooks are usually lighter and softer than tablets and laptops so they are not as dangerous although you could still slip in them. Hardcovers can be worse but are less common with travellers. As with anything safety, it's always a trade-off between risk and reward/benefit so I understand why regulatory agencies consider the risk of injury acceptable in one case but the not in the other. Ideally, there shouldn't be any heavy unstowed items around the cabin during take-off, landing or when heavy turbulence is expected whatever those items are.

gobluetwo Sep 13, 19 11:28 am

Enough with the pointless off-topic discussion. I know duty calls, but still...

https://cimg4.ibsrv.net/gimg/www.fly...278a3d0a8d.png


As for the OP's question, I think it would depend on the particular carrier and even the particular FA. I've only ever experienced the "no headphones, no books, no devices in exit rows on takeoff/landing" direction from FA's on regional US carriers. Regardless, it's been an exceedingly rare occurrence for me and, it seems, for OP as well. Just chalk it up to YMMV with respect to certain flights and FAs and move on.


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 10:00 pm.


This site is owned, operated, and maintained by MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. Copyright © 2018 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Designated trademarks are the property of their respective owners.