dt24

Has there been a debate on the topic of removing the seats in the exit rows from most planes?
I think there are some valid reasons to do this:
1. I've never been in an emergency where my flight had to utilize the exit doors, but I can only imagine 100 people trying to exit through these doors and not having enough room to exit in an efficient manner.

2. I assume some people with size limitations could possibly have greater difficulty with a row of seats limiting their movement to the exit door.

Overall, my argument comes down to safety and I understand that such safety concerns come with a set of consequences. I foresee the argument on loss of revenue over these seats. Another argument could be the current airplane exit row seat configuration is ample room for a safe evacuation.

There's another side to this in that these seats will definitely be premium seats. If ever there was a need to use the exit row, this "suggested" seat removal would have the "path of least resistance". Removing the exit row seats would result in the row behind the exit row seats to become the responsible owners of opening the exit doors.

I post this topic in hopes that different points of views will challenge this topic. I definitely look forward to your insights.

Thanks!

pinniped

I've always wondered that too: in an actual emergency, how easy would it be to escape out of an overwing exit on, say, an MD-80.

I usually fly AA, I usually fly short segments in coach, and I'm almost always in seat 21D or F - next to an overwing exit. I would be the first or second person out the door. But I find myself wondering "How would ten or fifteen people get out of this aircraft quickly through this little hole?"

On the larger aircraft (757's and up), I am usually seated next to or pretty near a full-sized door, so I wonder about it less. It's the long narrowbodies that appear to me to be the toughest to escape in an emergency. I know they have done tests to prove that X people can get out in Y seconds (fast enough to make the FAA happy) with the row of seats there, so I don't think they will ever remove the row unless the FAA says "You have to be able to get out faster."

Anyone know how they do those tests? I remember hearing a story (urban legend?) about how Boeing wanted to get the 777 rated for 407 passengers, but could only get 406 because one of the volunteers for the "escape" test freaked out and wouldn't jump down the slide. Does Boeing get to hand-select and run the volunteers through dress rehearsals, or do they have to be random people (with a mix of elderly and children) with no prior experience getting out of an airplane in a hurry?

WHBM

The tests are under the control of the FAA in the USA (for Boeing), JAA in Europe (for Airbus). Both are comparable. They generally take place in a hangar at the factory which can be darkened with the new aircraft fully fitted out with seats etc. The "volunteers" are generally friends and families of the manufacturers employees, selected to give an appropriate cross-section of the travelling public, including children, elderly and handicapped. JAA/FAA observers are stationed around the cabin. There is no rehearsal other than standard airline briefings.

On "go" only 75% of the doors actually work (not known beforehand which ones will not work) and the observers toss in a couple of smoke bombs to help things along. Appropriate noises are added on the PA. Everybody must be out in 90 seconds. As always, the captain is last out.

There were some unfortunate injuries during the MD-11 test some years ago that caused the whole principle to be questioned, but it needs to be done.

I often have my doubts about the passengers in emergency exit seats, particularly the one who would handle the door. It's about 40 pounds weight and you need to get it inside the aircraft, then throw it right out (except the Boeing 737NG which has a different design). Comments such as pinniped's about doubting the efficiency of the process make me wonder if he/she is an appropriate person to be seated in that row anyway. You need someone who will be committed to the process, who takes time to read the instructions on door handling and to practice them in their own mind, just as I do when there. The attitude that they are just good seats because of increased legroom should be tempered by the realisation that you are assuming an increased responsibility to your fellow passengers.

The basic layout ot the A380 was determined more than anything else by evacuation requirements. They looked at a single decker much wider than the present widebodies but it needed so many emergency exits they went for the full double deck layout. It will be an interesting trial when ready!

pinniped

I don't even know how to respond to this. I thought about an "I can bench my weight" response or an "I always read the instructions" response, but then I realized that I don't need to justify myself to you.

I am pretty comfortable that, among the generic public, I'm easily among the most qualified 5 or 10 percent of people to sit next to the exit, assuming that the skills required are speed, strength, and the ability to interpret both written and verbal (crewmember) instructions.

Of course, last time I checked, they weren't requiring me to submit my weight room metrics, last three marathon finishing times, results from the verbal section of my SAT, and my IQ in order to get that seat assignment, so who knows...

And yes, I still question how fast people could really make it out of that little exit in an emergency.

Globaliser

Tests have shown that if you increase the pitch at the exit, to make the passage to the door wider, you increase the rate of flow until a certain point. From there onwards, the wider that passage is the slower people get out, because of crowding and jamming issues. The path between the seat rows helps to ensure an orderly evacuation.

If you just removed the row of seats at the exit, this suggests that you would probably hinder rather than help any evacuation.

oldpenny16

Many years ago I made the decision not to sit in Exit rows as I believe that opening the door would be very hard for me to do. I am a small person, middle aged and can barely handle a 30 pound suitcase. I am perfectly willing to yield that job to a big, strong guy. Yes, I did say GUY!

I do take the precaution of counting the number of rows from my seat to the nearest exit in front of me and also to the rear. If need be I intend to get out of the airplane.

pinniped

Semi-on-topic: Did anyone happen to see this month's Wired magazine? In it was an article about how to design large rooms (as in a nightclub or ballroom) and exits such that people can actually escape in an emergency.

One of the scenarios illustrated a concept similar to what you describe, Globaliser. A well-placed column near a doorway can actually help move people along because it breaks up herds into a single line. I guess if you removed an entire row on an aircraft, you'd no longer have a single line filing out between seats, but instead would have a mini-herd trying to squeeze through the door.

JS

I think it's silly to worry about the overwing exits. What are the chances you will actually need to use it? Worry about something more likely, or just quit worrying, period. You will live longer!

I don't like sitting in the exit row because it's very cold. Grandma can sit there for all I care. I think the FAA gives people in an emergency less credit than due. If you do need to the use the emergency exit and Grandma can't lift the heavy door, I'm sure someone will volunteer real fast.

------------------
"Be careful about reading health books. You may die of a misprint." -- Mark Twain

pinniped

Maybe I overstated it a bit. Shoot me. I don't "worry". Mild curiousity on my part, not an extensive series of nightmares.