RonAiler

I made a suggestion to a number of airlines over the years, including AA, that passengers asking for/assigned to exit row seats be tested before boarding to see if they can actually open a window exit in an emergency. As we all know from reading those instruction guides, there are a couple of steps involved in opening the exits which I, too, wouldn't mind trying in case I ever needed that actual knowledge in an emergency. I frequently suspect that many people assigned those seats couldn't open the exits if their lives, literally, depended on it due to their old age or infirmness. I suggested that the passengers be allowed to try opening a mock-up exit located somewhere in the terminal prior to boarding. If they couldn't perform the maneuver, they wouldn't get the exit row seat. That simple. Naturally, all of the airlines rejected the idea while not citing a reason. I even suggested it might be good PR for the airlines as a safety preparedness measure. Any thoughts on this?

dfwdal

You've have an interesting idea, but it's not very practical. But don't worry, infirm and old people, as well as passengers traveling with young children are not seated in exit rows. If they are, it's my understanding that FA's are required to have them moved to a non-exit row seat.

In an emergency, if time permits, I'm told that FA's will move deadheading or non-reving crewmembers and other trained emergency workers such as police, firefighters, etc. into emergency row seats.

RonAiler

- Could you please tell me why you think it's not practical? I think setting up a small station behind a partition, probably about the size of volkwagon in the gate area, would be very doable. The station would be comprised of a wall section of the plane that had a window exit built into it, and maybe some seats to give it the narrow feel of a plane aisle.
- Regarding your comment about who sits in the exit rows, old, obese, and questionably-infirm people sit in them with alarming frequency. I'm plat on AA and the equivalent on Delta, and I see it happen regularly. FA's tell me they are very relucatant to move them, usually because they're often elite members or simply want to avoid the confrontation.
- Yes, FA's can put qualified people in the exits in an emergency if time permits. However, statistically, time doesn't permit in about half the time, such as when tire blow oout on the runway, when a wind sheer drops the plane back to the ground, etc.
I'd appreciate your feedback on these points.

SEA_Tigger

What you ask for, RonAiler, is pretty impractable. Such a structure would have to be pretty large, which would take up a good portion of gate real estate. Not to mention on some aircraft the "Exit Row" is a physical door - not a window exit - so you'd need to have a full aircraft door present, as well. We're talking probaby hundreds of square feet, all total.

Then there is the time factor. Airlines would have to station additional staff there solely to handle the "tests". You could have dozens of people who need to be "tested". Do you need to show up an hour early at the gate just to do the test? Or do you force them to do the tests while everyone else boards? At that point, you miss out on service (in premium cabins) and overhead bin space (in Economy) which will really go over well with your most frequent travellers. Not to mention holding up the flight for everyone else, which will not go over well with the whole plane, as well.

In non-catostrophic incidents (aborted take-off) that does not result in compromise of the airframe, they don't use the over-wing exits, anyway, as it is easier and safer to evacuate through the main doors. And in those incidents, an FA is stationed right at each door so the passengers never have to assist.

And catastrophic incidents that do compromise the airframe are so rare (last one I can remember was that British 732 that burst into flame during an aborted take-off like a decade ago) that the benefits of testing are far outweighed by the negatives involved. And in such an event, self-preservation will probably ensure that if the person at the door doesn't open the exit, someone else will go through them and do so.

RonAiler

Interesting, but I still think this issue is a weak link in the industry's safety protocol. Having someone try opening a mock-up door would take all a half minute prior to boarding. And I can't think of a major or secondary airport that doesn't have a small corner near their gates for this purpose. Anyway, thanks for giving the idea some thought.

BearX220

Think of the cost of building all those mockups for the gate areas, and the pre-boarding tension in the gate area that would come from people practicing, noisily and visibly, for a dire inflight emergency.

It's far cheaper, and probably more effective, for engaged FAs to size up the exit row pax before pushback and judge that they're capable. Airlines -- and FAs too -- are all over the lot on this point. Sometimes a really conscientious FA will come back and interview all exit row occupants at some length, which surprises and pleases me. But at least half the time FAs do nothing noticeable.

MDSD

I've seen this suggestion made before and one of the reasons offered for not doing so, from the airline's point of view, was psychological. For a large number of passengers, passing such a demonstration in progress would have a decidedly negative effect.
I agree with the OP and would like to see a dry run offered. I'm often in the exit row but check out the instructions for that aircraft; a pre-boarding mockup could shave a few seconds off the procedure.

Arthurrs

What if a gate is used for multiple different types of airplanes? Have a mockup for each type airplane there? That would get very expensive (knowing the cost of airplane parts to begin with).

WHBM

This has been discussed here before, generally that at one of the airline "open days" they do for their elites in some programmes at their training base the attendees could have a go on the evacuation training simulator, and it then be noted on their profile so they get first chance of the exit seats.

Of course many aircraft already carry passengers with such skills, in the form of deadheading pilots and FAs, or those from other airlines who are passengers. But if they were given the exit seats first (and personally I think they should be) I think there would be a bit of an uproar here !

SEA_Tigger

I find it only takes me thirty seconds to refresh in my mind how to open a main door or an overwing exit. I also watch the safety briefing, even though I could do it in my sleep by now. But the FAs appreciate it, knowing that there is at least one less chucklehead on the plane they have to deal with.

ricktoronto

Since 99% of passengers now carry a canoe-sized 150 pound rollaboard they pass the test every time they hoist that tonnage over their head and stow it above themselves. The OP idea is almost silly in its impracticality.

YVR Cockroach

Don't know what wold have helped in that incident. Due to use of reverse thrusters during the abort, burning fuel was sprayed all over the fueselage. Pax using the emergency exits would have had to go through that to get out.

WHBM

Well here's one (of many) a lot more recent). Nice and survivable. Note how the fuselage is broken preventing access to the regular exits.

http://www.airliners.net/open.file/327987/L/

Buster

I had never seen someone complain before, but a few months ago I was on a BA flight where 2 elderly people were sitting in the emergency exit row. They were clearly frail and had been wheeled to the plane by gate staff, and assisted to their seats by FAs. A man a couple of rows away complained that they should not be seated in the emergency exit row, as they were clearly unable to open the door in the event of an emergency. BA FAs replied that they would not reseat these passengers. I wondered about what it took to actually get someone reseated under these circumstances...and made a note to use the other exit if needed!

SEA_Tigger

Thanks. Never heard of it, but knowing the news media, they only like to showcase the "bad" ones.

Still, even in this case there was plenty of time to open the Overwing Exits and evacuate the plane. So while it is "catostrophic", I'm thinking more "Towering Inferno"-type accidents where time is literally of the essence in getting out alive. And while they do happen, they're rare (and even rarer in the United States).


A threat to leave the plane if they are not re-seated, which of course would cause a "security incident" if granted and would result in serious delay. Fortunately, you'd have valid grounds for making your case, so no worries about the cuffs and the airline probably would not like the media and FAA attention on violation of safety and security regulations.