angatol

.....

egentry

It is not the odds of the plane hitting turbulence in general as it is the number of people up when the sign is illuminated and the inability to convince and seat them when an bad turbulence is imminent. In the front when you see the FA running to her/his seat and strapping in people tend to follow the example. In the back as long as there is one person not rushing to their seat there will be many others following their example.

tyroner

Since I wrote the original post back in May, I have undertaken a great deal of 'research' through a summer of many long-haul flights. While none equaled the 8 hour endurance test I initially wrote about, the initial theory looks sound with numerous flights experiencing the overuse of the seat belt sign.

The insightful comments from freshairborne were forefront on my mind when on a UEX flight, we hit unexpected severe turbulence. This was a 145 regional jet and I was sitting in 1A while the FA was in the galley. I was initially worried the FA would end up on top of me but the FA was amazingly surefooted and did not budge. When the turbulence ceased a rep for the company got up and began giving the (now clearly trainee) FA tips on which parts of the ceiling are harder than others. I made sure to send a nice note in to UA as I was most impressed.

Miles Ahead

Don't be giving Jeff any ideas. Soon we will be seeing "Premier Qualifying Voltages"

More seriously, it's not intrinsically stupid. Risk is the probability of an incident multiplied by the severity of the incident. Having the light on all the time increases the probability of an incident (because people go up at random times, rather than times they have been informed our safer) but decreases the expected severity (because fewer people are up and available to crash into each other). It's possible that one ends up ahead with the light always on.

I very much doubt it. But it's possible.

ThisYearsModel

I experienced several 8 hour marathons with the seat belt sign on flying on UA to Europe. Nary a bump. Problem as I see it is that it increases the chance of pax disrespecting the sign.

mahasamatman

I was on an NZ flight where the seat belt light was off within 3-5 seconds of wheels-up. (I am not exaggerating.)

CO_Nonrev_elite

They don't care if you are up during the turbulence, they just want the liability protection of being able to say that the seatbelt sign was on, and despite the fact it was on, you got up anyways. Therefore leaving you with the liability.

If you know the level of petty lawsuits that they face every day, you'd probably agree with them.

gailwynand

Usually SQ is quite reasonable about seatbelts.

In this case culture was likely at play. The captain probably forgot to turn the sign off off but none of the FA's were willing to make the captain lose face by raising this possibility.

Combine that with the Singaporean tendency to follow rules and process to the letter regardless of common sense and you have the above outcome.

twtrvl

"Passenger Management" - That's downright hostile.

mahasamatman

If just shows that they consider themselves to be shepherds and passengers to be sheeple...

MSPeconomist

I've heard crew discussing keeping the seatbelt sign on for full flights in order to make it easier for FAs, not only for carts and to serve meals and then pick up the trays but just generally to keep passengers out of the aisles.

IMO the sign is mostly for liability reasons. When FAs are up, it seems best for people to make their own decisions based on how badly they need to leave their seat and their knowledge of their own physical limitations. IME FAs are more likely to try to strictly enforce the seat belt sign for coach passengers. Different carriers clearly have different attitudes.

mahasamatman

I'm waiting for this strategy to backfire like "The Boy Who Cried Wolf". Or maybe a better comparison is a broken traffic light.

mjcewl1284

Now that is fast

kettle1

Just like "in the good old days" when the smoking light would be turned off within seconds. I remember back when the entire plane was smoking. Then they created smoking "sections". The thrill of 50+ people lighting up at the same time on a 727. Oh, the memories!

MSPeconomist

The smoking light? OT, but having the smoking light lit usually meant that a meal was finished and people were free to smoke. I think you mean that the nonsmoking light/sign was turned off.