Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Hawaiian A332 teaches dozens of pax a painful lesson about personal freedom

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Hawaiian A332 teaches dozens of pax a painful lesson about personal freedom

    Clear air turbulence. Seat belt sign illuminated. Dozens injured. Eleven seriously. Twenty hospitalized. Nothing to see here. But a lot to learn from.

    Aviation Herald - News, Incidents and Accidents in Aviation



  • #2
    Bicycle ride teaches bubble boy a valuable lesson in life.

    Les règles de l'aviation de base découragent de longues périodes de dur tirer vers le haut.

    Comment


    • #3
      Originally posted by Evan View Post
      Clear air turbulence. Seat belt sign illuminated. Dozens injured. Eleven seriously. Twenty hospitalized. Nothing to see here. But a lot to learn from.

      Aviation Herald - News, Incidents and Accidents in Aviation

      Honest question (despite the sarcasm)...

      What do you do when the crew keeps the seat belt sign on during 8 hours of a super smooth flight, including 6 hours after you were served a laxative/diuretic dinner and you cannot hold it anymore? And when you get up and go to the loo, because you don't have any other respectable option, the flight attendants just watch you going up and down the aisle without caring or reminding you that what you are doing is not just dangerous but a violation of federal regulations?

      I think that airlines are at least partially responsible for the lack of respect we passengers have for the seat belt sign. It is called crying wolf.

      --- Judge what is said by the merits of what is said, not by the credentials of who said it. ---
      --- Defend what you say with arguments, not by imposing your credentials ---

      Comment


      • #4
        Originally posted by Gabriel View Post

        Honest question (despite the sarcasm)...

        What do you do when the crew keeps the seat belt sign on during 8 hours of a super smooth flight, including 6 hours after you were served a laxative/diuretic dinner and you cannot hold it anymore? And when you get up and go to the loo, because you don't have any other respectable option, the flight attendants just watch you going up and down the aisle without caring or reminding you that what you are doing is not just dangerous but a violation of federal regulations?

        I think that airlines are at least partially responsible for the lack of respect we passengers have for the seat belt sign. It is called crying wolf.
        I don't understand that. Are you saying that, because they FA's allow passengers to defy the warnings they have been given, the airline is partially to blame? We've seen what happens to FA's who try to impose their rules upon freedom-loving Americans.

        Personally, I use the lav as rarely as possible and only when there isn't a group of others waiting. And if we enter some significant turbulence (as this flight did) I either wait it out or proceed to the lav expecting to be suddenly thrown around. I don't recall ever being on a flight where the seatbelt signs were left on for 8 hours.

        But don't kid yourself. Most of these dozens of people were not waiting for the lav.

        I think the aftermath should go something like this:

        "We will be arriving at our gate momentarily. Emergency medical staff are standing by. We ask that our injured passengers remain seated while our smarter, uninjured passengers remove their seatbelts and gather their belongings so that they may proceed to their destinations or connecting flights. During this time, our injured passengers can fill out the lawsuit form found in the seatback pocket. Please write either your own name or the word 'aerodynamics' in space marked 'defendant'.

        Comment


        • #5
          Originally posted by Evan View Post

          I don't understand that. Are you saying that, because they FA's allow passengers to defy the warnings they have been given, the airline is partially to blame? We've seen what happens to FA's who try to impose their rules upon freedom-loving Americans.

          Personally, I use the lav as rarely as possible and only when there isn't a group of others waiting. And if we enter some significant turbulence (as this flight did) I either wait it out or proceed to the lav expecting to be suddenly thrown around. I don't recall ever being on a flight where the seatbelt signs were left on for 8 hours.

          But don't kid yourself. Most of these dozens of people were not waiting for the lav.

          I think the aftermath should go something like this:

          "We will be arriving at our gate momentarily. Emergency medical staff are standing by. We ask that our injured passengers remain seated while our smarter, uninjured passengers remove their seatbelts and gather their belongings so that they may proceed to their destinations or connecting flights. During this time, our injured passengers can fill out the lawsuit form found in the seatback pocket. Please write either your own name or the word 'aerodynamics' in space marked 'defendant'.
          Personally, I use the lav as rarely as possible and only when there isn't a group of others waiting. And if we enter some significant turbulence (as this flight did) I either wait it out or proceed to the lav expecting to be suddenly thrown around. I don't recall ever being on a flight where the seatbelt signs were left on for 8 hours.

          But don't kid yourself. Most of these dozens of people were not waiting for the lav.

          I think the aftermath should go something like this:

          "We will be arriving at our gate momentarily. Emergency medical staff are standing by. We ask that our injured passengers remain seated while our smarter, uninjured passengers remove their seatbelts and gather their belongings so that they may proceed to their destinations or connecting flights. During this time, our injured passengers can fill out the lawsuit form found in the seatback pocket. Please write either your own name or the word 'aerodynamics' in space marked 'defendant'.[/QUOTE]

          I must be terrible at conveying my thoughts. Let me try again:

          1- Flight crews tend to leave seat belt signs on for ultra-extended periods of time for no apparent reason, in perfectly smooth cruise flights. And with ultra-extended I mean hours and hours long. I have been in more than 1 flight where the crew followed the procedural sign-off after achieving cruise together with a PA saying "We are turning the sign off now but keep the seatbelt on while seated yadayada" only to, a few minutes thereafter, turn it on and leave it on for the reminder of the 10+ hours flight.
          2- The flight is super smooth.
          3- During said flight, and while the sign is still on, the flight attendants come and go freely serving hot food and hot beverages, what one would think is a big nono if there is an increased risk of intense turbulence.
          4- In said long flights, a non-negligible portion of the pax NEED to use the restroom.
          5- The flight attendants happily allow that without objections.
          6- People that go to the restroom see that nothing happens.
          7- People not going to the restroom see the other people coming and going and that nothing bad happens.
          8- Go back to 1 and repeat over and over in many flights.
          9- Apply the "boy who cried wolf" effect (or, the same reason why frequent false alarms are dangerous). People ends up believing that the sign is a formality without any critical importance (except for those times where it is obvious to them that it is important, like climb, descent, and turbulence).
          10- One flight where something bad DOES happen (turbulence without warning), the crew uses the "the seat belts were on at the time of the accident" (they may have been on since take off) as a liability-control measure.

          I do keep my seatbelt latched at all times while seated, and I do remain seated and belted as much as possible. But in 8+ hours flight it is not uncommon that I NEED to go tot he restroom. I try to pick the moment strategically. If the signs are off, I go as soon as I feel the need. If the signs were recently turned on, or they have been on for a while and there is turbulence, I resist. If the signs are on , have been on for a while, there has been no turbulence for a while, and I predict that I will not be able to resist until we are at the terminal (which can still be a couple hours away), then I go. In violation of federal regulations for not complying with posted signs. And in fully acknowledgement that if the fin hits the sham at that moment, the company will use the "the sign was on" stupid wildcard. Now, I do see how the sign losses credibility and authority with this misuse and random passengers that may not understand the circumstances and risks as I do may reject the abuse and elect to ignore the sign.

          It is as if the airlines had a policy (most likely unwritten) to keep the signs on to limit their liability, Because if the signs are off, and there is a truly unexpected jolt and people gets hurt, they may get sued under the pax's equally ridiculous excuse that "I was happily 5leeping in my seat and the sign was off"

          My proposal? Make remaining belted at all times while seated mandatory, not just a suggestion. In that way people will be liable for their own injuries if injured by turbulence while seated, regardless of the status of the sign. Prohibit flight crews form turning or leaving the sign on unless it is required for the phase of flight or for "reasonable suspicion" that the flight might encounter turbulence in the next few minutes. And give the pilots an electric shock if the sign remains on for more than 10 minutes at cruse (just in case this trend I observe is not intentional but an act of forgetfulness).

          (5leeping is not a typo, it's a workaround for another forbidden word)

          --- Judge what is said by the merits of what is said, not by the credentials of who said it. ---
          --- Defend what you say with arguments, not by imposing your credentials ---

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by Gabriel View Post

            I must be terrible at conveying my thoughts. Let me try again:

            1- Flight crews tend to leave seat belt signs on for ultra-extended periods of time for no apparent reason, in perfectly smooth cruise flights. And with ultra-extended I mean hours and hours long. I have been in more than 1 flight where the crew followed the procedural sign-off after achieving cruise together with a PA saying "We are turning the sign off now but keep the seatbelt on while seated yadayada" only to, a few minutes thereafter, turn it on and leave it on for the reminder of the 10+ hours flight.
            2- The flight is super smooth.
            3- During said flight, and while the sign is still on, the flight attendants come and go freely serving hot food and hot beverages, what one would think is a big nono if there is an increased risk of intense turbulence.
            4- In said long flights, a non-negligible portion of the pax NEED to use the restroom.
            5- The flight attendants happily allow that without objections.
            6- People that go to the restroom see that nothing happens.
            7- People not going to the restroom see the other people coming and going and that nothing bad happens.
            8- Go back to 1 and repeat over and over in many flights.
            9- Apply the "boy who cried wolf" effect (or, the same reason why frequent false alarms are dangerous). People ends up believing that the sign is a formality without any critical importance (except for those times where it is obvious to them that it is important, like climb, descent, and turbulence).
            10- One flight where something bad DOES happen (turbulence without warning), the crew uses the "the seat belts were on at the time of the accident" (they may have been on since take off) as a liability-control measure.

            I do keep my seatbelt latched at all times while seated, and I do remain seated and belted as much as possible. But in 8+ hours flight it is not uncommon that I NEED to go tot he restroom. I try to pick the moment strategically. If the signs are off, I go as soon as I feel the need. If the signs were recently turned on, or they have been on for a while and there is turbulence, I resist. If the signs are on , have been on for a while, there has been no turbulence for a while, and I predict that I will not be able to resist until we are at the terminal (which can still be a couple hours away), then I go. In violation of federal regulations for not complying with posted signs. And in fully acknowledgement that if the fin hits the sham at that moment, the company will use the "the sign was on" stupid wildcard. Now, I do see how the sign losses credibility and authority with this misuse and random passengers that may not understand the circumstances and risks as I do may reject the abuse and elect to ignore the sign.

            It is as if the airlines had a policy (most likely unwritten) to keep the signs on to limit their liability, Because if the signs are off, and there is a truly unexpected jolt and people gets hurt, they may get sued under the pax's equally ridiculous excuse that "I was happily 5leeping in my seat and the sign was off"

            My proposal? Make remaining belted at all times while seated mandatory, not just a suggestion. In that way people will be liable for their own injuries if injured by turbulence while seated, regardless of the status of the sign. Prohibit flight crews form turning or leaving the sign on unless it is required for the phase of flight or for "reasonable suspicion" that the flight might encounter turbulence in the next few minutes. And give the pilots an electric shock if the sign remains on for more than 10 minutes at cruse (just in case this trend I observe is not intentional but an act of forgetfulness).

            (5leeping is not a typo, it's a workaround for another forbidden word)
            I agree with 99.99% of that (I would only relocate the electric shock for passengers who remain unbelted for more than 10 minutes).

            When I do use the lav, I assume the risk, keep it to a minimum and I always remain very aware that I am hurtling through the stratosphere in a transonic metal tube, prepared to protect myself if I get thrown around. Contrast this to people who cluelessly unbelt and even lounge about the plane like it's a cruise ship. I seriously would like the preflight spiel to include a stern announcement about the unpredictable nature of clear-air turbulence and the danger that imposes when you are moving at these speeds. When they wander or lounge about, remind pax it is essential to their safety to remain belted in whenever possible. Airlines would resist this as they don't want to alarm the pax (especially in the big seats where they are hyper-focused on 'customer experience'), but many of these pax really do remain clueless about the danger. Then, when they get to something called 'cruise altitude', they think that means it's okay to go stroll about on the boat deck to stretch their legs.

            I know, some of this is just modern-age Darwinism and the 'what, me worry?' mentality of the ones bound for extinction. But not entirely.

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by Gabriel View Post

              I must be terrible at conveying my thoughts. Let me try again:

              1- Flight crews tend to leave seat belt signs on for ultra-extended periods of time for no apparent reason, in perfectly smooth cruise flights. And with ultra-extended I mean hours and hours long. I have been in more than 1 flight where the crew followed the procedural sign-off after achieving cruise together with a PA saying "We are turning the sign off now but keep the seatbelt on while seated yadayada" only to, a few minutes thereafter, turn it on and leave it on for the reminder of the 10+ hours flight.
              2- The flight is super smooth.
              3- During said flight, and while the sign is still on, the flight attendants come and go freely serving hot food and hot beverages, what one would think is a big nono if there is an increased risk of intense turbulence.
              4- In said long flights, a non-negligible portion of the pax NEED to use the restroom.
              5- The flight attendants happily allow that without objections.
              6- People that go to the restroom see that nothing happens.
              7- People not going to the restroom see the other people coming and going and that nothing bad happens.
              8- Go back to 1 and repeat over and over in many flights.
              9- Apply the "boy who cried wolf" effect (or, the same reason why frequent false alarms are dangerous). People ends up believing that the sign is a formality without any critical importance (except for those times where it is obvious to them that it is important, like climb, descent, and turbulence).
              10- One flight where something bad DOES happen (turbulence without warning), the crew uses the "the seat belts were on at the time of the accident" (they may have been on since take off) as a liability-control measure.
              #10 is a big deal here.

              You never know when sudden turbulence can occur (and this case seems to be one of those).

              So, pilots will err on the side of caution for liability control.

              Resulting in your instance #2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8...

              The sign is also used to make beverage service go well (ever noticed that tendency?)

              AND TeeVee's favorite (which I agree is somewhat bullcrap). "WE ARE ON AN ACTIVE TAXIWAY" (Never mind that the plane hasn't moved nor is moving for 10 more minutes...)

              If pilots use good science, there's still going to be those oops moments and bruises. With good science there's also going to be storm encounters where turbulence is a non_issue for drink service...And hell, passing out hot coffee, but I can't pee?

              Just saying that, like a bike ride, it's not_black and white.
              Les règles de l'aviation de base découragent de longues périodes de dur tirer vers le haut.

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by 3WE View Post

                #10 is a big deal here.

                You never know when sudden turbulence can occur (and this case seems to be one of those).

                So, pilots will err on the side of caution for liability control.

                Resulting in your instance #2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8...

                The sign is also used to make beverage service go well (ever noticed that tendency?)

                AND TeeVee's favorite (which I agree is somewhat bullcrap). "WE ARE ON AN ACTIVE TAXIWAY" (Never mind that the plane hasn't moved nor is moving for 10 more minutes...)

                If pilots use good science, there's still going to be those oops moments and bruises. With good science there's also going to be storm encounters where turbulence is a non_issue for drink service...And hell, passing out hot coffee, but I can't pee?

                Just saying that, like a bike ride, it's not_black and white.
                I agree. I am not saying that if the seatbelt sing was used in a more consistent and responsible manner there wouldn't be cases of unexpected turbulence causing injuries.

                What I am saying is:
                - Let's make it mandatory (and enforce it) to use the seatbelt when seated regardless of sign status, and let's change the "seatbelt" sign for a "remain seated" sign.
                - Let's use the sign only when there is reasonable suspicion that turbulence may hit (beyond "turbulence can happen at any time without warning").
                - Let's be consistent in the message. When the sign is on people is told not to leave their seats. When the sign is on flight attendants that are not currently actively engaging in any service or flight related activity remains seated and belted. (More than once I have gone to the restroom well after dinner service, and after the sign has been on for hours for no apparent reason, only to find the flight attendants standing in the galley chatting or checking their phones).
                - Let's get the signs turned off after the reasonable suspicion dissipated.

                What I would expect or at least hope as a result is.
                - More people would use the seatbelt at all times while seated (many of the injured persons in this flight were seated but not belted, so having more people belted while seated would have helped here).
                - Less people would get off their seats when the "remain seated" sign is on (possibly not a factor in this flight if it was a total surprise, but would help overall with the credibility and compliance regarding the sign and may help in other instances).

                --- Judge what is said by the merits of what is said, not by the credentials of who said it. ---
                --- Defend what you say with arguments, not by imposing your credentials ---

                Comment


                • #9
                  I am an old man (currently 73 yrs old) who has a weak bladder due to a need to take medication that has an unfortunate side effect of causing a sudden need, and I do mean SUDDEN NEED, to urinate. When I travel I try to juggle the time of day I take the medication but circumstances often cause it to kick in at a difficult time. When this happens I have a few minutes to urinate after which it will happen whether I like it or not.
                  it happened once on a flight when the seat belt lights were on. I got up and, when an FA told me sit back down tried to explain what was happening but she wasn’t about to listen. I therefore advised her that in about 2 minutes I would start to urinate involuntarily, that I would have no control over it and that I had no intention of allowing it to happen while sitting in my seat or letting it go in my trousers while standing arguing with her. She was therefore putting me in a situation where I would have no option other than to to unzip a publicly pee on the carpeted aisle floor.
                  I won the argument when I unzipped and started to dig out my dick in front of her after warning adjacent passengers to avert their eyes if they did not wish to view the impending flow of liquid.
                  Lesson learned here was that while you may be in charge the autonomic actions of a human body have absolutely no respect for authority. Sometimes we just have to take our chances.
                  A secondary lesson learned was…don’t argue with senior citizens who have an immediate and uncontrollable need. They have fought authority for their whole life and won. They also don’t give a shit about authority.
                  If it 'ain't broken........ Don't try to mend it !

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    while it is clear to all of us here for more than a few days that evan is a dyed-in-the-wool subscriber and adherent to the nanny-state religion, i find his typical, black and white comments here to be hilarious.

                    it is NOT a violation of any law to use the lav while the seatbelt sign is lit. i've flown well over 100 segments this year, and have spent probably 300-350 hours in flight. on almost every single one of those flights, on several different airlines and in several different countries, the Captain, you know, the person actually in charge of everything but the laws of nature while in flight, has said something to the effect of, "while the seatbelt sign is lighted, please remain seated with your seatbelt fastened. if you NEED to use the restroom, you may do so, but please return to your seat immediately after..." (to Gabe's point, on a very smooth flight on BA from JFK to LHR, they kept the seatbelt sign lit from just after door closure up until after arrival at the gate in the UK.

                    i'd love to see you "prepare yourself" for CAT. absolutely would love to see that.

                    ps, dont kid yourself about airlines being "hyper-focused" on customer experience in the big seats. aside from the likes of qatar and emirates, few if any airlines give a rat's ass about customer experience anywhere on the plane.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Originally posted by TeeVee View Post
                      it is NOT a violation of any law to use the lav while the seatbelt sign is lit.
                      This forum is like that old game of telephone. You begin by pointing out the lesson of not casually lounging about the cabin with your seat belt off. Then the weak bladder people chime in about the lav. I remark that most of these people were not using the lav. Then the lawyer chimes in, counseling us about the law. When did I ever mention the law?

                      But as long as we're on the subject, when the wheels leave the ground the law becomes what the captain tells you to do. And there is a higher law, the law of aerodynamics and physics and biology that you must take into account if you want to keep your skull intact. That law doesn't care about your need for personal freedom.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Now some idiot is blaming the turbulence on GLOBAL WARMING. Of course they won't blame the winter storm in the mid-west on it's way to the East coast on GLOBAL WARMING.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Originally posted by TeeVee View Post
                          it is NOT a violation of any law to use the lav while the seatbelt sign is lit.
                          Related question: Is is not a federal requirement to comply with the instructions of the crew and with signs posted in a plane? Is is not therefore a federal violation not to do so?

                          i've flown well over 100 segments this year, and have spent probably 300-350 hours in flight. on almost every single one of those flights, on several different airlines and in several different countries, the Captain, you know, the person actually in charge of everything but the laws of nature while in flight, has said something to the effect of, "while the seatbelt sign is lighted, please remain seated with your seatbelt fastened. if you NEED to use the restroom, you may do so, but please return to your seat immediately after..."
                          I am almost sure (almost because I am trying to to be so black and white) that you wither got it wrong every time or you got very odd captains.

                          The request is to remain belted at all times while seated (regardless of the seatbelt sign). Because turbulence can happen unexpectedly at any time before the pilot even know it, let alone have time to turn the sign on in advance. There is even a sign in every seat telling you this. This sign is mandatory and permanent (cannot be tuned off). We call it "placard".

                          Click image for larger version

Name:	360_F_317301497_aO1Bj3M1GTdQmP1E4ljC0HsQumqaRz2s.jpg
Views:	167
Size:	73.2 KB
ID:	1151209

                          While it is is written as a requirement, it is a request in practice because because it has zero enforcement. I think that this should change.

                          The message you typically get when the plane reaches cruise altitude and the pilots turn off the sign tends to be one of the pilots saying "I will turn off the seatbelt sign off now [ding], you can use the lavatory but please keep your seatbelt fastened while seated because turbulence can happen unexpectedly at any time"

                          And the message that you typically get when they turn the sign on again tends to be a flight attendant or automatic recording saying "The captain has turned the seat belt sign on, pelase return to your seat and fasten your seat belt". And it is typically enforced at least initially.

                          What happens in some flights (not most but not a tiny fraction either) is that they leave the seat belt sign on for hours with no turbulence to be seen. There is where enforcement, and credibility, go own the chute.


                          --- Judge what is said by the merits of what is said, not by the credentials of who said it. ---
                          --- Defend what you say with arguments, not by imposing your credentials ---

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Originally posted by kent olsen View Post
                            Of course they won't blame the winter storm in the mid-west on it's way to the East coast on GLOBAL WARMING.
                            Wrong. In fact it is all climate change and the increase on the YEARLY AND GLOBAL AVERAGE temperature is part of this climate change. The increase in variation above and below the average is also part of the climate change. That is why regardless of the increase on the average global temperature, you have more frequently more extreme hot and clod waves, storms, huracanes, tornadoes, floods and draughts.

                            So yes, global warming and extreme winter storms are part of the same phenomenon.

                            --- Judge what is said by the merits of what is said, not by the credentials of who said it. ---
                            --- Defend what you say with arguments, not by imposing your credentials ---

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Originally posted by Evan View Post
                              This forum is like that old game of telephone. You begin by pointing out the lesson of not casually lounging about the cabin with your seat belt off. Then the weak bladder people chime in about the lav. I remark that most of these people were not using the lav.
                              That is most certainly correct. That is why my focus was on the credibility of the whole seat belt request/requirement thing.

                              Then the lawyer chimes in, counseling us about the law. When did I ever mention the law?
                              Maybe it was not you. I did mention law (or similar, like requirement, violation, enforcement....)

                              But as long as we're on the subject, when the wheels leave the ground the law becomes what the captain tells you to do. And there is a higher law, the law of aerodynamics and physics and biology that you must take into account if you want to keep your skull intact. That law doesn't care about your need for personal freedom.
                              True, but the higher biological laws of urine continence issues and Irritable Bowel Syndrome also don't care about any of that.

                              --- Judge what is said by the merits of what is said, not by the credentials of who said it. ---
                              --- Defend what you say with arguments, not by imposing your credentials ---

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X