[GreenScot]

Once when flying on TAM I had an emergency seat on a domestic flight from Recife to São Paulo. Spotting my gringo skin the flight attendant challenged my knowledge of Portuguese in English with the explanation that if I didn’t speak any Portuguese I had to move. She was surprised to discover my response in Portuguese but what she didn’t check is the two Chileans to my inside who did not speak Portuguese and barely understood any English. To be honest at the time I find amusingly ironic but aftewards realised the potential risk of the situation. I do feel sorry for the cabin crew as it is not them who booked the seats, checked in the baggage or pass check at the gate but they are left to resolve the problems.

On International flights though I have never seen TAM enforce the Portuguese speaking regulation including on the 767s which have over wing exit doors. Perhaps only applies on local flights

[Charles-P]

I do find the language part of the regulations surprising. Here in Belgium for example there are three official languages, there are four in Switzerland and of course some countries have many more. India has 22, South Africa has 11. Is one expected to be fluent in them all ?

The issue of obesity is certainly one that needs highlighting, a individual who is unable to do up a standard seat belt should clearly not be in an exit row and yet I have seen this more than once.

[MrMichael]

Charles, in addition the Obese person should not be sat next to me either if in economy!

Up until a few years ago exit seats could not be booked prior to check in. It was at check in the agent would decide if you were suitable for the exit seats. Many a time I had a pre booked seat on Thai and then at Airport changed it to an exit seat. On no occasion was I challenged on language. just physical ability. It is I guess obvious in any language that an emergency is occurring and the door needs to be opened a bit pronto… I guess the language could come in to it more if the instruction is not to open the door. Better I guess to open and get it wrong than not open it and get it wrong. If in doubt, open the darn door.

[esselle]

Isn’t the issue being driven in part that you can now “buy” emergency exit rows as they tend to offer more legroom? In the past, to bag am exit row seat you had to in some way demonstrate that you “qualified” to sit in one, whereas now you just have to be able or willing to shell out a bit more for it.

[Charles-P]

‘esselle’ you have hit the nail on the head and this was the problem on the flight I mentioned above. The crew were unwilling to move the people because they had ‘paid’ for those seats. As long as airlines are willing to put revenue over safety the problem will continue.

[LuganoPirate]

Dare I say it, but the solution is to give everyone a bit more leg room then no-one would have to bag the emergency row. Of course it would mean paying a bit more as you’d lose one or two rows but I’d be happy to do that.

I find some airlines economy seating almost a case of cruelty and if an animal you’d not be allowed to transport then like that. On a recent Kulula flight I saw it was possible to reserve seats with extra legroom. What i didn’t realise was that to create those rows with the extra room they’d reduce the legroom for everyone else! Consequently my legs were jammed against the seat in front of me (row 3) and the (probably) size 12 lady next to me couldn’t even lower her tray.

I think governments should mandate a certain minimum amount of legroom thus all airlines would have to comply and while it may add 10% to the fare I think it would be worth it from both a comfort and safety point of view.

[canucklad]

Eselle, that’s why Charles should be lauded by us for alerting the regulator of his experience, and I understand now why he won’t name and shame….hence my comment about revenue usurping safety.

I don’t get the language thing either, the instructions on managing the escape are illustrated, and clearly indicate that you open, the door, chuck the door outside, and then immediately exit the aircraft .

As for UA, things must have changed, I remember in my 20’s being refused my seat, because the handling agent, noticed that I was favouring my right foot after a recent minor football injury. However, I suspect it had more to do with placating a Bolshie big arsed Yank.
As I passed the seat I should have had, he appeared quite smug at his conquest at the gate.
Incidentally, that was one of the very first 777 operated flights FRA-IOD

[rferguson]

In terms of the regulatory authorities there is a differentiation between an emergency exit and a ‘self help’ exit. Self help exits are the likes of the overwing exits on an Airbus A320 or a Boeing 737 where there are no crew present to operate them in the event of an emergency and passengers are given a briefing on how to open the exit and asked if they are willing to assist.

At exits where cabin crew are present the restrictions aren’t as tough. We don’t brief the passengers that they are sat near an emergency exit, are you willing to help in an emergency, this is how the door operates etc etc. Obviously there can be nobody or thing physically obstructing the exit – if someone is obese to the point of needing an extension seatbelt we’d likely move them. In terms of age – it’s a bit tougher. It wasn’t so long ago that at BA we had to retire at 55. Now, we can work until we are able to open that door on our recurrent safety course. So age is a difficult one to factor in.

In terms of a PRE PLANNED emergency (ie where we have time to brief passengers) we try and move those close to the exits that are fit, travelling alone, willing to assist and speaks english. In an unplanned emergency we’d hope that the cabin crew were able to open their door. If not – hopefully someone nearby watched the safety briefing!

[peter19]

Speaking of exit rows the other common one i have seen on an overnight flight are people thinking its a suitable sleeping area…lie down with the pillow and think its a good place to sleep while everybody strolls past.
Thankfully, on nearly every occasion the cabin crew have stepped in on this instance.

[rferguson]

Peter19 – that’s a HUGE no-no. At BA they’d be woken up very quickly and told not to sleep on the floor.

[canucklad]

My mate tried it, but got confused when the stewardess just kept on repeating “CAT”…… :: ]

[PeterCoultas]

managed floor sleeping several times in the 70’s/80’s on W-E flights transatlantic without problems – luckily no serious turbulence so much more comfortable than the economy seats – not available these days!

maybe comments on another thread about possible bunk bed layouts are not that totally silly?

[FDOS_UK]

Sleeping on the floor is not a good idea, the systems don’t necessarily get a lot of oxygen down there.

[PeterCoultas]

FDOS: An interesting point I didn’t consider – maybe there were problems and my brain damage could be a result of my mistake ??

[PeterCoultas]

In an earlier post on this thread I mentioned “complaints log” that no-one seems to have picked up on:

This arose from a TWA flight to ORD, long delayed at LHR for “mechanical” problems. We taxied for take off and the hydraulics went down & we were towed back to gate. After another couple of hours sitting on the plane I decided I’d rather go back home to Hampstead and fly the next day.

I was told me my ticket would be not accepted (a real cheapo) so asked to see the “complaints log”. Was shown a log in which I was able to write that the crew had informed me the hydraulics were being worked on in difficult conditions by the engineers but they were determined to get the flight away as there were many passengers needing to “get back for the US holidays”. I said that this indicated that safety was not being properly considered.

The result of writing this in the log was that I was allowed to leave the flight and take that a day later without charge.

It was easy for me to take this approach at that time. But if there are serious questions about safety a “complaints log” – if it still exists – could be a useful lever.

[Author]

Posts