To think that these passengers should have criminal charges brought

[HuntIdeas]

After the tragedy of the Aeroflot flight where 41 people died, it sounds like other passengers stopping to get bags out of overhead lockers might have delayed the evacuation and caused some of the deaths!

AIBU to think that the passengers who deliberately took the time to stop and get bags out of overhead lockers, delaying evacuation of passengers behind while the aircraft was on fire, should have criminal charges brought? They directly caused some deaths!

Obviously, in reality it would be difficult to prove who caused what. However, just talking about bringing charges and making it a criminal offence to retrieve baggage in emergency situations would maybe stop other passengers from doing it next time

And I take luggage on to save on baggage charges. This is the reason hand baggage taken on has increased. I know 30 years ago I took far less hand baggage on, because hold baggage was included in your ticket and was reasonably generous.

We had to evacuate a shop once- it wasn’t a drill so no planning or idea why it was happening, afterwards a woman lost it at me that the escalator wasn’t working or the lifts and she had to ask a man to help her carry her double buggy down the stairs and how dangerous it was.

It never occurred to her to take the kids out of the pram. It was awful, she kept screaming in my face what was I supposed to do, and I didn’t want to appear a bitch but said it to her anyway- I figured in case it ever happened again. Then she started screaming what about her buggy.

No the fire caused the deaths, nothing else.

So 30 years ago on a standard plane ticket I remember it being standard to be allowed to check in one large and one small case to hold at no extra cost.
It is easy to blame passengers. But this is really about how airlines now run their business.

There are several aspects to this crash this is an excellent site populated by pilots and other airline staff and flyers.

www.pprune.org/rumours-news/621198-sheremetyevo-superjet-100-flames-19.html

I read that an extremely large passenger blocked one of the exits which reminded me of the recent thread on here about obese passengers

Then there are those who sedate themselves with medication and/or alcohol to be able to fly. Who’s going to get them off in an emergency?

I wish they’d do the cabin crew and the rest of the passengers a favor and stay at home.

The problem is that once up a time a return flight to XYZ used to cost eg £100. For that you got everything - your baggage, your meal, airport tax, booking fee, everything. Then the low costs came along and advertised flights to XYZ for 50p. The small print would then reveal that the tax, booking fees, meal and baggage costs came in at £99. So in effect you were saving 50p but the average passenger leapt on the idea of a flight for 50p instead of £100. The big airlines started to lose passengers to the new low costs. They pondered how they were going to compete with them and it's no surprise that they took the 'if you can't beat them, join them' route. 'The passengers obviously want to pay for each little part of their journey laboriously and separately!' said the big airline bosses. So now you have a travelling public who expects to have to have a degree in working out how to prebook seats so they can sit next to their family members while trying to cram their whole holiday's worth of stuff into a wheelie bag to avoid the baggage charge and get outraged when they turn up at the airport and find there is a fee for not having printed off their boarding pass at home. This is the new normal. You can argue that this is how airlines run their business - airlines are just chasing the model that proves most popular with the paying public.

You can blame whoever you want. Blame the airlines, blame passengers, blame dead people, blame survivors. None of that will be of any interest to the people who will study this event to make things better in the future. As I said above, we work on a Just Culture basis in order to improve future safety, and in order for this to happen people must be able to come forward with information that can be learnt from. The aviation model of Just Culture is so successful that it has been adopted by the NHS (a pilot who's wife died as a result of medical negligence was one of the protagonists for this) in order to help them avoid situations that have arisen recently.

Business travellers do not need to take a lot on the plane, neither do parents. Some stuff yes, but not lots

I am a business traveller. I know what I need to take on.

It is more than a small handbag/coat for sure.

As I said though, I travel as light as possible and would favour a reduction in weight limit of hand luggage.

My laptop/device bag is way smaller than people who travel for a weekend and don’t check a bag.

And I take luggage on to save on baggage charges

You don’t need to do that right?

It’s not about being a business traveler. It’s about whether a person wants to travel light or not.

Cannot agree more with the need for a Just Culture. The airline industry leads the way in this (I’m NHS).

Backinthebox

re your comment:-

"Hand baggage slows every bit of an airport down - huge queues at security, long slow boarding and disembarkation while everyone tries to shoehorn their bag in the locker, because people have got everything they think they need for a 2 week holiday in Marbella in a wheelie bag in order to avoid a hold baggage fee or because they want the extra 15 minutes that they feel is wasted waiting by the baggage carousel".

Hand baggage in itself does not slow down security. Inefficient security procedures slows down security as does a lack of security staff. Overall the whole process of going through an airport is both a trial and inefficient. Some airports both in the UK and worldwide can and do process passengers far more efficiently than others of a smaller or similar size.

On many shorthaul flights airlines charge passengers quite a sum for each piece of bag to go in the hold. Many carriers worldwide have now brought that in as an additional revenue stream to offset declining revenues. People are price conscious so want and expect cheap fares nowadays.

All this is behind people seemingly bringing almost everything but the kitchen sink onto aircraft. Those overhead lockers also were never designed to take such numbers of weighty bags, no wonder such things can and do fall and cause injury.

It is difficult to know how you would react in an emergency, and some people are very anxious if they leave keys, passport, cards etc out of their sight. I always keep them on a small bag on my lap or at my feet, so would have them with me immediately if I had to leave. Otherwise you are stuck in a strange place with no way to get home.

I often wonder about the emergency instructions about taking your shoes off before going down a slide. In an emergency do people really do this? If they are stilettos, yes, they can just drop off. But if you have trainers or smooth boots that are a huge pfaff to get off.... wouldn't people just dive out as fast as they can?

Yes, sure, everything will be looked into Back, including how people could be evacuated better, but there would never be the conclusion that the passengers were to blame for not reacting properly. They haven't had the training, the air crew have, so you have to look at systemic solutions, not rely on human nature, because we are fallible, always.

It’s not about being a business traveler. It’s about whether a person wants to travel light or not

Yes and no. I have bits of equipment that belong to clients. They don’t want them in the hold (understandably, they’re expensive). So the point is when i travel for business (rarely actually) it sometimes isn’t down to me how light I travel

I've reported the thread.

Jesus, on what basis?

RTFT and find out.

Jacques If the rules changed about cabin baggage, then your clients would have to accept that. At the moment they have the choice.

If the rules changed about cabin baggage, then your clients would have to accept that. At the moment they have the choice

Indeed (although last time I was 5kg under allowance so I’m pretty safe right now).

But then so would everyone who decides they’re not paying for hold luggage.

Either way no skin of my nose.

It's time to stop passengers taking so much on board. It's got far worse now that airlines charge for hold baggage. Before they charged, people just took small hand luggage, i.e. hand bags, smallish ruck sacks, small hold-alls etc. Now it's become the norm for people to take suitcases on as well, so the "norm" is now two pieces of carry on luggage.

You never used to "have to" put your carry on luggage under the seat in front of you - there was always room in the overhead lockers. Now the onboard staff tell you not to put smaller stuff overhead as it's for suitcases only, so everyone ends up with their small bag under the seat.

Basically, there's twice as much (in numbers terms) as there used to be. That's got to have safety implications.

At least when your luggage was in the hold you couldn't get it in an emergency. Even those tossers who want to take their bags with them in an evacuation won't cause as much delay if it's only a small bag rather than a suitcase!

Let's get back to ALL suitcases in the hold and limit what the airlines can charge for them. If ALL airlines go back to not charging then it's a level playing field again.

jacqueshammer No I don't need to take as much cabin baggage as I am allowed to to save on paying more to put it in the hold. But I will. But I also think all but incredibly minimal cabin baggage should be banned for safety. So coat and equivalent of a small handbag, no overhead lockers at all.

@JacquesHammer In the past I have travelled with equipment. Back then, cabin baggage was very limited. So, clients had to accept that it was in the hold, or pay to have it couriered or driven there.