And all of these observations are why many countries have adopted a “just culture” approach to aviation (and indeed to medicine) which allows for examination of the system to see why an incident might have occurred rather than just blame the last link in the chain, and also to encourage a thinking learning and improvement culture rather than a mindless compliance and blame culture.
All systems have potential failure points. What if the red warning lamp is not illuminating but the engines are still warning?. Both require looking out
Covid pushed out a lot of these experienced crew who never went back. And what of the less legacy airlines who tend to have younger crew with maybe less experience. (I'm not saying cabin crew cannot initiate and evac)
Yes, nd what led to that error? Was it honestly just the error or deliberate wrong choice of an individual, or as suggested by the research and nicely summarised by @Quickstatus, what contributed to that error? Was it an impractical procedure leading to “everyone” taking short cut? Was it a particular view in some individuals/workteams that the rules did not apply to them, and why did they think that? Was it the case that everyone was doing it (whatever that was), so they thought it was OK? Did someone not understand something, but did not own that? Was it competing pressures meaning that in complying with one rule of procedure, the person necessarily defaulted on another? So many potential reasons for that point of human error.
Do we?
Agree, No system is perfect. But perhaps we need to look at the reasons why evacuations are reserved for the flight deck, whether those reasons still exist, and whether there’s technology or training to cover some of those barriers.
Given that the aircraft (Asiana) was in pieces, it's pretty astounding that the cabin crew even considered waiting for anything. I used to tell cabin crew, that as the pilots get to any accident first, it's quite likely that they will be in no state to control the evacuation. At the very least be prepared to get it going, but....
This is interesting and unusual. I remember at the time being surprised that they didn't shut the engine down in flight, and even more surprised that they then used it in reverse. Whilst the Captain was criticized for only using the single fire truck's assessment, it was from a fire truck, and not a random person on the radio. So, I can see why they didn't go in this case. The question I'd then ask is what would they have done if they'd simply exited the runway normally, and a random call from the radio had told them of the fire. Another aircraft would generally be the first person to see this sort of thing.
Some of the people you mention are excellent, and could be relied upon to make a good call. For instance the CSM from my QF30, probably would have knocked on the window from the outside to see how we were. And he would have had 390 odd people behind him. But, on average, I think they'd be inclined to jumping too soon. There are many reasons that they aren't pilots. And as mentioned by others, those legacy people are hated by management, and are replaced by kindergarten tots at every opportunity.
A system that relies upon electricity and data from the engines. Much better to look at it. It's pretty obvious when they're running.
Again, reliant upon electricity, and continuity of circuits and integrity of the electronics bay(s).
We won't solve it on AFF, especially quoting sensational media sources. The final JTSB report will tell us, eventually.
I certainly remember hearing the phrase "taking nothing with you" from other airlines that I've flown recently, also to remove high heel shoes as they may tear the slide.
I think it's long past time for these videos to go back to what they were originally intended for, and stopped being some form of entertainment. They should start with something like "Listen to this, or you might die, or be responsible for the death of another." Quiz at the end, offload those who read their iPad through it.
We were saying this on our international flights just a day ago. They need to outline five? key points only.
I've been saying that for years. Every airline, other the JL, that I've flown on over the past 20 years has been falling all over themselves trying to make the safety video "entertaining", which just defeats the point of the video.
Could be some light loads.
Part of the reason to make them ‘entertaining’ is to try and get people to watch. So a bit of a catch-22.
I think the high heels tearing the slide is a myth.
Before or after?
