5 ms·

Crashing, Burning Planes Don’t Stop Passengers from Grabbing Their Luggage

69 points by gwintrob 10y ago

gwbas1c 10y ago
Yesterday, I sat in an exit row on a plane. I remember looking at my bag at my feet and deciding to grab it in an emergency so that other people won't trip on it on their way out.
- eridius 10y ago
  If it's stowed properly under the seat ahead of you, it's not in the way. If it's not stowed properly, then you're already breaking the rules.
  - delroth 10y ago
    Most airlines I have taken even forbid you from stowing bags under the seat if you're sitting on the emergency exit row. Only in the overhead compartments.
    - mikestew 10y ago
      I counter your anecdata with my own: unless you're at the front of coach, behind first class, I've never heard of this. I book exit row seats as often as I can.
      - jkot 10y ago
        It is mandatory in EU.
        ghaff 10y ago
        It's not the case in the US if there is a seat in front of you--only in the case of bulkhead seats (whether or not they're an exit row).
        mikestew 10y ago
        Thanks; figured it was probably region-specific. U. S. is where my perspective is coming from.
        jkot 10y ago
        Some airlines even ban high heels at exit row. And person sitting next to emergency door must be a male, to manage to open it.
      - hk__2 10y ago
        I can confirm at least Air France forbids you if you’re on the exit row.
      - donretag 10y ago
        I believe that in the US it is only forbidden during take off and landing.
  - gwbas1c 10y ago
    It's a laptop backpack with straps that can move around a bit. All it takes is someone to hook a toe on a loop, and then that person would go headfirst down the slide.
    - debeggar 10y ago
      One of the first things crew does after emergency is to make sure that the exit rows are clear. If your bag does move around during the crash landing and blocks exit, it will be removed out of the way
    - k-mcgrady 10y ago
      The point still stands - if it can be tripped over you are not stowing it properly and it should be in the overheads.
- mikestew 10y ago
  Great, so now they can trip over the guy blocking the exit of a burning plane while he struggles to get his overstuffed laptop bag out from under the seat. Don't do this. Stuff it under the seat like your supposed to do and no one's going to trip.
MrFoof 10y ago
Oh, there's much worse problems at least when it comes to fire alarms in apartment buildings -- people simply refusing to leave their home. I live in a (modern, 4-floor, built in 2008, steel and concrete) building with 145 apartments. We have about 2 or 3 fire alarms a year because late-20s professionals don’t understand that pouring oil into a pan heated on high for 20 minutes does nothing but generate a massive amount of smoke. Though in 7 years, we’ve had 3 actual fires. One serious enough to pop the glycerin disk of a sprinkler head (and cause ~$1M in water damage from the ~5000 gallons it pumped out before it was turned off, compared to about $20-30K in fire damage). I am the building’s “unofficial first responder”. I try to find it, so I can direct fire fighters to it when they arrive 8 minutes later, in the hopes of it being dealt with before a sprinkler head pops and makes the lives of many of the units' neighbors miserable for the next few months (because water damage and related insurance claims). Once, management was still here, and we used the skeleton key to access the unit and I actually put it out myself with an extinguisher (and killed the breakers to the stove). As I’m running through the hall, I have to tell people peering out their doors to “get out now, fire alarm”, and that no, they can’t take the elevator (because they’re now parked) and they need to take stairs. When there are firefighters going into the building, with hoses, and putting up ladders, you have people in neighboring apartments watching... from the windows inside their apartments. Until the fire department knocks on their doors and screams at them, through a megaphone, to get out. Management commented to me that during the fire alarms with actual fires (which granted, were small), ~30% of people (~80-90 people) refused to leave. That's a hell of a potential burden in the event of a serious fire to put on the firefighters.
- archon 10y ago
  > people simply refusing to leave their home. This is the same in offices, in my experience. Our shared office building has a horrible fire system, and gets about a half dozen false fire alarms a year. My coworkers think I'm crazy for always going directly outside when the alarm starts blaring. Sooner or later, one of those "false alarms" is going to be real and people will still be sitting at their desks while the building is really on fire.
  - phkahler 10y ago
r1ch 10y ago
If airlines had a clear policy that they would compensate for lost luggage in emergencies I think this would be less common. When a small handbag can be worth $1000 and it takes you 5 seconds to grab it, it's an easy choice to take it vs leaving it to burn and not knowing whether you'll be compensated.
- white-flame 10y ago
  It's hard to compensate for things like your keepsakes, favorite items, and personal media & contacts in your devices. There's also the fear of being stuck somewhere without ANYTHING that makes people grab what they can, to at least have a change of clothes and their toothbrush or whatever.
  - ghaff 10y ago
    I agree that I don't think it's so much compensation. It's more like "But it's just a little bag and it's right here with my wallet and phone and medications. If I leave it I'll be at this random airport with absolutely nothing."
johnwheeler 10y ago
It's game theory and herding in effect. We all know it'd be most helpful to the group to abandon our luggage and exit single file. We also know no one else will do it. Plus, we witness examples and use those as justification for similar behavior. There have been studies done that show if you're in the middle of a crisis with bystanders, it's important to single them out and call for their direct responsibility: "You in the green shirt, call the police now!" Otherwise, responsibility distributes evenly among the group with no one player having enough impetus to affect change.
- e40 10y ago
  I could imagine myself saying "You in the green shirt, leave your damn luggage and exit the plane!" but I have no idea how effective that would be.
  - johnwheeler 10y ago
    Less effective when your own luggage is in your hands... :-P
- iofj 10y ago
  And then you're alone with nothing, no money or anything, in a foreign country completely dependant on the local authorities. Good luck to you.
johansch 10y ago
Has this happened in e.g. western Europe or other places where most people's parents weren't dirt poor farmers? I'm suggesting there's a strong cultural component to this behaviour. (Yes, I'm preparing to be down-voted by the PC brigade.)
jkot 10y ago
> The main reasons passengers gave for grabbing their bags was money, wallets, or credit cards, followed by work materials, keys. and medication. Maybe the reasonable thing is to require small separate handbag with all the valuables. And there are more things which prevent fast evacuation. Are we going to ban them as well?: - catering trolleys - less mobile persons - high heels
throw7 10y ago
Are handbags, like those ladies are carrying in the picture, supposed to be left behind? I have a hard time imagining women would ever leave something like that behind even if you "fine" them. At that point, a compromise is needed... probably smaller bags and packs that fit under the seat should be allowed and should be incorporated in the safety tests, but certainly opening up the overhead bins in an emergency should definitely be fined.
- ghaff 10y ago
  Yes. They're most certainly supposed to be left behind. That picture makes it pretty clear that even those smaller bags have plenty of opportunity to tangle ip with people and slow down an evacuation.
vinothgopi 10y ago
This has been a big discussion point everywhere - about shocking this behavior is and how people's lives are at stake. But let me offer an alternate perspective, and maybe some insight into their behavior. If you lose your ID or any other official documents in India, everyone knows how much of a hassle it is going to be to get these documents reissued. Of course the possibility of bribes to move the papers. Insurance claims for lost baggage? I wouldn't rely on it. It might take them a while to save up to buy whatever they might have in their bags too. Laptops, tablets etc. They probably don't earn that much to begin with. This is probably what ran through their minds. Yes, lives are more important in the end and every second counts in such a scenario. But as an individual they might think - hey, it takes a few seconds to grab my bag and jump out. That would save me SO much trouble. Unfortunately that's what everyone thinks and in the end everyone goes for their bags and waste precious time.
- nostrademons 10y ago
  It seems like a more effective social fix for this would be to ensure that any survivors of a plane crash are immediately met inside the terminal by representatives of the airline, doctors, and members from the national consulate, who give complimentary toiletries, changes of clothes, spending money, etc. and fasttrack any requests for replacement travel documents. Such a system would be beneficial for other reasons as well: in many recent plane crashes, survivors have ended up wandering the area, which leads to a lot of unnecessary stress for loved ones searching for them, administrative hassles for airlines and first responders, and difficulty for accident investigators. If there was a clear protocol for where to go, who to receive, and what you'd receive in the event of a crash, people would be a lot less nervous about their belongings.
  - justratsinacoat 10y ago
    >Such a system would be beneficial for other reasons as well: in many recent plane crashes, survivors have ended up wandering the area, which leads to a lot of unnecessary stress for loved ones searching for them, administrative hassles for airlines and first responders, and difficulty for accident investigators. If there was a clear protocol for where to go, who to receive, and what you'd receive in the event of a crash, people would be a lot less nervous about their belongings In light of this, the phenomenon of passengers grabbing their luggage makes objective sense, and has changed my view of people trying to take their carry-on with them. FTA: >> The main reasons passengers gave for grabbing their bags was money, wallets, or credit cards, followed by work materials, keys, and medication The individualism 'above' (no particular effort on the part of airline, airport or first responders to create an environment to receive and help crash survivors) informs the individualism 'below' (one should grab one's documentation, money, means of communication etc because no immediate means of support otherwise exists). Note to self, ALWAYS grab luggage from plane wreckage.
ff10 10y ago
My rationale: Make sure to have IDs, CCs, etc. on you. Grab your small bag from under the seat. Leave the overhead closed. It should be locked automatically as suggested in the article.
ionforce 10y ago
This is one of those scenarios where of course airline people know how to do things. But you cannot expect the consumers of your service to have the same level of fluency. Does everyone on the entire aircraft acknowledge and believe that evacuating the aircraft in 90 seconds is the number one goal? I would say no. Despite it being somewhat logical, I think it is unreasonable to believe that people are rational agents and won't act emotionally in a state of emergency. So don't get upset that people aren't following your directions.
- niccaluim 10y ago
  I think it would help if people knew why 90 seconds is the goal: because the real danger in a plane crash isn't the crash, it's the post-crash fire. I'm speaking generally of course. For something like Sioux City for example (total loss of hydraulics/controls), the crash is obviously catastrophic. But even in that case, the post-crash fire added to the death toll significantly. I don't think passengers realize this. No sane airline would ever mention it in a passenger briefing. Can you imagine? "P.S. If we crash, get off right away or you'll be burned alive." Never gonna happen. But it's the truth, and it's why getting the f* off the plane as fast as humanly possible after a crash will save your life—and the lives of all the people who can't get off until you do because they're stuck behind you. That's the other thing I don't think people realize. Grabbing your bag may take you two seconds, big whoop. But what if two seconds is the difference between life and death for the person thirty people behind you in line out the door? You just killed that person.
placeybordeaux 10y ago
Yes this is terrible and avoidable, but it's also an extremely uncommon event. The amount of lives saved by properly educating against this is basically negligible.
marze 10y ago
The crew announcement should offer a $5000 bonus for everyone who leaves without a bag. Even if they don't have one. It would be much more effective than the threat of a fine.
- test6554 10y ago
  Slow clap as everyone stops to slip all their small valuables out of their bags and into their pockets.
- flashman 10y ago
  "In the event of an emergency, the first twenty people off the aircraft will receive $100 cash." Of course then you'll have people deploying the escape slides without permission during non-evacuations...
kengi76 10y ago
Have to wonder how much of it is cultural. Flown alot in China and I can only imagine it being worse while here in Japan we'd politely try to figure out who went first while burning. Really the endpoint is the same. Humans panic.
roflchoppa 10y ago
Alternative: shoot out the overhead bins around the plane like a ejector seat, everyone gets their stuff when they get off. Now you got people scrambling to get off the plane to get their stuff. win-win.
- roflchoppa 10y ago
  aww man i was thinking about this more, and its going to take a really big compressed air tank to shoot out the bins. But good thing there was that recall of millions of airbags, we can just use those instead of wasting them. win-win-win
shurcooL 10y ago
The reason this happens is because it's hard to know the boundary between a minor problem and a major situation, and people tend to have a lag in their estimation of severity of the situation. Kinda like a car engine with a turbocharger has turbo lag. People end up not wanting to make a stupid mistake where they leave their passports, money, laptops behind just because of a false alarm. If they knew what they know later, they'd act differently. But in the moment, it's hard to predict if it's going to be a big deal or a minor thing.
dmalvarado 10y ago
Pretty much every time I board a flight I just look for the closest exit, then go back to reading. Then I have a vision of scrambling over the tops of seats to get out of a crash incident. Luggage isn't a part of that vision. Then I go back to reading.
sytse 10y ago
Proposal for a new FAA rule: all luggage taken from the plane during an emergency evacuation will be destroyed. Incentives matter.
- jkot 10y ago
  Great, now passengers will get their luggage, unpack it, and stuff valuables into their pockets.
test6554 10y ago
A slow passenger is only a problem because of the low number of exit hatches. The bottleneck is the number of exits, not the slow passenger.
- tfnw 10y ago
  manual upvote (site won't let me upvote normally, this is probably frowned upon, but then you should let people upvote normally)
  - colanderman 10y ago
    Please don't do this. You can't upvote until you reach a certain (rather low) karma threshold.
- FabHK 10y ago
  It is a certification requirement for airliners that they can be evacuated in 90 seconds, with half the emergency exits closed/inoperational (see [1], [2]). This is tested with volunteers before certification, see e.g. [3] for a video of the certification test for the Airbus A380. The details [4] are quite interesting: a third of "pax" must be over 50, three life-size infant dolls must be carried along, etc. Given those certification requirements, a slow passenger is very much a problem. [1] http://www.faa.gov/news/fact_sheets/news_story.cfm?contentKey=4008 http://www.faa.gov/news/fact_sheets/news_story.cfm?contentKe... [2] http://adg.stanford.edu/aa241/fuselayout/far801.html http://adg.stanford.edu/aa241/fuselayout/far801.html [3] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XIaovi1JWyY https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XIaovi1JWyY [4] http://www.ecfr.gov/cgi-bin/text-idx?SID=4fcf34b24a7a7963642d8bb3a45dd346&mc=true&node=ap14.1.25_11801.j&rgn=div9 http://www.ecfr.gov/cgi-bin/text-idx?SID=4fcf34b24a7a7963642...
openasocket 10y ago
[WARNING: armchair psychology] People can act bizarrely in a crisis. In situations like this where there is panic and the adrenaline starts pumping, rational thought gets tampered down and instinct and training takes over. Which is actually a great survival mechanism, but we don't really have any instincts, and very few people are actually trained for emergencies like this. What we are trained to do is not forget our luggage when leaving the plane. Assuming this is the case (see above warning), no amount of fines or prosecution will really help, because we're dealing with people's subconscious. People won't internalize that negative reinforcement unless it actually happens to them, and how often are people in plane crashes? Maybe having plane evacuation drills would help, but I don't know how practical that is.
- zeveb 10y ago
  > Assuming this is the case (see above warning), no amount of fines or prosecution will really help, because we're dealing with people's subconscious. Yeah, that also bothered me about the article. I don't think anyone in a crisis is going to think, 'if I grab my bag, I will be fined' — and I don't believe that the money recouped from fines will do anything to compensate for lives lost, anyway. Rather, I think that folks are going to feel, 'my life, and everything I have is in danger, I must rescue myself and my things or perish!'
Someone 10y ago
"The possibility of a huge fine “would stick in their mind” and cause passengers to leave their bags as directed" I'm not sure. There are psychologists who claim that people who have to disembark start their "leave a plane" program, and that includes taking ones luggage, because that program has worked well for them zillions of times. Chapter 7 of the referenced https://app.ntsb.gov/doclib/safetystudies/SS0001.pdf https://app.ntsb.gov/doclib/safetystudies/SS0001.pdf gives that theory some credence. Quote: "Of the 419 passengers who reported that they carried on bags, 208 (nearly 50 percent) reported attempting to remove a bag during their evacuation. The primary reason that passengers stated for grabbing their bags was for money, wallet, or credit cards (111 passengers). Other reasons included job items (65), keys (61), and medicines (51). Most passengers exited the airplane with their bags" So, urges that normally are top of the list (don't lose your wallet or keys) seem to get precedence over a directly life-threatening but unfamiliar one (you're in a burning plane) Given that, I doubt a technical solution such as a huge fine will have much effect.
whack 10y ago
This is a classic tragedy-of-the-commons problem. From one individual's perspective, you think to yourself that grabbing your bag only takes 1 additional second, and it's pretty unlikely that you'll get hurt just because of that additional second. Compared to the upside of not losing your precious belongings, that seems like an understandable cost-benefit analysis. The problem is, you aren't just delaying yourself by 1 second, you're also delaying the other 100 people behind you by 1 second. And if you multiply the risks involved by 100, the outcome of the cost-benefit analysis changes dramatically. We could yell at people for being too dumb to do the "right thing", but let's be honest, this isn't the kind of issue that will filter down to everyone in society. Unless it makes the front page of NYTimes or CNN, the vast majority of people will never get to hear your moral lectures and explanations. And airlines don't want to unduly alarm their passengers on the vast majority of flights which won't have problems, so they aren't going to spend too much effort on this either. The best solution here is some simple technology. Equip all the overhead bins with central locks, so that once a switch is flipped, it's impossible for a passenger to get them open. This way, people won't even have the chance to grab their luggage, and we wouldn't have to sit here having this discussion.
- bolasanibk 10y ago
  You will most probably have people spending more time trying to force the bins open.
- takeda 10y ago
  > The problem is, you aren't just delaying yourself by 1 second, you're also delaying the other 100 people behind you by 1 second. And if you multiply the risks involved by 100, the outcome of the cost-benefit analysis changes dramatically. In you analogy you are assuming that those people cannot perform that operation at the same time. Opening overhead compartments will take longer time, also having baggage in front/behind you takes space for other people. IMO I don't understand though concern about grabbing handbags or items that are not in overhead compartments. Since it is quick and those are generally small items.
- Falkon1313 10y ago
  >The problem is, you aren't just delaying yourself by 1 second, you're also delaying the other 100 people behind you by 1 second. Except for most people, it doesn't take an additional second. Past experience in crowded areas with narrow aisles and few exits tells you that you're going to be standing around waiting awhile for a chance to move. What else are you supposed to do, flail your arms, scream, and panic? Trample the people ahead of you? Fling your bag randomly, hitting someone else and causing a trip hazard? All our lives we are taught that in an emergency you should remain calm and collected and exit in good order. Of course you shouldn't waste time going back for unimportant things or things that are hard to get to, but if your bag is right there and you can pick it up in the same motion as standing up, that seems perfectly reasonable, rational, and logical. Or if you're standing around waiting for your chance to exit, it makes sense to pick it up. The article uses hyperbole like "Materialism has been winning out over self-preservation", "when it's your money or your life, money wins", and "leave your bags behind. Yes, all of them. Laptops and purses, too." But urging people to panic and act counter to everything they've ever been taught and everything that they've experienced in life, especially in the middle of a stressful emergency, doesn't really make sense. As others have said, fining people for behaving the way that they are supposed to behave does not make sense. Intercepting people and delaying the evacuation to remove their things does not make sense. What would make sense would be to improve egress routes if that is a problem. More exits and wider aisles would be a lot easier than trying to force everyone to act irrationally and counter-intuitively during an emergency.
k-mcgrady 10y ago
There is a video on a BBC story [1] about the Emirates crash landing. First of all the video is appalling - everybody is going for their bags in the overheads instead of moving to the exits and it looks way more chaotic than it would if they followed the procedure. Secondly, and even more shocking, is that some idiot videoed this. Considering the fireball this plane became soon after everyone got off the delays all of these people were causing to the evacuation is incredibly dangerous. Particularly for crew members who are going to be last off. I feel like there needs to be a pretty heavy punishment for anyone who comes down that slide with a bag. [1] http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-36977903 http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-36977903
AcerbicZero 10y ago
So get rid of overhead storage. Or have the overhead compartments automatically lock down in an emergency as suggested. I can't honestly say I wouldn't grab my backpack from the floor, if the situation allowed, but I am fairly convinced it won't be delaying my departure from a burning aircraft. The 82 year old lady in row 8, who had to be wheelchaired onto the plane or perhaps the mother/father trying to juggle one or more screaming children might be a more serious concern.
tfnw 10y ago
(In this article): The same people who are condemning taking your bags, citing it as an impediment to evacuation, are suggesting an additional movement restriction, passenger bag checks at the exit. Personally, I think treating this issue in a black and white manner is a mistake. I think that each individual's judgement should be better respected, acknowledging the limits of central control.
zeveb 10y ago
> “Smoking is not allowed because it can jeopardize the lives and the health of other passengers and the lives and health of the crew,” she said. “And carrying your bag could have the same consequence.” No, smoking is not allowed because people like to have an out-group they can hate, and it is currently politically-correct to hate smokers. Inhaling a little smoke on a plane ride is annoying (so, too, body odour …), but it doesn't negatively impact anyone's health. So-called 'secondhand smoke' is junk science, pure and simple: no more factual than phrenology.
throwaway201607 10y ago
Why not design a process that is fast enough _and_ assumes people will take their bags? Ex: quadruple the number of exits.
mianos 10y ago
The issue is people simply don't trust the airline to take care of them. Typically airlines place lots of limitations on losses and make it very difficult to get compensated. Lost identification usually involves fees to get them replaced. Some might argue, quite correctly, that you are making a choice between death and inconvenience but many would not assume they are going to die and weigh up the risk vs return accordingly.
calvinbhai 10y ago
There are multiple reasons for this behavior Most of these reasons are listed in these set of storified tweets https://storify.com/AnonDesi/conversation-with-peegeekay-madnavin-antaryaami-ga https://storify.com/AnonDesi/conversation-with-peegeekay-mad... I urge everyone to please read the tweets in the link I posted, as it gives you a totally different perspective as to why people behaved this way. One other reason, is the fact that a plane flying from India is filled with people who speak at least 10 to 15 different languages (native langauge). Its possible that those who didnt get the passenger safety instructions in the language they are comfortable with, just didn't even know what to do under such distress!
- FabHK 10y ago
  The tweet storm provides reasons (loss of passport/ID very severe problem, specifically for migrant workers in Gulf states), but not valid ones. These are, however, good reasons to carry your passport on your person, and not in a huge suitcase in the overhead bin.
gumby 10y ago
I have some perspective in having been in an emergency landing (fortunately less fiery than the 777 event). Our plane was in trouble so the flight attendants had plenty of time to go around and confiscate our shoes, remove everything from under the seats, make sure our pockets were empty, check our brace positions, and switch passengers around (this was 25 years ago so I was put in the emergency row as I was strong enough to open the over wing door). It's a long story but the relevant parts are: 1 - I broke the rules and pocketed my passport with 200 US dollars folded into it. Which meant when the plane was on the ground and they were figuring out what to do with all these passengers I was able to get out, get someone to let me back onto the plane for my stuff, and get myself on another flight. I'd do that again, but I would not bring my phone (too dangerous when whizzing down that slide). 2 - Most people don't realize that the flight attendants are mainly there for safety and all that drink crud etc is just to keep the swells distracted and under control. I think the very safety of flight and the rareness of incident means people don't bother to consider what they'd do in an accident and so kid of go into autopilot. There were many years when I worried what to do about my computer, but these days everything is backed up into the cloud so I can afford to lose it in a fire. BTW despite all the excitement the amount of view was minimal and I (as a total non-expert) think they could have skipped the evacuation. I have read that the FAA is satisfied if you slide down and break your ankle -- but don't burn to death.
- dingaling 10y ago
  > Most people don't realize that the flight attendants are mainly there for safety Airlines like to say that safety is priority but then dress their attendants in high heels and tight poly-cotton skirts. On the occasions that I flew with UK armed forces, the 'flight attendants' wore stout boots, flame-resistant olive drab coveralls and gloves. Depending upon aircraft, some wore helmets too. I had no doubt they were there for my safety, there was even a story at the time about a helicopter crew throwing an Admiral out the door of a helicopter in an emergency.

69 points by gwintrob 10y ago

Yesterday, I sat in an exit row on a plane. I remember looking at my bag at my feet and deciding to grab it in an emergency so that other people won't trip on it on their way out.

eridius 10y ago
If it's stowed properly under the seat ahead of you, it's not in the way. If it's not stowed properly, then you're already breaking the rules.
- delroth 10y ago
  Most airlines I have taken even forbid you from stowing bags under the seat if you're sitting on the emergency exit row. Only in the overhead compartments.
  - mikestew 10y ago
    I counter your anecdata with my own: unless you're at the front of coach, behind first class, I've never heard of this. I book exit row seats as often as I can.
    - jkot 10y ago
      It is mandatory in EU.
      - ghaff 10y ago
        It's not the case in the US if there is a seat in front of you--only in the case of bulkhead seats (whether or not they're an exit row).
      - mikestew 10y ago
        Thanks; figured it was probably region-specific. U. S. is where my perspective is coming from.
        jkot 10y ago
        Some airlines even ban high heels at exit row. And person sitting next to emergency door must be a male, to manage to open it.
    - hk__2 10y ago
      I can confirm at least Air France forbids you if you’re on the exit row.
    - donretag 10y ago
      I believe that in the US it is only forbidden during take off and landing.
- gwbas1c 10y ago
  It's a laptop backpack with straps that can move around a bit. All it takes is someone to hook a toe on a loop, and then that person would go headfirst down the slide.
  - debeggar 10y ago
    One of the first things crew does after emergency is to make sure that the exit rows are clear. If your bag does move around during the crash landing and blocks exit, it will be removed out of the way
  - k-mcgrady 10y ago
    The point still stands - if it can be tripped over you are not stowing it properly and it should be in the overheads.
mikestew 10y ago
Great, so now they can trip over the guy blocking the exit of a burning plane while he struggles to get his overstuffed laptop bag out from under the seat. Don't do this. Stuff it under the seat like your supposed to do and no one's going to trip.

MrFoof 10y ago

Oh, there's much worse problems at least when it comes to fire alarms in apartment buildings -- people simply refusing to leave their home. I live in a (modern, 4-floor, built in 2008, steel and concrete) building with 145 apartments. We have about 2 or 3 fire alarms a year because late-20s professionals don’t understand that pouring oil into a pan heated on high for 20 minutes does nothing but generate a massive amount of smoke. Though in 7 years, we’ve had 3 actual fires. One serious enough to pop the glycerin disk of a sprinkler head (and cause ~$1M in water damage from the ~5000 gallons it pumped out before it was turned off, compared to about $20-30K in fire damage). I am the building’s “unofficial first responder”. I try to find it, so I can direct fire fighters to it when they arrive 8 minutes later, in the hopes of it being dealt with before a sprinkler head pops and makes the lives of many of the units' neighbors miserable for the next few months (because water damage and related insurance claims). Once, management was still here, and we used the skeleton key to access the unit and I actually put it out myself with an extinguisher (and killed the breakers to the stove). As I’m running through the hall, I have to tell people peering out their doors to “get out now, fire alarm”, and that no, they can’t take the elevator (because they’re now parked) and they need to take stairs. When there are firefighters going into the building, with hoses, and putting up ladders, you have people in neighboring apartments watching... from the windows inside their apartments. Until the fire department knocks on their doors and screams at them, through a megaphone, to get out. Management commented to me that during the fire alarms with actual fires (which granted, were small), ~30% of people (~80-90 people) refused to leave. That's a hell of a potential burden in the event of a serious fire to put on the firefighters.

archon 10y ago
> people simply refusing to leave their home. This is the same in offices, in my experience. Our shared office building has a horrible fire system, and gets about a half dozen false fire alarms a year. My coworkers think I'm crazy for always going directly outside when the alarm starts blaring. Sooner or later, one of those "false alarms" is going to be real and people will still be sitting at their desks while the building is really on fire.
- phkahler 10y ago

r1ch 10y ago

If airlines had a clear policy that they would compensate for lost luggage in emergencies I think this would be less common. When a small handbag can be worth $1000 and it takes you 5 seconds to grab it, it's an easy choice to take it vs leaving it to burn and not knowing whether you'll be compensated.

white-flame 10y ago
It's hard to compensate for things like your keepsakes, favorite items, and personal media & contacts in your devices. There's also the fear of being stuck somewhere without ANYTHING that makes people grab what they can, to at least have a change of clothes and their toothbrush or whatever.
- ghaff 10y ago
  I agree that I don't think it's so much compensation. It's more like "But it's just a little bag and it's right here with my wallet and phone and medications. If I leave it I'll be at this random airport with absolutely nothing."

johnwheeler 10y ago

It's game theory and herding in effect. We all know it'd be most helpful to the group to abandon our luggage and exit single file. We also know no one else will do it. Plus, we witness examples and use those as justification for similar behavior. There have been studies done that show if you're in the middle of a crisis with bystanders, it's important to single them out and call for their direct responsibility: "You in the green shirt, call the police now!" Otherwise, responsibility distributes evenly among the group with no one player having enough impetus to affect change.

e40 10y ago
I could imagine myself saying "You in the green shirt, leave your damn luggage and exit the plane!" but I have no idea how effective that would be.
- johnwheeler 10y ago
  Less effective when your own luggage is in your hands... :-P
iofj 10y ago
And then you're alone with nothing, no money or anything, in a foreign country completely dependant on the local authorities. Good luck to you.

johansch 10y ago

Has this happened in e.g. western Europe or other places where most people's parents weren't dirt poor farmers? I'm suggesting there's a strong cultural component to this behaviour. (Yes, I'm preparing to be down-voted by the PC brigade.)

jkot 10y ago

> The main reasons passengers gave for grabbing their bags was money, wallets, or credit cards, followed by work materials, keys. and medication. Maybe the reasonable thing is to require small separate handbag with all the valuables. And there are more things which prevent fast evacuation. Are we going to ban them as well?: - catering trolleys - less mobile persons - high heels

throw7 10y ago

Are handbags, like those ladies are carrying in the picture, supposed to be left behind? I have a hard time imagining women would ever leave something like that behind even if you "fine" them. At that point, a compromise is needed... probably smaller bags and packs that fit under the seat should be allowed and should be incorporated in the safety tests, but certainly opening up the overhead bins in an emergency should definitely be fined.

ghaff 10y ago
Yes. They're most certainly supposed to be left behind. That picture makes it pretty clear that even those smaller bags have plenty of opportunity to tangle ip with people and slow down an evacuation.

vinothgopi 10y ago

This has been a big discussion point everywhere - about shocking this behavior is and how people's lives are at stake. But let me offer an alternate perspective, and maybe some insight into their behavior. If you lose your ID or any other official documents in India, everyone knows how much of a hassle it is going to be to get these documents reissued. Of course the possibility of bribes to move the papers. Insurance claims for lost baggage? I wouldn't rely on it. It might take them a while to save up to buy whatever they might have in their bags too. Laptops, tablets etc. They probably don't earn that much to begin with. This is probably what ran through their minds. Yes, lives are more important in the end and every second counts in such a scenario. But as an individual they might think - hey, it takes a few seconds to grab my bag and jump out. That would save me SO much trouble. Unfortunately that's what everyone thinks and in the end everyone goes for their bags and waste precious time.

nostrademons 10y ago
It seems like a more effective social fix for this would be to ensure that any survivors of a plane crash are immediately met inside the terminal by representatives of the airline, doctors, and members from the national consulate, who give complimentary toiletries, changes of clothes, spending money, etc. and fasttrack any requests for replacement travel documents. Such a system would be beneficial for other reasons as well: in many recent plane crashes, survivors have ended up wandering the area, which leads to a lot of unnecessary stress for loved ones searching for them, administrative hassles for airlines and first responders, and difficulty for accident investigators. If there was a clear protocol for where to go, who to receive, and what you'd receive in the event of a crash, people would be a lot less nervous about their belongings.
- justratsinacoat 10y ago
  >Such a system would be beneficial for other reasons as well: in many recent plane crashes, survivors have ended up wandering the area, which leads to a lot of unnecessary stress for loved ones searching for them, administrative hassles for airlines and first responders, and difficulty for accident investigators. If there was a clear protocol for where to go, who to receive, and what you'd receive in the event of a crash, people would be a lot less nervous about their belongings In light of this, the phenomenon of passengers grabbing their luggage makes objective sense, and has changed my view of people trying to take their carry-on with them. FTA: >> The main reasons passengers gave for grabbing their bags was money, wallets, or credit cards, followed by work materials, keys, and medication The individualism 'above' (no particular effort on the part of airline, airport or first responders to create an environment to receive and help crash survivors) informs the individualism 'below' (one should grab one's documentation, money, means of communication etc because no immediate means of support otherwise exists). Note to self, ALWAYS grab luggage from plane wreckage.

ff10 10y ago

My rationale: Make sure to have IDs, CCs, etc. on you. Grab your small bag from under the seat. Leave the overhead closed. It should be locked automatically as suggested in the article.

ionforce 10y ago

This is one of those scenarios where of course airline people know how to do things. But you cannot expect the consumers of your service to have the same level of fluency. Does everyone on the entire aircraft acknowledge and believe that evacuating the aircraft in 90 seconds is the number one goal? I would say no. Despite it being somewhat logical, I think it is unreasonable to believe that people are rational agents and won't act emotionally in a state of emergency. So don't get upset that people aren't following your directions.

niccaluim 10y ago
I think it would help if people knew why 90 seconds is the goal: because the real danger in a plane crash isn't the crash, it's the post-crash fire. I'm speaking generally of course. For something like Sioux City for example (total loss of hydraulics/controls), the crash is obviously catastrophic. But even in that case, the post-crash fire added to the death toll significantly. I don't think passengers realize this. No sane airline would ever mention it in a passenger briefing. Can you imagine? "P.S. If we crash, get off right away or you'll be burned alive." Never gonna happen. But it's the truth, and it's why getting the f* off the plane as fast as humanly possible after a crash will save your life—and the lives of all the people who can't get off until you do because they're stuck behind you. That's the other thing I don't think people realize. Grabbing your bag may take you two seconds, big whoop. But what if two seconds is the difference between life and death for the person thirty people behind you in line out the door? You just killed that person.

placeybordeaux 10y ago

Yes this is terrible and avoidable, but it's also an extremely uncommon event. The amount of lives saved by properly educating against this is basically negligible.

marze 10y ago

The crew announcement should offer a $5000 bonus for everyone who leaves without a bag. Even if they don't have one. It would be much more effective than the threat of a fine.

test6554 10y ago
Slow clap as everyone stops to slip all their small valuables out of their bags and into their pockets.
flashman 10y ago
"In the event of an emergency, the first twenty people off the aircraft will receive $100 cash." Of course then you'll have people deploying the escape slides without permission during non-evacuations...

kengi76 10y ago

Have to wonder how much of it is cultural. Flown alot in China and I can only imagine it being worse while here in Japan we'd politely try to figure out who went first while burning. Really the endpoint is the same. Humans panic.

roflchoppa 10y ago

Alternative: shoot out the overhead bins around the plane like a ejector seat, everyone gets their stuff when they get off. Now you got people scrambling to get off the plane to get their stuff. win-win.

roflchoppa 10y ago
aww man i was thinking about this more, and its going to take a really big compressed air tank to shoot out the bins. But good thing there was that recall of millions of airbags, we can just use those instead of wasting them. win-win-win

shurcooL 10y ago

The reason this happens is because it's hard to know the boundary between a minor problem and a major situation, and people tend to have a lag in their estimation of severity of the situation. Kinda like a car engine with a turbocharger has turbo lag. People end up not wanting to make a stupid mistake where they leave their passports, money, laptops behind just because of a false alarm. If they knew what they know later, they'd act differently. But in the moment, it's hard to predict if it's going to be a big deal or a minor thing.

dmalvarado 10y ago

Pretty much every time I board a flight I just look for the closest exit, then go back to reading. Then I have a vision of scrambling over the tops of seats to get out of a crash incident. Luggage isn't a part of that vision. Then I go back to reading.

sytse 10y ago

Proposal for a new FAA rule: all luggage taken from the plane during an emergency evacuation will be destroyed. Incentives matter.

jkot 10y ago
Great, now passengers will get their luggage, unpack it, and stuff valuables into their pockets.

test6554 10y ago

A slow passenger is only a problem because of the low number of exit hatches. The bottleneck is the number of exits, not the slow passenger.

tfnw 10y ago
manual upvote (site won't let me upvote normally, this is probably frowned upon, but then you should let people upvote normally)
- colanderman 10y ago
  Please don't do this. You can't upvote until you reach a certain (rather low) karma threshold.
FabHK 10y ago
It is a certification requirement for airliners that they can be evacuated in 90 seconds, with half the emergency exits closed/inoperational (see [1], [2]). This is tested with volunteers before certification, see e.g. [3] for a video of the certification test for the Airbus A380. The details [4] are quite interesting: a third of "pax" must be over 50, three life-size infant dolls must be carried along, etc. Given those certification requirements, a slow passenger is very much a problem. [1] http://www.faa.gov/news/fact_sheets/news_story.cfm?contentKey=4008 http://www.faa.gov/news/fact_sheets/news_story.cfm?contentKe... [2] http://adg.stanford.edu/aa241/fuselayout/far801.html http://adg.stanford.edu/aa241/fuselayout/far801.html [3] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XIaovi1JWyY https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XIaovi1JWyY [4] http://www.ecfr.gov/cgi-bin/text-idx?SID=4fcf34b24a7a7963642d8bb3a45dd346&mc=true&node=ap14.1.25_11801.j&rgn=div9 http://www.ecfr.gov/cgi-bin/text-idx?SID=4fcf34b24a7a7963642...

openasocket 10y ago

[WARNING: armchair psychology] People can act bizarrely in a crisis. In situations like this where there is panic and the adrenaline starts pumping, rational thought gets tampered down and instinct and training takes over. Which is actually a great survival mechanism, but we don't really have any instincts, and very few people are actually trained for emergencies like this. What we are trained to do is not forget our luggage when leaving the plane. Assuming this is the case (see above warning), no amount of fines or prosecution will really help, because we're dealing with people's subconscious. People won't internalize that negative reinforcement unless it actually happens to them, and how often are people in plane crashes? Maybe having plane evacuation drills would help, but I don't know how practical that is.

zeveb 10y ago
> Assuming this is the case (see above warning), no amount of fines or prosecution will really help, because we're dealing with people's subconscious. Yeah, that also bothered me about the article. I don't think anyone in a crisis is going to think, 'if I grab my bag, I will be fined' — and I don't believe that the money recouped from fines will do anything to compensate for lives lost, anyway. Rather, I think that folks are going to feel, 'my life, and everything I have is in danger, I must rescue myself and my things or perish!'

Someone 10y ago

"The possibility of a huge fine “would stick in their mind” and cause passengers to leave their bags as directed" I'm not sure. There are psychologists who claim that people who have to disembark start their "leave a plane" program, and that includes taking ones luggage, because that program has worked well for them zillions of times. Chapter 7 of the referenced https://app.ntsb.gov/doclib/safetystudies/SS0001.pdf https://app.ntsb.gov/doclib/safetystudies/SS0001.pdf gives that theory some credence. Quote: "Of the 419 passengers who reported that they carried on bags, 208 (nearly 50 percent) reported attempting to remove a bag during their evacuation. The primary reason that passengers stated for grabbing their bags was for money, wallet, or credit cards (111 passengers). Other reasons included job items (65), keys (61), and medicines (51). Most passengers exited the airplane with their bags" So, urges that normally are top of the list (don't lose your wallet or keys) seem to get precedence over a directly life-threatening but unfamiliar one (you're in a burning plane) Given that, I doubt a technical solution such as a huge fine will have much effect.

whack 10y ago

This is a classic tragedy-of-the-commons problem. From one individual's perspective, you think to yourself that grabbing your bag only takes 1 additional second, and it's pretty unlikely that you'll get hurt just because of that additional second. Compared to the upside of not losing your precious belongings, that seems like an understandable cost-benefit analysis. The problem is, you aren't just delaying yourself by 1 second, you're also delaying the other 100 people behind you by 1 second. And if you multiply the risks involved by 100, the outcome of the cost-benefit analysis changes dramatically. We could yell at people for being too dumb to do the "right thing", but let's be honest, this isn't the kind of issue that will filter down to everyone in society. Unless it makes the front page of NYTimes or CNN, the vast majority of people will never get to hear your moral lectures and explanations. And airlines don't want to unduly alarm their passengers on the vast majority of flights which won't have problems, so they aren't going to spend too much effort on this either. The best solution here is some simple technology. Equip all the overhead bins with central locks, so that once a switch is flipped, it's impossible for a passenger to get them open. This way, people won't even have the chance to grab their luggage, and we wouldn't have to sit here having this discussion.

bolasanibk 10y ago
You will most probably have people spending more time trying to force the bins open.
takeda 10y ago
> The problem is, you aren't just delaying yourself by 1 second, you're also delaying the other 100 people behind you by 1 second. And if you multiply the risks involved by 100, the outcome of the cost-benefit analysis changes dramatically. In you analogy you are assuming that those people cannot perform that operation at the same time. Opening overhead compartments will take longer time, also having baggage in front/behind you takes space for other people. IMO I don't understand though concern about grabbing handbags or items that are not in overhead compartments. Since it is quick and those are generally small items.
Falkon1313 10y ago
>The problem is, you aren't just delaying yourself by 1 second, you're also delaying the other 100 people behind you by 1 second. Except for most people, it doesn't take an additional second. Past experience in crowded areas with narrow aisles and few exits tells you that you're going to be standing around waiting awhile for a chance to move. What else are you supposed to do, flail your arms, scream, and panic? Trample the people ahead of you? Fling your bag randomly, hitting someone else and causing a trip hazard? All our lives we are taught that in an emergency you should remain calm and collected and exit in good order. Of course you shouldn't waste time going back for unimportant things or things that are hard to get to, but if your bag is right there and you can pick it up in the same motion as standing up, that seems perfectly reasonable, rational, and logical. Or if you're standing around waiting for your chance to exit, it makes sense to pick it up. The article uses hyperbole like "Materialism has been winning out over self-preservation", "when it's your money or your life, money wins", and "leave your bags behind. Yes, all of them. Laptops and purses, too." But urging people to panic and act counter to everything they've ever been taught and everything that they've experienced in life, especially in the middle of a stressful emergency, doesn't really make sense. As others have said, fining people for behaving the way that they are supposed to behave does not make sense. Intercepting people and delaying the evacuation to remove their things does not make sense. What would make sense would be to improve egress routes if that is a problem. More exits and wider aisles would be a lot easier than trying to force everyone to act irrationally and counter-intuitively during an emergency.

k-mcgrady 10y ago

There is a video on a BBC story [1] about the Emirates crash landing. First of all the video is appalling - everybody is going for their bags in the overheads instead of moving to the exits and it looks way more chaotic than it would if they followed the procedure. Secondly, and even more shocking, is that some idiot videoed this. Considering the fireball this plane became soon after everyone got off the delays all of these people were causing to the evacuation is incredibly dangerous. Particularly for crew members who are going to be last off. I feel like there needs to be a pretty heavy punishment for anyone who comes down that slide with a bag. [1] http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-36977903 http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-36977903

AcerbicZero 10y ago

So get rid of overhead storage. Or have the overhead compartments automatically lock down in an emergency as suggested. I can't honestly say I wouldn't grab my backpack from the floor, if the situation allowed, but I am fairly convinced it won't be delaying my departure from a burning aircraft. The 82 year old lady in row 8, who had to be wheelchaired onto the plane or perhaps the mother/father trying to juggle one or more screaming children might be a more serious concern.

tfnw 10y ago

(In this article): The same people who are condemning taking your bags, citing it as an impediment to evacuation, are suggesting an additional movement restriction, passenger bag checks at the exit. Personally, I think treating this issue in a black and white manner is a mistake. I think that each individual's judgement should be better respected, acknowledging the limits of central control.

zeveb 10y ago

> “Smoking is not allowed because it can jeopardize the lives and the health of other passengers and the lives and health of the crew,” she said. “And carrying your bag could have the same consequence.” No, smoking is not allowed because people like to have an out-group they can hate, and it is currently politically-correct to hate smokers. Inhaling a little smoke on a plane ride is annoying (so, too, body odour …), but it doesn't negatively impact anyone's health. So-called 'secondhand smoke' is junk science, pure and simple: no more factual than phrenology.

throwaway201607 10y ago

Why not design a process that is fast enough _and_ assumes people will take their bags? Ex: quadruple the number of exits.

mianos 10y ago

The issue is people simply don't trust the airline to take care of them. Typically airlines place lots of limitations on losses and make it very difficult to get compensated. Lost identification usually involves fees to get them replaced. Some might argue, quite correctly, that you are making a choice between death and inconvenience but many would not assume they are going to die and weigh up the risk vs return accordingly.

calvinbhai 10y ago

There are multiple reasons for this behavior Most of these reasons are listed in these set of storified tweets https://storify.com/AnonDesi/conversation-with-peegeekay-madnavin-antaryaami-ga https://storify.com/AnonDesi/conversation-with-peegeekay-mad... I urge everyone to please read the tweets in the link I posted, as it gives you a totally different perspective as to why people behaved this way. One other reason, is the fact that a plane flying from India is filled with people who speak at least 10 to 15 different languages (native langauge). Its possible that those who didnt get the passenger safety instructions in the language they are comfortable with, just didn't even know what to do under such distress!

FabHK 10y ago
The tweet storm provides reasons (loss of passport/ID very severe problem, specifically for migrant workers in Gulf states), but not valid ones. These are, however, good reasons to carry your passport on your person, and not in a huge suitcase in the overhead bin.

gumby 10y ago

I have some perspective in having been in an emergency landing (fortunately less fiery than the 777 event). Our plane was in trouble so the flight attendants had plenty of time to go around and confiscate our shoes, remove everything from under the seats, make sure our pockets were empty, check our brace positions, and switch passengers around (this was 25 years ago so I was put in the emergency row as I was strong enough to open the over wing door). It's a long story but the relevant parts are: 1 - I broke the rules and pocketed my passport with 200 US dollars folded into it. Which meant when the plane was on the ground and they were figuring out what to do with all these passengers I was able to get out, get someone to let me back onto the plane for my stuff, and get myself on another flight. I'd do that again, but I would not bring my phone (too dangerous when whizzing down that slide). 2 - Most people don't realize that the flight attendants are mainly there for safety and all that drink crud etc is just to keep the swells distracted and under control. I think the very safety of flight and the rareness of incident means people don't bother to consider what they'd do in an accident and so kid of go into autopilot. There were many years when I worried what to do about my computer, but these days everything is backed up into the cloud so I can afford to lose it in a fire. BTW despite all the excitement the amount of view was minimal and I (as a total non-expert) think they could have skipped the evacuation. I have read that the FAA is satisfied if you slide down and break your ankle -- but don't burn to death.

dingaling 10y ago
> Most people don't realize that the flight attendants are mainly there for safety Airlines like to say that safety is priority but then dress their attendants in high heels and tight poly-cotton skirts. On the occasions that I flew with UK armed forces, the 'flight attendants' wore stout boots, flame-resistant olive drab coveralls and gloves. Depending upon aircraft, some wore helmets too. I had no doubt they were there for my safety, there was even a story at the time about a helicopter crew throwing an Admiral out the door of a helicopter in an emergency.