Anti-AFA Delta FA's On US 1549

[Dignity]

One aspect of being professional is simply being able to accept a suggestion/reminder(even if it is not directed solely toward an individual) it also refers to a set of qualities one person actually possesses regarding their behavior in work related situations and their ability to simply take advice(even if the person does not think it applies to them at all)..

during briefing a Purser may offer a reminder to simply be respectful of the business class passengers and those in the main cabin by maintaining a quiet environment and limit/keep the tone down regarding personal conversations(that may be overheard from the galley and jumpseats) and refrain from any union/company business discussions as we should focus on safety and service...would I take that as that individual being a mother-hen? absolutely not..what would be so different on a forum? because the rules dont apply anymore?

its just a reminder that sometimes these discussions have their place and it is not on the aircraft(especially at this time) based on a post that I felt would like to share a comment...that is all.

while I personally enjoy reading others opinions(regardless..)..I am not a union rep, nor a company advocate or person with an agenda nor trying to change anyones mind.. I am just another Flight Attendant who would just like to participate on an open forum... I certainly do not feel the need to ..walk on eggshells.. around anyone or feel I cannot share an opinion.. because someone may react in a way that is a little over the top...when a simple general comment is made.

these are discussions and comments, maybe someone will appreciate a comment, maybe someone could really care less..either way with me is fine..

now I have another comment/suggestion..since the thread originally was about 1549..

here is some...advice..

when someone is going to the store to buy a pair of shoes for work...
look at the shoes and ask yourself.. keeping uniform guidelines in mind(they do have a purpose..with that rule..)will these shoes hamper my ability to perform in an emergency situation?.. do they have any buckles that may get caught on something, are they too tight that in case they were wedged they would not be easily removed, if they have laces..are they too long that may be a tripping hazard(and the need to double tie).. are they too loose.. they shouldnt be as the heels may slip..do they have slip resistant outsoles for long term comfortable wear...are they sturdy to protect your feet.
always..always invest in a good pair of shoes for work not only for comfort but safety.

Have a nice evening.

 

[dlpalmer]

luke, i posted the quote from pat friend. it can be found at http://www.pww.org/article/articleview/14311/ if mrs. friend did not say this, then she is misquoted by pww.org.

you are misleading people on this site as to what was discussed on facebook. perhaps that why you choose to keep your debate here than at the source.

as far as the incredible allegation that posters on facebook were against those crew members on flight 1549. in fact, luke, the poster, michael, ends his post with this: (On a side note, I do NOT wish to discredit the flight attendants getting everyone off the aircraft, this was a 1 in a million landing and they did a great job evacuating the aircraft, however some of it was luck as they failed to do some important things that had it gone differently could have cost lives)

please don't mislead people any more.

 

[Dignity]

however some of it was luck as they failed to do some important things that had it gone differently could have cost lives

Hello DlPalmer,

is that comment implying the only reason why it was successful was simply they got lucky? because that is exactly what that quote is suggesting(even if that is not the intent). what did they fail to do? how would someone handle the situation differently? could it be they handled the situation the best they could under the circumstances? maybe its best to reserve what someone should have done..until an investigation of the facts is final.

How about simply accepting the fact what they did and how it was handled saved everyone on board and luck had nothing to do with it, rather than having the ability to keep people calm due to the fact their training enabled them to handle a situation under all conditions.

as far as allegations....I personally do not find that to be the case at all.. rather than others reactions/concerns to comments made available.

I do NOT wish to discredit the flight attendants

for a disclaimer to be used does not necessarily imply that was not the intent at all...if the poster felt their comments would not be perceived any other way than mentioned.. then it would not have been included at all..

what one can derive however.. is the obvious disregard of sound good judgement and total lack of tact and class.

some of it was luck

the comment from facebook.. the poster suggested the fwd rafts should have been detached from the aircraft(maybe the entire text should be made available instead of the closing?)...however the comment speaks for itself...

now lets think about the situation for a moment..

to me...

The Flight Attendants in the aft obviously had two blocked aft exits that could not be used due to a reason.. the aircraft was partially submerged in water(or maybe they were unusable because the aft section received the initial impact..because the nose had to be kept as high as possible in a water landing...and the aft exits were possibly damaged..(when the aft section of the aircraft hit the water..that is probably when the Flight Attendant got injured)...whatever the case they were blocked.. and the Flight Attendants appeared to have no choice but redirecting to the over wings(as the forward slides could not accommodate all passengers)

their only alternative may have been (for those passengers mid to aft) was to either go onto the wings or into the river..due to the frigid water conditions its better to go somewhere rather than into the water in the middle of winter...now...keeping that in mind...there are passengers on the wings..could it be possible.. a part of the reason why the aircraft remained floating was simply the fact the fwd slides remained attached to the aircraft allowing some additional buoyancy for the aircraft itself? had the forward slides actually been released as suggested by the "poster"...(while the aircraft is taking on water) may have actually caused all those on the wings to go into the river to be exposed more to the elements as the aircraft continued to become more submerged.. from takeoff to being in the river all happening in a matter of minutes..

to me, the two fwd slides itself may have actually helped contribute keeping the plane buoyant (allowing enough time to keep the plane afloat as rescue boats were on their way), had those two slides been released immediately, the aircraft may have taken on more water and caused all the passengers on the wings to go right into the river.....but the bottom line is simply they did nothing wrong, they did not fail to do anything but try the best they could dealing with what was directly in front of them.


they had to make a split second decision what to do based on not only one..but two unusable. exits.. they were handling a situation the best they could with blocked exits and a injured Flight Attendant, there is no luck here and yes they did a great job.., its called dealing with a situation calmly/professionally due to excellent training and using all available resources to save lives, which they did...and in this incident...

everyone.

I applaud the Flight Crew's courage, their bravery, training and the ability to make the right decisions(at the right time) when it was necessary....fortunately all agree that in regard.



Flight Crew of #1549,
JOB WELL DONE.

please don't mislead people any more

since you have admitted you are the original poster? I suggest one good idea for you going forward.. would be for you to apply that same advice and rely on factual comments from the source.

Have a nice evening.

 

[N965VJ]

That whole Facebook page is full of FAIL:

Michael wrote
on January 23, 2009 at 4:52pm

Interesting seeing how those US Air flight attendants made several mistakes which could have cost the lives of those passengers. For one it has been stated several times that the flight attendant in the aft attempted to open the back doors causing water to rush in before the door was closed and that they seemed to be running around confused and paniced [sic].

Obviously Michael did not pay attention to the NTSB briefing on 1-17-09

 

[SKY HIGH]

Michael wrote on January 23, 2009 at 4:52pm
Interesting seeing how those US Air flight attendants made several mistakes which could have cost the lives of those passengers. For one it has been stated several times that the flight attendant in the aft attempted to open the back doors causing water to rush in before the door was closed and that they seemed to be running around confused and paniced. At no time did the flight attendants yell there commands "Life Vests Under Seat put vest On" this was clear as the fact that 90% of the passengers had no life vest or a seat cushion and the harbor patrol stated they were throughing life jackets to the passengers. Finally look closely at the pics, an A320 is not a overwater aircraft. So why are the slides still attached to the 1L and 1R doors with passengers sitting in them? As a former US Air FA we were taught you open the door, unhook the slide and kick it away from the door and tell the passengers to jump and inflate.
=================================================


This is quoted from the FACEBOOK posts! Interesting how Michael states WRONG information himself. The A320 is not an overwater aircraft???? THAT'S WRONG.

And, let's see, it was 20 degrees that day, water freezing, who in their right MIND would detach the slides if it were a NON EOW aircraft and send passengers INTO THE WATER?

 

[Whatnow?]

Michael wrote on January 23, 2009 at 4:52pm
As a former US Air FA we were taught you open the door, unhook the slide and kick it away from the door and tell the passengers to jump and inflate.
=================================================


This is quoted from the FACEBOOK posts! Interesting how Michael states WRONG information himself. The A320 is not an overwater aircraft???? THAT'S WRONG.

Wow....first, it sounds like Michael is a little "bitter" about being a former USAirways F/A...second, that A320 was an EOW A/C and if he would have remembered from F/A Training at USAirways he would know that in a ditching on any EOW (Over Water Equipped) A/C once the "slide/rafts" are inflated upon opening the respective doors.....passengers are to board the "slide/rafts" from the A/C to the respective capacity and then they are to be "quick/released" from the A/C.

On Non-EOW A/C.....the inflatable door slides are just narrow "slides to escape the a/c"....and cannot hold a passenger capacity like those of a EOW "slide/raft". So, the procedure on a Non EOW A/C ditching is to immediately quick release the slide from the A/C because it cannot hold more than a handful of passengers on it.....and have the passengers jump into the water and use flotation devices from the a/c such as seat cushions and also to grab onto the tethered life lines on the released door slides. I honestly think that having this particular A320-EOW A/C in this situation prevented countless hypothermia injuries from people not having to jump into the water.

This crew of Flight 1549 did exactly what was supposed to be done.....not to mention all of this happened in the time frame of only several minutes! And most importantly, why would a F/A from any Airline criticize their own peers on a job well done! :huh:

 

[LukeAisleWalker]

luke, i posted the quote from pat friend. it can be found at http://www.pww.org/article/articleview/14311/ if mrs. friend did not say this, then she is misquoted by pww.org.

you are misleading people on this site as to what was discussed on facebook. perhaps that why you choose to keep your debate here than at the source.

as far as the incredible allegation that posters on facebook were against those crew members on flight 1549. in fact, luke, the poster, michael, ends his post with this: (On a side note, I do NOT wish to discredit the flight attendants getting everyone off the aircraft, this was a 1 in a million landing and they did a great job evacuating the aircraft, however some of it was luck as they failed to do some important things that had it gone differently could have cost lives)

please don't mislead people any more.

dpalmer--
I think you've already been set-straight by some of the other posters here today, however, since you directed your post at me, I am going to answer you myself.
1. I misled no one on this site. Go back and re-read the title of the thread and my first posting.
I pasted a direct quote from the Facebook page AND provided a link. I did that so the readers here could read the Facebook page themselves and make their own decision. I asked where your group could have gotten such a quote from P. Friend.
HOW did I mislead anyone? Back your assertions up with facts.

2. I NEVER mentioned the criticism that Michael made of the f/a crew. I found it so disgusting that I chose not to even comment on it. Others here decided to comment on that part of the Facebook page.

And, in my opinion, Michael's disingenuous disclaimer at the end is bogus after he already criticized this goup of brave f/a's who aren't even 2 weeks out from their harrowing experience. That's like inviting people into a room with paintings of elephants and asking them not to think about elephants. Sorry, but the damage was done. In my opinion, he should have just kept his mouth shut. But it sounds like he's a loose cannon......

The Facebook thread shows pettiness, lack of class and manners and reeks of desperation. Now run off and try your poor-me, victim routine on someone else. Obviously, it's not working here.

 

[Dignity]

one of those comments

one of those comments not all..

in this country we have the opportunity to join groups or organizations that may reflect personal views and beliefs...that site is no different and the opinions associated are their right and should be appreciated(regardless of the message) but one should fully expect a reply if a comment is made available..

 

[aislehopper]

The Facebook thread shows pettiness, lack of class and manners and reeks of desperation (emphasis added). Now run off and try your poor-me, victim routine on someone else. Obviously, it's not working here.

. . . and you ask the source of "pot meet kettle?"

 

[LukeAisleWalker]

. . . "pot meet kettle?"

Either you have a cookware fetish or I'm hearing a broken record.

 

[LukeAisleWalker]

One aspect of being professional is simply being able to accept a suggestion/reminder(even if it is not directed solely toward an individual)

Dig--
I think it's because the first part of your post was written in the second person after quoting me. Because it was a second-person reference (plus it was late and I was tired), I took offense. The remainder of said post was written third person ("they") and that was fine.
That's the problem with the electronic world, emails, message boards, etc...Because you don't hear tone, inflection, etc...things can be misconstrued.
Sorry about that--I'm ok if you're ok <?> :mellow:
Have a good one.

 

[N965VJ]

Those Facebook people need to quit reading drivel posted on Communist websites, stop watching Kettles flapping their gums on the Chicken Noodle Network, and pay attention to the NTSB briefings.

 

[Dignity]

Dig--
I think it's because the first part of your post was written in the second person after quoting me. Because it was a second-person reference (plus it was late and I was tired), I took offense. The remainder of said post was written third person ("they") and that was fine.
That's the problem with the electronic world, emails, message boards, etc...Because you don't hear tone, inflection, etc...things can be misconstrued.
Sorry about that--I'm ok if you're ok <?> :mellow:
Have a good one.

I see..

The post was just a thought that came to mind because you had mentioned some were discussing these ideas on the jumpseat...the suggestion really never implied to you or even to those who were in discussion. rather than simply a general comment these types of discussions should not be happening on the aircraft(and was not directed really to anyone in particular)...and simply a reminder that maybe... if it happens in the future..that it might be a good idea to simply remind those its not the appropriate place..that's all!

we're cool.

Luke, I dont know it all..I just comment on subjects when a thought is on my mind.. that is really all there is to it..my intent is really only what is in the best interest of Flight Attendants.

to me, positive and refreshing change focusing on brighter ideas would be ideal..(I think a lot of us need that..)..especially what we have all gone through over the past few years...it would be a good idea everyone start focusing on the airline, customers, communities and employees..and future success for Delta.



personally...I think resolution regarding these important issues needs to be addressed in the very near future.. so it is ultimately determined where the majority stands(either way) and then move forward and make Delta the best it can be..

 

[N965VJ]

*POOF!* The Facebook page has magically disappeared.

Was it something I said?

 

[dlpalmer]

luke... i suggested you mislead people because you claimed that pat friend did not say something she is quoted as saying. in the end, it's anyone's guess, i assume, whether she actually said it or it's a communist site or whatever it might be...

however, in my original post, i quoted that site. it was not made up as you and others have suggested on here.

as far as michael's comments, they were hasty and in my opinion poor taste. nonetheless, that's his battle to fight, not mine.