2024 Qantas Inflight safety video

[jb747]

There is no joy greater than missing an ATC offered take off slot, because you aren't "ready". And you're not ready, because the video is still droning on, with nobody watching it. 90 seconds. Anything longer than that has operational implications (though I doubt that the people responsible for these videos are aware that the company operates the occasional aircraft).

 

[jase05]

Not a fan of any of these gimmick productions on any airline. The message should be all about safety and nothing else.
In a perfect world there should be a 10 question exam at the end and if you get less than 80% you are escorted off the plane

 

[RooFlyer]

In a perfect world there should be a 10 question exam at the end and if you get less than 80% you are escorted off the plane

A wee bit O/T sorry, but an analogy.

When I was taking a ballon ride over Bagan, Burma, the pilot was a crusty ex RAAF type. He gave the safety demo and instructions but during it, there were 2 guys obviously not paying attention, chatting etc. Pilot:

Oi! You two. I'll say it just once again, and if you can't repeat it back to me, you'll be straight off!! I'm certain they would have been, too.

 

[flyer89]

here is no joy greater than missing an ATC offered take off slot, because you aren't "ready". And you're not ready, because the video is still droning on, with nobody watching it. 90 seconds. Anything longer than that has operational implications (though I doubt that the people responsible for these videos are aware that the company operates the occasional aircraft).

Considering the flight crew can complete a thorough safety brief in less time than these videos tells you all you need to know.

 

[Franky]

[OT] I wonder what the average taxi time is from gate to hold point and if it is always >6mins [OT]

20m for my flight on Tuesday SYD-PER…

 

[RSVKanga]

There is no joy greater than missing an ATC offered take off slot, because you aren't "ready". And you're not ready, because the video is still droning on, with nobody watching it. 90 seconds. Anything longer than that has operational implications (though I doubt that the people responsible for these videos are aware that the company operates the occasional aircraft).

If you’re really a frequent flyer then you’d know that Qantas safety videos are compressed/reduced to up to half of their original length when it comes to the actual screening onboard aircraft. The 10 minute YouTube version which people watch at home is NOT the version that will be played onboard aircraft. It will be a 5 minute version of this video.

 

[dairyfloss]

I was able to trim the 6m video with CapCut to 3m 52s by taking out all the fluff, meaning ~36% of it is unnecessary... Not putting this on YouTube etc., so won't post here.

 

[half-hour]

Must have missed the news on the effectiveness of the JAL safety video in relation to the recent incident. I've flown JAL twice in the last year and must admit, I remember nothing of the video at all. Whereas, I last flew SQ 2 years ago, and I can still remember that one.

Done correctly, I do think an attention grabbing video can be effective. As mentioned in a previous post, it helps to keep passengers interested rather then distracted. Which is why so many airlines do it these days.

It maybe well be a case of different types of video working well for different people.

I flew JAL a week before the incident, and the message about not taking bags with you when evacuating really stood out as an emphasised point.

I found the JAL video to be really short and to the point, so much so that I didn't mind watching four times during my trip. Contrast that with the Qantas videos that are engaging upon first viewing (for the aesthetics rather than the safety messages) but then become really hard work on repeat.

 

[Lynda2475]

Noting that ime when you watch the English version of a safety video on an airline from a non-english speaking country it is almost always significantly shorter than the local language version.

Same true with Qantas, the Spanish version flying to SCL used to be very short.

 

[RooFlyer]

If you’re really a frequent flyer then you’d know that Qantas safety videos are compressed/reduced to up to half of their original length when it comes to the actual screening onboard aircraft. The 10 minute YouTube version which people watch at home is NOT the version that will be played onboard aircraft. It will be a 5 minute version of this video.

You are right! I dare say that JB747 watched the safety video in only a small proportion of his flights.

Oh, and a 6 minute edition for B787, at least (see up thread).

 

[kpro]

It maybe well be a case of different types of video working well for different people.

In my line of work we do Usability Testing, sometimes multiple rounds to determine what works best for a realistic cross section the target user base. You would hope that Qantas (and every other airline with a 'creative' video) has done the same.

 

[andyrb]

YouTube subtitles on point.

 

[justinbrett]

20m for my flight on Tuesday SYD-PER…

20 minutes from pushback to take off is pretty standard at most major airports around the world.

This ridiculous talk of 4 vs 6 minutes is a bit hysterical. Even at the smallest airport with the perfect runway configuration (close to the apron), if you are ready for take off 6 minutes after pushing back, well done. That's by far the exception.

Now if the crew start the video 10 minutes after pushback, well, that's a different issue.

 

[RooFlyer]

This hysterical talk of 4 vs 6 minutes is a bit ridiculous.

Describing it as hysterical is also a bit ridiculous, doncha think?

 

[justinbrett]

Describing it as hysterical is also a bit ridiculous, doncha think?

Apologies, fixed.

 

[RichardMEL]

Dare I say.. length matters .. but for me it's way more about attention span and covering the important details without all the extras. I think most of us agree that this effort is not great at that - be it 4 or 6  in... minutes.

 

[justinbrett]

Dare I say.. length matters .. but for me it's way more about attention span and covering the important details without all the extras. I think most of us agree that this effort is not great at that - be it 4 or 6  in... minutes.

I don’t think it’s any worse than the last decade or so of QF safety videos. Less cringe (no double shot) and not as dated (with the centenary).

They'll get 4-5 years out of this. The average pax won't bat an eyelid.

 

[Quickstatus]

Actually, you raise an ON topic point I think.

Interesting that CC can be standing/walking through cabin as aircraft taxiing. I've never been able to reconcile that. The whole reason that passengers are asked to belt up until the aircraft comes to stop and seatbelt signs off is the emergency stop (say due to a wayward Ute).

BTW has anyone opened a Lifejaclet and put it on and inflated it?

 

[Mattg]

FWIW, when the original and a foreign language version of this safety video need to be shown back to back (e.g. on flights to many destinations in Asia, South America, etc.) the video takes almost 9 minutes.

 

[jb747]

This ridiculous talk of 4 vs 6 minutes is a bit hysterical. Even at the smallest airport with the perfect runway configuration (close to the apron), if you are ready for take off 6 minutes after pushing back, well done. That's by far the exception.

Now if the crew start the video 10 minutes after pushback, well, that's a different issue.

True enough, especially at busy times, but even in the big jets, the stars sometimes aligned, with a start point that's near the runway. But, you're starting and ending your timing from the wrong spot. In many aircraft the cabin crew cannot start the video until at least two generators are running...which means two engines. Which, these days, means all of them. Generator switch-overs often cause issues with any running videos. It's less of a problem in big aircraft. So, now that's a few minutes used up. And then it actually has to finish a couple of minutes before we get to the runway. Beyond that, it's not as if the cabin crew had nothing to do whilst headed out to the runway. Long videos serve to slow everything down. The the biggest problem of all is that these videos continue to disconnect everyone from the fact that there are life saving facts hidden within, and they are important, but they're hidden in a sea of flotsam and verbiage.