
The volume is too damn high on flights - jaf12duke
http://blog.42floors.com/volume-damn-high/#flights
======
Alupis
Few thoughts:

> and opened the decibel meter on my iPhone

These are notoriously inaccurate. To get accurate decibel readings, the mic
must be calibrated to absolute known levels (something your App can't do). The
App's are basically just comparing relative sounds (this sound is more
prominent than this other one, and therefore must be louder... after
establishing some relative baseline). Real decibel measuring equipment is very
expensive and requires re-calibration routinely. So, measuring 80db could
easily be in a swing of +/\- 10db's (or more).

> 150dB: Jet take-off at 25 meters (eardrum rupture)

That's not quite accurate. Long term exposure could lead to damage over time,
but for comparison a shotgun is typically measured at 165db when it's up
against your shoulder and face. Yes, you wear hearing protection (nick-named
"ears" if you are a frequent shooter) but your eardrumps aren't rupturing
immediately if you take them off.

> What shocked me was the volume of the PA system

Yes, it's loud -- by design. The PA system is not there just to provide
something to listen to in case you are bored. In a best case scenario, it's
there for the usual "buckle-up" talk and for the pilot to give a greeting. In
the worst case scenario, it's there for emergency instructions (a time when
panic and passenger noises are likely to get quite loud on their own).

~~~
dikaiosune
Probably worth noting that shooting without "ears" can still leave you
basically unable to hear anything for a good while depending on the firearm,
shooting environment, etc. It's not an instant ear-bleeding rupture but it's
still VERY loud and will cause significant hearing loss with little
repetition.

Side note: I'm always curious how soldiers/SWAT/HRT/etc. are able to hold
normal volume conversations. If they're wearing ear-protection, how do they
listen for potential threats and assailants? If not, how do they not shout all
day long every day?

~~~
logfromblammo
I would guess that they use more expensive hearing protection systems with an
active electronic system to pass through sounds at a comfortable level,
attenuate louder and potentially damaging noises, and possibly even amplify
quiet sounds.

The technology would be similar to that used in hearing aids and noise-
cancelling headphones. But it is also probably an order of magnitude or two
more expensive just because the primary customers are tax-funded.

Without electronics, I could also conceive of an earplug with a winding
channel bored through it, past flaps that can block the channel by moving too
far in either direction and forming a seal with the outer wall of the channel.
Sound energy above a certain level would push the flaps closed as the air
vibrated, and would thus attenuate louder sounds to a greater extent than
quieter ones. If the flaps were tuned to different sound energies, the loudest
sounds would push closed the most flaps.

That would require some precise machining to fit inside the outer ear canal.
The electronic filter might actually be cheaper.

~~~
seany
You can get a basic set of electronic ear pro for ~$70
([http://amzn.com/B007BGSI5U](http://amzn.com/B007BGSI5U)), there are even
cheaper options with a lower NRR.

~~~
logfromblammo
Those look a bit bulky for use by police or military in the field. You would
need to miniaturize down to an in-ear version. Then you need to add very
generous padding in your procurement contract.

If an over-the-ear tech is available for civilians for $70, I would guess that
an in-ear police/military version is $850, with an upsell option to integrate
with your existing radio communications system for only $1150 per pair. I'd
also call it "active hearing protection system" and never, ever refer to them
as "earplugs".

That's comparable with a good hearing aid, only because the health insurance
payments system is superficially similar to government procurement contracting
with respect to profiteering middlemen.

Again, this is only a guess, made without supporting data by someone who owns
a foil hat.

~~~
Alupis
These seem to be more along the lines of what is issued:

[http://archive.armytimes.com/article/20090908/NEWS/909080313...](http://archive.armytimes.com/article/20090908/NEWS/909080313/Army-
says-new-earplugs-will-save-your-hearing)

> Soldiers can adjust the rocker with a quick "click" depending on the amount
> of protection they need. When it's in the open or "weapons fire" position,
> sound can travel through the sound channel filter into the ear.

> For noisy environments that don't require an acute listening capability,
> such as around helicopters, troop carriers or generators, the rocker can be
> switched to the closed or "constant protection" position.

There's also larger over-ear kinds that are integrated with comms:

[http://www.bosssafety.com/p-10356-peltor-comtac-iii-a-c-h-
he...](http://www.bosssafety.com/p-10356-peltor-comtac-iii-a-c-h-headset-
single-comm-neckband-military-green.aspx)

This style has both active and passive configurations.

~~~
logfromblammo
For those hitting the paywall on the the first link, the in-ear protection
resembles 3M Ultrafit earplugs, with a hole bored through the center. The
rocker switch may be lengthening or diverting the pass-through channel, like
the rotary valves on a tuba or French horn. A longer or narrower channel would
provide more attenuation of all sounds. It may also simply be closing and
opening the channel.

They don't seem to have variable attenuation based on the acoustic energy,
though. If the soldiers find them to be acceptable everyday gear at all, there
would certainly be funding available to engineer improved internals.

The over-ear comms-integrated rig is priced at double my estimate for what an
in-ear version might sell for, which tells me that I was probably
underestimating.

------
nakedrobot2
The PA when heard over the headphones (when watching a movie, etc.) is even
worse - I wouldn't be surprised if it was over 100dB. Sometimes a movie has
quiet audio, or quiet moments requiring you to turn up the volume a lot. More
than once I have been painfully ear-raped by the flight attendant PA system in
my earphones for this reason.

Just another instance of outrageously bad customer service in the airline
industry. I'm convinced at this point that they simply despise their entire
customer base.

~~~
ZoFreX
I've stopped using the in-flight systems because of this. I use in-ear
earphones on flights, as the design of them (basically ear plugs with speakers
in the middle) blocks out sound and as a result I can have the volume lower,
with the idea of preserving what's left of my hearing. Because of that design
I not only _can_ have the volume low, but _have_ to have the volume low - and
when the PA announcements override the volume to max, it's very loud indeed.
On Virgin Atlantic flights, it hits the physical pain threshold, so I've
stopped plugging in to these systems entirely and use my phone/iPad/whatever
instead.

~~~
MichaelGG
I'm sorta curious why anyone is using in in flight systems in the first place.
Doesn't nearly everyone own personal devices capable of playing hours of music
or videos? Even with 32 GB of storage, total, I'm able to hold more video than
I can watch in a day.

~~~
davb
Not all seats come equipped with power sockets. Watching movies on long-haul
(transatlantic) flights, after using your device while waiting to board, had a
good chance of running the battery flat before the trip is complete.

Economy seats sometimes have a pitch so narrow that it's difficult to get a
tablet sitting at a comfortable viewing angle.

Additionally, it's sometimes convenient to use the in-flight entertainment
systems when travelling with someone else. My girlfriend and I can watch the
same movie, at the same time, without awkwardly balancing a tablet between us
and having to use a headphone splitter.

------
rottyguy
I've always wondered why bars crank up the music so high to the extent you're
yelling to convey conversation to the person next to you. One of my friends
hypothesized that it was done to focus patrons on drinking and not chatter,
but socializing is a big part of the bar scene...

Anyone know?

~~~
omegant
A very good private party DJ(He plays for artist and actors) told me that if
you want people to dance, the volume must be very high.

As it was my party I told him to do it as he saw fit and indeed almost all the
people (200) danced.

Then one neighbour complained and he lowered the volume (just for a while ;) )
and most people stopped dancing almost immediately. When he boosted the volume
again, they all jumped to dance.

It was amazing.

Edit: Typo.

Reply to the comment below: I understand your comment, but the party was in a
former s.XIX coastal battery fortress,(now an environmental Hotel). This
fortress is excavated on the stone , below the ground level (You don´t see it
till you are literally falling in the ditch). The place where the Party took
place was 10 meters below the ground level, behind a fortress wall, a 6m high
ditch and 1.5 km away from the nearest buildings, separated by rolling hills
and Mediterranean woods.

No, sorry but I certainly was not that worried of the volume and the
neighbours.

~~~
leephillips
Glad you didn't let consideration for the rights and comfort of the people who
live around you interfere with your need to party as you saw fit.

~~~
GrinningFool
You had me up until "rights". Consideration (or lack thereof) for their
comfort - and just for them as individuals- yes definitely.

For their rights? that's a lot less clear.

~~~
arrrg
Well, in my country people do have the right to sleep unimpeded (between 10pm
and 6am). One that is regularly enforced, actually, so it’s not just on the
books.

Is that such an outlandish concept?

~~~
GrinningFool
Interesting. Here in the States, that's usually a regulation at the municipal
level if it exists at all. Even in that context, it's not defined as a right -
just a law to be completed with.

------
pngat2x
OSHA probably wouldn't have much to say… The peak he measured would only be
outside of their guidelines if the attendants screamed for the entire LAS-SFO
flight and then he hopped on a plane and immediately flew back with the same
treatment.

Table G-16 - Permissible Noise Exposures

[https://www.osha.gov/pls/oshaweb/owadisp.show_document?p_tab...](https://www.osha.gov/pls/oshaweb/owadisp.show_document?p_table=standards&p_id=9735)

~~~
userbinator
NIOSH says 15 minutes at 100dB, which is still far longer than the combined
duration of all announcements on a flight.

[http://www.sengpielaudio.com/PermissibleExposureTime.htm](http://www.sengpielaudio.com/PermissibleExposureTime.htm)

I think the 99dB value the author of the article measured is not arbitrary -
and was chosen specifically to meet some regulations.

~~~
kissickas
That depends on the flight. I've timed the announcements on some medium-length
flights totaling upwards of 30 minutes.

------
nate_meurer
My comment from another thread on this subject:

\---

Earplugs! I bought a box of foam earplugs that has supplied me for years now.
I cut them in half; half an earplug is the perfect length for unobtrusive
everyday wear.

I have quantities of half-earplugs stashed in all my pants pockets, in my car,
my work bag, and in a little container on my keychain. I wear them in the car,
on planes, at the shooting range, when grinding coffee, and especially when
putting away dishes. Fucking clanging-together dishes are the loudest things I
encounter in my regular routine.

For my kids I bought silicone putty plugs. They work perfectly for little
ears, and I keep them with the foam plugs. My kids know where the big orange
jar of earplugs is, and they've acquired some of my discipline.

~~~
azth
> I wear them in the car

Hopefully not while driving though :)

~~~
Dylan16807
Why not? Attenuating _all_ sound doesn't have a huge impact on what you're
able to hear.

~~~
ctdonath
Indeed; to the contrary, I find myself hyper-aware of sounds when wearing
attenuative hearing protection.

------
jaxbot
I can second the author's conclusion. I fly regularly and have noticed in the
last 6 months, PA systems have become much louder than usual on most flights.
It's especially bad if you have headphones plugged in to the XM radio -- they
don't seem to have separate volume controls for the PA speakers and hardwired
headphones.

~~~
jonnathanson
I've noticed it, too. Also, PA announcements, when heard over headphones, seem
to be super-loud regardless of whether you adjust the volume on the
headphones. It's as if there is some mandatory minimum volume for the
announcements.

I'll hazard a guess--and I might be completely wrong--that there is some sort
of legal reason for this. Maybe there have been lawsuits in which people
claimed not to have heard the in-flight announcements, and therefore, did not
feel not bound to them. I dunno. It just seems as if there's a reason for
this. Not necessarily a good reason, but a reason.

Anyhow, this is 100% armchair speculation. It just seems like the sort of
thing that could have happened.

~~~
beachstartup
legal reasons, or, they just don't give a fuck and will continue to physically
hurt their customers with ultra-loud headphone announcements until it becomes
so widely hated it turns into an internet meme.

------
userbinator
I've had the opposite experience - PA systems so quiet they're drowned out by
the plane's noise. Perhaps he was sitting very close to one of the speakers.
Given that the announcements are usually important, not continuous but made in
short bursts, and that volume level (99dB) is discomforting but only harmful
with prolonged exposure, I don't think it's too loud. The whole idea of an
announcement is to get the attention of the passengers - including those who
may be asleep. Missing an important announcement may have safety implications.

~~~
mikeash
I can't remember the last time I heard an in-flight announcement that I
actually needed to hear. They're far from "usually important." 99% of flights
could happily go from start to finish without a single use of the PA, if it
were legal to do so, and if the airline could exercise self-control.

The PA system should be reserved for actual important safety-related
announcements. It's outrageous that the same system that would be used to tell
you to brace for a crash is also used to repeatedly flog credit cards, duty-
free sales, and other such nonsense, training everybody to ignore it.

~~~
sokoloff
There is a specific legal requirement for the passenger briefing. You'll
notice that the briefing pretty much follows the script required by the law:
[http://www.law.cornell.edu/cfr/text/14/91.519](http://www.law.cornell.edu/cfr/text/14/91.519)

~~~
gergles
> The oral briefing required by paragraph (a) of this section shall be given
> by the pilot in command or a member of the crew, but need not be given when
> the pilot in command determines that the passengers are familiar with the
> contents of the briefing.

Maybe the airlines could make you take a quiz on the ground to get early
boarding, and if everyone passes, no briefing!

------
binarymax
I also use earplugs and over ear noise cancelling headphones during flights.
They work very well. I rarely fly United but I've noticed that some airlines
are definitely worse than others when it comes to PA.

I haven't used it on flights yet but did some research and splurged on the
Faber Acoustical SoundMeter
([https://itunes.apple.com/us/app/soundmeter/id287615105?mt=8&...](https://itunes.apple.com/us/app/soundmeter/id287615105?mt=8&ign-
mpt=uo%3D4)). I bought it since I live on a busy road and lots of sirens go
by, adding to the general traffic whooshing. Sirens are in the high range and
go over 100. Its a good app to have to check whether I'm going crazy or if it
is really loud in place where I'm feeling overwhelmed with sound.

I will be sure to try it out next time I fly and provide some data. Maybe we
can crowdsource samples of airline loudness.

~~~
MichaelGG
In SF, waking around, the sirens seem so ridiculously loud. I have a hard time
believing that loudness level was derived by research versus just going as
high as possible without causing immediate physical damage.

------
xenonysf
So when are we all starting to measure sounds around us (including cafes,
vehicles, cities) and create a map of quietest things and places?

~~~
cryptoz
There is work being done on crowdsourcing ambient sound:
[http://www.technologyreview.com/view/520606/noise-
pollution-...](http://www.technologyreview.com/view/520606/noise-pollution-
maps-crowdsourced-from-smartphone-data/)

It's a neat problem. You can turn on smartphone microphones and listen for
noise levels to measure for noise pollution and law violations, etc. However,
you have to develop algorithms that filter our human conversations (for this
application linked above), and the privacy implications are astronomical.

Edit: [http://www.citylab.com/tech/2013/05/crowdsourcing-citys-
quie...](http://www.citylab.com/tech/2013/05/crowdsourcing-citys-quiet-
corners/5597/)

~~~
edsykes
we've also developed an early version of this. Still very early stages and we
aren't making use of all the data yet:

[http://noise.1self.co](http://noise.1self.co)

disclosure: I'm a founder

------
uptown
Sort of off-topic, but maybe somebody commenting on audio acoustics and
decibels will know -- When you call a business and they pipe their automated
music into the call while you're on-hold, why is the audio quality of that
music frequently horrible? You'll get fuzzy music, or drop-outs of the music
track - but when a human picks up the phone, it tends to sound just like most
other phone calls. It seems like such a basic solvable problem, but I don't
know where to attribute the blame.

~~~
userbinator
Music is basically never going to sound good over a POTS because it's a low-
bandwidth channel optimised for human voice:

[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Voiceband](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Voiceband)

It may also be a legacy system using old worn-out looping casette tapes for
the music.

~~~
yourcelf
It's even worse if the sound is going through a digital (VOIP / cell phone)
system. Most modern codecs for voice are using some form of Linear Predictive
Coding[1] (e.g. ACELPC) which is basically modeling sound as a resonator at
the bottom of a tube with a filter bank (sortof like your voice box). With
voice, this is a reasonably good approximation, and the codecs are
aggressively tuned to be efficient at that. But if full-band music gets piped
through it will sound roughly like that music is being produced by a flapping
plosive at the bottom of a long tube.

[1]
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Linear_predictive_coding](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Linear_predictive_coding)

~~~
spdustin
"Flapping plosive at the bottom of a long tube."

What an exceptionally colorful description of the effects of that type of
codec! Well done.

I wonder if there are applications for psychoacoustic modeling approaches for
safety/compulsory announcements. Can they be encoded in a different way before
broadcast on the PA to take advantage of our perception of human speech? And
possible a different codec still for users of headphones?

Or perhaps a quick, sharp attention tone before urgent broadcasts, but for non
safety/compulsory announcements, a lower volume setting...

------
ChuckMcM
I think the author answered their own question with this statement: _" I’ve
been on flights where the sound of the flight attendants over the PA system
was loud enough to sound like the attendant was shouting directly into my ear
despite having two layers of sound protection."_

The PA system in the airplane is part of the safety equipment, the crew uses
it to inform the passengers during an emergency what they should do to
prepare. Everyone knows that during a flight people will have noise cancelling
earphones on and possibly dual layers of protection. Also the ambient noise in
an aircraft with its nose pitched down at a steep angle or in an uncontrolled
spin is likely to be quite high. The PA has to cut through all of that in
order to communicate with you.

I agree it would be nice if they didn't use full emergency power during non-
essential communication, but the FAA considers the safety briefing to be
essential communication so you are out of luck there.

------
louprado
Preferably, limit announcements to the bare minimum and use pre-recordings.
There is too much variability in voice intensity. A pre-warning chime before
an announcement would reduce stress and allow time to cover our ears. It would
also spare me from apologizing to passengers since I scream when I am awoken
abruptly. Thanks for the data Darren.

------
thanatosmin
This is exacerbated by the absolutely intrusive use of the PA system--rather
than just for safety announcements we now have the pleasure of enduring credit
card and frequent flier program ads.

------
k2enemy
I've noticed this too. On my last few flights it has been so loud it caused
physical discomfort (to me) and made my toddler cry.

~~~
spdustin
It's been my assertion, as both a solo passenger and one traveling with a
child, that crying babies and toddlers are the result of one of two things:

1) Kids need to be chewing something, or sucking on a nipple/bottle/straw to
help facilitate inner-ear pressure changes. Most aren't, and those that can't
say "my ears hurt" simply scream.

2) Kids who are tired (because they're kids or because their parents figured
"I'll tire him out so he sleeps on the flight") and get startled by a scary
loud voice saying things they don't understand. Like yours - probably a
tuckered out toddler desperate to rest, no?

(Edited to avoid sounding like I was disagreeing with parent comment)

~~~
k2enemy
Great tips for flying with kids in general. I'm pretty confident that these
particular instances were due to the announcements as things instantly went
from happy to crying "it hurts! loud!" with hands over ears, then back to
(relatively) happy once it was over.

------
ufmace
I could believe it. I just flew Spirit (never again, for reasons in addition
to this) a couple of weeks ago, and they spent the last 20 minutes or so of
the flight hawking some kind of credit card deal. Even wearing earplugs barely
put a dent in the volume.

~~~
spdustin
I've not experienced this at all, but I routinely fly American or United (or
their international "alliance" partners). My next flight is on Southwest. I
wonder how different that'll be - boarding procedures don't generally bug me
(we're all going to the same place in a giant airborne metal tube), but crew
behavior has the power to wreck the experience for me.

~~~
ufmace
I haven't seen it on any other airline either. I think it's only on the
"discount" airlines, where you can get a slightly cheaper flight... as long as
you buy your baggage check and check in in the right way and don't expect to
actually eat or drink anything on board.

------
joshuaheard
They probably do it because no one pays attention to the announcements
anymore. It's the same reason they (used to) turn up the volume on TV
commercials.

Has the author tried asking the flight attendants to turn the volume down?

~~~
chadgeidel
The volume is not "turned up" on TV commercials. The perceived increase in
volume is due to dynamic range compression:
[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dynamic_range_compression#Broad...](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dynamic_range_compression#Broadcasting)

~~~
TillE
Which means the commercial is playing at maximum volume. Of course it's not
physically changing the volume control on your television, but the source is
as loud as it can possibly be.

------
mixmastamyk
I use a pair of sony extra-bass earbuds that are thicker and have a bit of
extra foam around the earbud to reduce noise. The work great in the airplane,
knocking off about 50% of the outside volume. I leave them in the whole flight
as they cut out most of the engine vibration as well. Also wear them in a
crowded office, at home with kids, or coffee shop etc when I need to focus.

Most of the time I'm not even playing music, but people assume so and will
interrupt you a bit less often. Also helpful when making calls, etc.

------
JshWright
I recently flew Delta (I generally stick with American/USAir) and noticed
this. On several occasions I noticed folks physically cringing and plugging
their ears during PA announcements.

------
grandalf
I've experienced airline PA announcements to exceed the pain threshold many
times. It's utterly ridiculous how loud they are.

In my opinion, the less that is broadcast over the PA the better.

------
lfam
This is a pet peeve of mine that I developed while doing video production in
the live event industry. Unfortunately almost nobody cares about protecting
their hearing.

Pretty much everyone in food service in the US exposes themselves to dangerous
audio levels throughout their work shifts. My coworkers with SPL meters
routinely measured sound pressure levels above 105 dB for hours at a time. But
try wearing earplugs as a waiter or bartender... you will be treated like a
lunatic.

~~~
specialist
As a father and fan of live music:

I get cranky when I see kids without ear protection, especially toddlers and
younger, who have no control or way to escape.

I make a point of praising the parents who put ear muffs on their infants.

~~~
MichaelGG
Why make the music so loud as to require hearing protection? That seems
inefficient.

~~~
bashinator
Because the experience of being physically vibrated by the compression waves
in the air is amazingly sublime. There's a reason people don't start dancing
until you hit a certain volume level.

I wear musician-quality earplugs.

------
mschip
I used to work for a major jet engine manufacturer. Noise reduction is right
up there with fuel consumption in consideration with new model development.
Not because of complaining passengers though.. A lot of the push comes from
certain airports that aren't far enough outside of major cities (I can't
remember which ones exactly, I think it was mostly a few major asian cities).
They actually restrict certain models from using their airport.

~~~
lil_cain
London City, and even Heathrow have major issues with neighbours.

------
Zigurd
I have for a long time used unobtrusive IEMs with Comply tips (MEElectronics,
small, black, with a memory wire that guides the headphone wires over and
behind the ears). They shut out the world very effectively, and are cheap
enough that it's not a tragedy to lose them. I have never had a flight
attendant bug me about them.

United is particularly bad about cranking their PA system up into distortion
screeching range. It's pure sadism.

------
quinndupont
To take the edge off the sound (but only slightly... still able to carry on a
conversation) and to prevent my ear drum from exploding I wear Ear Planes[1].
They aren't perfect, but I do find they help, say, maybe 40% of the pressure
issue.

1] [http://www.cirrushealthcare.com/EarPlanes-
Adult-P49.aspx](http://www.cirrushealthcare.com/EarPlanes-Adult-P49.aspx)

------
suvelx
Recently spent over 48 hours in the wonderful company of Cathay Pacific. Their
announcements (and especially their English announcements) are always a quiet
high-speed mumble. 10/10 would (try to) listen to them again.

Everything else was terrible.

------
shutupalready22
I think the correct response when the PA system is used at excessive volume is
to scream loudly asking that it be turned down. When this becomes a socially
acceptable (or simply common) response, airlines will have to stop.

------
SunShiranui
I've always wanted to buy some good earplugs to protect my hearing from noisy
environments (es. near public transport in the city). Does anyone have a
product they recommend?

~~~
murbard2
I own the "Etymotic Research ER20 ETY-Plugs", about $13 on Amazon Prime.
They're much more comfortable than the cheap foam ones you can buy, they
actually stay in your hear, and the tube means that you can still hear high
frequencies. They reduce the surrounding volume rather than attempt to mute
it. This makes them great for concerts.

There are also much more expensive concert earplugs for musicians, which do an
even better job at preserving the spectrum, but I'm not that picky.

~~~
TheLoneWolfling
I have the same ones. They are great, although I find them getting
uncomfortable if wearing them for an extended period of time. Then again, I
haven't found a set of earplugs for which that is not the case, so take that
with a grain of salt.

------
beachstartup
a pet peeve of mine is when they do this in restaurants when calling out order
numbers. they CRANK the fucking volume and then YELL into the microphone to
call out order numbers when everyone is standing right at the counter!

------
ehosca
there's a big difference between Peak and RMS measurements.

------
dothething
Hacker News on Friday is always the worst.

------
6stringmerc
Having many, many years of travel experience leads me to one Occam's Razor
type observation:

If people would actually pay attention to a safety briefing instead of playing
with their gadgets / not taking off their headphones, then the flight crew
wouldn't be trying so hard to get the attention of the passengers.

With this unpopular opinion, I'll see myself out the nearest exit, which is
actually located behind me.

~~~
MichaelGG
Is there any indication the safety announcements are effective? The fact they
dedicate so much time to taking about smoking makes me doubt they are evidence
based. United's 787s have a no smoking sign built in to every single seat, at
eye level.

I suppose it's possible that they fly places that have such a strong smoking
culture that this is an important and useful reminder, but that seems
doubtful.

Which makes me call into question the rest of the announcements.

Though, I've found United's new safety video to be so well done, I watch it
every time despite having seen it dozens of times already.

~~~
aleh
Some people are better at noticing visual signs, some react only to what they
are being told. Smoking on board is really dangerous, so why to take risks?

~~~
mixmastamyk
Hard to believe but it was done heavily on flights until the 70's or 80's or
so. Though disgusting, it is unlikely to be that dangerous.

