Letters | Cathay Pacific emergency evacuation: penalise passengers who took their bags

Readers discuss the importance of following safety protocols during an emergency, the MTR’s handling of passenger anxiety during unexpected events, and the dangers of deep-sea expeditions

Hong Kong

Letters

Published: 11:30am, 27 Jun 2023

Why you can trust SCMP

Feel strongly about these letters, or any other aspects of the news? Share your views by emailing us your Letter to the Editor at [email protected] or filling in this Google form. Submissions should not exceed 400 words, and must include your full name and address, plus a phone number for verification.

I refer to the article, “Close shave for Hong Kong Cathay Pacific flight, as ‘12 wheels damaged’ when emergency brakes applied just before take-off” (June 24).

As a frequent Cathay Pacific traveller, I was astounded to read that some passengers on CX880 apparently scrambled to get their luggage after the evacuation order was issued.

Retrieving baggage while evacuating is extremely dangerous for everyone on board. It delays the evacuation by slowing down passenger flow and maybe even blocking aisles. The bags may also cause damage to the evacuation slide as they are thrown, in addition to potentially injuring other evacuating passengers. Those people who stopped to get their bags are selfish and thoughtless.

CCTV footage must be reviewed to identify these passengers. The Hong Kong Civil Aviation Department should prosecute them for failing to comply with safety instructions and Cathay Pacific must issue them with a permanent flight ban for endangering the safety of all others on board.

A strong public message must be sent that safety cannot be compromised.

Xander Ho, Auckland, New Zealand

Keep MTR travellers informed during unexpected events

Last week’s incident of an emergency exit activation at Wan Chai MTR station has shown yet again the impatience of some commuters and the need for the MTR Corporation to find ways to keep passengers calm during an unexpected event.

In this case, a passenger activated the emergency exit after the doors remained closed for a few minutes after the train pulled into Wan Chai station. It turned out that the train driver was communicating with the control centre after the doors failed to open automatically as usual.

The media reported that according to the MTR Corp’s standard operating procedure, drivers need permission from the control centre to manually open train doors, and this can take some time. Announcements to passengers would usually come after the driver has communicated with station staff and the control centre.

Couldn’t an announcement have been made sooner? Reports said the driver in last week’s incident did announce that the doors would be opened later and appeal for patience, presumably before the emergency exit was opened, but this might have come too late.

The practice of waiting before making an announcement probably added to the confusion when the doors wouldn’t budge as the train sat at the station. With no idea what was happening, some passengers panicked and opened the emergency exit, resulting in an hour-long service delay and disrupting the commutes of many other passengers.

Needless to say, this dangerous act has once again shown the impatience of some people in a city that moves quickly.

Lessons should be learned. The public should be well educated on the need to keep calm and be patient during unexpected events and wait for guidance. They should also know how to classify which events are emergencies, and which are just nuisances.

The MTR Corp should put passengers at the top of its mind and inform them of what’s happening before doing anything else. The MTR should take the lead in promoting patience and calm and safe evacuation, because when the dust settles, the biggest loser – in terms of wasted time and lost revenue – would be the operator.

Most important of all, every Hongkonger should be clear-headed and not clouded by impatience when facing these sorts of situations. The actions of one fool can impact the journeys of myriad others.

Koios Pang, Sham Shui Po

Is deep-sea tourism worth the expense and risks?

I refer to the article, “Titanic sub destroyed: what happens in a ‘catastrophic implosion’?” (June 23).

The all-out search for the missing submersible on an expedition to the wreck of the Titanic captivated the world and has given us a lot of food for thought. To put it bluntly, it was irresponsible of OceanGate Expeditions, the company that led the expedition, to send humans to a shipwreck some 12,400 feet below sea level using a submersible whose design was called into question by some experts back in 2018.

But OceanGate’s founder and CEO, Stockton Rush, one of five people to have died on board the Titan, apparently dismissed such safety concerns. Had Rush heeded the experts’ warning, would this tragedy have happened?

While it is true that at least 46 people visited the shipwreck on board the Titan in 2021 and 2022 without incident, the fact is that they simply lucked out.

While visiting and seeing the Titanic shipwreck first hand is a once-in-a-lifetime experience, it is not the only way to explore it some 110 years after it sank. For the record, OceanGate has posted videos on YouTube showing every part of the ship, from the bow to the stern. One can look at the wreck, free of charge. Is it necessary to splurge on a trip that puts one’s life at risk just to catch a glimpse of the wreck when there are free resources available on the internet that serve the same purpose?

In the wake of this deadly tragedy, it is time to review the feasibility and safety of such deep-sea expeditions.

Lucas Lee, Sha Tin