Surely then an extra fairness tax on exit seats is appropriate.

john, Dursley,

Two tips: get a seat on top of the black box, that always survives the crash!!
Sit at the back, no plane has ever backed into a mountain!

Keith Wilson, Beziers, France

"Your chance of survival should not be based on your ability to pay for an emergency exit seat or to reserve your seat online"... Why not? Someone's got to sit in all the seats!

Thomas Goodey, Cuxton-upon-Medway, England

My Dad use to say "when they call your number" that's it. Sam from Enfield made a similar comment. Great discussion.

Joanne, Los Angeles, USA

'University study finds people sitting further away from emergency exits stand less chance of escaping quickly'

Another shock result from the department of the bleeding obvious.

Ben, Staffs,

Qantas used to have rear facing seats on all their planes, but scrapped them because they found that it made more people air sick.
If you notice on plane safety cards they only tell you how to escape if you crash in water, probably because they don't expect you to survive a 200mph crash on land!!

Chris, Stourbridge,

If airlines find that people avoid the window seats 5+ rows away from the exits, they would have to sell them off cheaper,buy planes with more exits or use those spaces differently (galleys, storage ..). So it is a question of how many people will refuse to be placed at higher risk.

diana, derby,

I am taking a business trip with a colleague this summer and have noticed him sharpening his elbows. Now I know why. Thank you Greenwich University.

Erik D., Cape Cod, Mass., USA

Why not an open-topped plane? Better views and wind in your hair. Just jump out in an emergency, or when flying over your home instead of all that queuing, waiting for baggage and the long journey home!

SteveH, London, UK

Now repeat the experiments with mostly fat people and mostly thin people. My experience on London commuter trains tells me that the group of thin people will exit the plane much faster.

Faizal Essat, LONDON, uk

Honestly, it took "105 accidents and personal accounts from almost 2,000 survivors" to confirm something that is as obvious as day? Gold stars anyone; or perhaps a big shiny sticker?

David, Belfast, UK

Plane manufacturers should be required by law to provide anexit after every five rows. there is no moral justiication to subject people to varying degrees of risk whther or not extra fare is charged or saer seats. Extra exits mean extra cost of manufacture so what this will be paid by pax anyway!

Arshed Mahmud, London, UK

As a very frequent long distance flier for many years it is quite common to be placed at wing exits that are not ccovered by flight attendents. I was told the theory being those with good flight experience are more likely to open exit doors quickly aiding escape while also assisting the flight crew.

MikeV, Bath, UK

"In our study of people of 200 people with cancer, all of whom eat Cornflakes for breakfast, we learnt that 100% of people of eat cornflakes for breakfast have cancer."

Is this another pointless waste of tax payers money, and why i lose nearly a quarter of my salary every month.

Don't fly!?

Alex, Southampton,

Maybe rear facing seats should be compulsory for the passengers’ own good.

Those who won't travel in rear seats can't actually need the journey/holiday. In which case, why worry - cuts down on global warming.

Ooops sorry I forgot - profits before human safety and the planet.

Jo, Devon, England

There should be parachutes on planes rather than oxygen masks.

Al, London, UK

Rearwards facing seats are not actually being safer in the event of a fire, the subject of this study

Detachable air supplies mean more weight = more fuel burn/ticket costs/lower aircraft range but safer!

I suggest improved design for reducing fire occurence in the 1st place is best option

rich s, Derby,

Couldn't engineers come up with some way to eject the fuel tanks or explosively eject the fuel away immediately upon a crash landing? Or maybe some spray automatically sprayed into the fuel tanks to hinder flammablity? I also like the detachable oxy masks idea!

Claudia , Atlanta, USA

If they left the doors open wouldn't it be easier still to get out? Greenwich University didn't happen to do an experiment on the best way to survive a burning Cutty Sark did it?

Chris, Derby,

RAF passenger carrying aircraft have always had backward facing seats which have always been regarded as a safer option in the event of a forced landing. I believe that commercial airlines don't like the arrangement simply because, for some reason, people like to "see" where they're going.

don marshall, cadiz, spain

Michael from Chelmsford - adding more doors and windows to an aeroplane fuselage greatly reduces its structural integrity, which in turn would cut survivability rates. Aircraft manufacturers have to strike a compromise between the strength of the aircraft, and the ability of the passengers to escape

Ed, Farnborough, UK

My cousin was travelling with her husband & 3kids from Damascus to Khartoum on Sudan Air flight that caught fire a 3weeks ago. They said if we haven't been sitting at the front we wouldn't have made it.... Apparently, all the crew members escaped first, only one attendant dying in the fire...

Alia, Leicester, UK

Safest place to travel is on a certain discount airline (you fill in the blanks) You will then be 30 miles and a coach ride away from any impending disaster.

Peter, London,

The report's conclusion has been covered with admirable cynicism by other readers, so I'll comment on a more important point the researchers have missed: If it's the smoke that results in the deaths, why not make the oxygen masks detachable but redesigned to have a built-in small oxygen bottle.

David, Cheshire,

In the Manchester plane fire, passengers were fiddling in the overhead lockers looking for bags. A women who escaped, described how she went over the backs of seats and climbed over people who were paralysed by fear or struggling to get out with bags. She did the right thing. Save yourself or burn.

Tony Volpe, Newcastle upon Tyne, UK

Bearing in mind that passengers have little choice as to what seat they are given, clearly planes need to have more emergency exits. If the chances of non-survival increase so much if you are more than 6 rows away then there should be an exit every 5 or 6 rows.

BN, Cambridge,

Surely the answer is to have more exits.

anne murphy, London,

Go Greenwich! Go Greenwich! Go Greenwich

Alex, Lancaster, England

It was suggested by Mr. Gifford to put familys and the elderly near the exits. I have no problem with putting families near exits, but the elderly would only insure maxium number of deaths as they would clog the exits with their slow movements.

Greg Nichols, Chicago,

Why should families and old people get priority over other people? If I was travelling with my parents would I get to sit near an exit? The bottom line is if you are in that situation you get yourself and anyone you love off and it's to hell with anyone else. Harsh but deep down we're all savages.

Polly, Suffolk, UK

Once again a study from the University of Stating the Bloody Obvious at Greenwich.
Of course people nearer an exit will get out of the plane first.

GJB, Slough, Berkshire

Yes, but the view from the aisle seat is just awful, often obstructed by the overweight American or Arab passenger...

Farrukh, Woking,

Lies

Damn Lies

Statistics.

Leave it to actuaries to come up with such a study. If female left handed agnostic sheep herders have the highest rate of survival, can they charge more for that too?

Brian W., Los Angeles, USA

"People travelling with colleagues, however, appeared to focus on their own survival and head straight for the exit."

haha

Imaad, Bradford, UK

there is no way of escaping death. if the time has come no matter how safe you are if you time is up you have to go you cant cheat death

sam, enfield, uk

I must say i do like the exit row seats when i get them no surprises here all makes sense stuck on a window way down the back one would surley know in the back of their mind less chance of escaping but then it's not something one tends to think about too much

Phil Trevan, Melbourne, Australia

Why should elderly people have priority of escape in an emergency? Surely it should be the other way around. Also, surely it is better to put people near exits who are less likely to hinder the escape of others - i.e. non elderly people and people without kids. That way more people could escape.

Sally, london,

Nothing new here. Survivability depends on the type of incident, overwing seats are above the strongest part of the structure (good for gear up landing), rear seats good for nose first impacts (Kegworth)

Chris, London,

Ian in Felixtowe, yes you're right. The airlines say passengers don't want to fly backwards so they won't do it

Chris, London,

What about crashes which don't involve fires? I've seen a previous study which suggested that it's safest to sit between the wings, on the grounds that the impact on crash is generally either the nose or the tail, which may break off.

Peter Taylor, Valencia, Spain

I drew the same conclusions after being involved in emergency exit trials at Cranfield College of Aeronautics 20 years ago. Your individual chance of survival increased with the number of times you experience an emergency exit - some people always get out first.

Craig, wakefield, UK

Always remember: Don't die!

Roger Mort, Dull,

RAF and Army troop transports sit facing backwards. I wonder why!!

Douglas Porter, Reading, UK

Would it help safety if any of the seats faced backwards? I always sit in a rear facing seat on a train!

Ian, Fekixstowe, UK

Greenwich University, congratulations!! It would never had occured to me.

robert, vancouver, bc

I suggest the following...Do not get on a flight that's going to crash,burn,stumble or fall.....2),,,remember....."Fate is the Hunter"...

Mr tim, san marcos, U S of A

So how about installing an extra door on either side of the aircraft. Im sure that aircraft manufacturers have done their own studies as to crashes/fires and survivability and fit the bare minimums to comply with FAA/CAA regulations. One more door and those odds would probably have climbed a few %.

michaEL, chelmsford,

Whilst I applaud the sentiment of considering placing elderly travellers and families near to emergency exits, this surely would reduce the survival chances of others as these groups would surely depart slowly and thus block the exits in the limited survival time available.

Graham, Pattaya, Thailand

My conclusion is put families with children and elderly poeple *away*from the exit so they do not block the passage of passengers such as young men who have a realistic prospect of survival. Also, it is well researched that a major cause of deaths is forgetting how to undo your buckle-style seatbelt

Iain, Tokyo, Japan

Other tactics for surivial are: close your eyes at nighttime prior to landing so you can be ready for a crash. All the lights will go out but you will be able to see. That is why planes are required to switch off cabin lights on landing, but a lot of people override this with the rading lights.

Iain, Tokyo, Japan

So it took some really intelligent people and a detailed study to determine that you have more chance of surviving a fire if you can easily get to an emergency exit?

Amazing, whoever would have thought that?

Slow news day is it?

GM, Brisbane,

So by sitting near an exit, you stand a better chance of surviving. It took an "exhaustive study" to determine this?

n larsen, Boulder, US

Oh Professor Science, I bow before thee. The safest way to exit a plane is to sit next to an exit. Any chance of a research grant for working this one out ,or do I have to drag it out for years?

Adrian, London,

This appears to confirm a seminal study by Cranfield University several years ago which modelled the Manchester airport fire. That study also found that while emergency exit rows were relatively safe, the two rows immediately behind them were not.

richard, horley,