Emirates 777-300 crash-landing at DXB

[sn26567]

Yesterday, Emirates seemed to say nobody was injured. Today it appears that, due to all occupants evacuated via slides, 13 passengers received minor injuries: 10 were taken to hospitals, 3 treated at the airport.

But it is still an "operational incident involving Emirates flight EK521"...

[Poiu]

Yesterday, Emirates seemed to say nobody was injured. Today it appears that, due to all occupants evacuated via slides, 13 passengers received minor injuries: 10 were taken to hospitals, 3 treated at the airport.

But it is still an "operational incident involving Emirates flight EK521"...

It sounds like you have an axe to grind.
Wrong time, wrong place!

On topic, an eye witness pilot from fly Dubai reports it as a mishandled go around following a bounced landing.

[nordikcam]

Yesterday, Emirates seemed to say nobody was injured. Today it appears that, due to all occupants evacuated via slides, 13 passengers received minor injuries: 10 were taken to hospitals, 3 treated at the airport.

But it is still an "operational incident involving Emirates flight EK521"...

Maybe the AF crash in YYZ years ago without fatalities was too an "incident" !

[sn26567]

The United Arab Emirates’ General Civil Aviation Authority (GCAA) will produce a preliminary report within a month.

The investigation will be led by the GCAA’s Air Accident Investigation Sector (AAIS), together with representatives of the US and UK, as states representing the airframe and engine manufacturers, respectively. Representatives of Boeing, Rolls-Royce and Emirates Airline will act as advisors to the representatives.

The GCAA said work was continuing to recover the aircraft’s flight data recorder and cockpit voice recorder. Once acquired, they will be taken to the AAIS laboratory at Abu Dhabi for downloading and data analysis. The aircraft’s wreckage is being moved to a secure location for technical examination while its technical records, together with crew personnel records, have been secured.

Source: ATWonline

[Passenger]

But now Emirates can no longer call it an incident.

whats the point of this useless dicussion? It almost sounds like a triumph that they cant call it an incident OFFICIALLY.

Today it appears that, due to all occupants evacuated via slides, 13 passengers received minor injuries: 10 were taken to hospitals, 3 treated at the airport. But it is still an "operational incident involving Emirates flight EK521"...

It sounds like you have an axe to grind. Wrong time, wrong place!

There is no reason for you and your identical twin brother (with different IP-addresses!) to blame sn26567 (André) for pointing out that Emirates uses "incident" iso "accident". André is damned right: it's a shame that Emirates refuses to call it an accident.

Their first statement was: "Emirates can confirm that an incident happened at Dubai International Airport on 3rd August 2016 at about 12.45pm local time...". And on their website, they persist: "Emirates flight EK521 was involved in an operational incident upon landing on 3rd August 2016". Emirates uses the word "incident", whilst we all know it is a very serious accident. You even mentionned ICAO's definition that proofs it's an accident.

[Flanker2]

Yes, shameful of EK to choose to prioritise PR over stating the facts. I'm completely with SN26657 on this one.

From the ATC recordings, the accident flight seems to have initiated a go around as ATC gave them go around instructions.

It could be a case of wake turbulence destabilising the flare and slamming the aircraft during the go around.
An A388 (EK409) landed 4 minutes prior and a B77W (EK545) 2 minutes prior to the accident flight.

Another company that is growing faster than its ability to maintain safety standards.
They'll probably never see me on one of their planes.


Regarding the evacuation, I don't think that cabin crew did everything perfectly.
1. I don't hear any megaphones.
Once an aircraft has clearly crashed unexpectedly, cabin crews shoud be shouting instructions through megaphones. I can only hear them shouting by the doors, but deeper in the cabin there is shouting of the pax.
2. I think that it's stupid to give instructions toleave the luggage to pax who are by the emergency exits. It will end up clogging the exit paths. That instruction should be given before starting the evacuation and should be shouted through the megaphones. If they are holding luggage by the exit, let them take it with them, good riddance.
3. No instructions in Arabic nor Indian. Not everyone speaks English, so the local languages should also be used and be prepared for such events.
4. "Jump jump" is a stupid term, because only English speakers understand it. I know that many airlines use this as SOP during the drills, but not even a Frenchman who barely speaks English would understand it. "Evacuate" is a language that most Latin speakers understand.

[avroflyer_1]

Regarding the evacuation, I don't think that cabin crew did everything perfectly.
1. I don't hear any megaphones.
Once an aircraft has clearly crashed unexpectedly, cabin crews shoud be shouting instructions through megaphones. I can only hear them shouting by the doors, but deeper in the cabin there is shouting of the pax.
2. I think that it's stupid to give instructions toleave the luggage to pax who are by the emergency exits. It will end up clogging the exit paths. That instruction should be given before starting the evacuation and should be shouted through the megaphones. If they are holding luggage by the exit, let them take it with them, good riddance.
3. No instructions in Arabic nor Indian. Not everyone speaks English, so the local languages should also be used and be prepared for such events.
4. "Jump jump" is a stupid term, because only English speakers understand it. I know that many airlines use this as SOP during the drills, but not even a Frenchman who barely speaks English would understand it. "Evacuate" is a language that most Latin speakers understand.

From your statements I clearly see that you don't have a clue on how an evacuation should be conducted...

First of all the cabin crew conducted a perfect evac... Why? Because they got everybody out safe and that is in the end what counts in such an event and not necessarily the exact procedures.

In reply to your 1st remark: megaphones are never used during the evac itself only after the evacuation to do some crowd control... If you just crashed you are not going to spend valuable time to get a megaphone etc you need to shout your commands right away and rest assured we are trained for it

2. I didn't see the video so I can't judge on that however this is clearly an unprepared emergency so when would cabin crew have the time to also instruct pax to leave luggage.

3. Again unprepared evacuation so English is considered as the lingua franca ... Also the crew might not have knowledge of the local language... I personally can't imagine myself shouting evacuation commands in all world languages for everybody to understand...

4. Again this command might differ from SOP to SOP but to me jump is quite clear as a command and quite logical too if you get at and exit with a slide inflated

And as a general remark: this is why a safety demo / video is shown before every flight and you have a safety card, just to already prepare yourself just in case something might go wrong because there isn't always time to prepare the cabin for an evacuation as is clear in this accident.

[sean1982]

Yes, shameful of EK to choose to prioritise PR over stating the facts. I'm completely with SN26657 on this one.

From the ATC recordings, the accident flight seems to have initiated a go around as ATC gave them go around instructions.

It could be a case of wake turbulence destabilising the flare and slamming the aircraft during the go around.
An A388 (EK409) landed 4 minutes prior and a B77W (EK545) 2 minutes prior to the accident flight.

Another company that is growing faster than its ability to maintain safety standards.
They'll probably never see me on one of their planes.


Regarding the evacuation, I don't think that cabin crew did everything perfectly.
1. I don't hear any megaphones.
Once an aircraft has clearly crashed unexpectedly, cabin crews shoud be shouting instructions through megaphones. I can only hear them shouting by the doors, but deeper in the cabin there is shouting of the pax.
2. I think that it's stupid to give instructions toleave the luggage to pax who are by the emergency exits. It will end up clogging the exit paths. That instruction should be given before starting the evacuation and should be shouted through the megaphones. If they are holding luggage by the exit, let them take it with them, good riddance.
3. No instructions in Arabic nor Indian. Not everyone speaks English, so the local languages should also be used and be prepared for such events.
4. "Jump jump" is a stupid term, because only English speakers understand it. I know that many airlines use this as SOP during the drills, but not even a Frenchman who barely speaks English would understand it. "Evacuate" is a language that most Latin speakers understand.

This post just made my skin crawl. Having been taught by Boeing on evacuation techniques and having taught new entrants this course hundreds of times you clearly belong in the group of passengers that thinks because the fly once a year they know how to do our job better. To add a few things to my colleague avro's excellent post.

The reason why they tell people to leave their bag once they are at the exit, is cause they dont want to have the slide tearing. Different airlines have different views. Most airlines promote the removing of the bag from the passenger ie grabbing it out Of their hands forcefully and throwing it out of the door to the side or back in the cabin in an empty row of time permits.

You don't shout "evacuate" at the door because it has no meaning! They are doing that already. You want to shout what you want them to do! Jump, form two lines, follow the arrows. If they hesitate or seem confused, don't waste time and physically "help them" out of the door i.e. Push them out.

Lastly. Think before you speak. How are they going to: open the door, pull the inflation handle, hold on to the assist handles, stand in a dedicated assist space and physically push people out while at the mean time shout through a loudhailor??

Edit my moderator...

[Passenger]

As a passenger, I agree with Flanker that the evacuation was not done like it should have been, though I don’t agree with Flanker’s arguments (like wrong language choice, no use of megaphones and no use of the word evacuate).



No crew member intervened when so many passengers took their hand luggage. Only one male crew member near the slides shouted not to take luggage, but pictures taken on the ground show that many passengers had a trolley. Once it was clear that passengers were grabbing luggage during the evacuation, crew had to intervene.

The video proofs that the danger of people taking hand luggage is not that the slide could be damaged, but that it causes a queue inside the aircraft. Passengers looking for their hand luggage block the ail, thus delay the evacuation, thus hamper other passengers to rush for the exit. Actually, that's probably the most important lesson from that live evacuation video: crew should raise your voice when passengers don't follow the herd that is running for their lives.

Congrats though to the crew for opening the doors and slides almost immediately when the aircraft stopped from its gliding.

Some people said that they didn’t know if the Emirates Safety Video states that one is not allowed to take hand Luggage in case of an emergency. The video doesn’t, as one can see in these Youtubes (though I’m not sure if they are the latest ones). The only place were hand luggage (no brief cases) is mentionned, is a small pictogram on the Safety Card. Next to a “No shoes” pictogram… So that's another lesson, specially nowadays with people having expensive smartphones and laptops in their hand luggage: don't focus on the brace position, focus on "get out".

[Stij]

Maybe the overhead bibs should lock during take off and landing...

Peiple have become more atrached to their stuff than to other peoples lives...

Cheers,

Stij

[Treeper]

Maybe the overhead bibs should lock during take off and landing...

Peiple have become more atrached to their stuff than to other peoples lives...

Cheers,

Stij

I think that could be a good and quite reasonable/affordable idea. Every time the 'fasten seatbelts' sign is lit, they lock (after 2minutes). Which is the case during every landing and take-off.

[Passenger]

Maybe the overhead bibs should lock during take off and landing... People have become more atrached to their stuff than to other peoples lives...

I think that could be a good and quite reasonable/affordable idea. Every time the 'fasten seatbelts' sign is lit, they lock (after 2minutes). Which is the case during every landing and take-off.

Yes, you could lock the overhead bins. But in case of a real emergency, like here or like the BA Las Vegas fire, those passengers who really have the need not to leave without their smartphone or laptop, will stand in the ail untill they have forced the locker to get their reward.

[Flanker2]

I think that we can here realise the true disconnect between airline SOP's and aircraft manufaturer/national safety bodies' recommendations.
As a result, some "experts" here are throwing a lot of bullsh*t, before taking the time to think about it.

In reply to your 1st remark: megaphones are never used during the evac itself only after the evacuation to do some crowd control... If you just crashed you are not going to spend valuable time to get a megaphone etc you need to shout your commands right away and rest assured we are trained for it

Quoting TSB Canada (Aviation Safety Study SA9501 A SAFETY STUDY OF EVACUATIONS OF LARGE, PASSENGER-CARRYING AIRCRAFT):

It is noted that at least one battery-operated hand held megaphone is available on most large passenger-carrying aircraft. Such megaphones are carried for use inside the aircraft when the PA system is not working (e.g., to give the passenger emergency briefing for a planned evacuation); following an evacuation, they may be used outside the aircraft to facilitate communication. However, the Board understands that the majority of air carriers train cabin attendants not to use megaphones during the actual conduct of an evacuation. It is felt that using megaphones to issue commands during an evacuation would expose cabin attendants to an unacceptable risk of being injured.

Lastly. Think before you speak. How are they going to: open the door, pull the inflation handle, hold on to the assist handles, stand in a dedicated assist space and physically push people out while at the mean time shout through a loudhailor??

You should think before you speak yourself, you are embarassing yourself.
You clearly don't use a megaphone during an evacution, but have you ever thought of using one to start an evacuation? Did you think that the best use of a megaphone is during the evacuation? Where is your common sense?

Communication is usually the first step of everything. This is not a Cessna, it's a B777.
1. Is the interphone/PA system working? Is the captain giving evacuation commands? Is everyone getting them? Are cabin crews at the back of the aircraft fit to conduct an evacuation? The first reflex is to grab the interphone. If it's not working, you grab the megaphone.

Quoting Airbus (Flight Operations Briefing Notes - Cabin Operations -Unplanned Ground Evacuation):

An evacuation requires cabin crew coordination. Therefore, all cabin crewmembers
must be informed that a life-threatening situation exists. There are many ways to
inform cabin crewmembers, such as via:
• An evacuation alarm
• A Public Address
• An interphone
• A megaphone.


Second, it's too late when the pax show up at the exit with the luggage. You need to tell them before they start opening the overhead bins and carrying thm down the aisle. If the PA system is not working, you use the megaphones, but you need to do this before the evacuation!
You may lose a few valuable seconds doing so, but you're going to save a lot more valuable time than you lose because pax wanting to retrieve their cabin luggage is a given, not a remote assumption.

Quoting Airbus (Flight Operations Briefing Notes - Cabin Operations -Unplanned Ground Evacuation):

Carry-on Baggage
Many studies, such as the Safety Study conducted in 2000 by the US National
Transportation Safety Board (NTSB), and investigation reports document the fact that
in some cases, it was necessary for the cabin crew to argue with passengers because
passengers attempted to carry baggage to the exits during emergencies (in one case,
the evacuating passenger tried to exit with his guitar!).
Carry-on baggage brought to the exits can cause blockages and congestion at the exit
and in the aisles, and reduce the efficiency of the evacuation.
An Australian Transportation Safety Board (ATSB) report in 2001 reported that in
an accident that occurred in 1999, some passengers were authorized to take baggage
with them as they evacuated the aircraft. When the cabin crew attempted to enforce
that passengers leave their carry-on baggage behind, the passenger flow from the exit
became less orderly.
This example illustrates an important point: If the cabin crew gives the command to
passengers to leave their carry-on baggage behind during the evacuation, this may be
too late.
Therefore, the cabin crew should instruct passengers to leave their baggage
at the beginning of the evacuation. Some examples of possible commands are:
• “Open seatbelts, leave everything”
• “Open seatbelts, no baggage”.


This thread reflects poor knowledge of national air transport safety bodies' and aircraft manufacturers' recommendations on the part of trainers and crews.

My recommendation on this accident case is that megaphones should have been used at the beginning of the evacuation (not during).
You don't have time to select the correct setting on the PA system, nor may you be able to see it with smoke entering the cabin irritating the eyes and lowering the visibility. The PA system may not be working and you don't have time to test it. Also, the megaphone is the prefect tool to address pax in sections, as they can be addressed directly and it will be more personal than a general announement on the PA that everyone will ignore. It's a display of authority and pax will tend to obey it more than a general PA, on the principle of "I've got my eyes on you".
A flight attendant giving an initial evacuation command with the megaphone also conveys a sense of urgency to the pax. No clear evacuation command was given to pax in the EK521 video, so how can pax get a sense of the urgency of the situation?


Sen1982, I suggest to you to think about improving the use of the megaphone in your company.
I also invite you to try to tear the slide open with cabin luggage
I also invite you to tell your retired Sicilian pax getting on in Trapani to jump, he won't understand a word of it. If you can make scratch card announcements in local languages, you can also prepare evcuation commands in the local language as part of the pre-flight crew briefing.
I also don't appreciate being called names when as a trainer, you should be open to learning from anybody and not pretend to know everything just because you teach this stuff.


Interesting to note how ANA cabin crew made pax drop anything they were holding in the galley in the following video. It's definitely not ideal as time is wasted.



Finally, I want to say that while the evacuation was not perfect and shows many area's of improvement, overall it worked.

[Flanker2]

In a separate post, I want to address the psychology behind pax taking their cabin luggage with them.

What kind of things do pax carry on cabin luggage:
A. Irreplaceables (belongings that they wouldn't send in checked luggage)
-Jewelry: Family jewelry passed on through generations.
-Documents: for instance, pax may carry original documents that if lost, could affect million dollar court cases
-Data: Media may carry sensitive information that can not be stored on back-up drives

B. Replaceables
-Money. Depending on the type of trip, the amount may be high compared to the individual pax's earning power.
-Luxury goods, such as brand bags, jewelry
-Travel documentss, such as passports


Irreplaceable goods can result in million Euro damages to individuals.
Replaceables will in most cases result in higher damage than the airline will compensate for. Typically, monney and jewelry will "disappear", while it takes several days of lost productivity, or holidays, a lot of expenses (esp. if there is no embassy or consulate in the neighborhood) to get passports re-issued.


Solutions:
The easiest solution IMO is to suggest pax to keep their valuables on them separetely or readily accesible during an evac. However, this is not always practical.
Irreplaceable goods could be identified as such during check-in or boarding and could be stored in fireproof/waterproof safes aboard the aircraft. It's being done in hotels, so why not on aircraft?
The safes can be retrieved at a later time fter the accident.
As for replaceables, national authorities should establish and enforce regulations such that all pax discomfort would be covered under such events by the airline's insurance policy.

As long as such measures are not taken, pax will retrieve luggage from overhead bins.
It may seem stupid and selfish to do so from a third person perspective, however I think that airlines are equally selfish for not providing information, recommendations and services just in case one of their pilots screw up and victimise the pax.

[Passenger]

Quoting TSB Canada (Aviation Safety Study SA9501 A SAFETY STUDY OF EVACUATIONS OF LARGE, PASSENGER-CARRYING AIRCRAFT):

It is noted that at least one battery-operated hand held megaphone is available on most large passenger-carrying aircraft. Such megaphones are carried for use inside the aircraft when the PA system is not working (e.g., to give the passenger emergency briefing for a planned evacuation); following an evacuation, they may be used outside the aircraft to facilitate communication.

I'm not going to name your two novels bullshit - I just call them "wrong facts". Your above Google Search & Rescue mission is irrelevant because... there is proof that the P.A. system was working. Just listen to the first four seconds in the evacuation video (remember the recordings started when the emergency was altready in progress): one can hear the purser saying through the P.A. something what I understand as "...attention cabin crew... the captain has ordered an evacuation..."

[sean1982]

Quoting TSB Canada (Aviation Safety Study SA9501 A SAFETY STUDY OF EVACUATIONS OF LARGE, PASSENGER-CARRYING AIRCRAFT):

It is noted that at least one battery-operated hand held megaphone is available on most large passenger-carrying aircraft. Such megaphones are carried for use inside the aircraft when the PA system is not working (e.g., to give the passenger emergency briefing for a planned evacuation); following an evacuation, they may be used outside the aircraft to facilitate communication.

I'm not going to name your two novels bullshit - I just call them "wrong facts". Your above Google Search & Rescue mission is irrelevant because... there is proof that the P.A. system was working. Just listen to the first four seconds in the evacuation video (remember the recordings started when the emergency was altready in progress): one can hear the purser saying through the P.A. something what I understand as "...attention cabin crew... the captain has ordered an evacuation..."

Further more, flanker2, you are the one who is embarrasing yourself once again. Not only do you know better than the Boeing human factors specialists that trained me. Your knowledge on the regulations is surrounded by some cobwebs too.

Its an EASA requirement that Cabin crew demonstrate during training that they can shout evacuation commands for a period of at least 30 sec at a volume that can be heard through their section of the aircraft. Yes even on a B777/747 and A380. Again your arguments become nil and void. Once the aircraft is stopped and the pax start getting up from their seat and moving towards the exit it doesnt matter anymore what you shout as they wont listen anymore anyway. Basic human psychology. You could have spared yourself a longwinded post.

[Inquirer]

I've read through the posts above and I have to give it to Flanker2 that using the megaphone iso just shouting a command like one could see being done in that video might have been a good idea.
Would it have prevented people from taking things with them?
That is a matter of discussion indeed, but it certainly wouldn't have done any harm, so why not?
The megaphone is there: better use it then, no, even if it doesn't really bring anything extra.
If I may add a suggestion of myself: why no automated evacuation commands (possibly in the language of (most of) the pax too, then)????

That and maybe the idea to have those overhead bins lock in certain cases are 2 interesting improvement inputs, IMHO.

Its one of my personal frustrations in traveling on planes these days: the huge amounts of luggage carried onboard. You didn't see that 10 or 15 years ago, and quite honestly I am not sure it's an improvement to allow people to do that nowadays, not just for safety reasons like we see here, but also for many other reasons. OTOH, I admit I am guilty of packing everything in hand luggage too, so what to do about it?

[Flanker2]

Its an EASA requirement that Cabin crew demonstrate during training that they can shout evacuation commands for a period of at least 30 sec at a volume that can be heard through their section of the aircraft. Yes even on a B777/747 and A380. Again your arguments become nil and void. Once the aircraft is stopped and the pax start getting up from their seat and moving towards the exit it doesnt matter anymore what you shout as they wont listen anymore anyway. Basic human psychology. You could have spared yourself a longwinded post.

That is an understandable requirement, but it doesn't prevent you from using all tools at your disposal in a real emergency.
In the video, the cabin crew is not audible until in proximity of the exits.
Elderly persons may not hear them even if they scream at the top of their voice.
Also, how can you know that the person giving the instructions is cabin crew with so many people standing in the way? Sometimes pax take initiatives, ie carry out an evacuation, against cabin crew orders.

1. If the PA system was working, why wasn't a evacuation command issued to the passengers?
2. How do you know that all cabin crew and pax can hear the PA? Do you wait too get feedback from each station, ie 8 stations on the B777? What if one of the stations doesn't confirm receiving the instructions?
3. A megaphone tends to attract attention and make pax quiet. On top of asserting authority and control, it has the added benefit of making the evacuation more quiet, so that you can talk to other stations and once the evacuation is launched, you don't need it anymore to give instructions.


Automated evacuation commands should be a given on a 200 million USD jet.
Sometimes pax are asleep and they shouldn't have to figure out by themselves that something happened and that people are evacuating the aicraft after seeing the last people run to the exits.
In English and local languages please.

About the locks, I think that it's a good idea, as long as pax know about it beforehand as part of the safety demo or something. This way they won't put valuables in there and keep them handy.
The technical execution is a bit more complicated, as overhead bins are just a series of hanging racks.
A completely mecanical solution would require an overhead bin redesign.
An electrical solution would require electrical wiring or integrated batteries that need replacing or charging.
Power is already coming to the personal lighting units, so all you need is light wiring that sends the impulses.
It can be done affordably and it would add to safety as overhead bins are known to open by themselves in crashes, with contents dropping on the pax. A lock would prevent that.

[sean1982]

I've read through the posts above and I have to give it to Flanker2 that using the megaphone iso just shouting a command like one could see being done in that video might have been a good idea.
Would it have prevented people from taking things with them?
That is a matter of discussion indeed, but it certainly wouldn't have done any harm, so why not?
The megaphone is there: better use it then, no, even if it doesn't really bring anything extra.
If I may add a suggestion of myself: why no automated evacuation commands (possibly in the language of (most of) the pax too, then)????

That and maybe the idea to have those overhead bins lock in certain cases are 2 interesting improvement inputs, IMHO.

Its one of my personal frustrations in traveling on planes these days: the huge amounts of luggage carried onboard. You didn't see that 10 or 15 years ago, and quite honestly I am not sure it's an improvement to allow people to do that nowadays, not just for safety reasons like we see here, but also for many other reasons. OTOH, I admit I am guilty of packing everything in hand luggage too, so what to do about it?

*sigh*
How many loudhailors are there on an aircraft the size of a B777 you think?
The amazing amount of ..... 2
So what about the 8 other doors that arent covered then? (yes flanker, a B773 has 10 stations)
Cabin crew members have one priority only in an evac and that is: OPEN THE DOOR AND GET EVERYONE OUT.
90 sec is the maximum amount given. The amount of time to unstrap from your seat, check outside conditions, open the door and wait for the slide to inflate is roughly 20 seconds. you dont want to extend that by moving from your door to collect a megaphone and then shout something. By that time everyone is already and moving, shouting. You can just as much try and have a conversation with the toilet door. In the mean time the clock is ticking and no-one is protecting the door from being opened by a passenger

But hey what do I know, you guys are clearly the experts in my field

[sabtech81]

Automated evacuation commands should be a given on a 200 million USD jet.
Sometimes pax are asleep and they shouldn't have to figure out by themselves that something happened and that people are evacuating the aicraft after seeing the last people run to the exits.
In English and local languages please.

About the locks, I think that it's a good idea, as long as pax know about it beforehand as part of the safety demo or something. This way they won't put valuables in there and keep them handy.
The technical execution is a bit more complicated, as overhead bins are just a series of hanging racks.
A completely mecanical solution would require an overhead bin redesign.
An electrical solution would require electrical wiring or integrated batteries that need replacing or charging.
Power is already coming to the personal lighting units, so all you need is light wiring that sends the impulses.
It can be done affordably and it would add to safety as overhead bins are known to open by themselves in crashes, with contents dropping on the pax. A lock would prevent that.

I think you forget that there is no electrical power on the A/C anymore during such an event. So the automatic evacuation command you can forget. The same for the locking system on the bins. The power for the PSU's is lost when the electrical power is gone. Thus the only way to keep the bins locked is to supply power via battery packs. This is possible but will require testing each so many hours and replacement each so many hours, bringing a big maintenance cost with them + it makes the A/C heavier which increases fuel use.