Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
How Come, We Can Still Bring Lighters On Board?  
User currently offlineNoUFO From Germany, joined Apr 2001, 7917 posts, RR: 12
Posted (9 years 10 months 2 weeks 4 days 5 hours ago) and read 3696 times:

In addition to smoking being prohibited from the aircraft, many airports
are now banning smoking from all but a few places.

That being said, I do not see a good cause to still allow passengers to bring books of matches or lighters onboard of an aircraft. Even more so after that Richard Reid incident.

From what I've heard, the FAA put lighters and books of matches on their list of prohibited items but the administration removed them after the tobacco industry intervened. http://www.andrewtobias.com/newcolumns/020710.html

Regardless of the reputation (or lack thereof - pick one) of Michael Moore, I just dont see why lighters are still allowed as a carry item - not only in the US of course, but also in Europe.


I support the right to arm bears
19 replies: All unread, jump to last
 
User currently offlineIkarus From United Kingdom, joined Jan 2001, 3524 posts, RR: 2
Reply 1, posted (9 years 10 months 2 weeks 4 days 4 hours ago) and read 3691 times:

Well, what about people who want to smoke at their destination and travel with hand luggage only?

User currently offlineNoUFO From Germany, joined Apr 2001, 7917 posts, RR: 12
Reply 2, posted (9 years 10 months 2 weeks 4 days 4 hours ago) and read 3686 times:

The destination is usually an airport with shops and other facilities. I'm positive some of them sell lighters.  Insane


I support the right to arm bears
User currently offlineStarFlyer From Germany, joined Sep 2002, 987 posts, RR: 1
Reply 3, posted (9 years 10 months 2 weeks 4 days 4 hours ago) and read 3677 times:

Why should they not be allowed?! The more items the authorities prohibit the harder it becomes to travel without being hassled!

*s



Yours truly - StarFlyer
User currently offlineIkarus From United Kingdom, joined Jan 2001, 3524 posts, RR: 2
Reply 4, posted (9 years 10 months 2 weeks 4 days 4 hours ago) and read 3672 times:

So why force people to waste money?

If spirits with more than 50% alcohol are allowed on board (and no one, AFAIK, has proposed a ban on duty free liquors), then there is no reason to prohibit other flammable items, such as lighters or matches.

Besides, they are much harder to check for than metallic items. Essentially, the cost of stopping people from bringing them on board would be greater than the safety gain (which, IMO, would be close to nonexistant)

Regards

Ikarus


User currently offline4jaded From United States of America, joined Apr 2004, 248 posts, RR: 0
Reply 5, posted (9 years 10 months 2 weeks 4 days 4 hours ago) and read 3670 times:

The lighters and matches are not the problem it is the explosives they are intended to light that are the big hazard to aviation. As a GSC for 2 airlines I remember taking away these items for a long while. All this did was cause huge volumes of trash and a landfill explosion. The only time one of these items can be attributed to brining down a plane was many years ago involving Air Canada. Since that time smoking in Lavs has been banned and smoke detectors have been installed. These items for the most part are a non issue unless they are brought onboard in bulk which should be detected at the checkpoint.

User currently offlineIkarus From United Kingdom, joined Jan 2001, 3524 posts, RR: 2
Reply 6, posted (9 years 10 months 2 weeks 4 days 4 hours ago) and read 3661 times:

I do not see a good cause to still allow passengers to bring books of matches or lighters onboard of an aircraft. Even more so after that Richard Reid incident.


By the same logic, we should ban shoes / boots.

What is the "good cause" in letting people take anything onboard an aircraft? What's the good cause in letting them carry mobile phones in their carry-on luggage? Or condoms? Or perfumes? Or anything they won't use during the flight?

The burden of proof (that an item endangers the safety of the aircraft) is on the side of the people who want to ban something. Unless it can be proven to be a safety risk, it should be legal to carry pretty much anything a person likes on board.

Regards

Ikarus


User currently offlineGreasespot From Canada, joined Apr 2004, 3076 posts, RR: 21
Reply 7, posted (9 years 10 months 2 weeks 4 days 2 hours ago) and read 3612 times:

As long as your shoes do not explode when lit a fire set by a lighter can be extinguished by a fire extinguisher.

GS



Sometimes all you can do is look them in the eye and ask " how much did your mom drink when she was pregnant with you?"
User currently offlineBwaflyer From United Kingdom, joined Jun 2004, 689 posts, RR: 0
Reply 8, posted (9 years 10 months 2 weeks 4 days 2 hours ago) and read 3606 times:

To that end, why do we still have glasses, or metal forks on board? A lot of the security is for show - politicians showing the public they are doing something. As a crew member, we have had to remove small scissors from our personal first aid kits that we carry with us, but then have access to scissors (and hypodermics) on the aircraft as well as crash axes etc! At the end of the day, there is a lot onboard an aircraft legally that will do a lot of damage. A pity that the insane actions of a tiny minority affect us all.

User currently offlineCraigy From United Kingdom, joined Jun 2001, 1118 posts, RR: 0
Reply 9, posted (9 years 10 months 2 weeks 4 days 2 hours ago) and read 3576 times:

I thought it was the other way round.

Lighters and matches are allowed in the hand luggage and not in the hold luggage. A faulty lighter can do a lot more harm setting light to your suitcase contents, triggering the smoke detectors and causing the plane to divert because of a baggage hold fire.

I may be wrong, since I don't smoke, I don't pay much attention to the warnings about lighters etc..

Craig.


User currently offlineClrd2go From United States of America, joined Feb 2003, 1000 posts, RR: 0
Reply 10, posted (9 years 10 months 2 weeks 4 days 1 hour ago) and read 3558 times:

Twice when returning from The Bahamas I've had my later liberated from
me at the departure gate when pulled out of line.


Jim



What a long strange trip it's been
User currently offlineAndz From South Africa, joined Feb 2004, 8416 posts, RR: 11
Reply 11, posted (9 years 10 months 2 weeks 4 days 1 hour ago) and read 3552 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Lighters and matches are NOT allowed in your hand baggage, they are supposed to be carried on your person only, for the same reason, they can trigger a fire, which is more likely to be detected immediately in your pocket than in your carry on.


After Monday and Tuesday even the calendar says WTF...
User currently offlineNoUFO From Germany, joined Apr 2001, 7917 posts, RR: 12
Reply 12, posted (9 years 10 months 2 weeks 4 days 1 hour ago) and read 3541 times:

Ok guys, you are right. I take that back.


I support the right to arm bears
User currently offlineGreasespot From Canada, joined Apr 2004, 3076 posts, RR: 21
Reply 13, posted (9 years 10 months 2 weeks 3 days 23 hours ago) and read 3487 times:

umm for the record the lav fire on A/C was not caused by smoking. It was caused by a short circuiting lav flush motor...

GS



Sometimes all you can do is look them in the eye and ask " how much did your mom drink when she was pregnant with you?"
User currently offlineIkarus From United Kingdom, joined Jan 2001, 3524 posts, RR: 2
Reply 14, posted (9 years 10 months 2 weeks 3 days 22 hours ago) and read 3447 times:

Greasespot:

Thanks for that info. Can anyone else confirm this? I've been quoted that "smoking caused the fire" on that AC plane twice by now, by people trying to convince me that smoking poses a "threat to safety". I still doubt it, and increasingly suspect it's an urban legend created by militant anti-smokers...

So, where can I find out an official version? (www.airdisaster.com lists a fire in the lavatory, but no cause for the fire)

Regards

Ikarus


User currently offlineSpike From United Kingdom, joined Feb 2004, 1170 posts, RR: 5
Reply 15, posted (9 years 10 months 2 weeks 3 days 22 hours ago) and read 3448 times:

I've never unstood why batterieries are allowed on board either. I mean, if a CD player, laptop or mobile can effect the plane, take the damn battery out of it. These things get joged on in flight when you thought it was turned off.
I saw an axe in the last overhead bin of an ATR-72 in China, having even been shoe searched before getting on the plane. You could do a lot of damage with that, and all aircraft carry them.


User currently offline4jaded From United States of America, joined Apr 2004, 248 posts, RR: 0
Reply 16, posted (9 years 10 months 2 weeks 3 days 4 hours ago) and read 3342 times:

Well since I was not on board the AC flight I really don't know if a lit cig in the trash can caused the fire or not however that was the speculation at the time. They even pinned it on a male passenger at some point if I remember correctly, however the result was that airlines everywhere installed smoke detectors in the Lavs which is a good indication that someone felt that was the cause of that blaze.

User currently offlineIkarus From United Kingdom, joined Jan 2001, 3524 posts, RR: 2
Reply 17, posted (9 years 10 months 2 weeks 3 days 2 hours ago) and read 3299 times:

4jaded - I disagree. Installing smoke detectors in toilets simply indicates that someone thinks a fire could start inside a lavatory - a self-evident fact after this incident. I would argue that banning smoking in toilets is a result of the smoke detectors being installed (and the risk of false alarms), and not because the lavs are likely to self-incinerate in the presence of a cigarette.

Regards

Ikarus


User currently offlineRobsawatsky From Canada, joined Dec 2003, 597 posts, RR: 0
Reply 18, posted (9 years 10 months 2 weeks 2 days 18 hours ago) and read 3220 times:

If the reference is to an AC DC-9 that landed in flames in 1983 due to a fire originating in the lavatory, then the official cause of the fire is "undetermined".

Other than that:

"The fire was not set deliberately nor was it the result of an explosive Or
incendiary device."

The recommendation for smoke detectors in the lav was probably based upon the fact that the fire was estimated to have burned for 15 minutes before smoke was noticed.


[Edited 2004-06-08 01:44:53]

User currently offlineUALongHaul From United States of America, joined Jun 2004, 227 posts, RR: 0
Reply 19, posted (9 years 10 months 2 weeks 2 days 12 hours ago) and read 3166 times:

I think lighters would be a good item to ban, but who is going to enforce it?

Pleanty of weapons already exist in cabins. I never understand those huge wine bottles always being carried through the cabin either. It is a mystery to me why large pieces of glass are allowed on board. If we ban everything, airplanes are going to look like jail cells with people sitting naked behind bars. Sure it may be the safest, but how well do you think that will go over?


Top Of Page
Forum Index

This topic is archived and can not be replied to any more.

Printer friendly format

Similar topics:More similar topics...
How Can I Transport Aerosol Cans On-board? posted Fri Dec 6 2002 16:04:49 by Jfidler
How Come European Carriers Still Offer Free Food? posted Mon Nov 13 2006 18:05:35 by B777A340Fan
Can I Carry Copied CDs On Board? posted Sun Oct 22 2006 01:09:50 by RootsAir
How Come We Haven't Seen The 380 In VS Colors Yet? posted Mon Mar 20 2006 20:41:14 by DeltaGator
Can I Take A Glass Bottle On Board? posted Wed Mar 15 2006 17:25:59 by Venezuela747
Can I Take A Shaving Razor On Board? posted Thu Oct 27 2005 05:09:54 by Slashd0t
Can It Be Carried On Board An A/c? posted Sun Nov 7 2004 19:48:38 by Soups
Alitalia -- Do They Still Allow Smoking On Board? posted Wed Jul 21 2004 02:32:16 by Ssides
Airlines That Still Allow Smoking On Board posted Thu Dec 11 2003 18:52:26 by Lucky727
Which Airlines Still Allow Smoking On Board? posted Sun Oct 26 2003 12:50:05 by EZYAirbus