englandair
Posts: 2193
Joined: Tue Oct 10, 2000 4:34 am

Smoking Flights

Tue Oct 17, 2000 3:27 am

Just out of intrest, do most airlines now opperate non-smoking policies?
 
 
prebennorholm
Posts: 6419
Joined: Tue Mar 21, 2000 6:25 am

RE: Smoking Flights

Tue Oct 17, 2000 3:55 am

Since the retirement of the CV-880 the air has cleared a lot...    
Preben Norholm
Always keep your number of landings equal to your number of take-offs
 
SIA fan
Posts: 715
Joined: Sat Aug 26, 2000 11:56 pm

RE: Smoking Flights

Tue Oct 17, 2000 4:00 am

Yes, I think most airlines' flights are now non-smoking. But I believe JAL and Garuda still allow smoking. SQ also allowed smoking for flight to and from Japan until a few years back.
SQ*G BD*S
 
Mr.BA
Posts: 3310
Joined: Sun Sep 24, 2000 12:26 pm

RE: Smoking Flights

Tue Oct 17, 2000 8:13 am

How about BA???
Boeing747 万岁!
 
Trvlr
Posts: 4251
Joined: Thu Feb 17, 2000 9:58 am

RE: Smoking Flights

Tue Oct 17, 2000 8:17 am

I think Air Lanka has a smoking section on their flights to and from Japan and Colombo.

Aaron G.
 
Guest

RE: Smoking Flights

Tue Oct 17, 2000 9:14 am

As a die hard smoker, it is becoming increasingly difficult to find good airlines that permit smoking.

Only a handful of airlines now allow smoking such as Air India - but not on its US routes, Malaysia Airlines ( London to KL and Japanese flights), Kuwait, Garuda - apart from its inter Asian and Australian routes. Off course, there is also Aeroflot.

BA is definately non-smoking.

 
AirCanadaMan
Posts: 458
Joined: Sun Feb 27, 2000 4:42 am

RE: Smoking Flights

Tue Oct 17, 2000 9:15 am

Air India offers(I thinks its still in effect) smoking services on its routes except those served by 744, going to Europe and North America. Im sure many of the airlines flying in less developed countries with less restrictive air standards allow smoking on board.


 
Guest

RE: Smoking Flights

Tue Oct 17, 2000 9:18 am

I know that Iberia and Spannair allow it!!! Those Spaniards sure can puff.... You can actually also smoke in their mini-hub in Miami!!!! I think it's the only place in the whole airport you can light up...
 
aio86
Posts: 910
Joined: Sat Sep 16, 2000 12:16 pm

RE: Smoking Flights

Tue Oct 17, 2000 9:30 am

Acording to the timetable seating maps Saudi Arabian Airlines allows smoking on all of their aircraft, 747-400,-300, -100, 777-200,A-300, MD-90, and 737-200. I don't know about any resrtictions that apply for flights to Washington DC and New York. Egypty Air offers smoking on all flights with their 747-300, 777-200, A-300, 767-300, A-321, A-320 and 737-500. The only jet aircraft they fly that has no smoking what so ever on it is the A-340. Same thing that I said about flights to the US though, I don't know if they allow it on JFK, and LAX (do they still fly there after the accident?)
-aaron
 
airsicknessbag
Posts: 4626
Joined: Thu Aug 17, 2000 2:45 am

RE: Smoking Flights

Tue Oct 17, 2000 4:37 pm


No scheduled flight to or from the US is smoking. Exceptions only for charter airlines; so the only way to go from Germany to the US smoking is on Condor, to Fort Lauderdale, Tampa, San Juan, Anchorage (there might be more in Florida, don´t know.
Daniel 
 
Kuba74
Posts: 418
Joined: Fri Mar 24, 2000 7:42 pm

RE: Smoking Flights

Tue Oct 17, 2000 4:49 pm

What about Pakistan International Airlines? I was on their flight back in 1997 /FRA-JFK/ and it was smoking flight. Do they still have smoking flights?
 
airlinefreak1
Posts: 249
Joined: Wed Jul 12, 2000 5:13 pm

RE: Smoking Flights

Wed Oct 18, 2000 1:37 am

EMIRATES AIRLINES (EK) have special seats on all their aircrafts that allow smoking including london heathrow and dubai sector .....personally , its alright and its perfectly harmless , it doesnt bother any of the passengers , so i think all airlines that have NON smoking flights are lame and stuiped .
 
Guest

RE: Smoking Flights

Wed Oct 18, 2000 2:28 am

From november 1, all air france flight wll be non smoking.
before, smoking was allowed on some flight, not on north american routes.
 
Ilyushin96M
Posts: 2506
Joined: Sat Sep 04, 1999 3:15 am

RE: Smoking Flights

Wed Oct 18, 2000 2:42 am

Well, I know that Aeroflot and most Eastern European carriers allow smoking on international flights. Aeroflot was up in arms about the latest US restrictions on smoking; they were going to protest the banning of smoking on all flights to the US, though I'm not sure how.

Personally, I think it is an airline's business whether it chooses to offer smoking flights vs. non-smoking. As a non-smoker, I prefer not to be in the same aircraft with smokers as the smell of the smoke permeates everything eventually, and the air is the same for everyone. There have been many studies made as to the effects of second-hand smoke - the smoke from cigarettes that is exhaled - on people, namely as far as it causing cancer. It's been proven that second-hand smoke is a leading cause of cancer in non-smokers who are exposed to it repeatedly and over a good length of time.
 
Guest

RE: Smoking Flights

Wed Oct 18, 2000 10:03 am

Folks,
Just a couple of reasons for NOT smoking on aircraft.
Incidentally,I am a smoker,but agree with a total ban.
1.Fire hazard;
Have had several close calls over the years (all smoking related) most notably during a flight back from US to London during the night,when a passenger came to me and thought that the guy sitting next to her had fallen asleep whilst smoking.She wasn't sure as she had been dozing herself,and didn't know how long ago etc.,but it had been playing on her mind.We went down to see,woke everyone up,got down there with torches and sure enough,a 3 inch diameter hole in the carpet that was smoldering.
A fire can be out of control in under 30 seconds,and trust me guys & girls,you DON'T want a fire on board an aircraft!
2.Air quality;
Air quality on aircraft is poor anyway,why make it worse?
3.Decompression;
I was once on an 747-200 in the hangar (in the days BA allowed smoking) when the engineers did a manual test of the drop-down oxygen.Of all the overhead compartments in the smoking section (some 20 0r 25 panels over 6 or 7 rows),only TWO opened.This,apparently,was due to a build up of nicotine gunge which had effectively "glued" the panels up.
This would not go down well during a decompression,I can tell you!
The moral of the story is....if your'e on a flight that still allows smoking,don't sit back there.Or better still,take a non-smoking flight.
You know it makes sense!!!
Regards,Mr K.
 
Guest

RE: Smoking Flights

Wed Oct 18, 2000 10:52 am

Mr K,

Thats some very interesting information about the overhead panels getting stuck from smoking. Is there any documented evidence of this? The airlines could use this to their advantage if it were proven.

mb
 
Guest

RE: Smoking Flights

Wed Oct 18, 2000 11:39 am

Mx5_boy,
Have never seen or heard of any documented evidence specifically on that topic,I'm sure the engineering report of what I saw was seriously noted though.I imagine other tests on different aircraft were carried out too.
BA surveyed passengers for a few years and tested certain routes as non-smoking to seek general opinion.It came back as an overwhelming 99.5% in favour of a smoking ban.That ,coupled with the safety implications ,really didn't cause BA's management to think to hard about it.
Like you,I'd be interested to see some documentation etc...anyone know anything??
 
velocityair
Posts: 126
Joined: Wed May 24, 2000 10:48 am

RE: Smoking Flights

Wed Oct 18, 2000 1:56 pm

I guess it is ok for Chain-Smoking Commies and spaniards ... but why in hell is AirFrance banning smoking? I thought smoking was as central to their lifestyle as wine and smelling? I guess SkyTeam is whipping those stinky winegrowers into shape
 
Guest

RE: Smoking Flights

Wed Oct 18, 2000 2:53 pm

Velocity air...LMAO!!  

I think its absolutely ridiculous that the majority of passengers be subjected to toxins, carbon monoxide and a medley of other carcinogens so a few can get their nicotine fix. Chew on some nicotine gum or something because I don't want to breathe your poison for eight hours straight!

I think AF got rid of their little smoking tent because they had to rip out anywhere from 4-12 seats to provide this little *luxury*. Clearly loosing thousands of $$$ wasn't worth the preservation of a longstanding french tradition.
 
Amir
Posts: 1224
Joined: Thu Dec 30, 1999 8:56 pm

RE: Smoking Flights

Wed Oct 18, 2000 3:02 pm

Hi

even RB (Syrianair) has meanwhile introduced all non smoking flights!
however they don't have any long haul flights.

Rgds
Amir
 
Guest

RE: Smoking Flights

Wed Oct 18, 2000 5:10 pm

I remember Lauda being one of the first tobe non smoking but still offered a "smoking bar" on their 767-300 flights to Australia.
Australia's Domestics soon followed suit as did Qantas which at that time was purely an International carrier.
This is going back around 15 years mind you so I am really surprised there are any airlines out there still willing to pay thousands to clean out their air recirculation systems.
Some have said that smoking is not so bad or not even dangerous but in fact it kills more people every year than just about anything else. Just sitting next to a smoker (who is smoking at the time) is enough exposure to cause a life threatening illness.

I only hope I gave it up in time!
 
Pacific
Posts: 1043
Joined: Fri Mar 10, 2000 2:46 pm

RE: Smoking Flights

Wed Oct 18, 2000 5:23 pm

I have heard that air in the plane is recycled. This pretty much means that we get CO all over the plane if someone's smoking.
When I flew a JAL DC-10 in August 1998 (terrible ageing interior, noisy) the last two rows of the plane were smoking. The check-in lady managed to get me into the last row (sick!).

Pacific
 
Guest

RE: Smoking Flights

Thu Oct 19, 2000 3:58 am

I agree with you all about smoking on flights. Mainly because of the fire hazard. Beyond that, why do we need to discuss it further? And, Bcl, isn't "die hard smoker" an oxymoron?
 
ZRH
Posts: 4371
Joined: Tue Nov 16, 1999 11:32 pm

RE: Smoking Flights

Thu Oct 19, 2000 9:44 pm

There are three serious reasons for an all non-smoking flight: 1. It molests and makes sick all other passengers. 2. It is extremly dangerous for the flight attendens. A f/a told me recently that, when she worked on a smoke-flight in former days, her clothes all smelt like an ashtray afterwards and she had serious problems with her eys. 3. Smoking on board is a serious fire hazard!
I would never fly anymore an airline which allows smoking.
 
caravelle
Posts: 656
Joined: Thu Aug 10, 2000 4:33 am

RE: Smoking Flights

Fri Oct 20, 2000 5:08 am

Parts of this discussion is faintly ridiculous. If you don't smoke, of course you'd mind smelling smoke when you -ah- alight from your flight.
Which is fair enough. But what has happened is that since smoking was banned on most planes, companies have cut costs by cutting down on that supreme resource. Air. They quite simply let less air through the plane, and save money by the minute. So if you're a non-smoking allergic, like I am, you are likely to be hit by in-plane air that has been recycled five instead of two times. Which is a health hazard.
So I miss smokers. As long as they stayed at the back of the plane, and the airliner gave me a seat in front, it wasn't bad at all.
And please: as far as safety is concerned: Could anyone here please tell me if a plane has ever crashed, had an accident, or was severely threatened by anyone smoking? I would like to know.

-caravelle
Trains and boats and planes....
 
jaysit
Posts: 10186
Joined: Thu Jun 01, 2000 11:50 pm

RE: Smoking Flights

Fri Oct 20, 2000 5:37 am

Actually the crash of a Varig Boeing 707 in Paris in 1974 was apparently caused by a burning cigarette thrown into the lavatory waste bin. 134 killed.

Take your smelly smoking habits and do it in the privacy of your own home, not in seat 14G.
Atheism is Myth Understood.
 
Guest

RE: Smoking Flights

Fri Oct 20, 2000 12:30 pm

Well pointed out,Jaysit.
Caravelle,
Please read my post above.
The point is not whether the air is "smelly" or not,or how often airlines recycle air.
Having ignited materials on a metal tube,6 miles above terra firma with limited fire fighting equipment should give the most "hardened" of smokers food for thought.
Even as a smoker,I for one,would always choose to fly "smoke free".
 
Guest

RE: Smoking Flights

Fri Oct 20, 2000 10:33 pm

Air Canada DC-9 had a fire in the aft lav started by a cig thrown in the trash (it was ok then to smoke onboard) Landed with the cabin burning in Cinncinnatti. I think at least a dozen or more were killed.

Proof enough to ban smoking...
 
caravelle
Posts: 656
Joined: Thu Aug 10, 2000 4:33 am

Mr K

Sat Oct 21, 2000 3:34 am

As a non-smoker, of course I don't mind non-smoking planes. My only point was that companies use this opportunity to put less air through the craft, thus saving money, thus making it even worse for asthmatic people like myself. In the old days, even though there were sections for smokers on both first, biz, and tourist, you could always get a seat where smoke didn't bother one too much.
Today, all seats are "smoking", in the sense that air is polluted, too dry, and stale. I think Lufthansa and SAS may be exceptions - not as a rule, as so often, things like this depend on the crew.

-caravelle
Trains and boats and planes....
 
Guest

RE: Smoking Flights

Sat Oct 21, 2000 6:03 am


Click for large version
Click here for full size photo!

Photo © Picture taken by Capt. Grieder, scanned by Jan Von Wuthenau




Air Canada DC9, June 1983, 23 fatalities

From airdisaster.com

“While on a flight from Dallas, Texas to Toronto, the crew reported a lavatory fire just as the aircraft was passing over Louisville, Kentucky. An emergency was declared and the aircraft was vectored to a successful emergency landing at the Cincinnati/Northern Kentucky International Airport in Covington, KY. When the main door was opened, the influx of oxygen ignited a fire which killed half on board.”

http://www.airdisaster.com/cgi_bin/view_details.cgi?date=06021983&airline=Air+Canada

Smoke detectors were subsequently installed in the lav’s of all Canadian aircraft.
 
caravelle
Posts: 656
Joined: Thu Aug 10, 2000 4:33 am

RE: Smoking Flights, Cp 666

Sat Oct 21, 2000 7:32 am

CP666,
I see your point, though evidence is inconclusive. But since when did smokers have to resort to lavatories?
Myself, throughout this thread, I've stated again and again, I hate smoking. But let's see.. What's happening here? It's much like drinking, methinks.
People shouldn't, but they do. So why don't check in on them? From time to time? Keep control, like, and legalize the stuff? And keep non-smoking areas free from smoke? Today, what with new technology and all, it should be easy....

-caravelle
Trains and boats and planes....
 
Transat1011
Posts: 112
Joined: Tue Nov 16, 1999 11:14 am

Smoking Flights Still There

Sat Oct 21, 2000 7:44 am

Hello,

I know the following facts about Royal Air Maroc:
1- the CMN-JFK-YUL-CMN route is non-smoking
2- all domestic flights are as well
3- however, most of the other ones still are. (European, Middle-East and African flights)
Not too many seats are smoking though. I would say the last 3-5 rows of seats of a 737, representing about 15-30% of the available seats, depending on the version.
2 years ago, all flights used to me smoking I believe.

Rgds,

Transat1011
 
Guest

RE: Smoking Flights

Sat Oct 21, 2000 1:25 pm

I believe the flight was non-smoking. Smokers would sneak into the lavatories, and smoke, thus the smoke detectors. Canada was one of the first to ban smoking on short haul and domestic flights. You can't smoke in most bars and nightclubs where I live, let alone airplanes!
 
Rafabozzolla
Posts: 968
Joined: Sun Apr 30, 2000 1:27 pm

RE: Smoking Flights

Sun Oct 22, 2000 1:57 am

Concerning Varig's crash in Orly in 1974, rumor in Brazil goes that the actual cause of fire had some relation with some kind of prohibited weapon it was shipping secretely on behalf of the Brazilian Air Force.

OK I know it is just a rumor, but remember: In the 60's and 70's there was a military regime in Brazil wich gave Varig exclusive rights on all int'l routes even though it has allways been a private company. Hence Varig allways offered "favours" to the authorities, to put it mildly.