Coronavirus Impact on Air Travel
"Every person in an aircraft must obey all lawful commands which the pilot in command of that aircraft may give for the purpose of securing the safety of the aircraft and of persons or property carried in the aircraft, or the safety, efficiency or regularity of air navigation."
Thread Starter
I am anti mask and feel it is way way too late. However when flying it was a requirement and I wore one, despite not believing in the voodoo science behind it. I changed masks when got on second leg of journey as found it just not good enough for 2nd leg.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Dec 2014
Location: scotland
Posts: 162
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Indeed they have,the question though arises that if the infection rate is 33 per 100000 in West Dumbartonshire,Glasgow 20.7 per 100000 which is a lot more than Greece,so therefore it must follow that everyone in these area's must quarantine for 14 days.I believe though someone sneezed on the LGZA to EGPF that has triggered this new round of insanity.
Scotland has put Greece on the Q list as a result of track and trace, not just the pure numbers. The system identified returning travellers from Greece as a major source of covid. On the beeb this morning.
Given the reputation for partying that some resorts on some of the islands has I don't imagine this is too surprising. Look at the news story last week - The Man. U football captain. Didn't see too much social distancing going on in the footage that was shown on the news.
The son of a friend (in his mid 30s) went on holiday to Malta with his partner. They returned to 14 days quarantine and that lasted three days before they went off on another holiday to Cornwall. No doubt if he had received a call on his mobile checking he was maintaining quarantine he would have lied and I doubt the location of a mobile can be traced without a warrant.
So is this a rant against the irresponsibility of his generation? No, although the fact that many are irresponsible in this context is well established, it's to illustrate that 14 days quarantine simply doesn't achieve its aim and should be replaced by a test upon arrival back in UK and another test, say, five days later. If both are negative normal life could be resumed. There would certainly be much more likelihood of adherence to 5 days quarantine than 14 days.
So is this a rant against the irresponsibility of his generation? No, although the fact that many are irresponsible in this context is well established, it's to illustrate that 14 days quarantine simply doesn't achieve its aim and should be replaced by a test upon arrival back in UK and another test, say, five days later. If both are negative normal life could be resumed. There would certainly be much more likelihood of adherence to 5 days quarantine than 14 days.
Think Wales have done the right thing with just doing the red zone for Zante,with islands like the Canaries ,Madeira ,they can be done separately from their mainland areas
if Boris and others had done this through the summer, the travel industry might have been in a better state and more people would not have had this quarantine,which it seems is being ignored by many .
if Boris and others had done this through the summer, the travel industry might have been in a better state and more people would not have had this quarantine,which it seems is being ignored by many .
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: uk
Posts: 410
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Expressflight:
The idea is great but I imagine the travelling public will have to pay for these tests in order to avoid the 14 day quarantine period. They will also have to isolate for the 5 days between the tests.
Based on your example (& no doubt countless others like it) can you see people paying for two tests where potentially the cost is greater than the airline ticket?
Or will they just chance it?
https://travelweekly.co.uk/articles/...e-warns-tanzer
The ABTA chief Execs comments on the practicalities of airport testing aren't overly helpful (I know he is being realistic but you would think he might be on the side of promoting the industry) and it appears the travel industry might have a long winter ahead.
The idea is great but I imagine the travelling public will have to pay for these tests in order to avoid the 14 day quarantine period. They will also have to isolate for the 5 days between the tests.
Based on your example (& no doubt countless others like it) can you see people paying for two tests where potentially the cost is greater than the airline ticket?
Or will they just chance it?
https://travelweekly.co.uk/articles/...e-warns-tanzer
The ABTA chief Execs comments on the practicalities of airport testing aren't overly helpful (I know he is being realistic but you would think he might be on the side of promoting the industry) and it appears the travel industry might have a long winter ahead.
commit aviation
Would they have to pay for the tests? It's obviously in the Government's power not to charge and if not charging produces a better outcome in terms of reducing the spread of infection that should be the way ahead.
Would they have to pay for the tests? It's obviously in the Government's power not to charge and if not charging produces a better outcome in terms of reducing the spread of infection that should be the way ahead.
Ideally the government would not charge, but testing would be mandatory, no ifs, no buts, no excuses, no exceptions. However watching "Hancock's Half Hour" this morning, and reading between the lines, I don't actually believe there is sufficient lab capacity in the UK's "world beating" (not) testing system to accommodate all the tests. Germany has found this to be the case and is dropping the testing on arrival from what I read last week.
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: uk
Posts: 410
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
No doubt they could get some form of bulk discount and has already been noted, there are testing stations at many UK airports. However, there is always a cost at some stage - if not direct at source (the customer) then we all pay through general taxation in some form.
So here's a thought - why not add another £50 or so to APD. People who want to fly pay without the rest of the population picking up the tab. Limited means to avoid it and so likely to get better take up of the test.
I think it would be an understatement to say that it would not be popular idea with the airlines or airports who rightly see APD as a deterrent to flying and is already one of the highest in the world.
So here's a thought - why not add another £50 or so to APD. People who want to fly pay without the rest of the population picking up the tab. Limited means to avoid it and so likely to get better take up of the test.
I think it would be an understatement to say that it would not be popular idea with the airlines or airports who rightly see APD as a deterrent to flying and is already one of the highest in the world.
Serbia I can see could be in with a shot,but looking at the trend I doubt Bulgaria would be removed from the quarantine list until the end of this month, which essentially is the end of the summer season on the Black Sea.
You have to ask just how stupid some of these people are. There would appear to have been multiple attempts to contact them which have come up dry, and only then to the police come knocking. Surely if you were minded to ride your luck, once you'd had a couple of calls and presumably not responded you'd think your luck had probably run out, and start quarantining as you should have been in the first place.
I don't agree this quarantine thing is a particularly smart policy, but again, it's the law, not optional and if the law is flouted, to a point where the police have to become involved then a fine should be the logical result - in every instance. It's hardly fair on those who do comply with the rules for those that can't be bothered to get away with a slapped wrist and suffer no penalty.
I don't agree this quarantine thing is a particularly smart policy, but again, it's the law, not optional and if the law is flouted, to a point where the police have to become involved then a fine should be the logical result - in every instance. It's hardly fair on those who do comply with the rules for those that can't be bothered to get away with a slapped wrist and suffer no penalty.
I know I'm like a broken record, but there needs be a more sensible / joined up approach to this; not just in the UK but across Europe. Science doesn't change at the border, but with everything in international diplomacy, each country makes it up as they go along. A common approach with exemptions, not just for air crew, but also for all key workers.
The map at the bottom of this ECDC webpage is a good colour coded indicator of regional variations.
https://www.ecdc.europa.eu/en/cases-2019-ncov-eueea
I'd argue that self isolation requirements should apply to the following:
Blue (zero cases) - Free travel... TLL for example
Yellow (less than 20 in 2 weeks) - free travel... LGW, NOC, OSL, RIX, FNC, LCA, HEL
Light orange (20-60) - recommend isolation, but not mandatory... LHR, MAN, DUB, FAO, MRS, TXL, CPH, FCO, ATH, VIE
Brown (60-120) - mandatory isolation with testing options... CDG, AGP, MLA, NCE
Maroon (120+) - lockdown... MAD, BCN, TFS, ACE, LPA
The map at the bottom of this ECDC webpage is a good colour coded indicator of regional variations.
https://www.ecdc.europa.eu/en/cases-2019-ncov-eueea
I'd argue that self isolation requirements should apply to the following:
Blue (zero cases) - Free travel... TLL for example
Yellow (less than 20 in 2 weeks) - free travel... LGW, NOC, OSL, RIX, FNC, LCA, HEL
Light orange (20-60) - recommend isolation, but not mandatory... LHR, MAN, DUB, FAO, MRS, TXL, CPH, FCO, ATH, VIE
Brown (60-120) - mandatory isolation with testing options... CDG, AGP, MLA, NCE
Maroon (120+) - lockdown... MAD, BCN, TFS, ACE, LPA