Go Back  PPRuNe Forums > Misc. Forums > Airlines, Airports & Routes
Reload this Page >

Coronavirus Impact on Air Travel

Airlines, Airports & Routes Topics about airports, routes and airline business.

Coronavirus Impact on Air Travel

Old 28th Dec 2020, 05:55
  #2641 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: UK
Posts: 956
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Vokes55

Or with the aircraft operating, the passengers maybe didn’t want to lose £1000s in costs? And with only few insurers wanting to cover COVID losses, no recourse there. What are you expecting these people to do?
Dannyboy39 is offline  
Old 28th Dec 2020, 07:32
  #2642 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2016
Location: The EU
Posts: 636
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Well if COVID and flying was as dangerous as many contributors to this thread are making out, I’d expect them to cancel to save their lives....

But no, I’m not buying it. BA Holidays and BA allow people to amend their travel dates, Tier 4 was announced 3 days in advance which is enough time for the majority of accommodation bookings to be amended/cancelled without a fee these days, and with the FCDO still advising against travel to Mexico, one would imagine those on this flight would’ve specifically chosen insurance that does cover them - or are so nonchalant about the whole thing they knew they’d be going regardless.

304 passengers on yesterday’s LGW-CUN so no anomaly either.

Vokes55 is offline  
Old 28th Dec 2020, 07:42
  #2643 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Reading, UK
Posts: 15,786
Received 196 Likes on 90 Posts
Originally Posted by Vokes55
Tier 4 was announced 3 days in advance
Only for the areas that went into Tier 4 on Boxing Day.

Southeast England, on the other hand, was put into Tier 4 at only a few hours' notice.
DaveReidUK is offline  
Old 28th Dec 2020, 07:48
  #2644 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2016
Location: The EU
Posts: 636
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
But I’m talking specifically about a flight that went on the 26th December, from an airport that entered Tier 4 on that day along with half of its remaining catchment area.

But you’re quite right to point out that a certain percentage of passengers on this flight would’ve had six days from entering Tier 4 to amend their bookings, not just the three.
Vokes55 is offline  
Old 28th Dec 2020, 09:23
  #2645 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Exit stage right.
Posts: 290
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes on 2 Posts
Originally Posted by Vokes55
Well if COVID and flying was as dangerous as many contributors to this thread are making out, I’d expect them to cancel to save their lives....
Majority of people are willing to take the risk. 1.7M deaths with 81M reported infected. The deaths probably accurate but with testing we know it is undereported.

But even using the reported stats it is a death rate of circa 2%. Break it down even further and if travellers were sub 50 in age with 2 kids and no undelying conditions then death rate is tiny.
racedo is offline  
Old 28th Dec 2020, 09:52
  #2646 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2016
Location: Between the check-in desks
Posts: 443
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
304 passengers on yesterday’s LGW-CUN so no anomaly either.
With the new variant of Covid being 70% more transmissible would anyone be happy to sit next to a passenger on a 9 hour flight who was infected with London Covid as it is certain that testing is missing many cases?
Spanish eyes is offline  
Old 28th Dec 2020, 10:08
  #2647 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: U.K
Posts: 782
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
At least 304 people were.
The96er is offline  
Old 28th Dec 2020, 10:14
  #2648 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Exit stage right.
Posts: 290
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes on 2 Posts
Spanish eyes

UP to 70%........................... which could mean anything, it doesn't say it is more deadly.
racedo is offline  
Old 28th Dec 2020, 10:41
  #2649 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: In the sticks
Posts: 9,803
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
70%. The more people who catch it the more people who die. Not rocket science is it. Also shows how ineffective pre travel checks and tests are as the new variant pops up all over the world. Never mind, all worthwhile for a few days in the sun
LTNman is online now  
Old 28th Dec 2020, 10:50
  #2650 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: UK
Posts: 3,021
Received 197 Likes on 108 Posts
Actually I agree with Racedo; clever advertising ploy has been used by the government propaganda machine here. You will have heard the same technique used when, for example, advertising toothpaste - "Acme toothpaste reduces cavities by up to 50%". That actually means that it could reduce fillings but not by more than 50%. It could reduce them by virtually nothing - say 0.000001% and it would be a lie. One thing is for sure the ploy as been proven to work, since the media quite readily parrot out the 70% without the "up to" readily, and if something is repeated often enough people will believe it.

At the same time I also agree that travel, any travel, domestic or overseas is probably not sensible at this time for a myriad reasons. Leave it until March / April and things should be better.
ATNotts is online now  
Old 28th Dec 2020, 10:57
  #2651 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: In the sticks
Posts: 9,803
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
The figure has come from the scientists.
LTNman is online now  
Old 28th Dec 2020, 11:24
  #2652 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2016
Location: Oban, Scotland
Posts: 1,841
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
I believe that with more data the new variant is between 50 and 60% more transmissible. Still more than enough for it to cause a major spike in new cases which will result (about two weeks later ) in a major spike in hospital admissions. And an increase in the number of people unwell for several weeks (long Covid19 ) .

In every country the strategy has been to keep the number of hospital admissions down to a level with which their health system can cope and the latest variant threatens that.

I hope that the Mexican authorities quarantine all these pax in their hotel rooms. With those numbers it is almost certain that a few will have been incubating the disease when they left and if they are allowed to mingle the whole resort could become infected.
inOban is offline  
Old 28th Dec 2020, 12:02
  #2653 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Exit stage right.
Posts: 290
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes on 2 Posts
LTNman

Which ones ? These the Danish ones who tested effectiveness of mask wearing and proved it made no difference but media refuse to reference their study............... they scientists as well.

Believing a figure which comes from scientists is all fine and good BUT it was Govt who announded the findings, it produced very little data to back up the claim, little data to prove the deadliness of of and basically blew smoke which the media lapped up.
racedo is offline  
Old 28th Dec 2020, 12:26
  #2654 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Reading, UK
Posts: 15,786
Received 196 Likes on 90 Posts
You mean the Danish trial that produced inconclusive results on the benefits of mask wearing to the wearer, and didn't concern itself at all about any wider benefits to those that the mask wearer comes into contact with?

But hey, don't let the facts get in the way of a good story.
DaveReidUK is offline  
Old 28th Dec 2020, 12:46
  #2655 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: UK
Posts: 3,021
Received 197 Likes on 108 Posts
inOban

If US holidaymakers are still travelling without restriction to Cancun, then to me going there from UK at the moment is doubly foolhardy, and that's before you even start on those asymptomatic carriers from UK.
ATNotts is online now  
Old 28th Dec 2020, 12:47
  #2656 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2016
Location: Oban, Scotland
Posts: 1,841
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Do you have another explanation for the fact that the new variant has become dominant, ie has out-competed the other variants?

It's my belief that the act of wearing or not wearing a mask is associated with other behaviours. Together these affect the chances of an individual spreading their infection or catching it from someone else. It's clear that those countries where mask wearing has been normal since previous viruses like MERS have lower spread.
inOban is offline  
Old 28th Dec 2020, 13:08
  #2657 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: UK
Age: 75
Posts: 2,690
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
FACT:

NERVTAG (New and Emerging Respiratory Virus Threats Advisory Group) reported on 18th December 2020 that the new COVID - 19 variant (B.1.1.7) had been sequenced early in October, but was only discovered to to be important in December. It's greater rate of transmission than the previous variants, with a 95% confidence interval, was between 67% and 75%.

Perhaps those doubting this fact would care to substantiate their contrary claims, but I'll behave appropriately on the basis of the NERTAG figures.
Expressflight is offline  
Old 28th Dec 2020, 13:12
  #2658 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2016
Location: The EU
Posts: 636
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by LTNman
70%. The more people who catch it the more people who die. Not rocket science is it.
Actually, 30 seconds of research into the basics of virology would tell you that as viruses become more transmissible, they become less virulent. So despite what Sky News will tell you, which I'm under no doubt you have had permanently on loop since February, not only does a virus becoming more transmissible not necessarily result in more people dying, it is a completely expected and normal development of a virus. Not rocket science is it.

I would also take any increasing death figures in this country with a pinch of salt, with the UK deciding to record deaths for any reason within 28 days of a positive test. More people die in the Winter, always have and always will. So if a certain percentage of the population have COVID, and more people die in December than June, more people are going to be recorded as having died *from* COVID. I'm not saying the number of people dying from COVID hasn't increased, but the figures will certainly be inflated by the natural increase in deaths that happens at this time of year.


Originally Posted by ATNotts
If US holidaymakers are still travelling without restriction to Cancun, then to me going there from UK at the moment is doubly foolhardy, and that's before you even start on those asymptomatic carriers from UK.
Given that the number of positive cases per population is currently lower in the US than the UK and the majority of European countries, I don't understand the point of your post. If anything, that makes going to Mexico "safer" than staying in the UK

Last edited by Vokes55; 28th Dec 2020 at 13:34.
Vokes55 is offline  
Old 28th Dec 2020, 14:46
  #2659 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2016
Location: Oban, Scotland
Posts: 1,841
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Oh dear! As viruses become more transmissible they often become less virulent. Not always and there is no evidence that this variant is more or less virulent. (Actually it's not the deaths that are the problem. It's those in hospital for a long time and unwell for a long time after.)

And given that the US population is about 5x ours, their current case rate us at least as high as ours, assuming their data collection is as accurate as ours.

And the Antarctic cases were arose during the annual crew change at the Chilean base. Clearly the incoming crew ought to have been quarantined.

And I used to work in a Virology department.

inOban is offline  
Old 29th Dec 2020, 10:24
  #2660 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2016
Location: Essex
Posts: 1,215
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
The Spanish have a cunning plan. They want to create a data base of all who refuse a Covid jab. This will be made available throughout Europe. Presumably, they would like other nations to do the same, obviously with the intent of preventing those not protected from crossing borders.

DC3 Dave is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service

Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.