PPRuNe Forums

PPRuNe Forums (https://www.pprune.org/)
-   Airlines, Airports & Routes (https://www.pprune.org/airlines-airports-routes-85/)
-   -   Coronavirus Impact on Air Travel (https://www.pprune.org/airlines-airports-routes/629647-coronavirus-impact-air-travel.html)

BigDoris 21st Jun 2020 18:27


Originally Posted by helipixman (Post 10817102)
I know about the finer details, but who wants to take the chance and risk their family if the a Spanish airport is not carrying out the checks as per previous post ! Who knows what they are letting in. So the R rate is not important if they can just let it in without checks ?

I agree on risks but I also wonder if these checks are anything more than a placebo. A temperarure check, for example, may be reassuring but is probably of very limited use beyond that. Iím not really sure what checks you could carry out that (a) would be any use whilst (b) also allowing quick processing of thousands of passengers.

BigDoris 21st Jun 2020 18:28


Originally Posted by Spanish eyes (Post 10817070)
The Romanian and Bulgarian meat processing workers are not too keen being placed into quarantine in Germany and had have been fighting the police as they try to make their escape. I doubt their governments will be chartering aircraft to fly them home.

https://www.barrons.com/news/german-...754905?tesla=y

Hereís where the problems really begin.

valefan16 21st Jun 2020 18:37


Originally Posted by helipixman (Post 10817102)
I know about the finer details, but who wants to take the chance and risk their family if the a Spanish airport is not carrying out the checks as per previous post ! Who knows what they are letting in. So the R rate is not important if they can just let it in without checks ?

If their rate of infection is the same or lower than the U.K. youíve the same if not less of a risk there than if you go on a staycation to a U.K. resort as no checks as you enter a U.K. resort for example.

If sensible and do the correct things in terms of masks and social distancing where possible then you negate the risks as much as possible.

As you spend most of a foreign holiday outdoors in hot weather your chances of avoiding it are pretty good.

Meat factories seem to be a key problem here and abroad though, partly because they are indoors and also kept and cold temps.

LTNman 22nd Jun 2020 06:14


Originally Posted by valefan16 (Post 10817111)
If their rate of infection is the same or lower than the U.K. youíve the same if not less of a risk there than if you go on a staycation to a U.K. resort as no checks as you enter a U.K. resort for example.

If sensible and do the correct things in terms of masks and social distancing where possible then you negate the risks as much as possible.

As you spend most of a foreign holiday outdoors in hot weather your chances of avoiding it are pretty good.

Meat factories seem to be a key problem here and abroad though, partly because they are indoors and also kept and cold temps.


For starters the great British holidaymaker will have no control over social distancing on the aircraft. They will have no control if the aircraft is parked on a remote stand and only 2 buses turn up to transport 200 passengers to the terminal. They will have no control of how many flights share their baggage belts. All the time they will be mixing with a variety of different people at close quarters.

Once at the holiday resort they will be in holiday mode where the mindset will be that they have escaped the virus. Lifts will be shared and the people of many nations will freely mix in the evenings in bars and restaurants. Then it is back to home with a queue at check-in where due to terminal constraints social distancing is not possible, back on the bus to the aircraft, back sitting in a metal tube for 2 hours, back to the baggage belt.

What could possibly go wrong. The question is what is more risky, the holiday or the previous or following week?

ericsson16 22nd Jun 2020 09:24


Originally Posted by LTNman (Post 10817382)
For starters the great British holidaymaker will have no control over social distancing on the aircraft. They will have no control if the aircraft is parked on a remote stand and only 2 buses turn up to transport 200 passengers to the terminal. They will have no control of how many flights share their baggage belts. All the time they will be mixing with a variety of different people at close quarters.

Once at the holiday resort they will be in holiday mode where the mindset will be that they have escaped the virus. Lifts will be shared and the people of many nations will freely mix in the evenings in bars and restaurants. Then it is back to home with a queue at check-in where due to terminal constraints social distancing is not possible, back on the bus to the aircraft, back sitting in a metal tube for 2 hours, back to the baggage belt.

What could possibly go wrong. The question is what is more risky, the holiday or the previous or following week?

I think we gather by now your stance on this,so here is mine.The virus has blown itself out. Over 3 weeks have passed since the 2nd spike brigade were telling us all about the packed beaches in England South coast would have us all back in ICU. Nothing happened. Get it into your thick heads the Lurgy is gone.

valefan16 22nd Jun 2020 09:43


Originally Posted by ericsson16 (Post 10817501)
I think we gather by now your stance on this,so here is mine.The virus has blown itself out. Over 3 weeks have passed since the 2nd spike brigade were telling us all about the packed beaches in England South coast would have us all back in ICU. Nothing happened. Get it into your thick heads the Lurgy is gone.

Chances of getting it out doors are slim, it may well be blowing over, certainly in the places past the "peak", there is suggestions from Italy its weakening so hopefully that is the case but guess we wont know until Latin America has got through it.

IF you don't have underlying conditions and are generally fit the risks are nominal but its down to using common sense, ultimately if I get it I guarantee the chances are it will be from work rather than going to the beach with my kids or a taverna in Kos. If I get to go to Kos on July 20th I will happily go and take my kids (they have more chance of drowning on holiday than dying of Covid statistically) and we have taught them from the start despite their young age to respect other people and keep their distance.

I do understand some people will be more concerned but its down to personal choice, mine is I will try and live life with Covid but be as cautious and respectable as I can whilst doing so. If this goes on for years we can't all just give up living and locking ourselves away can we?

OzzyOzBorn 22nd Jun 2020 12:50

It does seem to be time to move away from the 'force-of-law' approach to one driven by individuals' sense of self-preservation. There is no longer a need to lock people down by threat of a fine if they are seen out in public. At the outset we knew little about C-19, but now we know a great deal. We know that there are specific groups who are highly vulnerable to it, and a large majority of others for whom it is either a minor short-term inconvenience or even passes completely unnoticed.

Those over 80 years of age and individuals with serious co-morbidities are the groups who must exercise extreme caution. But we know who these people are. Most vulnerable are those in the care home system, those in hospitals, and impaired elderly who require frequent assistance from home-helps to function. We must prioritise keeping their environments as secure and safe as possible. Beyond these lie many independent individuals who are nevertheless in the vulnerable groups. But these folks know who they are and are aware of their own risk. They don't need to be threatened with fines and police visits: simply provide them with high quality information on the prevailing risk level in their area and allow them to exercise their own good judgment. Maintain a voluntary registry of those within the vulnerable categories who have no means of obtaining their own shopping / prescriptions etc., and make sure assistance is maintained for them. We know that this crisis has brought out the best in many volunteers who have been more than pleased to help such people.

Beyond these groups, the rest of society. It is time to let them go about their lives and get back to earning a living / education / socialising. Maintain strict numerical limits and safety precautions on visits to hospitals, hospices and care homes. But free-up visits to restaurants, pubs, public spaces. And open up travel both domestically and between countries with comparatively low levels of transmission risk. Sensible measures such as handwashing stations and mask use aboard public transport stay in place until after a successful vaccination programme or the eradication of C-19. Social distancing must be phased out, as the point comes beyond which prohibiting natural human interaction becomes more harmful than the very modest increase in C-19 infection risk. We must keep in mind too the enormous damage which the C-19 'climate of fear' has done to many within our society. Depression, suicides, domestic abuse. Not seeking treatment or medical advice for other very serious conditions. Poverty issues driven by rising debts, loss of income and the extraordinary stress deriving from this.

It is arguably selfish for a small number of people who are entirely free to choose to self-isolate at their own discretion, to insist that the rest of society must halt their lives and see their careers ended to assuage fear in a few. We must not become a nation of cowering whipped dogs, afraid to venture from our safe space for ever more. I am personally aware of two generally healthy people who have been so terrified by all this that it will be difficult to persuade them to leave their homes ever again. Some contributors on this thread may themselves be familiar with this mindset.

Life isn't risk-free. But it never has been. And if we insist on waiting till the day 100% safety is guaranteed we will all die within our own four walls. Probably alone in many cases. We've all done our bit to help society weather the high-risk period of the first C-19 surge. We remain keen to help those in groups who are vulnerable. But the time has come to move forward. Kids must be allowed to be kids again and to physically interact with their peers. We must not teach them that holding hands with their friends will send them to an early grave. We must not tell them that they can only make new friends by yelling at them from a distance of not less than six feet away. This is quite mad and risks seeding damaging phobias which can persist into adulthood. Students and those of working age must be allowed to return to their studies and careers without further impairment. Not to do this brings enormous medical and societal challenges of a different kind.

And, for mental health, it is time to legalise having fun again. Take a holiday (if you can still afford it). Eat out. Meet new friends. Experience new places. FLY ON PLANES!!! And remember how to enjoy life again. And bear in mind as you do so that you are helping to enable thousands of travel and hospitality workers to provide for their families once again. That's healthy!

On a personal note, I did dummy bookings on all sixteen of my remaining flight sectors last night. Eight still look good to go. The other eight look like goners ... I shall await the official bad news from the airlines concerned in due course. The main reason I want early confirmation is so I can book replacement trips over the blocked-off dates. I've got a stash of vouchers to redeploy! Yes, I'm taking some measured risk by travelling. "Reassuring" ads from airports showing rows of taped-off seating and extremely long 'social distanced' security lanes isn't good news for my dodgy knee. But I'm keen to give it a go anyway. Locking oneself away indefinitely isn't healthy for sure!

If you are professionals in gainful employment - as many on here are - get yourselves a good holiday booked once again! Something positive to look forward to. Break out from the cycle of fear.

FFMAN 22nd Jun 2020 13:46

Well said Ozzy!
It's time all the prophets of doom were put back in their cages.
Life must go on. There is risk in all aspects of living, always has been and always will be.
There are clearly two camps in society on this issue: 1) those that know the risks and are capable of managing those risks and deciding what an appropriate level of risk is for their circumstances and 2) those that have been paralyzed by fear by a lame media who have not held the government to account (how about 'show us the science that led the UK to - almost uniquely - choose to impose a 2m rule'). If these people want to lock themselves away with their face masks and wipes, fine, that's their choice but to expect everyone else to do so is pure selfishness.
The way governments have reacted to all of this will cause more deaths in the long term than direct virus deaths. 10s of millions of people around the world will be plunged back in to poverty, many of them in to destitution. It's time to get economic activity back in the cross hairs.
Fear and the resultant uncertainty are the real enemies now.

helipixman 22nd Jun 2020 13:49


Originally Posted by LTNman (Post 10817382)
For starters the great British holidaymaker will have no control over social distancing on the aircraft. They will have no control if the aircraft is parked on a remote stand and only 2 buses turn up to transport 200 passengers to the terminal. They will have no control of how many flights share their baggage belts. All the time they will be mixing with a variety of different people at close quarters.

Once at the holiday resort they will be in holiday mode where the mindset will be that they have escaped the virus. Lifts will be shared and the people of many nations will freely mix in the evenings in bars and restaurants. Then it is back to home with a queue at check-in where due to terminal constraints social distancing is not possible, back on the bus to the aircraft, back sitting in a metal tube for 2 hours, back to the baggage belt.

What could possibly go wrong. The question is what is more risky, the holiday or the previous or following week?

I totally agree with LTNman. There are so many variables you will not be in control of on an aircraft and at airports. Example if someone walked through at Alicante without any checks at all, who knows how much control you will have when eating/drinking at your resort. What if they, like the airport do not do any checks or do not clean properly anything you touch could be infected. I just do not get the mentality of some people who are so desperate to go on holiday knowing the risk is there and putting themselves and their family at risk.

And for FFMan yes there are risks in all aspects of life, but we do not have to accept them or put ourselves in harms way. If risks are acceptable maybe we should go on holiday to a war torn country !!! But we dont do we, why Oh yes the risk of getting killed ? COVID is a silent and unseen killer that could be right next to you at any time ?

valefan16 22nd Jun 2020 14:15


Originally Posted by helipixman (Post 10817696)
I totally agree with LTNman. There are so many variables you will not be in control of on an aircraft and at airports. Example if someone walked through at Alicante without any checks at all, who knows how much control you will have when eating/drinking at your resort. What if they, like the airport do not do any checks or do not clean properly anything you touch could be infected. I just do not get the mentality of some people who are so desperate to go on holiday knowing the risk is there and putting themselves and their family at risk.

And for FFMan yes there are risks in all aspects of life, but we do not have to accept them or put ourselves in harms way. If risks are acceptable maybe we should go on holiday to a war torn country !!! But we dont do we, why Oh yes the risk of getting killed ? COVID is a silent and unseen killer that could be right next to you at any time ?

The chance of death to most of us via Covid is so small if your not very old or in the vulnerable categories.

School age kids 1 in 3.5 Million have caught and died from Covid in the UK for example.

The average female 16-45 with no underlying conditions 1 in 350,000 according to a study last week. Many more things can get and kill you before Covid 19 and that is where its about managing the risk to your personal circumstance. If your fit and healthy you should be able to get back to living and re-building the economy whilst taking sensible precautions to limit the spread where possible, bearing in mind the infections are now far down on the peak.

Playamar2 22nd Jun 2020 14:40

Is the UK so much better than anywhere else with comments like 'not cleaning anything properly and anything you touch could be infected' you can apply that to your local supermarket, restaurant or bar. The UK is not so great for hygiene standards or infected cases and deaths would be lower. You need to come down of your high horse helipixman..

FFMAN 22nd Jun 2020 15:08


Originally Posted by helipixman (Post 10817696)
,
Oh yes the risk of getting killed ? COVID is a silent and unseen killer that could be right next to you at any time ?

In all seriousness helipixman if you really think that, I feel sorry for you and you should consider seeking pyschiatric help. Not that I blame you for holding those views, I blame the media for constantly bigging up bad news and downplaying good news. Despite the numbers in Europe going down quite dramatically, this is almost overlooked, the focus is now on massive increases in Latin America and willing on 'second waves' so they can peddle their diatribe of fear.
I understand 3 school age children have sadly died of cv19 in the UK during the whole episode - that is undeniably sad, but for context you have to compare it to the 50 or so that die of things like accidents every year. That barely ever gets mentioned in the media. 'Child dies after falling off bike - calls for all bikes to be banned' That is literally the level of nonsense some people would tolerate now.
All this goes to prove to would be tyrants the world over, just how easy it is to subjugate a population with fear: the old adage 'there is an invisible enemy that wants to do you harm - just do exactly what we tell you to and we will protect you' works a treat in all autocratic states.

helipixman 22nd Jun 2020 15:15


Originally Posted by FFMAN (Post 10817764)
In all seriousness helipixman if you really think that, I feel sorry for you and you should consider seeking pyschiatric help.

You do not need to feel sorry for me and I do not need psychaitric help ! Especially from someone unqualified like you. I am sensible enough to wait it out and travel next year if all is OK. Even my friends in Greece have told me to wait it out to be SAFE ! You can take all the risks you wish, I will not because I love my family and that is FINAL.

Playamar2... I am not on a high horse, I travel abroad very often and have seen some horrific practices abroad with hygiene, they will not change. I will not risk it. Too many people on here telling us its OK to go abroad, well you go and hell mend you if you catch something and enjoy not being able to do much once there.

Expressflight 22nd Jun 2020 15:50

helipixman

While I agree with some of your points, you really do display an element of paranoia regarding the risks that the average person faces from Covid-19. Do you feel the same way regarding influenza I wonder. OK, there is a annual vaccine but if I recall correctly a couple of winters ago the flu vaccine was somewhat ineffective as that winter's strain had mutated from that anticipated and for which the vaccine had been formulated.

I'm a healthy 71 year old who needs to take reasonable care against catching Covid-19 so I shall not fly this year but I have not isolated myself from the rest of humanity for the past 3 months as I think that would be worse for my health, both physical and mental. I just take reasonable precautions and try to keep my situation in perspective while maintaining an acceptable quality of life within the guidelines. Those of my generation who have chosen to live a totally sheltered life due to extreme nervousness (and I know a number who have not set foot out of their homes) have my understanding and sympathy but they can do so without impacting on the ability of others to earn a living and contribute to rebuilding the economy. If extreme poverty, both monetary and socially, is allowed to result for some and for others a deterioration in their health that will result in shortening their lives, is that an acceptable price to pay for total 'safety'? I don't think so and the time has come, with a better understanding of the nature of the beast, to relax the restrictions so that the economy can begin to recover and that includes the right for people to travel for leisure if they wish without them being labelled pariahs. I live in a coastal town that lives or dies by its ability to attract tourist from other parts of the UK and that ability must be restored with some urgency if its economy is to be rescued.

helipixman 22nd Jun 2020 16:04


Originally Posted by Expressflight (Post 10817802)
helipixman

While I agree with some of your points, you really do display an element of paranoia regarding the risks that the average person faces from Covid-19. Do you feel the same way regarding influenza I wonder. OK, there is a annual vaccine but if I recall correctly a couple of winters ago the flu vaccine was somewhat ineffective as that winter's strain had mutated from that anticipated and for which the vaccine had been formulated.

I'm a healthy 71 year old who needs to take reasonable care against catching Covid-19 so I shall not fly this year

Yes you do agree with me because you are not willing to fly and I guess you are doing that for your own safety - great ! Which is basically what this forum is about ! I am at risk with diabetes and asthma, I get the flu vaccine but that aside it is MY decision to safeguard my family, they all agree with that. There are lots of other thing we do, we are not prisoners in our home but some things are a risk too far !

Yeehaw22 22nd Jun 2020 16:27

I do find it odd the amount of people posting on here about how they wont fly, why are people flying etc etc. Which is fine, everyone has a choice and their own views. But why keep posting it on an aviation based forum where real people who actually work in the industry are all crapping themselves about losing their jobs.

I have no interest in riding a horse, I don't then join and post on an equine forum about how it's dangerous to ride a horse!

OzzyOzBorn 22nd Jun 2020 16:32


I am at risk with diabetes and asthma, I get the flu vaccine but that aside it is MY decision to safeguard my family, they all agree with that.
Nobody here is arguing for you to be stripped of your right to choose on this. But there are others at negligible risk out there for whom personal choice has been removed at devastating cost. It is time to liberate them to earn a living again and enjoy their lives. The good health and general best interests of their dependents may depend on bringing in an income.

Expressflight 22nd Jun 2020 17:00


Originally Posted by Yeehaw22 (Post 10817828)
I do find it odd the amount of people posting on here about how they wont fly, why are people flying etc etc. Which is fine, everyone has a choice and their own views. But why keep posting it on an aviation based forum where real people who actually work in the industry are all crapping themselves about losing their jobs. I have no interest in riding a horse, I don't then join and post on an equine forum about how it's dangerous to ride a horse!

... and I "find it odd" that you think being an aviation industry person should prevent someone giving an honest personal opinion on this thread. Despite being retired myself I have a family member, as well as a number of friends, who work in the industry and open discussion of the ins and outs of opening up international travel at this time is important. It will be of no benefit to anyone if a one-eyed approach results in a second peak of infection. All I'm saying is that at my age I am not happy that my risk of catching the virus, with possibly serious consequences, is low enough to encourage me to take a foreign holiday and if any of my peers asked me I would give them the same advice. For those younger than me I would say go ahead if it's important to your happiness to do so.

I assume you would also criticise those aviation professionals who drew attention to the shortcomings of the certification of the B738MAX as in doing so they were harming the economics of the industry.

LTNman 22nd Jun 2020 17:11


Originally Posted by ericsson16 (Post 10817501)
I think we gather by now your stance on this,so here is mine.The virus has blown itself out. Over 3 weeks have passed since the 2nd spike brigade were telling us all about the packed beaches in England South coast would have us all back in ICU. Nothing happened. Get it into your thick heads the Lurgy is gone.

Ha Ha with that inspirational last sentence you make Trump sound intelligent. In the U.K. it hasn’t gone it is dropping with the R number still just below 1. Worldwide it is still growing.

https://i.imgur.com/OJ0rmox.jpg

Yeehaw22 22nd Jun 2020 17:16


Originally Posted by Expressflight (Post 10817855)
... and I "find it odd" that you think being an aviation industry person should prevent someone giving an honest personal opinion on this thread. Despite being retired myself I have a family member, as well as a number of friends, who work in the industry and open discussion of the ins and outs of opening up international travel at this time is important. It will be of no benefit to anyone if a one-eyed approach results in a second peak of infection. I assume you would also criticise those aviation professionals who drew attention to the shortcomings of the certification of the B738MAX as in doing so they were harming the economics of the industry.

No not at all, and that's a totally different kettle of fish entirely and I don't really understand the relevance of the max In this discussion.

I agree that a balanced view is required, however that isn't happening its all negativity, primarily from people who have no real ties to the industry. We all know its a balancing act of getting the industry moving and preventing another mass outbreak. Those who cant/don't want to fly then fine thats their choice. But at present those who are able and willing to fly dont have that same choice at present.


All times are GMT. The time now is 14:46.


Copyright © 2018 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.