ryanair smokers banned!!??

[aidanf]

This has possibly been covered here before, but here goes anyway! In a recent news article it was claimed that Ryanair have 'banned for life' a number of passengers who were caught smoking on their flights. Now, first thing I should state is that this isn't a crack at Ryanair or a comment on recent threads which spoke about those puffing at the pointy end. My query relates to their claim that the primary concern here is for 'safety' and those that were caught put everyone else in danger. I was always under the impression that smoking was banned for health reasons and not flight safety concerns - am I right?

[leander]

Flight safety & maintenance costs.

[Engine overtemp]

Smokers have been forced "underground" and now smoke in the toilets.
There have been occasions when these smokers have tried to cover up their antics by firstly tampering with the toilet smoke detectors, and then placing their cigarette stubs in the waste paper bin.

[Jarvy]

Persons caught smoking on any flight should be banned from all airlines!!!!

[davethelimey]

Jarvy - nice kneejerk reaction mate. You honestly think that there should be a blacklist system whereby any person caught smoking, on any airline, should be banned from flying with anyone for the rest of their lives? What about Air France's plans to introduce a smoking section in their long-haul routes in future?

[yintsinmerite]

Smoking is a disgusting addiction from which people should be dissuaded at every opportunity.

About 4 years ago, I went from SaoPaulo to Paris on Air France and they had a smoking section at the back of economy (right next to the loo's). Have they banned that now ??

[Coconuts]

Does that mean there going to ban the FR pilots that smoke too, from what I've ready there's a few who are quite adept at it???

Would have thought that would be far more of a safety risk especially in such small confines surrounded by all that instrumentation, not to say unpleasant for their fellow flight crew member & unhealthy for professionals whose jobs & future hang largely on the outcomes of their regular medicals. You can't exactly open the window mid flight to dispel the smoke, can you?

What's good for the goose should be good for the gander, I say! :}

Coco

[Jarvy]

Yes I do, not just for smoking either! It would be someone living in the USA accusing me of a knee-jerk reaction!!!!!

[av8boy]

There have been occasions when these smokers have tried to cover up their antics by firstly tampering with the toilet smoke detectors, and then placing their cigarette stubs in the waste paper bin.

Re lav fires... NTSB reports generated by a simple search go back to 1973 when a pax in an AAL B707 enroute from DC to Dallas started a lav fire by discarding a cigarette in the trash. Aircraft landed in Memphis. Here are some selections from the FAA incident database and the NTSB. The list is by no means exhaustive (and mignt not even be representative). Just some examples...

May 2002. American Airlines B757. During descent into (LAS), passenger was smoking in right hand aft lavatory. To hide the fact that he was smoking he ignited the air freshener in the right hand aft lavatory. The fire was extinguished by one the flight attendants. An emergency was declared by the captain. The aircraft landed without further incident. Individual was detained by local police who turned him over to the FBI.

July 1998. Comair Challenger. Smoke in cabin. Returned. Evacuated on runway. Put out fire in lavatory from careless smoker.

May 1998. Alaska Airlines DC9. Unscheduled landing due to unknown source of smoke odor from forward cabin. After uneventful landing, determined to be unidentified passenger smoking in lavatory.

October 1995. UAL B757: passenger Lewis Klee was smoking in the aft lavatory and started a smoldering fire in the waste bin. A F/A put the fire out with a pot of coffee. The passenger was beligerent and the captain recommended to the MWAA IAD police that he not continue on flight 1464 to LGA. On arrival, MWAA IAD police handcuffed passenger Klee and took him into custody.

March 1994. US Airways B757. Passenger smoked in lavatory. Threw cigarette into trash. Started a fire. Attendants put fire out. Police met plane.

January 1994. America West 737. Lav fire started by smoldering cigarette in trash.

July 1993. Reno Air MD80. Passenger smoking in lavatory. Smoke detector activated. Fire in trash container. Fire extinguished by crew.

March 1993. Trans States ATR42. Passenger smoked cigarette in lavatory. Small fire in trash bag. Extinguished by water. Police met passenger.

[Bronx]

Kinda funny how someone starts a thread with an intelligent question and you get the anti-smoking lobby leaping in at great speed with stuff that don't answer the question.
Everyone knows smokers damage their health and probably the health of people around them, and it's anti-social to do it in confined areas, and it increases maintenance costs on airplanes but that don't mean it's a flight safety consideration. I don't believe for a second it is and the manufacturers don't or they wouldn't fit ashtrays. How many aviation bodies worldwide make it expressly against the law to smoke in flight?

[av8boy]

Kinda funny how someone starts a thread with an intelligent question and you get the anti-smoking lobby leaping in at great speed with stuff that don't answer the question.
Personally, I'm a card-carrying member of the anti-lav-fire-induced-death lobby. Seemed reasonable at the time...

[Coconuts]

I asked a similar question like this years ago & Raw Data was quite an authority on it. Saying that smoking is banned for safety reasons is hard to back up since smoking was allowed for years on board, & as far as I can remember no interior of a plane ever went up in smoke because of it.

I'd imagine even though airlines emphasis the safety aspect, the real reasons are for health grounds & cost. Maintaining the cleanliness of the air, aircraft interior & filter systems all costs money. The fresher the air supply, the more fuel hence money is needed to maintain it so banning smoking cuts down on costs IMHO, not to mention for the comfort of non smoking pax, smoke does not respect invisible boundaries.

Coco

[Jarvy]

To be serious the airlines have found it extends the time between interior refits. Also from a legal point if an airline allows smoking could cabin crew sue if they develope any smoking related illness from passive smoking?

[davethelimey]

That's some exhaustive research AV8. Want to write my dissertation?

One supposes cabin crew could sue for the effects of passive smoking, but then in a society where burglers can sue for twisted ankles on broken flagstones on someone else's property, anything's possible.

[aidanf]

twas I who posted this thing in the first instance and let me reinforce that this isn't a smoking is right or wrong thread (hasn't that been done to death?). It's simply that an article stated Ryanair were banning those that they found smoking on board for life and it was solely down to safety reasons. Yes, I agree that foolishly starting a fire in the lav is dangerous, but wouldn't they be better off just stating that they were banning people because they broke company policy on no passenger smoking on board? I understand that it is only policy after all, since not all countries or aviation authorities have placed a ban on in-flight smoking.

[davethelimey]

I agree. Clearly smoking on planes is not the pressing safety issue that Ryanair is suggesting it is - if it was, no-one would ever have been allowed to smoke on a plane, and it is only relatively recently that is has been banned. Ryanair is therefore not banning smoking for safety reasons and looks, again, slightly ridiculous for it.

[Crepello]

By extension then, smoking in the home isn't a pressing safety issue, otherwise that too would have been banned. Er... apart from the fact that it's the #1 cause of fatalities in house fires.

[davethelimey]

Crepello:

An interesting sideways step, except for:

a: smoking fatalities in the home tend to happen when there's only one person there. A fire on an aircraft will be noticed by everyone, not least the cabin crew.

b: homes are very combustible places, filled with things like wood and fabric that aren't fire resistant. Planes, on the other hand, are made of tougher stuff, and it would take more than a smouldering ciggy to set one off. Waste paper bins in toilets excepted.

[Crepello]

Dave:

a - True, but by the time it's noticed, the safety of the aircraft could be in jeopardy.

b - It doesn't matter how tough most of the plane is, you have to protect against the weakest link.

I'm not trying to pick a fight here, just disputing your assertion that smoking on planes isn't a pressing safety issue.

[Globaliser]

Plus, one might add, you can't simply lower yourself out of the aircraft to the ground on a rope of knotted bedsheets when you discover said fire. Not easily, anyway.

[Tony Flynn]

It's stressed and made utterly clear before takeoff that there is no smoking aboard the aircraft, anyone who ignores this rule will probably ignore any other rule they don't agree with. In banning people for life the airline is also banning some of the rude selfish anti-social people who make life difficult for other passengers and crew alike. I'm no fan of Ryanair but they are to be applauded for this stance.

[Paracab]

Tony Flynn,

Couldn't agree more, when you book the flight it is made clear that there is no smoking on board the aircraft, whatever the reasons for that rule are irrelevant, all you need to know is that is what Ryanair have decided.

In booking the flight you agree to those terms, and if you are unable to adhere to them due to lack of self-control then you don't fly. Simple.

[BEagle]

I am not a fan of Mo'L and deplore some of what he does. But of his airline's Ts&Cs I am in full support. "These are the rules. No exceptions". People have no excuse for not understanding such terms.

Anyway, smokers' life bans won't be for that long - their vile habit will kill them off sooner rather than later.........

[aidanf]

Tony Flynn, Paracab & BEagle - will ye put down yer righteous flags of anti-smoking just for a minute. I never claimed I agreed with smoking on board. My point was that Ryanair could have handled it better . SO AGAIN, I think Ryanair would have been better off if they simply stated the following

"Ryanair has a no-smoking policy on all flights (not giving the reason why) and as these people have broken this policy we have banned them for life"

Now, guys, tell me where this transgresses your points?

As it happens I am a smoker and on an 8 hour plus trip to Nairobi last year would have loved a fag, but I knew the rules and I didn't - we're not all irresponsible morons you know!! Mind you, seeing as it appears I wont be around for too long more I might as well start enjoying life to a higher degree "hello is that steve's strippers?"

[dicksynormous]

Whislt working as a skipper at ryr ( g reg)my address included the info that smoking in the loos was illegal and dangerous ( in addition to the general no smoking). When the aircraft is under way the law of the land is applied by the capt ( via the crew)under the air navigation order.

Logic dictates that the people that then insist on having a fag in the loo in complete disregard for reasonable requests should answer to the authorities on the gnd,( and kudos to stn coppers and ryr mangement they did). They were warned.

In addition to that i dont want some know all selfish pax with an addiction and personality problem to put me or anyone else at possible risk from dying in a fire, or fire induced crash,(The crews skills and training notwithstanding)just because they needed a fag.

Now sit back ,relax ,and enjoy the flight.

[Paracab]

aidanf,

I am in no way anti-smoking. While I personally choose not to smoke, I honestly couldn't give a toss if the rest of the planet does.

All I was trying to say is that if you are unable to follow the rules imposed by the Airline you choose to fly with, the rules that you were aware of when you booked cause it is in the small print (if you agree with the rules or not is irrelevant) then you don't fly.

Perhaps the life ban will deter others from doing the same as these people in the future.