Would you like Smoking or Non-Smoking ?

[UN-Coordinated]

I don't know if there is another thread on this issue, but do any airlines still offer a Smoking option ?? And would anyone like to see a return to the Smoking / No-Smoking option ?

[ExXB]

Only if the smokers have to do it outside ... Filthy habit, killing yourself and us too.

[Hartington]

I hope there are no airlines offering smoking. Unless you're right at the front and smoking is right at the back you still get the smell.

[PAXboy]

What the others posters are trying to say is: No. The fire hazard is too great.

[Anansis]

A couple of years ago a friend of mine (who's father is an SQ captain) told me that Air India allow smoking on some of their flights (he previously flew for them). Is this still the case?

Judging by the steady sales of smokeless cigarettes that I've witnessed on many a Ryanair flight, I'd say that there is probably a significant market for smoking sections on certain flights (I must stress that I write this as a non smoker...).

[Ancient Observer]

As a smoker - trying to reform - I would hate flights to allow smoking. Horrible habit, and to smoke in a tiny tube up in the sky, where the beancounters do not allow for full air-changing, would be awful.

[Load Toad]

I'm now officially a 'non smoker who occasionally smokes especially when he's on the lash', I don't think smoking has any place on a 'plane & there is no need for it. If you can't wait a few hours for a ciggy then you really aren't trying very hard. And it stinks, and it's a fire hazard and it's just one more thing to pish y' off inside a 'plane. Now - if we can shut up crying kids and 2@'s that play video games n such loudly...

[UN-Coordinated]

Was it ever a real fire hazard ? Or was it stopped because of the anti-social stigma or pasive health risk to cabin crew and other passengers. Does anyone remember which airline was the first to introduce an all Non-Smoking flight and which of the major airlines was the last to convert ?

[TightSlot]

I've always thought that the most sadistic aspect of the smoking ban was not on the aircraft - where I can quite see that the effects on non-smokers are quite unacceptable and that a ban is justified - but at airports.

[robtheblade]

I used to regularly take the Garuda flight from Gatwick to Bali. The last ten rows were for smokers who always seemed a jolly lot enjoying a cig and a beer. As a (reformed) non smoker I didn’t have a problem with the smoke which just seemed to disappear out the back of the plane.

I also agree with Tightslot, just what is the reason for not having a smoking area away from the non smokers?

[Shack37]

I also agree with Tightslot, just what is the reason for not having a smoking area away from the non smokers?


CdG has one in Terminal 2E departures (possibly others too), a kind of glass box where the inmates can be observed sinning.

I heard one of the reasons for banning smoking on aircraft was due to the build up of nicotine/tar gloop which eventually added quite a lot of extra weight to the airframe. Could be a total rumour of course.

[MerchantVenturer]

Does anyone remember which airline was the first to introduce an all Non-Smoking flight and which of the major airlines was the last to convert ?


Paramount Airways (QJ/PAT) and not to be confused with the Indian airline of the same name, which operated MD 83s and later B 737s from 1987 for about three years from its operational base at Bristol Airport and from other UK airports, did not permit smoking on board during the life of the airline.

Furthermore, they would not sell tobacco products on board in their duty free sales.

It was said at the time that they were the first British airline to operate a complete no-smoking ban on board.

I travelled with them several times and thought them an excellent little airline, and not just because they banned smoking on board.

The airline company became insolvent but was only wound up after protracted financial legal action.

[WHBM]

I also agree with Tightslot, just what is the reason for not having a smoking area away from the non smokers?
Normally legislation. Much of this has never envisaged a building like an airport where people cannot step outside in a minute, so it's not allowed at all.

I am convinced that the upsurge in violent pax behaviour that gets into the press regularl is principally down to the banning of smoking, and is carried out by those who have been deprived of their fix for many hours. Anyone know if there is any analysis of how many "air-ragers" are smokers ?

[Load Toad]

Most if not all of them are drunk. I'd suggest not having had a cigarette was right at the bottom of the list of reasons the inconsiderate 2@'s cause trouble. And if smoking did calm people down it'd be far better to give them a spliff than nicotine.

[Hotel Tango]

The ban never bothered me because, strangely enough, in the long gone days when I was a smoker I never felt the urge to smoke when flying. To answer the OP's question: No, I would not like to see a smoking section re-introduced.

Quite a number of European airports I travel through provide designated smoking rooms. I think I have even seen them in the States (MSP being one as I recall).

[Exascot]

I used to fly with a captain who smoked a pipe. IMC on the flight deck :eek: He didn't mind if I excused myself. I smoke a few small cigars a day (outside) but I would not want to sit on an aircraft with people smoking around me. At ATH there is an emergency smoking area as soon as you get off the aircraft even before baggage collection. It is very popular with the locals! Oddly enough I can fly long haul and I am not desperate for the deadly weed. Now, no drinking, that is a completely different matter :(

[WHBM]

Most if not all of them are drunk.
Oh yes. But have they downed it and downed it because they have no cigarettes ? I just feel it was too much of a coincidence that the rate went up when smoking was banned.

[ZFT]

WHBM,

Quote:
Originally Posted by robtheblade http://images.ibsrv.net/ibsrv/res/src:www.pprune.org/get/images/buttons/viewpost.gif (http://www.pprune.org/passengers-slf-self-loading-freight/464563-would-you-like-smoking-non-smoking.html#post6718359)
I also agree with Tightslot, just what is the reason for not having a smoking area away from the non smokers?

Normally legislation. Much of this has never envisaged a building like an airport where people cannot step outside in a minute, so it's not allowed at all.Airports such as Singapore show what a little planning can achieve. Harry's bar is a perfect example of an outside smoking area.

[Exascot]

Harry's bar is a perfect example of an outside smoking area.

And, then the is the Irish bar at DXB where the no smoking area is outside :ok:

[Rush2112]

I took a Swissair economy class flight in Dec 1997 from either Geneva or Zurich (I don't recall which and it was dark when the flight from LHR got there!) to Singapore and didn't realise it was a smoker. I was in the last row of the non-smoking section and it was the most unpleasant flight I have ever had. 12 hours later I came out like a kipper!

[UN-Coordinated]

I would imagine there must be some small carriers in places like China they allow smoking. I mention China only because I know smoking there is much more widespread than in many other countries. Was there ever any real safety issue to smoking on board, afterall most of the components are made of fire resistant materials. Does any one know of any instances where a fire in the cabin / loos was caused by a disgarded fag end ?

[Load Toad]

Oh yes. But have they downed it and downed it because they have no cigarettes ? I just feel it was too much of a coincidence that the rate went up when smoking was banned.

Where is the source that air rage went up when smoking on 'planes was banned & what other factors may have contributed to increasing 'air rage' (if indeed there has been a % increase)?


(And in my experience (which is considerable) a smoker drinks more when smoking rather than when not).

[Load Toad]

No, I have never seen any carrier however small in China allow smoking on a 'plane.

[Load Toad]

There was a South African 747 that crashed following an inflight fire killing about 150 I think. One suspected cause was a fire started by a cigarette butt. Need to look it up.

[ExXB]

When the Canadians banned it years ago it was to ensure a smoke-free environment to all of the crew. Canadian legislation required this for all workers.

With regards to the weight of nicotine etc, I've heard the opposite - that the minute smoke trails around rivets and bulkheads were the best way to detect a very slow leak. However that is not a good reason to allow it.

In the last few years of 'smoking on aircraft' I was often assigned a seat in a smoking row - (flying standby) and no-smoking seats no longer available. Often, during the flight some (expletive deleted) smoker who had a non-smoking seat, would come back and sit and smoke next to me. Rarely would they ask if was OK. Bar-Stewards!

[Hotel Tango]

Load Toad, what ignited SAA B747 fire was never determined, however, it was determined that it started in the cargo hold. Nothing to do with a cigarette.

[piton]

In 1983 an Air Canada DC9 was a total loss after a discarded cigarette caused an on board fire, 23 people died when the aircraft was not evacuated quickly on landing - the fire was thought to have been dealt with.

To my knowledge it was the aftermath of this accident that was the start of stricter no smoking rules.

Air Canada Flight 797 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Air_Canada_Flight_797)

[JessA2]

am an ex smoker now, but even when I was I used to hate sitting in the smoking bit on the plane, it was like I didn't need to light up as I just breathed in !, came off the plane feeling like I'd been on 40 a day !!

being stuck 36 thousand feet up in the air with no hunky fire men dont sound like a good idea :*

jess :)))))

[WHBM]

There was a South African 747 that crashed following an inflight fire killing about 150 I think.
That was a 747 Combi with main deck cargo and reduced passenger accommodation, and the fire broke out in this main deck cargo hold. There was R/T describing this before the aicraft was lost. It was identified that the fireproofing for the main deck cargo was not of the same resistance as that installed in the underfloor holds. SAA took the Combis out of service immediately afterwards.