SidT
20th Oct 2013, 12:21
Hi All,
*LONG POST WARNING* (sorry, I ramble on quite a bit)!
Firstly let me state a couple of things:
As a PPL I regard in-flight safety as paramount
Your aircraft, your rules!
I realise that CC do not make the rules but have to enforce them.
I hate rules that are applied inconsistently or are applied to the lowest common denomenator (sensible, resoponsible people get caught by rules designed for stupid people).
I appreciate that difficult PAX/SLF just make life terrible for CC!
I recently had the pleasure of flying to Crete on holiday with a well-known travel company that has recently taken possession of a shiny new Dreamliner and it was this aircraft we were allocated for our trip.... we were also invited (for a small additional fee) to upgrade to the "turn-left-on-entry" section.... which we did.
During the normal pre-flight announcements we were informed that our seats had charging points, but no heat-producing device could be charged using these devices. There was the usual no-smoking announcement, but no mention of the use of vapourisers (e-cigs).
During the cabin check walk-around, one of the CC told a passenger sitting next to me that he could not charge his e-cig (the look-alike version with an orange tip) from the USB as it was heat-producing and anyway he was not allowed to use his e-cig on board (which he hadn't attempted to anyway).
The passenger on the far side of him had plugged his iPod into the charger and this was not commented upon.
The "heat producing" rule....
I understand the potential safety risk from heat production (possible combustion/fire risk), however, the e-cig battery which was being charged is simply that. a rechargeable battery.... effectively the same as in any re-chargeable electrical device... all of which are capable of producing heat, combusting etc... so why was this device treated as a special case?
I have a feeling it was because it was related to an e-cig.
This inconsistetly applied rule is one of those that annoys me, sorry.
The "e-cig" rule....
When I enquired about the use of e-cigs, I was told that these were not allowed to be used on board because someone further back might see the "smoke" (actually vapour) and assume it was ok to smoke.
This one gets my goat a little (as an ex-smoker, user of vapourisers but follower of rules).
Telling someone that they cannot use one because someone else might think it ok to smoke a real cigarette is akin to me be told I can't drive my car (which is legal) because someone else might speed (which is illegal) or me being refused a drink because someone else might think its ok to get drunk.
I vapourise (use an e-cig) and would like to do so on board but accept that it is not allowed. Regardless of the reasons, I actually would not want to be the person next to someone using one that had to put up with a cloud of, albeit probably harmless, vapour drifting across me throughout the flight (this is what an irresponsible vaper might allow to happen).
and this brings me onto my final point....
I do not drink alcohol (except on vary rare occasions), but have frequently had to put up with intoxicated, verbally abusive (fortunately not physically abusive) passengers.... in the same way that vapouriser use is potentially anti-social (clouds of vapour), so is imbibing alcohol potentially anti-social (getting intoxicated, abusive, aggressive etc).
I believe that all acohol should be banned on board. I know that this will upset the "responsible drinkers" but why should they be given any more rights than the "responsible vaper" (one that doesn't allow clouds of vapour to drift across the person next to them)? :)
The trouble is that often those who get on their high-horse about someone using an e-cig are those that will happily get intoxicated on alcohol.
Thoughts welcome :)
Sid
*LONG POST WARNING* (sorry, I ramble on quite a bit)!
Firstly let me state a couple of things:
As a PPL I regard in-flight safety as paramount
Your aircraft, your rules!
I realise that CC do not make the rules but have to enforce them.
I hate rules that are applied inconsistently or are applied to the lowest common denomenator (sensible, resoponsible people get caught by rules designed for stupid people).
I appreciate that difficult PAX/SLF just make life terrible for CC!
I recently had the pleasure of flying to Crete on holiday with a well-known travel company that has recently taken possession of a shiny new Dreamliner and it was this aircraft we were allocated for our trip.... we were also invited (for a small additional fee) to upgrade to the "turn-left-on-entry" section.... which we did.
During the normal pre-flight announcements we were informed that our seats had charging points, but no heat-producing device could be charged using these devices. There was the usual no-smoking announcement, but no mention of the use of vapourisers (e-cigs).
During the cabin check walk-around, one of the CC told a passenger sitting next to me that he could not charge his e-cig (the look-alike version with an orange tip) from the USB as it was heat-producing and anyway he was not allowed to use his e-cig on board (which he hadn't attempted to anyway).
The passenger on the far side of him had plugged his iPod into the charger and this was not commented upon.
The "heat producing" rule....
I understand the potential safety risk from heat production (possible combustion/fire risk), however, the e-cig battery which was being charged is simply that. a rechargeable battery.... effectively the same as in any re-chargeable electrical device... all of which are capable of producing heat, combusting etc... so why was this device treated as a special case?
I have a feeling it was because it was related to an e-cig.
This inconsistetly applied rule is one of those that annoys me, sorry.
The "e-cig" rule....
When I enquired about the use of e-cigs, I was told that these were not allowed to be used on board because someone further back might see the "smoke" (actually vapour) and assume it was ok to smoke.
This one gets my goat a little (as an ex-smoker, user of vapourisers but follower of rules).
Telling someone that they cannot use one because someone else might think it ok to smoke a real cigarette is akin to me be told I can't drive my car (which is legal) because someone else might speed (which is illegal) or me being refused a drink because someone else might think its ok to get drunk.
I vapourise (use an e-cig) and would like to do so on board but accept that it is not allowed. Regardless of the reasons, I actually would not want to be the person next to someone using one that had to put up with a cloud of, albeit probably harmless, vapour drifting across me throughout the flight (this is what an irresponsible vaper might allow to happen).
and this brings me onto my final point....
I do not drink alcohol (except on vary rare occasions), but have frequently had to put up with intoxicated, verbally abusive (fortunately not physically abusive) passengers.... in the same way that vapouriser use is potentially anti-social (clouds of vapour), so is imbibing alcohol potentially anti-social (getting intoxicated, abusive, aggressive etc).
I believe that all acohol should be banned on board. I know that this will upset the "responsible drinkers" but why should they be given any more rights than the "responsible vaper" (one that doesn't allow clouds of vapour to drift across the person next to them)? :)
The trouble is that often those who get on their high-horse about someone using an e-cig are those that will happily get intoxicated on alcohol.
Thoughts welcome :)
Sid