Smoking in the cabin of commercial aircraft
 

I am a non-smoker, so this is purely out of curiousity!

Firstly, a lot of aircraft have facilities for smokers, such as ashtrays... but the flights are non-smoking.

Secondly, a lot of boarding cards still have a "smoking?" box (always marked "no").

Thirdly, despite it being understood that you may not smoke on airlines, there are signs *everywhere* advising that one may not smoke.

With all this in mind, I wondered, is it allowed for passengers to smoke in the cabin of aircraft, or are the prohibitions down to licensing rules, airline choice, or what?

I just wondered, as there seems to be a lot of left-overs from the days of flights where smoking was allowed... do any airlines allow smoking onboard, in any, however far-flung, corner of the world?

Crew also have to have somewhere to safely extinguish cigarettes in the event someone does start smoking. AFAIK that is why the Lavs still have "ashtrays" on the exterior wall. Some newer aircraft have replaced the traditional No Smoking sign with one saying "turn off electrical devices" or something to that effect..

in some countries . . . . . . .
 

Depends on what you mean by "western". I've been on Olympic inter-island flights ( usually ATR 42 or 72 ) when the F/D door has swung open and it was obvious that the flight crew were smoking. Many times.

Same at Athens airport : "no-smoking" signs are everywhere, but they are simply ignored ! Try to tell Police or Security - they just shrug their shoulders !

If you don't have any ashtrays, my understanding is that the a/c would need to go tech as like someone said previously, we need to have somewhere to extinguish any cigarettes unruly pax may decide to smoke.

As for the no smoking signs, they have to be there so as anyone that doesn't speak the language the PA's are made in cannot simply claim they didn't understand what was being said as the symbol used is universal so they airline can protect themselves by saying that they were indeed warned about it's no smoking policy. At least that's what we get told ;)

Do JAL still allow smoking? I used to know folks who routed via Tokyo to Oz simply because they couldn't face a 14hr nonsmoking flight!

We installed blanking plates on the armrest ashtrays immediately after the law came into effect as they would be used to deposit used chewing gum in otherwise - and that's a bugger to clean out.

The most effective way to dispose of an illegal cigarette onboard is to run it under the tap in the lav for a second and chuck it.

Or soak a paper handtowel and fold butt into it. ( This used to be a preferred method of secret smokers in the toilets - until they all got flushed out)

Despite the signs, I usually find someone smoking in the toilets about once every three months. And that's on short haul!

Makes my blood boil!

I have overhead Pax in lounge discussing sparking up on board whilst in their seats and when challenged coming over all innocent. They supposed that you could not be touched for it if you pleaded ignorance and "could get at least three drags before they stopped you".

Give 'em all the handcuff treatment say I.:sad:

no chance . . . . . . .
 

Would be interesting to know if they could even get that far. I'd doubt it ! If I saw anyone near me even open a packet of cigarettes and take one out, especially with a lighter in hand too, I'd be shouting loud and pressing the CC call button simultaneously.

Ignorance is simply NOT an acceptable excuse nowadays. To the best of my knowledge ALL pre-flight safety announcements include the message that "Smoking is not allowed anywhere on this aircraft".

Haha, they can try to light up but endangering the safety of an aircraft would be met with a pretty big punishment. Ignorance isn't a good enough excuse when there are lights above your head and PA's made. If pax choose to not listen then they will be punished by the courts and there plea of ignorance will fall on deaf ears (haha-get it? Made me laugh anyway). The police would escort them from the a/c and take them to the cells and they'd probably get a fairly hefty fine. If they really can't wait to have a cigarette and would rather take the risk, let them. The fag would be put out pretty quick by crew, they would then have to go thru all the police crap and waste a majority if not all of their holiday. Is it really worth the risk? Just get some patches ;)

follow the example of the pubs . . . . . . . !
 

Easy answer to this one . . . . . . . . just like all public buildings since 1 July 2007 . . . . . . .

"You'd like a smoke, Sir ? "

"Certainly, Sir, this way . . . . . . . . just step outside, here, Sir "

Smokers Unite!
 

I love the comments from the non or reformed smokers! A 14 hour flog without a drag is serious purgatory for a smoker, I promise.
I digress.
The ashtrays etc are a leftover from a more tolerant age, I've heard that seat design still incorporates them but not as 'ashtrays' per se but the more PC term 'receptacles', as any private buyer could require them, most likely as ash trays.

Incidentally Cornishflyer, for years I smoked on aircraft ranging from the Bristol Freighter and Hastings which run on Avgas, up to a 747 and its had no effect on the safety of the aircraft whatever. If those captains had been smokers banned from smoking it would have made for some very interesting trips. I remember one Hastings captain who smoked 'Counter Shag' in a pipe like a bucket, and when he fired that up you couldnt see past the panel - but we lived in more tolerant times then. (Plus you could open a window!)

As a non-smoker, changing the wotrd "tolerant" to "selfish" would be more like it. It was awful coming off a long haul flight with your head pounding from not being able to breath properly and having to change your clothes because they stank of other people's fags.

However, we had to be tolerant, otherwise we couldn't fly anywhere, and with the old booking systems, the non-smoking areas always filled up really quickly so if you had a connection or couldn't get to the airport really early, you had to suffer in the back with the smokers (as if the smoke knew it shouldn't go past the "no smoking" signs).

I know it isn't a danger to the a/c, indeed I too have flown with a few CPT's that had a crafty fag during a flight and I only do european flights-haha. However, that is how it would be perceived as a punishment by any airline that chose to take action as there is a chance it could obviously cause a fire in the cabin. For those of you that may now start thinking, "we used to be able to smoke and I didn't ever have a fire" etc etc, prevention is better than cure I'm sure you'll all agree ;)

nonsense . . . . . . ! !
 

Smoking CAN be a danger to your mode of transport ! Just look at this bus, after a passenger smoked (illegally) in a toilet . . . . . .

20 dead as smoker sets fire to bus - | MSN News UK - news & weather

Extrapolate that to a Boeing or Airbus in flight . . . . . . . . :ugh:

Or perhaps not.

Huh? Your post makes no sense PaperTiger. You think that trying to put out a fire would be better than preventing it in the first place? :confused: My "I'm sure you'll agree" was referring to that not any other part. Of course fire can be dangerous but smoking used to be allowed on a/c and although there may have been, I'm not aware of many major air accidents whereby a cigarette was the cause

Not so!

Look at this latest Associated Press story

HANNOVER, Germany (AP) — A bus fire that killed 20 people in northern Germany may have been caused by a spark from the undercarriage, prosecutors said Wednesday, discounting an initial theory that the blaze was started by a cigarette.

The Associated Press: German officials: spark may be cause of bus fire

The rumour that it was started by a cigarette smoker was started by the owners of the bus ( well they would wouldn't want to blame the bus itself would they )

However mud sticks- in a years time people will quote this story as a example of the dangers of cigarette smoking.

ps I disagree strongly with smoking in aircraft toilets by the way - just want to get the facts straight as they are...

Hmmm . . . . . interesting ! I'm still the most vehement anti-smoker in the UK, but I do agree that the facts should be correct !

So, I wonder if it was a Boeing bus then ? Or maybe an Airbus bus ! !