Smoking in cockpit......and journos exaggerations

[Lemain]

Clue, please

It is said that there is no fire without it

[AnthonyGA]

I'm not convinced that the term 'substance abuse' should be applied to nicotine. You could argue it both ways but there is a huge stigma associated with 'substance abuse' so probably best not to use the term.

Sometimes it applies, stigma or not.

There are people who smoke maybe one cigarette a week, or one a month, or only on rare social occasions when someone else is smoking, in order to fit in. They don't have a problem, and substance abuse hardly is a term one would apply to them. It's still a stupid idea to smoke, but at least they are not addicts.

But when someone is prepared to risk his job or safety or legal consequences just to indulge his addiction to tobacco, there is a problem, and substance abuse—complete with stigma—fully applies. A pilot who cannot stop smoking despite a prohibition on doing so is in exactly the same boat, addiction-wise, as a passenger who insists on sneaking a cigarette in the lavatory. They both have a substance abuse problem and they are both taking unnecessary risks. The passenger risks becoming the leading cause of in-flight cabin fire, and the pilot risks being impaired by hypoxia or incapacitated by a cardiovascular accident.

Spoken like a true nonpilot.

Spare me the irrelevant "non-pilot" comments, please. Pilots are not a separate species, and they have the same behavior, psychology, and physiology as every other human being, irrespective of what a few of them seem to believe. When they are lifetime smokers, their lungs look the same at autopsy as those of other tobacco addicts, and they have the same 50% risk of dying from a smoking-related disease that other smokers have. Addicts come from all walks of life, although they are always a minority of the population (current evidence indicates that a minority of people are predisposed to addiction, whereas the rest of the population is not). When the doctor sees the shadow on your x-ray, the fact that he's not a pilot isn't going to help you.

I could say, "spoken like a true smoker," because people with addictions tend to be extremely defensive about those addictions and extremely defensive whenever the topic comes up. That doesn't prevent them from suffering the consequences of the addictions, though.

[stepwilk]

Spare me the irrelevant "non-pilot" comments, please.

I could say, "spoken like a true smoker,"

I don't smoke. I'm just tired of coming to this supposed professional pilots forum to find it clogged by the moronic comments of game players, truck drivers, model builders, Top Gun wannabes and others who have nothing of relevance to contribute. Find yourself an appropriate forum of your own, or simply listen/read and don't bother us with your irrelevant opinions.

[Lemain]

A pilot who cannot stop smoking despite a prohibition on doing so is in exactly the same boat, addiction-wise, as a passenger who insists on sneaking a cigarette in the lavatory. They both have a substance abuse problem and they are both taking unnecessary risks.

Not a good simile as both cases involve only nicotine. You are equating nicotine with mood-altering and CNS-affecting substances (ethanol, opiates, cannabinols...). Do you think it's appropriate to use the same collective noun ("substance abusers") for smokers and those with, say, a drink problem, alike?

It seems that you have a real hate on for nicotine addicts. Don't forget that many of today's adults were addicted during a time when smoking was the usual behaviour, in society. Even today, the trade in nicotine is legal, marketed and advertised one way or another.

Tell me, what do you feel about pilots using substitute nicotine (electronic ciggies, inhalators, gums, patches,....) while in the cockpit in control of the aircraft? Should they be banned from using those replacements?

[J.O.]

Why is it that when someone doesn't like the message but can't refute it, they spend their time attacking the messenger instead.

[750XL]

It's not just the Middle Eastern Carriers...

I've seen Libyan, various Turkish Carriers, Tunisair and even Air Berlin have a smoke in the cockpit on a turnaround

[16024]

Addictive personalities will find something to get addicted to.
Coffee, sex, adrenaline, collecting Star Wars memorabilia...
I am with Stepwilk at post 44. If you have some agenda on this go and start your own forum.
I smoke and drink ( best to stop there...) but how about a sense of proportion.
The guy heading towards you on the road to the airport lighting up as he passes two feet away at a closing speed of 120? Less of a problem than a quick one on the long taxi in along the parallel? (Cigarette, stop sniggering at the back...).

[stepwilk]

Why is it that when someone doesn't like the message but can't refute it, they spend their time attacking the messenger instead.

I'm attacking the messenger (assuming that it's me to whom you're referring) simply because as a one-time working pilot, I come to PPRuNe to read and learn from--no, I rarely comment--current professional pilots, not amateurs and wannabes who have never been in a cockpit.

As I've said before, threads typically are valid and useful for about five pages, then the flight-sim players and frequent flyers swarm the thing, whatever the subject. The most recent nadir was when a poster on the AF447 thread asked whether an Airbus A330 "had a T-tail." Jeez...

[Tourist]

"and the pilot risks being impaired by hypoxia "

Not a smoker myself, but a quick google will show you that one of the very few advantages of smoking is that smokers have reduced suceptibility to hypoxia.
Something to do with the fact that their physiology is used to operating with reduced oxygen supplies. If there was to be a decompression actually while they were smoking, they would merely be reduced to our level.

[Lemain]

If there was to be a decompression actually while they were smoking, they would merely be reduced to our level.

My father smoked 80 untipped per day and owned and piloted an Airspeed Consul in the 1950s and 60s. He maintained that his heavy smoking gave him a much higher ceiling to non-smokers. The Consul wasn't fitted with oxygen (thank God as he chain-smoked during all phases of flight) and he said that he would often amuse himself flying to the absolute ceiling on long flights. I always though it was a daft thing to do but he lived to tell the tale so maybe there is something in it? The gasoline fumes were strong in the Consul -- very noticeable to a young child such as me -- I reckon now that the brass fuel primers were leaky. Nobody would allow that today, eh?

[brakedwell]

Similar primers in the Anson usually emitted the smell of petrol during the climb, on levelling off it was considered safe to smoke! I also remember being told by a doctor from the RAFIAM that heavy smokers had a greater tolerance to the lack of oxygen than non smokers.

[Elledan]

I'm pretty sure that taking up a sport like swimming would also give the increased oxygenation capacity, in addition to various other health benefits, without the yellow teeth, breath like an ashtray, wrinkled skin and increased chance on lung- and other cancers

[YorkshireTyke]

.....I have a few years on 727 but I can't see anything @ 3.29......

" Should Have Gone To Specsavers " !!!

actually - it's about 3.28.30 (bottom left hand corner )

[Tourist]

It isn't about increased oxygenation capacity, in fact just the opposite.
It is about building a tolerance to lack of oxygen!

[J.O.]

I'm attacking the messenger

Your explanation does nothing to change the fact that he has a valid point. Whether you like it or not is irrelevant, as is his position in life (pilot or not). Yes sometimes there is some pretty uninformed drivel on this forum, but AnthonyGA's posts don't qualify as uninformed. In fact, his are among the most sensible comments in this thread, IMHO.

[grounded27]

Tourist

"and the pilot risks being impaired by hypoxia "

Not a smoker myself, but a quick google will show you that one of the very few advantages of smoking is that smokers have reduced suceptibility to hypoxia.
Something to do with the fact that their physiology is used to operating with reduced oxygen supplies. If there was to be a decompression actually while they were smoking, they would merely be reduced to our level.

I find this hard to believe. Just from personal experience, living at sea level and having been a heavy smoker I flew into Quito Ecuador, doing my walk around I did not make it past the LMLG W/O having to take a rest on a wheel. Quit smoking and 6 months after quitting (doing flower runs the next year) I was climbing stairs like a champ.

It has been my understanding that a smoker is at 10k feet above a non smoker. I am sure one could adapt to be as functional as at sea level while smoking but this does not fly with me when you live at sea level then are deprived of oxygen for hours on end.

[grounded27]

Tourist

"and the pilot risks being impaired by hypoxia "

Not a smoker myself, but a quick google will show you that one of the very few advantages of smoking is that smokers have reduced suceptibility to hypoxia.
Something to do with the fact that their physiology is used to operating with reduced oxygen supplies. If there was to be a decompression actually while they were smoking, they would merely be reduced to our level.

I find this hard to believe. Just from personal experience, living at sea level and having been a heavy smoker I flew into Quito Ecuador, doing my walk around I did not make it past the LMLG W/O having to take a rest on a wheel. Quit smoking and 6 months after quitting (doing flower runs the next year) I was climbing stairs like a champ.

It has been my understanding that a smoker is at 10k feet above a non smoker. I am sure one could adapt to be as functional as at sea level while smoking but this does not fly with me when you live at sea level then are deprived of oxygen for hours on end.

[16024]

Grounded27, believe the science.

I have BP of 120/60 and have to run round the block before my medical or the issue of Bradycardia is raised, as my resting pulse rate is 50 or less.
And I'm a lazy bugger, in my 50's and a pack a day man. My wife shames me by running marathons while I prefer sitting in a pub.
Mind you, you can't smoke there any more...
Dad's 92, and is pretending to give up for the n'th time. Maybe it's all in the genes.

YouTube - ‪Smoke! Smoke! Smoke! That Cigarette---Tex Williams‬‏

[Basil]

and risk the health of their co-workers

Not the old secondary smoke stuff again!
The following would be in trouble:
Boy scouts.
Certain military personnel.
People in wood fired rooms.
Industrial workers.
etc. etc.

[grounded27]

Shell Mgt..

is someone with a flawed personality who doesn't deserve

Do not care if it is out of context, Your personality scares the **** out of me. Hope you never accomplish as much as Hitler did. Narrow minded and ready to condemn at the drop of a dime anyone who does not fit your standards.