EASA COVID-19 Aviation Health Safety Protocol
Join Date: Aug 2016
Location: Europe
Posts: 704
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If you divide an aircraft cabin into Sanitary Class in the front and COVID-19 Class in the back, that will likely boost bookings an awful lot. Just like the deliberate negative publicity which MOL has sought multiple times. As weird as it is, but people's curiosity to try whether something is as bad as it is alleged to be often outweighs many other considerations.
Look at his location. He's either a parody of a brexiteer or an actual brexiteer. Neither are likely to have anything relevant to bring to the discussion. Leave the scientific discussion of viral transmission to experts, not to a bunch of aviation people.
On that note, I found it interesting to see that IATA has decided there's no need to keep middle seats empty, despite scientific evidence to the contrary.
On that note, I found it interesting to see that IATA has decided there's no need to keep middle seats empty, despite scientific evidence to the contrary.
Instead a 14 day quarantine will catch those infected while flying.
but the quarantine rules are likely to tip the balance against it, especially for those unable to work from home (you would need to use an additional 14 days leave).
Join Date: Aug 2019
Location: Brexland
Posts: 214
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Look at his location. He's either a parody of a brexiteer or an actual brexiteer. Neither are likely to have anything relevant to bring to the discussion. Leave the scientific discussion of viral transmission to experts, not to a bunch of aviation people.
On that note, I found it interesting to see that IATA has decided there's no need to keep middle seats empty, despite scientific evidence to the contrary.
On that note, I found it interesting to see that IATA has decided there's no need to keep middle seats empty, despite scientific evidence to the contrary.
I made a long haul flight two days ago. I am now in a country that requires me to self quarantine for 14 days.
If only there was a way to keep the empty, stress free airports and empty flights with rows of spare seats without the damage to businesses and livelihoods that has already happened and of course will happen. It made travel much less stressful.
On a more serious note, everyone in the industry has my utmost sympathy and I hope you can get through this with your sanity and finances intact.
Sadly I think we all know it is going to be some time before air travel gets back to ‘normal’.
BV
If only there was a way to keep the empty, stress free airports and empty flights with rows of spare seats without the damage to businesses and livelihoods that has already happened and of course will happen. It made travel much less stressful.
On a more serious note, everyone in the industry has my utmost sympathy and I hope you can get through this with your sanity and finances intact.
Sadly I think we all know it is going to be some time before air travel gets back to ‘normal’.
BV
Retail space rental is, I think after car park fees, where they make their money.
CT
It’s guys such as yourself who have been at the forefront of my mind since this rubbish started. I can’t imagine how stressful it must be.
I truly hope it all works out in the long run.
BV
I truly hope it all works out in the long run.
BV
Join Date: Sep 2018
Location: Yorkshire
Posts: 257
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
PilotLZ's Post #11 is probably the most sensible one here: We need people back flying and any way of starting that, even though it may be very restrictive at first, has to be good. Yes, there are some who are eager to get back to travel but there are a lot of people who are still very fearful. Something, anything, that gets people back flying again to show others that it is safe has to be a good thing.
I have been circulating detailed information taken from TravelHealthPro, IATA and WHO that shows that "research has shown there is very little risk of any communicable disease being transmitted on board an aircraft" to everyone that I know that has shown any 'health' concerns about travelling by air. We all need to do everything that we can to ensure that people don't follow media garbage (or worse still 'social' media utter garbage) that is detrimental to them wanting to fly. It's like that irrational fear of flying when you point out to them that the journey to and from the airport is more risky than flying, well we need to be pointing out the same with this nasty 'thing'.
We need people back flying again and if a first few cautious steps help to allay fears of the regulators and then the travelling public, that is what is needed.
I have been circulating detailed information taken from TravelHealthPro, IATA and WHO that shows that "research has shown there is very little risk of any communicable disease being transmitted on board an aircraft" to everyone that I know that has shown any 'health' concerns about travelling by air. We all need to do everything that we can to ensure that people don't follow media garbage (or worse still 'social' media utter garbage) that is detrimental to them wanting to fly. It's like that irrational fear of flying when you point out to them that the journey to and from the airport is more risky than flying, well we need to be pointing out the same with this nasty 'thing'.
We need people back flying again and if a first few cautious steps help to allay fears of the regulators and then the travelling public, that is what is needed.
I have been circulating detailed information taken from TravelHealthPro, IATA and WHO that shows that "research has shown there is very little risk of any communicable disease being transmitted on board an aircraft" to everyone that I know that has shown any 'health' concerns about travelling by air. We all need to do everything that we can to ensure that people don't follow media garbage (or worse still 'social' media utter garbage) that is detrimental to them wanting to fly. It's like that irrational fear of flying when you point out to them that the journey to and from the airport is more risky than flying, well we need to be pointing out the same with this nasty 'thing'.
Join Date: Sep 2018
Location: Yorkshire
Posts: 257
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Sam, You are correct that getting to and from the airport will be a greater risk than flying, but then that has always been the case even in normal times. Don't worry about space in the airport. Have you been to an airport to catch a flight recently? I can assure you that there is no problem with space! And even as flights start to increase there is still a huge amount of space to use until airports become 'crowded'.
Pre-flight drinking sessions
Absolutely right - the pre-flight drinking frenzy invariably leads to a stampede for the toilets after take-off. It is not uncommon to have 15-20 people queuing at each end of the cabin - something which simply will not be acceptable going forward.
Join Date: May 2003
Location: uk
Posts: 713
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Look at his location. He's either a parody of a brexiteer or an actual brexiteer. Neither are likely to have anything relevant to bring to the discussion. Leave the scientific discussion of viral transmission to experts, not to a bunch of aviation people.
On that note, I found it interesting to see that IATA has decided there's no need to keep middle seats empty, despite scientific evidence to the contrary.
On that note, I found it interesting to see that IATA has decided there's no need to keep middle seats empty, despite scientific evidence to the contrary.
As far as experts go IATA and these are miles apart, well 10 feet actually.
All to do with airborne transmission.
Join Date: Sep 2018
Location: Yorkshire
Posts: 257
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
"Those" that you quote seem to be 'miles apart' from not just IATA.
Also WHO, who (excuse the pun!) state:
WHO also state:
So... regarding that 'SMART' summary:
Masks are no protection;
Refreshed air in aircraft cabins is better than many indoor environments.
Let's come back to IATA who state, using evidence from EASA,
So maybe "#Stay SMART" isn't really that 'smart' when applied to air travel?
Regarding
Quoting Gov.uk 'Guidance' on COVID-19:
... so, don't cough in a crowded space if you are sick. But if you follow the 'S' (Stay at home when sick) in that '#Stay SMART' guide, that takes care of all the rest.
We need people back flying. We do NOT need them scared off by '#Smart' type comments that, without being looked at in detail, give misguided ideas about air travel.
AIR TRAVEL IS THE SAFEST FORM OF PUBLIC TRANSPORT IN BOTH HEALTH AND PHYSICAL SAFETY TERMS. THAT NEEDS TO BE EMPHASISED TO PEOPLE.
Also WHO, who (excuse the pun!) state:
... there is no evidence that [masks] protect people who are not sick ...
The quality of aircraft cabin air is carefully controlled. Ventilation provides a total change of air 20-30 times per hour.
Masks are no protection;
Refreshed air in aircraft cabins is better than many indoor environments.
Let's come back to IATA who state, using evidence from EASA,
... "cabin/cockpit air quality is similar of better than what is observed in normal indoor environments" such as offices, schools and home dwellings.
Regarding
Originally Posted by chrisbl
All to do with airborne transmission.
... airborne transmission may be possible in specific circumstances and settings in which procedures or support treatments that generate aerosols are performed.
We need people back flying. We do NOT need them scared off by '#Smart' type comments that, without being looked at in detail, give misguided ideas about air travel.
AIR TRAVEL IS THE SAFEST FORM OF PUBLIC TRANSPORT IN BOTH HEALTH AND PHYSICAL SAFETY TERMS. THAT NEEDS TO BE EMPHASISED TO PEOPLE.
Here's one example of how opening up can be acheived: Iceland is about to completely eradicate the virus, they're at 1 - 3 active cases, testing has been massive, and every case gets tracked down. From June 15 anyone can travel there, no restriction on where you're coming from, nationality or residency. Icelandair is starting 9 weekly flights to at least CPH on that day. On arrival, you need one of the below:
* A certificate from an approved authority that you have antibodies
* Have a test taken upon arrival - with a negative result
* Go into quarantine for 14 days
If the test is positive, you go into quarantine, but I wonder what's going to happen to the people that were seated around you. I also wonder how early after infection a test will show positive. Probably best to bring ample supplies of sudoku and crosswords... Perhaps they should instead enforce a second test, say 3 days after arrival.
* A certificate from an approved authority that you have antibodies
* Have a test taken upon arrival - with a negative result
* Go into quarantine for 14 days
If the test is positive, you go into quarantine, but I wonder what's going to happen to the people that were seated around you. I also wonder how early after infection a test will show positive. Probably best to bring ample supplies of sudoku and crosswords... Perhaps they should instead enforce a second test, say 3 days after arrival.
Last edited by Gargleblaster; 3rd Jun 2020 at 08:34.
I also wonder how early after infection a test will show positive.
The antibody test done in a lab on blood from the elbow has less than 2% false negative but some people do not produce antibodies. ie it correctly says 'no antibodies' even though you have had the virus. It isnt worth doing until about day 11 but antibodies will persist at least a month and we are now thinking three months
