Go Back  PPRuNe Forums > Flight Deck Forums > Rumours & News
Reload this Page >

MOL on protracted slot at 20.00 on the 22nd. MASKS.

Rumours & News Reporting Points that may affect our jobs or lives as professional pilots. Also, items that may be of interest to professional pilots.

MOL on protracted slot at 20.00 on the 22nd. MASKS.

Old 23rd May 2020, 03:10
  #1 (permalink)  
Psychophysiological entity
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Tweet Rob_Benham Famous author. Well, slightly famous.
Age: 80
Posts: 4,856
MOL on protracted slot at 20.00 on the 22nd. MASKS.

I'm sitting here at 04:00 the next day and haven't spotted another post, but I think it merits separate comment since he could be something of a trailblazer.

MASKS, no ifs or buts. He argued the findings. Deep cleaning before first flight and leave a chemistry around that will survive the day.

'No, of course we can't clean them at every stop'. 'No, of course we can't guarantee total safety'. Frankly, he spelled it out as it is.

He seemed to be arguing against regulation for aircraft while people are still allowed to pack into public transport.
Gosh, I'm agreeing with every word he's saying, I thought. He had quite a few minutes with dedicated camera.

Masks are the best tool if everyone wears one. I'm personally sure of that, but not everyone will be able to stand the claustrophobic and abrasive effects. A friend on long haul - just escaped back home in time - cleaned every surface of her comfy cubical thereby showing a commitment, but it wasn't long before she ripped the mask off. Will people be able to maintain their good intent even for a few hours?
Loose rivets is offline  
Old 23rd May 2020, 06:04
  #2 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Auckland, New Zealand
Posts: 591
I wonder what MOL's liability is if someone catches the virus on one of his flights and subsequently dies?

Is there personal liability since he has been so vehemently opposed to "social distancing" etc, or were his words from on high spoken as the company's representative?
Chris2303 is offline  
Old 23rd May 2020, 06:32
  #3 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: I wouldn't know.
Posts: 4,075
Originally Posted by Chris2303 View Post
I wonder what MOL's liability is if someone catches the virus on one of his flights and subsequently dies?

Is there personal liability since he has been so vehemently opposed to "social distancing" etc, or were his words from on high spoken as the company's representative?
I would think the same liability as for any other bug that causes someone to subsequently die, happens every year after all. As long as he makes sure the company follows the rules as laid down by the relevant authority that is.
Denti is offline  
Old 23rd May 2020, 06:38
  #4 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Auckland, New Zealand
Posts: 591
Originally Posted by Denti View Post
As long as he makes sure the company follows the rules as laid down by the relevant authority that is.
Which, from what I have been reading, he is refusing to do.
Chris2303 is offline  
Old 23rd May 2020, 06:47
  #5 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2016
Location: Europe
Posts: 109
I'm pretty certain that any airline has zero liability for contagion on board. There's no way to guarantee that you won't get a bug when flying with them. There's only a way to guarantee that measures are in place to ensure as sanitary an environment as practically possible. Once you're familiar with that and have made the decision to travel either at your own risk or under an appropriate insurance cover, suing MOL would be about as productive as suing TfL after getting a bug on the tube.
PilotLZ is offline  
Old 23rd May 2020, 06:49
  #6 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2020
Location: Scotland
Posts: 5
Originally Posted by Chris2303 View Post
Which, from what I have been reading, he is refusing to do.
I highly doubt that Ryanair will openly flout the rules. His personal liability is quite obviously zero.
guy_incognito is offline  
Old 23rd May 2020, 07:53
  #7 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: I wouldn't know.
Posts: 4,075
Originally Posted by Chris2303 View Post
Which, from what I have been reading, he is refusing to do.
I didn't read that, and i am by no means someone who likes that guy. Simply said, deep cleaning before first flight, keep a universal precaution kit on board for the crew (not passengers), and require all passengers to wear masks at all times. Which of course reduces the amount of crap he can sell them while they are his willing prisoners.

A rule most likely coming into force will be to keep at least one pack running while passengers are on board, and no low cost airline nor many airports are going to like that, but alas, it is not a requirement right now.
Denti is offline  
Old 23rd May 2020, 08:28
  #8 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: U.K.
Age: 43
Posts: 177
Safety implications of masks.

Mrs Jump Complete asked a valid question last night with reference to passengers wearing masks. What are the safety implications of having to remove the masks firsts before donning the 02masks in the event of a depressurisation? She was asking from the point of removing the protection from the virus in order to don them, but the more pertinently, it will take time and many of the pax will probably try and don them over the face masks, which will I doubt will work very well!

Last edited by Jump Complete; 23rd May 2020 at 08:30. Reason: Typo’s, sense.
Jump Complete is offline  
Old 23rd May 2020, 08:54
  #9 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: East of Edenbridge
Age: 59
Posts: 94
Originally Posted by Jump Complete View Post
Mrs Jump Complete asked a valid question last night with reference to passengers wearing masks. What are the safety implications of having to remove the masks firsts before donning the 02masks in the event of a depressurisation? She was asking from the point of removing the protection from the virus in order to don them, but the more pertinently, it will take time and many of the pax will probably try and don them over the face masks, which will I doubt will work very well!
Is there any research that shows oxygen masks would become ineffective if worn over a face mask?
OPENDOOR is offline  
Old 23rd May 2020, 09:05
  #10 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Geneva, Switzerland
Age: 50
Posts: 1,576
Originally Posted by OPENDOOR View Post
Is there any research that shows oxygen masks would become ineffective if worn over a face mask?
Well if you are in a situation where O2 make are necessary for your short term survival I'd say that the virus contamination risk should definitely not worry you too much. But if it does I'd suggest not to travel - or get out of your house for that matter - in the next few years.
atakacs is offline  
Old 23rd May 2020, 09:08
  #11 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2019
Location: Here
Posts: 14
Originally Posted by OPENDOOR View Post
Is there any research that shows oxygen masks would become ineffective if worn over a face mask?
From personal experience (not related to COVID), they are still effective.
jimmievegas is offline  
Old 23rd May 2020, 13:02
  #12 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: On the beach with a cerveza.
Posts: 1,183
I watched the MoL interview and have to say it was probably the best, most reasoned, most reasonable, view that I have seen on TV news for weeks. Made a refreshing change from all the hysteria from the usual suspects.

At some point normality has to resume and normal life carries risks, if you dont want the risks involved with getting on a bus or airplane then don't, that will be your choice as allways.
Jet II is offline  
Old 23rd May 2020, 17:37
  #13 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Location: UkK
Posts: 87
Masks aren't the answer, nor is people wearing gloves all day long thinking they're protected...
BirdmanBerry is offline  
Old 23rd May 2020, 18:15
  #14 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: On the beach with a cerveza.
Posts: 1,183
Originally Posted by BirdmanBerry View Post
Masks aren't the answer, nor is people wearing gloves all day long thinking they're protected...
Depends what the question is. If you want to reasonably slow the transmission rate whilst still allowing a section of normal life to continue they are better than daft ideas like leaving the middle seat empty.

Otherwise you end up being on lockdown indefinitely.
Jet II is offline  
Old 23rd May 2020, 18:25
  #15 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2016
Location: Europe
Posts: 109
There's also a psychological factor in all those measures, including masks. First, things need to be done to give people reassurance as few will fly if they don't feel reasonably secure on board. Second, the last thing airlines want now is to be seen as the bad guys who have already spread the lurgy all around the world and keep doing so without any due care. Such negative publicity would crater bookings even further, give even more wiggle room to environmental activists who believe that airlines should not be supported by their states and perhaps give governments another excuse not to provide any aid on the grounds of the airlines behaving in a socially irresponsible manner and aggravating the crisis for the sake of their earnings while other industries have to introduce new rules and restrictions. So, let's say that it's a medical problem with a sociopolitical component.
PilotLZ is offline  
Old 23rd May 2020, 18:48
  #16 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: est
Posts: 71
Mask regulation etc will be different in every country, so it may become a huge mess if they are compulsory in BA, but not in Aeroflot, for example, or vice versa. Even now, when free movement between Estonia and Latvia started - masks are compulsory in buses in Latvia and not compulsory in Estonia, so you need to put on mask after crossing the border after 2h ride. These measures can't last long, otherwise no one will travel, if one risks to be fined or put in quarantine, because his temperature seemed high to random security person.
liider is offline  
Old 23rd May 2020, 19:17
  #17 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: scotland
Posts: 155
There is a suggestion on another forum that each passenger should ensure that the air vent above them is on and directed at their face, which would ensure that they are breathing recently filtered air. The only caveat seems to be that the cockpit has to be persuaded to keep the air at an appropriate temperature.
occasional is offline  
Old 23rd May 2020, 19:21
  #18 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: In the sticks
Posts: 7,513
O’Leary is banking on those that refuse to send their kids to socially spaced classrooms will be happy to share the air with 197 others.
LTNman is offline  
Old 23rd May 2020, 19:25
  #19 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2016
Location: Ilmington, Warwickshire
Posts: 122

BehindBlueEyes is offline  
Old 24th May 2020, 06:53
  #20 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: somewhere hot and sticky
Age: 40
Posts: 277
Originally Posted by occasional View Post
There is a suggestion on another forum that each passenger should ensure that the air vent above them is on and directed at their face, which would ensure that they are breathing recently filtered air. The only caveat seems to be that the cockpit has to be persuaded to keep the air at an appropriate temperature.
i haven't read that forum, but it is at odds with EASAs recommendation to "Reduce the use of individual air supply nozzles as far as possible"

source EASAs COVID-19 Aviation Health Safety Protocol
https://www.easa.europa.eu/document-...afety-protocol

sorry for the thread drift!
Dupre is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service - Do Not Sell My Personal Information

Copyright 2018 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.