And I thought I'd seen everything...

[Gremlin]

So was travelling on DJ on the weekend from CBR to BNE with Mrs Gremlin and the two little Gremlins. We were seated in 3A thru 3D on a 738. Bloke sits in 3F and about two-thirds of the way down the runway for take off proceeds to pull out his cigarette lighter and sets fire to the rim of his hat! He tamps it out and then does it again.

I've immediately pressed the call bell. As the seat belt sign was still on, was first ignored so I've dinged twice more in quick succession. Cabin crew comes down, I suspect to give me a serve, and I just point to my seat mate. The look on the FAs face was one of absolute incredulity. They've immediately taken the lighter and dealt with it in a thoroughly professional way but I'm still left stunned by the whole incident.

What left me most stunned was the action of the guy who couldn't see what could possibly be wrong with what he'd been doing? Apparently the brim of his hat needed trimming and that was an efficient way to do it.

I know I travel far more than most, but surely there's a point where common sense kicks in that must come before you set fire to an item of clothing you are currently wearing whilst confined in a highly pressurized tube with others in close proximity whilst flying through the air at great speed? Or am I expecting too much?

 

[tuapekastar]

How bizarre! Was there any Apparent further follow-up?

 

[albatross710]

Perhaps the flying public has become complacent.

 

[jetlagger]

How moronic of the ill-equiped (brain wise) passenger in question.

Should be publicly shamed, lifetime ban on flying & charged with potentially endangering lives.

 

[Paddy55]

Thought I'd heard it all....

 

[The Rok]

Or perhaps he doesn't fly often enough to know the difference.

I didn't know we were allowed to take lighters on board anymore though??

 

[markis10]

Or perhaps he doesn't fly often enough to know the difference.

I didn't know we were allowed to take lighters on board anymore though??

Lighters are permitted on person only, not as part of carry on or checked luggage.

 

[serfty]

Or perhaps he doesn't fly often enough to know the difference.

I didn't know we were allowed to take lighters on board anymore though??

Virgin permit one:

Safety Matches and Lighters

Permitted on ones-self only - Either one small compressed gas lighter or a box of safety matches or a liquid fuel lighter that has the flammable liquid fully absorbed, is permitted only when carried by the guest on their body.
Note: Blue flame cigarette, pipe lighters and ‘Strike anywhere’ matches are forbidden for air transport.

So do Qantas :

Safety matches (one small packet) or a cigarette lighter that does not contain unabsorbed liquid fuel, other than liquefied gas, intended for use by an individual when carried on the person. Lighter fuel and lighter refills are not permitted on one's person nor in checked or carry-on baggage.
Note: "Strike anywhere" matches, "Blue flame" or "Cigar" lighters are forbidden.

 

[Boris spatsky]

You would think he must have some status (and therefore fly a bit) to be seated in row 3??!!??

 

[jetlagger]

You would think he must have some status (and therefore fly a bit) to be seated in row 3??!!??

Status of an idiot.

 

[markis10]

You would think he must have some status (and therefore fly a bit) to be seated in row 3??!!??

Row 3 is a common solution for last minute problems.

 

[TonyHancock]

Row 3 is a common solution for last minute problems.

The chap with the hat certainly thought so!

 

[awilcockson]

He's lucky he didn't get smacked in the face, tackled to the ground and end up in restraints. I reckon that's what would have happened on a US flight.

 

[Gremlin]

Me and the Gremlins were off the plane before him. He was last seen arguing with the FA upon arrival in BNE about the return of his lighter. At the gate there was a larger than usual DJ staff contingent, I'm assuming waiting for him.

I'd overheard him saying that he hadn't taken many flights in his life - he would've been in his sixties - and he was connecting on to CNS. His biggest concern, even at the end of the flight, was ensuring he'd be able to get a cigarette break whilst in transit in BNE.

 

[Gremlin]

He's lucky he didn't get smacked in the face, tackled to the ground and end up in restraints. I reckon that's what would have happened on a US flight.

That's what I felt like doing. The DJ cabin crew handled it well, I thought. I don't think he was deliberately menacing, he clearly just had no idea!

 

[ozmille]

That's what I felt like doing. The DJ cabin crew handled it well, I thought. I don't think he was deliberately menacing, he clearly just had no idea!

Very scary thought

 

[Ansett]

Ahhhhhhhhhh the delights of the flying Bogan strikes again.

How can people be so stupid about flying and what is and isnt acceptable behaviour ... Bring on Bogan Free Flights Please

 

[anat0l]

Ahhhhhhhhhh the delights of the flying Bogan strikes again.

How can people be so stupid about flying and what is and isnt acceptable behaviour ... Bring on Bogan Free Flights Please

Bit difficult to do that. I would've suggested "flying licenses" or "permits" (e.g. like a drivers license, but one you need - linked to your passport - to be able to travel by air), but that doesn't stop other kinds of air travelling idiots (it would make them highly more accountable, though, at the cost of obvious exponential increases in bureaucracy).


They say there is little one can be angry about when genuine ignorance is the excuse. Would anyone suggest if common sense may be a counterargument to this defence in this instance.

 

[harvyk]

Bit difficult to do that. I would've suggested "flying licenses" or "permits" (e.g. like a drivers license, but one you need - linked to your passport - to be able to travel by air), but that doesn't stop other kinds of air travelling idiots (it would make them highly more accountable, though, at the cost of obvious exponential increases in bureaucracy).

I've often wondered if an "air travelers license" is needed. I've also wondered if passport applications should include some sort of basic test to make sure you don't get in trouble from doing really stupid things whilst traveling.
Fail the test, and you don't get to travel.

They say there is little one can be angry about when genuine ignorance is the excuse. Would anyone suggest if common sense may be a counterargument to this defence in this instance.

Well as they say, common sense is not exactly common... Ignoring anything else, one would think that if smoking was banned, setting fire to anything (eg the lighter fluid) in that same environment is probably going to be frowned upon.