In-flight experience - Should Etihad compensate me?

[Rebekkap]

But I'd still have to ban alcohol for those that get obnoxious, try to open exits, or assault crew and fellow pax.

I see your argument - maybe I expressed my side badly. But I stand by it that a packet of cigarettes is not inherently dangerous. Someone has to decide to not only light it, but also throw it into a waste container without extinguishing it.

Simple solution if it is a major problem is to ban the lighting implements. Not the cigarettes, which would cause a disproportionate inconvenience (cost and time wise) to the passengers concerned.

Even if they don't throw it in the waste bin, they're still exposing people to carcinogens. But by all means, ban lighters/matches instead. Probably a better idea anyway as then people can't set anything else on fire either.

 

[PaulST]

Except if it does Varig Flight 820 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Again, there's a difference between a fool lighting a cigarette and promptly being told to extinguish it and a raging inferno (OK, slight exaggeration ) on a B707 forty years ago.
Such an event wouldn't happen these days because of smoke detectors in the bathroom and FAs being trained to use fire extinguishers and gas masks. I imagine rubbish bins are probably airtight and designed to smoother any fire that may start (but my last point is only a guess).

 

[MEL_Traveller]

I imagine rubbish bins are probably airtight and designed to smoother any fire that may start (but my last point is only a guess).

I dunno about air tight - but they have in-built fire extinguishers. here's some info! : SKYbrary - Aircraft Fire Extinguishing Systems

[h=2]Toilet Waste Bins[/h]Toilet waste bin fire extinguishers are activated automatically if heat detectors in the vicinity are activated. Toilet Smoke detector activation does not trigger waste bin fire extinguishers. Alternative extinguishing agents to Halon 1301 have been approved for use in fixed toilet waste bin systems and have also been, uniquely in terms of the search for Halon alternatives, shown to be more effective than Halon 1301 units whilst being the same size. Since only a documentation change is required to fit these alternative extinguishers, they have been used for retrofit as well as in new-build aircraft.

 

[PaulST]

Even if they don't throw it in the waste bin, they're still exposing people to carcinogens. But by all means, ban lighters/matches instead. Probably a better idea anyway as then people can't set anything else on fire either.

I must admit that I thought lighters/matches were already banned?

Yes, they're briefly exposing people to carcinogens but the long term effects of that brief exposure would be minimal (except if they set off an asthma attack or similar). I dare say that the health effects would be no different to spending a few hours in a smoggy LA let alone a developing-world city like Beijing or New Delhi.

 

[PaulST]

I dunno about air tight - but they have in-built fire extinguishers. here's some info! : SKYbrary - Aircraft Fire Extinguishing Systems

I wondered if they might have something like that - thanks!

 

[medhead]

My point was that they're reasonably harmless in the short term (ie. a 15hr flight). Obviously, long term exposure is going to cactus your lungs, blood vessels and bladder. The OP was quite distressed believing that the single person smoking was putting the aircraft at risk, and I was disagreeing with that. Blowing a door or engine is something to worry about, a single person lighting a cigarette is not. Unpleasant, no doubt, but it's not going to bring down a modern jet liner.

My post was solely about the health effects. It was not a comment about physical action on an aircraft. The point is the health effects of smoking is due to chronic exposure. It is all coughulative, you can't dismiss some exposure as not important. It's also true that many other sources of exposure can result in similar problems. But again that is not an excuse to dismiss one type of exposure as unimportant.

He was using 'F' and 'C' words, loudly, directing them at the crew and captain.

Flight Centre?

 

[PaulST]

My post was solely about the health effects. It was not a comment about physical action on an aircraft. The point is the health effects of smoking is due to chronic exposure. It is all coughulative, you can't dismiss some exposure as not important. It's also true that many other sources of exposure can result in similar problems. But again that is not an excuse to dismiss one type of exposure as unimportant.



Flight Centre?

Let's agree that:
Smoking is bad for you.
Smoking as described by the OP did not put the aircraft in danger
Don't book flights through Flight Centre.

 

[aaflyer]

Flight Centre?

Close enough!

 

[milehighclub]

Yes, all the toilets have automatic extinguishers, but as MEL_travelller says. - the ash tray is better!

Did you also know that if you are a smoker, and carry a lighter, it must remain on your person, not in a bag or jacket pocket. Even changing into pyjamas you'd be required to keep it with you under IATA regulations.

 

[MEL_Traveller]

Yes, all the toilets have automatic extinguishers so the bin is the place for it!

Did you also know that if you are a smoker, and carry a lighter, it must remain on your person, not in a bag or jacket pocket. Even changing into pyjamas you'd be required to keep it with you under IATA regulations.

the ashtray would be preferable!!

i didnt know the IATA regs. I know matches are supposed to be bad... can spontaneously combust. lighters I didn't know.

 

[JohnK]

Nothing worse than sitting on a plane next to someone who's just been chain smoking in the airport - the stench can be enough to set off my asthma and mean I need to use my puffer. So I'm all for people not being able to do it. If they're that much of a desperate addict that they can't function for however many hours without a smoke, they can wear a nicotine patch.

Sorry to hear you have problems with asthma.

Your last line is interesting. Swap smoke for gadgets.

I boarded a very full VA flight yesterday SYD-BNE yesterday that was full of kids and parents. I was the last to board and for some reason we waited 10-15 minutes before the doors were closed. Someone a few rows back had some sort of gadget playing some kid show without speakers and the screeching in my ears was becoming unbearable. I was losing my sanity rapidly.

Luckily the doors were closed and I fell asleep before take off. I woke up with the snack service and I could not hear the screeching noise anymore. Luckily the noise of the engines drowned most noises around me.

I understand that parents need to keep kids occupied but playing gadgets out loud is not the answer. Nor is it for me to wear headphones.

 

[Rebekkap]

Sorry to hear you have problems with asthma.

Your last line is interesting. Swap smoke for gadgets.

I boarded a very full VA flight yesterday SYD-BNE yesterday that was full of kids and parents. I was the last to board and for some reason we waited 10-15 minutes before the doors were closed. Someone a few rows back had some sort of gadget playing some kid show without speakers and the screeching in my ears was becoming unbearable. I was losing my sanity rapidly.

Luckily the doors were closed and I fell asleep before take off. I woke up with the snack service and I could not hear the screeching noise anymore. Luckily the noise of the engines drowned most noises around me.

I understand that parents need to keep kids occupied but playing gadgets out loud is not the answer. Nor is it for me to wear headphones.

I agree - that's completely inconsiderate! You can get kid-sized earphones, if parents want to distract their kids with gadgets in public they can get them earphones, and insist they either wear them or leave the device muted.

 

[harvyk]

Sorry to hear you have problems with asthma.

Your last line is interesting. Swap smoke for gadgets.

I boarded a very full VA flight yesterday SYD-BNE yesterday that was full of kids and parents. I was the last to board and for some reason we waited 10-15 minutes before the doors were closed. Someone a few rows back had some sort of gadget playing some kid show without speakers and the screeching in my ears was becoming unbearable. I was losing my sanity rapidly.

Luckily the doors were closed and I fell asleep before take off. I woke up with the snack service and I could not hear the screeching noise anymore. Luckily the noise of the engines drowned most noises around me.

I understand that parents need to keep kids occupied but playing gadgets out loud is not the answer. Nor is it for me to wear headphones.

Just to play devils advocate for a second, how do you know the kids parents where not insisting that their child put on headphones for the few minutes you actually heard the noise? Flying with kids can be difficult and it's a definite balancing act. Go on too strongly about something and you could end up with screaming kids, don't go strongly enough and you'll upset other pax, and once in a while your kids will be blamed for something by complete strangers which they didn't do full stop.

Furthermore, on a plane with very limited exception, no one is more acutely aware of a childs behaviour than the parents themselves, unless of course the child is been excepted to live up to a standard of which the complaining pax does not live upto themselves.

 

[DynastyWarrior]

You should be partially refunded cost of flight but keyword should. Doubt they will pay much attention to any complaint sadly!

 

[OzEire]

You should be partially refunded cost of flight but keyword should. Doubt they will pay much attention to any complaint sadly!

+1 to this as my experience with EY. A polite 'sorry for your inconvenience', but no admission that they did anything wrong or plan to do anything at all about it, including no customer recovery.

So save your time, add EY to the 'fly only as a last resort' list and tell all of your friends about your concerns with them.