3 ms·
> there was no evidence that the pilots of flight 804 smoked during the flight. But even though the BEA found that a cigarette didn’t cause the fire on flight 8
by eadmund 2y ago
> there was no evidence that the pilots of flight 804 smoked during the flight. But even though the BEA found that a cigarette didn’t cause the fire on flight 804 … the BEA recommended that EASA examine these risks and amend regulations as necessary
Smoking had nothing to do with this incident. Their own testing showed that holding a cigarette in the oxygen stream was (surprisingly) not dangerous. The only risk from cigarettes they found was deliberately trying to light oxygen tubing with a cigarette.
And yet, despite a complete lack of both relevance and evidence, they included a recommendation to clamp down on pilot smoking. Anti-smoking is hysteria.
- wussboy 2y agoThis is the second pro smoking post I’ve seen of yours on this thread. A curious stance to take. Could a cigarette fall into the mask stowage box and rest against the oxygen tube thus creating a fire? Yes, it could. The entire and complete elimination of this risk is simply solved by forbidding the pilots from smoking, which is already forbidden to the entire cabin crew and passengers. What’s the big deal? Who is harmed by not allowing pilots to smoke?
- eadmund 2y ago> This is the second pro smoking post I’ve seen of yours on this thread. A curious stance to take. I don’t particularly like cigarettes, but I love tobacco and I absolutely hate the moral panic over it. > Who is harmed by not allowing pilots to smoke? The pilots.