rockflyertalk

We have witnessed and seen the implications of 9/11 to air travel. There are still, almost 20 years on, checks to ensure people are clean of harmful possessions or weapons on flights and in airports.

I recently watched Border Control on TV and also Heathrow: Britain’s Busiest Airport. Whilst I appreciate these are TV programmes and edited, scripted etc for engagement.

HOWEVER, I do wonder when I see people, both on these TV shows and personally in real life, board aircraft with medical conditions that can be life threatening or susceptible to further issues in certain conditions, like an enclosed metal tube with particular atmospheric conditions, should these people be allowed to fly?

It’s harsh and possibly on the face of it, reactive to today’s crisis...granted. But there are studies that suggest epidemics, pandemics could or may well be more frequent than we wish for.

I see air travel in its current state/form as a huge contributor to these issues we face. We have all seen the dirty BA cabins posted about or talked about. Otherwise BA, LGW, Governments etc would not be stopping travel.

Just travelling on a tube (subway) you can see or partake in the dirty atmosphere/conditions.

So why are we allowing passengers to travel overseas via aircraft with medical conditions?

Should there now be stricter rules to ensure everyone including the said passenger is safe to fly?

This isn’t necessarily just about others but about the passenger themselves. Health of others in this crisis is clearly an important aspect but overall what is the line that we draw upon to prevent such crisis.

Just like 9/11 we implemented rules that are a pain for frequent flyers but they save lives.

Should we now consider measures for air travel to prevent epidemics?

I’d be keen to hear thoughts on this.