I am coming around to this view. Originally, I thought that those who would be reassured by the "mask = safe" mantra would outnumber those like me, who are put off by all the myriad hoops to jump through rather than fear of the virus.

Now I'm not so sure. The fear message is still being drilled in and the extra measures suggested - temperature checks, health certification, service cuts, hand baggage restrictions, etc - are just so over the top than many people are just going to say "you know what, sod it".

There is already enough hassle involved with flying - security checks, getting to/from airports, building in extra time, connections, etc - that I decided long ago that it is not worth flying to anywhere that's within a day's drive. With all this going on, I am extending that line to two days or even three.

Do you expect me to jump out of the plane?

What an offensive statement.

Who are you to use this language? Some kind of macho man who is not afraid of a tiny virus?

Someone who thinks that being concerned for the health of others and expects the same in return is for scared sissies?

People like you understand one language only: that of force.

If wearing a mask is made compulsory, then if you do not comply in a shop, you must be dealt with by police, booked and charged accordingly.

If in an airport, you must be denied boarding.

If in flight, the plane must divert as in cases of unruly passengers, you must be met at the air bridge by police, booked, charged and fined enough that you will not want to try again.

This should put an end to the debate, shouldn't it?

This is exactly why I'm still trying to put off work trips that I really can't put off much longer, as well as an important missions trip. It's such a hassle to travel that it's just not worth it. Especially as an OCD germophobe, with how laughable I find everyone's cross-contamination and 'safety' measures that end up being self-defeating. It's not worth arguing with people anymore. When the airlines return to a semblance of normalcy, I'll follow.

The best we can hope for is that a major airline comes to its senses and realizes that instead of automatically treating all their passengers as bipedal germ dispensers they should be welcomed on board as valued customers and provided with the usual inflight services and amenities, including decent meals (well, by airline standards that is, and at least in business and first class). As soon it becomes apparent that these passengers are then not all being carried off the plane in body bags on arrival, other airlines may feel the pressure to follow suit. Legacy carriers like KLM will of course have to deal with the unions, who if they had things their way would force all passengers to wear hazmat suits; and their members, who have no problem spending the whole flight hanging around in the galley and crew rest areas.

When it comes to setting the right example I suspect that one of the major ME or Asian carriers is the best bet, as they pride themselves on providing far better service than European and US airlines.

Johan

Good luck opening a door or window in flight.

If you truly believe that flying in a passenger airliner is such a serious threat to your health that everbody should wear a face mask etc., then I should imagine that not traveling or perhaps even staying at home and self-isolating might be better options. For your own peace of mind, if nothing else.

Personally, I believe the best way to achieve peace of mind is to take the advice Stonewall Jackson gave to Jedediah Hotchkiss after the battle of Port Republic:

"Never take counsel of your fears".

(I know, easier said than done. The congenitally anxious and fearful unfortunately cannot trade in their genes. At least not yet, who knows what science may have in store for us. The future is no doubt bright!).

Johan

Oops! MSAH must've missed the various recent studies showing the 80% reductions of droplets emitted.
Now if MSAH had then went on to argue (better yet show with science) that the persisting droplets and aerosol were enough to pass on Covid-19 undiminished from asymptomatic and presymptomatic infectees then we could all have a good read. But they didn't.
They instead are arguing social distancing and washing your hands are a better defense. Fine. But that's not to say masks don't also reduce transmission risks.
I direct the good folks from MSAH to the FT Coronavirus sub-forum. Some quite good to & fro over there on Masks, science and data too ;)

Presently BA is not requiring masks.
It seems more likely than not than a couple of people on my next flight will be Covid-19 infected. Stats are pointing that way. Frankly, I'd be happier they are in Masks. Thus KLM > BA right now.

My middle name is not Stupid. You did not understand the underlying irony in my question.

Do you need me to explain?

I do not "believe". I trust the scientific studies mentioned by littlefish which show that wearing a mask contributes to the safety of others. Thank you for your advice to self isolate, but no thanks. I go shopping, I meet people, I went to have my car serviced yesterday.

In other words, I try to lead an as normal as possible life given the circumstances, while taking precautions to protect my life as well as that of others.

The parallel with wars is so wrong.

Unfortunately, in a war, people on both sides will die. Sacrificing yourself may be the price to pay to help your side win. So in this case, indeed, fear would tell you to stay put and prevent your side from winning.

But no one needs to die to "defeat" Covid-19. We only need to do our best to prevent the virus from finding another host (aka "transmitting"), since without hosts this virus dies quickly.

This is where I agree with you. Particularly in LH business class, I do not see why catering should be what it is now.

Common sense behaviours such as passengers wearing masks (haha) to protect the crew, crew wearing N95 or FFP2 masks to protect themselves while serving food and drinks, paper menu gone replaced with on screen version etc, should allow a close to normal service.

Mask Hysterics and Hystrionics
 

An American Airlines FA has taken it upon herself to not only wear a mask, but also a face shield:

"I think it's a safety hazard for us to not protect our entire face for every second we're on a plane,' Marie said. 'Carriers like mine are going to create another devastating second wave of this deadly virus because we are not being given appropriate PPE to wear. I can see this virus spreading like wildfire throughout the cabin."

And I think she should consider mental health counseling. This is getting ridiculous. What's next? Hazmat suits for everybody? Fortunately AA put a stop to this nonsense.

Source

Somebody I know visited Sweden's largest horse track today (for work, to shoot a documentary; the track is closed to the public). One of the employees was wearing a gasmask the whole day! Outdoors, on a lovely summer's day. A gasmask?!? A gasmask?!? Oh boy!

Johan

I took an ET flight recently, while the FAs wore face masks (including one who had 2 on), it wasn't a requirement, nonetheless some passengers wore hazmat suits, some other passengers walked around with wet wipes every time they had to use the toilets, many wore face shields in addition to face masks, and some had a bottle with some cleaning liquid and lots of paper towels they used to clean everything around them, to each his own I guess.

There doesn't seem to be any scientific consensus on this topic. The report I linked to earlier comes to the opposite conclusion.

So do I. Only yesterday I shook the hand of an elderly lady. The initiative was hers, but I had no qualms about taking the extended hand, it was the courteous thing to do. Neither of us has C-19, so if we are dead by the end of the week it will be of other causes. Then we all had lunch. It was a beach picnic, so no hands were washed, not even those that had been shaken earlier. Everybody from young to old had a great time, distancing rules were honored mostly in the breach. Leading a normal life is just so much nicer. I put others at far greater risk when driving or riding my bike than by touching them.

Stonewall Jackson just happened to make that comment after a battle. I figure it can be profitably applied at all times. In war and peace, from cradle to grave. Never take counsel of your fears.

Johan

Out of curiosity, how do you know neither you nor the old lady had COVID-19? Are you both covered by the White House daily testing regime or something?

It's simple really: If face masks are going to make someone feel safer, they need to be scared in the first place. If someone's scared of getting infected, they won't travel anyway, because there are far bigger risks associated with travel and a piece of cloth on other people's faces is not gonna solve it, especially if airlines also do everything to make planes look like postapocalyptic warzones. At the same time, all these meassures are making experience even more misserable for everyone, including those who would be happy to travel. The way I see it, airlines can only lose. The only market where compulsory face masks can be good for business is truly essential travel, but that market is tiny.

Essentially, newsletters I get from various airlines consist of following statements:

• Flying is safe.
• Our flight attendants who volunteered their lifes to serve peasants on board our safe aircraft will not provide any service because it's dangerous.
• We made face maks compulsory. This is crucial for everyone's safety, so you better hope that pax around you will change their masks every 4 hours.
• You must not take any bags on board, because miraculous face masks don't work while putting stuff in the overhead bin.
• Travel restrictions are being lifted, come enjoy your summer holiday in a hazmat suit!
• You can now pre-book your 30-minutes slot for isolation box at the beach together with your Ryanair ticket and recieve a priority access to on-board toilets (make sure you show your voucher to FA when asking her to pretty please let you go to the loo).

Frankly, there is something good in this nonsense. It forced me to visit nearby cities which I often ignored, or simply didn't learn to appreciate. Now that airlines made flying experience unacceptable, I finally got to see what gems are within my driving distance. When I get to choose between enjoying my freedom in bustling bars of Budapest, or being treated like a biological hazard on board an aircraftt, the choice becomes pretty simple.

Following the discussion in another thread about AF staff asking to wear surgical masks, it is interesting to note that the AF website indeed now clearly states that surgical masks are mandatory at the airport and on-board, while KL only requires you to "wear a face mask".

Has anyone noted when the difference happened? If I remember correctly, at first AF and KL policies were aligned on requiring only face masks, whatever type it is.

It also looks like that on almost every picture used by AF communication, staff is shown wearing a surgical mask and not the "AF-style striped" face masks anymore.

What does the actual French decree say?

The term "surgical" may be a bit of a red herring. As far as the US CDC is concerned, a "surgical" mask is the basic, entry-level, loose-fitting mask that provides no filtration and minimal protection to the wearer.

If you are to understand Air France as requiring a N95 filter, then these are not supposed to be used by the general public in most countries - and I would be surprised if France now has such an abundance of PPE that N95 masks are not only available to the general public in sufficient quantities, but further required to be worn on all AF flights.

The only masks I see in photos on the AF website (Photo 1, Photo 2)are the simple, single-use disposable leaky face coverings that the public is generally expected to wear now; they merely act as a barrier but do not prevent any virus particles from being shed, but drastically limit the distance that such particles will travel.

Such face masks do not prevent the wearer from picking up the virus; but they do decrease the chances that the wearer will infect others. As such, the greatest protection to the staff and customers onboard is when everyone else is wearing a mask, rather than when that staff member or customer is wearing their own mask.

For instance on this photo (https://img.static-af.com/images/med...040921EADD844/), the AF staff wears a surgical mask whereas passengers are not. They are wearing what could be called "public face masks".

At first these kind of masks were widely shown on their communication, while now it appears almost nowhere but on this particular picture... Clearly a move forward to making surgical masks mandatory, while in other types of public transportation and places in France common "public" face masks are accepted or even encouraged.