We should ALL insist that anyone caught smoking on an airplane be banned from flying -- FOR LIFE. We need more potential dangers onboard these flight? It is time to get tough with these morons.

Forget about arresting them upon arrival. They ought to turn the smokers over to the passengers on the flight and let them decide what should be done http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/smile.gif

I can't imagine wanting to return to your seat after being caught. I'm sure most of the passangers on the plane would have it in for you.

Smoke 'em if you got 'em (the offenders, that is).

In all seriousness, I have not been on a flight in the last eight to ten years that was not announced as 'non-smoking.' And, I have, in that same time period, never seen the 'no smoking/no fumar' light go out indicating to the smokers that it is ok to light up. Do the crime, do the time. I'm glad to hear that the airlines are following through with arresting the offenders after the flight lands.

[This message has been edited by geo1004 (edited 02-02-2000).]

Slightly off topic, I read a little bit ago (within the past year) that Iberia had changed its rules to prohibit the pilots from smoking. Apparently they were still allowed to even though the passengers couldn't (it makes a small amount of sense, but only a small amount!).

Actually, apparently the US rules were only changed for pilots a few years ago - way after the self-loading cargo was forbidden to light up. Can anybody confirm?

Sadly,smoking is still going on among PAX, even on the US-registered airlines. Last summer coming back from Paris to SFO on UA, we were seated in the exit row seats ( lots of leg room but the lavaratories are way too close). The crew, although all United employees, were native French and were based in Paris. The plane had mostly French PAX flying to some convention to the US. If you've ever been to Paris, you should know that smoking for the French is almost a national passtime. EVERYBODY smokes and a LOT. So you can imagine what a tourture the 12-hour flight might have been for them. Sitting by the lavs, we could tell(smell) clearly that there was a lot of smoking going on during the flight. Amazingly, the FA's on the flight chose to ignore it ( comradery and mutual understanding among fellow coutryman?). I have no idea why the alarms did not alert the pilots. Maybe they were French too (the pilots). In hindsight, we should have spoken up about the fresh smell of sigarette smoke coming from the lav everytime the door got open. But what's the point? The FA were smelling it too and were doing nothing! US natives were a clear minority on this flight and I did not want to start a coup and to be thown off the plane by the irrate smokers. Well,may be next time I'll have more guts to speak up or to write United management about what's going on on their planes.

Well I've beenf lying for 10 years and I think the one time I had to deal with cigarette smoking on the U-A flights SFO-HKG-SFO. being in coach (did not know that I could use miles to upgrade!) I suffered miserably.

I'm surprised that the smoke alarms did not go off on those Paris flights. They are everywhere.

Well I've beenf lying for 10 years and I think the one time I had to deal with cigarette smoking on the U-A flights SFO-HKG-SFO. being in coach (did not know that I could use miles to upgrade!) I suffered miserably.

I'm surprised that the smoke alarms did not go off on those Paris flights. They are everywhere.

I smoke, and I don't mind the no-smoking environment on short flights (under 5 hours).

But, it gets a bit frustrating to be on a 9 or 12 hour flight that is non-smoking, especially if it is a daylight flight at a time when one normally does not sleep.

Air France designates one galley (usually at the rear) as the smoking area, this seems to be quite acceptable to everyone.

It is unfortunate that the North American carriers don't do this on their intercontinental flights. I wonder how much of it actually has to do with a desire to inflict someone's will on others (meaning, put down or control others, being politically correct and smug about it) rather than the smoke itself.

Canada seems to be one of the worst offenders in this area - I phoned the Toronto airport authority to suggest that they put a smoking area in the international departures area of terminal 2 (there is such an area in domestic and transboarder), and was smugly told that the two existing areas would be removed ASAP.

Doesn't sound too much like they are making much of an effort to listen to their customers, or meet their needs.

Before the politically correct out there start sending flames back, consider this: small children create as much of an externally imposed disturbance/annoyance/aggravation to their neighbors as smokers - so, the airport authorities usually provide a play area for the small kids, where they won't disturb others. It work well for both parties - the small kids, and the people who don't want to be exposed to the effects of the small kids.

Why not look at the smoking issue that way?

The short answer to Max Power's question RE: small kids vs. smoke disturbance is: small kids' noise can cause at most a migraine, second hand smoke can cause cancer. As long as a large amount of the air in planes and airport buildings gets recirculated, we all get to breathe however much or little poison there is in it.
Additionally, smoking on planes increases the risk of fires (already discussed above), which can be way more lethal than cancer, so...

That said, allow me to say that I understand how frustrating it must be for a serious smoker to be deprived of cigarettes for 9-12 hours. I used to be a smoker in a past life (albeit not a heavy one), so I vaguely recall the craving...

I wish there was an easy solution, but I really can't think of one.

Last time I checked, small children did not increase their neighbors' risk of cancer.

Adding to the list.. SMALL CHILDREN are not the same as cigarettes....

Either way, cigarettes are harmful and dangerous on the airplanes... maybe we should have a shooting range on the plane for addicted gun shooters?? Nahh dangerous.... could cause fire/explosion...

Ok.. going overboard.. sorry

I am a relatively recent non-smoker who is old enough to remember legally smoking in flight. The teensy little ashtray in the armrest, the ashes all over my clothes, burn marks in the upholstery!
The US departure terminal at YVR has a smoking lounge sponsored by Benson and Hedges. Within months of the terminal opening this was a stinking pit, even with the heavy duty exhaust/ventilation (I can testify, I was there puffing away!). By the time I quit I could hardly imagine smoking indoors anywhere anymore.
I suggest Nicorettes for the really long flights. You can buy them without a prescription in Canada now.

i kind of like the gas .. sorry smoking ... chambers that many airports have created for smokers. http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/smile.gif sorry no offense towards smokers. i personally don't have a problem with it as long as they respect the rules - especially safety related rules such as on airplanes.

Re: Second-hand smoke and cancer -

Ask any statistician who actually looked at the results of the studies that allegedly "proved" that second-hand smoke causes cancer, and he/she will tell you it's all a batch of bushwa. (This is not to say that it does or doesn't, only that the studies do not, from a standpoint of statistical validity, establish the link.)

It's (IMHO) more a matter of paternalistic control freaks who know what's "good" for you and have somehow managed to get into a postion of authority sufficient to allow them to inflict their opinions on the rest.

(Now, Counsellor, tell us how you really feel about it http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/smile.gif)

As for airports with "hot boxes", as I call them (I guess it has a slightly different connotation, but oh well), STL has to win the prize. I haven't been there in about a year (switched from TW to UA!), but it seemed like they kept shrinking the smoking lounges until they ended up being about 8' x 10' glass rooms that were amazingly putrid with smoke. The worst part was that they had regular doors on them and when it was REALLY crowded, people would hold the door open. You had to hold your breath as you walked down the absurdly long concourse in front of it.