Mask ON - Mask OFF (repeat!)

Old Aug 27, 20, 2:20 am
  #1  
Original Poster
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Denmark, SK*G ( EBD), BA (silver), FB (Silver)
Posts: 487
Mask ON - Mask OFF (repeat!)

On flight to FCO in Plus (Booked long ago).
Morning departure so everyone brought their own breakfast since SK doesnt have any cabin service - beyond a carefully distributed Single bottle of Water. Of course no fast track - no lounge - no priority boarding - and no access to the forward lavatory. So an almost full flight had to walk up and down the aisle constantly to go to the back lavatories and back - not exactly minimizing contact and exposure to other passengers.
Regarding this breakfast the crew made a point of telling everyone they must put their mask back on in between drink sips/ or bites of their own breakfast,. SO MASK ON - MASK OFF - MASK ON - MASK OFF -etc etc etc - everyone constantly touching their face and their face masks - and then off to the two toilets shared by everyone.....

Just for comparison - flew several LH (C) flights a few weeks ago: fasttrack (yes) - lounge (yes with several hot and cold food options as well as drinks and dessert stations and full bar)- priority boarding (yes) - blocked middle seat (Yes) - full food service (yes) - full hot and cold drinks service incl beer/wine and full access to all toilets the forward one reserved for C-class so very limited aisle traffic back to front and reverse - and yes I know eco plus is not the same as C-class .... just saying for comparison as the C class ticket was DKK1900,- r/t CPH-MUC-FRA-MUC

The lack of service by SAS is one thing but their own interpretation of what constitutes good COVID behaviour is beyond me.....
Baker421, sueco6 and the810 like this.
GreatDane is offline  
Old Aug 27, 20, 9:49 am
  #2  
 
Join Date: Jul 2014
Location: 280 from HMR DVOR
Programs: EBG
Posts: 303
Yep, they did the same to me, and every announcement is ended by the same statement "this is for your safety".

I think the front toilets being closed is not for you but to protect the staff, I dont think they really care about the passengers.

There will be some great cost cutting that will be done under the name of covid but they did also lose a lot of money to be fair.
sueco6 and the810 like this.
nussle is offline  
Old Aug 27, 20, 12:14 pm
  #3  
FlyerTalk Evangelist
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Posts: 14,335
Originally Posted by GreatDane View Post
The lack of service by SAS is one thing but their own interpretation of what constitutes good COVID behaviour is beyond me.....
Bunch of corona crazies.

To be fair, governments and (social) media have spent the entire year assiduously fostering a culture of irrational fear and encouraging mass psychosis, so logic and proper risk assessment have long since gone out the window.

Airlines have apparently come to the conclusion that to lure back passengers they must implement a huge array of "safety measures", thereby implicitly and continuously reinforcing the message that C-19 is somehow the greatest and most lethal threat to ever have come near an aircraft cabin in the history of commercial aviation. On top of that, they then do everything in their power to make the passenger experience as unpleasant as humanly possible.

If there was such a thing as a Nobel Prize for Stupid, the commercial airline industry would make a good candidate. Along with any number of governments etc.

So far this year, almost 300 people have died in airline crashes. That doesn't stop me from flying, nor should it deter anybody else. On the other hand, I've yet to learn of a single instance of somebody getting on a plane, catching C-19, and then hopping on the last rattler.

The last pandemic couldnt even stop Woodstock (quite possibly because snowflakes and woke wackos were nowhere to be found in those heady days).

Johan
hugolover, James91, the810 and 4 others like this.
johan rebel is offline  
Old Aug 27, 20, 5:45 pm
  #4  
FlyerTalk Evangelist
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Tokyo
Programs: JAL Metal Card (OWE), SAS Eurobonus Diamond (*G), Marriott Ambassador (LTP), Tokyu Hotels Platinum
Posts: 17,557
There is a teeny weeny difference between the 1968 to 1971 flu outbreak and the current outbreak; that the former killed 100,000 Americans from 1968 to 1971, and the latter has so far killed 184,000 Americans from March 2020 to August 2020. The former with no restrictions put in place on daily life, the second with some level of restrictions, even in the US. Not all pandemics are equal.

That being said, it does sound like SK has taken it to the absurd if they require the mask to be put back on between every bite or every sip. I like the approach of JANA; both have all services more or less in place in flight, and some changes to lounge services but mainly what you'd expect of a lounge is there in some shape or form. And yes, you are allowed to go through your entire meal even multicourse F meal with your mask of for the duration. Though if I leave my drink for a bit of time between sips, I do tend to put my mask back on, but that is really a judgement.
​​​​​
lhrpete likes this.

Last edited by CPH-Flyer; Aug 27, 20 at 7:44 pm
CPH-Flyer is online now  
Old Aug 27, 20, 6:13 pm
  #5  
Suspended
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 836
Originally Posted by johan rebel View Post
Bunch of corona crazies.

To be fair, governments and (social) media have spent the entire year assiduously fostering a culture of irrational fear and encouraging mass psychosis, so logic and proper risk assessment have long since gone out the window.

Airlines have apparently come to the conclusion that to lure back passengers they must implement a huge array of "safety measures", thereby implicitly and continuously reinforcing the message that C-19 is somehow the greatest and most lethal threat to ever have come near an aircraft cabin in the history of commercial aviation. On top of that, they then do everything in their power to make the passenger experience as unpleasant as humanly possible.

If there was such a thing as a Nobel Prize for Stupid, the commercial airline industry would make a good candidate. Along with any number of governments etc.

So far this year, almost 300 people have died in airline crashes. That doesn't stop me from flying, nor should it deter anybody else. On the other hand, I've yet to learn of a single instance of somebody getting on a plane, catching C-19, and then hopping on the last rattler.

The last pandemic couldn’t even stop Woodstock (quite possibly because snowflakes and woke wackos were nowhere to be found in those heady days).

Johan
This is the best post I’ve read on here. Rational and oh so refreshing. When I travel in a couple weeks, I’ll be eating the whole time to not wear a mask. I don’t have the rona, so other’s safety is not impacted and I’m certainly not worried about getting it from someone else.
The_Bouncer and sueco6 like this.
FriscoHeavy is offline  
Old Aug 28, 20, 12:07 am
  #6  
 
Join Date: Aug 2015
Location: SFO
Programs: AS 75K, SK, UR, MR
Posts: 2,814
Haha, nothing that a shot of Aalborg cant fix (big enough to put you to sleep). Wishing OP a happy return flight!
vanillabean is offline  
Old Aug 28, 20, 1:38 am
  #7  
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: ARN
Posts: 3,410
The whole face-mask-on-public-transportation-thing could very well be counterproductive.

A face mask needs to be changed whenever it's wet. In a warm and humid environment, that could be as often as every five minutes. (In a dry airplane, with passengers sitting down, it's probably much less seldom, though.) If the mask is not changed when it's wet, the risk is increased, not decreased, because the face mask traps and concentrates the viruses. Most people simply cannot afford to buy enough face masks to change them as often as they should.

Then there's the problem of how to physically change them. You should never touch the face mask itself. First, you need to wash your hands with soap and water. Then, you remove the mask by only touching the ear straps. You dispose of the mask in an open trash bin (the kind of trash bin which is in an airplane lavatory, where you have to push on the lid to open the bin, will have a huge concentration of viruses). You wash your hands with soap and water again, and then you put on a new face mask.

It's quite obvious that an airplane or a train doesn't have enough lavs for all passengers to do this in a safe way. Buses are even worse, with no running water at all. SAS has now taken this already counterproductive policy to a whole new level of silliness by closing one lav and this mask on - mask off - mask on policy.
Baker421, The_Bouncer and the810 like this.
RedChili is offline  
Old Aug 28, 20, 3:22 am
  #8  
 
Join Date: Jul 2014
Location: 280 from HMR DVOR
Programs: EBG
Posts: 303
The airline industry has always been a bit safety crazy. The whole transport by air idea is the safest way to travel from any method but they still insist on the long safety discussion at the beginning including the bizzare how to release the belt.

The safety vest below your seat, I think has had two or three uses in the whole aviation history that I have heard of and in one of those (sully) the aircraft was surrounded by boats within minutes.

I understand a thousand people or so per year get hurt in stuff falling out of lockers, some in turbulance but its really a safe way to travel.

Corona, just over reacting as usual.
The_Bouncer and the810 like this.
nussle is offline  
Old Aug 28, 20, 3:50 am
  #9  
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: ARN
Posts: 3,410
The life jacket is a good point. Many of the victims of flight ET 961 that crashed in the Comores died because they inflated their life jackets inside the aircraft, causing them to be pushed towards the ceiling of the aircraft as water was gushing in. Some of these would possibly have survived without a life jacket. It's an excellent example of the fact that instruments that are designed to be helpful, can do more harm than good if used in an improper way.
The_Bouncer and the810 like this.
RedChili is offline  
Old Aug 28, 20, 4:00 am
  #10  
FlyerTalk Evangelist
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Tokyo
Programs: JAL Metal Card (OWE), SAS Eurobonus Diamond (*G), Marriott Ambassador (LTP), Tokyu Hotels Platinum
Posts: 17,557
Originally Posted by RedChili View Post
The life jacket is a good point. Many of the victims of flight ET 961 that crashed in the Comores died because they inflated their life jackets inside the aircraft, causing them to be pushed towards the ceiling of the aircraft as water was gushing in. Some of these would possibly have survived without a life jacket. It's an excellent example of the fact that instruments that are designed to be helpful, can do more harm than good if used in an improper way.
Yeah, but we don't remove safety equipment just because they can be used wrongly. And improperly fastened seat belt in a car can also be a hazard, we don't remove seat belts for that reason, a child car seat placed in front of an airbag can be fatal., we don't get rid of child seats or airbags, we try to educate people on how to use them.

Same for life jackets, and clearly if people use them wrongly, the safety briefings are needed.
GreatDane, GUWonder and lhrpete like this.
CPH-Flyer is online now  
Old Aug 29, 20, 2:44 am
  #11  
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: ARN
Posts: 3,410
Originally Posted by CPH-Flyer View Post
Yeah, but we don't remove safety equipment just because they can be used wrongly. And improperly fastened seat belt in a car can also be a hazard, we don't remove seat belts for that reason, a child car seat placed in front of an airbag can be fatal., we don't get rid of child seats or airbags, we try to educate people on how to use them.

Same for life jackets, and clearly if people use them wrongly, the safety briefings are needed.
When it comes to life jackets, I agree with you.

But when it comes to face masks, due to the lack of sufficient washing facilities, it's almost impossible to use face masks in a proper way in an airplane. And when it comes to SAS, even the crew's "safety briefings" are plain wrong and counterproductive. In that case, it would be better to remove the "safety equipment."

The way that SAS does the face mask thing would be akin to cabin crew instructing passengers to inflate life jackets inside the fuselage before a crash landing on water.
The_Bouncer, the810 and Baker421 like this.
RedChili is offline  
Old Aug 29, 20, 8:45 am
  #12  
A FlyerTalk Posting Legend
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Watchlisted by the prejudiced, en route to purgatory
Programs: Just Say No to Fleecing and Blacklisting
Posts: 99,941
Lack of sufficient washing facilities on SAS planes? It's not like they closed off all of the lavatories on SAS planes.
GUWonder is offline  
Old Aug 29, 20, 1:31 pm
  #13  
 
Join Date: Aug 2019
Posts: 121
I personally don't believe the masks do much good, if any, simply because us "normal folk" don't really know how/care how to use them properly. But then I think about my mother, who is 73 years old and a cancer survivor. When I picture her wearing her mask at the grocery (the only place she goes these days), I picture the other people around her also wearing masks. And, for whatever reason, I'm grateful. I'm no doctor, and I have no gauge on the efficacy of masks, really. But I will wear mine in an airport and on the airplane, as best I know how. Because someone else's high-risk family member just might be sitting near me. (I will also take a covid test prior to flying, although those have their own set of flaws.) As for SAS, I just think they need to bring back the alcohol so that people can chill out a bit more with the mask requirements. ;-)
Baker421 is offline  
Old Aug 29, 20, 4:52 pm
  #14  
FlyerTalk Evangelist
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Tokyo
Programs: JAL Metal Card (OWE), SAS Eurobonus Diamond (*G), Marriott Ambassador (LTP), Tokyu Hotels Platinum
Posts: 17,557
Originally Posted by RedChili View Post
When it comes to life jackets, I agree with you.

But when it comes to face masks, due to the lack of sufficient washing facilities, it's almost impossible to use face masks in a proper way in an airplane. And when it comes to SAS, even the crew's "safety briefings" are plain wrong and counterproductive. In that case, it would be better to remove the "safety equipment."

The way that SAS does the face mask thing would be akin to cabin crew instructing passengers to inflate life jackets inside the fuselage before a crash landing on water.
If SK has this as a policy, they are indeed in need of" paying attention to the safety briefing", it might just be random crew members taking it too far, and them being in need of some additional training.

While the ideal is to wash your hands before and after handling the mask, as an alternative people could use the handsanitiser they are anyway carrying, and then wash their hands and the next possible opportunity.

Would make quite a show if following the SK guidelines...santise mask off santise take bite sanitise mask on sanitise chew. Well at least the health suggestion about eating slowly would come through.
CPH-Flyer is online now  
Old Aug 29, 20, 5:05 pm
  #15  
Suspended
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 836
Originally Posted by CPH-Flyer View Post
If SK has this as a policy, they are indeed in need of" paying attention to the safety briefing", it might just be random crew members taking it too far, and them being in need of some additional training.

While the ideal is to wash your hands before and after handling the mask, as an alternative people could use the handsanitiser they are anyway carrying, and then wash their hands and the next possible opportunity.

Would make quite a show if following the SK guidelines...santise mask off santise take bite sanitise mask on sanitise chew. Well at least the health suggestion about eating slowly would come through.
I dont carry and have yet to use any hand sanitizer when out. I dont even own any. 🤷‍♂️
The_Bouncer likes this.
FriscoHeavy is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread