Human gaseous emissions on board
May 15, 2000, 8:01 pm
#1
Original Poster
Join Date: Jan 2000
Location: The Internets
Posts: 8,266
Human gaseous emissions on board
Sensitive subject alert.... 
Well I have not seen this side of travel discussed much BUT we have all experienced it. I have certainly noticed that human odoriferous emissions tend to be more prevalent toward the end of a long transoceanic flight. ( Does anyone agree? and NO I am not talking of about myself but what I have been subjected to). Not to mention the associated charming noises... thanks Noise Cancelling Headphones.... How about smell-zapping devices?
Does any one know the physiology/physics behind this?
I remember seeing a TV special on the AA 777 where the FAs were giggling, thanking the engineers for having designed a system which does make the 777 the best enclosed space to fly in with another 250 human organisms....
Well I have not seen this side of travel discussed much BUT we have all experienced it. I have certainly noticed that human odoriferous emissions tend to be more prevalent toward the end of a long transoceanic flight. ( Does anyone agree? and NO I am not talking of about myself but what I have been subjected to). Not to mention the associated charming noises... thanks Noise Cancelling Headphones.... How about smell-zapping devices?
Does any one know the physiology/physics behind this?
I remember seeing a TV special on the AA 777 where the FAs were giggling, thanking the engineers for having designed a system which does make the 777 the best enclosed space to fly in with another 250 human organisms....
May 16, 2000, 10:42 am
#6
Original Member
Join Date: May 1998
Location: Rochester, NY USA
Programs: Hilton - Diamond, IHG - Platinum
Posts: 1,423
There was an extended discussion on this subject back in Nov/Dec ?? The discussion continued for two or three pages before CATMAN mercifully put an end to the subject matter. The puns got numerous and bordered on the sophomoric. Then again, my humour is down in the gutter when its not being highbrow, so I enjoyed the discussion - but I would imagine we will bring the attentions of the CATCOP down on us if we continue.
May 16, 2000, 11:51 am
#8
Commander Catcop
Join Date: May 1998
Posts: 10,259
CMDR CATCOP SAYS this has been discussed before and it need NOT be discussed again.
FYI: this is more OMNI than general Travel Talk. And it borders on sophmoric.
Please send your criticisms and complaints to my boss Catman's e-mail. MEOW!
FYI: this is more OMNI than general Travel Talk. And it borders on sophmoric.
Please send your criticisms and complaints to my boss Catman's e-mail. MEOW!
May 16, 2000, 3:36 pm
#9
Original Poster
Join Date: Jan 2000
Location: The Internets
Posts: 8,266
Catman,
I respectfully disagree. The physiology of the human body during extended flying periods is a highly germane, and very interesting subject. There is nothing sophomoric about it. I am truly mystified as to why we can't talk about this the way we would talk about jet lag or ears popping. Just because some of us are uncomfortable with the subject does not mean that all of us are.
Re. OMNI vs General Travel, I an not sure what in my post was not relevant to TRAVEL.
If you read my post again, I am interested in the physiology as well as in some of the very practical engineering that went into designing improved aircraft.
I am really sorry to have to disagree, but I think this is relevant, perhaps even more relevant than some of the posts I have seen-and I do not want to name names.
Re. a previous thread, I did a quick search and did not find anything related, so I went ahead with my post.
I respectfully disagree. The physiology of the human body during extended flying periods is a highly germane, and very interesting subject. There is nothing sophomoric about it. I am truly mystified as to why we can't talk about this the way we would talk about jet lag or ears popping. Just because some of us are uncomfortable with the subject does not mean that all of us are.
Re. OMNI vs General Travel, I an not sure what in my post was not relevant to TRAVEL.
If you read my post again, I am interested in the physiology as well as in some of the very practical engineering that went into designing improved aircraft.
I am really sorry to have to disagree, but I think this is relevant, perhaps even more relevant than some of the posts I have seen-and I do not want to name names.
Re. a previous thread, I did a quick search and did not find anything related, so I went ahead with my post.
May 16, 2000, 4:30 pm
#10
Original Member
Join Date: May 1998
Location: OMNI Award Winner, Recipient: Ol' Goal Personal Sootkase Tag Award. The Very Special Punki Authentic PiP Sootkase Tag, Pin, & T-Shirt. .........PRE-
Posts: 3,110
arturo thenk flatulense on aeroplains es very prevalent two travl, eespeshully genrl travl an whin arturo hav two smel et. arturo cary matches two verify flatulense.
wat wrong wiff yur "sniffer", generalisimo el gato hombre?
------------------
loving, caring, honest, intelligent, empathetic, creative, and giving.
wat wrong wiff yur "sniffer", generalisimo el gato hombre?
------------------
loving, caring, honest, intelligent, empathetic, creative, and giving.
May 16, 2000, 5:22 pm
#11
Join Date: Sep 1999
Location: USA/Asia
Posts: 379
Droneklax,
I agree fully. I've been here a while and don't quite understand the "cat-thing" but please continue your posts. It is CERTAINLY a relevant topic as anyone who travels extensively knows.
On to topic, can anyone explain why the 777 is better? I assume it has better air circulation? I understand the 717 has 100% air circ. True?
Thanks and no offense to the cat.
Carberry
I agree fully. I've been here a while and don't quite understand the "cat-thing" but please continue your posts. It is CERTAINLY a relevant topic as anyone who travels extensively knows.
On to topic, can anyone explain why the 777 is better? I assume it has better air circulation? I understand the 717 has 100% air circ. True?
Thanks and no offense to the cat.
Carberry
May 16, 2000, 9:31 pm
#12
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Jul 1999
Location: Over the Bay Bridge, CA
Programs: Jumbo mas
Posts: 38,600
I'm not sure about why the 777 is better except that I think it has a more advanced air filtration system. Its mix of fresh to recycled air is probably no better than the other "newer" aircraft.
As far as joining the more "base" part of this discussion, I have sat next to people that have caused me to have the airvent blowing directly on my face. I know there are times when we can't "help it" or whatever, but just like the little kids peeing in the pool, you could get out of your seat and go .......
Also, its not just the physics of the body in a pressurized tube of metal. If you take overweight gluttons and place them anywhere, mixing alcohol, icecream carts, cheese, gateau, meat, nuts and whatever else, with some nice coffee "just to make sure", its gonna happen. Common courtesy dictates a quick visit and flip of the "ocupado" switch.
Perhaps they should start placing a chewable Gas-X with the meal service....
As far as joining the more "base" part of this discussion, I have sat next to people that have caused me to have the airvent blowing directly on my face. I know there are times when we can't "help it" or whatever, but just like the little kids peeing in the pool, you could get out of your seat and go .......
Also, its not just the physics of the body in a pressurized tube of metal. If you take overweight gluttons and place them anywhere, mixing alcohol, icecream carts, cheese, gateau, meat, nuts and whatever else, with some nice coffee "just to make sure", its gonna happen. Common courtesy dictates a quick visit and flip of the "ocupado" switch.
Perhaps they should start placing a chewable Gas-X with the meal service....