Is smoking on a plane really that dangerous?

Is smoking on a plane really that dangerous?

Attached: fa-lightingcigar-600x400.jpg (600x400, 38K)

Other urls found in this thread:

askthepilot.com/questionanswers/cabin-air-quality/
inc.com/bill-murphy-jr/science-says-airplane-air-is-so-bad-its-making-pilots-sick-and-maybe-frequent-fliers-too.html
inspectapedia.com/indoor_air_quality/Commercial-Airline-Carbon-Dioxide-Levels.php
ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/10207985
mayoclinic.org/diseases-conditions/deep-vein-thrombosis/symptoms-causes/syc-20352557
twitter.com/SFWRedditVideos

it's degenerate

Even if it's not dangerous, it's just obnoxious as fuck.
Everyone is crammed in a flying metal tube with no option to move around. Doing shit like is one of the most asshole things you can do. It's much harder to block/ignore smell, so it's even more of an asshole thing to do than being somewhat noisy.

About as dangerous as using your phone while in the air (not at all).

Now it is. Back in the day airplanes had cabin airfilters, and drew in fresh air on a regular basis.
tldr; air quality in airplanes was ironically better back when smoking was allowed.

>not dangerous
small space with less than ideal ventilation
bottled oxygen stored for emergency cabin depress
>not dangerous

I wonder why they decided to no longer draw in fresh air after the smoking ban.

>it's just obnoxious as fuck.

This, as someone who has astma I can't be in a room people smoke in because it leads to my bronchial tubes tightening up and I simply can't breathe and sound like a chew toy.

Also I wouldn't be happy to be stuck on a long flight and smell like cigarettes by the time I get off.

askthepilot.com/questionanswers/cabin-air-quality/

Pilot blames the "wind" for that pungent smell, but the Airbus a320 air intakes for the cabin are rerouted from the engine. Yes it's kind of the "wind's" fault, or fault of lack of wind, but it's mostly do to the fact that it's rerouted air from the engine for the a320.
Pre smoking ban commercial aircraft had dedicated air intakes for the pilots, and passengers that weren't routed from the engines.

your really hung on the smoking band as if it some kind of significant engineering event.
Like the guys at boeing going...well damn we have to redesign all our planes since they banned smoking.....idontthinksotim.jpg

They did though. I'm guessing that the smoking ban was an excuse for airlines, and airplane manufacturers to save more money.
>Pre smoking ban
Dedicated clean air
>Post smoking ban
Engine rerouted air
They couldn't safely get away with rerouting engine air if people smoked, but could save $$$ with engine air rerouted, and the toxicity levels wouldn't be an issue for passengers given the flight times.

It never was. It's just an excuse because it's really annoying.

I miss times when people smoked in restaurants or buses

>and the toxicity levels wouldn't be an issue for passengers given the flight times.
>meanwhile pilots and flight attendants who spend their entire working day in the airplane are just left to die
Yeah, I call bullshit on that

>meanwhile pilots and flight attendants who spend their entire working day in the airplane are just left to die
Oh you didn't know about pilots, and flight attendants passing out from air quality sickness on a regular basis?
It seems like you don't know enough about the subject, but you're quite opinionated anyways.

Depends on what you smoke.
If you smoke c4garettes, the whole thing gets really blown out of proportion.

pilots regularly passing out because of bad airflow design, that occurred as a result of a smoking ban

yea sure kid

Yes. It causes cancer.

I actually just remembered how on my last flight three flight attendants and both pilots just randomly passed out at one point. The remaining flight attendants were trying to lighten the mood, "Oh yeah it happens all the time don't you know, a shitposter on Jow Forums said so" and "Does anyone know how to fly a plane? Haha, just kidding we have autopilot lol". In the end they managed to wake up one of the pilots, he was still quite groggy and coughing up blood from time to time, but he managed to land the plane almost without casualties and at the end everybody clapped.

>Not realising that a pilot, and crew member passing out here, and there, and then treating them with oxygen is actually cheaper than the money saved on fuel economy on a more aerodynamic aircraft that reroutes air from the engines
Good thing multiple pilots on an aircraft is relatively pretty cheap in comparison, and they rarely if ever pass out at the same time.

It's the truth, but I guess your opinion means something no matter how weightless your emotions are in comparison to the facts.
Last time I checked commercial transport is big business with economists influencing decisions.

air quality so bad you it causes unconsciousness
sitting 6 inches away prevents the other pilot from passing out

Ok kid.

inc.com/bill-murphy-jr/science-says-airplane-air-is-so-bad-its-making-pilots-sick-and-maybe-frequent-fliers-too.html
At least do a quick search engine search before you decide to post based on emotions alone retard.
There's plenty of sources available on the internet, and you should be able to find a few on your own faggot.

kill all smokers

There wqs even a smoking deck on the Hindenburg

If by "facts" you mean your unsourced claim that pilots regularly drop unconscious in the cockpit, sure.
>Last time I checked commercial transport is big business with economists influencing decisions.
And last time I checked airplane safety was heavily regulated making flights the safest mode of transportation there is, and a pilot being in a fucking coma for half the flight would pose such an enormous safety issue that it would inevitably lead to an investigation.

And how did that work out?

Well, it didn't catch fire due to smoking.

Accept that you got btfoed you emotional tranny.

Of course it is! Have you never seen that movie "smokes on a plane" with Jack L. Samuelson?

Accept that you ran out of arguments and had to resort to namecalling.

>Is smoking on a plane really that dangerous?
Depends, a fire on an airplane is dangerous, but so is a fire in a pub or bar if you're trapped too.

>tldr; air quality in airplanes was ironically better back when smoking was allowed.
This

>>tldr; air quality in airplanes was ironically better back when smoking was allowed.
No.

>but the Airbus a320 air intakes for the cabin are rerouted from the engine
They ALL do.
All passenger airliners do that.

>All passenger airliners do that
Yes. They all do now after the smoking ban. I believe that this was kind of established in thread.

See

But user was correct, then provided an article to corroborate claims meanwhilw you (I'll assume that you are "emotional-kun) just kept screeching.

Is Jow Forums pro- or anti-smoking?

Does it matter?

You can't breathe air at that altitude.
The cabin must be pressurized.
What the hell are you talking about?

Pressurised does not mean completely sealed. Both older and newer cabins use a mix of re-freshened air and intake air, it's just that with the smoking ban, the quality refreshened air has increased so airliners can use less intake air (and therefore save fuel costs).

Vaping is for fags

Didn't know there were still tobacco shills around. Yes, a cigar smoke-filled cabin was somehow more refreshing than a smoke-free one. Right.

You definitively got second-hand smoking and cancer. But you also didn't get blood clots caused by lack of oxygen and too much CO2.

There's a reason why the rate of people going amok and berserk on airplanes has drastically increased the later years. Not only would smoking calm them down, but the high CO2 levels causes people to act more irrationally and seriously impairs cognitive functions.

You're most likely too young to remember, but there were dedicated smoking areas. People didn't just smoke wherever on the plane.

I don't know. I've only flown soace-a.

>space-a

Just stop smoking, problem solved and you save money too.

I don't know. Is mister Jow Forums here today?

Being a smoker, or not being a smoker personally is not relevant to op.

I don't smoke, I'm just saying that air quality was ironically better when smoking were permitted on airplanes.

>High CO2 levels

inspectapedia.com/indoor_air_quality/Commercial-Airline-Carbon-Dioxide-Levels.php
>With additional measurement reports pending, I found in-flight cabin air quality measurements of oxygen to be relatively stable, ranging from 11.2% to 12.5%.

>Typical outdoor CO2 levels are between 350-400 ppm (0.035% - 0.04%) or up to 500 ppm by some sources.

>Carbon dioxide levels measured in-flight in the aircraft cabin ranged between 0.04% or 400 ppm and 0.1% or 1000 ppm to date in our studies and were measured at close to 0.5% or 5,000 ppm in earlier studies.

>As indicated at CO2 HEALTH EFFECTS, occupants are unlikely to be affected or to notice CO2 levels under 2% or 20,000 ppm - a far higher number than in-flight aircraft cabin carbon dioxide levels.

>telling me to see my own post
Pure idiot.

Did you see

What that study isn't taking to account is that air pressure is way lower as well (around the same level as 2500 meters above sea level), so it is a completely unrealistic comparison to compare it indoor environments, because most people don't live 2.5 km up in the mountains.

Fuck off, retard.

Yeah it's dangerous for people who have asthma, allergy to smoke, various other lung or airway issues. As far as the cancer angle, no there's 0 chance of giving another passenger cancer.

>Yeah it's dangerous for people who have asthma, allergy to smoke, various other lung or airway issues.
How? Smokers, and non smokers were separated, and the air was better ventilated to account for the smokers.

Those reading for oxygen are pretty low... Typically, outdoor air is ~20% oxygen. Combined with the fact that the commercial aircraft aren't pressurised all the way up to atmospheric pressure (~60%), that ~12% oxygen content leads to way less than 50% normal partial pressure of oxygen (~35%).
Surely that would make heaps of people show signs of altitude sickness from flying...

>I smoke so I want to smoke in an enclosed space that we can't leave for hours with 100 other people
This is really your point isn't it? Imagine unironically thinking cabin air quality was better when every other jackass had a camel going the entire flight.

Withdrawal is worse than minor discomfort. I should know, I have asthma and smoke.

Blood clots are from lack of movement and not from too much CO2 or lack of oxygen...
Stand up and move around every now and then on long distance flights...

I don't smoke.

Better ventilation vs poor ventilation with air recycled from engine.

Have you considered switching to vaping?

>Blood clots are from lack of movement and not from too much CO2 or lack of oxygen...
Science disagrees

ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/10207985

You don't get blood clots from lying in your bed all night or sitting in your office chair, why would you get it from spending a few hours in a seat on an airplane?

Yes. It also has no basis in reality.
Also, just noticed that 787s don't use bleed air like this, so I was also wrong.

It's plane disgusting

It's more a factor of both combined. You can sit perfectly still for 6 hours in an office and have no issues, but do the same thing on an airplane and get clots.

Best advice is to NEVER put a carry on bag underneath the seat infront of you. Use that space for your legs and feet. Drink tons of water too, it'll keep your blood from thickening up too much and force you to get up and go to the bathroom.

>rats in group 1 were exposed to room air only, rats in group 2 received CO2/O2 (approximately 66%:34% CO2:O2) by inhalation, and rats in group 3 received 100% CO2 by inhalation

>>Carbon dioxide levels measured in-flight in the aircraft cabin ranged between 0.04% or 400 ppm and 0.1% or 1000 ppm to date in our studies and were measured at close to 0.5% or 5,000 ppm in earlier studies.

Are you the emotions user again? Didn't you already get beta foed in this thread?

smoking is actually good for you thats why they don't want you to pick it up. think about it

See and Studies funded by airliners aren't worth shit.

>You don't get blood clots from lying in your bed all night or sitting in your office chair, why would you get it from spending a few hours in a seat on an airplane?
But you do... A healthy person naturally moves their limbs whilst they sleep.
In fact, one of the main jobs for nurses with unconscious patients and patients who are not able to move themselves is to move them around to prevent clots.
Depending the way your chair is designed and how long you sit on them, blood clots can form... on aircraft, this is compounded by being restrained by the seat belt and smaller seat sizes.
mayoclinic.org/diseases-conditions/deep-vein-thrombosis/symptoms-causes/syc-20352557

I have no idea what you are talking about.

Those don't relate to the fact that the CO2 doses in the study posted are ridiculously high in comparison. No matter how you look at it.

>In fact, one of the main jobs for nurses with unconscious patients and patients who are not able to move themselves is to move them around to prevent clots.
No, they move them around to prevent bedsores. Stop lying you dishonest fuck.

>Those don't relate to the fact that the CO2 doses in the study posted are ridiculously high in comparison. No matter how you look at it.
That's still moving the goal post, increased CO2 can cause DVT/blood clots. It's not from "sitting still", that's a fucking myth. Increased CO2 also impairs cognitive functions, which is why so many people freak out and act irrational on airplanes.

>there can only be one reason because i am a double nigger

You don't get blood clots from sitting still you lying piece of shit.

>Back in the day airplanes had cabin airfilters, and drew in fresh air on a regular basis.
They still do both of those things

>That's still moving the goal post, increased CO2 can cause DVT/blood clots.
No, it's not moving the goal posts. It's setting the goal posts to a rational size.
>It's not from "sitting still", that's a fucking myth.
Not according to the medical profession.
>Increased CO2 also impairs cognitive functions,
This is true, but at much higher levels than you get in airliners.
>which is why so many people freak out and act irrational on airplanes.
"So many people". Sure, my experiences are only anecdotal but on the eleven international flights and several domestic flights I have been on there wasn't a single person who freaked out or acted in a way I would call irrational.

>bottled oxygen stored for emergency cabin depress
Only the pilots have bottles, the passengers have chemical oxygen generators

Every pressurised airliner draws in fresh air all the time

Seriously is this the level of knowledge on Jow Forums?

Research disagrees with you.

>Not according to the medical profession.
Wrong.

>This is true, but at much higher levels than you get in airliners.
See . You're forgetting that airpressure is not at sea level.

>eleven international flights
Lol, found the American. Son, I fly 10-12 times a year and that's not even counting domestic flights.

>is this the level of knowledge on Jow Forums?
Jow Forums doesn't even know shit about basic computer technology that they use every fucking day.

CO2 levels are calculated by ppm (parts per million)
Pressure being lower will not increase risk of co2 poisoning if the ratio is the same as under higher pressure

Well, at 3500m height people still live quite comfortably. That would be equivalent to 13.5% oxygen. Only a low percentage of people get altitude sickness at these heights and that is usually paired with the physical strain of climbing to that height to begin with.

I'm not saying flying is not a health risk in any way, but looking for exhaust and fluid leaks entering the the cabin seems a lot more reasonable than blaming standard co2 levels.

Combustion of tobacco creates a shitload of carcinogens and other harmful chemicals. Why should I have to inhale all that shit for many hours straight?
Emphysema is for badass men
b-b-b-b I need my fix

Attached: hgj56h.gif (259x214, 760K)

Post any research that backs it up.

>Every pressurised airliner draws in fresh air all the time
But much less than they used to, which is the point in this thread.

400 ppm of CO2 at atmospheric pressure is 0.0004 bar of CO2 partial pressure
400 ppm of CO2 at cabin pressure (~0.6 bar) is 0.00024 bar of CO2 partial pressure
66% at atmospheric pressure is ~0.66 bar... i.e.
2750 times more than what you will experience on an aircraft...
Do you still think these are reasonable values to compare with?

>parts per million is different at different pressure
>parts per million is the same at different pressure

The absolute state of Jow Forums

>But much less than they used to
That's just not true
The engines have air bleeds for the cabin air and there's a vent in the back of the plane that controls the pressure (Sully forgot to close this which caused the plane to sink slightly more/faster)
There is no air recirculation

Alex Jones says airplane radiation is a real problem. thoughts?

Longtime smoker here. Everybody in this thread is a soipussy faggot who thinks they'll get testicular cancer just because they inhaled a speck of smoke from someone passing by with a cigarette.
Having said that. Don't smoke. You don't know what you're missing out and that's a good thing. It's retarded and I only keep doing it because I'm addicted.
Bottom line is. NOTHING HAPPENS IF YOU SMOKE ON A PLANE. SERIOUSLY. NOTHING. That doesn't mean that you should do it. It's just wrong.

Attached: TWGsHBO__400x400[1].jpg (400x400, 37K)

Passive smoke is unhealthy, but I doubt it's properly detrimental to the aircraft.

>There is no air recirculation
That's just a lie. Even the posts here that argue against the claimed reduction in air quality state that cabin air is a mix of intake and recirculated.

n3bp

You're either a troll or a complete retard...
Parts per million is not an absolute measure like partial pressure. You can have the same relative mixture but completely different dosages you tool.

See

Based and Marlboropilled

>About as dangerous as using your phone while in the air (not at all).
All it takes is one bug created by phone electromagnetic waves interfering with aircraft monitoring equipment. It's still very unlikely to bring down the craft unless it's a freak accident though. In fact you're probably more likely to get that form of problem from natural radiation.