You heard it here first ...

[rb1957]

I think masks are going to be required in the future on intercontinental fights.

Just as 911 brought security issues to the forefront, I think COVID has brought public health issues to the same focus.

Wearing a mask is a minor inconvenience for travelers (like airport security), particularly when compared to the major disruption that a pandemic causes.

Further, the general public is somewhat atuned (placated?) to wearing masks so the requirement won't seem So outlandish.

This may not apply to business jets (since does the 1% get the same treatment as the 99% ?). But the logic could be that the more limited number of passengers can be traced.

Thoughts ?

another day in paradise, or is paradise one day closer ?

 

[3DDave]

The US public has been itching to ditch masks even on what they half heard about continuing to wear them if unvaccinated.

International flights are a different matter with countries continuing mask and being symptom free before boarding.

What I would love to see is people in the West wearing masks when they have a cold or the flu and no one taking any particular notice of it - a found responsibility of the individual to the community. I just don't see that happening in the US.

 

[Sparweb]

Please forgive my use of a sleazy tabloid link, but it's related to my point:

Does anyone remember the tabloid hoopla about this?
Naomi Campbell scrubs down her entire seat before plane rides
That was a joke in July 2019. A year later everyone was doing it.

 

[CWB1]

I was going to ask why anyone is still discussing masks a year+ later, then I noticed the OP is Canadian.

Good luck w/that thought. Flights arent currently requiring it until landing overseas, so I doubt it will happen.

 

[rb1957]

My suggestion is that in the future, after the pandemic, we will have to address the 800lb elephant in the room. How do we respond, long term, to this ? I think the pandemic has woken us up to the possibilities/consequences in the same way as 911 (woke us up to the security issues).

1) do we do nothing and wait for the next pandemic. Remote communities are now (and have been for decades) only hours away from all the major population centers of the world.

2) do we impose strict quarantine on all intercontinental travellers ? 2 weeks ?? that sounds a very heavy burden, and would possibly send intercontinental passenger travel to ships (and why not ?) But it would have a very significant impact on aircraft manufacturing industry.

3) Masks seem like a tolerable measure, that may have little actual impact, but surely can't hurt. I see it as similar to the security search procedures ... any (potential) passenger may decline search, in which case the airline will decline travel.



another day in paradise, or is paradise one day closer ?

 

[3DDave]

In the US, those remote communities are $10k to $500k for out-of-network access to medical care for severe diseases. They are an hour away from care they cannot afford.

Masks are a few percent effective at blocking the inhalation of most viruses. They are 70-80% effective at blocking the effective spread from infected people. To see the effect, put on a mask and try to blow out a birthday candle and then picture that without the mask, a few minutes of being spread in a diffuse matter vs the 60 to 100 mph expulsion in a cough or sneeze reduces the decay time to fractions of a second.

The N95 masks can increase the effectiveness for inhalation reduction and significantly reduce exhaled particles to decrease the rate even further.

It's been reported both in the USA and several other countries that cases of influenza have dropped to near zero and there is no motive for every country to lie about that. I would wonder about the sales of cough syrup and other cold remedies this past year.

The initial problem dealt with by masks was the overload of hospitals which masks would have helped, and to lower the number ever infected ahead of the vaccine development. The US opted to go the other way.

The use of quarantines has been demonstrated to work. New Zealand stopped many incoming travelers and quarantined those they did let in and have had zero cases for most of the past year. It could be a boon to the hotel industry. Going by ship is demonstrably worse, as seen when Norovirus comes sweeping through, but also the ships that were refused docking privileges leading to nearly total infection.

What I envision is a demand system for annual vaccination variants to offset Covid variants, but a lot of Americans would rather make a political statement and not wear masks and not get vaccinated, so it's unclear how that would function.

I hope that in the future there is a more ready acceptance of travel restrictions and quarantines. For a look at the opposite - the handling of the outbreak at the Atlanta airport where, knowing there were ill people on board, no one on the ground was prepared to isolate or stop them and the passengers continued from their international flight to other airports across the USA.

 

[rb1957]

ships/voyages are bad in that the AC system spreads pathogens very quickly and quite thoroughly.
Voyages are good in that they allow diseases to develop, as they did before intercontinental air travel, and quarantine procedures are well understood.

Australia also protected itself, on the whole, with an effective quarantine.

Hotel stays for air travelers would be damn near impossible. One large jet = a pretty good sized hotel. and hotels suffer the same communication problems as ships, but their staff is uncontrolled. Australia (AFAIK) sent visitors to quarantine stations for 2 weeks.

Yes the US is a "special" (short bus ??) case. "I have the right not to wear a mask", "Certainly sir, but then you won't travel on our plane", "That's discrimination", "No, it isn't", "Yes it is", etc. It'll be as interesting when someone decides to wear a mask after COVID ... "I have the right to wear a mask", "Yes sir, and I have the obligation to stop and detain you".

with "remote communities" I was thinking more of rare infectious diseases coming from remote Africa, Asia to densely populated NA, European cities.

I think we're being overconfident in our vaccines. There'll always be a variant that the vaccines don't protect against. The best way IMHO to keep ahead of this menace is to change behaviour (like 911 changed our behaviour to security).

another day in paradise, or is paradise one day closer ?

 

[GregLocock]

Australia has had good and bad experiences with quarantine. Existing hotels are not good places to keep infected people, their a/c systems are interconnected, and the hallways become reservoirs of virusses. Also the rooms are not designed to be properly cleaned. We have got some purpose built quarantine facilities where Indian arrivals (in particular) are being sent. these seem to work fine.

Vacuum cleaners are a good example of the sort of thing that should be a no brainer, but of course are great for spreading virii around.


Cheers

Greg Locock


New here? Try reading these, they might help FAQ731-376

http://eng-tips.com/market.cfm?

 

[BrianPetersen]

I'm also Canadian.

I would expect that masks will be required for international travel for a long time into the future with the possible exception to and from the USA "because".

I am hoping that Canada signs onto the EU digital covid certificate system: co-operate with the issuing and validation of vaccine and testing certificates for its own residents on the one hand, and waive testing and quarantine requirements for incoming travellers (of any citizenship) bearing a valid certificate on the other hand. It appears that most (but definitely not all) Canadians are supportive of something like this.

No idea how the US-Canada border is going to be dealt with, but it will have to be dealt with somehow at some point.

 

[rb1957]

Now I'm thinking that masks in-flight are not enough. They offer some level of protection in-flight but what are we to do about infectious people spreading disease after they land ? I'm sure very few would support continued "contact tracking". Perhaps "all" we can do is control access to certain "worrisome" parts of the world (like deepest darkest Africa, etc) where maybe travel is discretionary (tourism) so adding a quarantine period after travel isn't completely unacceptable (as it would be adding to business travel between (say) London and New York).

another day in paradise, or is paradise one day closer ?

 

[BrianPetersen]

^ Hence, the EU's digital covid certificate scheme ... Not getting onto the plane (which is landing in another country) without that, and wearing masks addresses the residual risk of those who are on the certificate based upon testing (which isn't perfect).

Some parts of the world are likely to require covid clearance in order to get on any airplane, regardless of whether it's an international or short flight.

 

[DrZoidberWoop]

Nobody is ever going to wear a mask for a full 10+ hour flight in economy class, regardless of the science. It's impractical and unenforceable, especially considering in-flight meals and restroom visits. I'd support going back to pre-Covid policy and avoid the germ hysterics unless absolutely warranted. E.g. something far worse than Covid.

 

[rb1957]

I disagree. It is certainly enforceable, I don't think it is that impractical ... you can drink with a straw, you could possibly remove if eating a meal, airlines could offer liquid meal substitutes, what you do in the washroom is your business ...

I'm thinking that the impact of the pandemic is Way more significant than 911 ever was, and so I thought it made sense to change our approach to in-flight health issues (as 911 changed our approach to security issues).

Possibly airlines may differentiate on this ... some "safer" with masks, some without, although I expected an industry wide response, like through ICAO.

Of course the other side of the question is security, and the need to identify people (so nix masks ?).

another day in paradise, or is paradise one day closer ?

 

[DrZoidberWoop]

Exactly. "what you do in the washroom is your business," like blowing your nose and saturating it with germs, which will filter to every single person who goes in after you. That's a benign example. I don't know if you fly much, but it is already a cramped and uncomfortable experience for most people. Overly burdensome mask requirements on airlines would be totally impractical and drive a lot of customers away entirely. People would be incentivized to drive to their destination or connect remotely.

If I was going to police people's health to such a degree, I'd target obesity first (especially in my country, the USA).

 

[IRstuff]

People would be incentivized to drive to their destination or connect remotely.

I think that's going to be the norm from now on, just as WFH suddenly became a viable alternative during this pandemic. Nevertheless, there have been airlines that have successfully instituted mandatory masking for transcontinental flights, notably Air Emirates.

TTFN (ta ta for now)
I can do absolutely anything. I'm an expert!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BKorP55Aqvg

faq731-376 forum1529 Entire Forum list

http://www.eng-tips.com/forumlist.cfm

 

[rb1957]

"People would be incentivized to drive to their destination" ... why I suggested "on intercontinental flights". To my mind, there's as much risk of transmission from driving; although not so much as driving within a country, so domestic flights would be a lower priority.

Where you have several nations within one landmass (Europe, South America) ... well, different nations will adopt different rules, presumably dependent on alternatives and tourism revenue and business travel.



another day in paradise, or is paradise one day closer ?

 

[DrZoidberWoop]

It's still impractical. Especially on long intercontinental flights. I'm usually a reasonable person, but I would take off my mask at every opportunity aboard a 14 hour flight. I stand by the opinion that it's simply not effective or enforceable to a reasonable degree, for the previously provided reasons.

Also, it's not as if children under 6 (Air Emirates current age rule for exemption) are any less capable of spreading any given virus.

 

[GregLocock]

Perhaps we need better masks. If a surgeon can wear a mask for 11 hours while hacking me apart and sewing me back together then I see no reason why we shouldn't mask up on flights.

Cheers

Greg Locock


New here? Try reading these, they might help FAQ731-376

http://eng-tips.com/market.cfm?

 

[3DDave]

A surgeon, and the rest of the surgical team, wears the mask due to care about other people. Not sure how one instills that belief in those who think it's all a conspiracy.

 

[BrianPetersen]

All this adds up to...vaccination certificates.