A Travel and vacations forum. TravelBanter

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Go Back   Home » TravelBanter forum » Travelling Style » Air travel
Site Map Home Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

Carrying oxygen onboard



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old February 26th, 2004, 07:55 PM
News Reader
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Carrying oxygen onboard

This topic has come up a few times on A&E's "Airline" series... on more that
one episode, they've prevented passengers who require oxgen (for medical
purposes) from boarding the aircraft and have stated that it is against
their policy to allow oxygen onboard as it might explode.

This is all well and good and may very well be true, but:

1. In one of the episodes, they suggested that the passenger try another
airline (they didn't specify one) that might have a different policy -- is
Southwest the only airline that cares about an explosion? Surely not...
2. Obviously they have oxgen on board already -- otherwise, what comes out
of those little masks they make such a point of demonstrating every time
they take off...?

So something's not quite right here -- can anyone explain this apparent
contradiction?

Thanks


  #2  
Old February 26th, 2004, 08:41 PM
James Robinson
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Carrying oxygen onboard

News Reader wrote:

1. In one of the episodes, they suggested that the passenger try another
airline (they didn't specify one) that might have a different policy -- is
Southwest the only airline that cares about an explosion? Surely not...


They all have the same policy, since it is part of FAA regulations

2. Obviously they have oxgen on board already -- otherwise, what comes out
of those little masks they make such a point of demonstrating every time
they take off...?


They do not store oxygen for the masks. It is a chemical reaction that
generates oxygen when it is needed. The flight crew does have bottled
oxygen, however.

So something's not quite right here -- can anyone explain this apparent
contradiction?


From your description it sounds like someone was trying to bring their
own oxygen equipment on board. No airline allows this.

Passengers who need oxygen while in flight have to arrange for it
several days in advance through the airline, who will provide oxygen in
containers approved for operation in flight. They generally have a
special reservation desk that handles this service. They consult with
the traveler's doctor to make sure that the proper equipment is
provided, and the appropriate rates are set up. If oxygen is needed for
a flight connection, it is up to the passenger to arrange for it at the
connecting airport. The airline will not provide that service.
  #3  
Old February 27th, 2004, 12:24 AM
Jeff Hacker
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Carrying oxygen onboard

Southwest doesn't permit oxygen on board, but most other airlines (i.e.,
majors) do.


"News Reader" wrote in message
s.com...
This topic has come up a few times on A&E's "Airline" series... on more

that
one episode, they've prevented passengers who require oxgen (for medical
purposes) from boarding the aircraft and have stated that it is against
their policy to allow oxygen onboard as it might explode.

This is all well and good and may very well be true, but:

1. In one of the episodes, they suggested that the passenger try another
airline (they didn't specify one) that might have a different policy -- is
Southwest the only airline that cares about an explosion? Surely not...
2. Obviously they have oxgen on board already -- otherwise, what comes out
of those little masks they make such a point of demonstrating every time
they take off...?

So something's not quite right here -- can anyone explain this apparent
contradiction?

Thanks




  #4  
Old February 29th, 2004, 01:20 PM
Binyamin Dissen
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Carrying oxygen onboard

On Fri, 27 Feb 2004 00:23:52 GMT mtravelkay wrote:

:News Reader wrote:

: This topic has come up a few times on A&E's "Airline" series... on more that
: one episode, they've prevented passengers who require oxgen (for medical
: purposes) from boarding the aircraft and have stated that it is against
: their policy to allow oxygen onboard as it might explode.

: This is all well and good and may very well be true, but:

: 1. In one of the episodes, they suggested that the passenger try another
: airline (they didn't specify one) that might have a different policy -- is
: Southwest the only airline that cares about an explosion? Surely not...
: 2. Obviously they have oxgen on board already -- otherwise, what comes out
: of those little masks they make such a point of demonstrating every time
: they take off...?

: So something's not quite right here -- can anyone explain this apparent
: contradiction?

:Southwest policy is clearly stated and is located at
:http://www.southwest.com/travel_center/medications.html

:Some airlines will provide oxygen if you tell them in advance.
:I suspect WN doesn't want to deal with the logistics involved.

Very surprised that they have the choice.

I would expect someone could sue them under the ADA.

--
Binyamin Dissen
http://www.dissensoftware.com
  #5  
Old February 29th, 2004, 04:14 PM
Olivers
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Carrying oxygen onboard

Binyamin Dissen muttered....



Very surprised that they have the choice.

I would expect someone could sue them under the ADA.


IIRC, airlines are specifically excepted from compliance with the ADA
statute. In this case, I imagine WN has decided O2 forms a potential
hazard in any containers but those approved for use by WN.

TMO
  #6  
Old February 29th, 2004, 05:19 PM
Binyamin Dissen
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Carrying oxygen onboard

On Sun, 29 Feb 2004 09:10:41 -0800 Morgoth Bauglir wrote:

: On Fri, 27 Feb 2004 00:23:52 GMT mtravelkay wrote:

::News Reader wrote:

:: This topic has come up a few times on A&E's "Airline" series... on more that
:: one episode, they've prevented passengers who require oxgen (for medical
:: purposes) from boarding the aircraft and have stated that it is against
:: their policy to allow oxygen onboard as it might explode.

:: This is all well and good and may very well be true, but:

:: 1. In one of the episodes, they suggested that the passenger try another
:: airline (they didn't specify one) that might have a different policy -- is
:: Southwest the only airline that cares about an explosion? Surely not...
:: 2. Obviously they have oxgen on board already -- otherwise, what comes out
:: of those little masks they make such a point of demonstrating every time
:: they take off...?

:: So something's not quite right here -- can anyone explain this apparent
:: contradiction?

::Southwest policy is clearly stated and is located at
::http://www.southwest.com/travel_center/medications.html

::Some airlines will provide oxygen if you tell them in advance.
::I suspect WN doesn't want to deal with the logistics involved.

: Very surprised that they have the choice.

: I would expect someone could sue them under the ADA.

:The applicable regulations are at
:http://www.access.gpo.gov/nara/cfr/w...cfr175_02.html

:You can read them for yourself.

:The short answer is that you cannot carry compressed oxygen on an aircraft
:EXCEPT "(7) Oxygen, or any hazardous material used for the generation of
:oxygen, for medical use by a passenger, which is furnished by the
:aircraft operator in accordance with 14 CFR 121.574 or 135.91"

The issue is WN failing to provide it.

That seems to be an ADA violation, especially as other airlines seem to be
able to do it.

--
Binyamin Dissen
http://www.dissensoftware.com
  #7  
Old March 1st, 2004, 12:48 AM
James Robinson
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Carrying oxygen onboard

Morgoth Bauglir wrote:

The issue is WN failing to provide it.


No, it's not.


That's the question, as far as I'm concerned. Do ADA regulations apply
regarding oxygen in flight?

They're NOT required to carry passengers that know in advance that they
will have an emergency requiring that use.


Do they have an exemption? Most other airlines will carry passengers
who know in advance that they need supplemental oxygen. Here are some
links as examples:

http://www.continental.com/travel/sp...ties/other.asp
http://www.nwa.com/services/onboard/...spec.shtml#oxy

And they aren't PERMITTED to let passengers carry on their own oxygen.

If you know you're going to need oxygen during flight, charter a medevac
flight.


You must have more money than most people to seriously suggest that.

Most of the other airlines will arrange for oxygen on their flights for
passengers that notify they ahead of time, so the passenger should go to
one of them.

We all know that anyone can file a lawsuit for anything at any time; but
suing an airline for complying with Federal Law is unlikely to withstand a
12(b) (Failure to state a claim) motion.


The question is whether they comply with the ADA law, not FAA
regulations about oxygen.
  #8  
Old March 1st, 2004, 10:06 AM
mtravelkay
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Carrying oxygen onboard

Binyamin Dissen wrote:

Very surprised that they have the choice.

I would expect someone could sue them under the ADA.


If they had to comply with ADA, they wouldn't be charging large people
double, since quite courts have ruled obesity to be a disability.
Airlines are exempt from ADA.

  #9  
Old March 1st, 2004, 10:26 AM
Dennis P. Harris
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Carrying oxygen onboard

On Mon, 01 Mar 2004 00:48:04 GMT in rec.travel.air, James
Robinson wrote:

That's the question, as far as I'm concerned. Do ADA regulations apply
regarding oxygen in flight?

no. airlines are specifically exempt from the ADA.
  #10  
Old March 1st, 2004, 05:55 PM
Nomen Nescio
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Carrying oxygen onboard

Cisco troll/netkook/rogue canceller Michael Voight mtravelkay
kooked:

Binyamin Dissen wrote:

Very surprised that they have the choice.

I would expect someone could sue them under the ADA.


If they had to comply with ADA, they wouldn't be charging large people
double, since quite courts have ruled obesity to be a disability.
Airlines are exempt from ADA.


Does ADA cover netkooks like you?

About Rogue Cisco Employee Michael "mrtravelkay" Voight,
a.k.a. the "mrtravel" Netkook Troll/Usenet Flooder

***WARNING: THIS IDIOT HAS BEEN CAUGHT FORGING PEOPLE'S IDENTITIES ON USENET
AND CANCELLING THEIR POSTS.***

"mrtavelkay" is the latest usenet handle of a brainless troll whose real name is
Michael Voight, email .

He is better known by his previous stupid handle, "mrtravel".

The idiot works for Cisco in San Jose and apparently they don't
keep him busy enough so he has to troll usenet when he isn't
looking for foreign brides to marry in exchange for money
in alt.visa.us.marriage-based and alt.personals.big-folks, or trying
to pick up minors in alt.personals.teens or any of the number of creepy
newsgroups he frequents. Some of his other trolling aliases are Network
Guy, , sleepydoc , jlhunt
, and Lost 5 of 8 , mrt ,
news.sf.sbcglobal.net , not-nomen
, David Tanner
, Jeff Davies , BobTheBuilder
.

All intelligent members of the usenet community have killfiled him, so he takes
great pains to get past their killfiles by rubbing his only two cerebral neurons
together and coming up with gems like: mrtrav , mrtrav3
, mrraveltay , and mrtravelkay
, and mtravelkay and ""a.a\"@a,a,a.
The lastest product of his brain diarrhea is Bill Clarkj
.

He seems to like to hang out in alt.sex.preteen. Hmmm....

His phone numbers are 831-295-3628 and 831-252-2606.

He's got a daughter in Orange County that one of his ex-wives had the
intelligence to take away from him. Lord only knows what could have
happened to her if she had continued to live with the kook. The other kids
he has belong to his previous Russian sleazy brides, and since they come
and go so do the kids. It wouldn't hurt to let Cisco know what kind of
deviant sexual pervert maniac they have working for them, so....

For starters, forward his idiotic posts to
.

He works in technical support, so forward them to
.

He often posts through sbcglobal and prodigy, so forward them to
and as well.

You can also call them at 1 800 553 2447 and ask to speak with a supervisor
and explain that you are EXTREMELY unhappy that this idiot spends his whole
day at work playing on the internet on company time. THEY WILL NOT LIKE
THAT.

Then write to corporate headquarters explaining what this idiot is doing
and telling them HOW BAD IT IS FOR THEIR COMPANY IMAGE. They will LOVE
that you brought this to their attention:

Cisco Systems, Inc.
170 West Tasman Dr.
San Jose, CA 95134
USA

Then also call them. You should always follow up email or letters with
phone calls. Always ask for supervisors or managers. Try to get as far up
as possible.

(408)526-4000
(800)553-NETS or
(800)553-6387

Contact Investor Relations and tell them you are interested in investing in
their company but won't do so until they get rid of this asshole who is
wasting company resources:

Cisco Systems, Inc.
Investor Relations Department
170 West Tasman Drive
San Jose, CA 95134-1706
Phone: (408) 526-8890
Fax: (408) 526-4545
Email:


Might as well contact customer service too, they LOVE to hear about this
type of stuff:

USA 1 800 553 6387




Then finally, send letters with copies of his nasty posts addressed
personally to each one of the OFFICERS of the company using the
headquarters address. Believe me, they READ your complaints and are VERY
INTERESTED in them, especially if it's about one of their employees. They
will take a PERSONAL interest in rooting this ASSHOLE out of their company:

John Morgridge, Chairman
John Chambers, President, CEO
Donald Valentine, Vice Chairman
Larry Carter, CFO, Sr. VP-Fin. and Admin., Sec., Director
Richard Justice, Sr. VP, Worldwide Field Operations

Have fun!

 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 11:52 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 TravelBanter.
The comments are property of their posters.