Brussels Airport (BRU) infrastructure: future

Join this forum to discuss the latest news that happened in the world of commercial aviation.

Moderator: Latest news team

Post Reply
User avatar
Conti764
Posts: 1730
Joined: 21 Sep 2007, 23:21

Re: Brussels Airport (BRU) infrastructure: future

Post by Conti764 »

lumumba wrote:
18 May 2020, 11:38
I have question about the measure Brussels Airport is taking with distancing of 1.5m knowing this is impossible in the plane why is it necessary in the Airport?

Because if we really need to keep or distancing measures forget to fly before 1year at least?! :shock:
Because you need to take the practical side into consideration. Maintaining 1,5 meter distance between each other is doable in the airport. In a plane it isn't.

User avatar
lumumba
Posts: 1783
Joined: 04 Sep 2003, 00:00
Location: brussels Europe

Re: Brussels Airport (BRU) infrastructure: future

Post by lumumba »

Conti764 wrote:
18 May 2020, 12:38
lumumba wrote:
18 May 2020, 11:38
I have question about the measure Brussels Airport is taking with distancing of 1.5m knowing this is impossible in the plane why is it necessary in the Airport?

Because if we really need to keep or distancing measures forget to fly before 1year at least?! :shock:
Because you need to take the practical side into consideration. Maintaining 1,5 meter distance between each other is doable in the airport. In a plane it isn't.
So where is the point to do it :?:
After that you will stay a couple of hours has sardines in a tube...I just try to understand the meaning.
If they want to keep this 1,5m keep the planes on the ground that would be logic.

And believe me this 1,5 rule is not sustainable for restaurants,busses,trains etc...all this is not logic.

Anyway people are already afraid to put there kids in school or take the public transport if they continue to support this rule everybody will be afraid to fly!
This means the end of our Aviation industry and restaurants etc...please let this rule go and we will have to learn to live with this virus even when the vaccination will be ready it will not be 100%.

Sure this confinement was necessary but it has to stop before it's to late.

The morality of this virus is 1% or less it's like dead is becoming taboo.

In Africa millions of people die from Malaria etc...nobody stop the world for them.
Hasta la victoria siempre.

Ansett
Posts: 529
Joined: 13 Apr 2016, 19:12

Re: Brussels Airport (BRU) infrastructure: future

Post by Ansett »

Forgive me, I'm in 'history" mode today. For info (times change, media (over) coverage change people's perception..)

https://www.cdc.gov/flu/pandemic-resour ... demic.html

PttU
Posts: 368
Joined: 24 Nov 2015, 15:07

Re: Brussels Airport (BRU) infrastructure: future

Post by PttU »

lumumba wrote:
18 May 2020, 11:38
I have question about the measure Brussels Airport is taking with distancing of 1.5m knowing this is impossible in the plane why is it necessary in the Airport?

Because if we really need to keep or distancing measures forget to fly before 1year at least?! :shock:
Because in a plane there's a passenger list: if someone is infected, it's possible to trace who's at risk. Furthermore the risk is bigger as the period of contact was a couple of hours at least.
In the airport, it's impossible to keep trace of who was there at the same time as the infected person. So it's more important to prevent than it is to re-mediate afterwards, and preventing can be done by keeping distance, using masks,...

User avatar
lumumba
Posts: 1783
Joined: 04 Sep 2003, 00:00
Location: brussels Europe

Re: Brussels Airport (BRU) infrastructure: future

Post by lumumba »

PttU wrote:
18 May 2020, 23:10
lumumba wrote:
18 May 2020, 11:38
I have question about the measure Brussels Airport is taking with distancing of 1.5m knowing this is impossible in the plane why is it necessary in the Airport?

Because if we really need to keep or distancing measures forget to fly before 1year at least?! :shock:
Because in a plane there's a passenger list: if someone is infected, it's possible to trace who's at risk. Furthermore the risk is bigger as the period of contact was a couple of hours at least.
In the airport, it's impossible to keep trace of who was there at the same time as the infected person. So it's more important to prevent than it is to re-mediate afterwards, and preventing can be done by keeping distance, using masks,...
I understand but it's a bit ambitious to track people around world try to find someone in Kinshasa?!

But you make a point fair enough.
Hasta la victoria siempre.

Poiu
Posts: 822
Joined: 14 Nov 2015, 09:38

Re: Brussels Airport (BRU) infrastructure: future

Post by Poiu »

PttU wrote:
18 May 2020, 23:10
Because in a plane there's a passenger list: if someone is infected, it's possible to trace who's at risk. Furthermore the risk is bigger as the period of contact was a couple of hours at least.
In the airport, it's impossible to keep trace of who was there at the same time as the infected person. So it's more important to prevent than it is to re-mediate afterwards, and preventing can be done by keeping distance, using masks,...
Are you saying there is no need for prevention because you can trace? Please tell me I understood this wrongly!
How many people are going to inform the airline they flew with about their infection? The first days of contact tracing are a big disappointment, the majority of infected people are claiming they had contact with maximum 1 person...
Successfully fighting this virus is all about prevention, there are no hard rules for flying yet, but that’s because airlines are lobbying fiercely against them. Why do you think so many airlines are having commercials about masks, disinfecting their aircraft and HEPA filters? Just because they don’t want any hard rules as it will reduce their yields.
Nobody tells you the infection takes place long before the air hits the HEPA filter or long before the aircraft is disinfected overnight. Furthermore on the older aircraft not all the air goes through the HEPA filters.
I remember being shot down on here for pointing out that at the beginning of March Brussels Airlines was still boarding without APU despite EASA recommendations.
A study, published in the New England Journal of Medicine, revealed that 1 person infected 22 passengers, all sitting around him, with SARS during a three hour flight...
https://www.nejm.org/doi/pdf/10.1056/NEJMoa031349
Flying without strict distancing will kill more people than the 737Max!

User avatar
lumumba
Posts: 1783
Joined: 04 Sep 2003, 00:00
Location: brussels Europe

Re: Brussels Airport (BRU) infrastructure: future

Post by lumumba »

Poiu wrote:
19 May 2020, 09:45
PttU wrote:
18 May 2020, 23:10
Because in a plane there's a passenger list: if someone is infected, it's possible to trace who's at risk. Furthermore the risk is bigger as the period of contact was a couple of hours at least.
In the airport, it's impossible to keep trace of who was there at the same time as the infected person. So it's more important to prevent than it is to re-mediate afterwards, and preventing can be done by keeping distance, using masks,...
Are you saying there is no need for prevention because you can trace? Please tell me I understood this wrongly!
How many people are going to inform the airline they flew with about their infection? The first days of contact tracing are a big disappointment, the majority of infected people are claiming they had contact with maximum 1 person...
Successfully fighting this virus is all about prevention, there are no hard rules for flying yet, but that’s because airlines are lobbying fiercely against them. Why do you think so many airlines are having commercials about masks, disinfecting their aircraft and HEPA filters? Just because they don’t want any hard rules as it will reduce their yields.
Nobody tells you the infection takes place long before the air hits the HEPA filter or long before the aircraft is disinfected overnight. Furthermore on the older aircraft not all the air goes through the HEPA filters.
I remember being shot down on here for pointing out that at the beginning of March Brussels Airlines was still boarding without APU despite EASA recommendations.
A study, published in the New England Journal of Medicine, revealed that 1 person infected 22 passengers, all sitting around him, with SARS during a three hour flight...
https://www.nejm.org/doi/pdf/10.1056/NEJMoa031349
Flying without strict distancing will kill more people than the 737Max!
Don't forget 40 to 50% are asymptomatic but will infect others!
Hasta la victoria siempre.

Post Reply