Covid-19; Impact on the aviation industry

billy few mates

kona wrote: »

So what? Let them book, its none of his business what people do with their money.
Hes well able to make up legislation and rules to stop it if he deems it so.

Damned if you do and damned if you don't.
Are you honestly suggesting people should only do what's required of them by legislation...?

MrMusician18

MrMusician18 wrote: »

Why is it unreasonable? How can you suppress the virus if it's continually seeded from abroad. Entry testing to cut quarantine lengths is something loads of posters here have been looking for.

I'm trying to keep this aviation related.
As you can see at the link below there are some very good Antigen tests in terms of specificity and sensitivity despite the sensationalist reports you may have read elsewhere which have formed your unshakeable opinion on the topic.
When the test is handled by trained personnel in the airport or elsewhere then the accuracy is maximised.
Of course a PCR test is more accurate but takes longer and is much more expensive.
Germany is willing to use Antigen tests as a means of opening up their airports to travel. Nobody is accusing the Germans of being reckless. They are prudently managing risk which is something Irish authorities are unable to do and the Travel industry is Collapsing. What is worse now is that familial relationships are suffering because the Government advised by NPHET doesn't know how to quantify, manage and live with risk.

Get the planes flying again. People NEED to travel home and Labs can only process so many tests the week before Christmas so so long as PCR tests are mandated people will not be able to get back home.

https://antigentest.bfarm.de/ords/antigen/r/antigentests-auf-sars-cov-2/liste-der-antigentests?session=10573664191523&tz=1:00

NH2013

https://www.rte.ie/news/coronavirus/2020/1112/1177749-coronavirus-aviation-testing-airports/

I think IALPA made the best point here, better to have mandatory testing at the silver standard of Antigen testing than voluntary testing at the gold standard PCR.

Apparently the antigen tests currently being produced only produce a 10% false negative vs a 2% false negative for PCR tests. Surely that’s good enough as a screening tool at airports and keep PCR for testing.

I think that’s the difference people need to grasp, Antigen for screening and PCR for testing.

PCR test effectively means the vast majority of people don't get to travel. It is as simple as that. The labs can't process that many tests and a large proportion can't afford to pay around €200 per test but NPHET don't care as it isn't a criteria that they are allowing themselves to be judged on.

trellheim

For example Brussels Airport are doing PCR testing 67 euro for a regular test (24 hours) and 135 (4-6 hours) for a rapid one

Antigen testing looks like only around 20 quid

MrMusician18

trellheim wrote: »

For example Brussels Airport are doing PCR testing 67 euro for a regular test (24 hours) and 135 (4-6 hours) for a rapid one

Antigen testing looks like only around 20 quid

It's such a shame that antigen tests do not catch asymptomatic or presymptomatic infections.

TRANQUILLO

Ad-hoc travel is ****ed. I have to go to Europe to do some Borescopes next week and my travel date is unknown due to a hold up with lessors. I need a negative PCR test within 72 hours of my arrival and don't know what day i have to be there. What a cluster ****. I'll be invoicing someone for the 200 cost also. I don't want the bloody test or feel sick . I aint paying for it.

GT89

Is it likely that the vaccine be mandatory for going on flights when it's available to the general public?

GT89

GT89 wrote: »

Is it likely that the vaccine be mandatory for going on flights when it's available to the general public?

come back to us with that question towards the end of 2021/22 by which time the risk groups and health professionals may have been immunized.

Irish Steve

There are several people skating on very thin ice in this thread. This thread is supposed to be aviation related, and we've allowed some leeway, but there have been too many posts that are diverting out into areas that really should be part of the general covid threads, as they are not aviation related, or even close.

MrMusician18

Deleted User wrote: »

PCR test effectively means the vast majority of people don't get to travel. It is as simple as that. The labs can't process that many tests and a large proportion can't afford to pay around €200 per test but NPHET don't care as it isn't a criteria that they are allowing themselves to be judged on.

It's not the test or lack thereof that's stopping travel is the advice against non essential travel that voids travel insurance.

So even if there is a testing regime at the airport and we accept antigen tests as ok, it's the travel advice that's the real killer. I can't see the travel advice being reversed this side of Christmas, not with the state the continent is in at the moment.

But the vaccine is coming soon thankfully so if expect that advice to be dropped quickly into the vaccination programme. The end is coming. I guess it's a matter of hanging on until then. If there is anything fortunate is that this crisis hit at the top of the aviation cycle when balance sheets were strong.

travel insurance? most of us don't use it or need it to visit friends and family.
I have bought travel insurance precisely zero times in the last number of years for visits home. Ireland is not a conventional tourist destination in December. It is a destination to meet friends and family. people won't have problems flying out to a foreign destination that doesn't require a PCR test, it is the people who need to travel inward that have the problem for all the good a PCR test does in the very early stages of infection when you aren't shedding virus.

Travel advice from people trying to cover up the deficiencies of the Health Service and blame everyone but the health service should be treated with scepticism.

Travelling to France? An antigen test will do. Why not Ireland?
https://newyork.consulfrance.org/coronavirus-mandatory-covid-testing-before-traveling-to-france#:~:text=Coronavirus%20%3A%20mandatory%20COVID%20testing%20before%20traveling%20to%20France%20%5Bfr%5D&text=From%20August%201st%2C%20travelers%20aged,negative%20result%20for%20COVID%2D19.

Likewise for Italy:
http://www.viaggiaresicuri.it/approfondimenti-insights/saluteinviaggio (italian text)

kona

billy few mates wrote: »

Damned if you do and damned if you don't.
Are you honestly suggesting people should only do what's required of them by legislation...?

I didnt say that absoloutley anywhere in my reply.

VG31

MrMusician18 wrote: »

It's not the test or lack thereof that's stopping travel is the advice against non essential travel that voids travel insurance.

The advice against non-essential travel has been dropped for the EU.

https://www.dfa.ie/travel/travel-advice/

TRANQUILLO

Deleted User wrote: »

travel insurance? most of us don't use it or need it to visit friends and family.
I have bought travel insurance precisely zero times in the last number of years for visits home. Ireland is not a conventional tourist destination in December. It is a destination to meet friends and family. people won't have problems flying out to a foreign destination that doesn't require a PCR test, it is the people who need to travel inward that have the problem for all the good a PCR test does in the very early stages of infection when you aren't shedding virus.

Travel advice from people trying to cover up the deficiencies of the Health Service and blame everyone but the health service should be treated with scepticism.

what people are forgetting is that the PCR test also creates a horrible dilemma.......What if you feel fine but fail it. You're stranded. Im more afraid of the PCR result than the virus itself.

trellheim

TRANQUILLO wrote: »

what people are forgetting is that the PCR test also creates a horrible dilemma.......What if you feel fine but fail it. You're stranded. Im more afraid of the PCR result than the virus itself.

Spot-on. Flight cancelled due COVID ? No refund under 261. Very few hotels open and no insurance.

While I appreciate that for many people travel insurance may not seem necessary its availability for routine travel is a real indicator for how air travel will open up again.

JCX BXC

trellheim wrote: »

Spot-on. Flight cancelled due COVID ? No refund under 261. Very few hotels open and no insurance.

While I appreciate that for many people travel insurance may not seem necessary its availability for routine travel is a real indicator for how air travel will open up again.

Under EU261, can COVID really be said to be unforseen and exceptional circumstances that airlines cancelling within 14 days of departure had no choice? COVID is around with several months, I can't see how a court would see it reasonable to cancel a flight at short notice, COVID isn't going anywhere quickly.

trellheim

Happy to be corrected if anyone can point to successful 261 claims in the last few months

JCX BXC

trellheim wrote: »

Happy to be corrected if anyone can point to successful 261 claims in the last few months

I haven't seen any, however point still stands.

Plenty of cases where airlines have refused genuine cases of EU261 under very dubious pretences.

gral6

The Department of Health has significant concerns about the impact of a major increase in the number of people flying into Ireland for Christmas in the fight against Covid-19.

The Department fears the lack of mandatory quarantined regulations coupled with an increase in flights will lead to a massive spike in new cases. Health Minister Stephen Donnelly has expressed concerns within Government about the lack of border controls in Ireland.

https://www.independent.ie/world-news/coronavirus/department-of-health-concerned-christmas-flight-rules-are-far-too-loose-39747967.html

Does Department of Health care about increasing number of ICUs in their system or they just wasted their time this summer writing idiotic guidelines about safe sex during pandemic ? F... useless idiots

paddy19

trellheim wrote: »

Spot-on. Flight cancelled due COVID ? No refund under 261. Very few hotels open and no insurance.

While I appreciate that for many people travel insurance may not seem necessary its availability for routine travel is a real indicator for how air travel will open up again.

EU261 required a refund for a cancelled flight.
This is reasonable, you paid for a service, the airline did no deliver the service why would the airline be allowed to keep your money?

I have not seen a single case where a passenger was compensated under EU261 for a cancelled flight due to Covid.

I'm sure if there had been one the media would be highlighted it as a key precedent.

Jack1985

Moderna have just announced their vaccine is 94.5% effective.

Jack1985

IAG stocks again roaring up by +12% now.

PommieBast

Jack1985 wrote: »

Moderna have just announced their vaccine is 94.5% effective.

What sort of lead time before general availability they quoting though? So far everything I have heard, such as Ugur Sahin on BBC yesterday, indicates an expectation of normalcy of around Q4 2021.

Jack1985

PommieBast wrote: »

What sort of lead time before general availability they quoting though? So far everything I have heard, such as Ugur Sahin on BBC yesterday, indicates an expectation of normalcy of around Q4 2021.

Moderna are saying availability dependent on FDA approval for vulnerable groups in Dec, possibility in conjunction with Pfizer that mass vaccination can occur between April and June in the United States.

MrMusician18

Jack1985 wrote: »

Moderna have just announced their vaccine is 94.5% effective.

Doesn't require cold chain either. Great news.

bk

Jack1985 wrote: »

Moderna have just announced their vaccine is 94.5% effective.

There are a number of great points with this new vaccine.

- Highly effective

- It doesn't require very low temperatures, unlike the Pfizer one, normal fridge, etc. should be fine, makes it much easier to transport and distribute.

- A second company producing a vaccine greatly increases the supply, both are likely to be distributed at the same time, to maximise speed of supply.

- Even for the 6% of people who got the vaccine, but still got Covid19, they all got just very mild or no symptoms. This is an indication that even for those for whom the vaccine doesn't completely work, it still stops them from getting a very serious case. This is really good news, as it means it will stop even those people from getting seriously sick. Pfizer still hasn't released info about this for their vaccine.

- They tested it on elderly, diverse and at-risk populations, all with good results.

The only downsides of this vaccine are that it requires two doses and it is the most expensive of the vaccines.

Everyone is now holding their breath in hopes to see similar results from the J&J vaccine, as it is much cheaper, room temp and only requires one dose. All of which would make distribution even easier.

Obviously there is still a long way too go, but this early news couldn't be much better. This is almost as good as you get from vaccines. Fingers crossed.

L1011

bk wrote: »

- Even for the 6% of people who got the vaccine, but still got Covid19

Its not that 6% of those who got the vaccine got COVID19

Its that compared to the number infected in the control group, only 6% (well, 5.5%) of the equivalent number got infected

The actual raw numbers are 95 infections in the control group and 5 in the vaccinated group from a 30k study.

I think, maths escapes me this late in the evening and particularly since the coffee shop downstairs started closing at 3:30, that that suggests they had a fairly even split between vaccine and control group numbers. Pfizer had a vastly, vastly higher number of people getting the vaccine than in the control; something like 38k to 5k.



The problem for air travel is that its unlikely that anyone other than front line healthcare works and nursing home residents + people admitted to hospital without COVID will be getting the vaccine in the next six months. I'm in a non healthcare essential role as per even the strictest regs we had here and I'm not expecting to get it before maybe March. Next summer is not saved yet nor do I think it can be.

Nijmegen

The vaccine distribution question is a really interesting one, as you obviously need enough of the population to take it for it to be truly effective. A room temperature vaccine might be sent to countries and regions with less developed infrastructure while city dwellers will get the super cold chain vaccine. There is a question around whether or not rich countries hoard the early vaccine and Covid rages on in poorer countries, which could mean it's easier for us to go for a coffee in our home town but take longer to fly overseas safely.

But the recent vaccine news has been really positive, feels like the end of the beginning so to speak.

One thing Covid has shown us economically is that the pandemic has really odd and unforeseen impacts so far. Maybe aviation and travel swing back and we all go on a big holiday in two years. Or maybe the business travel world truly is now permanently decimated. But maybe not? Some stock traders are going to win and lose big on making the right or wrong bets around all of that.