Smoking to be banned on submarines.

[Ranb]

http://www.cnn.com/2010/US/04/09/navy.smoking.subs/index.html?hpt=Sbin

The last time I heard of a banning smoking on submarines below decks was back in the late 90's when the Commanding Officer of the USS Indianapolis did so. Some of the Sailors complained to the squadron commander and they got to light up again.

This will not stop some Sailors from smoking underway just as booze is sometimes smuggled aboard. This might also increase the use of chewing tobacco or dip.

Ranb

 

[Freddy]

http://www.cnn.com/2010/US/04/09/navy.smoking.subs/index.html?hpt=Sbin

The last time I heard of a banning smoking on submarines below decks was back in the late 90's when the Commanding Officer of the USS Indianapolis did so. Some of the Sailors complained to the squadron commander and they got to light up again.

This will not stop some Sailors from smoking underway just as booze is sometimes smuggled aboard. This might also increase the use of chewing tobacco or dip.

Ranb

I assumed smoking was already not allowed on a submarine. I agree that use of smokeless tobacco will increase, since nicotine addiction is an addiction.

 

[Architect]

I'm fairly confident that it's not allowed on the UK's subs.

 

[Bob Klase]

This will not stop some Sailors from smoking underway just as booze is sometimes smuggled aboard.

It would be just as easy to smuggle cigarettes on board as it would booze, but while it's probably not hard to hide the smell of alcohol in use it would also be much more difficult (likely impossible) to hide the smell of tobacco in use.

 

[Almo]

I'm amazed you could ever smoke on a sub. Though now that I think about it, they must have pretty decent air filtration, and maybe it's ok.

 

[GreyICE]

I don't see the problem with making a 'smoke allowed' breakroom. Really, why the hell not?

If its filtration, trust me they don't weigh that much and they're not that expensive. If necessary, take the weight of the filters out of the weight allowance of all smoking sailors, they'd probably find that fair (no weight allowance out of yours? You can't use it)

 

[Sledge]

It doesn't seem like a good use of the very limited space on a sub to put aside one room purely for the benefit of (apparently) 35-40% of the crew. Kinda surprised this hasn't happened already, but I don't know what the laws are on smoking in the workplace in the US.

 

[commandlinegamer]

Why can't they just smoke outside like every other workplace does now?

 

[John Jones]

I'm amazed you could ever smoke on a sub. [...]

That's me too. I heard some anecdotes that cologne and deodorants were banned because they fouled-up the ventilation systems.

 

[John Jones]

It doesn't seem like a good use of the very limited space on a sub to put aside one room purely for the benefit of (apparently) 35-40% of the crew. Kinda surprised this hasn't happened already, but I don't know what the laws are on smoking in the workplace in the US.

It's basically forbidden in the US, except outside.

 

[John Jones]

I don't see the problem with making a 'smoke allowed' breakroom. Really, why the hell not?

If its filtration, trust me they don't weigh that much and they're not that expensive. If necessary, take the weight of the filters out of the weight allowance of all smoking sailors, they'd probably find that fair (no weight allowance out of yours? You can't use it)

Because smokers are in the minority in the US. I don't know about submarine crews.

 

[MG1962]

It doesn't seem like a good use of the very limited space on a sub to put aside one room purely for the benefit of (apparently) 35-40% of the crew. Kinda surprised this hasn't happened already, but I don't know what the laws are on smoking in the workplace in the US.

Well Russian boomers used to have a swimming pool for officers to use, and I think they are still okay to smoke

 

[332nd]

So now it's just farts?

 

[One Eyed Jack]

Why can't they just smoke outside like every other workplace does now?

Or at least crack a window.

 

[GreyICE]

It doesn't seem like a good use of the very limited space on a sub to put aside one room purely for the benefit of (apparently) 35-40% of the crew. Kinda surprised this hasn't happened already, but I don't know what the laws are on smoking in the workplace in the US.

It would be a breakroom. Since I know subs have breakrooms of sorts, probably plural, it wouldn't be too much of a hardship.

 

[MatildaGage]

I don't see the problem with making a 'smoke allowed' breakroom. Really, why the hell not?

If its filtration, trust me they don't weigh that much and they're not that expensive. If necessary, take the weight of the filters out of the weight allowance of all smoking sailors, they'd probably find that fair (no weight allowance out of yours? You can't use it)

Nicotine replacements (patches, etc.) were developed several decades ago for submariners.

There is no safe level of exposure to secondhand smoke, and air ventilation systems cannot fully remove tobacco toxins.

http://www.surgeongeneral.gov/library/secondhandsmoke/factsheets/factsheet7.html

http://www.ashrae.org/content/ASHRAE/ASHRAE/ArticleAltFormat/20058211239_347.pdf

There is no legal right to smoke but there is a legal right to clean air, thus the smoke-free policy.

http://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&q...YNh9u5&sig=AHIEtbRe5cyBtD5YrD0UGIp1Mlu0_EYRog

 

[John Jones]

Or at least crack a window.

That's the spirit of compromise so often missing in politics anymore.

 

[GreyICE]

Nicotine replacements (patches, etc.) were developed several decades ago for submariners.

There is no safe level of exposure to secondhand smoke, and air ventilation systems cannot fully remove tobacco toxins.

This is straight up nonsense. There's a safe level of exposure to every one of the chemicals I have worked with. Lead/Tin solder, formaldehyde, asbestos, turpentine, a number of nasty industrial solvents. All of them had levels that were safe for me to be exposed to.

Simply put, there is no way in hell that secondhand smoke is somehow magically more active than any of those. Hell, there's safe levels of smoke inhalation, firefighters take good note of this.

Tobacco smoke can be processed by your body. In 10-20 years of not smoking, even the worst 3 pack a day smoker will have clean pink lungs, and no more risk of lung cancer than the average individual. And you're telling me that my lungs receive one molecule of secondhand smoke and they're irreversibly damaged?

Nonsense. Straight woo-woo. You might as well name it "Sauron's magical death smoke." Reality doesn't work like that.

 

[Gangularis]

So now it's just farts?

Only in the farting room.

 

[scissorhands]

It doesn't seem like a good use of the very limited space on a sub to put aside one room purely for the benefit of (apparently) 35-40% of the crew. <snip>

Thats an interesting thought.
At what percentage would you find it acceptable?
50%?