A380 Not Flying Brothel

OK, that's not how AvWeb headlined it but...


http://www.avweb.com/avwebflash/news...1.html?type=pf

Considering the areas of aircraft that have served the carnal desires of
their occupants, it would seem likely that the private suite with double bed
that Singapore Airlines has installed on its A380 would be creating a little
turbulence of its own on every flight. But if the airline has anything to do
with it (and good luck with this) the first-class section will not become
headquarters of the Mile High Club. "If couples used our double beds to
engage in inappropriate activity, we would politely ask them to desist,"
company spokesman Stephen Forshaw told the Times of London. "There are
things that are acceptable on an aircraft and things that aren't, and the
rules for behavior in our double beds are the same ones that apply
throughout the aircraft."


And that seems a shame say the first occupants of the exclusive space. Tony
and Julie Elwood paid plenty to recline in the suite on the A380's first
flight from Singapore to Sydney last week and said the accommodations and
the rule are at odds. "So they'll sell you a double bed, and give you
privacy and endless champagne - and then say you can't do what comes
naturally?" Tony told the Times. "Seems a bit strange." Julie agreed. "They
seem to have done everything they can to make it romantic short of bringing
round oysters."

On Mon, 29 Oct 2007 14:20:41 -0500, Gig 601XL Builder wrote:

But if the airline has anything to do
with it (and good luck with this) the first-class section will not become
headquarters of the Mile High Club.

I guess they don't want the next passenger to have to sit in the wet spot.

--
Dallas

On Oct 29, 1:44 pm, Dallas wrote:
On Mon, 29 Oct 2007 14:20:41 -0500, Gig 601XL Builder wrote:
But if the airline has anything to do
with it (and good luck with this) the first-class section will not become
headquarters of the Mile High Club.

I guess they don't want the next passenger to have to sit in the wet spot.

Apparently it isn't a problem for hotels. What's the difference? Does
the airline not plan on changing the bedding between flights?

-Robert

Robert M. Gary wrote:
On Oct 29, 1:44 pm, Dallas wrote:
On Mon, 29 Oct 2007 14:20:41 -0500, Gig 601XL Builder wrote:
But if the airline has anything to do
with it (and good luck with this) the first-class section will not
become headquarters of the Mile High Club.

I guess they don't want the next passenger to have to sit in the wet
spot.

Apparently it isn't a problem for hotels. What's the difference? Does
the airline not plan on changing the bedding between flights?

-Robert

Let's keep in mind that the walls on the suites DO NOT go all the way to the
ceiling.

On Oct 29, 3:44 pm, "Gig 601XL Builder" wrDOTgiaconaATsuddenlink.net
wrote:
Robert M. Gary wrote:
On Oct 29, 1:44 pm, Dallas wrote:
On Mon, 29 Oct 2007 14:20:41 -0500, Gig 601XL Builder wrote:
But if the airline has anything to do
with it (and good luck with this) the first-class section will not
become headquarters of the Mile High Club.

I guess they don't want the next passenger to have to sit in the wet
spot.

Apparently it isn't a problem for hotels. What's the difference? Does
the airline not plan on changing the bedding between flights?

-Robert

Let's keep in mind that the walls on the suites DO NOT go all the way to the
ceiling.

What, people might peek over the top?

wrote:
On Oct 29, 3:44 pm, "Gig 601XL Builder" wrDOTgiaconaATsuddenlink.net
wrote:
Robert M. Gary wrote:
On Oct 29, 1:44 pm, Dallas wrote:
On Mon, 29 Oct 2007 14:20:41 -0500, Gig 601XL Builder wrote:
But if the airline has anything to do
with it (and good luck with this) the first-class section will not
become headquarters of the Mile High Club.

I guess they don't want the next passenger to have to sit in the
wet spot.

Apparently it isn't a problem for hotels. What's the difference?
Does the airline not plan on changing the bedding between flights?

-Robert

Let's keep in mind that the walls on the suites DO NOT go all the
way to the ceiling.

What, people might peek over the top?

You'd assume the bed would at least have some sheets on it... Of course if
you get a howler, that could compromise the situation....

"Robert M. Gary" wrote in
oups.com:

I guess they don't want the next passenger to have to sit in the wet
spot.

Apparently it isn't a problem for hotels. What's the difference? Does
the airline not plan on changing the bedding between flights?

You haven't flown commercially in a few years, have you?

They don't clean the floors or seat pockets between segments anymore - what
makes you think they would change the sheets?

I would be surprised if the bed had sheets at all. Best I can tell, it looks
more like a futon with the 2" square pillows and 6" square blue blankets we
get on all the other airlines...

Robert M. Gary writes:

Apparently it isn't a problem for hotels.

It _is_ a problem for hotels, but since most people in hotels don't check
their "fresh" sheets for body fluids, they never know.

Mxsmanic wrote in
:

Robert M. Gary writes:

Apparently it isn't a problem for hotels.

It _is_ a problem for hotels, but since most people in hotels don't check
their "fresh" sheets for body fluids, they never know.





You don't fly AND you don't fukc.




You;re drifting ever further from your real area of expertise, mopping up
dust bunnies with your fuzzie slippers.



Bertie

Mxsmanic wrote in
:

Robert M. Gary writes:

Apparently it isn't a problem for hotels.

It _is_ a problem for hotels, but since most people in hotels don't check
their "fresh" sheets for body fluids, they never know.




And you do, eh?

Not surprising.



Bertie