Part 121 Regulations Question

"GS" wrote in message
...
[...]
stretching for 10 minutes on a 5+ hour flight is VERY reasonable and, in
fact, I've seen videos on planes suggesting to stand up to avoid that one
lawsuit of a passenger dying (?) due to blood pooling in their legs due to
inactivity. My percentages are NOT made up, but a guess, yes though.

By definition, if you don't have actual documented counts of the instances,
the numbers are made up. If you are guessing about the numbers, then they
are made up. That's what "made up" *means*.

As far as the stretching goes...no one is telling you that you can't get up
and stretch. They are telling you that there's a specific place on the
airplane they don't want you loitering. Whether this is a security
regulation or not, it's something that the flight crew has instructed you
not to do, and thus is carries the force of law. Go stretch somewhere else.

A frequent flier on another board wrote to me today "I fully agree with
your original thread started which was about FA's just "making" up rules
as they go which I've personally experienced as well........"

Maybe it will be relevant when a flight attendant writes to you and says
that they personally on a regular basis make up rules as they go. I doubt
the other person who replied to you has any more justification for his claim
to know what's actually a rule and what's not than you do.

Now, all that said, I will note that your post started on the margins of
being on-topic here (a newsgroup about *piloting* airplanes, not riding as a
passenger in them), and your replies have drifted well away from those
margins, into being entirely off-topic. Frankly, I'm not really all that
interested in debating the finer points of regulations governing passenger
behavior on airlines.

But besides that, there are so many absurd rules that DO exist that it seems
silly to me for someone to think that they know for sure some claimed rule
is too absurd to be true.

I gave you the reference for the regulation relevant to your original
question, pointing out that your belief that the rule didn't exist was
false. You SHOULD have taken that as a clue that other rules you believe
don't exist might actually exist as well. For some reason, you didn't, and
without bothering to research *those* rules you have continued your tirade
against the flight attendants. I don't really feel like having a discussion
where the other person can't be bothered to find and consider actual
*facts*. Your entire attitude and opinion is based on assumptions and
presumptions, and you're not even willing to admit it.

Please don't expect any more replies from me about this topic.

Pete